Ep. 944 - Dems Screech And Howl In Defense Of Baby Butchery
Today on The Matt Walsh Show, we’re told that the impending decision on Roe v Wade will help the Democrats because it will galvanize their base around the abortion issue. But as we’ve seen over the past couple of days, abortion is actually the last issue Democrats want to talk about. We’ll talk about why that is. Also, Rachel Levine at HHS says that there is “no argument” against castrating children. Democrats actually want Trump back on Twitter. I wonder why? And in our Daily Cancellation, an obese woman fights for greater plus sized representation in the travel industry.
Join the Daily Wire and get 20% off your new membership with code WALSH: https://utm.io/uewvd.
Order your copy of Julio Rosas’ new book Fiery but Mostly Peaceful: The 2020 Riots and the Gaslighting of America: https://utm.io/uexhZ.
I am a beloved LGBTQ+ and children’s author. Reserve your copy of Johnny The Walrus here: https://utm.io/uevUc.
—
Today’s Sponsors:
Constant Contact is a digital marketing platform that helps small businesses and nonprofits of all sizes build, grow, and succeed. Visit constantcontact.com to start your free digital marketing trial today.
Protect your identity with LifeLock. Save up to 25% OFF Your First Year at
www.LifeLock.com/WALSH.
Shop auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers at RockAuto.com. Visit www.RockAuto.com and enter WALSH in the 'How Did You Hear About Us' Box.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on The Matt Walsh Show, we're told that the impending decision on Roe v. Wade will help the Democrats because it will galvanize their base around the abortion issue.
But as we've seen over the last couple days, abortion is actually the last issue Democrats want to talk about, and we'll talk about why that is.
Also, Rachel Levine at HHS says that there is no argument against castrating children.
Democrats also actually want Trump back on Twitter, according to a new report.
I wonder why that is.
And in our daily cancellation, an obese woman fights for greater plus-size representation in the travel industry.
We'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
And that's what you need Constant Contact for.
Constant Contact is a digital marketing platform that helps small businesses and nonprofits of all sizes build, grow, and succeed with email marketing, contact management, industry-leading list growth tools, Social media ads and more.
Constant contact helps small businesses connect with customers, find new ones, and sell online, all from one easy-to-use platform.
They've been trusted by millions of businesses to help improve their marketing.
With a 97% deliverability rate, you can rest assured that your customers and potential customers are getting the right message at the right time.
With a simple interface, Constant Contact's easy-to-use platform makes contact management easier than ever.
Their list growth tools help you find a bigger audience fast.
Lead generation landing pages, text to join, and social media ads are proven to grow your list and drive engagement with your brand.
With thousands of integrations, you can sync Constant Contact's tools with the tools you're already using.
Powerful automation tools help you send the right message to the right person at the right time.
To start your free digital marketing trial today, visit ConstantContact.com.
So the popular wisdom that's formed around the leak of the Roe v. Wade decision, a leak that Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed as authentic yesterday, no surprise, is that overturning Roe would actually help the Democrats, ultimately, by galvanizing their base before the midterms.
It's pointed out that according to most polling data, a majority of Americans do not want Roe overturned, supposedly.
But it's always a precarious thing, I think, to trust popular wisdom in a society so bereft of wisdom.
Popular wisdom is simply the wisdom of the unwise, and that's certainly the case here.
First of all, of course, even if it happened to be true that overturning Roe and abolishing the mythical constitutional right to abortion would help Democrats, it would still be worth doing.
I mean, even if overturning Roe would tear our country in two and precipitate a civil war, it would still be worth doing.
In fact, some might argue that the latter scenario would be an added benefit of overturning it.
Some might argue that, anyway.
I'm just saying, some people might think that.
The point is that the first and most fundamental priority is to save the lives of innocent children.
There is no cost too heavy to pay.
Literally no cost.
I would accept any consequence at all if it meant rescuing even one child from the hands of the butchers.
But as it happens, it is not true that overturning Roe will help the Democrats.
It's not true because, for one thing, if Democrat voters are galvanized, they're not going to be the only ones.
This pushes the abortion issue back down to the states, which means that Republican voters will finally now have the power to elect people who can fully outlaw abortion in their states.
This is an inability, a power that pro-life voters have, most anyway, have never had.
The Roe decision, by design, took the power out of the hands of pro-life voters, and that was the whole point.
How could putting power back into their hands be somehow, what, demoralizing?
Or only galvanizing the people on the opposite side of the issue?
That makes no sense.
But there's another reason why this turn of events will not help the Democrats, despite the popular wisdom.
If this issue is still at the top of the stack by the time the midterms roll around, and that's a big if, because there's a better than 50% chance that the whole issue will be 300 news cycles in the past by then and nobody will be talking about it anymore, because no one can talk about anything or focus on anything for more than, you know, 30 seconds at a time.
But if it's still somehow above the fold at that point, that will not actually be a good thing for the Democrats, because that means that Democrat politicians Within close proximity of an election, we'll have to talk about abortion.
And they don't actually want to talk about abortion.
That's the dirty little secret here.
They want their voters to be motivated by the fear of, quote-unquote, anti-choice Republicans trying to take their, quote, bodily autonomy away.
But they want to stoke this fear in very generalized and very vague sorts of ways.
They don't want to actually talk about abortion itself.
They certainly don't want to get into the nitty-gritty of what they really believe on this issue, because when they do, it quickly becomes apparent that their views on the subject fall into two categories, and only two categories, and usually both at once.
One, incoherence, and two, barbaric.
The entire Democrat strategy with respect to abortion is built around the effort to make sure that voters don't notice these two facts.
And that means being very circumspect about abortion, and not dwelling on the issue for very long.
The polls may indicate that most Americans quote-unquote support abortion, but that's only because, or rather support Roe, that's what the polls indicate, that they support Roe, but that's only because most Americans don't understand Roe, or what it actually entails.
Which isn't fully their fault, I mean, they've got the entire media apparatus which is trying to confuse them about it.
A majority of those same Americans also support sweeping restrictions on abortions, whereas Roe was designed to eliminate those restrictions.
There is an incoherence to the average American's view on the subject, and that's what Democrats want to maintain, as always.
They don't necessarily need or want you to agree with their views, they just want you to be confused.
Now, agreeing with them is great if they can get it, but if they can't get it, then they'll take confusion.
That's a fine runner-up prize, as far as they're concerned.
Once abortion becomes the topic of conversation, as it is right now, For however long that remains the case.
The barbarism and incoherence of the left-wing position comes to the forefront.
One of the best, I think most famous, most infamous examples of this happened back in 2019
when Virginia Democrats were pushing for a bill that would legalize abortion
through every phase of pregnancy up until birth.
And lots of other states have bills like this on the books now.
An exchange in the Virginia House of Delegates between Republican delegate Todd Gilbert
and Democrat delegate Kathy Tran, I think illustrates the problem for Democrats.
When they're put on the spot and they're forced to actually explain their real position
on the subject.
They're exposed as the incomprehensible monsters that they truly are.
So let's go back and watch that again to refresh our memories.
And this again is why Democrats do not actually want to talk about this and especially don't want to talk about it when they're headed into an election.
Watch this.
Delegate Tran.
Yes, sir.
How late in a pregnancy would your bill apply if a physician was simply willing to certify that That the continuation of the pregnancy would impair the mental health of the woman.
How late are we talking about?
So the way the suggestion that we've made in the bill is to say it's in the third trimester and at the, you know, with the certification of the physician.
So how late in the third trimester would you be able to do that?
You know, it's very unfortunate that our physicians' witnesses were not able to attend today to speak specifically to that.
No, I'm talking about your bill.
How late in the third trimester could a physician perform an abortion if he indicated it would impair the mental health of the woman?
Or physical health.
Okay.
Okay.
I'm talking about the mental health.
So, I mean, through the third trimester.
The third trimester goes all the way up to 40 weeks.
Okay.
But to the end of the third trimester?
Yep.
I don't think we have a limit in the bill.
So, where it's obvious that a woman is about to give birth, she has physical signs that she is about to give a birth, would that still be a point at which she could request an abortion if she was so certified?
She's dilating.
Mr. Chairman, that would be a decision that the doctor, the physician, and the woman would make at that point.
I understand that.
I'm asking if your bill allows that.
My bill would allow that, yes.
So this was her bill, but she didn't want to talk about it.
This issue that's supposedly, what, good for the left, the Democrats, and it's going to motivate their voters, and they don't want to talk about it?
She didn't want to talk about the fact that, yes, it would have made it legal to kill a fully developed infant child in the womb, seconds before birth.
She also didn't want to talk about the fact that when Democrats say that abortion might be necessary to protect the health of the mother, that also includes mental health.
That's really what they mean.
Is if a woman says that her mental health will suffer because she'll be sad about having a baby.
Well, that's an example if she gets an abortion in that case.
Well, that's also an example of abortion saving the life of the mother.
These are the kinds of ugly realities that come out whenever the nation's attention is focused on this issue.
Democrats are simply not able to speak for more than one or two sentences about abortion without devolving into savagery and nonsense.
And that's certainly been the case over the last two days as well.
Let's look at a few examples.
And speaking of not being able to speak for more than one or two sentences, let's start with President Biden giving his take on the Supreme Court's draft decision.
And I want you to listen to the words that he uses.
So the idea that we're going to make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make
the judgment to choose to abort a child based on a decision by the Supreme Court.
I think that's way overboard.
Abort a child, he says.
The Democrat position on this subject is so horrifying that just simply hearing someone say it out loud, abort a child, makes your hair stand on end.
You also see there how much it pains Biden to be talking about this at all.
He spends most of his answer filibustering, you know, treading water, trying to avoid even saying the word abort.
The idea that we're going to make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make the judgment to choose to abort a child.
Now granted, Biden's brain is just a bowl of grits at this point, but this is pretty standard for the left when it comes to this issue.
Case in point, another case in point anyway, listen to Whoopi Goldberg on The View yesterday.
Listen to this.
This is my body and nobody, you, you know, you got people telling me I gotta wear a mask or don't wear a mask or do this.
Everybody wants to tell me what to do, but you won't let me make my decision about my body.
You are not.
The person to make that decision, my doctor and myself and my child, that's who makes the decision.
And one of the things I really want to point out before we go is the reason abortion came about.
Women in this country lived forever with it being illegal.
Okay?
Women, when they decide something is not right for them, they're going to take it into their own hands.
Well, we got tired of tripping over women in bathrooms, public bathrooms, who were giving themselves abortions because there was nowhere safe, nowhere clean, nowhere to go.
This law came about because people wanted people to have somewhere safe and somewhere clean.
It has nothing to do with your religion.
This is not a religious issue.
This is a human issue.
If you care about me as a human being, you should know three things.
Getting an abortion is not easy.
Making that decision is not easy.
We have to stop it there, even though she has two other things on her list.
There's already too much nonsense to sort through.
That was 78 seconds.
So she had 78 seconds to talk about abortion, and she couldn't get through it without venturing repeatedly into the realm of horrifying nonsense.
First, she says that an abortion is a decision that should be left up to myself, my doctor, and my child.
So, what?
The child consents to the abortion now?
This is consensual butchery?
Are we pretending that the child is consulted and agrees to have its body torn apart limb from limb?
That was 28 seconds in.
From there, she claims that before Roe, you couldn't go into a women's restroom without tripping over women laying all over the floor, giving themselves abortions with coat hangers.
That's what she wants us to believe.
And now that she's in the realm of the hallucinatory, she actually points to something that's true.
She says that getting an abortion is not easy.
That, again, that's true.
I mean, it comes at a great cost.
Women suffer immensely before, during, and after their abortions.
But why, Whoopi, why isn't it easy?
Why do women suffer so much from their abortions if abortion simply extracts a blob of lifeless, meaningless tissue?
Why?
Why would it be so painful?
Why isn't it easy?
You know, if you have a A wart on your skin or something, and you go and get that blob of tissue removed?
That's pretty easy.
Nobody would be talking about the emotional trauma involved there.
So why is it hard?
She doesn't want to answer that.
She can't.
She can't talk about it beyond the blathering nonsense you just heard.
And yet it helps Democrats when abortion is the number one issue?
This thing that they can't talk about?
And when it comes to disturbing gibberish that we hear from the left about abortion, we certainly cannot neglect to acknowledge this moment on MSNBC yesterday.
Here's Yamiche Alcindor, alleged journalist, giving her perspective.
Listen to this.
You'll always be able to get an abortion because you'll be able to fly to one of what they're calling the 13 safe states, places that might continue to have abortion, like California or New York.
But for a lot of vulnerable women, women who are poor, women of color, they will be forced to have pregnancies that they cannot afford to terminate and pregnancies that will then turn into children.
Forced to have pregnancies that turn into children.
Forced to have pregnancies that turn into children.
What were they before they turned into children?
Were they turtles before that?
Kangaroos?
Space aliens?
What was the woman pregnant with before the point when the pregnancy turned into a child?
This, of course, makes no sense whatsoever, and only the most oblivious Americans could fail to notice how nonsensical it is.
And here we're only focusing on the turn into a child bit.
But the part right before that is just as stupid.
She says, I'm forced to have pregnancies.
Who's forcing women to have pregnancies?
Less than 1% of abortions are due to rape.
And those statistics, by the way, are from the Guttmacher Institute pro-abortion groups.
Give us those statistics.
So we can be pretty sure that the actual number is smaller than even what they tell us.
Let's just go with 1% for the sake of argument.
For the other 99-plus percent, These are women who get pregnant after choosing to participate in the reproductive act.
They did a thing through their own free will and volition, which has literally billions of times in the past resulted in pregnancy.
They chose to participate in this activity.
In the 99% of cases, nobody forced anything.
So, who forced them to be pregnant?
Nature?
God?
Who's the culprit here?
What are you talking about?
Abortion doesn't turn back the clock or undo what's been done.
Abortion doesn't erase the pregnancy.
One way or another, if a woman is pregnant, eventually the pregnancy must come to an end.
It can end naturally, usually through the birth of a child, or it can be ended through violence.
Violence against another living being.
Our position as pro-lifers is that once a woman becomes pregnant, it is not acceptable to commit violence against the living being in the womb, no matter how she feels about the pregnancy.
That's our position, and it's clear.
We're not ashamed of it.
We'll say it out loud, clearly.
We don't need, you know, recourse to euphemism.
The left hides behind euphemism and code words and gibberish because they're terrified to let you see the hideous truth at the core of their position.
And that's why already many of them are changing the subject, changing it in quite desperate and hilarious ways.
Here's Eric Swalwell, congressman and infamous public farter, tweeting.
He says, the Republicans won't stop with banning abortion.
They want to ban interracial marriage.
Do you want to save that?
Well, then you should probably vote.
Ban interracial marriage?
What?
How did that get introduced into the conversation?
And what Republican has advocated banning interracial marriage?
I want to know, which Republican has stood on the floor of the Senate or the House of Representatives and said that we need to ban interracial marriage?
And how have we not heard about that, if that happened?
One of the conservative justices on the court, Clarence Thomas, is in an interracial marriage.
Does he want to ban his own marriage?
What is he babbling about?
Well, he's just trying to change the subject.
Because he wants to talk about any subject other than the subject at hand.
And don't be fooled.
That's what they all want.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
Identity theft may sound complicated, and maybe it sounds like something you don't have to worry
about.
But in some cases, all a thief needs to carry out a shopping scam is your name,
mailing address, email address, and phone number.
And it's not hard for them to get those details.
And with those details, they can start an online store account, but add their own shipping info.
Then they purchase items on accounts without your knowledge, leaving you only with collections notices.
It's important to understand how cybercrime and identity theft are affecting our lives.
This is just one of the ways of many.
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, your whole life, basically.
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.
If they detect your information has potentially been compromised, they'll send you an alert and you also have access to a dedicated restoration specialist if you become a victim.
So you have on both ends, you have protection.
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 for 25% off.
By the way, I also wanted to mention, like I said, that Whoopi Goldberg clip.
It's hard to sift through everything and point to every little piece of it that was incorrect or false or fallacious.
But one other point worth making here is that she says, this is not about religion.
Don't bring your religion into it.
And of course, every time abortion comes up, This is what we hear from the left.
Don't bring religion!
Get your religion out of my uterus!
And so on and so forth.
But you notice something?
They are always the ones who bring religion into it.
They bring religion into it by telling us to keep religion out of it.
But most of us, we're not talking about religion.
Now, it's true that if you are a Christian, It's not possible actually to be a Christian and be pro-abortion.
That's true.
Because our faith absolutely forbids murdering innocent people, including and especially children.
But that's... We don't... The argument against abortion is universal and simple.
We don't need to make it into a theological conversation, and we're not the ones who do that.
In fact, the left, they're the ones who bring up religion in two ways.
They bring it up by telling us to keep religion out of it.
And actually, ironically here, if anyone in the abortion conversation is going to bring up religion to justify their position, it's almost always the left.
That's where you hear Joe Biden and all these alleged pro-abortion Catholics saying, my religion calls me to... They're the ones who do that.
And why do they do it?
It's because, again, they're just scrambling to say anything, do anything, to put as much distance as they can in between the issue and themselves.
They want to put distance between the issue and the conversation.
And so if they can make the conversation about religion, they'll do that.
If they can make it about interracial marriage, they'll do that.
If they can make it about gay marriage, which is another thing we're seeing from the left, next they're going to go after gay marriage.
Anything they can do.
To put distance, they're going to do that.
A couple of the clips I want to play here.
Kamala Harris spoke out yesterday, and here she is doing her best impression of a normal human being.
She's trying to sort of pretend to be angry.
She's trying to generate feelings of anger, and let's see how she does.
Women would lose access to abortion immediately and outright.
Those Republican leaders who are trying to weaponize the use of the law against women.
Well, we say, how dare they?
How dare they tell a woman what she can do and cannot do with her own body?
How dare they?
How dare they try to stop her from determining her own future?
How dare they try to deny women their rights and their freedoms?
Just more transphobia from the left.
We have to keep pointing this out.
We have to keep pointing it out because we can't let them get away with this.
They're going to try to do it.
They are doing it right now, but we can't just let them get away with it.
There are many reasons why everything she said there is wrong and stupid and dishonest, but also, you can't do this anymore, Kamala.
That's out the window for you.
You're not allowed, this is not, you can't do it.
You've ruled this out.
You've given this up.
This whole thing about, this is an attack on women, that's out the window because women don't exist, according to you.
According to your world, you have, your worldview has erased women from existence.
They're gone, according to you.
Now, where does that leave you as a woman?
I don't know.
You're just some sort of, like, phantom walking the earth.
I don't know.
I mean, I can't make sense of it.
It's your worldview, not mine.
In my worldview, women certainly exist, but in yours, they don't.
So, you can't do this.
I'm not gonna allow it.
We can't allow it.
That's why, on the right, we should not engage with this attack on women.
We should not engage with that.
Claim beyond simply asking, what's a woman?
What are you talking about?
Again, there are many other ways we could engage with it.
But we shouldn't.
Instead, it's just, I don't even know what you're saying.
What in the world are you talking about?
How could this be an attack on women?
Are you suggesting that women have some particular special Capacity to give birth?
To bring new life into the world?
Are you suggesting that this is a unique, special aspect of womanhood?
What a transphobic, horrendous thing to say!
We've got the same routine from Elizabeth Warren, who was also pretending to be upset.
All right, let's play clip 14.
I am angry.
(crowd cheering)
I am angry because an extremist United States Supreme Court thinks that they can impose their extremist views
on all of the women of this country and their role.
(crowd cheering)
I'm angry because we have reached the culmination of what Republicans have been fighting for, angling for, for decades now, and we are going to fight back!
Somebody get grandmother over to a home.
She's losing her mind.
I mean, there's something especially just repulsive in particular about, well, about all, you know, the entire pro-abortion side.
In particular, these old, bitter, boomer feminists who are reaching the end of their The end of their days, I mean, they're in certainly the latter part of their lives, and they have already overseen, people like Elizabeth Warren, who's in her 90s or something, whatever she is, they've already overseen the slaughter, the mass slaughter of 60 million babies, and they're not satisfied.
I mean, their bloodlust has not been quenched.
They want even more babies to be killed.
I mean, just imagine being, you're a grandmother, and you're angry.
You're screeching.
I mean, she sounds like some creature that you hear in the woods at night.
Especially around here in Tennessee.
I go take the garbage out and we're surrounded by woods and you just hear all these sounds.
It's like Elizabeth Warren must be in the woods.
It's what she sounds like.
She is reduced to this guttural howling and screeching, this demonic hysteria.
She reminds me of that, either a creature in the woods at night, or maybe better yet, the scene in The Passion of the Christ, after, you know, when you see after Christ conquers death, and the resurrection, and then we cut to a scene of Satan just howling in hell.
And that's what she reminds me of.
And this is what, they're grandmothers, and this is what they're doing.
You're looking at someone who has forfeited her humanity.
A soulless husk.
Pretty disturbing.
All right.
Let's move to this.
This is from the Daily Wire.
More disturbing news for you, if you wanted some more.
The highest-ranking transgender person in the Biden administration, who is also a pediatrician, claimed there is no argument among medical professionals about the value and the importance of gender-affirming care.
This is speaking to the National Public Radio.
Admiral Rachel Levine, the U.S.
Assistant Secretary for Health, used the opportunity to attack Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, an ally of Florida GOP Governor Ron DeSantis.
Levine accused Ladapo of putting out a statement based upon political considerations that is not appropriate.
Ladapo had released a fact sheet on April 20th that stated it would clarify evidence recently cited on a fact sheet released by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services.
And now the Health and Human Services, Rachel Levine, and he's coming out and saying not just that it's acceptable to perform chemical castration on children and to sterilize children, but actually that there's no argument about it whatsoever.
And the response I've heard from the right to this is that, well that's absurd, that's ridiculous, of course there's arguments within the medical community about this, but Actually, Rachel Levine, in this case, is more right than we would like to think.
Not right about it being acceptable or okay to do that to kids.
Obviously, that's child abuse.
That's worse than child abuse.
And everybody involved should go to prison forever.
But, in terms of the medical community, the medical industry, there is now almost unanimous agreement.
Because they've pushed all the dissenting voices out.
And whatever dissenting voices could still remain within that community have mostly been silenced or they have silenced themselves out of fear and cowardice.
I mean, remember, I have to keep emphasizing this because I just... I feel like we're not focusing on it quite enough.
It was the American Academy of Pediatrics last week that put out that book.
Promoting, you know a book for kids which was charting on the children's bestseller list Below my own book, by the way, my book was a actually just found out from Amazon side note.
That's According to Amazon charts Johnny the walrus was the number one book in the entire country last week.
So that was good news and This disgusting book for the American Academy of Pediatrics was below that but even so American Academy of Pediatrics, that was their book promoting puberty blockers, chemical castration, sterilization for kids.
Okay?
In terms of the medical community, that's as mainstream as you can possibly get.
And so, when Rachel Levine claims, when he says that there's no argument within the medical community, It is a shame and an outrage that that is almost, almost true.
There are exceptions.
But they are few and far between.
Which does not at all, even a little bit, serve to legitimize this kind of butchery that's done to children.
And the drugging of children.
It doesn't serve to legitimize it.
What it does, unfortunately, is serve to further delegitimize the medical industry.
They have delegitimized themselves by putting politics and putting ideology and also putting their own professional advancement above their oath to do no harm, you know, to treat not to harm.
They've put politics, ideology, personal advancement above all of that, far above it.
Whereas the actual, what is supposed to be the actual purpose of medicine is now, it's not even an afterthought in many of these cases.
And especially when it comes to gender confused children.
It's not an afterthought.
You know, the idea of like actually helping these kids and treating whatever ails them.
And most of the time what's ailing them, it's a mental thing and it's not even a mental illness.
It's just confusion.
And understandable confusion given the environment they're in.
And so treating them doesn't require drugs, doesn't even require intense therapy in many of these cases.
It's just sitting them down and telling them the truth and explaining it.
But no, that's not an afterthought.
It's just that's not a thought at all.
That's not anywhere on the radar.
They're not going to do that for these kids.
Let's see what else we got here.
From the Daily Wire, Lil Nas X has been criticized for promoting his songs to a young audience and then releasing music that's only suitable for adults.
The 23-year-old rapper, whose real name is Montero Lamar Hill, insisted that he was free to change his target audience whenever he wants.
Now he's back to targeting the kids' music market by inviting the Wiggles to go on tour with him.
He shared on Twitter last week, trying really hard to get the Wiggles to co-headline the tour with me.
I'll keep you guys updated.
And I actually found out about this last week before the...
For the only why I reported on it, because my wife, you know, has been historically a big fan of the Wiggles, and she has inflicted that on me over the course of, you know, the last eight years with each successive kid.
She's tried to indoctrinate them into the Wiggles, and so I've got the songs about fruit salad and big red car and all this kind of stuff I have to endure and listen to in the car and everything.
And she saw this and was very upset.
I don't know if the Wiggles have accepted this invitation or not, But this only goes to show, this Lil Nas X guy, you want to talk about groomers and predators in Hollywood and in the music industry?
He's like predator groomer number one.
He's blatant about it and completely unapologetic.
A lot of the other groomers and predators, they at least pretend to be offended when you accuse them of that.
They pretend that they're doing something else.
Oh, we're not doing that.
For him, it's out in the open.
I mean, he came onto the scene trying to cultivate a fan base of not just kids, but very young kids, like elementary school aged kids.
He went and performed at elementary schools, and he was on Nickelodeon, all this kind of stuff.
And then he went immediately from that to giving a lap dance to Satan.
Right to there.
And then people that want to defend him, his defenders said, well, he's free to make that kind of transition.
He's free to make the transition from singing in elementary schools to lap dancing on Satan.
It's the evolution of his career.
Yeah, except now he's circling back around and trying to recruit this children's musical group to perform with him on stage.
So this is very much an out-in-the-open attempt to sexualize, groom, prey upon kids.
One of the quick things I want to mention, this is from the Washington Examiner.
It says, White House officials are letting it be known that they desire Twitter to invite back former President Donald Trump.
Conflicting with earlier reports, the occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue are reportedly warming up to the idea that President Joe Biden might benefit if Elon Musk, should his $44 billion takeover Twitter be finalized, immediately reverses the ban on Biden's 2020 rival.
Beyond casting the Republican Party as a hostage to right-wing extremists, the other thing White House officials are cheering for, a number of them said over the weekend, that if Elon Musk indeed takes over Twitter, they hope the first thing he does is put Donald Trump back on it.
And the reason they want Donald Trump back on Twitter is because they think it works to their advantage to have this kind of immediate access to Donald Trump's stream of consciousness.
They think that his tweeting works to their advantage and they want him back on Twitter.
And I've been saying this from day one.
That they pretended they wanted Trump off of Twitter, but they never actually wanted that, and they do want him back on, because it works more to their benefit to have him on.
Now, this reveals, of course, once again, that everything they say is fake and not true, and they're just pretending, because, you know, everything they say about, oh, Donald Trump is dangerous, we can't have his rhetoric, no, they want it out there because they think it benefits them.
So, it goes to show that, but it also shows how, you know, and I actually agree with them.
That I think Trump back on Twitter benefits Democrats more than it benefits Republicans.
I know there are a lot of Republicans and conservatives cheering for it.
They want Trump back on Twitter.
I think he should be allowed back on Twitter.
I think the idea that the sitting president of the United States was ever kicked off of Twitter in the first place is just utter madness.
And even now as a former president, it's still madness.
But as of right now, Trump says that if he's allowed back on, he's not going to He's not going to accept the invitation because he wants to use his platform, Truth Social, and I hope that he sticks with that.
Because I think ultimately it just, what it means, it means a lot of things, but mainly it means that if you got Trump on Twitter, tweeting all the time, It means that the Democrats, anytime they want, can just take one of his tweets and make that the story.
Anytime they want to distract from something, and we saw this through four years, five years.
Anytime they want to distract from something, there was a news cycle that wasn't going their way, just take one of his tweets, and he always had, there was always a stream of new tweets that they could choose from, say their pick of the litter, take one, and that's the story.
Oh, look at this mean thing he tweeted.
Now I think they got diminishing returns on that from a PR perspective, but even so, it is still a diversion mechanism for them that works in their favor.
If you've been listening to my show for a while, you're probably familiar with one of our top sponsors, who we're very happy and proud to have on the show, Rock Auto.
Well, recently, my producer, McKenna, told me about her own experience shopping with Rock Auto and how great it was for her.
And it's such a great story, we're going to tell it to you again.
McKenna was carpooling with her boyfriend during an ice storm and turned on his windshield wipers before he got in the car to help get rid of the ice.
But with this simple act, she destroyed her windshield wipers They had to drive in the rain with wipers that barely could wipe the rain away.
During the drive to work, she figured it was worth checking rockauto.com to see if they had replacement options for the windshield wipers.
And sure enough, she was able to buy some new windshield wipers for the car that are made to deal with ice and for a surprisingly reasonable price.
So, if you're like McKenna, I need a quick fix, or if you need to do some major repairs, you should check out rockauto.com.
Once you go to rockauto.com, a list will guide you through every single make and model you could possibly imagine.
All you have to do is quickly find your car, and Rock Auto will give you a list of every part available for your vehicle.
Included with the part descriptions are photos and specs, so you can feel confident you're choosing the correct parts.
So go to rockauto.com.
If your auto part needs today, and write Walsh in their How Did You Hear About Us box, so they know that I'm the one that sent you, that's rockauto.com.
part needs today.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Yeah, well that's not even close to the same thing at all.
Libs of TikTok was a Twitter account, an anonymous Twitter account, that posted TikTok videos on Twitter.
That's what Libs of TikTok was.
Is.
And posted other things too.
But primarily, that's why we call Libs of TikTok.
The person who leaked Supreme Court documents, that is somebody who works within the Supreme Court, who's taking these, what are right now, confidential documents, putting them out in public, in an unprecedented historic move, in order to intimidate Supreme Court justices and influence the outcome of a Supreme Court case.
Okay, so this is two completely different things.
In the case of, like, it's not newsworthy.
Nobody needs to know the identity of the person who's posting TikTok videos on Twitter.
It is very newsworthy, the identity of the person working within the Supreme Court, whoever it is, who's trying to influence Supreme Court decisions and intimidate Supreme Court justice by leaking these documents.
Very newsworthy.
And it's more than newsworthy.
It's relevant to law enforcement.
I mean, this is someone who needs to be flushed out and at least fired, and I think also prosecuted.
So, you're really reaching there, I gotta say.
Rose says, Matt, what about the theory that a conservative leaked the decision in order to stop one of the five in the majority from defecting, basically locking them into place?
Yeah, I don't buy that at all.
First of all, a conservative, if we're talking about a clerk here, Which I guess this is the assumption is that some clerk in the Supreme Court is the one who leaked this.
And which, I think it's almost certain that it was a clerk who communicated with this person over at Politico.
Whether or not an actual justice was involved and coordinated this, that I don't know.
And I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case.
But as far as the idea that a conservative did it, first of all, a conservative would not do this to their own people, their own side.
And just as a matter of strategy, it has a much greater chance of backfiring than actually working out.
What's the idea here?
You've got five in the majority, they're going to overturn Roe, and then you leak this decision, and you know that it's going to lead to harassment and intimidation of those justices, so there's a very good chance you're going to scare one of them away from the decision they would have otherwise made.
So I don't think a conservative would do this to their own side.
It also doesn't make any sense from a strategic standpoint.
And then the biggest thing here, and the number one reason why we know it wasn't a conservative who did this, is that it was leaked to Politico.
Okay, a conservative leaking to Politico, they might as well leak to the Huffington Post or like the feminist blog Jezebel.
It's the same kind of thing.
That's how you know.
They would not be leaking this to Politico.
They wouldn't entrust their anonymity to some leftist over at Politico.
Because by doing this, you're putting your career on the line at the very least.
You might be putting your freedom on the line if you get criminally prosecuted.
And a conservative is going to trust Politico to keep that a secret?
No way.
No way at all.
Gurgi says, lesbians and post-menopausal women freaking out over abortion law is just beyond ludicrous.
Yeah, we talked about that before.
That's one of the reasons why it's ridiculous.
And that's also one of the reasons that makes it even more repulsive when you see people like Elizabeth Warren panicking over this.
Like, it doesn't even affect them personally.
Because there's no risk of you having a baby.
But they just feel so passionate.
It's like they hate babies that much.
It's not just their own potential babies they hate, it's they just hate babies.
And they're filled with rage, at least with the younger feminists.
It's all very self-centered and it's narcissistic and they're worried that they might be forced, God forbid, to be responsible for their own actions and all of that.
But yeah, again, with these older women, that's not the case.
For them, it's simply hatred of babies, hatred of human life, this kind of demonic rage that I think animates and motivates them.
Malore Dankness says, hey Matt, just got to know, I have to know where on earth you get your sock subscription.
I've been listening to your videos for a while and I'm finally catching up.
Well, some sad news there.
My wife recently, I found out, canceled my sock subscription.
Which is reason enough, really.
Maybe that should be a daily cancellation at some point.
It was a company called Southern Scholar, and they sell socks for gentlemen, which I am one.
That's how they advertise themselves.
And this is not a paid promotion at all, but if you're a sock enthusiast like I am, then I'd definitely check them out and get your sock subscription.
The Daily Wire has accomplished a lot this year, including an announcement of our new platform, DW Kids.
We're taking on Disney, Hollywood, even razor companies, and rebuilding the culture that the left has been handily destroying, because it's about time we do something so you can as well.
Stop giving money to organizations that don't respect you or your values.
Help us build alternatives where the left is tearing down foundations.
We're building things.
They're tearing things down.
That's the way that goes.
And you can start today.
Head to dailywire.com slash subscribe and use code WALSH for 20% off and join us in our fight to preserve real American values today.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Unfortunately, we have to deal with a heavy topic for the daily cancellation today.
It's heavy, but it's also A big topic, and one that can be difficult to fully kind of wrap your arms around.
Here's the story from the Daily Mail.
They report that a morbidly obese traveler, quote, has divided opinion after sharing a viral TikTok slamming Ryanair for the size of its seats, with some critics telling her it was not the airline's fault.
Now, it's basically a monthly tradition at this point that a fat airline passenger complains on TikTok about the fact that planes are not being redesigned to specifically accommodate their hefty frame.
This is right in line with those other complaints.
The Daily Mail continues, KirstieLeanne29 from Shropshire filmed the clip while flying with the budget carrier, revealing how she struggled to fit down the plane's narrow aisle, couldn't use the tray table due to lack of space, and could barely move in the tiny toilet cubicle.
Kirstie, who blogs about her experiences traveling as a size 24 to 26, wanted to highlight issues she encounters to others.
Recalling the problematic flight, Kirstie explained, The plus-sized blogger also revealed how she was unable to do work because she didn't have space to use the tray table.
people on the plane because I was running a little late so I felt the
stares of people. All I could think was that they didn't want me to sit next to
them. The plus-size blogger also revealed how she was unable to do work because
she didn't have space to use the tray table. She said I was going to use the
tray table to do some work on the way but when I couldn't put it down I
quickly decided that it was not going to happen. Meanwhile she continued, "The
bathroom was another issue I faced."
Unfortunately, it's probably one of the smallest bathrooms I've ever seen, and I decided against trying to squeeze in.
She continues with this horror story in greater detail, but you probably get the gist.
Apparently, Kirstie does this for a living, or at least as a hobby.
She travels around and complains when she's too fat to do certain things.
According to her TikTok account, her mission is to push for greater plus-sized representation in the travel industry.
Although you could argue that plus-size people already have, you know, a very large representation.
Now, we've talked plenty of times in the past about the so-called body positivity movement, which encourages people to display their positive attitudes about their bodies by destroying their bodies.
This is what makes body positivity one of the most self-contradictory and also destructive ideas to come along in quite some time.
And it manages to stand out even amid all the other self-contradictory destructive ideas that are so popular these days.
But we're not going to dwell specifically on that aspect of it.
We're also going to leave aside the point that, if I'm being honest, part of me actually hopes that the obese community gets their way, plays the victim card successfully, and forces planes to better accommodate them.
Because the end result is that we would all get bigger seats and more legroom, I guess, which would be kind of nice.
Of course, that's assuming that the concession doesn't involve setting aside a special area on the plane just for fat people, where only they get the extra room.
Maybe first class will be abolished and replaced with fat class.
Fat people will be rewarded with, you know, premium first-class seats, and even better, the first-class food.
So come to think of it, that's actually probably exactly what would end up happening, so I take back what I said a moment ago.
Anyway, I want to turn our attention to another aspect of this situation, which lies a little deeper, and you can only see it when you sort of trim the fat away.
No pun intended, of course.
I'm not the kind of person who would bring up this discussion as nothing more than a vehicle to make fat puns.
That's not who I am.
Instead, I'm struck by The important truth about human nature that this story, and stories like it, illustrate for us.
After all, the fat acceptance movement is supposed to be all about freedom, right?
People should be free to be whatever size they want, and the world's job is to accommodate their girth, however gargantuan it might be.
But, as always, our culture promotes a kind of freedom which is really, in the end, slavery.
When you do whatever you want, you exercise no self-control, You exercise not at all in general, and simply follow the whims of the flesh, you end up trapped in a nightmare of your own making.
This woman is so free that she can't even fit on a plane.
She's so free that she can't fully participate in society.
She's so free that she's probably going to die before she reaches the age of 60.
This is the freedom of the modern world, the freedom that makes you a slave to your compulsions, the freedom that leads ultimately to annihilation.
And fat acceptance is just one example.
There are many others, often quite a bit more serious.
How about, to return to the topic of the day, the freedom granted to women to kill their unborn children?
This is a freedom that deprives you of something good and true and fulfilling.
It deprives a woman of herself in many ways.
It deprives her of the opportunity to be transformed by the love for and from her child.
It robs her of everything.
Consigns her to a life of regret and loss and guilt.
And then we call it freedom.
Dostoevsky noticed this about the modern world way back in the 1800s when he wrote The Brothers Karamazov, which includes this passage.
He writes, The world has proclaimed the reign of freedom, especially of late.
But what do we see in this freedom of theirs?
Nothing but slavery and self-destruction.
For the world says, You have desires, and so satisfy them.
For you have the same rights as the most rich and powerful.
Don't be afraid of satisfying them and even multiplying your desires.
That is the modern doctrine of the world, in that they see freedom.
And what follows from this right of multiplication of desire?
In the rich, isolation and spiritual suicide.
In the poor, envy and murder.
For they have been given rights, but have not been shown the means of satisfying their wants.
They maintain that the world is getting more and more united, more and more bound together in brotherly community, as it overcomes distance and sets thoughts flying through the air.
But put no faith in such a bond of union.
Interpreting freedom as the multiplication and rapid satisfaction of desire, men distort their own nature, for many senseless and foolish desires and habits and ridiculous fancies are fostered in them.
Now, Dostoevsky noticed this about Western culture as he observed it from Russia in the year 1880.
And he couldn't have known just how right he was.
There's probably never been a better definition of the modern conception of freedom than the one that he offers right there.
Freedom is the multiplication and satisfaction of desire.
But that's not freedom at all.
It is, as he points out, isolation, envy, hatred, suicide.
That's what this kind of freedom gets you.
You aren't even free to walk down the aisle of a passenger plane.
You're left hampered, disabled, helpless.
Screaming out like a child, demanding that the world conform itself to you.
You're not going to find any freedom in such a life.
But you will find, when it comes down to it, that you are ultimately, at the end of the day, cancelled.
And we'll leave it there for today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
Don't forget to subscribe.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Also, tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
We're there.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knowles Show, The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, 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.
John Bickley here, Daily Wire editor-in-chief.
Wake up every morning with our show, Morning Wire, where we bring you all the news that you need to know in 15 minutes or less.
