Ep. 1109 - American's Growing Death Tourism Industry
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, death tourism is a growing industry in the United States. It's as horrifying as it sounds. Also, Biden stumbled and fumbles his way through his State of the Union Address. Much of the speech was difficult to translate from whatever language he was speaking, the rest was full of lies. And Trump accuses DeSantis of being a groomer. All of the Trump's attacks on DeSantis have failed. Will this one be any different? Plus Joy Reid on MSNBC says the Left has achieved total victory in the culture war. Is she right? And if so, does that mean she'll finally stop playing the victim card?
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member for 40% off: https://bit.ly/3JR6n6d
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
PureTalk - Get 50% OFF your first month!
Enter promo code: WALSH at http://puretalk.com
Genucel - Use code "WALSH" at checkout for additional savings on your entire purchase! https://genucel.com/walsh
- - -
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 Wall Show, death tourism is a growing industry in the United States, and it's as horrifying as it sounds.
We'll talk about it.
Also, Biden stumbled and fumbled his way through the State of the Union address.
Much of the speech was difficult to translate from whatever language he was speaking.
The rest was full of lies.
And Trump accuses DeSantis of being a groomer.
All of Trump's attacks on DeSantis have failed so far.
Will this one be any different?
Plus, Joy Reid on MSNBC says the left has achieved total victory in the culture war.
Is she right?
And if so, does that mean she'll stop finally, you know, playing the victim card?
Unlikely, but we'll talk about that and much more today on the Matt Walsh Show.
For the first time ever, every order at GenuCell.com from now until Valentine's Day includes a free beauty box with two luxury gifts.
They just introduced their new Microbiome Moisturizer, which uses the power of probiotics to target skin redness, pesky wrinkles, fine lines, patchy blotches, and other signs of premature aging.
These are the same probiotics that are in your yogurt.
As it turns out, probiotics are Not just good for digestion, they can have the same nourishing benefits on your skin.
You can see results in 12 hours or get your money back guaranteed.
My talent manager Tessa uses GenuCell under eye treatment to help get rid of the bags under her eyes that she claims are my fault for working her so hard.
Right now you can get GenuCell's most popular package for 70% off as well as your two free luxury gifts.
Visit GenuCell.com slash Walsh and get 70% off with your free gifts.
Use code WALSH at checkout to have this applied to your account.
That's GenuCell.com slash Walsh.
GenuCell.com slash Walsh.
I am not going to begin the show today with an analysis of the State of the Union address.
It's just not that important.
This is a reality that is hard for the political pundit class to accept.
Besides, I think there are better ways of ascertaining the actual State of the Union.
In fact, of all the ways, listening to a stump speech from the President is going to give you probably the least accurate impression of how things are actually going.
Instead, I'll point you towards a report published this week by the Daily Mail, which reveals the startling details of the burgeoning suicide tourism industry.
The Daily Mail reports, quote, Oregon has become America's first death tourism destination, where terminally ill people from Texas and other states that have outlawed assisted suicide have started traveling to get their hands on a deadly cocktail of drugs to end their lives, DailyMail.com can reveal.
In the liberal bastion of Portland, at least one clinic has started receiving out-of-staters who have less than six months to live and meet the other strict requirements of the state's death-with-dignity law.
Dr. Nicholas Gidionis, the director of the End-of-Life Choices in Oregon, recently told a panel that he was advising terminally ill non-residents on traveling to the state to end their lives, despite a legal gray area.
Now, sidebar, one thing to note here is that the phrase strict requirements should be taken with an enormous grain of salt.
This is the way it always starts, right?
We begin with the evil thing in small doses with lots of alleged limitations and strict requirements, they say, until little by little those requirements are loosened and the limitations are eroded, and soon you're providing assisted suicide to people who suffer from conditions like homelessness, as they are in Canada.
Every country that now euthanizes people who aren't even terminally ill started by only euthanizing the terminally ill.
Okay, this is the way it always goes.
The process is inevitable.
It's a river that flows in one direction and one direction only.
Now it's not hard to see why an assisted suicide regime, if it gains a foothold, will always
grow more expansive over time.
And partly it's just the nature of the left's agenda.
This is a cancer that grows and progresses and infects other parts of the body.
And that's simply what cancer does.
And in this case in particular, we can see how the principles of euthanasia, once accepted,
will lead to certain conclusions inevitably.
Assisted suicide presents death as a legitimate treatment option.
It puts doctors in the position of directly killing their patients and charging them for the privilege of being killed.
Medicalizing and monetizing death.
Just one more way of doing it.
It says that death is a medically valid strategy.
So, you know, why suffer when death can give you an escape from all that suffering?
This is the euthanasia sales pitch.
If we as a society will accept this sales pitch for the terminally ill, there's no coherent reason to reject it in every other case.
I mean, we're all terminally ill, after all.
We all suffer from the medical condition known as mortality.
Our days are numbered.
And the older you get, the closer death approaches.
If you are, say, 75 years old, You'll probably be dead within a decade, statistically, whether you have a terminal illness or not.
So, I mean, why drag it out when the magic pill can give you an easy exit today?
See, by the logic of assisted suicide, if someone is suffering greatly, even if the suffering is only psychological rather than physical, there's no reason to force them to continue living with it, especially because they're just going to eventually die anyway.
This is the logic behind the greatly expanded euthanasia programs in Canada and some European countries and places like Colombia and elsewhere.
It always starts with limitations and then ends up here.
And this is not just with euthanasia, this is with literally everything on the left's agenda.
And if there's anyone out there who still needs this to be explained to them, then it's hopeless.
It shouldn't need to be explained.
All you need to do is look at the culture and see it for a fact.
Back to The Daily Mail.
Says, quote, out-of-state residents must be able to spend at least 15 days in Oregon to process the paperwork, which requires sign-offs from two doctors and witnesses before administering the fatal dose themselves, says the clinic's website.
Dr. Gidiones and the clinic operate in a legal gray zone.
The state last year agreed to extend access to doctor-assisted suicide to out-of-staters, but this is not expected to be codified into law until later this year.
But America's first death tourism destination throws up tough legal questions for family members who may help a loved one reach the state from a prohibitionist state.
They could face arrest or even be prosecuted in their home state as a result.
For critics, Oregon's nation's death tourism industry and efforts to create another in Vermont show how the U.S.
is on a slippery slope to following in Canada's footsteps, where lax rules have allowed people with so little as hearing loss to be euthanized.
Well, it's exactly what it does.
It's what it's designed to do.
help some desperately sick people and their agony.
Critics say they also devalue human life and make deadly drugs a solution for
the infirm, disabled, and even those who are castrapped or feel like a burden.
Well, it's exactly what it does.
It's what it's designed to do.
And I have to say, there is something so viscerally horrifying about the idea of filling out
paperwork to die.
And it's almost difficult to put into words.
It's a uniquely modern horror.
It's the combination of the worst things about modern society.
The combination of paperwork, waiting rooms.
And then death.
And it's depressing and despair-inducing in a way that evades description.
Just like imagining someone in this kind of sterile waiting room with the fluorescent lights, filling out a bunch of paperwork, you know, on a little clipboard, and then sitting there waiting to go back and die.
Or to talk to a doctor about being given the drugs to die.
It's, again, viscerally horrifying.
As always, our efforts to sanitize ugly things only make those ugly things even uglier.
And here, when I say ugly things, I don't mean death specifically.
Death is ugly in the sense that it's scary and often painful.
Yet, fundamentally, death is also a natural process.
It's part of life.
Our death is a passenger that we carry with us.
It's always there.
So when I say ugly, I'm referring to suicide.
Suicide is an ugly thing, one of the ugliest things, and that's what we're trying to sanitize and medicalize with euthanasia.
It's, among other things, dishonest, because it lies to the patient, first by calling him a patient, lies to him about what he's doing, allows him to lie to himself.
I mean, think about it this way.
If somebody needs euthanasia to kill themselves, If they wouldn't kill themselves, if not for euthanasia.
Because of course, you know, suicide is one of those things that is an option available to everyone all the time.
It's something that anyone can do, even painlessly.
They shouldn't, it's a terrible thing.
But it's not something that you, strictly speaking, need a doctor to facilitate.
So if somebody does feel like they, in order to do this, they need the doctor to give them the poison pills, Well, that tells us that there's something about suicide that this person recognizes as wrong.
And so they turn to the doctor-assisted version of suicide to paper over those rough edges.
Because it makes suicide seem palatable to people who otherwise apparently would choose to live.
This is the whole point of it, really.
And it's what makes it such a sinister evil.
Now, As repellent as all this may be.
We should also keep in mind it's not as unique in this country as we might like to imagine.
Death tourism comes in different forms.
A number of states have already set themselves up as abortion destinations.
Connecticut just recently passed a law and joined California and New York as abortion sanctuaries, offering to fly pregnant women in, kill their babies, and have them home in a few days ready to get back to work.
Some of these same states, California and Minnesota in particular, are also declaring themselves sanctuaries for child castration.
Parents can bring their gender-confused children, have them castrated and sterilized, and then back to school in no time.
Pretty soon these states will have their own travel agents offering package deals for the whole family.
You know, come to Vermont, we'll abort your baby, castrate your son, and euthanize grandpa.
Then you can all hit the slopes.
This is all death tourism in one form or another.
Perhaps we might call it culture of death tourism.
A tour through the culture of death and all its myriad horrors and all the ways it wishes to devour you.
Because that's all the culture of death wants to do, or can do.
You know, it offers nothing but nothingness.
It gives nothing in return for the everything it takes from you.
Which really is a bargain that should be very easy to turn down.
Now let's get to our headlines.
It's proudly veteran-owned, employs a US-based customer service team, and absolutely refuses to spend money on fake news networks.
Not to mention, Pure Talk's service is fantastic.
They're one of the largest networks in the country.
You can get blazing fast data, talk, and text.
For as low as $30 a month, that's probably half of what you're paying for Verizon, AT&T, or T-Mobile.
Pure Talk, the no-contract wireless company, is the only wireless company to offer a 100% money-back guarantee on your first month.
Don't get locked into a multi-year contract with huge penalties.
Switch over to Pure Talk in as little as 10 minutes while keeping your phone and your phone number.
Go to puretalk.com, enter promo code WALSH to save 50% off your first month.
That's puretalk.com, promo code WALSH.
Pure Talk is simply smarter wireless.
So we're going a little out of order here, I guess, because I'm saving the State of the Union stuff for the end, for the daily cancellation, where it belongs.
And there I'll give my full take on the address, and this particular address, and also just the State of the Union address in general.
And it'll be very exciting, I promise.
Well, maybe not, but...
We're going to do it anyway.
There's one part of the speech that won't be in that segment, but I can't neglect to mention, so we'll touch on it here.
Biden invited the parents of Tyree Nichols to the speech, and then used them as a platform to launch into a thing about racist cops, which of course is not only just abhorrent and gratuitous to use these grieving parents that way.
I think it's not at all surprising coming from Biden and Democrats.
But it's a sick and depraved thing to do.
And also, even more baseless than usual, given that Nichols was killed by black cops from
a department run by a female black police chief.
So there's just, as we've covered, there's no racism angle here at all.
Which is why, even though Biden brought the parents in, cuz he had to, and Kamala Harris
went to the funeral, which is another completely gratuitous and disgusting thing that politicians
do.
Going to a funeral of someone you didn't know.
I mean, it's one thing if this is some sort of dignitary or head of state or something like that, and then a politician attends the funeral.
But an average citizen going to the funeral?
It's like you are blatantly politicizing, your very presence is meant to politicize the funeral of this person.
So yeah, they're doing all that, but at the same time the media has basically moved on from Tyree Nichols completely.
If you think back to George Floyd, when we were a couple weeks out from George Floyd, it was still very much in the headlines and would remain there for months.
Tyree Nichols, they've already moved on because, although they look for this racial angle, it's not convincing to people.
They haven't been able to make that case.
They can try to racialize it, and they did try, but it fell flat, and so they kind of moved on.
It was this part of speech that started with Tyree Nichols that really stood out to me, and here it is.
Most of us in here have never had to have the talk, the talk that brown and black parents have had to have with their children.
Bo, Hunter, Ashley, my children, I never had to have the talk with them.
I never had to tell them if a police officer pulls you over, turn your interior lights on right away.
Don't reach for your license.
Keep your hands on the steering wheel.
Imagine having to worry like that every single time your kid got in a car.
I mean, first of all, there are a lot of talks with Hunter Biden that he probably should have had, and he didn't.
But this whole thing about the talk, I mean, we hear this all the time now about, the talk, the talk, the talk that black parents have to have with their precious children, and no other family has to have the talk.
All the black families, they know about the talk, the talk.
Oh, shut up.
What are you talking?
And everyone, you know, and then all these stupid white people go along with it.
Oh, you're right.
I've never heard of that talk.
I can't imagine.
I can't imagine having to hear that talk about how to handle getting pulled over.
I can't imagine.
It's nonsense, okay?
Black families are not the only ones who have that talk, okay?
It's just that I had the talk.
I remember that talk from my dad.
We didn't make a big deal out of it.
It wasn't like there didn't need to be emotional, dramatic music playing in the background.
It didn't traumatize me to hear the talk, but it's like every competent parent Has this talk with their kid when they first start driving.
I can remember it, I can remember it, when I got a license and I was able to drive on my own for the first time.
And I remember my dad explaining to me, if you get pulled over, make sure to listen to what the officer says.
Say, you know, yes officer, no officer.
Keep your hands in view.
Just comply with whatever they say.
If you don't agree with the ticket, don't argue with the police officer.
Nothing's going to come of that.
Well, you argue it in court.
And that was it.
That was the talk that my dad said to me.
And when my kids start driving, I'll say the same thing to them.
I mean, what's the other option?
It's like you're teaching your kid to drive.
Are you not going to say anything about what happens if they get pulled over?
It's not a big deal.
Of course you're going to have that talk.
Why is that a traumatic, terrible thing that you would have to explain?
You should explain that to your kid.
And it's not because we're excusing police brutality, or anything like that, or being bootlickers of the state, okay?
It's just, when you're having an interaction with a police officer, because you've allegedly committed some sort of infraction like speeding, it just makes sense to not Exacerbate the situation or make it worse than it needs to be.
The goal here, because you are having interaction with an agent of the state who's armed and carrying a gun and all the rest of it, so the goal here is to make that interaction as simple and quick as possible.
And if you, again, if you don't agree with something, if you don't think he should have been pulled over, if you think that he was wrong about this or that, then you go to court.
You're not going to have any success arguing with him.
He's already made his decision.
So then that's what court is for.
That's why we have that.
That's one of the advantages of living in an allegedly civilized society.
We have courts.
You go to them and you argue with them about it.
Yes, you should have this talk.
Everyone has this talk.
So shut up about the talk.
You know, it's this, and again, what's so wrong?
Why is that a problem?
The fact that you have to have that talk with your kids.
It's this whole concept of victim blaming, right?
Where it's somehow wrong to give people advice on how to avoid becoming a victim.
That's good advice to give.
And you also know something else too, that nearly every alleged police brutality video that we see, And many of them, I say alleged, because many of these police brutality videos, in reality, when you have the full context, you realize that it's actually not police brutality, but sometimes it is.
I mean, Tyree Nichols, almost everyone agrees.
I would say everyone.
I haven't heard anyone that's saying otherwise.
So, from what I've seen, everyone agrees.
The cops in that case went like several miles over the line.
Wherever the line is, they're way, way over it.
Because they're holding him back and beating him.
And it looks like, I said at the time, it looks like some sort of gang beating.
It doesn't resemble law enforcement at all.
And that's why they were all arrested and charged with murder.
So, there are times when police brutality is legitimately police brutality, but in nearly all these cases, okay, in nearly all of them, not all of them, but nearly all, it starts with someone resisting arrest.
Okay, and what that, now, does that mean?
That just because you resist arrest, it gives the cops the right to kill you.
No.
Okay?
Does that mean that every single person who resists arrest should be killed?
No.
That's not the point.
The point is simply that when you make that decision to start getting aggressive with the cops, you have radically increased your chances of something terrible happening to you.
So why do it?
Now, you can respond all you want by saying, well, I should be able to resist arrest without being killed.
I should be able to do that.
In America, we should be able to resist arrest and not be killed by the cops.
I mean, sure, maybe in some cases, depends on what we mean by resisting arrest.
I guess it depends on how long this goes on and what exactly you're doing.
And are you resisting arrest like the Rashad Brooks case in Atlanta where he steals the cop's weapon in the process and gets killed?
You know, that's one form, and then, or is it like a Tyree Nichols thing?
But regardless, okay?
You have still, like, you can talk all you want about how this is how it should be.
Yeah, you know, I could make an argument that I should be able to walk through the inner city, you know, in the middle of the night, waving a stack of cash in the air.
And skipping along and singing about how I have a wad of cash and I'm waving it in the air.
I should, and I should be able to do that without getting assaulted or killed or robbed.
I should.
Like in a country where everyone is good and decent and nothing bad happens, I should be able to do that.
I should be able to skip down the middle of the West Side Baltimore waving a wad of cash in the air.
And no harm should come to me.
I should be able to.
But I don't happen to live in a universe where that's the reality, unfortunately.
Okay?
And so it's important to tell people, like, yeah, maybe you should be able to, but you can't.
So don't do that.
There are just realities about the world we live in that you should understand, and you should respond accordingly.
You should operate within the boundaries of reality as it exists, not the boundaries of this fantasy world you wished you lived in.
And you should do that for your own sake so you don't die.
And this is an important thing to explain to people, and it's something that your parents ought to explain to you.
So back to police brutality.
You start resisting arrest.
Whether or not you should be able to do that without getting killed is irrelevant.
You've greatly increased your chance of getting injured or killed by doing that.
Why do it?
What could you possibly gain from doing it?
No one ever asks this question.
We're not allowed to ask it.
In every video where someone's resisting arrest and then gets killed, even if it was an unjustified killing, we're not allowed to ask, what was your plan here?
What did you think was, why do it?
Think this through for a second.
Best case scenario, you resist arrest.
Okay, so let's do the plan here.
Step one, resist arrest.
What are the other steps?
Do you think you'll resist arrest and then they'll just say, oh, never mind, we're not gonna arrest you at all.
Oh, you don't, oh, you don't wanna be arrested.
Well, never mind, just go about your, I didn't realize you didn't wanna be.
Well, go ahead, go ahead then, never mind.
That's not gonna happen.
So, like, best case scenario is you resist arrest and maybe you escape.
Unharmed, but then now you're a fugitive, and you've just added a whole bunch of charges that you didn't have before.
And so now you're gonna go to jail for longer when they do catch you than you did before.
More likely, you're not gonna escape, and so maybe they get ahold of you, and they detain you, and you're not injured, but now you have more charges than you would have had before.
So, best case scenario resisting arrest, you take a situation where you were in trouble, and now you're in a lot more trouble.
That's the best case scenario.
There is no other, that's as good as it can get for you.
So why do it?
It is just, it's like, it's utterly self-destructive behavior.
And every time, it's like, it's ridiculous that we're not allowed to point this out.
No one ever asks.
Why are you doing it?
Yeah, these are all talks.
And because, like, none of us are allowed to have this talk in public.
It's so deeply offensive to bring this up.
So maybe parents, yeah, you should probably be having this talk with your kids.
It's a good idea.
Whether your kids are black or white or any other color, this is a talk you should be having with them.
Alright.
Daily Wire reports this.
Former President Donald Trump Promoted baseless claims on social media Tuesday that accused Florida Governor Ron DeSantis of grooming underage girls with alcohol.
Trump's latest attack against the Florida governor, who recently won reelection in Florida with a historic 19.4 point blowout, comes after Trump claimed last week that DeSantis begged him for an endorsement in 2018 and that there were tears coming down from his eyes.
I'm sure there were.
Why make up lies that no one, yeah, Trump, DeSantis went to Trump crying and saying, will you endorse me?
All right.
Trump promoted a post that showed a grainy photograph of someone that is alleged to be DeSantis standing next to several women at a party who appear to be roughly the same age.
The post claimed, here is Ron DeSantimoni's grooming high school girls with alcohol as a teacher.
Trump promoted the post on a social media channel writing, that's not Ron, is it?
He would never do such a thing.
The New York Times previously reported the photo was published by a blog run by a Democrat super PAC, and that two former female students said parties that DeSantis attended took place after they had graduated.
Okay.
So Trump's latest line of attack is that DeSantis once took a picture with some former students.
That's it.
That's literally all.
That's what they have.
They have DeSantis standing with some former students in a picture.
And then Trump basically directly accuses him of grooming them with alcohol, which is defamatory, made-up nonsense.
And Trump, again, is borrowing this line of attack from left-wing groups that already tried it against DeSantis during a campaign that ended with DeSantis utterly crushing the competition in a landslide and flipping a bunch of blue counties red.
And so Trump is seeing that and saying, well, that line of attack didn't work at all in a general election.
So now I'm going to try it in a primary.
So it didn't work in a general election.
In fact, a bunch of Democrat voters found that line of attack so unconvincing that they voted for DeSantis.
So now I'm going to try it against DeSantis with the Republican base and see how it works out.
It is not a great political strategy.
You know, one thing about Trump is that people have, even as critics, have often in the past commended, or if not commended, at least remarked upon Trump's great political instincts.
But, I mean, recently, we're not seeing much evidence of that.
And his whole approach to DeSantis, this is the approach of somebody with no political instincts whatsoever.
Politically, the whole thing is catastrophically stupid.
And his attacks against DeSantis just get dumber and weaker every time.
And it looks desperate.
And as Trump continues to obsess over DeSantis, DeSantis has nothing in return.
Instead, he's governing his state, and it just makes Trump look absolutely pathetic.
Meanwhile, also, and this is where Trump has to be careful, though, you know, to say that Trump should be careful, there's no point in saying it, but he opens himself up to lines of attack that, yeah, didn't work against him in 2016, but there's a difference.
In 2016, there wasn't anyone in the race with enough credibility with the base to attack Trump on almost anything.
You know, he was Teflon Don in 2016.
He's not Teflon anymore.
There are lines of attack that land, and especially, and that can often depend on who is launching the attack.
The other thing about Trump is that, again, in 2016, there was really nobody going after Trump in the primaries from his right.
Almost all the attacks were from the left, where they were about Trump is mean, he's a jerk, and all of that is kind of a version of a leftist attack.
And most of it, he's not civil, it's all kind of attacks from the left or from the middle.
There was almost no one going after him from the right.
Well, DeSantis is to Trump's right.
On everything.
I mean, on every issue, DeSantis is firmly to Trump's right.
And so, if DeSantis ever does engage, and eventually he's going to have to if he does run against Trump, if he actually gets into the race, he's going to have some credibility that none of these other people did.
So, the point is, certain line of attacks that didn't work against Trump in 2016, they may suddenly become more effective.
And so, if Trump is bringing up, oh, look at this photo years ago of DeSantis standing with some women.
Well, it's pretty easy for DeSantis to respond by saying, oh, really?
Well, here's a photo of you standing with Jeffrey Epstein, and then a bunch of other photos of you also standing with Epstein.
I mean, if you want to bring this, if you want to go there, now, does that mean that Trump was guilty of anything just because he took pictures?
Epstein took pictures with almost every prominent person in D.C.
and in Hollywood and all the rest of it.
So that in itself doesn't prove anything.
But the point is, if you're going to go there, if you want to make wild insinuations based on photos from years ago, if you want to go there, then we can go there.
But you are going to come out looking a lot worse than me.
That could be DeSantis' response.
Yeah, it didn't work in 2016.
People brought up the Epstein pictures.
Didn't matter.
I don't know if he could be so...
Sure, that'll be the case this time around.
I mean, this is another mistake that Trump is making, is that he, and a lot of his, it seems like a lot of people in his circle, it's the same deal.
They're convinced that it's 2016 forever, and that nothing ever changes.
And so he could just do the exact same thing he's doing in 2016, and it'll work, but it's not.
I mean, times change, and these days they change very quickly, and political realities change very quickly.
And so just because, there could be something that worked really well in 2016 and it falls flat now.
And Trump has not kept up.
And the biggest problem for Trump is that, and I think this is what makes him so insecure about DeSantis, is that people.
People like DeSantis, the Republicans like DeSantis, for what he's done and what he's currently doing.
That's why they like DeSantis.
Yeah, they like the things that he says and all that, but that's very secondary.
That's not the point.
We can see what he's actually done while he's governor, and he's actually put this stuff into action.
And that's hard to get around.
It's like you can't argue with his results, and Trump really isn't, and he knows he can't.
So instead he's kind of around, he's picking at the edges.
And it looks pathetic.
All right.
Here's a great moment here in a BBC interview with Bill Gates challenging him on his environmentalist credentials.
Listen to this.
What do you say to the charge that if you are a climate change campaigner, but you also travel around the world in a private jet, you're a hypocrite?
Well, I buy the gold standard of funding Climeworks to do direct air capture that far exceeds my family's carbon footprint.
And I spend billions of dollars on climate innovation.
So, you know, should I stay at home and not come to Kenya and learn about farming and malaria?
Anyway, I mean, I'm comfortable with the idea that not only am I not part of the problem by paying for the offsets, but also through the billions that my breakthrough energy group is spending, that I'm part of the solution.
This is all science, right?
This is the way that science works, is that if you fly around a plane a lot, you send a lot of carbon emissions into the air, you are changing the weather, you're causing hurricanes and tornadoes.
I don't know if they've tied that one in yet to climate change, but that's the one natural disaster that I think they haven't been able to get to.
They haven't quite been able to explain how even earthquakes are our fault, but as far as I know they haven't yet, but eventually they'll figure it out.
You know, that's what happens when you just live.
You live your life as a modern person.
You're causing all these weather events.
And these are all weather events that existed before any of this modern technology existed.
But yet somehow now we cause them.
I don't know.
Yet, you can erase your own impact by also, as he says, if you spend a lot of money on climate initiatives.
So, somehow the money mitigates the carbon that you've emitted, and so then you are no longer, whereas before you would have contributed to the hurricane, then the money comes in and it wipes out that contribution.
I don't quite understand the science.
I'm trying to understand the science, but I'm sure that there is real science behind this.
I just it's probably it's of course it's my this is what they would you know they'd be quick to point out that it's like my it's my problem just too stupid to understand the science behind all this.
But Bill Gates understands the science.
I mean why should we trust him as an expert on climate?
Probably for the same reason we're supposed to trust him as an expert on vaccines and COVID.
Because he's a really rich guy who's been around for a while.
So it means he knows everything.
All right.
Here's another clip I want to play for you.
Joy Reid on MSNBC has her own reaction to the Grammys, where she's sort of spiking the cultural football.
And it's taking it in a different direction from where a lot of her compatriots on the left have done.
And she says a few things here that are unintentionally kind of interesting.
So I want to play this clip.
I hadn't watched in years, but I actually really enjoyed it.
Although I'm not sure everybody else did.
It was, to put it mildly, a celebration of the very thing the American right has turned into its latest anti-wokeness boogeyman.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion.
The show opened with Puerto Rican singer Bad Bunny singing 99% in Spanish.
Then host Trevor Noah walked and talked through a room that was diversity, equity, and inclusion in human form.
The first country Americana artist to perform, Randy Carlisle.
So the room at the Grammys.
He's also, he's walking down in the room with all the famous people.
That's diversity, equity, and inclusion incarnate.
That's what, that's really, so it's a bunch of really rich elite people from the same socioeconomic, with the same socioeconomic status, the same kind of cultural stratosphere, and who all believe the same things and are, you know, identical ideologically.
That's diversity, equity, inclusion.
A bunch of rich, very rich, wealthy, prominent, She's right, actually.
That is what DEI is all about.
is diversity and equity inclusion.
She's right actually, that is what DEI is all about.
It's just interesting to hear her admit that, but continue.
Was introduced by her wife and daughters.
We saw the first trans artist win a Grammy, Kim Petras, who has a hit song with Sam Smith, the British singer who came out in 2019 as non-binary.
Black acting superstar Viola Davis became an EGOT, winning a Grammy to add to her Golden Globe, Oscar, and Tony awards.
Lizzo performed with her amazing choir of many-sized singers.
Beyoncé took home her 32nd Grammy to become the most Grammy-decorated singer of all time, besting, and I had to look this up, Hungarian-British conductor George Salti.
Record of the Year went to Harry Styles, a British male singer who frequently puts on dresses to pose in magazines and is a sex symbol to women and men because of it.
And there was a 15-minute epic tribute to the 50th anniversary of hip-hop.
So, yeah, the culture wars are over, and the left won, like, total defeat.
I can only imagine the heads exploding in red states.
I imagine Ron DeSantis is somewhere stalking through his governor's mansion trying to figure out how to ban the airing of the Grammys in Florida and take away CBS's tax exemptions.
No educational value!
Queer theory!
Black music!
It's a helpful reminder that despite the almost hysterical war, the right is waging to take the culture.
All right.
Good.
So you heard that.
Now, a couple of things here.
So as I said, she's she's sort of spiking the football and say, well, you see, the left won the culture war.
OK, well, that's true, Joy.
Then to begin with, can you stop acting persecuted?
You just said you won.
You won, right?
And that means there's no more systemic racism or sexism or any of the rest of it.
Because you won.
You won the culture.
You took over.
And that's, if you want to take the approach of bragging about it and say, you see, we won.
Fine.
I think that's actually a much more honest approach.
But then you can't in the very next breath say, and we're so, we won, we run everything, and we're persecuted.
We're the champions and we're oppressed.
You can't do that.
You have to choose a lane.
So are you the football spiking victors?
You're dancing on the graves of your fallen enemies?
Are you that?
As you portray here, or are you practically still in chains, enslaved?
Nothing's gotten better.
In fact, it's gotten worse, and you're oppressed.
You're intersectional.
You're black, and you're female, and so you're oppressed in many different ways, with different angles.
Which one?
It cannot be both, Joy.
It can't be both.
So you have to choose.
And I'll tell you which one is the correct one.
It's sort of the first option that you won.
It's sort of that.
You did win the institutions.
So you're right.
You won the institutions.
You claimed the institutions.
Institutionally, it's an all-out victory, as you say.
The Grammys are institutional.
They are an institutional award show.
It's the music industry.
It is a billion-dollar industry, a multi-billion-dollar institution awarding itself, congratulating itself.
Other people with institutional power, like yourself, are very interested in the Grammys, while people that do not have institutional power, just regular people, look at this spectacle and say, why should I care about this at all?
So that's what you won.
You won the institutions.
And from there, the institutions that have been all ideologically captured, every single one, from there, the institutions are trying to impose themselves and impose the left-wing worldview on the population.
And as far as that goes, as far as the population goes, you do have an enormous advantage because you, again, you run all the institutions that people need and people rely on and turn to, and you control the flow of information.
You control a lot of stuff.
And that gives you an enormous advantage when it comes to capturing the people's minds and hearts as well.
But it has not been an all-out victory there.
Not quite.
Even with disadvantage.
And especially on some of the more recent efforts.
You know, so like institutionally, you can, we can give an award to two biological males and claim that they're something other than male, and so therefore this is a great victory for diversity or whatever.
And the institutions will give that award, and other people within the institutions will applaud that and say, isn't that so beautiful, such a wonderful thing.
But regular people, most of them, they look at that and they're not so convinced.
They look at, you know, chubby Sam Smith and we're told that he's, well, no, he's not a male, he's non-binary.
What?
What is that?
That's what regular people say.
They're not convinced.
And even though there are potentially incredible consequences for not, for failing to be convinced.
Like, we're punished for not being convinced.
And still, most people aren't.
And most people also are certainly not convinced.
That Tim Petras, who now calls himself Kim Petras, is actually a woman, because he was mutilated at the age of 16.
The idea that that mutilation makes him a woman, or that his perception of himself as a woman makes him one, people aren't convinced by that either.
So you do have the institutions.
The question is whether you can capture everyone's minds and souls from there.
It's what you're trying to do.
You haven't quite succeeded.
And that's where the battle is going to really be won or lost.
But I'm glad we can agree again that you are not oppressed, that you are in a position of power, that you own the institutions, that you now claim incredible status and privilege and power.
I'm glad you're finally admitting that.
So stop whining.
Let's get to the comment section.
Tie My Shoes says, Matt was definitely a Power Rangers kid growing up.
Actually, I was not.
They were too diverse for me.
I didn't like the diversity.
Media matters.
You know you can't help yourself.
You gotta take that clip.
Daily Wire host complains Power Rangers too diverse.
Actually, I couldn't get into Power Rangers because it's my certain hipster inclination, maybe even as a seven-year-old.
And they were too mainstream, really.
That was the problem.
I was a hipster when it came to my 90s network TV bargain bin superhero squads.
And that's why I liked VR Troopers.
And a lot of you kids, you don't know anything about the VR Troopers.
But they were, because the Power Rangers came along, and then a whole bunch of other shows that were just like exactly the Power Rangers with a different name.
And they kind of, you know, you had the Power Rangers, which was the, maybe we'll call it the Target brand, and then you had the Walmart brand, and then you had the Kmart brand.
VR Troopers were maybe a Walmart brand, and then there was, what was it, there was also Was there something called the Beetleborgs?
I think that existed too, or I just made that up.
And that was, maybe that was a Kmart brand.
But anyway, I was more into those.
I was into the, you know, I was into the ones that didn't have quite the same following.
All right.
Cocktails and Consul says, Disney, Disney, slaves made this country.
Well, slaves also make Disney's crappy merchandise in China.
Very good point.
Should have brought that up myself.
Ha Lokri says, I disagree with Matt about the young boys beating a nine-year-old girl.
Of course it looked and was savage, but in society where boys are thought they're toxic, that girls are better, that they can humiliate you and hit you without being hit back, you can expect these things to be happening more and more.
It's not justifying, but a possible explanation why it did happen.
I didn't say he doesn't justify it, but I think the only reason you say that is, if not to justify it, you are mitigating.
It does appear to me that you're at least slightly trying to mitigate this.
And I'll be the first to say that this message of toxic masculinity is very harmful to men and to boys, and much of what you said there I agree with, but that does not apply When a nine-year-old girl is being viciously beaten.
None of that applies.
This is surely a matter of parenting.
I mean, that could happen in a world, in a culture that's very encouraging and uplifting and empowering to boys.
That could still happen.
If a boy is growing up in a home where there's just emotional and spiritual chaos, and he's totally deprived of any kind of moral formation, and his dad is not present.
His dad is either not present because he's not physically present, he's actually gone, or he's at the very least not emotionally and spiritually, morally present in the home.
And that's what leads to situations like what we saw.
Mike says, Matt, I'm a father of a nine-year-old myself, and if that was my daughter, I'd be in prison, and that teenage boy would be in the hospital if he's lucky.
Yeah, a lot of comments like this, and I have a nine-year-old daughter too, and I can't, you know, you see things like this, you can't help but imagine your own child in a situation like that, and what I would want to do to that son of a b**** if I saw Someone treated my daughter that way.
Well, I can't even say it out loud.
Or at least I shouldn't.
What that kid certainly needs is for someone to teach him a lesson.
A very, very harsh lesson in a very, very tough way.
And I just can't.
I would be blind with rage.
I was pretty much blind with rage seeing it when it was not my own daughter.
And if it was my daughter, at least I'd be able to plead temporary insanity in court.
I'd have that going for me.
But, I will say, with that said, you know, I always think this when we see videos like this, I hesitate to go into the whole, if that was my child, thing.
I hesitate, and I don't know if this girl has a father at home or not, and that hasn't been mentioned in any of the articles, so she might, she might not, I have no idea.
But assuming she does, I think the...
If that was my child, I'd beat the hell out of that kid.
Some of that stuff, even though I agree with it, and I mean, I can relate to it emotionally for sure, I think it can cast a kind of unfair light on the actual parents of the little girl.
Because the obvious sort of implication, even if we don't mean it this way, is that, well, we would beat that punk to a pulp because we love our daughters.
And so if that punk does not get beaten to a pulp, then I guess her parents don't love her that much.
That to me seems to be the implication.
So that's why I don't like to say it.
I can also imagine being in the parent's position and hearing all these people say, oh, if that was my kid, here's what I would do.
And you're not doing that.
And so now not only has this horrible thing happened to your daughter, but now you've also got these feelings of guilt and like you're less of a man because you're not reacting that way.
But what I can also realize is that if you're actually in that, it's one thing if you're talking theoretically, but it actually happens to your own child.
Now you're in that position.
And yes, of course you want to find that kid and wring his neck, but you also realize, because now this is a reality for you, that if you do that, you are going to go to prison.
You will.
You'll go to prison for that.
And then, now your daughter already has the trauma of being viciously beaten that way, and now you're adding the trauma of being deprived of her father because he's in prison.
And now your wife loses her husband because he's in prison.
And why do you want to do that in the first place?
You want to get this vengeance, you know, at least in part because you're so angry and you want to let your anger out, which emotionally makes sense.
But, so in service to your own anger, you're going to deprive your family of a husband and a father.
And so I can imagine that if you're actually in that position, now you have to really weigh those things.
And so, it would make a lot of sense to say, like, I can't, as much as I want to react that way, I can't do that to my, I cannot add insult to injury to my kid.
Which is all to say, this is the kind of lose-lose situation that is created in a country.
It's the consequence of living in an unjust society filled with animals who do monstrous things and are not held accountable.
That's the consequence.
You create these lose-lose situations.
And you create a lot of victims, and victims' families, who end up feeling terrible no matter what.
Like, no matter what.
That happens to your daughter, no matter what you do from there.
You feel terrible because it happened to her, and you're left with guilt no matter what, no matter how you react.
Maybe you go after the kid you go to prison, now you feel guilty for that.
You don't, you feel guilty for that.
It's a lose-lose, which is why we should have, which is why the institutions that are supposed to be in charge of enacting justice should do it.
For the sake of the victims and their families.
To celebrate Presidents Day this year, The Daily Wire is launching our Presidents for Sale sale, with 40% off new annual memberships.
The big guy got 10%, well, we're going to give you 40%.
Get access to the world of Daily Wire Plus with fearless documentaries, gripping movies, Dennis Prager's The Masters program, and the entire library of Jordan Peterson's work, including new productions like Exodus, Logos and Literacy, and On Marriage, all available to watch right now.
Coming down the pipeline to a TV or laptop near you.
New episodes of Ben Shapiro's The Search, Exodus Part 2, our much-anticipated DW Kids content, and Pendragon later this year.
To sweeten the deal, like ice cream, we're also going to give you up to 40% off select items in the Daily Wire shop.
So you're getting a lot of stuff.
Take advantage of our President's for Sale sale today.
You know that he would.
So just go to dailywire.com slash subscribe to become a member today.
That's dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
As promised, I've saved any discussion of the State of the Union for the end of the show, but perhaps I also maybe have skipped the subject entirely, because the reality is the State of the Union is an absurd, monarchical pageant designed in its current form to give the President of the United States a chance to deliver a campaign speech on primetime television, on the taxpayer's dime, and under false pretenses.
It's a show, a spectacle.
What the media has tried to turn into the political equivalent of the Super Bowl, but it will never be the Super Bowl because people care about the Super Bowl and they remember it for more than a day.
And if it's a really good game, people will remember, you know, those games for longer than that and talk about it for years.
Whereas nobody specifically remembers the details of any State of the Union address at all, even 30 minutes after it concludes.
Because the address doesn't matter.
It certainly does nothing for the country.
Whatever is said during the speech could just as easily be, you know, communicated through a written statement from the White House.
And most of it will be stump speech, red meat type stuff that we've already heard a million times.
The country's not at all helped by it, by the State of the Union.
And even politically it doesn't matter.
It doesn't succeed in doing the one thing it is really designed to do, which is to give the president a chance to boost his poll numbers.
It can't succeed in that because most people aren't watching it, and even the ones who do watch it will forget nearly every detail about it as soon as their head hits the pillow that same night.
Once 24 hours have passed, the speech may as well have taken place a century ago in some far-off place and delivered in a foreign language, as far as anyone's concerned.
After a day at most, not one person in the country will remember anything that was said.
That includes, in this case, the president himself, who didn't know what he was saying while he was saying it.
Nobody did, in fact.
Much of the speech consisted of slurred gibberish, which the audience applauded because they assumed that they were supposed to applaud.
I guess just based on context clues, like this moment, for example.
Make no mistake, if you try anything to raise the cost of presidential jobs, I will veto it.
Oh, there's the standing ovation.
I have no idea what roo-roo-jubs are, but apparently there are people out there who want to raise the cost of them.
No worry, though.
Biden will veto that, so don't be concerned.
He will make sure that everyone can afford roo-roo-jubs.
We will all get as many roo-roo-jubs as we want.
That's one promise that we can count on Biden to keep.
We'll have to count them, to keep the promise anyway, because no one knows what the promise is, so we'll have to take his word for it.
At other points, Biden would start randomly screaming for reasons that weren't clear based on the context.
Autocracy's grown weaker, not stronger.
Name me a world leader who changed places with Xi Jinping.
Name me one!
Name me one!
Settle down.
This guy's had one too many.
We're Roo-Roo-Jubs.
I mean, by the way, what world leader would trade places?
Probably most of them.
But also, why are you yelling at us?
Well, I know why.
That's a rhetorical question.
Randomly screaming, not being able to regulate your volume, these are classic symptoms of Alzheimer's.
And I don't say that as a joke.
It's just like the reality.
The President of the United States is senile, and we are watching him physically and mentally decay right in front of us.
If there is anything that could possibly make the State of the Union memorable, that may be it.
As for the actual content of the speech itself, to the extent that we can tell what the content was supposed to be, it of course mostly consisted of lies and misdirections like this part where Biden pretends to stand up to Big Pharma.
Many things that we did are only now coming to fruition.
We said we were doing this and we said we passed the law to do it, but people didn't know because the law didn't take effect until January 1 of this year.
We capped the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors on Medicare.
People are just finding out.
I'm sure you're getting the same calls I'm getting.
Look, there are millions of other Americans who do not or are not on Medicare, including 200,000 young people With type 1 diabetes, you need this insulin to stay alive.
Let's finish the job this time.
Let's cap the cost of insulin for everybody at $35.
Folks, the big pharma's still gonna do very well, I promise y'all.
I promise you, they're gonna do very well.
So fact check, actually Trump capped the price of insulin and Biden shut down the program when he came into office.
Also, as a general principle, no Democrat on the national stage, at least of all Biden himself, can pretend to be standing up against Big Pharma.
The Democrat Party and Big Pharma are joined at the hip.
I mean, they are a dynamic duo.
They're madly in love with each other.
They're the modern-day Romeo and Juliet.
Let's not forget that the Biden administration teamed up with the pharmaceutical companies in an effort to force Americans to have Or be injected with one of Big Pharma's drugs, the vaccine.
So that was, that's bite.
And it's not just that.
The Democrats are also funneling countless children into the Big Pharma wood chipper, putting them on chemical castration drugs and hormones.
The Democrat Party works very hard every day to increase Big Pharma's profits and to tighten their stranglehold on the American public.
That's the truth that they hope you're too stupid to notice.
But this posturing against Big Pharma was all part of what was supposed to be The kind of mainstream, popular portion of the speech.
Problem is that the Democrats, at this point, can't even pretend to hold mainstream views for very long.
Which is why Biden was forced to dedicate a large chunk of this section to some issues that, while perhaps popular, also don't exactly rise to the level of importance that a primetime presidential address would allegedly seem to call for.
Like this, watch.
We're going to ban surprise resort fees that hotels charge on your bill.
Those fees can cost you up to $90 a night at hotels that aren't even resorts.
The idea that cable, internet, and cell phone companies can charge you $200 or more if you decide to switch to another provider.
Give me a break.
We can stop service fees on tickets to concerts and sporting events and make companies disclose all the fees up front.
And we'll prohibit airlines from charging $50 round-trip for family just to be able to sit together.
Baggage fees are bad enough.
Airlines can't treat your child like a piece of baggage.
Now I'll admit that this part of the speech did resonate with me personally because Biden is simply listing a bunch of oddly specific things that he finds personally annoying and promising to ban them.
And as fans of this show know, that is exactly how I would handle the State of the Union if I was president.
It'd be exactly the same thing.
And another thing, I'm tired of sitting at a table in the food court at the mall where the table's a little wobbly because one of the legs on the table is loose.
We're gonna ban wobbly tables.
How are you supposed to eat your chicken teriyaki in peace when the table's wobbling?
Speaking of which, those fast food Japanese places should include free spring rolls with every order.
I'm tired of paying extra for the spring rolls on my wobbly table.
That's exactly what I would do as president.
I mean, exactly.
And there are a lot of wobbly tables at food courts.
It's really annoying.
So, Biden's never been more relatable to me, personally.
And yet, even I must admit that this is not really what the President should be concerning himself with in an address of this level of alleged importance.
Americans are worried about inflation.
They're worried about being able to afford eggs at the grocery store.
They're not sitting around wallowing in despair over resort fees.
Like, no one is thinking about that.
In fact, many Americans can't afford to take vacations anyway, so baggage fees and resort fees are the last thing that they're going to be worried about.
Finally, once Biden had spent as long as he could, you know, pretending to care about things normal people care about, or even to know what normal people care about, he eventually got around to the one thing that really matters to Democrats.
As far as that goes, everything you need to know can be summed up in this moment here.
Watch.
Congress must restore the right that was taken away in Roe v. Wade and protect Roe v. Wade.
Give every woman a constant right. The vice president and I are doing everything
to protect access to reproductive health care and safeguard patient safety.
But already more than a dozen states are enforcing extreme abortion bans.
Make no mistake about it, if Congress passes a national ban, I will veto it.
Another big applause there.
That was by far and away the biggest applause line of the night.
I mean, the room was dead for most of the speech until it came time to celebrate the murder of children.
You know, that's what gets Democrats really excited.
It's what they really care about.
From there, Biden would call for the passing of the Equality Act, which enshrines into federal law a man's right to use the women's locker room, imposes trans ideology on the entire nation and every institution.
These two things together represent essentially the Democrat Party's entire agenda.
Kill the kids, trans the kids.
All the rest, as far as they're concerned, are extraneous details.
But we didn't need the State of the Union to know that.
In fact, we don't need the State of the Union for anything at all.
I think that's the one thing we learned, yet again.
Which is why this State of the Union address, and all others, past, present, and future, are today cancelled.
That'll do it for this portion of the show.
As we move over to the Member's Block, hope to see you there.
