Today on the Matt Walsh Show, mass hysteria has gripped our nation. People are so hysterical that many are now begging for nuclear war. But closer to home, on a smaller scale, we see the hysteria in the proliferation of racism hoaxes, especially in our schools. Speaking of which, there have been three in our schools in just the past week or two. We’ll talk about it. Also, Ukrainian President Zelensky addresses congress and asks for a No Fly Zone, which would lead directly to World War 3. And a funny thing: when most Americans are told what’s actually in the so-called “don’t say gay bill,” they support it. Plus, lawmakers want to hold social media companies responsible for making our children addicted to the internet. And, in our daily cancellation, lawmakers also now plan to make Daylight Savings permanent. I’ll explain why that’s a bad idea, and might in fact bring about the end of human civilization. All of that and more today on the Matt Walsh Show.
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, mass hysteria has gripped hold of our nation.
People are so hysterical that many are now begging for nuclear war.
But closer to home, on a smaller scale, we see the hysteria and the proliferation of racism hoaxes, especially in our schools.
Speaking of which, there have been three in our schools in just the past week or two.
We'll talk about that.
Ukrainian President Zelensky addresses Congress and asks for a no-fly zone, which would lead directly to World War III.
Small little detail.
And a funny thing, when most Americans are told what's actually in the so-called Don't Say Gay Bill, they support it.
Plus, lawmakers want to hold social media companies responsible for making our children addicted to the internet.
And in our daily cancellation, lawmakers also now plan to make daylight savings permanent.
I'll explain why that's a bad idea and might, in fact, bring about the end of human civilization.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
So do you really control your retirement money?
If you've got a 401k or IRA or similar retirement plan, the government actually controls it.
They decide how much you can borrow and when you must pay it back.
And you'll owe taxes and penalties for taking money out too soon or waiting too long, even though it's all your money.
And thanks to the skyrocketing national debt, who knows how much you'll have to pay in taxes during a retirement that could last 30 years.
Bake-on-yourself is a better way to grow and protect your hard-earned money.
You can access Your money for any purpose with no questions asked and even use it for purchases or opportunities without interrupting the growth of those dollars.
This is the strategy famous businesses used when no banker would lend them a dime and almost anyone can do it.
Your plan also doesn't go backward when the market tumbles.
Both your principle and growth are locked in.
The best part is that you have control of your money without government penalties or restrictions on how much income you can take or when you can take it.
You don't have to beg permission or pledge your firstborn to use your money as it should be.
So you can get a free report with all the details of how adding Bank On Yourself to your financial plan can help you take back control of your money.
Just go to BankOnYourself.com slash Walsh.
That's BankOnYourself.com slash Walsh.
This information is for educational purposes only and is not a solicitation for the purchase of any financial product.
All guarantees are based on the claims paying ability of the insurer.
You know, people as a group, when taking the shape of a mob, have always been susceptible to mass hysteria.
History provides, of course, many examples, but recent history provides many more examples, a new example each day, it seems, because modern media and modern methods of communication are the perfect delivery system for the sorts of psychological contagions which lead to hysteria.
Now, we're seeing this play out with respect to the war in Ukraine.
Many Americans who couldn't point to Ukraine on a map three weeks ago, and probably still can't, Nonetheless, now have Ukrainian flags in their bios and appear to feel greater patriotic pride for this foreign country that they've never been to and know nothing about than for their own country.
It's hysteria.
It's not rational thought.
And now the latest Pew Research poll shows that 35% of Americans, nearly a third, Favor taking direct military action against Russia, even if it means risking nuclear war.
That was written in the question.
If it meant risking nuclear war, would you still want to get involved to protect Ukraine?
35% of Americans said yes.
Now, these people, who again, know almost nothing about this conflict or the countries involved, would risk their own children's lives for the sake of Ukraine.
They would risk global death on an unimaginable scale for Ukraine.
They don't know why they feel this way.
They can't explain it.
But they do.
It's mass hysteria.
Now, we'll get back to Ukraine later, but as I said, our capacity for mass hysteria extends far beyond the current conflict overseas.
It invades every aspect of our lives.
We see it on every level, everywhere.
And this is where all the racist hate hoaxes also come from.
Now, they're both They are born from a sort of hysteria, an obsession with being the victim, a need for attention.
And the hoaxes also take advantage of that same proclivity towards hysteria in the general public.
So here's an example, closer to home, smaller scale.
Actually, three examples.
So we'll start with this.
A student at Our Lady of Mercy School for Young Women in Rochester, which is a grade 6 through 12 school, claimed last week to have discovered racist graffiti in the bathroom.
Of course, protests followed.
Kids were protesting.
Lots of media coverage.
You know how this works.
And you also know where it's going.
But before we get there, here's a local media reporting on the conclusion of this case while leaving something important out.
Listen to this.
But first, a breaking update to a local story that's gotten a lot of traction.
Our Lady of Mercy school officials say they know who was behind racist graffiti in one of the bathrooms.
A fellow student.
The message said the all-girls school is filled with a bunch of quote, n-words.
Administrators discovered it earlier this week.
Brighton police immediately began investigating the case as a hate crime.
This afternoon, school leaders tell us one of their students confessed to writing that message.
They say the maximum disciplinary action has already been taken.
Also in their statement, the school says Mercy will work to help heal the wounds caused by this incident, as well as help heal deep-rooted, related feelings this incident has brought to the surface.
Brighton Police have not charged the students.
So the investigation concluded.
They found the culprit.
Raises the question as to, you know, first of all, why they were investigating scribblings on a middle school bathroom stall as a federal crime.
So they were investigating it as a hate crime, which means a federal crime.
Because some kid supposedly wrote something in marker on a bathroom stall.
Now, of course, we don't really need to ask the question as to why they're doing that.
We already know.
It's part of the mass hysteria.
And it's that same hysteria that somehow prevents people from seeing that this was obviously a hoax from the beginning.
These things in recent history are literally always hoaxes.
I mean, always.
Though in this case, the authorities involved refused to come out and say so.
Here's the Post Millennial.
Says Brighton Police Chief David Catholdi said, quote, we have shared the results of our investigation with OLM.
They have decided to handle the matter internally and not pursue criminal charges.
Several students at the school shared the offending message to at primetime585, which is the Twitter handle of Karen Iglesia, a local woman who chronicles Section 5 sports and has developed a close relationship with many high school athletes.
At the beginning of the week, Iglesia posted an image of the racist graffiti on Twitter.
She said, quote, my inbox was flooded today from OLM high school girls.
The Twitter account, this note was written in the bathroom and they had issues on how the administration dealt with it.
They, many athletes all white, begged me to post it because they were so upset at how trivial the school made it.
Iglesia wrote on Monday afternoon.
Rochester-area radio talk show host Bob Lansbury tweeted that four sources, including two in government, said the culprit was an African-American student.
Quote, not true.
She's Hispanic.
A Hispanic.
Not considered African-American in no way, Iglesia responded on Twitter in a quote tweet replying to Lansbury.
So you got two people on the ground there, both confirming.
They're debating whether African-American or Hispanic, but confirming it was not a white student.
So it's what we've seen many times, a cycle from which we cannot escape.
Somebody, often a child, commits an obvious hoax, everyone loses their minds, and then we simply move on after it's proven to be a hoax, having not learned any lesson at all.
Nobody ever retracts anything they said, there's never any kind of apology.
This was made clear over in Minnesota recently as well.
Listen to this story from WCCO in Minneapolis.
Says quote, the superintendent of New Prague area schools says allegations of a racist chant at a girls basketball game last month could not be substantiated by the school's investigations.
Robinsdale area schools released a statement after the February 15th game between Cooper High School and New Prague saying quote, according to several accounts, some spectators made monkey sounds directed at the Cooper team.
Many of the Cooper players are black.
He said about 20 people who were at the game were interviewed and none reported hearing monkey noises.
The superintendent also said no one reported hearing any noises on the night of the game and the district only learned of the allegation via social media after the fact.
So...
After the game on social media, a few accounts claimed they heard, quote, monkey sounds, whatever that means.
And they extrapolated from this ambiguous sound that they allegedly heard that white people in the stands were being racist towards black players on the court.
Now, call me crazy, but I would say really that the racism comes in when, if you hear a sound and it vaguely sounds like a monkey sound, and then you immediately assume that it's directed at black people, I would think that that makes you the racist, if anything.
You know, if it were me, and I heard something like that, I heard a sound like, what was that?
I wouldn't draw that connection immediately.
But anyway, the School District investigated, interviewed 20 people, discovered that nobody in the room heard these sounds, and also that nobody who was present for the event reported anything of the sort.
Does that mean we can move forward now, relieved that yet another allegedly racist act was a figment of somebody's imagination?
No, of course not.
Because the report continues.
In a message to families, new Prague superintendent Tim Ditburner Somehow just a perfect last name for this guy.
I don't know why.
Said, while the investigation found the allegations of the racist chant could not be substantiated, the findings of this investigation neither negate the lived experiences of Robbinsdale Cooper student-athletes and staff, nor does it absolve the New Prague Area schools of its responsibility to create a culture that does not tolerate inappropriate behavior.
Dick Berner reiterated a three-step plan to address the school culture so these incidents do not happen in the future.
That plan includes creating a school climate task force, professional development, and resources for staff, and also working with student leaders.
Okay, so, the racist chant doesn't appear to have happened, because of course it didn't happen, because it's just beyond belief that a bunch of parents at a girls' basketball game would start making monkey sounds at black players.
But even though it didn't happen, We still must respect the lived experience of people who think it did happen.
What's more, the superintendent Ditburner felt the need to reiterate that he won't tolerate the kind of behavior that didn't actually occur.
And he's putting in place policies and plans to address this non-existent activity and ensure that the stuff that isn't happening continues to not happen.
But wait, there's more.
The superintendent made reference to incidents, plural, at the school.
Later in his statement, he said that, well, even if this racist thing didn't happen, other racist stuff has happened recently.
Well, what racist events was he referring to?
Well, according to a local NBC affiliate, a few students in the stands during a hockey match, also recently, flashed a, quote, white supremacist hand symbol.
Now, the symbol was the OK sign, which is not actually a racist symbol, and which we know for a fact was only connected to racism because of a 4chan hoax a few years ago.
I mean, you can go back and look at the posts where they came up with this and said, hey, wouldn't it be funny if we pretended that this was a racist symbol?
So we know that it's all a hoax.
And yet, continually, people get in trouble for, you know, doing this with their hands.
The offenders, in this case, explained afterwards that they had no idea that the symbol had any connection to racism at all.
No clue.
But of course, you know, of course they didn't know that, because it doesn't have any connection.
And also, the only way they'd even know that the symbol supposedly is connected to racism is if they spend a lot of time on Twitter, because that's the only place you'll see this.
But most kids their age don't use Twitter as their social media poison of choice.
So, Three fake racist incidents in our schools in the span of a couple weeks.
Mass hysteria.
And when I say hysteria, of course, this is not hysteria from the people amplifying all of this, encouraging it.
They're not being hysterical.
They're being quite intentional in their actions.
But the plan is to make everybody else hysterical.
Because when we are in the throes of mass hysteria, we can be manipulated.
We're at their mercy.
And that, of course, is their plan.
plan.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
So how do you tell the difference between the two, really?
The most common scams, though, take place on the phone or via email.
Be smart.
Never give information out or send money to anyone over the phone.
Always ask for everything in writing and only interact with websites that end with .gov.
It's important to understand how cybercrime and identity theft are affecting our lives.
Every day we put our information at risk on the internet.
In an instant, a cybercriminal could steal what's yours, sometimes even harm your finances, your credit, your reputation.
All of it is on the line.
Good thing there's LifeLock.
LifeLock helps detect a wide range of identity threats like your social security number for sale on the dark web.
You have access to a dedicated restoration specialist if you become a victim, so you have many layers of protection no matter what happens.
Look, nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses, but you can help protect what's yours with LifeLock by Norton.
Join now and save up to 25% off your first year at LifeLock.com slash Walsh.
That's LifeLock.com slash Walsh or 25% off.
All right, there's so much going on in the world, it's hard to fit it all into five headlines.
Not that in the five headlines segment, I actually don't do five headlines.
I mean, sometimes it's like two headlines, sometimes it's 12.
So five headlines, you know, we'll change the name of the segment to five headlines, give or take.
So we'll start here.
Zelensky, president of Ukraine, addressed Congress.
Um, today and he's, uh, he's kind of doing the world tour here all through zoom, but he's talked to, um, you know, he was, he, uh, addressed Canadian lawmakers, I think a few days ago.
So he's kind of going around and in addressing Congress here in the United States, he evoked nine 11 evoked Pearl Harbor and also the, I had a dream speech.
So he's kind of greatest hits here, throwing it all in there.
And as to the ladder, we have that clip.
Uh, let's listen to that.
I have a dream.
These words are known to each of you.
Today I can say, I have a need.
I need to protect our sky.
I need your decision, your help, which means exactly the same, the same you feel when you hear the words, I have a dream.
Ladies and gentlemen, friends, Ukraine is grateful to the United States for its overwhelming support for everything that your government and your people have done for us, for weapons and ammunition, for training, for finances, for leadership in the free world, which helps us to pressure the aggressor economically.
I'm grateful to President Biden for his personal involvement, for his sincere commitment to the defense of Ukraine and
democracy all over the world.
I am grateful to you for the resolution which recognizes all those who commit crimes against
Ukraine, against the Ukrainian people as war criminals.
However, now it is true in the darkest time for our country, for the whole Europe, I call
on you to do more.
New packages of sanctions are needed constantly.
So he has a dream, he wants us to protect the skies, he wants us to do more.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
And when he talks about protecting the skies, of course, what he means is, what he wants most of all, is a no-fly zone.
And that's what he's been asking for, talking to the UK, Canada, United States, he's been asking for a no-fly zone.
That's what he wants.
I, as I've been saying all along about this and about Zelensky, I understand why he would want a no-fly zone.
I understand why he would want the United States to get involved directly and militarily in this conflict.
So I get why he wants that.
Okay, because he's worried about Ukraine.
It's his job to be worried about Ukraine.
He's not worried about the United States, though.
That's not on his list of concerns.
He's not concerned about how many American deaths would follow if we got into a direct conflict with Russia, because that's what a no-fly zone would mean.
I feel like this is something that needs to be explained to people, because I'm not sure if everyone really understands.
When you hear no-fly zone, I think what people imagine, I don't know, but just based on the way they talk about it, how casually it's discussed by some people, especially on social media, they appear to think that A no-fly zone is like a force field that we can magically put over Ukraine to make sure that no planes fly over it and drop any bombs.
And by the way, if that was an option, if we had a magical force field and we could set it up over Ukraine, then I would say, yeah, let's definitely set up the force field.
But that's not what it is.
And also, what a no-fly zone is, it's also not like a gun-free zone where you just post signs all around.
You know, that's also not what we're doing.
We're not just posting signs saying, no flying here, Russia.
No, it means shooting down Russian planes.
Okay, it means active, direct military engagement with Russia.
It means getting involved in a war with Russia.
That's what it means.
And that's what he would like to see happen.
Which would result, you know, now that we're... Now we're in a war with another major power, a nuclear power.
We're risking nuclear war, which apparently, according to Pew, a third of Americans are okay with.
They're not really okay with it.
But, again, they're in the throes of hysteria.
They don't really know what they're saying.
If they stop to think for a minute about what that would actually mean, Okay, think about, because this is what you're saying.
Now, you're saying that you'd be okay with nuclear war, potentially, to protect Ukraine.
Okay, well just stop for a second and imagine what it would mean for a nuclear bomb to be dropped on a major American city.
Okay, just think about that.
You're really okay with that, potentially, the risk of that for Ukraine, a country you don't know a damn thing about.
A country that three weeks ago you never thought about.
Up until three weeks ago you never thought once about it.
In your life.
Ever.
Never thought about Ukraine.
And now you're willing to risk the nuclear destruction of American cities for its sake.
That's not thinking.
That's not clear thinking.
It's just not.
Now, I'm not saying that this is an overly simple situation.
War never is.
And there are different points of view people can have.
The level of involvement of the United States, what we do to help, do we help at all?
I mean, there's varying degrees, different opinions people can have as intelligent people.
But to purposefully get involved in a military conflict with Russia, which would lead to a world war.
I'm not saying it would definitely lead to nuclear annihilation, although that's on the table when you get into a world war and everybody has nuclear weapons.
But it would certainly lead, I think, to a world war.
You have to think about what that means.
And that's what Zelensky wants for his sake and for the sake of Ukraine.
Fine, I understand why he wants it.
But this is why the fawning treatment of this guy is very disturbing to me.
Because when you're fawning over somebody and treating them like a god, In fact, I just saw, there was a, I forget who it is, but a band, a singer just put out, and he was getting a lot of praise for this, and he was doing the rounds on cable news performing this song that he wrote as a tribute to Zelensky.
And the name of the song is, Can One Man Save the World?
Maybe I'll find that.
We'll play it for you tomorrow.
Play a clip of it.
And people are loving this song.
And it's all about Zelensky and about how he's taken a stand to save the world.
Talking about him literally like a Christ figure.
And the problem with doing that is, first of all, it's sacrilegious to talk about anybody that way.
But especially in a situation like this.
Because when you're talking about a guy like he's a Hollywood hero, Or something more than that, an actual savior of humanity, a messianic figure, then you're not thinking rationally.
And you're not thinking about what he is actually trying to get us involved in and what that would mean for us and our families and our children.
Also, I'll tell you this right now, Zelensky, shoes on the other foot, you know?
You think Zelensky is getting involved, he's sending Ukrainian troops to defend America?
You think he's doing that?
Do you think, shoes on the other foot, do you think that Zelensky would risk thousands of Ukrainian lives for the sake of us?
You think he'd do that?
We all know he wouldn't.
We all know he wouldn't.
Yet another one of our great allies who we all know would never do this for us.
Ever.
And yet, we think we're obligated to do it for them.
It's crazy to me.
Alright.
This is from the Daily Wire.
It says, nearly two-thirds of Americans support the key features of Florida's HB 1557 parental rights and education proposal.
So we've got one terrible thing that a third of Americans supposedly support, but then we've got two-thirds who support something good.
This is according to a new poll released on Monday by the Daily Wire.
The national poll of U.S.
adults was conducted over the weekend by market research technology platform Lucid on behalf of the Daily Wire.
The survey is a thousand-person sample, was 37% Democrat, 32% Republican, 31% Independent.
Unlike other surveys that have relied on a summary of the legislation written by pollsters, the Daily Wire's researchers presented the respondents in its study with the actual language from the Florida's bill.
And it's the most criticized passage, and then ask them to react to it.
Who would have thought, you know?
I mean, what do you know?
When you actually tell people what's in the bill itself, and you don't say... Yeah, if you ask people, should there be a bill where if you say the word gay, you're sent to Gitmo?
What do you know?
If you ask people that, most of them are gonna say, no, no, I don't think I support that bill.
Seems a little bit... seems a little overboard.
You tell them what the bill actually says and how limited it is.
Far too limited, in my opinion.
We're not going to teach sexuality, sexual orientation, and gender identity to kids in grades 6 through 3.
Or K through 3.
You tell them that and most Americans support it.
More than 6 in 10 Americans, 64%, support the Florida bill's ban on classroom instructions on sexual orientation and gender identity in grades K through 3.
21% said they oppose the bill.
The Florida measure is backed by 69% of Republicans, 62% of Democrats, and 57% of Independents.
There was also no notable differences among whites, blacks, and Latinos.
They're all in the 60% range.
Actually, black respondents had the highest in favor of the bill, 66%.
63% for white people, Latinos, 62%.
And that's what happens when you actually tell them what the bill says.
Most Americans, when you ask them, Do you think that seven-year-olds should be taught about transgenderism in school?
Most Americans say no.
Now, that's the glass half full.
That's the optimistic way of reading this.
The majority of Americans are opposed to this.
If you want to look at it from the more pessimistic end, then you might say only 62% are opposed to teaching that kind of stuff to seven-year-olds.
That's the other way you might look at this.
That, you know, 62% is still, or 64% rather, 64%, that's good, it's a majority.
And so, you make the point.
Majority of Americans are actually in favor of this bill that the left is treating like it's Armageddon.
And they're in favor of it when you tell them the actual language.
But the negative side of that, which, you know, I like to always take a gander at the negative side of the coin as well, because I like to be a realist.
And that tells you that, okay, 64% say we shouldn't teach transgenderism to seven-year-olds.
You know, that leaves a pretty sizable number of Americans who do not have that opinion, are either in favor of teaching it or don't care either way.
Which, to me, is somehow the most disturbing.
If you have no opinion, you can't be bothered to care.
And the thing is, if you were to ask this same exact question ten years ago, you know, you put this bill on the table ten years ago, I think the first reaction from everybody would be, well, why would you need this?
I mean, no one would ever, we don't need this bill, no one would ever even conceive of teaching this stuff to little kids.
But almost everyone would agree that yes, we should not be teaching it.
But it would seem like a conversation that doesn't need to be had in the first place.
Now you have a certain preponderance of Americans who are actually actively in favor of teaching this stuff to kids.
It shows you the kind of soul rot and the mental rot that afflicts our country.
Speaking of soul rot and mental rot, the Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, has chimed in on the Florida bill.
And this is what he says, Florida's recent law restricting discussions about gender identity in school has understandably raised serious concern.
The law concerns me too.
Let me explain why.
Learning that people are different and that not all families look the same, these are important lessons that start early in life, including in school.
They help create a society based on understanding and respect.
They help children know they belong, even if they're different.
I grew up in Florida, and I'm a proud graduate of the public school system.
As a kid who often felt I didn't belong, it helped tremendously when teachers openly discussed our different backgrounds.
This built understanding and reduced shame.
LGBTQ youth also deserve such proactive support.
Preventing or criminalizing efforts to foster such understanding hurts kids and families.
It shuts down dialogue instead of nurturing healthy conversation, and it sends a signal to LGBTQ youth that they're not fully accepted.
So he's finding a more wordy way to do it, and he's being a little bit more subtle, but he's still Hammering on this for this propaganda this false narrative that this is a bill that forbids people from saying the word gay He doesn't he doesn't he doesn't mention the don't say gay bill But this is what he's basically claiming that the bill would somehow prevent Classrooms and students and teachers from acknowledging the existence of various different kinds of people That's not what the bill does
And also, by the way, kids in a modern classroom, you don't need to have lessons teaching them that there are different... What was he saying?
Learning that people are different and not all families look the same.
You actually at no point even need to sit kids down and tell them that because they can see it for themselves.
They can look around them in a modern public school classroom, especially in a place like Florida, and they can look around and see that, oh yeah, people all look different.
You don't need to talk about it at all.
They can see that.
That's the world they live in.
Talk about lived experience.
That is their lived experience.
So you don't need to talk about it.
It's not a discussion that needs to be had.
But that's also not what the bill does.
It's got nothing to do with that.
Despite that piece of propaganda, that ridiculous commercial that we played last week, claiming that the bill would mean that if a child who has two mommies mentions both of her mommies in class, an alarm will sound and the teacher will be immediately fired.
That's actually not what the bill does.
All it does is it says that we're not going to have lesson plans about gender identity and sexuality.
You're not going to talk to a seven-year-old about that.
All right, let's move to this from the Wall Street Journal.
A pair of California lawmakers introduced a bill that aims to hold technology companies liable for social media addictions that may affect children.
The bill would let parents and guardians sue platforms that they believe addicted children in their care.
Through advertising, push notifications, and design features that promote compulsive behavior, particularly the continual consumption of harmful content on issues such as eating disorders and suicide.
It would hold companies accountable regardless of whether they deliberately designed their products to be addictive.
The bill, called the Social Media Platform Duty to Children Act, was introduced Tuesday by state assembly members Jordan Cunningham and Buffy Wicks, one's a Democrat, one's a Republican.
The bills were written to improve children's experiences online from two different angles.
So that's what this is about.
It's about improving their experiences and holding these tech companies responsible for making kids addicted to the content.
I think it tells you something that this is supposed to be a bill protecting children and protecting them when they're online.
And if you want to do that, then the very first thing that you should be doing Is everything possible to restrict pornographic content?
Because the worst thing that's happening to kids online is that ages as young as seven or eight or even younger, they're being exposed to hardcore pornography.
They're being exposed to the kinds of sexual images that most people through history never in their lives would have ever been exposed to, even as adults.
And now we've got eight-year-olds whose minds are marinating in this kind of filth.
And who go through their formative years marinating in it and suffer the consequences for a lifetime.
So if you really want to protect kids, that should be the first thing your bill accomplishes.
As far as I can tell with this bill, it doesn't even touch on that.
Instead, they're concerned with push notifications.
That's kind of the fact that it makes kids addicted.
Now, I'm all about holding the big tech companies responsible.
I'm certainly all about protecting kids.
And that's why I say when it comes to the kind of content that these companies allow to proliferate on their platforms, the fact that there's no barriers put in place at all.
Kid can go online and within two seconds he can access anything.
That to me is crazy and anything done to address that issue is a positive step.
But also, we have to acknowledge that if your kid is addicted to the internet, if he's addicted to social media, yeah, it's true that social media companies, they want that.
They're doing everything they can to make it, to form this into a compulsion.
And that's not good.
That's evil, in fact.
But also, if your child, if your nine-year-old has a compulsive need to use social media, that's primarily your own fault.
So we have to always turn the mirror around so the parents can see themselves.
That's on you.
As I've said a million times, especially younger kids, your ability to control, you have a profound ability to control Their access to the internet, how much time they spend on it.
Now you might not be able to completely control it, especially if they're going to school and they've got friends who have phones and that kind of thing.
So you can't completely control it, but whether or not your own child has a phone, that's a big one.
Your nine-year-old's not going out and buying his own phone.
If he has a phone, it's because you bought it for him.
Just don't buy it.
That one decision, don't buy the phone for him.
Or if you do buy the phone, don't buy a phone that has internet capacity at all.
Buy a dumb phone.
Buy a phone that only makes, it can only call two people, it can call, you know, it can call his parents, it can call 911.
Give him that phone.
Then you've got, then you can keep track of him, any safety concerns are taken care of, no problem.
You can do that.
You give him a phone that has access to the entire, you know, wild west of the internet, then that's on you.
And his internet addiction, and his compulsion, which he will develop, and so many kids have developed, I mean almost every kid you see now, has a compulsive need to look at their phone every 10 seconds, but that's a decision that you made as a parent, I think.
Alright, so here's another I wanted to play this for you because this was a lot of fun as well.
You know, of course, Georgia Tech two nights ago speaking out about the male invasion of sports and as we saw, you know, protesters came out and They were very upset, but many of them couldn't actually explain why they were there, what they were upset about.
I think this kind of ties into the whole mass hysteria theme of this show.
So, Campus Reform, they were also on the scene, and here's another fun interview with a protester.
He's got, you know, he's come out, he's got all the protesters behind him, they've got the trans flag, they've got all the signs, and can he explain why he's there and what he's so upset about?
Let's see.
Tell us why you're out here today.
I'm standing for trans rights.
Do you think there's a biological difference between men and women?
Biological.
I would stand for lesbian, gay, LGB, bisexual, and trans community.
Whose campus?
Our campus!
Whose campus?
Our campus!
Why are you guys out here yelling instead of maybe going inside?
I mean, there's a Q&A.
You guys have the opportunity to go in and ask lots of questions.
Don't you think that would be more productive?
When it comes to Republicans, Republicans are more argumentative.
More, my way or the highway.
Matt can't swim!
Matt can't swim!
Don't you think this might be my way of the highway here?
No.
F*** these fascists! F*** these fascists! F*** these fascists!
You couldn't have scripted that any better.
That was great.
They were literally chanting in the background, hey, hey, ho, ho, what is it, Matt Walsh has to go, or this fascist has to go, whatever it was.
That's what they're chanting in the background, while the guy in the front claims that Republicans are the ones who are the, it's my way or the highway.
You couldn't have scripted that any better.
That was great.
But of course, he couldn't really explain why he was there.
I'm here for trans rights.
Are men and women different biologically?
What do you mean biologically?
I'm not even sure.
I'm a college student.
I don't know what the word biologically means.
So they didn't know why they were there.
But this is, again, for them, it's hysteria.
They don't really know why they're there or what they're doing.
But pulling the strings, the people who are encouraging this, that's a very intentional choice.
All right, I want to play one other thing for you quickly.
Herschel Walker is running for Senate, and he was trending online yesterday.
And one thing you know, general rule of thumb, if you're a Republican candidate for office and you're trending online, it's never for anything good, right?
So he was trending because he was recently at, looks like a church, and he was giving his views on things.
He started to riff on evolution and is now being mocked ruthlessly for what he said about it.
Let's listen.
So when the light was created here, that means somebody up there had to say, let there be light, that the earth started.
And then he had to put someone there on earth.
Because remember, Adam was there.
Remember, Adam came there, then Eve came.
So somebody had to start it out.
So that means there had to be a God.
Because then just some bomb blew up and it started out.
And then I tell you something else I heard, and I think about this.
Because at one time, science said man came from apes.
Did it not?
Every time I read or hear that, I think to myself, you just didn't read the same Bible I did.
Well, what this was interesting though, if that is true, why are there still apes?
Think about it.
You know, now you're getting too smart for it.
No, no, no, no.
Think about this.
We have an evolution that is, we've gotten so intelligent that if that is true, why are there still apes?
You know, I struggle with this and I get kind of frustrated because I mean I appreciate someone running for office sharing their faith.
I think it's a wonderful thing.
But I don't like it when Christians go out and say things that reinforce the stereotype which says that Christianity is not compatible with science and that one must choose science or Christianity.
And the reason I don't like it, it's not because I care when people are making fun of us.
The reason that I care is because it's not true, first of all.
It's just not true that Christianity and science aren't compatible, or that Christians in general are ignorant of science.
It's not true at all.
And very often the truth goes the other way around, where what we find is that people in the secular leftist religion are truly the anti-science ones who believe that men can get pregnant and so on and so forth.
So, that's the truth, and I care about people knowing the truth.
But also, this is a line, a false narrative, that I think is persuasive to people who are not religious, but are sort of considering it, and the people who could be reached, could be saved.
I think when they're told that, well, you know, that Christianity, that's anti-science, and it's, you gotta, I think for many people in that camp, that becomes a persuasive argument for them.
And then people that could be reached ultimately are not because of that.
And that's why scientific ignorance, when it's displayed in a Christian context, can be harmful, I think.
And also, another thing that makes it frustrating is that it's such an unforced error.
There's just no reason to do it.
So, here's what I'm saying.
If you don't know much about evolution, that's fine.
That's okay.
No big deal.
You're running for office.
It doesn't matter.
It really doesn't matter how you feel about evolution.
It doesn't make a difference.
Just don't talk about it.
Don't go on stage talking about it.
The problem here for Hershel Walker is that he doesn't understand the theory.
The theory does not say that humans came from apes.
That's not the theory.
That's just not it.
The theory states that apes and humans have a common ancestor.
And that's not semantics.
We're not splitting hairs here.
It's just a very different sort of thing.
So, in other words, the point is, it's not that apes are our great-grandparents.
It's that, in this analogy, they're our cousins, according to the theory of evolution.
Now, think what you want about it.
Say what you want about it.
But that is the theory.
Common descent, as they call it.
So if you want to try to debunk it or whatever, or express your disagreement, that's what you're disagreeing with.
And so you say that and it just opens up the floodgates and it's again, it's an unforced error.
There's no reason to do that.
But if you do want to go down, I mean, I would say if you're running for office as a Christian, there's really no reason to go down this path at all.
But if you're going to do it, at least know what it is first.
You don't open yourself up to this.
All right, one other thing quickly.
This was interesting.
Apparently, an asteroid hit Earth a few days ago.
Sadly, it didn't do much damage.
Burned up in the atmosphere.
Once again, we were so close to all of our problems being solved, but yet so far.
The bigger issue is the headline from the Daily Mail, and the headline says, Asteroid half the size of a giraffe strikes Earth off the coast of Iceland.
I know the media sometimes struggles to describe things like asteroids on a scale that will make sense to the average viewer, and so that's why they come up with this, but I'm not sure that you're helping matters by using giraffes.
As a measuring unit.
Not even a whole giraffe.
Like, if you said, oh, it's an asteroid the size of a giraffe, it's like, OK, well, I can conceive of that a little bit.
But now I'm sort of imagining an asteroid in the shape of a giraffe.
But OK, the size of a giraffe, fine.
But half giraffes?
That's the measuring unit?
Which half of the giraffe are we talking about?
How are we splitting it?
Are we splitting it down the middle?
And is it a male or a female giraffe?
Because they're different sizes.
So, so many questions are raised.
And also, how do you convert this unit of measurement into, let's say, otters?
I think it's 57.
So, an asteroid the size of 57 otters hit the Earth.
Or maybe we could say, an asteroid the size of 114 half-sized otters hit the Earth.
I guess we could have a lot of fun with this measuring skill.
Let's get now to the comment section.
[Music]
Alright, dailywire.com/sweetbabycomments Let's check clip number eight.
Hey Matt, out here just returning my cart.
Unfortunately, I just learned that my own father is a member of the cult that leaves their carts out on the street, as he just told me to leave mine by the side of the car.
Naturally, of course, I instantly disowned him.
And now I will be taking you, adopting you as my sweet new daddy.
So sweet Daddy Walsh, you have a new son, sweet little John boy.
So sweet baby game for your life and we'll see you at home.
Is your dad in the car with you when you're saying all of this?
Well, but look, you did the right thing.
And I appreciate that, my son.
You saw something and you said something.
That's what we need.
And it doesn't matter.
Familial units and bonds, I think, are very important to me.
You know, I'm a big advocate of the family.
And I think fathers are very important.
But there are limits.
And those bonds can be dissolved, I think.
over something like a shopping cart.
It's serious enough for that.
Rob Green says, Wow, Matt, those protesters really found your kryptonite that you can't swim.
How will you possibly recover?
I mean, it would be my kryptonite if they threw me into the ocean or something.
So in a literal sense, but I still don't know what it had to do with what we were talking about.
Jonathan Richter says, Matt, society needs more men.
Also, Matt, doggy paddles.
Well, look, I admit it's hard to look manly when you're doggy paddling, but the only reason I would ever be in that position in the first place is if I did get thrown out into the ocean or something like that and I'm drowning so that I'm probably not going to be worried too much about style points.
I never learned the proper form for swimming because it's not something that ever comes up in my life.
You know, when I see a body of water, rarely do I think that I want to be inside it.
Like, I like to go overtop it in a kayak or a boat or something, so I can go fishing.
That's fun.
But I rarely have the experience of, I see a big lake, like, I want to be in the water.
I just, I don't, I don't have that instinct.
Let's see.
Evie says, Matt, if you can manage without a microwave in your home, then you should see if you can manage without a television.
Then you don't have to put so much effort into censoring what your kids are watching.
Hey, I got nothing but respect for people that go without televisions in the home.
I don't, for me though, see a phone, phone and television, those are two different things when it comes to with kids.
I think there's just no circumstance, as I've said, where you give your, say, nine-year-old a phone.
And also because once you give them the phone with internet access, one of the big problems is that it's just not going to be possible for you to monitor all the times when they're using it.
You're just not going to be able to do that.
TV is very different.
So our policy with the TV, we have one TV in the house, so that is our, that's our one That's the one rejection of modern society when it comes to TV for us, is that we only have one.
Which even that, that's how bad it's gotten, that that seems shocking to people.
Most people have... I think, in fact, the house that we live in right now, when we moved in, they had a TV in literally every room of the house.
I mean, the kitchen, the bathroom, everywhere.
So I guess they would put a show on, and then they could just move from room to room and watch the show and never miss a second of any show.
That's crazy to me.
So we have one TV.
It's in a public area of the house.
You know, we don't do TVs in bedrooms.
We certainly would never do TV in a kid's bedroom.
Asking for problems there.
One TV, public area.
And we can easily control when they watch the TV, what they watch.
Not a lot of effort actually has to go into it.
It's a pretty low effort thing with kids.
This is when you're allowed to watch TV.
No, you're not allowed to watch that.
You are allowed to watch that.
Pretty low effort.
Well, I guess that is the one thing that protects the WNBA from taunting.
You're right.
I mean, there's no fans in the stands.
analogy regarding Westbrook is that in order for taunting to occur, there must first be
fans to watch the game.
Well, I guess that is the one thing that protects the WNBA from taunting.
You're right.
I mean, there's no fans in the stands.
Although really, that makes the taunting even worse in the WNBA because if there are fans
in the stands, it's only going to be family members.
And so if you're getting taunted at a WNBA game, it's like your own mother who's doing
it and that makes it all the worse, I guess.
As you all know by now, The Daily Wire does not stop creating awesome new content, and we're super excited about our latest docuseries, Fauci Unmasked.
The show exposes the most successful failure in government history, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Hosted by our very own Michael Nolts, he'll peel back the mask on Fauci's past and shows the world's leading
scientists for what he really is, which is a fraud.
The first episode dropped this morning and explores Fauci as the voice of the AIDS crisis in the 80s.
The results? Well, it's the kind of thing you have to really see to believe. Check out the trailer.
He's the highest paid employee in our federal government.
And beginning in the spring of 2020, Dr. Fauci began to set national policy that affected the way the 330 million
Americans lived their lives.
For goodness sakes, I'm telling you wear a mask, keep social distancing.
There's nothing political about that.
But who is Anthony Fauci?
People who have conspiracy theories.
Those are people that don't particularly care for me.
In this short series, we will do what the establishment media have refused to do.
We will give you an unvarnished look at the career of the most powerful politician in America, Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Don't you think it's time that you step down and let someone else who has a more effective message?
Actually, no.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
[MUSIC PLAYING]
The three-part series will be dropping an episode a day starting today and ending this Friday,
and it's available exclusively with Daily Wire.
You don't want to miss this.
If you're not a member yet, head to dailywire.com slash subscribe to join today.
The show is excellent, and since we're only adding more content every day, you don't want to miss it.
Go become a subscriber today.
Also, if it's true, it's probably not getting published.
That's why The Daily Wire is changing everything with our own publishing wing, DW Books, and we're proud to be publishing two books that are actively fighting the left's monopoly on storytelling.
The first is 12 Seconds in the Dark by Sergeant Mattingly.
The book is the true story of what really happened the night of the Breonna Taylor shooting.
Mattingly is a 20-year police veteran, takes readers inside his department's response, and debunks the lies that have recklessly been shared with the public.
Check out the trailer.
It was very chaotic.
It was very quick.
Instantly, I knew I was shot.
Breonna Taylor, she was caught in the crossfire of those bullets.
As soon as your brain's registering, it's already over.
The media got so many things wrong in this case, saying we had the wrong apartment, her name wasn't on the warrant, she was shot and killed in her sleep, in her bed.
These are lies.
This is not true.
And all the while, you're hearing all these outside influences from athletes and Oprah and Ellen DeGeneres and Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, all those people coming and attacking you, putting your name on their account, saying he should be in prison.
All these things that they have no idea what they're talking about.
But they have such influence.
The more we attack police for doing their job, the less good qualified police you're going to have.
When you read 12 Seconds in the Dark, you will find out the truth of what really happened the night of the Breonna
Taylor raid.
[MUSIC]
In a world where voices like his are censored, this story is incredibly important.
And we're so grateful to have this brave truth teller on board.
The book is available now on Amazon or anywhere you buy books online, so go order your copy today, because I can promise you it will sell out.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Here's a rule that will never steer you wrong.
The second worst thing the government does are the things that Democrats do by themselves.
The third worst are the things Republicans do by themselves.
But the worst of all are the things that the two sides agree to do together.
The bipartisan things.
So, one example, which we may tragically see again in the near future, are all of the disastrous military conflicts we've been involved in over recent decades.
Those were all bipartisan.
Here's another example, perhaps slightly less serious, but maybe not.
And it happened yesterday when the Senate passed, by unanimous consent, the so-called Sunshine Protection Act.
I haven't heard of a bill this misleadingly named since the, you know, don't say gay bill, even though that wasn't really the name of the bill.
The Sunshine Protection Act.
This bill, greeted with much applause and fanfare by many in the public, would make daylight savings time permanent.
Now, that's not to say that it would abolish daylight savings.
No.
It would keep us stuck in daylight savings eternally.
The hour that we lost when we jumped ahead a few days ago will never be recovered.
It's gone forever.
It's banished to purgatory, never to be seen again.
Now, the idea behind this proposal is, for one thing, to end the silly ritual where we switch our clocks back and forth arbitrarily.
That's the part that most everybody can agree with, and I agree with.
You know, we've been switching our clocks back and forth for decades.
Nobody knew why.
Nobody wanted to do it.
Yet the daylight savings tradition continued, lingering on, hanging there uselessly like some kind of vestigial limb.
And it was time to end it.
That's good.
But the question is whether we end the tradition by making daylight savings permanent or by reverting back to standard time and just leaving the clocks there.
Out of these two options, Congress, of course, has chosen the worst one, electing to turn daylight savings into a chronic condition.
Two of the senators behind this ploy, Marco Rubio and Edward Markey, wrote an op-ed for CNN congratulating themselves and extolling the brilliance of their plan.
They wrote, "We can't always get bipartisan agreement in Congress these days, but here's
one thing we can agree on. We could all use a bit more sunshine. That's why we're working
together in the U.S. Senate to make sure we end the practice of spring forward and fall back
by making daylight savings time permanent." Yes, they say the Sunshine Protection Act will
literally protect the sunshine by giving us more of it.
Now, I find it necessary to point out that no matter what the clocks say, there will be exactly the same amount of sunshine regardless.
Now Congress may imagine itself to be powerful enough to literally control the sun itself, but it's not.
We're not giving ourselves more sunshine this way.
We're not giving ourselves anything.
We're merely agreeing by legislative decree to permanently pretend that it's an hour later than it really is.
But why?
Why are we doing this?
Where did this come from?
What the hell's going on?
Well, let's go through a brief history of this madness, and I think most of what I'm about to say is basically true, but I didn't care enough to look it up, so we'll just, we'll go with it.
Daylight Savings was first proposed by, I believe, Benjamin Franklin, as a joke, 250 years ago.
He told it to his buddies at a bar, and everybody laughed and said, ah, there's old Benny again with his wild schemes.
And for the next 100 years, people continued to laugh at the joke.
And then in the 1890s, a weirdo bug collector named George something or other decided that he wanted more time after work to stare at crickets and beetles.
This megalomaniac actually wanted to shift time itself just to accommodate his pointless hobby.
One hobby that I enjoy is night fishing.
I like to go out fishing at night.
But you don't see me suggesting that we blow up the sun so I can do it more often.
That's essentially what George wanted to do.
Slightly less drastic, but still a significant change.
Now fast forward to 1918 when daylight savings time was officially instated here in the USA.
Our lawmakers at the time, they didn't say they were doing this so that a guy named George could look at beetles.
Instead, they said that we were doing it for a few reasons, most importantly, to save energy.
Now, how could changing the numbers on a clock save energy?
How could it achieve anything at all?
Who knows?
But we did it.
And since then, studies have proven that this policy, like almost all government policies you can name, utterly failed to achieve whatever it was supposed to achieve.
It didn't save energy.
It didn't force the sun to give us more daylight.
It didn't usher in an era of utopia.
It didn't do anything except annoy everybody.
And now, after a hundred years of this failed government policy, the government's decided to do what it always does when a policy fails, which is make it permanent.
If it didn't work, do it more.
That's the motto of our elected leaders.
But many people in the public are celebrating this policy.
As I mentioned, they insist that this will now give us more sunlight during waking hours.
Of course, what they apparently don't realize is that there's another way to have more sunlight during waking hours.
Wake up earlier.
But no, people don't want to wake up earlier.
They don't want to adjust their schedules.
Instead, they prefer to manipulate time itself.
Or try to manipulate.
I mean, you could either adjust your schedule or adjust time itself.
Which one should we do?
Oh, I know, well, just time.
This is how lazy we've become as a society.
Never mind the fact that your extra hour of daylight after work now means that school children are going to be walking to the bus stop in the pitch black for several months out of the year.
Maybe some safety hazards there?
You think that'd be enough reason not to do this?
But who cares about safety if it means that you can have more sunlight after work?
Sunlight that you're going to squander anyway by just sitting on your couch and watching Netflix.
I like all these people pretending, I want more sunlight when I get home from work so I can go for a jog.
You're not jogging.
You're going to sit on your couch on your phone is what you're going to do.
Stop pretending otherwise.
What we should be doing, it's obvious, is abolish daylight savings entirely and revert back to standard time.
Now, standard time is a human construct in the sense that any method of measuring time will inevitably be a human construct, but it was far less arbitrary.
Standard time was more closely aligned with the body's circadian rhythm and with the rising and setting of the sun.
That's why standard time was devised.
That's where it comes from.
In fact, it's more important for your body and your mind to have sunlight in the morning than at night.
It's not natural to have sunlight that late at night.
Your body wants to wake up with the sun.
That's how we're designed.
Daylight savings is unnatural.
It's an attack on nature and creation itself.
We will have to answer for this come Judgment Day.
One other point.
Not to make too much of this.
Too late, I guess.
But there's another serious problem.
As I was discussing this on Twitter yesterday, many people insisted that, well, we can and should make daylight savings permanent because time is an illusion, it's a construct, and we can do with it whatever we please.
This, of course, is completely false.
Our method of measuring and keeping time is a construct, but time itself is real.
Time is simply the progression of reality from one moment to the next.
Time ensures that everything won't happen all at once.
Time is what keeps you from getting eaten by a T-Rex.
Time is the movement and flow of existence.
Yet, these claims from the anti-time agitators only show how Congress, by making daylight savings permanent, has undermined faith and confidence in the reality of time itself.
The United States Senate has caused many people to question the very meaning and existence of time.
They've created a mass existential crisis, one which threatens the foundations of human society.
Recklessly, the Senate passed this bill without even grappling with these questions and implications, without even first establishing what time is, where it comes from, or if it exists at all.
Are the past and future but illusions?
Are we trapped forever in eternal now?
Legislation raises these questions, doesn't answer them.
And now we're lost.
Mass anarchy, madness, and despair will be the result.
So not much of a change on second thought, I guess.
Even so, for all these reasons, I hereby declare that as far as I'm concerned, daylight savings is cancelled.
And we'll leave it there for today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
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 producer is Mathis Glover, our technical director is Austin Stevens, production manager Pavel Vodovsky, our associate producer is McKenna Waters, the show is edited by Robbie Dantzler, our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina, and hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Heart.
The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2022.
USA Today lists a man among the women of the year, criminal justice reform claims some more victims, and San Francisco boycotts most of the United States.
