Ep. 1140 - This Is What Happens When A Nation Abandons Its Fundamental Values
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a new survey reveals that all of the fundamental values that once defined our civilization -- and every other civilization -- are dying away in this country. But this is not an accident. It has been the Left's agenda all along. Also, trans insurrectionists storm the Kentucky state capitol, waging an assault on democracy and our very way of life. A democrat lawmaker screams hysterically at a Republican over gun control. Somehow the democrat thinks he comes off the best in the exchange. The NHL may be pulling back from its gay pride agenda after a small handful of players refuse to go along with it. An important lesson there for all of us. And speaking of important lessons, in our Daily Cancellation I will finally deliver the definitive and unquestioned list of rules for air travel.
- - -
DailyWire+:
Become a DailyWire+ member to gain access to movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3JR6n6d
Pre-order your Jeremy's Chocolate here: https://bit.ly/3EQeVag
Shop all Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/3xuFD43
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
LightStream - Get a special interest rate discount: https://www.lightstream.com/walsh
Balance of Nature - Get 35% off your first order as a preferred customer. Use promo code WALSH at checkout: https://www.balanceofnature.com/
Grand Canyon University - Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University: https://www.gcu.edu/
- - -
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 Waltz Show, a new survey reveals that all of the fundamental values that once defined our civilization, and every other civilization, are dying away in this country.
But this is not an accident.
It has been the left's agenda all along.
We'll talk about that.
Also, trans insurrection has stormed the Kentucky state capitol, waging an assault on our democracy and our very way of life.
A Democrat lawmaker screams hysterically at a Republican over gun control.
Somehow the Democrat thinks he comes off the best in the exchange.
The NHL may be pulling back from its gay pride agenda after a small handful of players refused to go along with it.
An important lesson there for all of us.
And speaking of important lessons, in our daily cancellation I'll finally deliver the definitive and unquestioned list of rules for air travel.
Very important.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
[MUSIC]
If it's time to start making big changes in your life, there's no better place to start than to take control of
your credit card debt.
You need to check out Lightstream.
A credit card consolidation from Lightstream can help you pay off your credit cards and lock in a low fixed interest rate.
Rate start is 7.99% APR with auto pay and excellent credit.
Plus, the rate is fixed, so it will never increase over the life of your loan.
You can get a loan from $5,000 to $100,000 without any fees.
You can even get your money as soon as the day you apply.
Lightstream believes that people with good credit deserve a better loan experience and that's exactly what they deliver.
Just for my listeners, you can apply now to get a special interest rate discount and save even more.
The only way to get this discount is to go to lightstream.com.
L-I-G-H-T-S-T-R-E-A-M dot com slash Walsh.
Subject credit approval rates range from 7.99% APR to 23.99% APR and include 0.5% auto pay
discount.
Lowest rate requires excellent credit.
Terms and conditions apply and offers are subject to change without notice.
Visit Lightstream dot com slash Walsh for more information.
I had originally planned to begin this week with a topic that had to be pushed off after
the trans terrorist shooting at the Christian school here in Nashville.
But now in light of the events of this week, it takes on, I think, an even more, even more
So, on Monday morning, the Wall Street Journal published poll results, which throw into stark relief a certain cultural reality that has been clear to some of us for a long time, but not nearly clear enough to most of us.
The publication reports, quote, Patriotism, religious faith, having children, and other priorities that help define the national character for generations are receding in importance to Americans, a new Wall Street Journal NORC poll finds.
The survey, conducted with NORC at the University of Chicago, a nonpartisan research organization, also finds the country sharply divided by political party over social trends such as the push for racial diversity in businesses and the use of gender-neutral pronouns.
Some 38% of respondents said patriotism was very important to them, and 39% said religion was very important.
That was down sharply from when the journal asked the question for the first time in 1998, when 70% deemed patriotism to be very important and 62% said so of religion.
The share of Americans who say that having children, involvement in their community, and hard work are very important has also fallen.
Tolerance for others, deemed very important by 80% of Americans as recently as four years ago, has fallen to 58% since then.
The only priority the journal tested that has grown in importance in the past quarter century is money, which was cited as very important by 43% in the new survey, which was up from 31% in 1998.
Now, by the way, the fact that people value money is, of course, not in itself a bad thing.
I mean, I value money.
I value money a lot, because it's how I provide for my family.
So it is very important.
But the problem is that while people value money more than they did in the past, they don't value hard work nearly as much, and they don't value having children.
So this tells us that many Americans want money for their own sake, to buy things for themselves, but they don't want to work for it.
So it's like the worst of all worlds.
It's one thing to be hardworking and greedy.
It's not good to be greedy, but if you're hardworking and greedy, you can even achieve great things motivated that way.
But to be greedy and lazy at the same time is, again, the worst of all worlds.
As expected, the gap in values can be seen not just across decades, but also by comparing generations.
The Wall Street Journal again reports, quote, Aside from money, all age groups, including seniors, attached far less importance to these priorities and values than when pollsters asked about them in 1998 and in 2019.
But younger Americans in particular place low importance on these values, many of which were central to the lives of their parents.
Some 23% of adults under age 30 said in the new survey that patriotism was very important to them personally, compared with 59% of seniors ages 65 or older.
Some 31% of younger respondents said that religion was very important to them compared with 55% among seniors.
Only 23% of adults under age 30 said that having children was very important.
And there's a lot more to the results, but those, I think, are the highlights or lowlights, depending on how you look at it.
Now, I normally don't lend a lot of credibility or weight to polls and surveys, but these results simply quantify, help us to visualize something that was already well apparent to anybody who was remotely paying attention.
We are a culture that has increasingly abandoned all of the values and priorities and principles that defined not only past generations of Americans, but all generations of all people who have ever lived anywhere on the planet.
These are for the most part universal, or what used to be universal, human values that are now fading away, dying out in this country.
And here's what we need to understand about all this.
First and foremost, this is the agenda.
These results have been engineered.
It's not the product of happenstance or the inevitable conclusion of the passage of time, as Kamala Harris would say.
Human civilization existed for thousands of years and for thousands of years.
All cultures, everywhere, though separated by time and location, still all valued family, Procreation, religion, patriotism, hard work, achievement.
These values manifested themselves in different ways, obviously took on different forms, but nearly everyone would have agreed on the most basic fundamentals here.
You could have, you know, pick almost any time in the past, in the year 1803 or 1555 or, you know, 300 BC, you could have polled anyone, anywhere, even people removed from each other by oceans or generations, and they would have said, yes, of course I value family.
Yes, of course I want to have children and continue my bloodline and, you know, pass down wealth and prosperity to my progeny.
Yes, of course I love my country, my community, my tribe.
Yes, of course I worship my God or my gods.
Yes, of course I believe that I should work and, you know, do some kind of work and provide for myself and my family.
These are the answers you would have heard anywhere.
It is only now, here, in this culture, at this time, that people will tell you they fundamentally don't care about any of that.
The Left's agenda has been precisely this, to eat away at these core essential human values.
To destroy the very things that have defined individuals and nations for millennia.
These are the things that make a person a person, and a people a people.
And this is also what the culture war is all about.
It's about, on our side, defending these basic values.
When we call ourselves conservatives, this is what we're trying to conserve.
So when you hear someone scoff at the culture war, this is what they're scoffing at.
They're scoffing at the notion that we should even bother defending the core human values that bind a civilization together and ensure its continued flourishing.
When someone dismisses the culture war and says it's silly, it's unimportant, tired of all these culture war issues.
Well, they are dismissing as unimportant and as silly the priorities and beliefs that are rooted deepest in the human soul.
Who cares about priorities and beliefs rooted deepest in the human soul?
What does that matter?
And what happens when those roots are torn out?
Is a new tree planted in its place?
No, there's nothing else to plant.
So all that's left is a hole.
And that's all they intend to leave.
This is the way it always works.
They tear out the thing, and they tear it out by the roots, and they put nothing.
You just have a hole there in the ground.
They want to take away everything, everything you love and value, and replace it with emptiness.
That's why the decline in these values has not been answered with an increase in new values.
Now, sure, people might say they value diversity and inclusion and equity or whatever, but first of all, it doesn't take much dicking to see that they don't really value any of that.
But second, those aren't real values anyway.
Those are slogans.
Those are things that people put on posters.
Those are values for HR seminars, okay?
That's what those values are.
They are not values for nations.
They aren't values for civilizations, for human beings.
In the past, people who valued family and children and God, religion, faith, country, hard work, sacrifice, they were driven by those values to achieve extraordinary things.
Okay, to achieve like everything that we benefit from today.
All the things that we have and the luxuries we take for granted and the rights we take for granted, all of that is given to us by people who value all of the things that we are now discarding.
These are the people who discovered new lands, and who built nations out of wilderness, and invented things, and built things, and made beautiful art, and sailed across seas, and figured out how to fly, and how to go into space.
It requires skill and intelligence to do those things, both of which are also in short supply these days, but you also won't even attempt to do them unless you value something beyond yourself.
A man must know how to do something great, but he must first be motivated to even bother trying.
We used to produce people like that.
The people who built the civilization that we're now destroying.
Because we instilled in them from birth the values that would drive and sustain them in their pursuit of something great.
So, what I'm saying is that when we talk about valuing family, And procreation, children, God, work, country, faith, sacrifice.
These are not just the best values for forming and maintaining a civilization.
They are the only ones.
That's it.
They're the only game in town.
There are no alternatives.
If you do not value those things, then you are left with nothing.
You are left as a person who values nothing.
And you are left with a culture that values nothing.
You either value those or you value nothing.
There are no other options.
Now, there are some who would say, well, if you don't value those things, you know, instead you value yourself.
It's like a selfish thing.
But even that's not exactly true.
Because if you value yourself the way you ought to value yourself, you would care about family, country, children, etc.
You know, if you value yourself, you're not going to embrace your own extinction, the extinction of your bloodline, and say, I don't need to have children, I don't need any purpose in life, I'll die alone and be forgotten and I'm okay with that.
If you value yourself, you wouldn't be okay with that.
So no, instead our culture cultivates a population which values You know, with people and individuals who value, not even really themselves per se, but more specifically, their own comfort and the satisfaction of their own immediate desires above all else.
In Dostoevsky's words, they value the multiplication and rapid satisfaction of desire.
That's what the whole culture is about now.
That's it.
Okay?
You ask somebody the meaning of life, And if they're even articulate enough to explain it, that's what it is to them.
The rapid satisfaction and multiplication of desire.
This is what we have replaced the old values with.
A man isn't driven to love his country and his God to work hard for his family and for his children.
Rather, he's called by the culture to focus on, to champion, to celebrate, and to satisfy his desires.
The more desires, the better.
The more depraved and degenerate, the better.
These are the new values of the new man.
And it's what we're fighting against.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
You need simple, manageable routines to make sure that you're getting the proper nutrition every day, which is why I'm a huge fan of Balance of Nature.
Balance of Nature fruits and veggies are a great way to make sure you're getting essential nutritional ingredients every single day.
Their capsules are packed with 100% whole food that you can take at any time.
Balance of Nature uses a cold vacuum process that preserves the natural antioxidants in 16 whole fruits and 15 whole vegetables and encapsulates them for easy consumption.
They sent a bunch of fruits and veggie capsules down to the studio for my team to try.
The whole team is feeling brighter, healthier, more energetic.
When you're disciplined enough to take care of your health, you reap all kinds of benefits.
Make fruits and vegetables a part of your daily diet.
Your body will thank you.
Right now, Balance of Nature is offering 35% off with your first preferred order.
So go to balanceofnature.com, use promo code WALSH for 35% off.
That's balanceofnature.com, promo code WALSH.
Well, lots of cover here.
We'll start with a report in the AP, Associated Press, which is, the bias in the reporting here will be very obvious to you, but I'll read it as it's written.
Republican lawmakers in Kentucky on Wednesday swept aside the Democratic governor's veto of a bill regulating some of the most personal aspects of life for transgender young people, from banning access to gender-affirming healthcare to restricting the bathrooms they can use.
The votes to override Governor Andy Beshear's veto were lopsided in both legislative chambers, where the GOP wields supermajorities, and came on the next-to-last day of this year's legislative session.
The Senate voted 29-8 to override Beshear's veto.
A short time later, the House completed the override on the veto, 76-23.
As emotions surged, some people protesting the bill from the House gallery were removed and arrested after their prolonged chanting rang out in the chamber.
The protesters, their hands bound, chanted, there's more of us not here, as they waited to be taken away from the Capitol.
So, that's the language of media bias, but in plain English language, what actually happened Is the Republicans in the state legislature tried to pass a bill that is very similar to bills that have been passed in Tennessee and other states banning the mutilation, incastration, sterilization of children, and also stipulating other common sense things like if you're a boy, use the boy's room, if you're a girl, use the girl's room.
Those sorts of things.
The Democratic governor vetoed it.
He said, no, absolutely not.
He said, you know, we want to continue sterilizing and castrating and butchering children.
That's something that that we care deeply about, says the governor.
And, you know, in so many words.
And then the Republicans vetoed, you know, over over overrode his veto.
And then, these protesters that we hear about are actually, according to the left's own language, according to their standards, again, these are insurrectionists.
Left-wing, trans insurrectionists.
Violent, left-wing, trans insurrectionists who hate democracy.
Shade!
They attack the very foundations of this country by invading the capital and we have just there's a lot of videos of
Lot of footage of the scenes that were carried out from there, but here's just one quick clip
So can we see this guy here, the guy with the horns?
Yeah, right there.
So a couple things about this.
First of all, apparently they were eventually escorted out by police.
But one thing we know is that... So here we have, I guess, the trans, the non-binary demon shaman.
This guy ain't going to prison for three years, like the QAnon shaman with the buffalo horns, okay?
He went to prison for, what was it, three years?
That's not happening to this guy.
That's not happening to any of these people.
Even though, again, by their standards, that's what this is.
This is an insurrection.
This is invading the Capitol building.
You have no right to be there staging this protest.
But they're not going to be going to prison for that.
Maybe they were escorted out by police eventually, but they're not going to be going to prison for it.
The other thing, too, that I appreciate, I guess he's dressed up.
So he's got this kind of like priestly garb, clown makeup, devil horns.
When you see these videos of these trans activists, extremists, One thing is when you watch the video, you can really almost, and I'm sitting so close to the screen, I can smell this video.
That's the thing when you see these people, you can smell them through the screen, and that's kind of disturbing.
But what I appreciate about it is that they make it so easy to oppose them, okay?
They always make it so easy.
apparent and so clear who the bad guys are.
Because they'll literally dress as demons.
In case there's any confusion, if you ever become confused about it,
and there shouldn't be because they are protesting in favor of castrating and
sterilizing children, so that's all you should need to know.
But if you ever become a little bit confused, and you see, you know, chaos, and you're looking at these clips, and you're thinking, who's the good guy, who's the bad guy?
Well, the people dressed as demons, they're the bad guys, okay?
So they are making that very clear to you.
And you can't appreciate that much, at least.
Speaking of demons in the Capitol, we go to D.C.
Representative Jamal Bowman, a Democrat, decided to start screaming like a hysterical woman at Representative Thomas Massie, who's a Republican.
And not only just any Republican, by the way, is Thomas Massie.
He's one of the good ones, you know, and there's not a lot, but he's one of the best Republicans in D.C.
by far and away.
And he got into, this is being This is being described by people on social media and some of the media as a shouting match between Thomas Massie and Jamal Bowman.
It is not a shouting match.
This is a one-sided match because only one person is shouting, and that is Jamal Bowman.
He posted the clip that we're about to play.
He posted it on his own Twitter page.
He's very proud of himself.
He thinks that he comes off looking very good here.
Because he was saying things loudly.
And we all know that whoever's saying it the loudest is automatically right.
So we judge rightness by volume, at least that's what they do on the left.
And let's watch the video.
Freaking cowards!
They're gutless!
They're not here!
I'm talking about gun violence!
I'm talking about gun violence!
Carry guns?
You think more guns means more death?
More guns lead to more deaths!
Look at the data!
You're not looking at any data!
You're carrying the water for the gun lobby!
Look at the data!
More guns lead to more deaths!
States that have open carry laws have more deaths!
States that have open carry laws have more deaths!
Are you listening to what I'm saying?
Calm down!
Children are dying!
Nine-year-old children!
Their solution is to have arm and teachers?
Have you ever worked in a school?
It's a yes or no question.
Have you ever worked in the school?
You will not answer my question.
Don't stop and talk to me.
Okay, I'll bring it down a notch.
Have you ever worked in the school?
I worked in the school for 20 years!
I was a teen!
I was screaming before you came and interrupted me!
I worked in the school for 20 years!
I worked in the school 20 years!
I was a teacher, I was a senior counselor, I was a middle school principal, I was in consulting rooms, protecting kids every day of my career!
Child!
Child!
He can't even answer a yes or no question!
Ask him!
Why would they pass legislation?
Why?
Ask him the question!
Ask him right now!
Make him answer!
I really appreciate this video.
I'm glad that he posted it because it really encapsulates, just in less than two minutes there, it really encapsulates the gun debate in this country because you have one side screaming hysterically with nothing to say, okay?
All they have are slogans.
That's all they have.
And also irrelevant, you know, he spends 30 seconds there trying to... It's a yes or no question!
Have you ever worked in a school?
Have you worked in a school?
Have you?
Yes or no question!
What the hell does that have to do with anything?
You think that's the ultimate gotcha?
Why won't you answer the question of whether you worked in a school?
No, I didn't.
So?
Have you ever been a plumber?
Like, what does that have to do with anything?
All he has are these slogans.
And slogans, ad hominem, shouting, and red herrings, irrelevant misnomers, that's it.
And you saw it all there in the video.
So if we were to walk through some of these.
First of all, he says, more guns lead to more death, and he keeps repeating it over.
While Thomas Massie is trying to, okay, calm down.
Calm down, you child.
Let's have a conversation like adults.
More guns, more death!
It's literally a child, okay?
This is the way a child thinks.
More guns, more death!
You are, you are a child.
And the exact context here is that Thomas Massie said, well, if teachers, okay, if you had teachers who were trained and armed, Then they're not going to be defenseless.
He says, well, that's more death.
Walk me through that, Jamal.
How does that work exactly?
Okay, so what you're saying, what you're saying is that when a bad guy with a gun walks into a school building, it is better if the good guys don't, if they are disarmed.
It's better.
So, the bad guy with the gun walks into the school building, shoots her way, in this case, bad woman with a gun, shoots her way into the building.
You would not be in favor of any of the teachers there having guns because you think that if they had guns there'd be more death?
How does that work?
But what, the psychopath mass shooter walks in and then you've got some teachers that have guns and it leads to more death?
Why?
Because what, they just randomly start shooting their own students?
What are you even saying?
Okay, this, the trans terrorist goes up to the second floor.
Start spraying bullets, kills three staff members and three children.
Let's take those staff members for a moment.
They were unarmed, okay, and defenseless.
Are you saying, Jamal, that it's actually better that they were unarmed?
In that situation, the psychopath is there, teachers are there.
The moment before the bullets start flying, Can we improve the situation and improve the odds of the victims by giving them guns or no?
What you're saying is no.
It is better for them to be defenseless.
This is a psychotic point of view.
It's not just factually incorrect and illogical.
It is psychotic.
You are saying that it is better in a situation if you are defenseless.
Now, you might respond and say, well, the better thing is if the bad person isn't there at all and doesn't have a gun either.
Yeah, of course that's better.
Of course it's better if they're not there.
Of course it's better if the shooting isn't happening in the first place.
Of course it's better.
Of course we would all prefer if the mass shooter doesn't show up in the first place.
But they do show up.
And when you're in a situation where they are there, it's better if they weren't.
You wish they weren't, but they are.
So, what do we do now?
How do you mitigate the damage that is about to happen?
Is it better for the victims to remain defenseless, where all they can do is huddle in a corner, or fling themselves defenseless at the psychopath with a gun?
Or, would we like to give them a chance?
He says no, don't give them a chance.
What he's saying is, psychopath with a gun comes into the school, your obligation is to simply die.
To simply die until the police show up.
And if the police show up and if they're courageous and skilled and everything like the National Police Department, then, you know, six people will die in the meantime.
If the police are incompetent and scared, then many more will die.
People will die for over an hour, like in Uvalde.
But what Jamal Bowman is saying is that that's your responsibility.
That's the responsibility of the parents, of the teachers, the staff members, and the students is to simply die because he doesn't want them to have the ability to defend themselves.
He says the states with open carry have more deaths.
Well, I've already spoiled the ending here, but do you know how many states have open carry laws?
45 out of 50.
Nearly every state.
Nearly the entire country has open carry laws.
So when he says that the states with open carry laws have more deaths, he's saying that that applies to almost everybody.
So it's a meaningless statistic.
It doesn't mean anything.
And what he just wants to skip over entirely is that the vast majority of homicides in this country, okay, the vast majority are not happening at the hands of concealed carry permit holders or even people who are open carrying, you know, right-wing red state Gun, second amendment advocates, open carrying.
These are not the people who are carrying out the vast majority of homicides in this country.
They are happening in cities, at the hands of thugs and criminals, and in these cities with strict gun laws already.
The vast majority of cases, they're happening at the hands of people who don't have the legal right to carry those guns in the first place.
They've got criminal records already.
All of that.
That's what they're happening.
But he doesn't want to talk about that either, of course.
He doesn't want to talk about anything.
He just wants to scream.
He wants to scream and then brag about it.
Absolute clown.
Here's some good news.
In the wake of several NHL players refusing to wear pride-themed attire, the league is reportedly considering shelving Pride Night events at its games.
Last week, two brothers who are teammates on the NHL's Florida Panthers refused to wear a pride-themed sweater during the team's warm-up skate, citing their religious beliefs.
Eric and Mark Stahl joined San Jose Sharks goalie James Reimer and Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Ivan Revarov, who had also refused to take part in warm-ups with pride-themed jerseys.
This is very good news, and it's a lesson, for once a good lesson, you know, a positive lesson for the rest of us.
So the NHL went uber woke and they started doing these ridiculous Pride Night things and they're just vomiting rainbow colors all over the place and vomiting it all over the fans and everything.
Most of the NHL players were obedient little cowards and went along with it.
It took how many people?
Four?
Four NHL players, four of them, took a stand and said it wasn't big, dramatic, or anything like that.
They weren't overly confrontational about it.
They weren't confrontational at all.
All they said is, no, I'm not going to... Taking a stand here was simply saying no.
It took four people, four people, to say, no, I'm not doing this.
And already the NHL might be abandoning the whole thing.
And what that tells us is that it doesn't take much.
You have to speak up, and you have to say no.
And if even one person has to go first, and if one person does it, the next person feels more safe to do it, and then the next person, the next person, you have the domino effect.
And oftentimes, it doesn't take much before results happen.
And when we look around the culture and everything, and we see so often, it seems like we're not getting results, and it feels very deflating and hopeless.
Well, in many cases, we're not getting the results because we're not even trying.
Once you try, you start to see the results.
We're seeing this not just in the NHL with Pride Night, I mean, going back to the gender issue.
We're seeing real, you know, it felt like this unstoppable march of gender craziness and gender madness, the trans ideology, on the march for several years.
It felt like there's no stopping it.
But then there was a concerted effort to actually oppose it.
And it wasn't like there was even millions of people all organized against it.
It's really only a comparative few.
But in response to that, we're already seeing results.
So it doesn't take much, but you gotta stand up and say no.
So, lots of credit goes to those NHL players.
More good news!
In an update on a story we talked about yesterday, this is from the Daily Wire, Jocelyn Barry, Press Secretary for Democratic Arizona Governor Katie Hobbs, has resigned after posting an inflammatory tweet suggesting, quote, transphobes should be gunned down in the wake of a woman who identified as transgender killing six people at a Christian school in Nashville.
We talked about this yesterday.
This is Jocelyn Barry, the spokeswoman for Katie Hobbs, posted this meme, you know, this is what we do with transphobes, and it's an image of a woman holding a gun.
Posted that, you know, not five seconds after the shooting when maybe she didn't hear about it.
Hours after the shooting on the same day, she definitely knew about it.
She posted that anyway.
And we talked about it on the show yesterday, and it was up for almost an entire day.
Wasn't even deleted.
Finally, the backlash started to gain some momentum, and she shut down her account.
And then finally, several hours later, after many calls from people on the right saying, you gotta fire this woman, this is unacceptable.
And they were calls, by the way, almost entirely from the right.
There were a few exceptions.
And some notable ones.
I saw actually Keith Olbermann.
Was maybe the one guy on the left, and I was off to say, credit where it's due, the one time in my life I'll give any credit at all to Keith Olbermann, but Keith Olbermann tweeted something saying that this is unacceptable and it's not appropriate and she should be fired.
Now, he did follow that up by admitting that his main concern is that when Democrats do this kind of thing, it only gives ammunition to the right, so that's what he's concerned about, but still.
He said that she should resign, but it was mostly, you know, 99.9% people on the right calling for this.
And then the governor did cave, put out a statement saying, the governor does not condone violence in any form.
This administration holds mutual respect at the forefront of how we engage with one another.
Sure.
The post by the press secretary is not reflective of the values of the administration.
The governor has received and accepted the resignation of the press secretary.
Resignation, quote unquote.
What that means is that we successfully got her fired.
Which is a very good thing.
She deserved to be fired.
And this was us holding them to their own standard.
That I don't care, you know.
The other side can say, oh, now you're engaging in cancel culture.
This is cancel culture.
Sure, whatever.
Call it what you want.
I really don't care.
Call it what you want.
But you have set up the rules, okay?
And now we're going to force you to play by them.
And you can whine and complain all you want.
It doesn't matter.
Very glad that this woman lost her job and her livelihood.
I could not be happier.
And I hope that she is unable to get any other job.
That's what I hope.
All right.
I want to play this for you.
One of the saddest videos that I've seen in some time, or I'll say one of the most pathetic videos that I've seen in some time.
Richard Dawkins was interviewed by Piers Morgan, and this doesn't need a lot of setup, but he was, a subject was broached with Richard Dawkins that Piers Morgan thought, he didn't mean, you could tell he didn't mean this to be a gotcha, he didn't think it'd be like a difficult question, but Richard Dawkins was terrified to talk about it.
And was not hiding his fear at all.
Let's watch this.
Big debate about this ISIS bride, Shamima Begum, whether she should be allowed to come back to this country.
Do you have a view about that?
I rather not say.
You rather not say?
I haven't studied it enough.
Well, she was married to an ISIS fighter.
Yeah, I know.
But she was 15 when she went out there.
The debate, really, is was she groomed to be part of this terror group in Syria?
And as such, should we show mercy and allow her back to this country?
Yes, I'm not going to say about that.
Are you worried about, I mean, do you get threats because of the positions you've taken on some of these things?
When you saw what happened to Salman Rushdie, didn't send a shudder through you?
Are you saying, no, you don't want to talk about it?
Yes.
Right.
I mean, that's interesting in itself.
Because there are areas which you would prefer not to discuss.
Yes.
I should have said that before we started.
Yeah.
No, but listen, I think it's sad that you can't.
I don't think anything should be off limits in interviews with people like you.
The whole point of the world's smartest thinkers is we ought to be able to have free and open debate.
But I don't think we do, because people use murderous Retribution against free speech.
Wow.
That is actually brutal.
That's tough to watch.
And I'm not someone, and maybe it wouldn't surprise you to learn, I'm not someone with a terrible amount of respect for Richard Dawkins.
But this is actually why.
You know, it's not, obviously he's an outspoken atheist and all that, so I'm going to disagree with him on those grounds.
This is actually why I've never had a whole lot of respect for him, because I just haven't bought, you know, he has this reputation, or had anyway in the past, certainly not anymore, of being a fearless, independent thinker who's going to say what he thinks and all that, and I never bought it, and here you see.
He's too afraid to even speak words about it.
He won't say anything.
He's sitting there.
I don't think I've seen, I've seen people dodge questions before because they're afraid of the backlash if they say what they really think.
So we're quite used to seeing that in interviews.
That's like almost every interview on cable news is that.
But he won't say anything.
He's sitting there shaking his head.
Stop, stop.
Because he's terrified, and it's especially pathetic in his case, because you're—how old is Richard Dawkins?
He's in his 80s.
He's in his 80s, and he's made a lot of money.
What are you afraid of, exactly?
You should very much be in the phase of your life where you don't care what anyone thinks, and you're just going to say exactly what you think all the time.
Now, I think that's how we should all operate always, but you've got no excuse when you're wealthy and old to not have that attitude.
So, yet another fearless, independent intellectual exposes himself as anything but that.
Let's get to the comment section.
Are you ready to take the next step in your education but feeling overwhelmed by everything
that you have going on and everything that's on your plate?
Well, Grand Canyon University's online programs are designed to make earning your degree easy and accessible no matter your age or your stage in life.
Whether you're a busy professional looking to advance your career or a stay-at-home parent juggling family responsibilities, whatever you got going on, their online courses give you the flexibility you need to learn On your own terms, which is the way that it ought to be.
Grand Canyon University specializes in helping you fit your bachelor's, master's, or doctoral degree into your busy schedule, from scholarships to customized scheduling.
Your graduation team, led by your own GCU counselor, provides you with personal support and everything else that you need to succeed.
So why wait?
If you're ready to take your education to the next level, you need Grand Canyon University.
Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University.
Visit gcu.edu.
That's gcu.edu.
Two sides, one stone, says no, there's zero reason to give any spotlight to any manifesto of a monster.
In fact, one of the last shootings, Ben Shapiro said, focusing on the manifesto creates copycats.
Now even he is talking about this manifesto like he's lost his values.
Yet again, the focus is on the shooter.
No one can recite the victims' names.
They don't know about their lives.
They don't know about their families.
They don't even know what class they were taking when they were gunned down.
But we know about the shooter's childhood, even her family, her parents' marriage dating back 30 years to Candace Harping.
Thanks to Candace Harping on this criminal.
Make the shooter disappear. We all know why she attacked a school and it will happen again if DW
doesn't enforce its do not name rule with all its hosts.
Other shooters will marvel at the sick person spotlight and more shootings will happen. Focus on
the victims, security in schools, Christian culture, and killing this trans movement that
brainwashed, radicalized, and destroyed a woman, turning her into a devil. Okay.
Fair points, but a couple of points I'll say in response.
First of all, you're making an argument that, just to be clear about what the argument is, and I'm going to assume this is your argument, that the media shouldn't publicize anything in the manifesto or talk about the killer.
And I'll address that in a moment.
But that is not an argument for the government to withhold this information from the public.
So we talk about releasing the manifesto, I would hope you would agree that even if you don't think the media should harp on it, it should still be released because the public has a right to know.
A community that was attacked in this way has a right to know who did it and why they did it.
It doesn't change anything for those who are mourning.
It obviously doesn't give them back what they have lost.
But we have a right to know, and more importantly, the government has no right to not tell us.
The government has no right to be the only ones who know.
Now as for the media, you may have noticed that I have never really abided by the Daily Wire's policy on not naming shooters.
I've often named them in the past, so this is not new for me.
I'm on the commentary side, not the news side, so it's been left up to my discretion.
There are journalistic standards and rules and everything that apply in any organization to news reporters.
Don't apply to you if you're commentary.
I'm giving my perspective.
I'm not pretending to be giving just an objective recitation of the facts.
The whole point is for me to tell my perspective.
So, it's different kind of standards apply.
But even as the policy goes, Look, not all situations are the same.
And you can have a policy that applies most of the time, but when you have this kind of, this is why, you know, so-called zero tolerance policies in general, in almost any context, are foolish.
I mean, they're foolhardy.
Because you have to allow for The application of discernment and for the recognition that sometimes situations arise that are different from the other sorts of situations you deal with.
You have to be willing to acknowledge that and recognize that and respond to it.
And sometimes other factors become overriding factors.
So here in this case, there is a truth.
A very important truth.
That I have known, and some of us have known, and that I have warned about, but that much of the public does not know, and should know.
And that is the truth, that this movement, this trans ideology movement, is radicalized, violent, extreme.
This is a real thing.
It is a real problem, and they don't want you to know about it.
The powers that be don't want you to know about it.
It has to be made known.
And that is the point of releasing the manifesto.
That's what makes it especially important in this case.
Because there are certain cultural realities that people actually don't understand and they need to.
I mean, literally lives are at stake.
So the radicalizing, as much as we hear about radicalization from the media, here's a place where it actually applies.
The radicalizing rhetoric of the trans ideology movement.
Is a real crisis.
People need to know that.
And this is something that would, I think, make that very clear.
So, all the concerns that you mentioned are valid.
But I think the value of the plain, unvarnished truth in this case takes precedent over the concerns that you've mentioned.
Taito says, Matt seems to be getting harsher and harsher with each episode since people blamed him for being too mean to Dylan Mulvaney, and I must say I absolutely love it.
This harsh course is the only course which will actually accomplish our goals.
Am I being more harsh?
I feel like I've always been.
I don't think I've changed much in that regard, but maybe I have.
Dave says, the manifesto from the mass shooter in New Zealand was released the next day.
Well, of course it is.
That's why, you know, as we've been talking about.
You know, if it's someone that the media will try to claim is right-wing or whatever, white supremacist, then we're going to see that manifesto right away, which is yet another reason why it should be released.
This also goes back to holding to the same standard.
You know, we want same standard applied.
We can't just accept, even if there are these double standards, we can't get to a point where we simply accept it.
Leigh Ann Christie says, Matt, I think the police department are being kept from releasing the manifesto by politicians.
Yeah, there's that.
There's probably political pressure, but I also think the FBI.
You know, the FBI has gotten involved and they haven't said that they're going to be investigating it as a hate crime, but they have said that they're taking an advisory role or an assistance role.
And I'm willing to bet that this is what much of their advice consists of.
Finally, John Adams says, a physical object cannot harm people.
Only another human being can harm another individual.
Alright, that's the old, you know, people kill, guns don't kill people, people kill people, which is sort of true.
I mean, people can use guns to kill people, right?
And here's the way I look at it, and this is not a great analogy for a few reasons, but it helps to illustrate at least one part of the point.
So imagine that you're a parent, you know, and you come into the room one day and you see, like, your 10-year-old son with a lighter trying to light the cat on fire.
Which is the more important question?
So the kind of scene that, in fact, the parents of a lot of these mass shooters have probably seen in the past, which is like an indication that there's something deeply wrong with your child.
And then too often these glaring warning signs are ignored.
But you see something like that.
What's the more important question?
How did he get the lighter?
Or, why in the hell is he doing this?
What is going on inside him that is making him do this?
You could take the lighter away, and you should, you know.
But you're still left with a child who tries to light animals on fire, which means that there's a very deep problem here, and addressing it simply by trying to control his access to potentially harmful objects is a bad strategy, because you can't control his access to harmful objects forever, and there are so many objects that can be potentially harmful, which is like almost any object, so you've got to get deeper than that.
To figure out why would he, you know, most kids, even if they were able to get their hands on a lighter, wouldn't do that.
Okay?
Most kids, if they, if they, there's, there's, there's something specific here going on that needs to be investigated.
Now I said this is a bad analogy because for one the government is not a parent and two a child has no right to a lighter in the first place and shouldn't have one anyway as opposed to American adults who don't have criminal records who do have a right to own guns.
So it doesn't work from those angles.
My point is just to illustrate how we skip over these deeper questions and you know and and that's why I said to start with when it comes to in response to this shooting and all the other ones.
The question is Is, why would, why did this person do this?
Like, all these people, as the left warns us about all the time, millions of people in this country own guns, that's true.
Okay?
But that only undermines their point, because you've got millions of gun owners, millions of guns in circulation, and almost none of them are doing that, or would ever do that.
Okay, I have guns.
There's zero percent chance that I would ever go on a killing spree.
So, why did this person do that?
For most people, having them owning a gun, a gun in their hands, is not a danger to anyone.
In fact, it could be helpful to other people.
It mitigates danger.
But for this small collection of evil scumbags, they become a danger.
Why is that?
And those are the questions we need to be focusing on.
We know the left tends to reject concepts such as common sense, science, tradition, God.
Ignoring the fundamentals of Western civilization may be tempting for those who lack exposure to them, but it ultimately results in ignorance.
There are absolutes, you know, in the world, including truth and beauty.
Keith Getty is the songwriter responsible for one of the most glorious modern-day hymns, and he discusses this idea in Jordan Peterson's Logos and Literacy.
Check it out.
I was very much struck by how the translation of the biblical writings jump-started the development of literacy across the entire world.
Illiteracy was the norm.
The pastor's home was the first school, and every morning it would begin with singing.
The Christian faith is a singing religion.
Probably 80% of scripture memorization today exists only because of what is sung.
This is amazing.
Here we have a Gutenberg Bible.
Bible printed on the press of Johann Gutenberg.
Science and religion are opposing forces in the world, but historically that has not been the case.
Now the book is available to everyone.
From Shakespeare to modern education and medicine and science to civilization itself.
It is the most influential book in all of history and hopefully people can walk away with at least a sense of that.
Here's where I would normally tell you that Logos & Literacy is only for DailyWirePlus members, but we're making it available for free for everyone at DailyWirePlus.com.
It's only for a limited time, though, so you've got to watch Logos & Literacy today at DailyWirePlus.com.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Our Daily Cancellation today begins with a report in the New York Post about a major and important controversy.
Quote, an angry traveler has shared their frustrations over a woman who had the audacity, quote-unquote, to request a seat swap so she could sit next to her kid.
In a resurfaced Reddit post now going viral, the flummoxed flyer said that it was, quote, not my problem they didn't book together when asked to switch seats.
The unidentified traveler was on a Trans-Pacific flight from Japan sitting in a window seat while the toddler was in the middle seat.
The tot's mom was in the row directly behind them, also seated in the middle.
She asked me, quoting now, and just me, to switch with her so she could have my window seat next to her daughter and I'd have to take her middle seat a row back.
The user wrote, hell to the F no.
The peeved passenger continued in the post, worse as we were surrounded by others from her tour group that she could have asked for a three-way trade instead or the tour operator.
The audacity to just ask me and expect an inferior trade on my side.
Now many of the comments on Reddit and on social media, as this critically important story has been shared far and wide, have come down against the man in the window seat, or I don't know if it's man, the person in the window seat, claiming that it was his responsibility to forfeit the seat that he likely paid extra money for and accept a much less comfortable arrangement for a flight across the Pacific Ocean, all because some stranger he doesn't know failed to plan ahead.
So as always, The internet jury has ruled incorrectly on this case.
There are rules for seat trading on airlines.
Rules that this woman defied.
In fact, there are many rules governing airline travel.
Rules that many people constantly flout.
These are not rules made or enforced by the airlines themselves.
They have their own rules.
But these are rules that exist at a deeper level.
Rules that are written on the human heart.
I'm not speaking about the laws of man, but rather natural laws.
Laws that we should all understand innately as human beings with rational souls.
And if you don't understand these laws, then I will explain them to you right now.
Okay, we have in the past touched on many different aspects of air travel, but it's become apparent to me that I need to provide one resource with all of the rules laid out in a clear and accessible format.
And that's what we're going to do today.
So this is the definitive list of rules, of laws for air travel.
We'll deal with the question of seat swapping when we get there, but the rules begin well before you step foot on the plane.
Now, in the interest of time, I'm only going to be able to cover the rules that govern the time when you wake up in the morning on the day of your flight to the moment when you sit in your seat on the plane.
So this is the beginning of the definitive list, but it will not be the entire list.
Okay, so let's proceed.
Rule number one.
You dress like a civilized, well-groomed adult.
If you're not that kind of adult, then you need to pretend that you are.
Nobody stumbles accidentally onto a plane.
You have to book tickets, you have to pack, you have to engage in some kind of planning ahead of time.
So there's no excuse to not be completely dressed and showered and presentable when you get on the plane.
Now, if I knocked on your door in the middle of the night, Well, you'd probably call the cops.
But let's say that you answered the door.
You'd be in your pajamas, maybe wearing slippers, hair messy, matted, teeth not brushed, blurry eyed, you know, unshowered, confused.
And I could not complain about having to look at you in that disheveled and disgusting state because I knocked on your door in the middle of the night.
But when I see you at the airport or on a plane, I did not knock on your door in the middle of the night.
We are meeting out in public in a place we both paid money to be and planned ahead of time to be.
So I should not have to be exposed to your middle-of-the-night look.
I should not have to see you in your pajamas wearing slippers and a bathrobe.
This is an airport.
It's not your bedroom.
So put on some clothes, you sloppy freak.
That's rule number one.
Rule number two.
On that note, there will be no sleeping in the terminal.
Okay, I was at the airport a couple of weeks ago, sitting at the gate.
By far, not the first time this has happened.
There's a man five feet from me, laid out on the ground, curled up in the fetal position.
This is a grown man.
Jacket pulled over him like a blanket, fast asleep.
Now, once again, this is an airport.
It's not your bedroom.
It's also not a refugee camp.
So forget about the fact that By sleeping on the ground at the airport, you are displaying an extremely unreasonable amount of faith in the airport's janitorial staff.
The truth is that that patch of floor you're lying on was probably last cleaned during, like, the first Bush administration.
Not to mention you're displaying an even more unreasonable amount of faith in other people.
Do you actually trust other humans enough to become voluntarily unconscious amid a huge crowd of them?
Well, you shouldn't, but that's not even the point.
The point is that I don't want to have to look at you like that.
It's undignified.
It's embarrassing.
Okay?
You can take a nap when you get to the hotel.
The airport is a place for being awake and tired and miserable like the rest of us.
Rule number three.
So you've gotten to the airport, you're awake, like everybody else, like a civilized adult, now we're boarding the plane.
When boarding the plane, remember that you are on stoplight time.
Okay, what do I mean by that?
Well, when you're sitting at a stoplight, and the light turns green, and then a second passes, And you still haven't moved.
The cars behind you will start blaring their horns and screaming curses at you and throwing eggs and tomatoes at your windshield, and they will be morally justified in doing so.
That's because at a stoplight, each second counts as 10 minutes.
If you wait two seconds to move, you've actually been sitting there for 20 minutes.
Three seconds has been a half hour.
And now it's both morally and, from what I understand, legally acceptable for the cars behind you to ram into you and force you through the intersection.
Now, when boarding a plane, time works exactly the same way.
It's not normal time.
You have to understand that.
You have less than one second, therefore, to stow your bags and get in your seat.
Okay, you're getting on the plane, keep it moving, stow the bag, get in your seat.
You have less than a second to do it.
If you bring a bag on board that doesn't fit in the overhead storage, and now we have to wait not only seconds, but even minutes, minutes, while the situation is resolved, you have, in effect, Delayed us by years.
We are years behind schedule because of you.
And we hate you for it.
One other note about boarding a plane.
If you're running late for your flight, and will now be boarding after everybody else has already taken their seats, you're not going to like this, but this is the rule.
The rule dictates that you don't board at all.
Your trip is cancelled.
You're not flying.
Because first of all, you've held us all up, and now you have to pay the price for it.
But also, second, the other people in your row now assume that you aren't coming.
And they have experienced the joyful elation at the thought that they'll have extra space on their flight.
It is deeply painful to believe that the person next to you isn't showing up, only to see them appear out of nowhere, five seconds before the doors shut, sweaty, exhausted, like out of breath, happy that they made the flight.
Totally unconcerned by the trauma that's been being inflicted on you now that you realize that this sweaty person is me sitting next to you.
So if you're running that late, you don't get to board.
Rule number four.
To deal with the issue we began with, if you have a problem with your seat, you need to trade with somebody else on the flight, you may only propose a lateral trade.
Window seat for a window seat, aisle for an aisle.
Because I'm generous, I'll even allow you to propose a window for aisle or aisle for window trade.
But what you cannot ever do under any circumstance is try to trade your middle seat for someone else's end seat.
Too big a favor to ask of someone you don't know.
It's like going up to some stranger in a parking garage and asking them to take your 2011 Toyota Corolla with a broken air conditioning and 150,000 miles on it in exchange for their luxury sedan.
Well, I guess no seat on a modern airline is tantamount to a luxury sedan, so it's more like asking to exchange your beat-up, disgusting Toyota Corolla for a slightly less beat-up and disgusting Toyota Corolla.
Either way, it's a laughable proposition, and it's inappropriate to even request.
Rule number five, finally, for now.
Once you're sitting in your seat, here are all the things you may not do.
You may not lean back your chair.
Seats are equipped with this function, but not because you're supposed to actually use it.
The recline option on the seat is just there as a test to see who is a sociopath.
If you hit the button, you fail the test.
You may not eat any food that gives off a strong smell or makes any kind of sound.
So this rule basically rules out all food except for white, plain white bread is all you're allowed to eat on the plane.
If you're sitting next to me anyway.
You may not speak to the person next to you unless you're spoken to, but they also are following the same rule, which means that nobody's speaking at all.
If you're in the middle seat, as I've explained in the past, you have no privileges and no human rights.
You are worse than a second-class citizen.
You don't exist.
This means that you don't have permission to use either of your armrests.
Your superiors, on the end, get both of their armrests.
You get nothing.
You're also not allowed to inconvenience the aisle seat by getting up to use the bathroom.
You must sit there, legs together, arms folded, head bowed down in silence for the duration of the flight.
Now if you're sitting in the window seat, you need to use the bathroom.
You may impose this inconvenience on the aisle seat, but only once per six hours of the flight.
So if your flight is less than six hours, you're not permitted access to the bathroom at all.
Now this, as I said, only a partial list of rules.
Enough to get you on the plane and seated.
As for how to conduct yourself during the flight, how to get off the flight, well, we'll have to cover those rules at a different time.
What I would recommend is that nobody take any flights at all until I've had a chance to cover the entire list of rules.
For now, though, anyone who has ever violated Rules 1 through 5 is, of course, banned from flying from here on out, and also, obviously, today cancelled.
And that'll do it for this portion of the show.
As we move over to the Members Block, become a member today by using code WALSH at checkout for two months free on all annual plans.
