Ep. 1042 - Pathetic Antifa Brats Try And Fail To Derail My College Tour
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a large Antifa mob attempts to derail my What Is A Woman event at University of Houston. It was the largest protest yet. And it had no effect at all. Also, the Parkland mass shooter escapes the death penalty. AOC is berated by hecklers at a sparsely attended town hall. Democrats in Virginia want to take your child away from you if you fail to “affirm” his gender confusion. And an NFL coach has no time or patience for race-baiting reporters.
- - -
DailyWire+:
Shop the Jeremy’s Razors Columbus Day Sale to get 40% OFF you Founder’s Series Shave Kit at https://www.jeremysrazors.com/
Candace Owens presents “The Greatest Lie Ever Sold”, streaming exclusively on DailyWire+: https://bit.ly/3dQINt0
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Epic Will - Get 10% OFF Your Will! Use Promo Code ‘WALSH’ at EpicWill.com
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on The Matt Walsh Show, a large Antifa mob attempts to derail my What Is A Woman event at University of Houston.
It was the largest protest I've encountered yet and it had no effect at all.
Also, the Parkland mass shooter escapes the death penalty.
AOC is berated by hecklers at a sparsely attended town hall.
Democrats in Virginia want to take your child away from you if you fail to affirm his gender confusion.
And an NFL coach has no time or patience for race-baiting reporters.
All of that and more today on The Matt Wells Show.
A big win.
A left-wing institution caving to pressure from the right.
Doesn't happen very often.
Deserves some recognition.
But the fight is far from over.
There's still so much we can do to protect our children from these evil leftist indoctrination attempts.
One thing you can do today is write a will.
Many new parents don't realize how important it is to have a will in place.
The sad truth is that if you were to die tomorrow without a will, The fate of your children will be left up to the state.
I don't know about you, but I don't want the state to decide anything for my family.
Luckily, my partners over at Epic Will make early estate planning incredibly easy and affordable.
They bundle your last will, living will, health care, power of attorney, HIPAA release, and durable financial power of attorney.
Bundle all that together.
Plus, you save 10% when you use code Walsh.
It only costs $119 for a single person to create a will.
And when you use promo code Walsh, you'll save 10%.
So go to epicwill.com.
Use promo code WALSH to save 10% on Epic Will's Complete Will Package.
That's epicwill.com.
Promo code WALSH.
So yesterday concluded the first leg of my What Is A Woman college screening tour.
We'll be back on the road in a couple of weeks.
Fittingly, our final stop on this portion of the trip was the most eventful, I would say.
As I had previously reported on this show, the Antifa cell in Houston had promised to show up and shut the event down, which is at the University of Houston.
Meanwhile, far-left activists on campus had been working on the university, within the university, to cancel the event before it even began.
But the event happened anyway, with hundreds of students waiting in line, a line stretching around the block, to get into the screening of our film.
We packed an auditorium, which unfortunately could only hold a fraction of the people who wanted to get in.
I'm not going to say that What Is A Woman is the first or only documentary to sell out college auditoriums across the country, but it is certainly in a small club, I think.
But while large crowds gathered inside, there were large, though still significantly smaller, but crowds of protesters outside who came together to voice their strident objections to truth and reality.
They attempted several different tactics to, I guess, scare me away.
Earlier in the evening, they stood in a line, and in a very direct sort of way, they chanted about what they want.
Let's listen to that.
What do we want?
Walsh Out!
When do we want it?
Now!
What do we want?
Walsh Out!
When do we want it?
Now!
What do we want?
Walsh Out!
When do we want it?
Now!
What do we want?
Walsh Out!
When do we want it?
Now!
No!
No!
So I think they want me out, is what I'm getting from that?
I like how it trails off at the end, and they get kind of lazy, and then they just, at first it's, what do we want?
Walsh out.
What do we want?
Now.
And then that's too much effort, so then at the end it just turns into, now!
Now!
Now!
It's a subtle message anyway, but I think I picked up what they were trying to say.
I think I did.
Soon there were various speakers who arrived with bullhorns to fire up the crowd and lay out their indictments against me.
Here's one who describes all the many ways that I have invited violence against the trans community.
I started last week organizing a peaceful protest against Babs Walsh's hateful transphobic
rhetoric, and I am proud to see how far this has grown in this short time.
For those who are not aware, some of the things Babs Walsh has said to invite violence and
hatred against the trans community include calling his supporters to action against Boston
Children's Hospital, resulting in supporters threatening a children's hospital with a bomb.
This was coupled with threats against individual providers of gender affirming care.
There's similar inflammatory language against Vanderbilt University Medical Center,
resulting in the hospital suspending gender affirming care.
Because of this and other comments, it's important that us as Cougars show up and say loud and proud
that we as students do not support this!
It was my inflammatory language that resulted in Vanderbilt suspending their child mutilation program.
Evidently, my words are so scary that the hospital simply bent to my will out of sheer terror and fear.
Now, I would like to think that I am that intimidating and powerful.
I wish that was the case.
But in fact that's not the case.
They suspended their gender-affirming care quote-unquote program because they could not defend or justify mutilating children after those practices had been exposed.
So that's how that's actually how bad this stuff is that all we had to do was point it out and say look what these people are doing and within a few weeks they just stopped doing it.
You know, that's like a pretty good indication that someone is doing something wrong where, you know, if they're doing it and all you have to do is point to the fact that they're doing it and they stop doing it, pretty good indication that it's wrong.
Indeed, the fact that they stopped doing it Actually, proves that I was not using inflammatory language.
They admit in their letter to lawmakers announcing that they're pausing the procedures that my report was correct.
And they, in effect, admit it because they say, I mean, they had to have been performing gender transitions on minors in order to pause them, it would seem.
There was also this speech that I enjoyed from another protester, though I feel a little bad that Stephen Crowder and Andrew Tate catch some strays here for no reason.
But here's what she says.
Steven Crowder and Drew Tate.
Like cockroaches, they crawl out of the dirt of society and subject us to their hate.
[crowd cheering]
(swoosh)
Yeah, but I did get away with it.
I mean, I thought I could get away with it, and I did.
I got away with it, and it was great.
I not only did exactly what you didn't want me to do, but I had fun while doing it.
It was a lot of fun.
Yet still, really think about the phrasing here.
I'm going to just skip over the part where I'm a cockroach.
The cockroaches that have—she was attempting a metaphor there.
She's trying to get poetic.
But cockroaches that have crawled out of the dirt of hate to spread their—you know, let's put that aside.
The phrasing that actually disturbs me a little bit more is, he thinks he can get away with this.
I mean, like, get away with what exactly?
Existing?
Speaking?
Saying things?
Expressing a point of view?
Much is revealed about the leftist mindset, just from that one statement, I would say.
Anyway, the crowd outside grew more and more rowdy as the night went on.
Police had to arrest at least, I think at least one person, as far as I know.
When the speech concluded, the mobs stood outside, cussing at and harassing the audience.
as they left the building. And there's a lot of videos there that are a lot of fun that you can
go watch because, you know, my audience, I'm very proud of them, the way they handled it.
They started chanting, "Let's go, Brandon," back. So that was great. There are also some,
some earlier on, earlier on before the speech, there were some counter demonstrations of people
standing and praying, saying the rosary, while these satanic lunatics scream at them.
You just, as always, you see the contrast there and you can kind of decide whose side you want to be on.
But they then, the protesters stood around for a while longer even after all the crowds cleared out,
I was gone, and they stood around for a while longer chanting various slogans including this one.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Yeah, they ran out of slogans by the end of the night.
There's nothing left.
And so they were left with that.
For some reason, I got to tell you that I derive a lot of pleasure from the fact that at this point, when the crowds were screaming, F Matt Walsh over and over again, I was already back at my hotel sitting at the bar with a glass of whiskey.
So, there could not be anything more impotent than crowds screaming in protest against an event that already happened while the guy they're protesting is relaxing at his hotel out of earshot.
Though they did attempt to do more than simply scream outside, I should say.
I'm told by Yaf that Leftist activists on campus had been sort of plotting to sabotage the event by infiltrating the audiovisual team that's running it behind the scenes, you know, doing something with the live stream or doing something with the audio in the auditorium.
It seems that one of them actually tried to execute this plan.
The Daily Wire reports this morning, quote, those trying to watch the Young America's Foundation live stream of Matt Walsh's University of Houston speech Thursday night were met with an unavailable video and leftist students, student employees are being blamed.
Yaffe wrote following the event that it believes it is likely that student employees who opposed Walsh's speech disrupted the live stream.
Part of the speech was seen on Yaffe's YouTube page, but poor audio made it impossible to hear what Walsh was saying.
The live stream later became completely unavailable.
Quote, one of the student workers, Kai Lai, was in communication with members of a leftist coalition called Stop Transphobia at UH and shared that she would be working behind the scenes.
After Yaf became aware of the student workers posting, she was removed from the event and a bomb sweep was conducted.
This is according to Nick Baker, assistant editor for Yaf's The New Guard.
According to Baker, several student workers were required by the university to remain on site for the event and had access to Yaf's streaming equipment in the hours before Walsh's speech.
Earlier in the night, A person protesting the event was wrestled to the ground and handcuffed by police.
Video of the incident showed the mass protester who had made it inside the event venue on the ground and surrounded by five police officers who were attempting to arrest him.
The protester appeared to be carrying a small transgender flag that ended up on the ground beside him.
So, they couldn't get in the room.
But it looks like they were able to mess with the live stream, and so they did that.
No big deal, really.
There are three other live streams from the What Is A Woman tour available on the AFS YouTube page.
There will soon be several more.
Besides, the live stream is secondary.
The most important thing is the event itself, like the physical event, which none of these screaming lunatics were able to prevent or derail, despite their many and varied attempts.
They were, in the end, powerless.
And this is something that I want The protesters at this and any forthcoming universities to understand.
But of course, I will do precisely what you don't want me to do and say what you don't want me to say, and there's nothing you can do to stop it.
You are powerless.
And that's something you just have to deal with.
I know that you're accustomed to making demands and having your demands met, but that's not the way it's going to work this time.
Okay, I want you to know how little your feelings Mean to me.
I want you to know that literally nothing you say has any effect or makes any impact.
I want you to know all of that.
So often in your life, you know, you stomp your feet and you cry and you get results and that's how you get the results.
But I want you to know that it's not going to work that way here.
And I want you to know all of that because it's a learning opportunity for you.
It really is.
It's character building.
I'm trying to help you.
I want to help you.
It's evident that most of you didn't have fathers who would teach you this lesson, didn't have fathers at all in the home.
That's extremely obvious.
And so I'm trying to stand in the void for you.
You need to be able to cope with the fact that people have ideas that differ from your own.
You need to be able to make peace with that reality.
Or don't make peace with it.
Honestly, I don't give a damn.
It's your problem either way.
My only point is that it's good for you to encounter a situation every once in a while where your cry bully tactics just don't work.
And that's especially the case here because it's not just that I have differing ideas from you.
It's that the ideas I'm expressing are simply true.
Self-evident.
Obvious.
You aren't just protesting different ideas.
This is not... I'm not sitting here saying that you need to... Diversity of viewpoints.
You need to accept a diversity of viewpoints.
I mean, you should be able to accept that, but that's not even what we're talking about here.
You are protesting the truth.
That's what makes us all so pathetic and disturbing.
There have always been protests on college campuses.
There have always been differences of opinion.
But you're trying to protest and silence the truth.
That's the issue.
And to call for the suppression of truth is insane and tyrannical.
You are tyrants.
Pathetic, ineffectual, laughable tyrants.
But tyrants all the same.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
The video montage began with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi walking through the Capitol and I've lost interest already.
So that's still happening.
They're still doing this.
In case you didn't know.
They're still doing the January 6th thing.
Another hearing.
Let's move on.
We actually begin here.
Okay, this is in fact an important story.
So this is from the Daily Wire.
A Florida jury rejected the death penalty Thursday for the Parkland school shooter who killed 17 people on Valentine's Day 2018.
The shooter received life in prison without the possibility of parole for each of the
murders, causing disappointment and frustration among family members of the victims attending
the trial.
Dr. Ilan Alhadeff, who gave a moving victim impact statement in August on the murder of
his daughter, Alyssa, is a 14-year-old varsity soccer player.
He says, what do we have the death penalty for?
We're beyond disappointed with the outcome today.
And his wife, Lori, said, I just don't understand this.
Another victim who lost a daughter says, I don't know how this jury came to the conclusion that they did today, but 17 families did not receive justice.
The shooter was in the penalty phase of his trial, having pleaded guilty to 17 counts of murder last year.
14 students and 3 staff members were killed, with the youngest victims only 14 years old.
They're not giving him the death penalty.
This is truly absurd and a miscarriage of justice.
This guy is in his early 20s, I think, so he's like 22, 23 years old, something around there.
Taxpayers will have to pay to keep him alive for the next six decades?
Seven decades?
Why?
Why?
What's the point of that?
To me, it's a very simple equation.
That if you have done something which necessitates that you can never return to society again, then you shouldn't be living anymore.
You have given up your right to live.
We know that the right to life is not unconditional.
Somebody breaks into your home, Um, and has a gun.
You don't have to allow them to kill you and your family because you're respecting their right to life.
They have forfeited that.
They have chosen to forfeit that through their own behavior.
It's not what you wanted, it's what they wanted.
And they've left you no choice.
And we could say the exact same thing about, uh, about someone who goes and kills 17 people, 14 kids at a school.
You have left society no choice but to just get rid of you.
The ultimate punishment.
That's justice.
And of course, to make the absurdity, to make the irony even more outrageous here is that I talk about the right to life.
Well, there's the, I think, the misguided belief among some pro-lifers That they have to take this absolutist position on the right to life and declare that, well, because we defend the rights of babies to live, that means we also have to defend the rights of convicted murderers and monsters to continue living.
And that's, you know, there are some pro-lifers who do that.
I think it's, I think they're mistaken.
But at least there's a certain consistency there that they're trying to establish.
But, as we know, many of the people who oppose the death penalty, and who I suppose are happy today that this scumbag is not going to be executed, many of those people don't even believe in the right to life, or certainly don't believe in the right to life for babies.
I mean, there are, it would seem, millions of people in this country who believe in the right to life for this guy after he kills 17 people, but not for the babies.
That's how twisted and upside down all of this is.
If you're going to have the death penalty at all, I mean, if it exists as an option, it just, it does not make any sense that this person would not be eligible for it.
There's nothing else to be done.
Is he going to spend the rest of his life in prison?
There's no, you know, it's not like we're, there's no, there's no, we're not reforming this person and trying to reintroduce them to society.
Although, who knows?
In some states, in some cities, if he had been tried and convicted there, maybe they actually would try that.
Try to reintroduce him to society.
But that's not going to happen here.
He's going to be sitting in a cage for the rest of his life.
And what's the most just thing to do?
Well, it's to tell them, okay, here's the date of your execution.
And by the way, it's not going to be 30 years from now.
It's going to be soon.
Like, I don't know, next week?
You got a week to get right with God, if you can.
But either way, this is when it's coming to an end for you.
This is the end of your story here on Earth.
It's a tragic ending, but it's the one you chose.
That's what we should say.
And also, I don't really totally understand this idea that people say, well, it's a horrible thing for the state to execute someone, the state to kill someone.
The state has no right to do that.
Well, why would the state have no right to execute a murderer, but the state does have the right to put you in a cage for your whole life?
That's another thing I don't quite understand.
All right.
This is from the Daily Wire.
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez struggled at a town hall event on Wednesday evening when two attendees confronted her for allegedly supporting nuclear war.
I mean, personally, editorializing, I would take the allegedly out.
I think, in effect, she does support nuclear war.
That's what happens.
I mean, everyone in the Democrat Party that are, you know, wanting to confront Russia and potentially get us into a nuclear war, that is what they're supporting.
So this would appear to be, we'll play the clip here, but this would appear to be, I don't know a lot about the people that are protesting here or confronting her, but these would appear to be people on the left.
So maybe these are left-wing anti-war people?
I didn't even know those existed anymore.
But there are a few of them out there, and here's what that looked like.
Congresswoman, none of this matters unless there's a nuclear war, which you voted to send arms and weapons to Ukraine.
Tulsi Gabbard, she's left the Democratic Party because there are so many war hunts, okay?
You originally voted, you ran as an outsider, yet you've been voting to start this war in Ukraine.
You're voting to start a thermonuclear war with Russia and China.
Why are you playing with the lives of American citizens?
You're playing with our lives.
There will be no neighbors if there's a nuclear bomb.
You voted to mobilize and send money to Ukrainian Nazis.
You're a coward.
You're a progressive socialist.
Where are you against the war mobilization?
He's telling the right truth.
You have done nothing.
Tulsi Gabbard has shown guts where you've shown cowardice.
I believed in you, and you became the very thing you sought to fight against.
That's what you've become.
You are the establishment and you are the reason why everybody will end up in a nuclear war unless you choose to stand up right now and denounce the Democratic Party.
Will you do that?
Yes or no?
Okay, simple.
Are you going to stop nuclear war?
Yes or no?
I'm just enjoying this video, to be honest with you.
That's what happened there.
None of it.
You know that.
Then let's take it up right now because this is the only thing that matters.
This is the only thing that matters right now.
I'm just enjoying this video to be honest with you.
Any minute and you continue to fund it.
That's what's going on.
That's what happened there. Alright.
I mean I love that.
This is exactly what needs to happen.
This is exactly, and this is, with politicians, there should be a lot more of this.
Direct, angry confrontation.
This is what they deserve.
This is what a town hall should look like, I think.
That's actually, this is a healthy country.
There are people that see videos like that, they're like, oh, there's so much division, this is terrible.
Actually, in a healthy country, That's what a town hall with a politician looks like.
Especially a politician who's in the party that is in fact moving us towards nuclear war.
Advocating for, pushing us towards, helping to fund and facilitate a confrontation with a nuclear power over Ukraine.
And yet, none of these people, for the many months that this has been going on, none of these people have been able to explain why exactly Ukraine should matter to us that much.
Why should it matter so much to us that we are willing to risk world war, nuclear war, over it?
They've never been able to explain that.
The most they can do is they give us this nonsense about, well, we're standing up for democracy and freedom.
Democracy and freedom in a country 5,000 miles away that has nothing to do with us whatsoever.
Also assuming that Ukraine, one of the most corrupt governments on earth, cares about democracy and freedom in the first place, which obviously is absurd.
So, she's confronted for that, and based on what the protesters are saying there, it does seem as though they are on the left.
So yes, this is a very rare spotting of a left-wing anti-war protester.
There used to be a lot of those.
I can remember when I was younger, back in the Bush years, Code Pink and all those, it was very common.
But in recent years, they seem to have gone away, almost entirely.
Until they confronted Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez there.
The other thing you notice in that video is that the room is almost completely empty.
And that's one of the reasons why these protesters were able to have this confrontation is because the room was empty and so their voice carried and everyone can hear them.
And Cortez didn't have enough of her own supporters there to boo these guys out of the room.
That is maybe the most interesting thing to me about the video, is that there's almost nobody in the room.
Now, you expect to see this with a lot of politicians, and we expect to see this with Joe Biden.
But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, she's the biggest star in the Democrat Party.
She is.
Who's a bigger star in the Democrat Party, aside from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez?
She's the most well-known.
One of the most well-known, anyway.
She's a household name, for better or worse.
I would say for worse.
So, she is their star, and here she is holding a town hall, and almost nobody shows up.
I think that really tells you something.
All right, climate activists threw tomato soup, this happened this morning, threw tomato soup on a Van Gogh painting at the National Gallery in London.
So first we have the footage of them committing this act of vandalism.
Let's play that.
All right, so a priceless work of art.
Deface it with tomato soup.
And now they pull out their super glue, and they're going to glue their hands to the wall.
This is all to save the environment.
You have to understand.
Now, how does this help save the environment?
What exactly?
What's the plan here?
So I know if we were to look at the step-by-step plan, the goal is save the environment.
Step one, throw tomato soup on a priceless work of art.
Step two, glue hand to wall.
Step three, question mark, step four, planet is saved.
So I'm not sure, what happens in this, what are we missing in step three?
Well, they were interviewed while they were sitting there glued to the wall, and they tried to explain, they tried to kind of square this circle, and let's hear that.
What is worth more?
Art or life?
Is it worth more than food?
Worth more than justice?
Are you more concerned about the protection of a painting or the protection of our planet and people?
The cost of living crisis is part of the cost of oil crisis.
Fuel is unaffordable to millions of cold hungry families.
They can't even afford to heat a tin of soup.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
I think a good punishment with these sorts of things is, and
I could see maybe why the art gallery wouldn't be a fan of this.
But I tend to think a good punishment is just to leave them glued to the wall.
Just leave them there.
And it's the same thing, they've done this at Starbucks, where they glue their hands to the counter to protest.
I forget what they're protesting at Starbucks.
Oh, they're protesting because there aren't enough, you know, very often they protest at Starbucks because there aren't enough non-dairy Options for cream, like they want more oat milk and that sort of thing, I think.
But anyway, I say the same thing there.
Just leave them glued.
And if you're not going to do that, then I actually think that years in prison is the appropriate response here.
That would be justice.
You come in and deface priceless works of art, you should be going to prison for, you know, not jail for a day, even that much they probably won't get.
We should be looking at 5, 10, 15 years in prison.
And that's what a society, that's what a serious society, a serious culture would do.
That's how you protect your art.
You send the message that this is, you cannot do this, this is unacceptable.
That said, I will admit that I have a bit more sympathy for these kinds of people than, say, the Leonardo DiCaprios and Al Gores of the world.
At least in a way they have the courage of their convictions.
Very stupid convictions, I grant you, but it's there.
And the other thing too is that they actually believe this stuff.
So when you see these younger climate activists who are gluing themselves to walls and defacing things and blocking traffic and doing a lot of really annoying things, and things that are much worse than annoying in fact are horrifically evil.
But, also keep in mind that they've been, not to make excuses for them, but they have been brainwashed from a young age, and they really do believe.
This is what they've been told.
They believe that the Earth is, we are barreling towards destruction and apocalypse.
They really believe that.
Unlike a lot of the older people that are bankrolling this movement, and are really behind it and pulling the levers, who don't believe it at all.
Alright, here's a Really awful story.
This is from Fox News.
It says a neonatal nurse in the UK who allegedly murdered seven babies and attempted to kill ten more wrote notes reading, I am evil and I killed them on purpose because I'm not good enough, according to the prosecution.
Lucy Letby.
32, who worked in the neonatal unit of the Countess of Chester Hospital, left handwritten notes in her home that police found when they searched it in 2018.
Earlier this week, Nick Johnson, the prosecutor, argued that Letby was a constant malevolent presence in the neonatal unit.
of the babies let be allegedly murdered or attempted to murder between 2015 and 2016.
The prosecution said that she injected some with insulin or milk,
while another she injected with air. She allegedly tried to kill one baby three times.
So this is a story maybe you've seen in the headlines of this neonatal nurse that's
a serial killer of babies. And you hear about a story like this and obviously it's unthinkable as
It's horrible.
Here's another person that should be a, this should be a easy case for the death penalty.
We shouldn't even have to think about it.
Obviously this is a death penalty candidate.
Although being in the UK, it's probably that's not going to happen.
Um, but you, it is also worth noting.
In fact, you can't help but note, That this woman working in the neonatal unit, that would mean that her victims were probably all not only infants, but they were born premature.
That's how they ended up in the NICU.
One of the most common ways to end up in the NICU is you're born premature.
So she's killing premature infants.
And we all look at this case, every single person who sees this case, we all recognize it as unbelievably evil.
We see this woman and think this is one of the worst humans on earth.
We all agree with that.
There's no disagreement.
And yet, you put a Planned Parenthood badge on her, you change the context just a little bit, but you have her killing the exact same babies in a slightly different context?
Not only now is it all of a sudden legal, but there are people who defend it and would say that in fact she's a hero.
She is a heroic practitioner of reproductive health, they would say.
Killing the exact same babies.
At the exact same stage of development.
Only difference is you take these babies, and you take the crime, and you put it in a building that says Planned Parenthood on it, In this case, the babies are still inside the womb of their mothers, rather than in the NICU.
And somehow, that changes the moral complexion of this case completely, we're told.
Which is total nonsense.
Alright, I also need to mention this as we continue along.
I think I may have to return to my home state of Virginia, based on this report anyway, out of Virginia.
Let's watch this.
is introducing a new bill centered around parents and how they handle their child's sexual orientation and gender identity.
7 News reporter Nick Minak explains why this is controversial.
Right now, parents' rights and LGBTQ protections are a big focus in Virginia.
Thousands of students in Virginia have walked out of class protesting Governor Glenn Youngkin's newly proposed model policies on the treatment of transgender students at school.
Trans rights are human rights!
And Governor Youngkin argues schools shouldn't keep parents in the dark about their child's sexual orientation and gender identity.
These same progressives in Fairfax County I actually believe that they should lock parents out of their children's lives.
They think that parents have no right to know what your child is discussing with their teacher or their counselor.
Democratic Virginia delegate Elizabeth Guzman is a social worker and she's planning on reintroducing a bill in Richmond that she says would help protect LGBTQ children from their parents and guardians who may not be affirming of their child's sexual orientation and gender identity.
This is how we're going to push back.
Her bill would expand the state's definition of child abuse and neglect to include parents who do not affirm their child's gender identity or sexual orientation.
There's an investigation also in place that is not only, you know, from a social worker, but there's also a police investigation before we make the decision that there's going to be a CPS charge.
What could the penalties be?
If, you know, the investigation concludes and it's concluded that a parent is not affirming of their LGBTQ child, what could the consequences be?
Well, we first have to have an investigation.
You know, it could be a felony, it could be a misdemeanor, but we know that a CPS charge could harm, you know, your employment, could harm your education.
In Alexandria, Nick Minak, 7 News.
Now, what you have to realize, of course, is that this is in, so this is in Virginia, where as we heard at the beginning there, obviously, Glenn Youngkin is the governor, so that means that this bill is not going to be signed into law right now in Virginia.
But this is what they want to do.
And this is what they will do.
Especially in blue states, where they can get away with it.
Make it a, it is child abuse to not affirm, so-called affirm your gender-confused child.
They're already doing this in Canada.
This was, this is, it's a couple of years ago.
They declared that it's, and their anti-conversion therapy, I think it was Bill C-4 in Canada, Which forbids conversion therapy.
But what is conversion therapy, according to them?
It is conversion therapy if you do not affirm your child's confusion.
So if you have a son who is a boy and says he's a girl, and you do not immediately accept him as a girl, then you are committing conversion therapy by trying to convince him that he is what he in fact is, which is a boy.
So if you, in other words, if you do not facilitate his attempted conversion into another sex, which is impossible, then you are guilty of a conversion therapy.
And that's child abuse, you could lose your kid.
And parents in Canada have lost their kids because of that.
Now the left wants to do the same thing here in the United States.
I saw someone on Twitter, I don't remember who, but they referred to this as kind of, we know on the left they had their no-fault divorce policies and for married couples.
And so now what they're working on basically is a no-fault divorce of children from parents.
They're looking for every way that they can to sever that relationship, sever that bond, And in the schools, they do it.
They sever the bond psychologically.
They sever it emotionally.
They turn the child against the parent.
But now they're looking for ways to do it legally.
Just tear the kids away from the parents and into the arms of the state, where the state can make of them whatever they want.
That's what they're looking at doing.
All right, a lot of heavy stuff.
Let's go to something a little bit less heavy.
Well, this is celebrity gossip, so a little less serious, I suppose.
This is from The Sun.
Gisele Bundchen has broken her silence following her recent alleged marriage troubles with star quarterback Tom Brady.
Bucks quarterback Brady and the Brazilian model have reportedly hired divorce lawyers following an epic fight.
And she was spotted visiting a spiritual healer earlier this week.
We heard about that.
But she broke her silence.
How did she break her silence?
Okay, well she replied to a post on Instagram that read, and here's what the post read.
You can't be in a committed relationship with someone who is inconsistent with you.
Read that again.
The 42-year-old commented below it with a prayer emoji, which I guess is her way of agreeing.
So this is what qualifies as breaking silence now.
Your first public statement is an emoji.
God help us.
But I'm mostly just reading this to you because I want to say that the relationship advice here is really terrible.
You can't be in a committed relationship with someone who's inconsistent?
What does that mean?
I mean, if by inconsistent you mean unfaithful, then sure, yeah, but then just say unfaithful.
If by inconsistent you mean someone who is, I don't know, prone to shifting moods, someone who sometimes says one thing and does another, someone who doesn't always follow through, someone who doesn't stick to what they say they're going to do all the time, if that's what you mean by inconsistent, because that's what comes to mind when you think of an inconsistent person, if that's what you mean, and you're saying you can't be in a relationship with that kind of person, then you're really saying that you can't be in a relationship with anyone ever, because that describes all people.
All people are inconsistent.
Some more than others, but all people are.
That just comes with being a weak, temporal, mortal human being.
Inconsistency.
It is a defining human characteristic.
One of our most consistent traits is inconsistency, ironically.
Now, the key to having a successful relationship is learning how to love and be loyal to someone, even in spite of this frustrating defect that we all share.
Now I'm not saying that inconsistency in all cases should be tolerated or just accepted or that you should resign yourself to your spouse being unreliable.
I'm not saying that.
What I'm saying is that if you're married, you are married to a human being.
And you need to know that.
You need to understand what that means.
You're not married to a robot, even less to an angel.
You're married to a person.
And persons disappoint.
They frustrate.
They irritate.
They let you down sometimes.
All people do this.
If you can't love someone in spite of that, then you can't love.
And you won't love.
And you won't be loved.
And you'll be alone.
Alone with your own inconsistencies, your own fickle, frustrating nature, until you die.
I know this is just a cliché marriage advice that someone posted on Instagram, but it has an effect on people.
They hear enough of this and they start believing it.
And it's just nonsense.
Finally, the New York Times has an article revealing that on average now for pollsters, people doing political polls, only 0.4% of the people that they call actually pick up the phone and complete a survey.
So that's the report they had.
And I'm surprised it's even that high.
But this brings up an issue I've always had with polls, all polls, and we're seeing a lot of polls heading into the midterms.
But this is especially with political polls.
It's why I tend to believe that all political polls are fake, like they're all bogus.
None of them mean anything at all.
And the reason is that there's such a vanishingly small percentage of people who will even take them in the first place.
It's only a certain type of person who would take a political poll over the phone, a freak to be specific.
A lonely, weird, bizarre person who actually will talk to a stranger on the phone about his political opinions.
So when you see a poll and it says that so-and-so is leading by however many points, it means, how you should interpret that is that among the lonely, weird, bizarre demographic of people who answer polls, this person is most popular.
And yet that demographic is so small as to be irrelevant from an electoral perspective.
So who cares?
And forget about taking a poll.
I've never taken a phone survey in my life or even been asked to take one.
But the reason for that is that I don't pick up the phone to begin with if I don't recognize the number.
So, well, I don't pick up the phone for anyone, to be honest, but especially if I don't recognize the number, I'm not picking up the phone.
So who are these people where you get a call on your phone, you don't recognize the number, and you pick up anyway, rather than letting it to go to voicemail.
If they have something important to tell you, then they'll tell you in the voicemail.
So you pick up the phone, even though you don't recognize the number, and then someone on the other line says, I want to talk to you for 15 minutes about your political opinions, and you sit there and just talk to them, rather than hanging up.
That I don't understand.
What sixth satisfaction do you derive from that kind of masochistic behavior is what I want to know.
All right, let's get to the comment section.
I find it interesting and haunting.
Yeah, that is a notable thing.
It is interesting that when you hear about detransitioners, and it seems pretty much any time you see someone telling their story as a detransitioner, in the vast majority of cases, it's a girl.
And what's the reason for that?
Well, one of the big reasons that comes to mind immediately is that the vast majority of the people who are transitioning in adolescence are girls.
So, I think that explains why the majority of detransitioners are girls.
Now, I think that'll change over time because what we see is that, and we know this statistically, that among adolescents Vast majority of people experiencing gender confusion and going through transitions are girls.
We know that.
Now it seems to me, and I don't have the numbers for this, but this is my estimation, my guess, is that for younger kids, it seems the majority there, the majority of younger kids who begin transition seem to be boys.
Certainly when it comes to the cases that get a lot of attention from the media, like anytime we hear about some five-year-old who's being transitioned and the media is telling us about it and celebrating how wonderful and accepting the parents are, in almost every case it's a boy transitioning into a girl.
So I think, give it another 10 years or so, you're going to see a lot more detransitioned males who are in their 20s.
But right now, because this is such an epidemic among adolescent girls, that's where you see most of the regrets.
All right.
Stephanie Marie says, A few years ago, I went without a phone for about two to three months.
Mind broke, and I just didn't bother getting a new one for a bit.
In that time, I noticed an extreme decline in my anxiety in the morning, an increase in activity.
I woke up, and instead of checking my phone right away, I went right to yoga, breakfast, working, etc.
It's a shame that we need small computers on us 24-7 for work, while people manage without them for hundreds of years.
Yeah, if you could kind of detox from the phone, this seems to be what most people say.
If you can detox from it, put it down, leave it alone for a certain period of time, you have this incredible impulse, at least for a period, to go pick up the phone.
But if you can get through that detox period, you'll come out on the other end feeling a lot better.
I know this for my, this is certainly the case for me because I go through these minor kind of detox periods.
Anytime I go on vacation, like when I go on vacation, I have, I actually have no problem putting my phone down and not looking at it when I'm on vacation because I know I'm not working.
I have no responsibilities.
And so whatever it is, whatever the period of time is, I can put the phone down, not even bother with it.
I have no, I don't even have the temptation to pick it up.
But then you come back and it's almost at first getting back from vacation, at least for me, picking up social media again, it's like a chore.
I have to force myself to develop the impulse again.
And then I do and it becomes an impulse.
It's just very sick and unhealthy.
Josh says, I'm 100% in agreement with all this stuff, but I might be even more in agreement with your quick comment about making beds every morning.
I've never understood it at all.
My wife does it because she says it makes her feel more organized or something like that.
But to me, it's just wasted effort.
When I push off the covers in the morning, if I leave it there, then that night I lay in the same spot and pull them over me, streamlined as going to bed should be.
Yeah, I think this is a classic argument, especially between husbands and wives, but I've tried to explain this to my wife.
Like she goes through this, we wake up in the morning, it's not just making the bed, like she makes the bed, and it's like she tucks the covers underneath the mattress, and then she has all of her pillows, as I've complained about many times, she has 50 pillows that she puts on the bed, and so then every night when it's time to go to bed, we gotta take the pillows off, and there's nowhere to put all these extra pillows, you just end up throwing them on the ground, you know, pull the covers out from underneath the mattress, It is wasted effort.
Think about all the cumulative hours of my life that I've wasted doing that.
James Savely says, I wish there was a way to force every adult in the U.S.
to watch one week of the Matt Walsh podcast.
I couldn't agree with you more.
And when I am theocratic fascist dictator of the world, then your dream will become a reality because that will be a requirement.
Although not for a week, of course, every day.
So a few weeks ago on the show, I read you an email that we were copied on from a Harry's Razors customer who was canceling his subscription and switching over to Jeremy's Razors.
He was so ticked off with Harry's virtue signaling nonsense that he was willing to pay the extra money to have his Jeremy's kit shipped to the UK, where he lives.
Since then, we've been copied on a flood of breakup emails from our listeners, all telling Harry's and Gillette what they can do with their woke razors.
Here's a new one.
Reading it now says, "Hello, I've been using Harry's for many years and have enjoyed your product.
However, when you choose to inject yourself into political matters and say that 50% of the country
are bigots, you make it a very easy decision for me to cancel. Why should half the country have to
tolerate open discrimination simply for having a different opinion? The answer is that we shouldn't.
And thanks to The Daily Wire, we no longer have to. I'll be giving my money to someone who will
use it for something I support, not a company that openly despises me. P.S. I am a bald man
and shave my head three times per week so you genuinely are missing out on a good deal of money from me."
Now this man's follicle fallout is Harry's financial loss, but they have no one to blame but themselves.
Actions have consequences, and we will gladly take the lead in holding woke companies like Harry's, Gillette, Disney, and all the rest to account.
Someone has to do it, right?
That's what we're doing.
Right now, when you go to jeremysrazors.com, you can get 40% off your founder's kit.
So head to jeremysrazors.com and start shaving woke-free.
And don't forget to copy us on your breakup email using reviews at jeremysrazors.com.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Well, this is a momentous day.
In our daily cancellation, we will be discussing comments about race which were made by an NFL coach, but we will not be cancelling the coach.
As you know, in almost all cases, if this segment is focused on someone in the professional sports world who said something about race or politics or social issues, they will almost always be getting cancelled because it is nearly certain that whatever they said, it was incredibly stupid, virtue-signaling, left-wing claptrap.
But not today.
Head coach of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Todd Bowles, will be facing the Pittsburgh Steelers this week, and his team will likely win by a couple of scores, not because the Bucs are all that good, but because the Steelers are pathetically bad.
Not really relevant to anything to point that out, but as a Ravens fan I feel the need to make a point of mentioning how bad the Steelers are this year, and they are really bad.
But in any case, the point most relevant to the media, to the media anyway, is that Todd Bowles is black, and Pittsburgh's head coach Mike Tomlin is also black.
Two black men facing off in the NFL.
Historic.
I mean, if you leave aside the fact that we see these kinds of matchups in every NFL game, every single weekend, for the past, I don't know, 50 years.
If you leave that aside, you could say that we never see these kinds of matchups.
They are historic.
That's why the media wants to make a big deal out of it, and they point out that although, yes, there are black men in many positions on every NFL team, there are comparatively fewer NFL head coaches who are black.
And having two teams with black head coaches facing each other, therefore, is monumental.
Both of these men must understand how monumental it is.
They must.
They have to.
I have a very good relationship with Tomlin.
And that's what these reporters tried to do for Todd Bowles during a press conference
yesterday which led to this exchange.
Listen.
You and Mike Tomlin are two of the few black head coaches in the league.
I wonder what your relationship is like with them and your thoughts on Steve Wilkes joining
that bowl.
I have a very good relationship with Tomlin.
We don't look at what color we are when we coast against each other.
We just know each other.
I have a lot of very good white friends that coach in this league as well.
And I don't think it's a big deal as far as us being coaching against each other.
I think it's normal.
Wilk's got an opportunity to do a good job.
Hopefully he does it.
And we coach ball.
We don't look at color.
But you also understand that representation matters too, right?
And that when young aspiring coaches or even football players, they see you guys, you know, they see someone that looks like them, maybe grew up like them.
That has to mean something.
Well, when you say you see you guys and look like them and grew up like them, it means that we're eyeballs to begin with.
And I think the minute you guys start making a big deal about it, everybody else will as well.
That's great.
I love that.
Wow.
So Todd Bowles, it turns out, hasn't spent much time sitting around and meditating on the significance of his opponent's skin color as it relates to his own skin color.
He says it isn't a big deal.
And if you guys, the media, stop making it a big deal, he says, everyone else would move on with their lives too.
So there are a few points here worth noting.
First, unsurprisingly, The reporter lecturing the black man about why he ought to see more significance in the racial dynamics of this weekend's matchup.
That reporter is a white woman.
Notice that the patronizing tone she uses.
You understand that representation matters, right?
You understand that?
And then she goes on to explain the importance of black representation to a black man.
Clay Travis over at Outkick reports that the reporter is Jenna Lane, who works as a Bucs correspondent for, of course, ESPN.
Who else?
In her write-up on this exchange, she makes sure to note, again, just why Todd Bowles should care more about the racial component of this weekend's Bucs-Steelers game.
She writes, quote, the NFL has come under increased scrutiny in recent years for its lack of black head coaches when roughly 70% of the league's players are black.
Following Wilkes' promotion, there are four active NFL head coaches who are black.
Wilkes, Bowles, Tomlin, and Lovey Smith of Houston, Texas.
Aside from those four, three additional head coaches are people of color.
The Miami Dolphins' Mike McDaniel, who's biracial, the New York Jets' Robert Saleh, who is of Lebanese descent, and the Washington Commanders' Ron Rivera, who is Latino.
Okay, so that means 20% of NFL head coaches are, quote, people of color?
I'm not sure I quite see the problem here.
Meanwhile, as she notes herself, 70% of the players are black.
All in all, a hugely disproportionate number of those making millions of dollars to work in the NFL are black.
There is no racism problem here.
And if there was, the numbers would suggest that the racism problem would be going the other way.
Yet this will not stop Jenna Lane from pushing her narrative, even if she has to push it on to a black man against his will.
More specifically, she is pressuring him to push it for her.
This is very often how it goes with the left's racial narrative.
That's what's so revealing about this.
White liberals depend on non-white people to be their puppets, their ventriloquist dummies, repeating the lines that have been assigned to them.
White liberals assume from the outset that every non-white person they meet will be willing and eager to play that role.
If you're not white, they will presume That they know ahead of time what your basic outlook on life is, what your priorities are, what your values are, what your political stances are.
Any non-white person who does not play their assumed role risks being ripped to shreds for their lack of cooperation.
In fact, I expect that several lengthy think pieces have already been written explaining why Todd Bowles is a self-hating white supremacist and probably suspected Nazi sympathizer.
The other thing we see from this incident is how the left's racial obsession just makes everything so shallow and boring and dreary.
Because by far the least interesting or relevant thing about the Steelers-Bucks game is that the two head coaches are black.
But that's what they want to focus on.
In fairness, there's not a lot interesting at all about the game because both teams kind of suck.
But even so, the racial dynamics are the least interesting aspect out of all of it.
Now, it's not that the races of the coaches are meaningless.
Race is not nothing.
Your race is a fact about you.
It does mean something.
It's important in its own way because it's a fact about you.
Yet, on the left, they want to reduce you entirely to these identity markers.
You are nothing but the combination of your race, your sex, your sexual orientation, your gender identity, quote-unquote, which is a made-up and meaningless category, of course.
They want us all to go through life as just, like, walking demographic statistics.
That's how they want the world to see us.
And most importantly, it's how they want us to see ourselves.
And it's how Jenna Lane at ESPN wants Todd Bowles to see himself.
And that is why she is today, certainly not Todd Bowles, but she is cancelled.
