Ep. 898 - Democrats Virtue Signal While The World Burns
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, with war raging in Europe, our leaders here at home are focused on the important things. Namely, outlawing lynching. But isn’t that already illegal? Why does it need to be illegal again? And why are they worried about this? Why now of all times? We’ll sort through that today. Also, there’s so much propaganda flying around about the war in Ukraine that it can be hard to keep things straight or know exactly what’s going on. It’s probably no surprise, though, that the people pushing the propaganda are also the people who want to push our country into a direct armed conflict with Russia. We’ll discuss. And, Democrats try and fail to pass a federal law permanently enshrining Roe, regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision. Plus, Kamala Harris goes off script, Joe Biden can barely walk, and John Oliver makes the case for decriminalizing prostitution across the country. I’ll explain why he’s wrong, and why he’s canceled.
I am now a self-acclaimed beloved children’s author. Reserve your copy of my new book here: https://utm.io/ud1Cb
I am now a beloved LGBTQ+ and children’s author. Reserve your copy of Johnny The Walrus here: https://utm.io/ud1j6
You petitioned, and we heard you. Made for Sweet Babies everywhere: get the official Sweet Baby Gang t-shirt here: https://utm.io/udIX3
Stopping the attack on America starts with exposing the source: from within. Subscribe to The Daily Wire and start streaming The Enemy Within today. https://utm.io/uejBd
Haven’t gotten your preferred pronouns badge? Head to my Swag Shack to grab yours today:https://utm.io/uei4E
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, with war raging in Europe, our leaders here at home are focused on the important things, namely outlawing lynching.
But isn't that already illegal?
And why does it need to be illegal again?
And why are they worried about that?
Why now of all times?
We'll sort through all that today.
Also, there's so much propaganda flying around about the war in Ukraine that It can be hard to keep things straight or to know exactly what's going on.
It's probably no surprise, though, that the people pushing the propaganda are also the people who want to push our country into a direct armed conflict with Russia, we'll discuss.
And Democrats try and fail to pass a federal law permanently enshrining Roe, regardless of the Supreme Court's decision.
Plus, Kamala Harris goes off script, Joe Biden can barely walk, and John Oliver makes the case for decriminalizing prostitution across the country.
I'll explain why he's wrong and also why he's canceled.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
[MUSIC]
Another question I get from my listeners is, "What can I do to help turn the tide in the
The answer is a simple one.
Know your ideals and fight for them.
One of the truths that I'm constantly talking about is the truth that life begins upon conception, a fact that the left is actively trying to erase.
We have to fight tooth and nail to defend the lives of these babies, and if you want to join this fight, here is one way to do it.
By disconnecting your current phone service provider, who doesn't care about the life of the children, and lives of children, in fact, is probably very much
against you when it comes to that issue and every other issue, and switch instead to Charity Mobile, a
phone service that does care about life.
Charity Mobile will donate 5% of your monthly plan price to pro-life charities of your choice,
all while giving you access to the latest 5G phones with great nationwide coverage.
If this sounds like a hassle, I assure you it isn't. Charity Mobile makes switching from their
current carrier painless.
Their live customer service is exceptional and they'll guide you through the process.
You can keep your number and phone or if you want you can even take advantage of my special offer and get a free cell phone with free activation.
All you have to do is call 1-877-474-3662 or chat with them online at CharityMobile.com and mention OfferCodeWalsh to redeem your free phone and free activation.
That's CharityMobile.com and mention OfferCodeWalsh.
Join the fight for the life of children by switching to CharityMobile today.
Well, these are volatile times, dangerous times.
War has already broken out in Eastern Europe.
If the crisis is not handled with prudence and resolve and restraint and foresight, the conflict could well spread across the globe, sending us barreling headfirst into another world war.
This is a time for competent, assured, intelligent leadership.
It's unfortunate, then, that the Western world is led by the most pathetic collection of morally bankrupt halfwits our civilization has ever seen.
These are the people we must entrust to guide us through this calamity without getting 50 million people killed in the process.
Frankly, I don't love the odds right now.
And I'm not feeling any better today considering what happened in D.C.
last night.
With the world teetering on the brink of nuclear destruction, Congress, which can never be accused of having its priorities straight, got together to work on making lynching illegal.
Yes, that violent act which literally hasn't occurred one single time in this country in at least 40 years.
That's the thing they decided to focus on.
They might as well pass a law prohibiting the use of giant catapults to storm fortresses.
Maybe next they can finally legally ban people from burning witches at the stake.
How about a law, once again, abolishing the transatlantic slave trade?
Now, I'm not being totally fair.
They didn't just work on outlawing lynching.
They also tried to do some other things, like they tried to pass a bill banning something called hair discrimination.
That's hair discrimination.
It's called the Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair, or CROWN Act, and it would make it illegal to discriminate against hairstyles worn by black people.
Now you might be thinking that discrimination against black people is already illegal, and it is, but this bill would make a black person's hairstyle its own protected class.
So black people would be protected from discrimination twice over.
Once for their whole body, and then a second time for the top of their heads.
Eventually, I'm sure Democrats will pass laws specifically protecting each marginalized body part individually.
So we've covered head discrimination.
What about shoulder discrimination?
What about knees and toes and eyes and ears and mouth and nose?
Head, shoulders, knees and toes.
Knees and toes.
You can tell I have a two-year-old at home.
Sorry about that.
But the Dreadlock Protection Act of 2022 didn't pass.
That was one bit of empty virtue signaling that Republicans refused to go along with.
The same cannot be said for the Anti-Lynching Act, however, which was an even more dangerous and grotesque form of virtue signaling.
But as for that, Republicans were fully on board, save for three.
There were three Republicans who rightfully voted against the measure, including Thomas Massey from Kentucky, who's, you know, one of the only good ones left.
But they were not enough to prevent this bill from passing, and so the Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act was passed, with near-unanimous support from both parties, and the bill now makes it a federal hate crime to lynch somebody, or to conspire to lynch somebody.
Now, before the bill's passage, various members of Congress took turns, you know, standing on the floor of Congress, bravely denouncing this despicable act, which was already illegal, and which doesn't happen anymore at all to anybody.
Squad member Cori Bush, of course, made sure to get her time in the spotlight.
Listen to her.
Those who survived the Middle Passage survived only to be brought onto these shores, bought and sold at auctions like the goods their forced labor was producing.
These auctions launched a long-standing practice in America in which white folks, including white women, scrutinize and violate the bodies of black people, especially black women.
We're going to tell the truth today.
Black adults and black children enslaved and forced to endure being tormented, being tortured, being raped by white slave owners on slave ships and on the plantations.
Our ancestors, Try to escape the bondage of slavery, just to be hunted, captured, imprisoned, executed.
Executed.
Why is she talking about this?
Why is she talking about slavery?
And why does she pretend that in denouncing slavery, she's bravely telling a truth that nobody else will say out loud?
Oh, we're going to tell the truth today.
Oh, how brave about slavery.
Now, I was joking before about the Democrats outlawing slavery all over again.
Maybe that's really where this is headed.
And I guess I can see why.
The Democrats were all in favor of slavery the first time around, so it's only fair to give them a chance to, you know, get on the right side of the issue.
But as for the Anti-Lynching Act, two points must be emphasized.
One, as discussed, nobody is getting lynched in modern America.
Thank God.
The last case was in 1981, five years before I was born.
And that was an extraordinary event because it was the first such occurrence in decades.
So since my parents were born, you could count the number of lynchings on maybe, like, one hand, and you may not need all your fingers.
Since I was born, it hasn't happened at all.
Not once.
Anywhere in the country.
Now, does that mean that it should be legal?
Well, of course not.
And the good news is that it's not legal.
It's always been illegal.
If you lynch a person today, with or without this bill, You will go to prison for a very long time.
Though, ironically, with this bill, you may actually go to prison for a shorter length of time than you otherwise would have.
Because the legislation prescribes a sentence of not more than 30 years.
Now, I would have thought that lynching should carry a life sentence or a death sentence.
But, you know, that's just me.
I guess I'm tougher on lynching than the Democrats are.
In fact, lynching isn't just already illegal.
Race-based lynching, lynchings committed for racist reasons, are illegal twice over.
Okay, because lynching is murder, or attempted murder, which is illegal.
If it's racially motivated, then it's race-based violence, which is already a hate crime.
So, no black people are getting lynched in America, but if such a horrific event did occur, it would already be illegal twice.
Illegal on the state, and the federal level.
Illegal, and then illegal again.
So this law makes it illegal a third time.
Why stop there?
Let's make it illegal four times.
Let's make it illegal every year.
By 2030, we should have over 10 laws outlawing a crime that nobody is committing anyway.
By the way, this is true even if you expand the definition of lynching to include things that are not lynching, which is what the left has done.
In order to make the case that lynching is still a problem in the United States, what they'll always do is they'll say, well, George Floyd was a lynching victim.
Or Ahmaud Arbery.
But words have meanings, and those don't apply.
If lynching now just means any violence committed against a black man by a white man for allegedly racist reasons, well, again, that's already illegal.
The Wikipedia article on lynching in the United States actually lists Ahmaud Arbery as a victim.
If you go to Wikipedia and you trust them as a source, They have a list of all the victims of lynching and they have, according to them, there's been one case of lynching in the 21st century and Ahmaud Arbery was the victim.
Except that he was not lynched in any way.
His killers have already been convicted of murder and a hate crime.
So even under the expanded definition of lynching, in fact, especially under the expanded definition, there's no need for this law.
It already exists.
So, what is the point?
I mean, why are they doing this?
Well, the primary point, obviously, is to virtue signal.
Treating the law itself like it's some kind of Twitter hashtag.
Now, all of these lawmakers can appear in campaign videos declaring that they bravely took a stand and finally, once and for all, banned this terrible practice.
They'll just hope that their constituents are too stupid to realize that it was already banned and also that they were wasting time on this empty stunt while the world stood at the precipice of nuclear annihilation.
But there's something else too.
And this is what makes this more than an empty stunt and more than just a silly and pointless symbolic gesture, but something far more sinister as well.
This is also why spineless Republicans should have refused to go along with the charade, but they didn't refuse because they're, well, spineless.
And that is this.
The law is meant to send a message that lynching is still a current and urgent problem in the United States.
That's what this is.
It's psychological conditioning.
It's kind of like, you know, if you stand in a crowd and you look up at the sky inquisitively, everybody else will look up too.
They'll assume that because you're looking up there, there must be something there.
And so when Congress passes a law banning lynching for the third time, stupid people will assume that, okay, well, if they had to pass a law banning lynching, then I guess it still happens.
So this is all part of the overarching effort to paint our country as systemically racist against minorities, which it is not.
It is a narrative booster, most of all.
And that's what our leaders are concerned with at a time like this, because they're not leaders.
We have no leaders in this country.
Only parasites and con artists playing the part.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
Are you having trouble finding good meat to buy at the store?
You know, when my wife goes grocery shopping for the household, because she always goes, she doesn't trust me to do it, she comes home to tell me horror stories about the nearly empty shelves and the only options that remain are unappealing and cheap cuts of meat.
Well, good thing we don't rely on the grocery store for our meat.
Thanks to Good Ranchers, we are eating well every single day.
Good Ranchers is a meat delivery service that delivers prime American-grown cuts directly to your door.
They offer everything from steaks, burgers, chicken, and even seafood.
And the best part?
Getting this delicious meat painlessly delivered actually saves money and gives you better quality than the cheap cuts you find at store.
Good Ranchers also offers a subscription service so you can schedule how often you want their boxes delivered and you'll save even more than purchasing just one box.
Now, thanks to me, my family eats premium meat every night.
I guess I can give my wife some credit too.
No, I'll give myself all the credit for that.
So be like my family and eat well every night without breaking the bank by visiting GoodRanchers.com slash Walsh.
And just to spice this offer up some more, if you use my code WALSH at checkout, you can get an additional $30 off your first order.
That's GoodRanchers.com slash WALSH to get $30 off your first order of great American meat from Good Ranchers.
All right, sorry I missed the show yesterday.
I'm a deadbeat.
I actually had to call out sick, if you can believe it.
First time, I think the first time I've ever done that, that I can remember.
And it was worse because I didn't really call out.
I was already here in the building and I got to the office even earlier than usual.
So, you know, and I was working on my show and I was doing show prep and I started to feel a little bit off and I began to rapidly deteriorate and I ended up getting hit hard with a stomach bug.
And I'll spare you the details unless you really want them, but I assume you don't.
And so I had to go into my boss's office and like ask to go home.
It was pretty humiliating.
And I'm just, I'm humiliated to be sick, like some kind of mere mortal.
And then I was thinking about it.
I don't think I've had to do anything like that since grade school.
That's the last time I called out sick for something.
But back then, I was almost always making it up.
So that's the big difference.
I was in bed all day, and my wife got me popsicles and crackers and Gatorade.
And it was kind of nice, to be honest.
I remembered why I enjoyed being sick back in high school so much.
It's more enjoyable when you're not really sick and you're pretending, but still, it was kind of nice.
I was thinking I might start cashing this chip in more often.
Who knows?
Because sometimes people can have stomach bugs that flare up on a semi-regular basis, say like twice a month or something.
You know, it happens.
A lot of times it'll hit on a Friday, really, really weird sort of like scientific phenomenon.
And so you never know what might happen.
All right, let's, um, I want to start with this.
It's from the Daily Wire.
It says prominent anti-Trump Republican representative Adam Kinzinger fell for an infamous hoax last week, tweeting support for comedian Sam Hyde, whom Kinzinger apparently believed to be the so-called ghost of Kiev due to a poorly photoshopped tweet.
Kinzinger captioned in a now deleted tweet, the ghost of Kiev has a name and has absolutely owned the Russian Air Force.
Godspeed and more kills.
Samuel.
Fans of Hyde's are known for trying to dupe journalists and others by falsely claiming Hyde is the culprit or hero in various events and memes.
Supporters often reply or caption the hoax posts saying something like, he can't keep getting away with this.
So this is what Adam Kinzinger was doing.
And look, the truth is that there's been a ton of propaganda lies, otherwise known, flying around, you know, pardon the pun, in this case with the ghost of Kiev.
There was even a video, which turned out to be a video from a video game, which supposedly showed this ghost of Kiev.
But the volume of propaganda and the speed with which it is disseminated is unlike anything I think I've seen.
And this stuff matters, and it matters especially when guys like Kinzinger are propping up the narrative.
So, I mean, the ghost of Kiev was fake.
They also told us about the heroes of Snake Island who chose death rather than surrender to the Russians.
And I almost said, on Friday, I heard about that story right before the show on Friday, and my first reaction was, I don't know if I believe this.
And I almost said it on the show, I stopped myself from saying it because in case I'm wrong, I didn't want to be the guy that was doubting the people who courageously gave their lives.
And that's one of the reasons why this propaganda spreads so rapidly, because you don't want to be the one, especially if you don't have any evidence that it's false.
And when it comes to this stuff, we're all None of us are there, so we can only, we just get this information and we can't know if something's true or false until other information comes along.
But, you know, that was the story about the heroes of Snake Island who, I think it was supposedly 13 Ukrainians who told a Russian warship to go F themselves and then died heroically rather than surrender.
Well, it turns out that they did indeed surrender and are currently, you know, alive and doing fine physically.
Um, they told us about a Russian tank that chased down a Ukrainian civilian vehicle and crushed it.
There was video of that.
But now it seems that the tank was actually Ukrainian.
And when you watch that video again, you see the video and you see the tank and you say, well, how do we know that's a Russian tank?
And the video is oddly cropped too, because it, it, anytime you see like an eight second video, That carefully cuts off everything that happened before and after, that should send up some red flags, and that was the case there.
There have been pictures floating around of Ukrainian President Zelensky in body armor on the battlefield that were actually taken months ago.
Other pictures of Ukrainian supermodels charging to the front lines holding what turned out to be airsoft rifles.
I mean, there's this whole narrative about basically supermodels who are charging to the front lines and shooting the bad guys.
I mean, maybe that's happening.
I'm not there.
It sounds suspiciously cinematic and like something Hollywood would come up with.
And a lot of the videos turn out to be fake.
And a lot of the photographs, too.
There was a viral video of a Ukrainian girl standing up to a Russian soldier and berating him and saying, you know, get out of the country.
Well, you can't really tell what she's saying because it's in a foreign language.
That's the other problem.
There's a language barrier here.
The problem with that video is that it was obviously taken in the desert in summertime.
The little girl's wearing like a tank top.
And it's wintertime in Ukraine right now and there's snow everywhere.
So these are all lies, and there are many others, along with, you know, a whole collection of dramatic and suspicious stories that haven't yet been totally debunked, but haven't been proven either.
Like the story that Russia sent mobile crematoriums onto the battlefield to burn their dead bodies and hide their losses.
I mean, that has not been confirmed, but that was another story that was spread.
Everybody was spreading it.
Sends up a red flag for me.
I don't know.
Speaking of Russia's losses, Ukraine says it's killed almost 5,000 Russian troops in a few days.
Nearly doubling the number of Americans killed in Afghanistan in 20 years.
Seems like an extraordinary figure.
Maybe it's true.
I don't know.
And if it is true, you'd think we'd have seen video by now of battlefields littered with dead bodies.
We haven't really seen that.
Maybe that's because they're taking the bodies and throwing them into the mobile crematorium.
I mean, that's the narrative anyway.
It sounds extraordinary.
I mean, it's extraordinary.
5,000.
I mean, it's extraordinary.
5,000 killed in action in less than a week.
Being covered up by this battalion of mobile crematoriums.
That's an extraordinary thing.
Doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Doesn't mean it's not happening right now, but it is extraordinary.
And that's why you need more evidence before you believe it.
And this is the problem.
To know what's happening in Ukraine, we have to rely on some collection of foreign governments, our government, and the media.
Now, as it happens, I trust no one and nothing less than I trust foreign governments, our government, and the media.
They have all earned my distrust, and yours.
And then you add on top of that just the general fog of war that you always have, and the fact that Ukraine, you know, we're getting all this information from Ukraine, and they have a reason to put propaganda out.
It's actually, it's a smart strategy for them.
Propaganda is part of waging any war, especially in the internet age, the information age.
And they're winning the propaganda battle, at least in the West, by a large margin.
So I understand why they do it.
It makes a lot of sense.
I would do it too, if I was a Ukrainian in charge of these things.
But for those of us who care about the truth, we still want to know what's actually happening.
And this really matters, okay?
Because I know when we talk about this and those of us who have pointed out that some of this stuff, it's really not true.
There's actually not just some stuff, there's a lot of stuff we're being told that just isn't true.
And then other stuff that sounds like there's a very good chance it's not true, although we just don't know.
And anytime any of us say that, we're always shouted down and we're told that, oh, just let it, it's for morale.
They understand morale for the Ukrainian troops, but we're not Ukrainian troops.
If you want to go fight for Ukraine, by the way, Zelensky has sent the offer up and said anyone is welcome to come, we'll give you a gun.
So, you know, anyone in this country who really feels strongly about it can go do that.
But most of us, we're not Ukrainian troops.
So do we need propaganda for our morale?
What does that mean?
And there's something More insidious happening.
Because guys like Adam Kinzinger, right?
They're the ones in America who are amplifying this propaganda.
And Adam Kinzinger also insists, as he insisted last week, that the fate of the West depends on the US establishing a no-fly zone over Ukraine, which would be an act of war against Russia.
Okay.
And others have echoed this call.
Yesterday, Richard Engel, one of NBC's most prominent correspondents, floated the idea that the U.S.
should go in and bomb Russian convoys heading into Ukraine.
Another act of war that would suck us into a potentially cataclysmic confrontation with a nuclear superpower.
And of course, there's a contradiction here because Kinzinger, along with Advocating for things that would get us involved in a world war and saying that the fate of the West depends on us getting involved and, you know, shutting down the airspace and fighting the Russians.
He says that on one hand, but then on the other hand, he's gloating that Russia is a paper tiger and they're easily getting their butts whooped.
Well, okay, I mean, I could buy the latter narrative, but if that's true, then how does the fate of the West depend on us getting involved?
According to you, they're a paper tiger and Ukraine's doing a good job handling them.
How can these both be true?
How can they be a paper tiger and the fate of the West, the very fate of our civilization, depends on us getting involved?
Makes no sense.
All we know is that war is good for the media business.
It's also good for the neocon business.
And so it's no surprise to see guys like Kinzinger pushing this stuff.
There are people in our country, this again is why it matters, to call it the propaganda and to want to know the truth.
That's all we're asking for.
Just tell me what's really going on.
That's all I want to know.
That's it.
It's really important because there are people in this country who want to get us involved in a world war.
That's what they want.
That's why it disturbs me.
You know, Senator Rob Portman, a Republican, he was on Meet the Press on Sunday, and he said that And I've heard this before, you know, he said that people are more united now around Ukraine than they've been in our country since 9-11.
You know, he said this is just like right after 9-11, people are very united.
Well, the unity, I hate to be the guy peeing in the punch bowl here, but the unity after 9-11 was used to propel us into two decades of disastrous and pointless wars overseas.
So, and there are those who wish to repeat that performance.
But you can't question it, or contradict the narrative, or dump on the pro-war parade, because if you do, you're a stooge of Putin.
And this has been the message.
A message that Hillary Clinton, among others, has been spreading.
She was on cable news, yes, I think she was on MSNBC, and she was there excoriating the fictional pro-Putin demographic in our country.
Let's listen to that.
We have to also make sure that within our own country, we are calling out those people who are giving aid and comfort to Vladimir Putin, who are talking about what a genius he is, what a smart move it is, who are, unfortunately, being broadcast by Russian media, not only inside Russia, but in Europe, to demonstrate the division within our own country.
So, it's people giving aid and comfort to Putin.
Meanwhile, Mitt Romney was on cable news as well, and he said that those who, you know, he's also going after this alleged pro-Putin group of Republicans, and he said that they are actually treasonous.
They're committing treason.
Or rather, he says they're nearly treasonous.
They're almost very close to treason.
Let's listen.
No place in either political party for this white nationalism or racism.
It's simply wrong.
It's, as you've indicated, speaking of evil, it's evil as well.
And, you know, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Paul Gosar, I don't know them, but I'm reminded of that old line from the Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid movie where one character says, morons, I've got morons on my team.
And I have to think anybody that would sit down with white nationalists and speak at their conference was certainly missing a few IQ points.
And just more broadly, the pro-Putin sentiment that you are seeing from some corners of your party?
Well, a lot of those people are changing their stripes as they're seeing the response of the world and the political response here in the U.S.
But how anybody, how anybody in this country, which loves freedom, can side with Vladimir Putin, which is an oppressor, a dictator, he kills people, he imprisons... That's good.
Yeah, that's a good question.
I mean, how could anybody in this country side with Vladimir Putin?
Yep, I have the same question, because nobody is doing that.
Nobody of note.
Nobody prominent.
Siding with Vladimir Putin, aid and comfort to Putin.
Who's doing that?
What does that even mean, by the way?
I wouldn't know how to give aid and comfort to a foreign dictator, even if I wanted to.
What would I do?
Send him a care package?
Maybe a gift basket from ProFlowers?
How does that work exactly?
Well, I can speak for myself.
And this is something I shouldn't need to say out loud, but no, I don't support Putin, nor do I wish to give him aid and comfort.
I don't, first of all, support any foreign leader.
I don't even support most of our own leaders.
I especially don't support Putin, who's an anti-American dictator, so it's not a tough call for me.
He's also the aggressor in this situation, invading a foreign country.
I'm always going to side.
Most of the time anyway, it's a pretty easy call to side with the people who are defending their homeland, who are being invaded.
And when the person doing the invasion is an anti-American dictator, well again, easy call.
But, I also don't like being lied to.
And right now we're being lied to by lots of people about a lot of things.
And I don't like that.
This is also why the outbreak of virtue signaling is not only, you know, annoying but troubling.
All the people who are... You know, it's one thing people put the Ukrainian flag in their Twitter bio or whatever.
I mean, personally, I am not going to march under, even symbolically, even virtually, any flag other than the United States flag.
So I'm not putting any foreign flag in my bio.
People are doing that.
They're, you know, hashtag stand with Ukraine.
They're changing their profile pics, all that kind of stuff.
Okay, I mean, it's...
It's an empty gesture, whatever.
But then we move on, people are dumping their Russian vodka down the sink that you already bought.
And there are even governors who are outlawing Russian vodka.
Even though, you know, much of the vodka in the United States actually isn't from Russia.
It's already been purchased.
And anyway, we're still importing 20 million barrels of Russian oil per month.
So that's, I think, the perfect picture of empty virtue signaling, is we're going to dump the Russian vodka down the sink and take our Russian nesting dolls and waterboard them and toss them in the ocean.
Maybe burn our Tolstoy, you know, Russian literature.
If you have any Russian dressing in the fridge, go throw that up.
While we're still importing, 20 million barrels, 600,000 barrels, I think it is, a day of Russian oil.
You want to hurt Russia, you stop doing that, but we're not going to stop doing that.
But all the virtue saying that people get caught up in this fervor and they start dumping their vodka and doing all this stuff, which by the way, I mean, go ahead and dump the vodka anyway because it's disgusting, but people doing this, it just shows how easily manipulated they are.
And then I worry that if next thing you know, we're marching into a world war, There are a lot of people who are going to march lockstep
along with it.
So that's my concern.
All right, so from the National Review, here's some good news.
It says, this evening, the Senate failed to proceed to a vote on the Women's Health Protection Act, a radical piece of pro-abortion legislation that codifies Roe versus Wade, establishing a fundamental right to abortion on demand, and nullifies state pro-life laws across the country.
It was a 46 to 48 vote, with six senators not voting.
The bill, which passed the House last fall with the support of every Democrat, but won, is now effectively dead.
Far from achieving the 60 votes needed to proceed to vote, it didn't even achieve 50 votes.
So, I think I sold them short a little bit.
Not only were Democrats last night spending their time trying to outlaw lynching and outlaw hair discrimination, whatever the hell that is, they were also fighting for the right to continue murdering babies, no matter what the Supreme Court says.
And lots of Democrats got up On the floor of the Senate and, you know, spoke out in favor of killing babies, including Chuck Schumer.
Let's listen to what he had to say.
Across the country, it is a dark, dark time for women's reproductive rights.
Last year, we saw the most, the most abortion restrictions passed by state legislatures in a single year.
Some of them were almost vicious.
The vigilantism of Texas's law, I call vicious vigilantism.
Many of these new laws are downright extreme, effectively extinguishing women's ability to even exercise their rights at all.
And the new extreme restrictions fly largely in the face of public opinion.
They also fly in the face of common sense health practices.
And frankly, they fly against common decency itself.
And sadly, It seems like the Supreme Court is close to drastically restricting this long established right in the coming months.
So there's Chuck Schumer, you know, speaking up valiantly for the right to kill babies because that's what, I mean, think about with war happening in the world.
And again, the possibility, especially with the incompetent people running the country, that we could get involved in a world war.
Their bloodlust is not satisfied.
What they're thinking about is how can we make sure more people die?
They're very concerned that in the near future, depending on what the Supreme Court decides...
Even though, if the Supreme Court decides to strike down Roe v. Wade, it will not mean, unfortunately, that abortion is illegal now automatically across the entire country.
It will still be legal in many of the most populated cities and states.
It just goes back to the states to decide.
But they're worried that in the near future, fewer babies will be killed.
They're very concerned about that, and they want to do what they can to make sure, codifying this into law.
Superseding the Supreme Court and make sure that babies can still be killed all across the country.
That's what they're concerned about.
With the Women's Health Protection Act.
Which I also don't have to point out, but I will.
They're talking about the Women's Health Protection Act, but they can't tell you what a woman is.
That should be the first thing that you do.
Maybe this should be a law.
And if I were in charge, this would be a law.
That you cannot pass a law With woman or women's in the title, unless you begin in the language of the bill, the very first thing that you do should be to define what the word woman is.
I mean, if you're gonna make a law about women's health, then I think to begin with, we're all gonna have the really logical question, which is, well, what is that exactly?
Who are you talking about?
Whose health?
I don't know what you mean.
So you just have to start by defining woman, which of course they can't.
All right, so moving on.
Kamala Harris is really bad when she stays on script, even worse when she goes off script.
And so this is a moment here that will play for you if you haven't seen this yet.
If you haven't seen it yet, you'll see it now.
You're going to see and hear it many more times after this because this is going to appear in every GOP campaign ad for the next three years at least.
Here is Kamala Harris yesterday going off script.
Because as we all know, elections matter.
And when folks vote, they order what they want.
And in this case, they got what they asked for.
I went off script a little bit.
First of all, what is that accent that she does?
Second, yeah, I mean, I actually agree.
I couldn't agree more.
That you got what you asked for.
That is going to be their campaign slogan for re-election.
Hey America, you got what you asked for.
That's true.
At least a lot of people.
We didn't all ask for it, but a lot of people did.
And this is exactly what they're getting.
And when it comes to what they asked for, they also asked for Joe Biden, who is a man who is falling apart physically and mentally in every other way.
And we're at the point now with Biden.
Now, I've said before that I would prefer for him not to appear on camera, for him not to take questions, for him not to, you know, do any more press conferences, because I think it's become almost a national security issue.
The more that we advertise to the world that, hey, look, this is the dude who's in charge over here, the more that we do that, the more likely it is that we're going to have, you know, we're going to end up in some kind of world war.
But it's so bad now that even when Biden, even if he's not He's not saying anything, and he's just walking.
He somehow manages to embarrass himself, even in that context.
So here he is walking across the lawn of the White House yesterday, and he's got his mask on.
Let's go ahead and play this.
He's got the mask on, first of all.
That's strike one.
All by himself, outside, with the mask on.
Look how he's walking.
You can tell that he's just focused.
This is a nicely manicured lawn.
It's not like he's walking through mud or quicksand or anything like that or even tall grass.
You can almost see the thought bubble in his head.
He's thinking, OK, left foot, right foot, left foot, right foot.
He's just terrified that he's going to fall.
He's already done that once.
He looks like he's getting a field sobriety test, but he's had a few.
And you know, he's like, he gets pulled over and he's had a few, the cop can smell the alcohol in his breath.
And he knows he's going to be, when it comes time to, you know, to do the blood alcohol content, it's, it's, he's going to, it's going to be close.
And so he's had, the cops have him walk on a line and you could just tell he's, he's doing everything he can to fool the officer, appear as sober as possible.
But the harder he tries, the more drunk he appears.
Um, that's what's happening in our country.
That's, that's the state that we're in.
Uh, again, you gotta, you gotta feel real good about having these people, especially those two.
They're going to be in charge of, uh, navigating this crisis that we find ourselves in.
All right.
I want to play this for you quickly.
Here's a local news report about an assistant principal in Michigan who was arrested for child sex abuse.
And, um, again, assistant principal arrested for child sex abuse.
It even gets worse than that.
When you hear about who the victim is.
And where do you think this guy is right now?
Let's watch and find out.
[VIDEO PLAYBACK]
Assistant principal at Ecourse High School facing criminal sexual conduct charges involving
a child.
45-year-old Melvin Conway was arrested this morning and arraigned this afternoon on one
count of first degree criminal sexual conduct.
Grant Herms is live tonight.
So, Grant, what did the judge decide on bond here?
Well, the bond is relatively low.
You'll also have to be confined to home arrest and wear a GPS tracker that will let you go back to work at the school.
Well, we see this quite often.
E Corps High School assistant principal Melvin Conway, the 45 year old arrested by Detroit
police and the Wayne County Sheriff's Office.
A Sheriff's Office spokesperson telling local 4 Conway is accused of sexual misconduct in
a case involving his daughter and that the alleged incident appeared to happen eight
years ago.
According to the Wayne County Prosecutor's Office, the girl was just 10 years old at
the time of the incident and reported it last spring.
We see this quite often.
It looks like at some point the victim shared this information with someone else.
someone else who took the initiative to report the incident.
The judge today said in Conway's bond at $75,000 along with house arrest with a GPS monitor
so he can still go to work at the school.
As of this afternoon, Conway was still listed as employed by the district.
Local four asked for a comment today but did not get one back.
Conway is charged with criminal sexual conduct.
Can still go work at the school, arrested for quote unquote sexual misconduct
with his daughter who's 10 years old and he can still go work at the school after that.
I've been saying for years.
I'll keep saying Until until I'm not the only one saying it anymore This is an epidemic in the school system Okay, that right there is just one case But it's in the context of an overall epidemic that's been going on for years There is an epidemic of sexual abuse within the schools.
Now, as far as we know, this crime did not occur in the school itself.
But the epidemic is sexual sex crimes happening in the school and also sex criminals being hired by schools and allowed to stay there even after their crimes are known.
We're seeing the same thing in the school system that we've seen in so many other institutions, including the Catholic Church, where something happens, things are reported, and then you take that person and you just move them to a different school.
We've seen that too.
This is an actual epidemic.
And our government has known about it.
I've told you before about the Department of Education actually did a study about sexual misconduct by teachers in schools.
They did this back in 2004.
And they found that it's thousands and thousands of cases.
It's very common.
That was back in 2004.
You think it's gotten better since then?
I guarantee it hasn't.
Because a problem like this, if you don't address it, if you don't do anything about it, it certainly isn't going to go away.
It's only going to get worse.
It's like any other, you know, you've got some putrid, disgusting mess and you sweep it under a rug, it's just going to fester under there and get worse.
It's not going to get better.
And on top of that, that's just the natural course of these sorts of things, but on top of that, the schools themselves are becoming an increasingly sexual environment.
We're putting teachers more and more in charge of having Uh, radically inappropriate sexual conversations with kids at very young ages.
And that is only going to encourage more and more of these kinds of people, of predators, to flock to these jobs.
I mean, one of these days, eventually one of these days, we're actually all going to start talking about this epidemic of sexual assault and sexual abuse in the school system.
Uh, but so far, very few people seem to care that much about it, which I cannot understand.
Finally, this is from the Wall Street Journal.
A billionaire who recently rocketed to the International Space Station said he's sending one of his prized Jean-Michel Basquiat paintings to auction this spring for an estimated $70 million.
You can see the painting there.
The move hints at the shifting whims of the world's wealthy, but also underscores the continuing strength of the art market overall.
So that's the painting right there.
We'll take a look at that.
That's $70 million.
Looks like something that a four-year-old future serial killer would make with finger paint during preschool art class.
I could have vomited on that thing yesterday when I had my stomach bug, and you wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
It could already have vomit on it, for all we know.
It's impossible to tell.
So there's always this debate about whether something qualifies as art or not.
And sure, I'll say that that's art, technically.
It's just really bad art.
And I don't mean subjectively, right?
It's not subjectively bad.
It's objectively bad.
It is objectively bad.
It is objectively not beautiful.
And all art should be striving for beauty, which isn't to say that all art should be, you know, should be cheerful.
It doesn't mean that art can't sometimes be sad or dark or even grim or whatever.
It can be all those things, but it should still have beauty and meaning.
And this has neither of those things.
So, it's just bad.
But someone's gonna spend 70 million dollars on that.
Money well spent.
Let's get to the comment section.
section.
You go to dailywire.com slash sweetbabycomments and leave your own.
I've still entrusted her to do this, and I've given her a second chance, really.
So let's see what we got.
Let's go to clip nine.
Hello again, Mr. Walsh.
It's me, it's Uncle Murray.
I got a bone to pick with ya, buddy.
That last video that I sent ya?
That afterwards that you threw your producer under the bus?
You cast her to the dogs, as the kids say.
And how could you do that to such a sweet, long-suffering woman who works tirelessly for ya?
Day in and day out.
You know, she's just trying to share a little joy and a couple of chuckles with you.
Like, I'm trying to share that with you.
And then what do you do?
You throw her under the bus and you threaten the livelihood.
You jeopardize the food on her plate.
On her plate, you know.
Don't worry about me.
You know, don't worry about hurting my feelings.
I got thick skin, you know.
I can take care of... I died inside, you know, just a little bit.
And so, you know, you and me, you know, that's another battle, General.
But how could you be such a bully to such a sweet producer like that?
Shame.
Shame on you, you overbearing tyrant of a bully.
You ain't heard the last of me, my friend.
For shame.
Uh, this is, this is sabotage.
I know what this is.
I know what's happening here.
There are those, I don't know if it's, I don't, it's, McKenna's in on it, I don't know who else is, but it's a conspiracy.
There are obviously those in this building who don't like the comment section, segment of this show, don't like the video comments, and they're trying everything they can to sabotage the segment.
And it might actually work because if this continues, I don't think we can do the video comments anymore.
All right.
This is why you never give people second chances.
This is why you never do it.
All right.
Let's go.
I'll go to the written comments.
Johnny says, Matt, I saw your Instagram post and would like to inform you that your man card is revoked forever.
No man can eat a cake pop and remain a man.
Shame on you.
OK, I did.
So I'll ask you guys about this.
So on Sunday, I was out with my family, stopped for coffee.
And while I'm getting a coffee, I order myself a cake pop, a chocolate cake pop with sprinkles.
And I did specifically say that I wanted that.
I was very specific.
And my wife, for some reason, thought this was hilarious.
And she took a picture of me holding the cake while you could see there.
Nobody has ever looked less happy while eating a dessert than me in that picture.
But only because she's my wife's laughing at me and shaming me.
And then keeps laughing about how my man card is revoked.
So, is that... Is that really how far we've fallen as a society?
That a grown man can't even eat a cake pop anymore?
Is that the sort of toxic masculinity that we've come to simply accept?
This idea that a man can't still be a man as he says out loud to a person behind the counter, I'd like a cake pop with chocolate and sprinkles, please.
And then proceeds to eat said cake pop.
Do I really lose my man card over that?
Am I banned from my own show?
I'll leave it up to you, the judge, the jury, to decide.
Let's see, IJ Kelly says, Matt, I'm an avid viewer of your show from England.
I'm a big fan and I agree wholeheartedly with 99.9% of what you say.
My burning question to you, though, is this.
Does the Sweet Baby Gang extend to the UK and other nations, or are you strictly a U.S.
outfit?
Much love.
The Sweet Baby Gang is international, of course.
I'm not xenophobic.
I wouldn't exclude foreigners.
You're welcome to join.
You'll have to pay a $300 processing fee, of course, undergo a background check, renounce your country of origin, and work for 12 years as an indentured servant in America to an American member of the gang.
But other than that, you're absolutely welcome.
We don't discriminate.
Finally, Greg says, Matt, your Friday show was disappointing.
I get that you're more the culture war guy, but you need to be able to put that aside and focus on more important things in the world sometimes.
Everyone's talking about the major crisis in Europe and you're ranting about trans people again.
Real war, greater than sign, culture war.
Well, you're right.
I did commit the sin of talking about something other than what everyone else is talking about.
For some reason, as a listener of this show, that annoys you, which I don't quite understand.
Just from a sort of pure entertainment perspective, I don't understand that.
Do you really want and need to hear me say the same thing that you've already heard a million people say already?
Why would you even want that?
And if you do, I'm not sure why you're a fan of this show to begin with, given that I frequently ignore the major headlines and talk about other things.
There have been major stories that have been in the news for weeks at a time, and I never even mention them.
That's what you get on this show.
And I do that because I believe other things are still important, even if the corporate media says otherwise.
You know, with the corporate media, it's one thing at a time.
One thing is of utmost importance, the most important thing in the world, and then that is just tossed to the side, and then here's another thing that's the most important thing in the world.
And as soon as we move on to the next thing, it's like that other thing never happened.
We never speak of it again.
And if you think that won't happen with the situation in Ukraine, it will.
Because when you're in the midst of the hysteria, it's hard to imagine that by next week, nobody will be talking about it anymore, but that's the way it goes in this country.
Now, if this turns into a global world war, that might be different, but if not, then yeah, that's the way it'll go.
And I believe that...
You know, I'd also disagree with you about real war, quote-unquote, being more important than the culture war.
Now, if our own country was being physically invaded by a foreign military, I would probably agree that such an event would be the most pressing concern for all of us at that moment.
But it isn't right now, and hopefully it stays that way.
And so, I mean, our country is being invaded, just not by a foreign military, not in an official capacity.
So the question is whether a war between foreign countries is more important, more immediately relevant, more pressing, more urgent, more likely to impact your life or hurt you or your children than the state of our culture.
I think the answer to that is no.
Doesn't make the war overseas unimportant.
But yes, I believe that fighting for our culture here at home is still more important.
I do believe that.
Well, tonight is Joe Biden's first official State of the Union address, and the one thing I guarantee you is that you're not going to hear a lot of truth.
That's the one thing you won't hear.
That's because the Biden presidency is an unmitigated disaster, supply chain crisis, energy crisis, debacle in Afghanistan, all self-induced, and now war in Ukraine.
Much of it, if not all of it, due to Joe Biden's feckless and embarrassing leadership.
Of course, Biden is never going to say any of that.
But Ben Shapiro will.
What am I talking about?
Tonight, exactly 15 minutes following President Biden's remarks before a joint session of Congress, Ben will offer up his response.
We'll call it the real State of the Union.
Ben is going to tell you where we really are as a country.
I promise you Ben's real State of the Union response will be free of focus group testing.
And he'll be holding the president accountable.
There will be no hiding behind COVID or blaming rogue dictators.
Put simply, Ben will destroy Joe Biden's State of the Union with facts and logic.
So join me, Ben Shapiro, Jeremy Boring, Michael Knowles, and Andrew Klavan tonight at 8.15 p.m.
Eastern, 7.15 p.m.
Central on the Daily Wire YouTube channel.
The Real State of the Union response with Ben Shapiro will be airing as soon as Biden's address ends on the same channel.
So make sure to tune in.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Well, the left-wing blogs informed me yesterday that John Oliver had returned to his HBO show to deliver another epic smackdown, this time destroying, demolishing, eviscerating anti-prostitution laws.
Oliver is quite sure that there is no good reason for prostitution to be illegal.
He's even more sure that it's mostly just a bunch of repressed puritanical bumpkins who still support such laws.
Now, he begins his segment by playing some kind of weird 1950s PSA about wet dreams.
Don't ask me why.
Then he proceeds to list a bunch of sex positions while the audience cackles uproariously.
This is just great comedy.
Watch this.
Specifically tonight, we're going to talk about sex work.
And the concept is pretty simple.
Let's say you have sex.
Any kind.
Missionary.
Doggy.
Cowgirl.
Cowboy.
The Eagle.
The Wheelbarrow.
The Wild Chincoteague Pony.
The Jerry Seinfeld.
The Pick-Me-Up.
The Put-Me-Down.
Mouth-Butt.
Butt-Mouth.
Mouth-Mouth-Butt-Butt.
Butt-Butt-Mouth-Butt.
You know, whatever.
But then that's it.
You go home.
It's fine, right?
So you see there why Oliver needs the crutch of a live studio audience?
Because without the mindless drones laughing, that would have just been a sex-crazed schizophrenic randomly shouting a bunch of sexual terms into the abyss.
With the laughing, it's still that, but at least the people in the room are enjoying it, I guess.
But it sets the stage for what's to come.
Oliver proceeds to lay out his case for decriminalizing prostitution everywhere in the country.
He has 25 minutes to present the argument in favor of prostitution, but wastes most of it talking about alleged instances of abuse by the law enforcement officers tasked with policing the practice.
So he mentions, for example, a report claiming that officers in sting operations sometimes have sex with the prostitutes before arresting them.
Now, we can all agree that if that's happening, it's wrong and horrible and exploitative.
But it has nothing to do with whether prostitution should be legal or illegal.
There are plenty of cases of police officers mistreating murder suspects, but that doesn't mean murder should be legal.
So before we talk about how these laws are enforced, and I personally think they should be enforced by first and foremost penalizing the pimps and traffickers themselves, before we can do that, we need to figure out if the laws should exist at all.
Oliver doesn't really have a lot to say about that subject, even though it's ostensibly the subject of this episode of his show.
But let's listen to his case, for whatever it may be worth.
He starts things off by drawing what actually is a valid comparison, and one that listeners of this show have already heard many times.
Listen to this.
Very basically, sex work is the exchange of sex for money or goods.
And in the United States, a complicated patchwork of local, state, and federal laws makes that act illegal everywhere except for a few counties in Nevada.
And if you're thinking, "Well, hold on, John.
Didn't Donald Sutherland and Julie Christie have sex for real in Don't Look Now
and also get paid at least scale?
Wouldn't that be illegal?"
The answer is one, yes, I also believe that rumor.
Great reference.
And two, that is actually legal because of the presence of the camera, making it an art film, otherwise known as porn, and thus legally covered as part of free speech.
So basically, consensual sex for money on camera is legal porn, and consensual sex for money off camera is illegal sex work.
Makes sense, right?
Wrong?
Well, exactly.
Everything about the way we regulate sex work in this country is confusing and counterproductive.
Oh, where have I heard that before?
I mean, you're right, John.
That is, in fact, a point that I have made many times, and people on your side of the ideological divide have mocked me relentlessly for it.
I guess I need to say it with a British accent for it to be credible.
Pornography is prostitution on film.
It fits the definition in every sense of the word.
It makes no sense for prostitution to only be legal when there's a camera filming it.
In fact, if you could only outlaw one form, the filmed or unfilmed variety, it would make more sense to outlaw the former because it has more participants.
Either way, there's no denying the contradiction in the way that our laws treat prostitution as opposed to how they treat pornography.
My answer to that contradiction is to make all of it illegal.
His answer is to make it all legal.
And let's find out why.
But a human history's worth of **** laws hasn't changed the fact that, one, sex work has always been part of society, appealing to every interest and every kind of clientele.
And two, sex workers are not a monolith.
People from a variety of backgrounds do it for a variety of reasons.
And the fact is, our current system of criminalizing the trade and driving everyone underground is actually only making life harder for the most vulnerable involved.
And given that, sex workers are, and this is true, people with thoughts about their own **** So here, John offers two incredible insights.
One, he points out that prostitution has always been around.
And two, he observes that some of the people doing this illegal thing would prefer if it were not illegal.
Now, both of these points may seem rather obvious and irrelevant, but remember that he dropped an F-word in there, which automatically makes his point both powerful and clever and funny.
Yes, we know that there have been prostitutes for as long as there's been human civilization.
That's why the old cliche about the world's oldest profession.
But we've also had murder and rape and child abuse and every other bad human activity for as long as we've had humans.
The fact that people have been doing something for a long time and will always do it doesn't automatically mean that there should be no laws against it.
If it did, then there shouldn't be laws against anything.
Because the only things we need laws against are precisely those things that human beings tend to do.
If nobody did it, we wouldn't need to outlaw it.
As for the point that anti-prostitution laws ignore the perspective of prostitutes, that wouldn't be relevant if it were true.
Because again, pointing out that the people doing the illegal thing don't like that it's illegal is not really relevant, but it's also not true at all.
Because some of the most vocal anti-prostitution voices in the country are people who've been rescued from that life.
Prostitution is bad.
It harms people.
It harms everybody involved in one way or another.
There's a reason why prostitutes, just like people in the porn industry, have astronomically high rates of substance abuse, suicide.
Any law that could potentially prevent people from getting involved in this activity, or deter them from it, or at least any law that fails to condone it, is good for the prostitutes, or potential prostitutes themselves, even if they don't always have the self-awareness and foresight to see it that way.
You know, it's pretty common for people who are stuck in a self-destructive cycle to defend their self-destructive activity and to get very angry at anybody who tries to stop them from doing the self-destructive thing.
But that doesn't really mean anything in terms of what the law should be.
Now, we'll return to that point in just a moment, but first we'll continue listening to Oliver's argument, such as it is.
So far, he hasn't really presented any reason to decriminalize it.
Perhaps he finally gets to that point here.
This story is going to be about the fact that sex work is inarguably labor.
It is a job.
And people do it for the same reasons that people do any job, as this advocate explains.
Sex work is inherently work.
It's how people feed their families, it's how people put clothes on their bags, it's, you know, how people survive.
I mean, I've been a sex worker, I've been a lawyer, I've served sandwiches at Subway, I folded clothes at Abercrombie.
All those are work.
Right!
It's all work!
Uh, okay?
What's your point?
Yes, those are all things you did for money.
You folded clothes at Abercrombie.
You were a prostitute.
You were a lawyer, which some would argue is more of a lateral move.
All of that is work if by work you simply mean a task performed for financial compensation.
But what does that prove?
Are you saying that anything done for money is automatically good?
Or should automatically be legal?
That's quite an interesting take from the same people who also tend to be critics of capitalism.
What about child pornographers?
What about hired assassins?
What about Bernie Madoff running a Ponzi scheme?
All of that is work done for money.
If you don't think that all of it should be legal, then you're saying that there are certain types of jobs, certain types of work, that nobody should be legally allowed to do in a civilized society, even if they use it to feed their families.
The question is whether prostitution ought to be in that category or not, and that is a question you still have not really answered.
And never do, but we'll keep listening.
To those who are still uncomfortable here, out of a concern that there are people who feel economically forced into sex work, I totally agree with you.
That is a huge problem.
But the fact is, our current laws are not addressing that.
If you want to do that, that's a much bigger conversation to have, because fundamentally, the only way to make sure that people have a choice in the way they earn money is to make housing affordable, healthcare accessible, and to not burden marginalized people with criminal records that lead to a cycle of joblessness, homelessness, and desperation.
But until such time as we have that conversation, and it does not seem like something enough people are itching to have right now, we need to stop pursuing policies that harass, endanger, and occasionally refrigerate sex workers, and instead start listening to what they actually want.
Because unfortunately, if we don't do that, we're just going to carry on looking like a bunch of f***ing clowns.
Well, speak for yourself, John.
Now, he once again returns to the point that people who are currently prostitutes do not want prostitution to be a crime.
Again, I must remind him that most of the people currently engaged in all types of illegal activity probably would prefer if the activity was not illegal.
That doesn't really help enlighten the issue at all.
Nor does it do anything to negate the real reason why prostitution is illegal almost everywhere and should remain so.
And that is this.
Prostitution is human trafficking by definition.
It is the human body sold as a good, an object.
That's also what distinguishes prostitution from legitimate forms of work.
With legitimate labor, you are providing a good or service in exchange for money.
In prostitution, you are the good.
You are the service.
This is also how you differentiate, you know, a zip recruiter from a slave auction.
You're not buying the slave's labor, really.
You're buying him.
The slave himself is the commodity, and so is the prostitute.
The prostitute gives herself up to be used and discarded.
It is inherently dehumanizing, degrading, violent, despair-inducing.
Oliver mentions how poor and vulnerable people tend to be the ones on street corners offering to perform oral sex on strangers, which is true, but he never stops to ask himself why.
Putting the law aside, why is it almost always poor and desperate people who end up going down this dark road?
There are exceptions, of course, and the internet version of prostitution provides many of those exceptions, but the vast majority of the hookers on street corners are poor, desperate, drug-addicted girls.
That's not going to change by making it legal.
It's not like if you legalize it, suddenly a bunch of middle-class, financially stable women are going to flock to the corner, hoping to get their turn humping a random dude in a car parked by a dumpster.
This is something that only people in dire straits do because it is debasing, humiliating, dirty, and shameful.
And dangerous.
That's not an argument for making it legal.
And if you think it is, I have to question not only your common sense, but your basic moral judgment as well.
Now, the prostitute apologist will say that the prostitutes are acting consensually.
But we know that's not true in a great number of cases.
Many of these girls are physically forced and coerced into it.
And again, you're not going to alleviate those cases by making the practice legal.
Pornography is legal, and that certainly hasn't done anything to put a dent in the child porn business.
The effect has gone entirely the other way.
As for prostitutes, many did not choose that life.
That's reason enough to keep it illegal.
But even the ones who appear to have chosen it didn't really choose it.
People who think they have choices don't become prostitutes.
You'd think this would be obvious to the left especially as they're the ones who say that a boss having sex with a subordinate is automatically a rapist because the power dynamics make consent impossible, right?
That was the Me Too logic.
Now if they can apply that principle to the workplace, where it should not actually be applied most of the time, how can they exempt prostitution?
But however you look at the consent question, the fact remains that prostitution is human trafficking.
It is the buying and selling of human beings.
It is exploitation of the most degrading and dehumanizing kind.
Whether everybody agrees to the arrangement, or nobody does, or some people do but others don't, or whatever other combination, it still should not be legal.
And John Oliver is still, today, certainly, cancelled.
And we'll leave it there for today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
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 producer is Mathis Glubber, our technical director is Austin Stevens, production manager Pavel Vladovsky, the show is edited by Robbie Dantzler, our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina, hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Heart, and our production coordinator is McKenna Waters.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2022.
As Putin threatens nuclear winter, Democrats focus on outlawing lynchings from a century ago.
Ukraine attempts to join the EU.
And one Russia expert says we are already in World War III.
