Today on the Matt Walsh Show, another congressional hearing about abortion. This one features liberals refusing to denounce infanticide, refusing to define the word woman, and once again claiming that men can get pregnant. It has been a very instructive spectacle, if nothing else. Also, AOC is the victim of an outrageous and violent attack after a comedian mildly heckles her for 10 seconds. And a parent at a school board meeting is told that it would be illegal to read out loud some of the material that the school board has approved for children in their district to read. Plus, Amazon bans me from advertising my book on its platform, again. And car companies are now charging you subscription fees to access the features in the vehicle that you already paid for.
Become a DailyWire+ member today to watch my documentary “What Is A Woman?” and access the extensive DailyWire+ content catalog: https://utm.io/ueIZt
—
Today’s Sponsors:
Charity Mobile sends 5% of your monthly plan price to the Pro-Life charity of your choice. Call at 1-877-474-3662 or chat online at charitymobile.com and mention offer code: WALSH
Manage your family's financial future like a parenting pro. Try Fabric Today RISK-FREE 30-Day Money-Back Guarantee MeetFabric.com/WALSH
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, another congressional hearing about abortion.
This one features liberals refusing to denounce infanticide, refusing to define the word woman, and once again claiming that men can get pregnant.
It has been a very instructive spectacle, if nothing else.
Also, AOC is the victim of an outrageous and violent attack after a comedian mildly heckles her for 10 seconds.
And a parent at a school board meeting is told that it would be illegal to read out loud some of the material that the school board has approved for children in their district to read at school.
Plus, Amazon bans me from advertising my book on its platform again, and car companies are now charging you subscription fees to access the features in the vehicle that you already paid for.
We'll talk about all of that and more today on the Matt Walsh Show.
(upbeat music)
The Supreme Court decision overturning Roe is a huge step in the right direction
and of course, long overdue.
But there's still a long way to go to rid our country of abortion and give all unborn children the right to life that they're guaranteed by the Constitution.
Did you know that if you're currently on a phone plan with one of the major carriers, you may be helping these left-leaning companies donate to pro-choice causes and candidates, or you may be paying for their employees' travel expenses for abortions, even worse.
Don't let abortionists use your money to fund policies and behavior that you don't believe in.
Switch to the pro-life, pro-family cell phone company that I use instead.
That's Charity Mobile.
They send 5% of your monthly plan price to any pro-life charity of your choice.
You don't have to compromise on values or services because Charity Mobile offers the latest 5G phones.
No device or service contracts, great nationwide coverage, and exceptional live customer service based right here in the USA.
The fight for the right to life continues and pro-life causes need your continued support.
You can help by simply switching your cell phone service today to Charity Mobile.
Call 1-877-474-3662 or chat with them online at charitymobile.com and mention OfferCodeWalsh to redeem the free cell phone offer.
That's charitymobile.com and mention OfferCodeWalsh.
Two days ago, the Senate had its hearing on abortion rights following the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
During that hearing, we were treated to the spectacle of University of California, Berkeley School of Law Professor Kiara Bridges attempting to explain to Senator Josh Hawley that men can get pregnant.
As we heard on the show yesterday, this exchange was provoked because Bridges, in her testimony, repeatedly referred to People with the capacity to get pregnant, rather than simply saying woman.
And Holly asked her why she was using this sort of wordier label.
And she said, well, because women aren't the only ones with the capacity to get pregnant.
Now, the funny thing here, of course, is that people with the capacity to get pregnant is perhaps the best possible definition of woman.
Maybe even better than adult human female, which is the one that I usually go with.
I mean, they're both true, they're both accurate, but people with the capacity to get pregnant, that's what a woman is.
Trying to draw a distinction between people with the capacity to get pregnant and women, it's like trying to draw a distinction between the 864,000 mile wide ball of hot plasma at the center of our solar system and the sun, right?
The former is just a longer way of saying the latter.
But Professor Bridges seeks to divorce the word woman from its inherent definition while still reserving the right to use the now meaningless word as if it still has meaning.
And those are the conditions that created what was at the time maybe, maybe the most absurd and mind-boggling conversation ever heard in a congressional hearing.
That was Tuesday.
And that was until yesterday, Wednesday, when the House of Representatives had its turn.
This was a House Oversight Committee hearing on the same subject of so-called abortion rights.
And this featured testimony from a number of other pro-abortion witnesses, all competing with Bridges, it seems.
Let's start with this.
Here is Sarah Lopez, who's an abortion activist, describing her own experience with abortion.
Listen.
What these restrictions are intended to do is try and make people, try and stop people from having abortions, but abortion is healthcare.
My abortion was the best decision I ever made.
It was an act of self-love, and I'm here today to make sure that everybody who currently needs an abortion, who has had an abortion, or will need an abortion, is not alone, no matter what the state tries to force upon us.
Abortion is the best decision she ever made.
I mean, it did, after all, enable her to become a mediocre nobody in a pantsuit shilling for abortion.
She sacrificed her soul and her child, and in exchange, she earned a life so miserable and pathetic and pointless that, by her own telling, her greatest achievement, even still, was paying someone $400 to kill her child.
She says this is a self-love.
Well, it isn't.
It's selfishness, certainly.
It's self-centeredness.
It's self-involvement.
It's a lot of self-words, but it's not self-love.
Because to love is to will the good of the other.
To love yourself, then, is to will your own good.
But through abortion, you deprive yourself of what is good.
The woman gives up the joy and fulfillment and goodness of motherhood for the sake of the pantsuit, believing the lie that these are mutually exclusive alternatives.
She wills for herself a shallow, regrettable, and regretful life of just misery and loneliness.
She condemns herself to an existence spent constantly rationalizing and defending to the world, but really to herself, the awful thing she did in order to open a door that she knows deep down was not worth the price of admission.
Okay, that's not self-love.
That's actually self-loathing disguised as self-love.
But there was more discussion along these lines at the hearing and about how abortion is an act of love.
We heard this from other witnesses as well.
And the conversation got darker than that.
At one point, the same witness, Lopez, was asked whether this self-love might extend to killing babies outside of the womb, infanticide.
Here's how she responded to that.
I assume you agree with infanticide, the killing of a child, a perfectly healthy child at birth.
I don't accept the basis of that question, but I do believe abortion is healthcare.
I'm talking about, do you agree?
I know I get that, but do you agree?
I mean, are you in, do you support infanticide, killing the child after he's born?
I do not agree with the basis of that question, but I do believe that abortion is healthcare.
Now she does not agree, doesn't agree with the basis of the question.
She says, I don't agree with the basis of the question.
She treats it like a, like a gotcha question.
And yet, all she has to do is say no.
You can only get got by a question like that if you refuse to answer it.
Like, if the question, should it be legal to murder a six-month-old infant, if that's a gotcha question for you, then there are some serious problems with you.
For some reason, she cannot bring herself to say no.
You know, just no, I don't agree with killing infants outside of the womb.
Can't say it.
In fact, none of the pro-abortion witnesses were willing to express any opposition to the execution of infants.
Here's another example.
Mrs. Shannon, do you agree with infanticide?
Well, I think you're using inflammatory language to basically describe a situation that does not happen.
We don't have infanticide happening.
Doctors would not do that, and neither would folks who have carried pregnancies.
Okay, would a healthy child, do you agree, if a healthy child is born, that it's that woman's right to decide if it lives or dies?
What I think is, based on your question, you have a very low opinion of pregnant people.
Because if you think that anybody would carry... No, no.
Answer the question.
Excuse me.
Answer the question.
I'm answering it.
No, you're not.
I will take it that you agree.
Do you want to answer or do you want to keep talking over witnesses?
What I'm telling you is nobody would carry a pregnancy and then decide on a Monday, because they are bored, that they want to have an abortion.
That's ridiculous.
And it's inflammatory what you're saying.
You're talking about families who are in tough situations where folks have been excited about carrying a pregnancy.
Most of the abortions that happen later in pregnancy are really tragedies where it's really a disappointment for everyone involved.
But you agree with, I take it with all those words, you do agree with basically murdering a child after they're born.
Doctors would not commit infanticide, she says.
But, you know, that's not the same thing as saying that they shouldn't be able to or that it would be wrong to.
Also, by the way, abortionists have committed infanticide.
That's why Gosnell is in jail.
And as you know from this show, activists just a few months ago, pro-life activists uncovered physical evidence of infanticide in D.C.
abortion clinics.
That's going on, like, right now.
Though law enforcement never expressed any interest in following up and pursuing that lead, of course.
They were too busy ignoring other crimes, it seems.
Still, it does happen.
It actually happens a lot.
And will certainly happen much more often, especially as abortion activists are conspicuously hesitant to denounce the practice.
It'd be an easy win to denounce it.
If they were to say, no, of course I don't support that.
Are you crazy?
That's got nothing to do with abortion.
Why would you even ask me that?
If they were to just answer that way, that would be enough to flip the question around and make the questioner look silly.
But they couldn't say that because they realized that by condemning the killing of children a second outside of the womb, they will have fatally weakened the case for killing kids a second before they emerge from the womb.
That's why they know they can't answer.
That's why the question's being asked.
Also, at least one of the reasons.
Because if you ask them, hey, can we kill a child a second outside of the womb, a minute outside of the womb, and if they say just plainly, no, of course we can't do that.
Well, why can't we do that?
Well, because that's a human child.
Of course we can.
Well, is it not a human child a minute before?
What happened in the minute?
What changed in the minute besides the location of this human child?
They know that's where it's leading, and that's why they can't answer.
But we're still not done.
The witnesses were, and this is now a tradition, I hope, given the opportunity also to define the word woman as the What is a Woman movement grows, and here's how that went.
Earlier this year, our newest Supreme Court Justice, Katonja Brown Jackson, was asked what a woman is, and she had a difficult time defining that.
Since you are the president of the National Women's Law Center, I was hoping that you could define what a woman is for us in this committee hearing.
Well, as the president of the National Women's Law Center, you can imagine I say woman a lot in my day job.
Okay, so I'm just asking for the definition.
And so what I'll tell you is, I am a woman, that's how I identify.
But I wonder, however, if in part the reason that you're asking a question is that you're trying to suggest that people who don't identify as women can't find it.
I am simply asking the question and I simply want an answer.
And so I think it's actually really important to be very clear here that there are people who identify as non-binary.
I think about 5% of young people do.
We're not going to go there.
I was hoping maybe you would say something that maybe we learned in high school biology that has to do with X and Y chromosomes, which define male and female, but I guess we're not going to get there.
You know, the amazing thing is that these people, by now, they must see this question coming from a mile away.
Filming the movie, What is a Woman?, we had the advantage of surprise.
Nobody expected to be asked this stumper of a question.
But now, they must expect it, especially at a congressional hearing, where just the day before, at another congressional hearing, the most viral moment revolved around this question.
So they have to see it coming.
They know it's coming, and still, they have not come up with an effective way to deflect, let alone actually answer the question.
But we know they're not going to answer it, but at least you'd think they'd come up with some kind of half-effective, convincing deflection.
They don't even have that.
Altogether, I think these hearings have been quite instructive, and I'm glad they're having them.
It's the Democrats who wanted to have these hearings to give their side a chance to get up there and talk about how terrible it is now that we're not going to have Roe v. Wade.
And I think it's great to put all of this on full display for the world to see.
To see these people, leftism, now like a planet out of orbit, just like tumbling through the abyss, untethered completely.
I think it's a great thing for people to see.
so that they can decide whether they want to follow these people into that abyss.
The liberal witnesses have, just to review, refused to condemn infanticide, they've hailed abortion as an act of love, they've refused to define the word woman, and they've repeatedly claimed that men can get pregnant.
Once again, the stark, vast, unbridgeable rift between the two sides is made evident.
A great void separates us.
It's not a fracture that can be repaired.
It's not a wound that can be healed.
At least I don't see how.
I don't know if, as so many people have predicted, this will all lead to a civil war, but if it does, I can certainly say it will be the weirdest civil war in history.
But on the bright side, you know, probably also the shortest.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
And also amazingly expensive.
But with Fabric, protecting your family with term life insurance is surprisingly affordable.
Fabric was built specifically for parents to help you manage your family's financial future like a parenting pro, stress-free.
Fabric's new Lower prices mean that significant savings that you're going to earn over other providers with great policies like a million dollars in coverage for less than a dollar a day.
It's hard to beat that.
Everything is on your schedule at Fabric because it's all online.
Less than 10 minutes to apply and you can be offered coverage instantly with no health exam required.
Then just personalize your quote to fit your family's needs.
With Fabric's online hub, it's easy to track your family finances all in one place, get affordable life insurance, set up your kids' college savings plans, and even establish a rainy day savings fund on top of it.
You can do all of that with Fabric Life.
Planning for the future has never been easier.
There's no risk to apply today.
Fabric has a 30-day money-back guarantee, and you can cancel anytime.
So protect your family with term life insurance now in just 10 minutes.
Apply today at meetfabric.com slash Walsh.
That's meetfabric.com slash Walsh to start protecting your family today.
M-E-E-T fabric.com slash Walsh.
Fabric Insurance Agency policies issued by Vantis Life not available in New York and Montana.
Price is subject to underwriting and health questions.
Okay, before we get to the headlines, I have to mention again our new piece of merchandise in the store that I'm very, very proud of and excited about, and I should be wearing it right now, honestly.
The My Truth is Out There alien shirt, so you can show your support for the space alien community.
There's a lot of great stuff at the Nat Walsh store if you go to dailywire.com slash shop, and I was looking through.
Just read 41 on the air.
There are things here that I didn't even know we had.
I mean, I know we have the Virtue Signal patch, which if you don't have that yet, you've got to get that to show your virtue to the world.
It's a good way of just staying on top of things.
If you have the Virtue Signal patch, then you don't have to rotate between the Ukraine flag and the Pride flag and the current thing.
You've just got it all covered with the Virtue Signal patch or the Virtue Signal t-shirt, which we have.
We of course have the Chef Self Pronouns Apron so that you can let people know your pronouns while you're cooking out on the grill.
And then I didn't even realize we had now officially the Sweet Baby Baby Onesie.
So if you're welcoming a new bundle of joy into the world and you want to indoctrinate them as you should into the Sweet Baby Gang cult early on, you can get them this onesie.
So there's a lot of great stuff.
Go to dailywire.com and see it all there.
Congresswoman Alexandria Cesar Cortez was confronted on the steps of the Capitol in what I'm sure she would describe, and maybe has already described, as an act of insurrection.
She was confronted by Alex Stein, who is a conservative, a comedian, a social media personality.
We've played a number of his videos on this show before.
This confrontation, though, was a little bit unique.
It's not what you usually see.
But let's watch it.
AOC, my favorite big booty Latina.
I love you, AOC.
You're my favorite.
She wants to kill babies, but she's still beautiful.
You look very beautiful in that dress.
You look very sexy.
Look at that booty on AOC.
That's my favorite big booty Latina.
I want you to do a little selfie.
I love it.
My favorite, AOC.
Nice to meet you, AOC.
Look how sexy she looks in that dress.
Ooh, I love it, AOC.
Hot, hot, hot like a tamale.
So.
There you go.
That's how that conversation went.
Now, AOC is, of course, picking this up and running with it.
Here's what she tweeted.
Actually, it's pretty funny.
She tweeted at first.
There's like a string of tweets here.
So, last night at around 8.30, she tweeted... Let's see if I can pull this up.
She tweeted, I posted about a deeply disgusting incident that happened today on the Capitol steps, but took it down because it's clearly someone seeking extremist fame.
It's just a bummer to work in an institution that openly allowed this, but talking about it only invites more.
Just really sad.
I don't want to call attention to this, so I don't want to give this person more fame.
And so she just posted about it, then she deleted it, then she posted again.
And then another 15 minutes goes by and she just can't help herself.
She posts the video herself with this guy's face right there after just saying, I don't want to give more attention to this guy.
She just can't.
She can't help herself because you know why?
Because this is attention to her.
And it's also an opportunity to make herself into a victim.
She knows that the smarter move would just be to not acknowledge it at all, don't bring attention to it, hardly anybody will see it, and then you move on with your life.
She knows that, but you can see this internal conflict, and you can just imagine the torturous 15 minutes between that first tweet and the follow-up when she finally posted the video herself, where she's going back and forth.
You know, devil and angel on the shoulder.
Well, they're both devils for her, but, um, one is slightly more reasonable telling her don't post the video.
She's like, no, I can't.
It's just, it's attention.
I have to.
And so she finally posted it and she says, here is a video he posted of the incident.
I was actually walking over to deck him because if no one will protect us, then I'll do it myself.
But I needed to catch a vote more than a case today.
Right?
She, uh, she was gonna, she was gonna go over and deck him.
I don't want to catch a case though.
I was going to beat this guy up.
Yet what does she do?
She goes over and gives the peace sign and like mugs for the camera.
I was going to deck him for it, but instead I just went along with it and posed for a selfie instead.
Now, if we can get past how pathetically hilarious it is that we're supposed to take her seriously, that she was going to go deck somebody.
She is, though, threatening violence against a comedian for heckling her.
And she's also saying that she thinks it should be illegal for people to say rude things to her.
That's what she says.
She says it's a bummer to work in an institution that allows this.
So she's saying this should not be allowed.
You should not be allowed to approach me as a politician and say things to me that I find offensive.
You shouldn't be allowed to do it, she says.
And she needs to be protected from it.
She needs to be protected from people saying big booty Latina to her.
Now that's an interesting perspective.
Let's go back and remember, let's go back to ancient history, which was just like, I don't know, five days ago.
And remember what she said after Kavanaugh, Justice Kavanaugh was harassed by leftist militants while he was at a restaurant with his family.
Here was her response to that.
Okay, so we saw her response to when she's getting harassed.
What about when Kavanaugh is getting harassed?
She says, poor guy, he left before his souffle because he decided half the country should risk death if they have an ectopic pregnancy within the wrong state lines.
It's all very unfair to him.
The least they could do is let him eat cake.
So that's her response when other people are being harassed.
In fact, AOC has defended mobs that show up at the homes of Supreme Court justice.
She has no problem with any kind of aggressive harassment or intimidation tactic used against her opponents.
Famously looting and rioting, she has openly defended.
Now she wants us to feel sorry for her because someone said big booty Latina to her?
No, too bad, AOC.
No sympathy from me.
Sorry.
You openly advocate for your enemies to be harassed and then you're offended?
And you want it to treat it like a crime when it happens to you?
I say again, nope.
Sorry.
You want this world, Congresswoman.
Now you get it.
Have fun.
Something else that AOC, by the way, has said is that protests...
are supposed to make you uncomfortable.
She said this multiple times.
And this is her way of excusing.
Again, rioting, looting, people showing up at people's houses.
Remember when the protesters followed Kristen Sinema into the bathroom?
Followed her as she went into a bathroom stall and harassing her on camera?
Did AOC come out and condemn that?
No, she didn't.
Why?
Because protesting is supposed to make you uncomfortable.
Well, made her uncomfortable to be called a big booty Latina.
Isn't that what protesting is supposed to accomplish?
Now, does this video count as a protest?
Was he actually protesting her?
Like, in his way, he was.
He starts off by saying she wants to kill babies.
Obviously, what he's doing is he's heaping disrespect and scorn on her as an act of protest, as a statement.
You can agree or disagree with that approach.
That's what he's doing.
Now, if it were me, Um, that's not what I would be saying to her.
I certainly wouldn't be saying anything nice, but that's not where I would go.
But the point is that, again, these are the rules that she established.
And as conservatives, we really have to stop trying to protect these people from suffering the consequences of their own choices, from being held to their own standards, from being forced to play by the rules that they have established.
We can't try to shield somebody from what comes after them once they tear down all the fences.
You know what it's like?
Especially these conservatives, and there have been some today that have come to her defense and said, this is too far.
This is inappropriate.
I don't like AOC, but I condemn this.
I condemn it.
You know what it's like?
It's exactly like if somebody came along and tore down a fence.
Knowing there's a rabid dog on the other side of it, and they tore it down because they want the dog to tear you to pieces.
But instead, the dog turns around and mauls them.
Now, if that were to happen, would you look and say, oh, that's unfortunate.
That's really terrible.
That's a terrible thing.
You'd say, well, it serves you right.
That's justice.
You tore down a fence, hoping a dog would attack someone else, and it attacked you.
That is justice, is what that is.
What else am I supposed to call that?
Am I supposed to feel sorry for you?
You wanted this thing to maul me to death and instead it's chopping on your leg?
And I'm supposed to feel sorry?
How self-loathing would I have to be?
How much would I have to hate myself to sympathize with you in that circumstance?
This woman, just to reiterate again, she has no problem siccing mobs of dangerous militants on the homes of people she doesn't agree with.
Even after she defended the people harassing Kavanaugh, even after someone showed up to Kavanaugh's house with a gun planning to kill him.
And she was still saying, yeah, go after him.
It's fine.
Poor little baby.
And now she's crying because someone said big booty Latina and they're actually conservative saying this is too far.
This is too far.
Give me a break.
Although I will say even if I don't sympathize with AOC because she's an attention starved hypocrite getting a dose of her own medicine.
I do think, actually, that it was objectively inappropriate to call her a big-booty Latina.
The proper term is big-booty Latinx.
Or Latinx.
Shameful oversight there, Alex Stein.
You should be ashamed.
All right, let's move to this from the New York Post.
It says, a Florida father is speaking out after a school board cut off his microphone as he denounced pornographic material in classrooms, claiming somebody failed drastically in the mission to protect young minds.
Bruce Friedman is his name.
He's the Florida chapter president of No Left Turn in Education, which works to restore parental function in public education.
He was silenced during a June 30th Clay County School District board meeting As he read from a book he found at the Fleming Island High School.
And this exchange is just one you have to see for yourself, so let's play it.
Tonight I'm going to give a sampling from three books that are in our libraries, the Fleming School and the Oakleaf School.
I'm going to stop you right there, sir.
I'm going to stop you right there.
Turn the microphone off.
because there's a Clay County employee that got paid to put this book, Lucky, by Alice
Sebold.
I'm going to read things.
If there's children watching, cover their ears.
He began to need a specific answer.
I'm going to stop you right there, sir.
I'm going to stop you right there.
Turn the microphone off.
Turn off his microphone, please.
I've told you I'm stopping you.
The reason I'm stopping you is because these meetings are, if you'll hush your mouth for a minute and listen instead of just talking, you may learn something.
The problem is, sir, is these meetings are broadcast.
There are people at home that are watching it on YouTube.
There are people that are watching it on community television.
Are you going to listen or are you going to run your mouth?
You'll get it back, but you'll get it back to talk about something besides reading pornography into a public television set.
Well, let me explain something to you.
There are federal and state laws that prohibit you from saying the things that you're getting ready to say on television.
There are state laws that prohibit and federal communications laws that prohibit you from publishing these things to a child.
You don't have the ability at this point to determine who's watching the television show, and for you to say, everybody cover your ears, just doesn't cut it.
If you go to television, and you look before anything that comes on that's offensive, they have it graded as R.
NC-17, PG or G or X.
Wow.
Now, if you put something on the television without that, you are violating state and federal law.
Number one.
Number two, if you'll hush a minute and listen, you'll learn something.
Wow.
First of all, this is really another reason why, even though the two incidents are not directly related,
another reason why I don't have any problem with someone calling AOC a big booty latinx is that, it's
disrespect, but these people, I'm just lumping them all together.
The people running school boards, AOC, they're all in the same camp.
They have no respect for us whatsoever.
You know what, you want to talk about scorn.
The scorn they heap on us every second of the day.
And you hear it in that exchange.
You want to shut your mouth for a minute?
Who are you talking to?
I thought the guy that was trying to speak, he kept his calm better than I probably could.
I respect that.
And in the process, he illustrated something very important.
But part of me wishes he'd respond like, who the hell are you talking to, you son of a bitch?
Why don't you shut your mouth?
Who do you think you are that you can sit up there and tell me to close my mouth?
That's not how this works.
You sit on a school board.
You're a nobody.
You work for me.
I tell you to shut your mouth and listen to me.
That should be the response.
And what is he saying?
It's illegal.
This guy is saying it's illegal to read this material out loud because a child might hear it.
Meanwhile, this is the material that he allows to be in the schools that he oversees.
So it's illegal for a parent to read it out loud at a school board meeting, but it's not illegal to supply it to the kids in the library at the school?
Just incredible.
And this brings me back to a point that should be reiterated.
I said yesterday that you shouldn't be sending your kid into the university system.
Not the first time I've said that.
You know how I feel about the public school system because of stuff like this.
Because of the The indoctrination that goes on, the content that kids in these schools are subjected to, the messages and everything else, and also the people running these institutions.
And I got pushback yesterday, as I have many times in the past, from people saying, as we were talking specifically in that case about the university system, but I hear it also about the public school system when I say, get out of the public school system, homeschool your kids and all the rest of it.
The pushback that I get is that, well, no, that's cowardly.
We're giving up, right?
We can't do that.
We need to fight for these institutions.
We have to reclaim and fight for these institutions rather than abandon them.
But here's the problem, we can't.
Okay, you can't reclaim them as they are currently constructed.
They have to be destroyed and rebuilt.
The public school system, the fact that something like that can even happen at a school board meeting.
Everything from the tone the school board member is taking, the way he's speaking to the other guy, and what they're talking about, everything about it.
The fact that a school board member will sit there and say, it's illegal for you to read this out loud, but we can still give it to your kids.
That just shows that the rot in the school system goes all the way down at a structural level.
You know, if you're buying an old dilapidated home, and you might think at first, well, we could do a nice remodel, and then you look at it and you say, no, there's structural damage.
This thing is beyond saving.
It has to be demolished.
Okay, we need to remodel this thing with a wrecking ball, which is how we need to remodel the public school system, metaphorically speaking, and then rebuild something completely different.
That's the only answer.
The answer is not.
To try and take over the left's institutions as they are currently constructed.
Because they are the left's institutions.
They own them.
And as long as you are inside them, you're at their mercy.
Abandon the institutions to the extent that you can build your own.
And you can do that with education too.
Homeschooling may not seem like an institution, but it actually is.
As homeschooling parents, we've been involved in several of them.
You can get together as a community of homeschoolers and build your own co-ops, in effect, your own small-scale educational system.
So it's not just you taking the burden of this all on your own.
You don't have to do that.
So that's the answer.
And then once we've abandoned these institutions, you don't even need the wrecking ball because they'll collapse on their own.
The public school system, in order to survive, it needs your children.
It can't survive without them.
It feeds.
It's a parasite that feeds on your kids.
And then the other point that I always have to make sure to emphasize is that when it
comes to education, you know, you talk about, "Oh, we need to fight for it.
We need to fight for the institutions."
Well, if you send your kid to public school or to a liberal university for that matter,
You are not fighting to reclaim that institution.
You're not doing the fighting.
You're not doing anything.
You're just sending your kid off.
Your child is the one who you are tasking to wage this war.
You're sending your kid in.
And especially when it comes to the public school system, that is an insane strategy.
It's hard enough for parents to deal with these people.
You're going to send your seven-year-old in and say, fight for this institution.
Asking way too much of your child, if you do that, I think.
All right.
You know, we can always rely on, as we move on, we can always rely on this guy to make compelling arguments and to get right to the heart of the matter.
So here is Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut.
tweeting after in response to the new footage that came out of the Uvalde Police Department and how they were cowering in the hallways while children were being executed on the other side of an unlocked door that never tried to open.
Chris Murphy, though, he says, The Uvalde video puts to bed forever the question of whether the way to deal with bad guys with guns is to make sure there are more good guys with guns.
We've always known it was a gun industry created lie designed to sell more guns.
Now we just have the gut-wrenching proof.
So think about the logic here.
First of all, he's saying these men with guns were cowards and they failed in their duty.
That part is correct.
But he says, which proves forever that no man has ever or will ever use a gun to protect himself or anyone else.
So footage of men with guns, who are supposed to be the good guys, failing in their duty, that proves that there has never ever been a good guy with a gun who has actually lived up to his duty and acted courageously.
And there could never be one in the future because of this one tragedy.
I guess that's about the sort of logic that you would expect from the males can give birth crowd.
But also, the ill logic goes one level deeper because what is he actually saying?
What's the implication?
He's saying that you can't trust the cops to protect you.
The good guy with a gun thing is a myth and that also applies to the cops, he says.
Doesn't exist.
And so, give up your guns.
So that you'll have to rely totally on the cops to protect you.
Good guy with a gun is a myth.
Can't rely on the cops to protect you.
Therefore, give up your guns, and if the bad guy's ever coming after you, rely on the cops to protect you, even though you can't, and it's a myth that they will.
So, this is what we get from this crowd.
All right.
Couple other things to mention here.
Daily Wire says the Everything store appears to have a double standard when it comes to gender identity content.
Amazon recently rejected the Daily Wire's paid ads for Matt Walsh's book, What Is A Woman?, saying the ads contain prohibited content.
The company cited a policy banning content that questions a person's sexual orientation.
An Amazon advisor's support wrote in an email to Daily Wire, we don't allow content that appears to infer or claim to diagnose, treat, reverse, or question sexual orientation.
It's a strange rationale.
The article continues, what is woman is not about sexual orientation as much as gender identity and the radical progressive ideology around it.
Yeah, I mean, this just makes, this of course makes no sense at all.
Actually, Yeah, the book doesn't deal with sexual orientation at all.
That is not the subject of the book.
And as far as sexual orientation goes, as the transgender agenda, gender ideology runs roughshod over what was in the past the leftist agenda, especially as it pertains to feminists, like we've talked about this week.
It also does this with so-called gay rights, because sexual orientation doesn't even really mean anything anymore if your gender doesn't mean anything.
And also, if it is, as we've been told, you know, your sexual orientation is immutable.
It cannot be changed.
This is one of the, this has always been, or at least when I say always, for the last, you know, A couple of decades, anyway.
On the left, this has been one of the number one most sacrosanct creeds.
That your sexual orientation is set in stone, you're born with it, and it can never change.
Well, if that's the case, then it's also impossible to change your gender.
Because if you can change your gender, that means you can change your sexual orientation.
If you're a gay man attracted to men because that means you're a gay man and then you become a woman and you're still attracted to men, well that means your sexual orientation has changed.
So that's just yet another inherent contradiction created by gender ideology.
So what is Amazon doing here?
They realize they can't Justify banning the book because that's what they would like to do.
They'd like to ban the book outright and say you can't sell this book on our site.
But they do have their own guidelines which they've published and everybody can read and they realize that according to those guidelines, the book doesn't violate any of them.
Now, of course, it doesn't make sense that the book is so hateful and violates policies, and so you can ban advertising, but according to your own guidelines, you can't just ban the book outright.
If it violates the standards for advertising, then you'd think it also violates the standards for being sold on the site at all.
So that doesn't make a lot of sense.
But I think this is just kind of...
The compromise Amazon has come up with, especially to appease their own woke employees who infamously have been literally crying about the books that I've published on their site.
Amazon realizes that they can suppress and censor the book in certain ways without drawing a lot of backlash
and negative publicity.
So they're going as far as they can without making it into a story.
And they realize that censoring the ads for whatever reason isn't a story,
banning the book outright is a story.
And so that's what they're doing.
That's the compromise they've come up with.
All right, one other thing to mention before we get to the comment section.
It's from the New York Post, a very important report.
It says, a woman in a now viral TikTok video climbed through a McDonald's drive-thru window to get to the kitchen so she could cook the food herself.
The clip posted by the user Greer Greer said that because the fast food company, the fast food employees ran out of gloves, they could not take any more orders due to sanitary concerns.
So then she just asked if she could climb through the window and make the food herself and I guess they let her do it.
Let's watch this video.
Lady climbs through McDonald's window because we're not taking any more orders cause we have no gloves.
She's not playing.
she wants to make her own food.
She wants to make her own food.
It's a training thing.
McDonald's corporate is training.
It's my first day of training and I came unactually dressed.
So you are not responsible for my first day of training.
I made food for you.
McDonald's corporate is training.
It's my first day of training and I came unactually dressed.
So you are not responsible for my first day of training.
She clapping and all.
What are you doing?
What are you doing?
(laughing)
What are you doing?
What is he doing?
Okay, so she's clearly drunk climbing through the drive-thru window, as one does.
This is something drunk people apparently do, part of the culture.
But here's where the focus should really be.
They aren't taking orders because they ran out of gloves.
What?
You can't just wash your hands?
Have you heard it?
Do you have soap and water back there?
Or send someone out to get more gloves?
Or check ahead of time to make sure that you have enough gloves to get through the night shift?
It seems like there are any number of solutions that would have worked both before and after this problem arose.
Instead, there are, you can see in the video, there are like 57 employees there.
They can't claim to be understaffed.
There's this whole gaggle of employees just kind of standing around, still on the clock, but telling everyone, oh, you can't make your food.
We're just going to sit here.
We're on the clock.
Well, yeah, we can't do anything for you.
Sorry.
I swear people will come up with any excuse these days to not work.
I told you about the story from Chipotle going in and being told that they can only take online orders, but they can't listen to my order.
They can't listen with their ears as I speak the order, but if I were to type it into my phone, then they can take it.
Just finding another excuse not to work.
I'm expecting to go to Burger King one of these days and be told that they aren't serving anymore because all of the employees simultaneously stubbed their toes and they're taking a week off to recover from the damage.
Just kidding, of course, I would never go to Burger King.
I do have some self-respect.
Let's get to the comment section.
[MUSIC]
Every day I report the ludicrous, just insane stuff the left is doing to our children.
Drag queen story hours, underage and irreversible sex changes, even grooming that goes on.
We here at the Matt Wall Show humbly inform the nation of the left's agenda every day.
But I'm thrilled to report that there's an organization taking action to finally push back on all of this woke madness and filth.
That's the American Principles Project.
It's a grassroots political advocacy group that is mobilizing the grassroots and pressuring states and the federal government to stop LGBT insanity.
You can sign up today at savethefamily.app.
Again, that's savethefamily.app.
If you've ever listened to our show and wondered what you can do to stop the destruction of our country, what actual Actions can you take?
What plan can you put in place?
This is your chance to fight back.
The work of the American Principal Project has resulted in 18 states banning men from women's sports.
It's even pressured so-called conservatives in Congress to get off their butts and pass pro-family platform planks.
They also target some of the worst pro-grooming Democrats in the country.
Working to defeat really sinister creeps like Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, self-proclaimed Georgia Governor Stacey Abrams.
For the same price, look, as a Disney Plus subscription, you can join the American Principles Project and directly fight back against the left's grooming agenda.
I highly encourage all of my listeners to visit savethefamily.app.
This is a great organization.
Again, that's savethefamily.app.
Visit the site, sign up, and help win the war on the groomers today.
Barry Bishop says, related to the guy who lost friends over your movie, my childhood best friend of 15 years just decided she can't talk to me unless I change my views on abortion and LGBT.
This doesn't make much sense to me because we hardly ever talk about politics when together.
Has this ever happened to you, Matt?
If so, how did you get over it?
Yeah, I mean, there are definitely plenty of people who don't talk to me anymore in recent years.
And then there was another, just over the years as I've been doing this for a living, just people have dropped off and have dropped off of the tree here.
And then, especially over the last month, there's been even more silence.
And how do I deal with it?
I deal with it by being A hermit at heart who has absolutely no problem not talking to people anymore.
I'm not saying it's the best way to be psychologically or the most healthy way, but when people say, I'm not going to talk to you anymore.
Okay, great.
That's just one less person I have to talk to.
That's fine.
I'm totally fine with that.
Psychologically healthy well-adjusted person.
How do you deal with it?
I unfortunately I can't I can't give advice from that perspective because that's not my own lived experience Jesse says Matt is such a dad persona makes him a great SBG dad, too Sometimes when he talks to us in the gang and he's being all down-to-earth all real and common-sense sounding It feels like sitting down to a dad lesson to educate and prepare his kids for dealing with the world You know, it is a very strange thing because when I first had kids I I felt very out of place, and I think every parent goes through this.
When you first have kids, you feel very out of place.
Referring to myself as a dad was just weird.
My first Father's Day, I felt like an imposter, like I didn't earn this.
How am I the one celebrating Father's Day?
But then one day you look up and you can't conceive of yourself anymore as anything but a parent.
So now it's like my defining trait, as you say.
So that's how life works.
Another dad lesson for you.
GameTime says, the much funnier approach to the JK Rowling thing would be to apologize for her and praise the fact that she's a staunch ally and is only saying these things to deflect criticism, then thank her for her support.
The media will instantly latch onto it.
No matter what she says, thank her for her staunch allegiance to your cause.
That would be some next level trolling toward not only her, but the media as well.
They wouldn't be able to help themselves.
That would be the funny thing to do.
But, you know, things I actually do respect, Um, how she's stood up against the trans mob, throwing me to the wolves and under the bus all at the same time.
I don't really respect that as much, but anyone who stands up against the mob, especially the trans mob in particular, I, I just, I respect that.
And so even if she hates my guts and she does, I still respect it.
So I'm not actually trying to cause problems for her.
Not going to back down either, but I'm not going to go out of my way to create issues for her.
So this is what I've, I've settled on.
Um, Let's see, Midna says, I'm sorry to inform you, Matt, but you're kind of wrong on something.
You can, in fact, sue a manufacturer for misuse, lol.
Pretty sure I just heard recently a woman got an STD or something while having sex in a vehicle and sued the manufacturer and won.
It's insane, but it happens for some reason.
Actually, I have to fact-check your fact-check here, Midna.
You need to do your research into STD and car-related issues.
The woman did not sue the car manufacturer.
She actually went after the insurance company.
The insurance company that covered the car in which she had her sexual interaction.
She had, so she had sex with a guy in his, uh, I think it was his Hyundai.
And of course, and she contracted genital warts.
And then she filed a claim saying that his car insurance company Geico should compensate her for it.
And I think the court actually sided with her to the tune of like $5 million.
So this could lead to a very interesting ad campaign with the Geico gecko.
You know, I, cause this is a, this is a certain customer base.
If you're, you know, the kind of person who, Has sex in the vehicle and you're gonna pass on various STDs, then we've got you covered.
We need the Geico Gecko out there to explain that to us.
Although the whole thing is, of course, it's ridiculous on a number of levels.
I don't think I need to explain why.
Starting with the fact that any rational person would know ahead of time that you're gonna get genital warts if you have sex with a guy in a Hyundai.
Like, that's... Another type of car, you know, we could talk, but a Hyundai is a, you know, what do you expect?
Everybody knows that if you want to make something more valuable, all you have to do is raise the price of it, right?
Just like that.
Just slap on a higher price tag, and it's as simple as that.
You have luxury bread, designer gas, exclusive squares of toilet paper.
Soon, every home with groceries, electricity, will be the envy of its neighborhood.
Sounds familiar, right?
Well, the other way to create value is to offer people something that they really want and then charge them a fair price for it.
I think this is the way.
This is the better way.
I prefer this way.
So if you still haven't heard, maybe because you were listening to Jill Biden comparing Latinos to tacos, then maybe you were distracted from the fact that Dr. Jordan Peterson has joined us at Daily Wire Plus.
Right now, just $8 a month gives you access to the full sum of Jordan Peterson's outrageous intellect, including dragons, monsters, and men.
A four-part miniseries on men, masculinity, and the pursuit of greatness.
It's great stuff.
You have to watch it.
I feel greater just talking about it.
Not to mention everything else we're doing with Daily Wire Plus to unwoke the country through fearless documentaries, gripping movies, and coming soon, we're also going to have kids content.
You don't want to miss any of that.
To take advantage of our $8 a month special membership offer, go to dailywireplus.com today and use code PLUS.
I gotta get used to saying dailywireplus.com.
That's dailywireplus.com right now, or go buy a gallon of Biden's designer gasoline.
Totally up to you.
I think I know which one you should choose.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Today for our daily cancellation, I'm going to harp on something seemingly very small and petty.
That is, after all, what this segment was always supposed to be about, even if I have on occasion betrayed the spirit of the daily cancellation by talking about topics that actually matter.
I will not make that mistake today.
Although I do believe, as I'll explain, that this issue is a microcosm of a larger and more pervasive cultural problem.
And here it is.
BMW, speaking of cars, will be charging a subscription fee for giving genital warts to people in your car.
No, for using the heated seats in some of their vehicles.
There's gonna be a subscription fee if you wanna use the heated seats in their vehicles.
Now, I have no dog directly in this fight.
I don't own a BMW.
I'll never own one.
I prefer for my cars to be 100% American made.
And unfortunately, those kinds of cars don't exist.
So I try to settle for at least like 52% American made.
God bless the USA.
But even if I'm not a BMW customer, I still am annoyed by this news.
As reported by the Daily Wire, it says, BMW owners are furious that on top of the cost
of the luxury car, they'll be required to pay a monthly subscription fee
to use features like the heated seats.
Per the New York Post.
Subscription plans recently rolled out in the UK, Germany, South Korea, and in several other markets, which include fees for premium features.
BMW owners will be forced to pay the equivalent of $18 a month to use heated front seats in their cars.
Owners also have the option to pay $180 per year to use their heated seats, or they can opt to spend $300 for a three-year subscription or $415 for unlimited access, the publication reported.
Quote, front seat heating gets things nice and cozy in no time, BMW's UK site says.
Activation after purchase is quick and easy.
Heated seats aren't the only premium feature with an upcharge.
In some markets, owners will pay $12 per month to use their heated steering wheels.
It'll cost $42 per month for adaptive cruise control.
The feature that switches off high beams automatically when another car appears also costs $12 monthly.
Anyone who wants to connect their iPhones to their cars through Apple's CarPlay feature will be charged $265.
Now this is not something that's confined only to BMWs in foreign countries.
As an article this week in The Verge points out, cars today are packed full of software systems and computers, and this fact is being exploited more and more by the manufacturers.
The Verge reports, quote, Most of the subscription plans seem to be coming mainly from luxury automakers, which makes sense given that their customers are mostly rich and can more easily absorb an annual or monthly fee.
But industry analysts have said that subscriptions are coming to mass-market vehicles as mainstream automakers look for new revenue streams to help fund their enormously expensive plans to build vehicles that are electric, connected, and autonomous.
Last year, General Motors said it earned over $2 billion in in-car subscription service revenue, a number the company expects to grow to $25 billion by the end of the decade.
GM had approximately 16 million vehicles on the road in the U.S., about a quarter of which include features for which customers are paying subscriptions.
Quote, our research indicates that with the right mix of compelling offerings, customers are willing to spend $135 per month on average for products and services, according to one of the guys at GM.
OK.
Now, here's skipping ahead.
Here's why I hate this.
First of all...
It's not as though you're paying less for the car if you don't want the extra features.
This isn't like a Spirit Airlines thing where you pay for the standard no-frills service where they just throw you in the cargo hold and airdrop you over your destination with a parachute made out of a tarp.
Or they can give you the option to pay extra for the luxury of a seat and a seatbelt and an oxygen mask.
That's not what's happening with these vehicle subscription fees.
That's not the case.
If you purchase a BMW in one of these markets, You already have the heated seats.
It's built into the car.
They already made it.
You bought it.
You have it.
Which means you paid for it.
The manufacturer is double-dipping, forcing you to pay twice for the same feature.
So they sell you the car with the heated seats, but then they install software to block your access to it unless you pay an additional recurring fee.
It's a kind of out-in-the-open extortion.
Companies openly and just like shamelessly bilking their customers as we grow ever more accustomed to be treated this way.
One wonders how far it will go.
Perhaps soon you'll have to pay a small fee every time you use your windshield wipers or your turn signal.
Maybe you'll need to subscribe for monthly access to your vehicle's braking system.
Oh, sorry, you got a new debit card and forgot to update your payment method, so they've had to temporarily disable your brakes.
Unfortunately, you're learning about this while going 75 on the highway.
Sorry about your luck.
This is the glorious benefit that we enjoy when all of our consumer products are smart.
Not just cars, of course, but increasingly, almost all of our consumer products are filled with software, computer programs, they're connected to the internet.
You don't even have a choice anymore.
We moved last year and we bought a bunch of new appliances.
And, you know, I didn't really need a washing machine with its own Twitter account.
That's what we ended up with.
I don't need to be able to connect with my dishwasher through an app on my phone, but I can.
I don't need to be able to adjust my refrigerator's internal temperature while I'm a thousand miles away.
I don't need to be able to remotely monitor my crockpot, but that's basically what I end up with.
And the more connected and computerized we make all of these products, the more fragile they are, the more unreliable, and the less we're able to control and understand and fix them ourselves.
As many people have remarked upon, the great irony of modern life is that our products are getting smarter and we are getting dumber, and this is all by design.
Another great advantage of the design, advantage for the companies that make and sell this stuff anyway, certainly not for the consumers, is that the connectivity of all these things, the fact that every consumer product is now a device, means that the brands can track us and they can monitor us and they can collect our information and sell the information.
They can stay connected to us in ways that don't benefit us at all.
They can monetize us long after the initial point of purchase.
But here's the worst thing about all this stuff.
The more the manufacturers can stay connected to and in control over the things that we ostensibly own, the more that ownership becomes subscription-based, the less ownership we actually experience.
See, there's a war on ownership in our culture.
The powers that be, they don't want you to actually possess and own anything.
They want you to buy a lot of stuff.
They want you to fill your homes with branded material goods.
But they don't want you to actually own any of it.
Everything's on loan.
So many Americans live now in rented homes or apartments.
They drive finance cars filled with subscription-based features.
They buy everything on credit and they own nothing.
This is simply not how human beings are meant to live.
We're meant to take ownership of something, of our own small piece of existence, so we can lay down our roots and say, this is mine, this belongs to me.
It is a natural and good human desire, which we so often suppress, so that we can live in other people's homes, on other people's land, using products that still belong to the companies we bought them from.
We own nothing.
Instead, we are owned.
And that is why BMW's heated seats feature is canceled.
I told you I was going to make a mountain out of a molehill.
I followed through on the promise and I'll do it for us today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
And if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.
Also, tell your friends to subscribe as well.
We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
We're there.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including The Ben Shapiro Show, Michael Knowles Show, The Andrew Klavan Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, production manager Pavel Vodovsky.
Our associate producer is McKenna Waters.
The show is edited by Jeff Tomlin.
Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina.
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.
