Ep. 1093 - Deranged ‘Medical Experts’ Recommend Diet Pills And Surgery For Overweight Children
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the corrupt and morally bankrupt American Academy of Pediatrics has announced new guidelines for dealing with childhood obesity. No surprise: they recommend drugs and surgery. We'll talk about that, and the medical industry's decades-long campaign to medicalize every aspect of the human condition. Also, the DOJ is investigating after classified documents from Joe Biden's time as Vice President were found stashed away. I guess we have to impeach Biden now. Those are the rules. Plus, schools across the country reinstate masking policies. And M&Ms empowers women with all-female candy.
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to access the entire content catalog of movies, shows, documentaries, and more. Use code WALSH and get 2 months free on annual plans: https://bit.ly/3dQINt0
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/walsh, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit.
Innovation Refunds - Learn more about Innovation Refunds at https://getrefunds.com/.
- - -
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the corrupt and morally bankrupt American Academy of Pediatrics has announced new guidelines for dealing with childhood obesity.
No surprise, they recommend drugs and surgery.
We'll talk about that and the medical industry's decades-long campaign to medicalize every aspect of the human condition.
Also, the DOJ is investigating after classified documents from Joe Biden's time as Vice President were found stashed away.
I guess we have to impeach Biden now.
You know, those are the rules.
Plus, schools across the country reinstate masking policies and M&Ms empower women with all-female candy.
What the hell exactly does that mean?
We'll find out all of that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.
If this is at odds with your goals, which it probably is, if you're tired of the government playing games with your savings and your retirement plans, then you need to get in touch with the experts at Birch Gold today.
For over 5,000 years, gold has withstood inflation, geopolitical turmoil, and stock market crashes.
Now you can own gold in a tax shelter retirement account.
Birch Gold makes it easy to convert an IRA or 401k into an IRA in precious metals.
Text Walsh to 989898 to claim your free info kit on gold and then to talk to one of their
precious metal specialists.
With an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers and countless
five star reviews, you can trust Birch Gold to help protect your savings.
Text Walsh to 989898 and protect yourself with gold today.
That's Walsh to 989898 today.
Given their reaction to COVID and their full on embrace of gender ideology, nearly every
major medical organization in the country has completely discredited itself over the
past couple of years.
I'm not sure that we've really ever seen an industry so quickly and so thoroughly torch its own credibility in this way.
Granted, we're facing an institutional crisis in the West where almost all major institutions have forfeited the public's trust, but the medical industry sets itself apart because of the dramatic and seemingly sudden nature of its moral and intellectual collapse, and because the consequences of the public losing confidence in the medical industry, of all industries, are especially dire.
The public may still have faith in medicine, the science of medicine, but they don't trust the people charged with developing, dispensing, and prescribing it.
And why should they?
Worst of all, the specific area of the medical field that has conducted itself the most shamefully and destructively is that area which deals with children.
In particular, the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is the largest association of pediatricians in the country, has gotten it disastrously wrong on every important issue for the past several years and counting, pushing faux medicine and faux treatments and putting ideology ahead of science every step of the way.
The APA, of course, pushed school shutdowns during COVID, masking for children, even now recommending the COVID vaccine for six-month-old babies.
That's the APA's recommendation.
And of course, it is one of the principal promoters of gender ideology in the country, giving a rubber stamp to whatever the extremist World Professional Association of Transgender Health has to say.
And as WPATH guidelines recommend castration, mutilation, and sterilization for ever-younger, gender-confused children, so too then does the APA.
Of all the once-respected organizations that have been ideologically captured by the far left and become these grotesque, discredited husks of what they once were, the APA, perhaps, sets itself apart.
And it's not done.
It's not done yet.
CBS News has the latest quote Children struggling with obesity should be evaluated and
treated early and aggressively Including with medications for kids as young as 12 and
surgery for those as young as 13 according to new guidelines released on Monday the long-standing
practice of Watchful waiting or delaying treatment to see whether
children and teens outgrow or overcome obesity on their own Only worsems that worsens the problem that affects more
than 14.4 million young people in the US researchers say.
Left untreated, obesity can lead to lifelong health problems, including high blood pressure, diabetes, and depression.
Weighting doesn't work, said Dr. Ihuma Inelli, co-author of the first guidance on childhood obesity in 15 years from the American Academy of Pediatrics.
What we see is a continuation of weight gain and the likelihood that they'll have obesity in adulthood.
For the first time, the group's guidance sets ages at which kids and teens should be offered medical treatment, such as drugs and surgery, in addition to intensive diet, exercise, and other behavior and lifestyle interventions, said Inelli, director of the Center for Healthy Weight and Nutrition at Nationwide Children's Hospital.
In general, doctors should offer adolescents 12 and older who have obesity access to appropriate drugs, and teens 13 and older with severe obesity referrals for weight loss surgery, though situations may vary.
So, as we've seen, the APA loves nothing more in this world than performing medically unnecessary and potentially dangerous elective surgeries on children who cannot consent to them or fully understand their long-term ramifications.
It's like their favorite thing to do.
Apparently, they aren't able to get their fix with just gender transition surgeries, and so now they've moved over to the area of obesity.
And what sort of supposedly extreme situations might warrant weight loss surgeries for minors?
Well, CBS News also provides a helpful example, and let's listen.
Rose Garcia says for as long as she can remember, doctors told her she was overweight.
What did the doctor or others tell you to do?
Just to exercise and eat better.
She struggled unsuccessfully for years.
Then, at age 15, she developed hypertension and became pre-diabetic.
I visited my doctor and I told her that I wanted to lose weight, but I wanted help.
I knew I couldn't do it by myself.
With parental permission, she finally tried bariatric weight loss surgery last June, along with counseling for emotional eating.
Since then, she has lost more than 90 pounds.
Did you look in the mirror and think, who is that?
My clothing was a big, big sign.
I would put on my favorite dresses and they were too big.
And it was really, really surprising to me.
The new guidelines from the AAP recommend better nutrition, exercise, and face-to-face counseling.
Treatment may also include weight loss drugs and surgery for adolescents who meet the criteria.
But for many families, medication and surgery are not covered by insurance.
If they have insurance.
What do you think about these new guidelines?
I think that it's definitely a step in the right direction.
Step in the right direction.
But we have to operate on even more kids.
Now you notice a couple of things about the girl in that clip, if you're watching on the video podcast.
The first is that she was not morbidly obese, especially when she was younger.
They show pictures of her when she was a younger child, and they say, well, she's been struggling with her weight since she was a very young child.
They show the picture, she was chubby, moderately overweight, the kind of overweight that can be quite easily handled with modest diet changes and a reasonable amount of exercise.
It's very easy to deal with.
Second, she says that doctors initially told her to eat healthy and exercise, but she doesn't say that she actually followed those recommendations.
And we know that she didn't, because anyone who eats healthy and gets exercise will not be overweight.
Okay?
That's the case for every person on earth.
And if you're listening to this and saying, I'm an exception to that, no you're not.
Okay?
If you eat less than you're eating now, and you eat better than you're eating now, and you get more exercise than you're getting right now, you will lose weight.
You will.
Everyone will.
Now we hear a lot about alleged hormone issues and other medical complications that cause people to gain weight uncontrollably, and yet the fact remains that eating less food, or better food, will result in less fat on your body.
This is a matter of simple science, and it's the reason why most third world countries do not have an obesity epidemic.
The people don't eat a lot of food in those countries, and therefore they don't get fat.
If it was possible that genetics or hormones could make you morbidly obese regardless of what you eat, then we should see starving 450-pound Ethiopians.
But we don't.
Weight gain is a simple formula.
If you consume more calories than you burn, you will gain weight.
If you burn more calories than you consume, you will lose weight.
It's not complicated.
And therefore, losing weight is not complicated.
Though it may be difficult, there's a difference between difficult and complicated.
Difficult not because there's any sort of complex math equation involved, but simply because developing healthy habits requires discipline, and discipline requires effort, and effort can be hard, especially in a culture that encourages laziness.
Effort is always at least going to be harder than no effort.
The easiest thing is to put in no effort, and the difficulty level will increase with each extra bit of effort you apply.
Difficult, not complicated.
Living a healthy life, in any sense of the word, healthy physically, healthy mentally, healthy spiritually, is difficult in our society especially, but there is no substitute for just doing the difficult thing.
Either you will do it and have the life you wish to have, or not.
I mean, it's your choice.
It is your choice.
And in the end, there is nothing a doctor can do to compensate for your refusal to make the right choices.
Or rather, if there is something they can do to compensate, the negative consequences in the long run will vastly outweigh, pun slightly intended, the benefits.
Now, every doctor in the country, and every member of the APA, knows that everything I've said so far is true.
They know that anyone can lose weight with a healthy lifestyle.
They know that the obesity epidemic is an epidemic of people living unhealthy lifestyles, choosing unhealthy lifestyles.
Or if their children we're talking about, very often these are lifestyles being chosen for them.
Their parents feeding them garbage, putting them on a couch with video games and TV and whatever and screens.
Yeah, and again, every doctor knows that all of this is true, yet they have embraced the obesity-as-a-disease model of care anyway, where the fat person is treated as though his fatness was inflicted upon him through no fault of his own.
Rather than telling the parent of the obese child that they should feed him better food, instead they now treat the obese child as though his obesity is a virus or a cancer.
As though it is something that he, you know, like, contracted.
An illness inflicted upon him, which must now be surgically removed, like a tumor.
The important thing to understand is that the medical professionals involved in instituting this change of approach, they know that their reasoning is bogus.
They know it.
They went to medical school.
They know why people get fat.
They know how people get unfat.
Just like they know the difference between males and females and how binary and immutable those identities are, but they're now operating within their medical field as if they do not know these things.
This is a philosophical decision, and we must understand what the philosophy is.
The medical field has long since decided, and this goes back many years, okay, so it's actually not just in the last couple of years.
It goes back many years.
The medical field decided that human beings are helpless automatons with no free will, no capacity to make choices or to change, and no agency over their own lives.
Okay, that is the assumption that the medical field as a whole operates.
It is an industry run by extreme materialists who believe essentially that the human mind basically doesn't exist.
Certainly the soul does not exist.
We are the product of chemical reactions.
We are governed by these reactions entirely.
And so literally any problem we have, anything we suffer from, can be solved chemically.
That's the way they look at it.
This is a process that has been ongoing for decades and it began principally in the psychiatric industry.
Where every bad habit is an addiction now, and every addiction is a disease, and every uncomfortable or inconvenient human emotion or behavior is a mental illness, and every mental illness is a disease?
The psychiatrists have spent decades cataloging and medicalizing the entire human condition, prescribing psychotropic drugs to treat everyone who behaves in a way that falls slightly outside the norm.
The norm as defined and determined by them, the psychiatrists.
They have done this for so long with almost no resistance from the public.
And mostly because the public has bought into the program.
Or been drugged into it, as the case may be.
The psychiatrists have been lying to us.
But for many people, it's a comforting lie.
It's a convenient lie.
It's a lie that absolves the individual of all responsibility.
If you're doing something you shouldn't be doing and you're destroying your life and your family in the process, it's only because you're addicted and it's not your fault because it's a disease.
And if you're experiencing difficult emotions, well, then take a drug and get rid of them because human beings are not supposed to feel those sorts of feelings.
All of this rests, you know, all of this rests on a whole precarious pile of philosophical claims and assumptions that make no sense and that fall apart under the slightest scrutiny.
But most people do not scrutinize them because they're afraid of the burden of personal responsibility they'll end up with if they reject the psychiatric industry's claims.
Now, that's psychiatry.
My point here is simply that when you start seeing doctors prescribing diet pills and gastric bypass surgeries for chubby 13-year-olds, treating their obesity like a cancer that cannot be cured any way except with medical interventions, you should know that this sort of extreme medicalization of the human condition, this treating human beings like pre-programmed robots who cannot be expected to change their behavior, this has all been going on for a very long time.
And the stage has been set for many years.
And the average American, tragically, has gone along with it up until now.
There may reach a point, I think we've already reached the point, where the average American starts to object.
But the question is whether it's simply too late.
Now let's get to our headlines.
[MUSIC]
If you own a business, the past few years have, to say the least,
have been a bumpy ride from COVID and lockdowns to Bidenflation.
You could probably use a break, and innovation refunds can help with that.
If your business has five or more employees and managed to survive COVID, you could be eligible to receive a payroll tax rebate of up to $26,000 per employee.
This isn't a loan.
There's no payback.
It is a refund of your taxes.
The challenge is getting your hands on it.
How do you cut through the red tape and get your business the refund money?
Well, you gotta go to GetRefunds.com.
Their team of tax attorneys are highly trained in this little-known payroll tax refund program and have already returned $1 billion to businesses.
They can help you, too.
They do all the work with no charge up front and simply share a percentage of the cash that they get for you.
Businesses of all types can qualify, including those who took PPP, nonprofits, and even those that had increases in sales.
Just go to GetRefunds.com, click on Qualify Me, and answer a few questions.
This payroll tax refund is only available for a limited amount of time.
Don't miss out.
Go to GetRefunds.com.
GetRefunds.com.
We begin with this headline from the Daily Wire.
Breaking!
DOJ-FBI probing classified documents from Biden's vice presidency found at a Biden think tank, according to reports.
So, Attorney General Merrick Garland has reportedly assigned the U.S.
Attorney in Chicago to review classified material from President Joe Biden's time as Vice President that was discovered at a Biden think tank.
CBS News reported that the approximately 10 documents were found at the Penn-Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement in Washington.
The files were discovered by Biden's personal attorneys when they were packing files housed in a locked closet to prepare to vacate office space at the Penn-Biden Center in Washington, D.C.
The report says that the FBI was involved in the situation.
Now, this obviously is, and you know, people on the right are having a lot of fun with this, and for good reason, because it's pretty hilarious that, you know, all of this freaking out and panicking that went on because Donald Trump had classified documents.
And initial speculations that he was, was he taking these documents to Mar-a-Lago and then selling them, the information to the Russians and all this crazy.
He had nuclear secrets and he was selling them and he was meeting, you know, he was meeting Vladimir Putin in, you know, a dark street corner somewhere underneath a streetlight and passing off a briefcase with secrets and then being handed a, you know, a bag with a dollar sign on it in exchange.
That's what we were told.
And it was all complete nonsense, of course.
And as it happens, why did Donald Trump have the documents?
Well, just because he had them.
He didn't think it was a big deal.
Whatever.
It's just kind of like a general sort of carelessness.
Many of us pointed out that it's almost certain that Donald Trump is not the first person who's done this.
It's almost certain that he's not the first president or someone in the White House who has done something like this.
And then we find out, oh well, apparently Biden is guilty of it as well, which is great.
And you know, it puts the left in a position, and it puts us in a position too, but the position that we're in, it's their fault.
Because, and this happens, this kind of thing happens a lot.
Where you read this story and you think, well, like, in reality, right, who cares?
I don't actually care that he had the documents.
It just means nothing to me at all.
It doesn't matter.
I'm sure it's not a big deal, okay?
I'm sure that there was not anything sinister or nefarious going on.
They're just ten documents.
Whatever.
Who cares?
That's my reaction.
That's my gut initial reaction.
Objectively, you know, analyzing the situation from what we've been told so far, that's what I would say about it.
Now, you know, we don't know.
There's still a lot of information we don't have, so maybe there's something more serious going on here.
I tend to doubt.
So that's my objective, immediate reaction.
That's not the grace that the left gives to Republicans and conservatives in the same situation.
They are the ones who have set the precedent here.
So while I will say that I don't think this matters and I don't personally care, I'm all about, as you know, holding the left to their own standards.
Which is not a double standard for me, because it's not my standard.
I'm saying that you should have to reap what you sow.
You should be held to your own standards.
That's the exact opposite of a double standard for me.
That is my standard.
You have your standards.
You set the precedent based on your own behavior and your own words, and you should be stuck with that.
Okay, it's your medicine you're trying to give everybody else, and now you've got to take a dose of it.
Which means that in this case, Even if objectively, who cares?
Our reaction has to be, well, it's got a call for investigations.
We need to think about impeachment.
This is like, we have to treat it like a crisis.
Because that's what the left did.
And we're going to hold them to their own standard.
Sorry.
This is a major crisis now, according to you.
And that's how we have to treat it.
I don't want to have to do that.
You know, it's like we don't want to have to talk about this or make it into a thing.
But you see, this hurts us more than it hurts you.
Is what I'm trying to say.
But this is your punishment.
Now we're going to have to make a very big deal about these documents.
And we do have to call for, there have to be investigations into it, hearings, everything.
It's the precedent you set.
All right, ABC News headline.
More U.S.
schools institute mask mandates as COVID cases rise.
More schools across the United States are putting mask mandates in place as COVID-19 cases continue to rise.
Before winter break, districts in New Jersey and Pennsylvania announced that they would temporarily be requiring masks among students and staff members amid a surge of respiratory illnesses.
Now schools in Massachusetts and Michigan are following suit while Chicago schools are asking students to take rapid tests before classes start.
Chelsea Public Schools in Boston announced in a letter to the community the decision was due to Suffolk County designated as high risk for COVID-19 transmission as defined by the CDC.
As a result of this designation, Chelsea Public Schools will implement a mask mandate.
Masks must be worn in school buildings at all times except when eating or drinking.
Meanwhile, Ann Arbor Schools in Michigan said it was instituting a two-week mandate starting... Oh, two week.
Where have we heard that before?
It'll only be for two weeks.
That sounds familiar, but I just can't... My memory's not what it used to be.
I can't put my finger on it, but that sounds familiar of, like, COVID-related things where they say it's only two weeks.
According to a local affiliate WXYZ, the decision comes after a wave of respiratory illnesses led to at least five school closures in December alone.
The Ann Arbor Public Schools will require well-fitting masks to be worn by schools, students, staff, and visitors while indoors in AAPS schools, beginning on January 9th and during the first two weeks following the winter break.
Now, you notice what they're doing here.
The schools that are instituting these mask mandates, which are only temporary, only for two weeks, They're citing COVID as a reason, but not just COVID.
And they know they can't just cite COVID anymore.
That's not going to be enough, because even the most brainwashed of the sheep have realized at this point That all the masking and all the panicking that happened was completely absurd, especially as it pertains to children.
So people know that.
Even people that were oblivious and going along with it for years, most of them have woken up to that fact.
And so they can't just say COVID anymore because they know that most people will respond rightfully so.
Okay, who cares?
So there's another spike of COVID.
Whatever.
COVID's going to be spiking and then going down and up and down forever.
It's endemic.
It's with us.
As some of us said from the very beginning, this is always going to be with us.
It's just another thing that's out there now of so many other things.
And it's always been the case that it has very little impact, certainly very little serious impact on children to begin with.
But they can't just say it's COVID.
So now what they're saying is, well, it's respiratory illnesses.
COVID's just one of them.
There's also RSV and influenza and all these other things.
Now, you might point out that, well, RSV and the flu, influenza, these things have been out there circulating forever.
I mean, they were circulating Long before COVID.
And yet there were never mask mandates.
Nobody ever even... It's not just that there were no mask mandates in school in response to flu before COVID.
It's not just that there were none.
It's that no one even suggested it.
It wasn't even a topic of conversation.
It wasn't in the realm of possibility.
But now it is.
And what they'll tell us is that, well, yeah, Influenza was out there before.
RSV was out there before.
Nobody ever masked for any of that before.
Certainly, we never had kids wearing surgical masks in school because of it.
They'll say, yeah, that's true, that's true.
But we've learned.
We've learned from the lessons of COVID.
And so things are different now.
Really?
What did we learn?
What did we learn about masking that we didn't know before?
Actually, we didn't learn.
Maybe some people who were, you know, oblivious before learned something, but there's like no new information about masks and how they work and when they work and when they don't work.
There's no new information.
These are all things that we knew before.
So no, we didn't learn anything.
It's just that the political situation has changed.
Masking has become a political issue, and so that is what has changed, and that's why they're now requiring.
Now, and this is what it's going to be.
Speaking of things that are always with us, masking in schools, this is just how it's always going to be forever now.
They know they can't get away with keeping the masks on the kids permanently in schools, but you'll have masking, and then they'll get rid of the masking, and then it'll be back and back and forth, and that's just how it's going to be forever.
If you don't like it, which you shouldn't, then the only real answer is to not subject your kids to the government indoctrination camps to begin with.
Because as soon as you send them into that building, they are at the mercy of the government.
They're in a government building being cared for, or not cared for, by government employees, and that's it.
All right, I missed this yesterday, but Dr. Fauci was interviewed by CBS News over the weekend.
Fauci retired and yet still does like 14 interviews per day in retirement.
He just, he loves the spotlight that much.
He can't let it go.
He's 145 years old and retired and yet still sitting down for every interview he can get.
Anthony Fauci has done, I mean, he's easily done more interviews in the last three years than like the average Hollywood actor will do in three decades.
And I'm making that statistic up, but then Anthony Fauci makes up statistics all the time.
So, you know, it's what's fair is fair.
He was asked in this interview with CBS about the DeMar Hamlin situation.
And about the theories and speculation and the questions, really, about whether his cardiac event had maybe anything to do with vaccines.
And here's what Fauci said.
Dr. Fauci, I don't know if you saw it, but on Monday Night Football this week, DeMar Hamlin, a player for the Buffalo Bills, collapsed on the field.
You're not an NFL expert, and you're not an expert on any cardiovascular issues the player might have had.
But what I want to ask you about, Dr. Fauci, is As I want to do in moments like that, I kept an eye on Twitter.
And I can't tell you exactly how many minutes transpired, but it was less than 20 before people on Twitter began to say, well, clearly the vaccine caused his seizure.
And that had a multiplier effect on Twitter, as these things tend to do.
What's your reaction to that?
Well, my reaction is one of concern.
Is it horror, borderline, more than concern?
Yeah, it's horror that misinformation and disinformation, when you have a platform like social media, that exponentially spreads.
In its best form, proper and important and value-added information can spread, which is good.
Yes.
The thing as a public health person and as a physician and a scientist and my identity as a physician is the thing that gets pained The most by that, because what that means, Major, is that yet again, another conspiracy theory, complete nonsense, is going to have some people make a decision for themselves and their family not to get vaccinated, which may cost them their lives.
So that's the thing that's so horrible about it.
And if you want to go out spouting nonsense, conspiracy theories and spreading it all around, fine, except If it results in a person suffering and perhaps dying.
And that's what happens when disinformation disincentivizes people to get proper interventions for a threat like a pandemic.
There's some real journalism there.
That's some real journalism from, is that Major Garrett?
Dr. Fauci.
These people disagree with you.
How horrified are you by that?
On a scale of 1 to 10, how horrified are you by people who disagree with you and thus are wrong about everything?
There's no attempt to extract actual information at all.
I said before that he's done a million interviews, but they're not really interviews.
Because an interview is asking questions, and then if you don't get an answer, you keep trying to extract that information.
That's how an interview is supposed to go.
It's not an interview.
These are just speeches, really.
It's all scripted, and they're setting him up, they're lobbing the volleyball up so he can spike it over the net.
That's all it ever is.
And we hear again this phrase conspiracy theory, which if there's one phrase that I could ban from public discourse at this point, that would be the one.
Even if you disagree with the people theorizing that maybe the DeMar Hamlin situation had something to do with the vaccine, it's not a conspiracy theory.
Where's the conspiracy?
Now, there might have been a lot of conspiracy surrounding this, but the theory that, okay, whether it's right or wrong, The theory or the question about whether, okay, did he take the vaccine and did that cause a cardiovascular event?
That's not, that's just a, that's a medical theory, not a conspiracy theory.
And if you're sure that it's not true, if you're sure that it had nothing to do with that, if you have evidence that had nothing to do with it, then tell us the evidence.
As I said from the beginning, I'm not convinced That it had anything to do with the vaccine.
We still don't even know if the guy's vaccinated.
I don't know yet that that's even been answered.
Now, statistically, it's likely because the majority of the NFL is vaccinated, I believe, but they're not all vaccinated and it was never mandated for players.
So, it's possible he wasn't even vaccinated.
I'm going to assume that he was, though, because if he wasn't, then that information would probably be out by now.
They'd probably be telling us that.
They'd find some way to get that information out.
But we don't know.
If it was vaccinated, like the simple fact that somebody was vaccinated and then ends up having their heart stops, that doesn't automatically mean, that's correlation, that doesn't automatically mean that there's causation.
So I'm not convinced by that.
And I don't think anyone's really saying they're convinced, it's more like it's a question.
Is there a connection here?
Can we talk about that?
What's the evidence?
What's going on?
He went to the hospital.
He was in the hospital for several days.
What do the people in the hospital say?
What do the doctors who are treating him say?
So, if you have evidence that disproves this theory or this possibility, then present it.
But he doesn't bother doing that.
And he thinks it's good enough to just label it as disinformation.
Dangerous!
It's gonna get people killed!
And of course, the more you respond to it that way, the more you respond to questions like this, which are totally valid questions.
The question about a possible connection to the vaccine.
It's a valid question.
But the more you respond to those questions, By trying to shut people down who even ask them?
Accusing them of killing people by simply asking a question?
The more you respond that way, then the more that the so-called conspiracy theories will grow.
If you're really worried about so-called conspiracy theories, well, that's a great way to encourage them.
All right, quick headline from the Daily Wire.
House Republicans pass rules for McCarthy's reign with one GOP holdout.
The House of Representatives passed on Monday evening a set of rules that will govern how the lower chamber operates for the next two years under the leadership of Speaker Kevin McCarthy.
All Democrats voted against the rules package, while every Republican except for one voted to pass it.
The final tally was 220 to 213.
The set of rules featured concessions by McCarthy to woo hardline conservatives who were holding up his rise to speakership last week across more than a dozen votes.
Among the concessions was changing the rules so that a sole member of the House can file a motion to vacate the chair.
And then there were other concessions that we talked about yesterday.
72 hours to read the bill, single-issue bills, investigating government corruption, the FBI.
These were all things that were conceded.
It should not have necessitated a concession in the first place because these are things that should just happen anyway.
And do make note of the fact that Democrats voted against it.
Right?
Every Democrat in the House voted against reading bills before you pass them.
Okay?
Every Democrat said, no, we should not read bills before we pass them.
60 Minutes, though, said that this was all very embarrassing.
The whole process was very embarrassing.
And the fact that there was this negotiation, you know, in the Republican Party, and that it led to this agreement, it's very embarrassed.
It should be very embarrassing to all of us, they said.
Listen to this.
The historic chaos in the House of Representatives this past week embarrassed not only a party, but an entire nation.
A small minority blocked the House from electing a leader or even swearing in its own members.
Vote after vote, a would-be speaker could not bring himself to stand aside in favor of a colleague.
Yes, it was only for a few days in January.
But if members of the incoming majority party can't bring themselves to support a new leader, then one wonders what happens when Congress faces tough decisions on budgets, taxes, defense, or raising the debt ceiling.
Actually, governing.
I'm Leslie Stahl.
We'll be back next week with another edition of 60 Minutes.
Yes, my God, how embarrassed.
It's a deliberative body engaging in deliberation.
The legislative branch, people in the legislative branch are deliberating and compromising.
How embarrassing!
It's embarrassing that they didn't just immediately coronate whatever leader was put forward in front of them by, you know, the establishment of their party.
It's embarrassing.
I'm embarrassed by that, she said.
The entire nation is embarrassed.
Well, I don't know.
I'm in the nation.
I'm a member of the entire nation.
I'm not embarrassed by it.
It's one of the only times I have not been embarrassed.
It's one of the only times recently I have not been embarrassed by something happening in Congress.
That's one of the very rare occasions where I'm actually proud of some members of Congress for the way they handled something.
In this case, specifically, the holdouts who, you know, stuck by their guns and got these concessions and got these rule changes in place.
Proud of them for that.
Does not happen very often.
Is anyone actually embarrassed?
You can go up to somebody on the street.
I'd like to see 60 Minutes test this theory and go do kind of like man-on-the-street interviews and ask people, you know, the whole Kevin McCarthy battle.
How'd you feel about that?
Pretty embarrassing, right?
Of course, as I said last week, most people will have no idea that it even happened.
But when you tell them about it, I don't think anyone's gonna say, oh, wow, that's embarrassing.
They're gonna say something like, I don't care, I gotta go.
Or they're gonna say, oh, okay, well, isn't that what Congress does?
They're supposed to argue about things, right?
I also wanted to mention this New York Post headline.
Terrible headline.
Seven-year-old Louisiana girl was mauled to death by a neighbor's pit bull that ran into her family's yard, authorities said.
Sadie Davila was playing outside the East Baton Rouge Parish home at 6.30 p.m.
Friday when the dog barreled onto the property and viciously attacked her, according to arrest documents obtained by The Advocate.
A family member tried to ward off the dog by hitting it with a walking cane, but the animal couldn't be deterred.
The first grader was taken to the hospital with multiple dog bites to her face and severe skull damage.
She later succumbed to her injuries now.
This is...
I believe at least the second pit bull mauling of a child in the last couple of days.
There was a story a few days ago of a child who I believe fortunately survived but was horrifically mutilated.
The child was basically scalped, his scalp ripped off by this dog.
And this just happens all the time, every year.
It just goes on and on.
It remains a statistical reality, okay?
I don't care if you're a pit bull owner and it makes you upset to hear it and you're gonna tell me that, oh, not my pity, not my pity, he's a nice puppy, he's a nice puppy.
Yeah, well, the reality is that the vast majority of fatal maulings in this country are carried out by your nice puppies, okay?
They are responsible for a vastly disproportionate number.
I mean, it's not even close, okay?
Of all the fatal dog attacks, pit bulls account for, I don't know, you can look up the statistics, something like 70% or more.
And that's of all dog breeds, okay?
There are many dog breeds, and you've got this one dog breed that is responsible for almost all of the fatal dog attacks.
And and please don't tell me don't pull up statistics about dog bites and say oh actually they they don't bite nearly as much as Chihuahuas or you know poodles poodles bite a lot more.
Yeah, but poodles don't kill anybody.
That's the difference okay, if your little annoying ugly poodle goes rogue and The worst it can do is like maybe you might have to get stitches on your shin or something That's the absolute worst case scenario Whereas with a pitbull If it decides to act as it has been breeded, as it is genetically programmed to act, then it will kill somebody.
And very often, it's not even going to kill you as the owner, it's going to kill somebody else.
Someone else who didn't choose to take this animal on.
Didn't choose the risk.
Now, you can say all you want, well, I'm going to buy a pit bull and adopt a pit bull and I'm going to take on the risk.
It's not just a risk for you.
You are assuming this risk on behalf of everybody else in the neighborhood.
If your neighbor has young children, you've decided that this risk is worth taking not only with your own life, but with your neighbor's children's lives, too.
Because, why?
Because you think the pit bull is cute.
That's what it is.
It's, I think the Pitbull is cute, weighed against the lives of the children and innocent bystanders and various mailmen and joggers and all the rest of them who might be mauled to death by this beast.
There's just no contest here.
Your desire to adopt an animal that you find cute does not outweigh the right of people in your community to be safe from these vicious animals.
Don't tell me it's all about how they're raised.
Well, you know, you keep telling me it's all about the owner.
Yeah, but the owners of these pit bulls that end up attacking and killing people, they always say that they did everything right, that they raised the animal right, that they got proper training.
That's what they always tell us.
Now, you can assume that that's not true.
But that's just your assumption.
You have like this unfalsifiable theory on your part, which is that every pitbull that attacks another person, it's because it was a bad owner.
And how do you know that?
Well, because you just assume that any time a pitbull attacks, it was a bad owner.
You have no evidence of that whatsoever.
There's zero evidence of that.
You just say it.
And what you are disregarding amid all of this Is that you're disregarding genetics, okay?
Which, that's a real thing.
That exists.
That's not superstition.
There's nothing magical going on there.
Pitbulls aren't genetically programmed to be vicious, fighting animals.
They just are.
And so the job of the owner is to do everything they can to suppress that nature in the wild animal.
And if, you know, something goes wrong, then someone might die.
And might I add, die horrifically.
Like, the most painful and horrific death you can imagine is what might happen.
This is not like guns.
Oh, you're saying guns should be banned?
No.
I'm not.
Because you have a constitutional right to a gun.
You do not have a constitutional right to own whatever animal you want.
And I'm assuming you agree with that, which is why you're not advocating for people being allowed to have lions and tigers and, like, cheetahs, you know, in neighborhoods.
What does that tell us?
It tells us that you do not have a constitutional, God-given human right to own whatever animal you want.
You just don't.
There are certain animals that we say do not belong in communities, and how do we judge that?
How do we make that judgment call?
Well, if the animal is unreasonably dangerous, then he doesn't belong in the community.
And pit bulls, I mean, how many children do they have to maul to death before we are willing to accept that this animal falls into the unreasonably dangerous category?
The other thing too is that guns don't have minds of their own.
What's the one thing that gun owners like myself, what do we always say when people say, you know, we gotta get rid of the guns?
You know, there's that cliched response, which is true.
It's guns don't kill people, people kill people.
Well, people with guns kill people, but the point is that the gun is not going to get up on its own and just go out and shoot somebody.
It's a person has to do that.
Well, you know what dogs can do?
They can get up on their own and just go out and kill somebody.
Because they have minds of their own.
They are sentient beings, unlike guns.
So, we just need to—pit bulls need to be banned from communities.
It just—that's the law that needs to be passed everywhere.
It cannot be allowed anymore.
We need to stop breeding these things.
We need to stop allowing them in communities.
And there really is no sane argument to the contrary.
The entire argument to the contrary is just that, well, I like pit bulls.
I think they're cute.
That's the whole argument.
And I've had this discussion so many times, and I've listened to the other side, and that's all they got.
That's it.
Why don't I want them in communities?
Well, because they are responsible for killing a vastly disproportionate number of children.
That's why I don't want them.
Why do you want them there?
Because I like them.
Not a good argument.
Finally, I want to play this for you.
Dr. Jill Biden, PhD, has some inspirational words for women.
Listen.
From soft lullabies to battle cries for justice, women nurse and nurture, teach and build, lead and dream our world forward each and every day.
I'm going to turn this a little bit like this.
(Laughter.)
We have never been silent, but women have been silenced.
For many women around the world, simply raising their voice is a struggle.
And they've had to fight for a seat at the table.
When women are left behind or pushed out, it hurts us all.
But when women get the opportunities that they deserve, there is no limit to what we can do, right?
The only thing more incredible than that inspiring speech was her dress, which was either pixelated because it contained a series of obscenities, or it was meant to be some sort of tribute to the game Tetris.
I don't really know.
Whatever the case, Jill Biden, Dr. Jill Biden, PhD, is right.
Women are done being silent.
Every woman in the world.
Every woman.
is done being silent.
And we know that because no woman has ever been silent for more than 15 seconds at a time.
So they are really done with it.
They never even started being silent.
That's how done with it they are.
Anyway, we'll have more about female empowerment in the Daily Cancellation coming up.
Coming up, but first, the comment section.
If you deliberately choose to carry what looks to be a gun, then you should expect people to respond as if you're a threat.
Yeah, pretty simple.
That's how I see it, too.
You know, and of course I say the same thing about people who, you know, someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night.
That's why somebody breaks into your house in the middle of the night, and they end up dead.
Like, I don't really care about the details.
If it was totally up to me, I wouldn't even ask any questions.
All I need to know, like, right, if I'm the one calling the shots, and if I am theocratic fascist dictator of the country, and, you know, someone breaks into your house, They're dead.
The only question I have is, does this person live at your house?
No.
Did you invite them in?
No.
Okay.
That's it.
That's all.
I don't need to know anything else.
So, if they were, as far as I'm concerned, if they're like coming at you with a knife or if they're pulling a gun on you and you shoot them, obviously justified.
If you're shooting them in the back as they're walking away, Like, that's when we could have a moral conversation about, you know, not all shootings are the same morally, but as far as the law should look at it, you come into someone's house uninvited, you break in, you forfeited your life, and that's it.
And we're not even going to attempt to parse it and figure out what exactly, it's just you are in there.
You made that decision.
Your life is forfeit.
And that, you know what?
That approach and that attitude will actually, that is a pro-life attitude.
It preserves lives in the future because of what it's going to do.
It tells other people, don't do this.
Don't break into people's houses.
Don't turn to a life of crime.
Okay?
It's not worth the risk.
It's not worth the cost of your life, which is what, which is the price you will have to pay.
All right.
Tim the Tool says, my favorite part of the full taco shop video is when the hero, after he finished saving the day and making the other customers whole, proceeded to return to his table, finish his coffee, and calmly step over the robber and leave.
I guess I didn't see the full video.
I saw the part leading up to the actual shooting, and I guess I didn't watch it to the very end.
I didn't realize that that's how it ended.
But yeah, he took care of business, gave people back their money, and then left.
I believe the police are still looking for him to ask him questions, but, you know, the only question I have for him is, like, what's your favorite beer so I can buy you one?
That's my question.
That would be my... If I'm the police, if I'm the detective, and I'm sitting down, we finally get him, we're sitting down for questioning in the room, you know, at a table much like this one, my only question is, sir, do you like IPAs or are you more of a stout guy?
You seem like maybe a Bud Light guy.
You want one of those?
Okay, that's it.
Anyway, be on your way.
Locutus says, my daughter is 18, so she's been driving for a couple years now, but when she had her permit, I was blown away at how crappy driver's ed has become.
She just had to watch videos on her laptop and pass a multiple choice test, and the driving test for her license was even worse.
She just drove around the block, no parallel parking, no highway driving.
I had to take it upon myself to teach her about blind spots, merging, parking, and everything else that keeps you alive.
If I didn't know any better, I would think that the state doesn't care very much about human life.
Well, I think that apparently you do know better, because you're exactly right.
We've talked about this before with the driver's test.
It was already a joke back when I took the driver's test 20 years ago.
It was already a joke, and it was almost like, let's make sure you can do a three-point turn, and that you know how to make a right turn at a stop sign, and that you know how to parallel park, and that was it.
That's all they did.
And of course, most people don't even know how to do any of those things, and yet still ended up passing the driver's test anyway.
And now it seems like, apparently, they don't even do any of that anymore.
It's just like, can you see?
Can you see out of at least one eye?
And if you can do that, then we'll give you... And eventually, even that will be too much of a burden.
Even that will be a bar too high, because that's not equitable.
We're excluding those with vision impairment.
It is at the point where there's, it's just like, why even do the whole licensing thing anyway?
The only reason to have a driver's license, really, is if you're going to actually, if there's going to be some process for obtaining the license to make sure that you know how to do it.
And if you're not going to do that, then what's the point of the license to begin with?
LFT says, you got lucky.
You managed to find a good woman and you have enough money to take care of a family.
Not everyone is so lucky.
In fact, most aren't.
Stop assuming that your life works for everyone.
Now that's, that's another cope.
That's, that's, that is also cope on your part to hear that.
Oh, you got lucky.
You know, you see someone who has things in their life that you don't have and that maybe you wish you had, and then you immediately just say, oh, they're lucky and I'm not.
Come on.
Now, is their luck involved to some extent?
Yeah.
Obviously, yes.
If you're still walking around on two legs and haven't been killed or paralyzed in a car accident, that's partly luck, right?
Lots of things could have happened to you so that you didn't have those advantages, right?
I mean, so there's luck involved every time you walk outside of your house, right?
You drive down the road, you drive across a bridge.
If that bridge could collapse one day, and that's like no fault of your own.
That's just a matter of luck.
So there's luck involved in life.
But is it all a roll of the dice?
You know, the fact that I have a family, a wife that I love, and kids, and a career that I'm happy in, I found some financial stability.
Like, is that all just a roll of the dice?
Did I stumble blindly into all of this?
No.
You know, it is a process, and you have to work very, very hard.
And if you want financial success, you have to work very, very hard for it.
There's just, there's no way around it for most people.
There are rare exceptions of a person who just, you know, maybe they're born with a silver spoon in their mouths, or they really do get lucky and everything falls into place.
There are rare exceptions, but those are the exceptions.
That's why we call them that.
For most of us, if you want to have a life worth living, if you want to be happy in life, if you want to have anything worthwhile in life, you just have to work, and you have to keep working at it, and you gotta keep at it for years and years and years.
Where I am professionally right now, it took me 15 years to get there.
15 years!
And what you find, it's not a coincidence.
The majority of the people that I know And that I've ever met, who are really hard workers, and they put the time in, and they're willing to work and do it and just humble themselves, and even if they have a setback or, you know, there are peaks and valleys, when they're in the valleys, they don't get discouraged, they keep at it.
Almost everyone I know like that, and I know plenty of people like that, but here's the crazy thing.
Almost everyone I know like that is living a successful life.
And almost everyone I know who isn't living a successful life, they're not like that.
So there is just a connection here.
All right, so that's my self-help speech for the day.
You know who hates ads?
I do.
The last thing I want to do is read an ad, even though I'm so good at reading them.
But I do it because ads help pay the bills.
However, if you become a Daily Wire Plus member, you can help us pay the bills and in exchange never have to hear me read an ad again, which is probably a huge incentive for so many of you.
That means no more sales pitch, no more skipping and then having to reverse because you skipped too far.
And this also means you'll get to hear other shows, like the Ben Shapiro Show, the Michael Knowles Show, and Morning Wire, all without ads.
I owe a debt of gratitude to the people who are already members because they were the reason why I was able to make, you know, What Is A Woman?
And I'm planning on doing more and even bigger things in 2023, and your support will ensure that I make that a reality.
We need your help, though.
Right now, you can use code WALSH to get two months free on all annual plans.
Head over to dailywire.com slash WALSH to become a member and get this show and so many others ad-free.
That's dailywire.com slash WALSH.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
We live in a culture that is always changing, always evolving, always reaching greater and greater heights of tolerance and enlightenment.
And as everyone knows, the vanguard of this movement, the warriors up on the front lines fighting the hardest for progress, the people we look to first and foremost for guidance and insight, are corporate brands.
And most specifically, candy companies.
We would be facing grave civilizational peril without the leadership of candy.
We would be lost without candy's wisdom.
The ancient Greeks had Aristotle and Plato.
We have Reese's Peanut Butter Cups and Starbursts.
Our philosophers are more progressive, wiser.
Even better, you can eat them?
2022 was a landmark year for candy-centric social justice.
It seemed that every candy brand was stepping up to the plate, so to speak.
For example, Mars Incorporated announced in May of 2022 that Skittles would be teaming up with GLAAD to bring us Pride Skittles for Pride Month.
Now, Skittles had, for several years prior, turned their Skittles all gray for Pride Month to symbolically represent the brand's cemented, quote-unquote, support for LGBT rights.
Because who wouldn't want to, you know, eat cement-themed candies?
But in 2022, they took it up a notch, hiring a collection of LGBT artists to create special LGBT art for the packaging.
It's estimated that approximately, from the numbers I read, 98,000 homosexuals were saved from persecution because of the Skittles packaging.
Kit Kat also spoke out forcefully in defense of gay rights.
I'll let Wunderman Thompson, which is the consultant firm that came up with this gay rights campaign, explain it.
Here it is.
Canada's LGBTQI2S population has risen to over 1 million.
But hate crimes, discrimination and mental health issues have also continued to rise.
The LGBTQI2S community needs a break and KitKat wanted to help.
So we reimagined its iconic brand identity to redefine what it means to take a break for those who really need one.
We partnered with Toronto LGBTQI2S organization Friends of Ruby to help young people express who they are.
Our partnership was launched with a video that celebrated a full spectrum of identity and love.
We created two limited edition Kit Kat flavors and sold them at the Kit Kat Chocolatory.
All proceeds were donated to Friends of Ruby.
We also sent the Pride Bars along with custom mailers to LGBTQI2S influencers.
Wow.
Kit Kat's traditional slogan is, give me a break, which is exactly what most people say to themselves when they hear the acronym LGBTQI2S.
So this campaign really makes a lot of sense, I suppose.
It's got something meta going on here.
But as heroic as the efforts of Kit Kat and Skittles were, they obviously paled in comparison to M&Ms.
Indeed, M&Ms have been civil rights pioneers for a long time.
They are the Martin Luther King Jr.
of candies, some have said.
Last year, they redesigned their candy mascots to be more inclusive.
The changes were Nothing, if not bold and dramatic.
Most startling of all, the green M&M ditched her iconic high heels in favor of sneakers, because M&Ms had decided they could no longer enable those legions of misogynistic perverts who have candy-related foot fetishes.
All the other M&M characters underwet their own makeovers in the hopes of making them more sympathetic and relatable to a new generation.
That's what M&Ms said.
They wanted, we needed to sympathize with and relate to these characters.
Because, of course, it's important to sympathize with and relate to an object that you're about to eat.
This ability to see something as human and yet also consume it
will at least come in handy when we all turn to cannibalism during the forthcoming apocalypse, I suppose. But that was
2022. Now it's a new year, and I'm pleased to report that M&Ms will be aggressively defending their crown as the world's
wokest candy.
Parade has this report, quote, For the first time ever, select M&M packaging will feature a cast of all female characters.
Parent company Mars is releasing the new packaging to spotlight dynamic female M&M characters in celebration of women everywhere who are flipping the status quo, as revealed in a January 5th press release.
The limited edition packs feature brown, green, and recently introduced purple, and will exclusively contain brown, green, and purple candies.
The M&M's brand is on a mission to use the power of fun to create purposeful connections as we work to create a world where everyone feels they belong.
Gabrielle Wesley, Chief Marketing Officer, Marg's Wrigley North America, said in a release, Women all over the world are flipping how they define success and happiness.
While challenging the status quo, so we're thrilled to be able to recognize and celebrate them, and who better to help us on that mission than our own powerhouse spokescandies, green, brown, and purple.
To represent the flip, the packaging shows the three female spokescandies standing upside down above a note, supporting women, flipping the status quo.
Now apparently there will be milk, chocolate, peanut, and peanut butter versions of the new packages, which is good because just like female human beings, as we've learned, there's no reason why the female M&Ms can't have nuts.
Needless to say, this latest campaign by M&Ms Has already been a source of great joy and inspiration for women all over the country and the globe.
In fact, I have seen this firsthand.
I walked into my living room yesterday, and I'll never forget this.
I found my wife and my daughter embracing each other and smiling, just tears of pure happiness streaming down their faces.
And my wife turned to me and said, she said, didn't you hear the news?
And I shook my head.
Now, like everybody else, I'm on the Eminem email list so that I can read all of their press releases and PR statements as soon as they come out.
But somehow I'd missed this one.
I don't know how.
And my wife then took me by the hand and she said to me, they're making an all-female Eminem package.
And I was floored.
I didn't know what to say.
It was the most amazing thing I'd ever heard in my life.
The courage and heroism of Mars Incorporated had once again left me speechless.
And then through tears, my wife and daughter, they both announced in unison, we've never felt so empowered and inspired.
And together we all wept.
It was beautiful.
And no doubt a scene repeated all around the world.
There are those of a more critical disposition who have ruthlessly mocked this latest example of what they would describe as a woke corporate virtue signaling.
But these people are nothing but cynics, nihilists even.
They lack the purity of heart necessary to fully appreciate what M&Ms have done.
They're so jaded they can't even admire an international corporate conglomerate brand when it comes up with an uplifting marketing campaign designed to empower women and also sell candies with 18 grams of processed sugar per serving.
And there are still other critics who, you know, they've pointed out that while Mars Incorporated is empowering women with purple candy, they're also facing a lawsuit filed last year by eight Africans from the Ivory Coast who say that they were used as slave labor on cocoa plantations.
It's hard, you know, they say, to take their empowerment seriously when they're also profiting from the enslavement of human beings, allegedly.
And to that I say, yeah, but still.
The point is that M&Ms are empowering everyone, except for the slaves, allegedly.
And that's what we should be focused on.
And that is why, once again, the critics and the naysayers, certainly not M&Ms or Mars Incorporated, Are today.
Canceled.
And that will do it for this portion of the show as we move over to the Members Block.
