Ep. 1151 - They're Coming For Your Children And They Aren't Hiding It
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Joe Biden announces his re-election bid. The prospect of another four years of Biden is terrifying because he's a decaying old vegetable, but also because he's an anti-family tyrant. Just yesterday, Biden declared explicitly that your children are not your own. We'll discuss. Also, we are learning more about the circumstances that led Fox to make the disastrous decision to fire Tucker Carlson. Meanwhile, another cable news host also got the axe yesterday. The difference is that the other one deserved it. And a report details the horrific death of an 18 year old who suffered complications during a "gender transition" surgery. This is yet another reason why medical gender transition should be illegal for everyone, not just kids.
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
- - -
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:
ExpressVPN - Get 3 Months FREE of ExpressVPN: https://expressvpn.com/walsh
PureTalk - Get 50% OFF your first month with promo code WALSH: https://www.puretalk.com/landing/WALSH
ZipRecruiter - Rated #1 Hiring Site. Try ZipRecruiter for FREE!
ZipRecruiter.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, Joe Biden announces his re-election bid.
The prospect of another four years of Biden is terrifying because he's a decaying old vegetable, but also because he's an anti-family tyrant.
Just yesterday, for example, Biden declared explicitly that your children are not your own.
We'll discuss that.
Also, we're learning more about the circumstances that led Fox to make the disastrous decision to fire Tucker Carlson.
Meanwhile, another cable news host also got the ax yesterday.
The difference is that the other one deserved it.
And a report details the horrific death of an 18-year-old who suffered complications during a quote-unquote gender transition surgery.
This is yet another reason why medical gender transition should be illegal for everyone, not just kids.
I'll explain why we'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
Hackers want to steal this information and sell it on the dark web where it can be used for various criminal activities such as phishing, ransomware, and identity theft.
Needless to say, it's incredibly important that you use a VPN to prevent that from happening.
But choosing a VPN you trust is equally as important.
That's why we recommend using ExpressVPN every time you go online.
ExpressVPN makes you anonymous online by camouflaging your IP address and replacing it with a different,
secure IP of your choice.
ExpressVPN also encrypts all of your data so that it's protected from hackers and anyone
else that tries to spy on you.
I love ExpressVPN because it doesn't log your activity.
Lots of cheap or free VPNs, they make money by selling your data to advertisers, but ExpressVPN doesn't do that.
They've even developed a technology that makes their VPN servers incapable of storing any data at all.
ExpressVPN is incredibly easy to use.
Just fire up the app and click one button.
Plus, it works on all of your devices, phone, laptop, even your Wi-Fi router.
So, if you're like me and you believe your internet data belongs to you, then ExpressVPN is the answer.
Visit ExpressVPN.com slash Walsh and get three extra months free.
That's E-X-P-R-E-S-S-V-P-N.com slash Walsh.
ExpressVPN.com slash Walsh to learn more.
This week, the media has been running with a list that purports to rank the 13 most banned books of 2022.
And the list has been put out for the second year in a row, actually, by the American Library Association.
USA Today reports, quote, it's not your imagination and it's not fear mongering.
Books, and our free and ready access to them, are under attack in the U.S.
The American Library Association has the data to prove it.
The ALA today released their list of the 13 most challenged books of 2022, the titles that have been the biggest targets of banning efforts in school and public libraries.
The last few years have seen a dramatic uptick in the book banning attempts, An escalation of censorship tactics and the coordinated harassment of teachers and librarians as political groups and parent associations target works of literature containing what they deem to be objectionable material for young readers.
For more information on book banning attempts and how to fight against them, go to this website.
Books are under attack, they say.
Books themselves, like the concept of books, are under attack.
There are people out there who oppose books, who hate books, and want to just ban books.
And it just so happens that the anti-book faction especially has it out for these 13 books, and they list them.
Here's the list.
Genderqueer, All Boys Aren't Blue, The Bluest Eye, Flamer, Looking for Alaska, The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Lawn Boy, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, Out of Darkness, A Court of Mist and Fury, Crank, Me and Earl and a Dying Girl, and This Book is Gay.
Now, if you know something about these books, you'll notice that these books, many of them, first thing you'll notice is that many of them are explicitly sexual.
Genderqueer, Flamer, This Book is Gay, all contain graphic sexual depictions and pictures.
Lawn Boy has a passage, at least one passage in the book, describing a sexual encounter between two 10-year-old boys.
That's what's in the book.
None of the articles lamenting these bans will mention any of that.
And they also won't mention that the book bans aren't really book bans.
The books aren't being banned from distribution in the United States, which is what a book ban would be, though some of them probably should be banned from distribution.
Rather, in some cases, they're being kept out of grade school libraries.
That's it.
That's what they consider a book ban.
Simply saying, we're not going to take this book that depicts sex acts between ten-year-old boys and put it in the library at the elementary school so that a fourth grader can read it.
If you do that, they cry, this is book banning!
We're burning books!
It's Nazi Germany all over again.
Calling this a book ban, it's like saying that a movie has been banned because it landed in R rating.
It's exactly the same kind of thing.
It really is that absurd.
It's like saying that we still live in the Prohibition era because 11-year-olds aren't allowed to buy whiskey at the liquor store.
The claim doesn't make any sense, but that's because, as always, the people making the claim aren't being honest about their true concerns.
They aren't upset about any fictional attack on books.
They're upset because we're trying to exercise control over the material that our children are exposed to.
That's what they're upset about.
They don't want us stepping in between children and them.
That's what it's all about.
President Biden made the agenda clear during a speech in the Rose Garden yesterday meant to honor the 2023 National and State Teachers of the Year.
And during this speech, he made one especially startling statement.
Listen to this.
Rebecca put a teacher's creed into words when she said, There's no such thing as someone else's child.
No such thing as someone else's child.
Our nation's children are all our children.
There's no such thing as someone else's child.
Your child is not your child.
Your child belongs to everyone, he's saying.
Now you might like to think that Biden doesn't mean this literally, that it's just kind of a meaningless platitude.
But remember that he belongs to the same party that just passed this law in Washington State.
The New York Post has the report, quote, a Washington State bill that would strip parents' rights to intervene on their kids' medical care in certain circumstances passed the House on Wednesday, clearing its pathway to being signed by the governor.
An act relating to supporting youth, or Senate Bill 5599, allows host homes for runaway youth to house youth without parental permission.
Furthermore, the host homes do not need to notify parents about where their kids are or if they're getting medical interventions if there's a compelling reason not to, which includes a youth seeking protected health services.
The protected health services include gender-affirming care, quote-unquote, Okay, so if a two-spirit child runs away from home and ends up at a host home, then they can undergo gender transition to become two-spirit.
Gender-affirming treatment can be prescribed to two-spirit, transgender, non-binary, and
other gender-diverse individuals, the bill said.
Okay, so if a two-spirit child runs away from home and ends up at a host home, then they
can undergo gender transition to become two-spirit.
It's an entirely made-up concept, obviously.
Another compelling reason "not to notify parents about kids staying in a host home"
was circumstances that indicate notifying the parent or legal guardian will subject
the minor to abuse or neglect.
So, in other words, when this bill is signed into law, if a child in Washington State decides that he wants to undergo a medical gender transition and his parents object to it, all he has to do is run away from home and land at one of these host homes.
And from there, his parents will be stripped of all rights to protect him from being sterilized and butchered.
Keep in mind that refusing to affirm your child's gender confusion, because that is what they're saying you should affirm, so if you refuse to affirm the confusion of the child, if you tell him that he's really a boy even though he thinks he's a girl and so on, that counts as abuse and neglect according to the people who write laws like this.
And this is how they will and have already begun to strip rights away from parents across the country and induct children into the gender cult by force.
First, they set the stage by declaring that a lack of affirmation is abusive, and then they come to the rescue by extracting the children from those abusive homes and leaving them in the arms of a state where they can be shaped and molded in a literal, physical sense and made into the sort of person that the system wants them to be.
So, who exactly is consenting to the procedure in a case where the parent's been cut out of the picture completely?
Well, the child cannot consent.
The parent does not consent.
Who's authorizing this?
The answer is that the parent is authorizing it because a new parent, a new parental figure, has been appointed.
You know, Joe Biden said that our nation's children are all of our children, but we already know from extensive experience that when anyone on the left uses the term our or us or we, they don't mean it in a general collective sense.
Okay, this is an us that doesn't include you, or me.
Us means the system, the institutions, the powers that be.
Our nation's children, or all of our children, means that our nation's children are the system's children.
It will raise your child.
It will decide what is best for him.
It will take charge of his formation, or deformation, both physical and moral.
As should be clear to everyone by now, if it isn't already, the family unit is the greatest threat to the system.
It's the left's greatest enemy.
In general, hates local authority.
It militates against localization in every form.
It wants you to be totally subject to overarching, inhuman, bureaucratic powers.
It wants your life to be run by institutions that don't know you, don't love you, don't recognize you as a distinct individual.
And the most localized structure, the most local form of authority of all, is the family.
In a healthy family, the members of the family, they look primarily to each other for love and guidance and purpose.
They're not looking out to the institutions and to the system and the media and Hollywood and all that.
They're looking to each other.
This is a problem for the system because it makes them much harder to influence, harder to control.
So the family must be destroyed.
And all of the vibrant and fulfilling bonds that define the family, the bond between husband and wife, the bond between parent and child, must be severed and replaced by the lifeless, empty bond between subject and system, where the subject can be unmade and remade in the image of the institutions that wish to control his life.
That is what they intend to do to you, and especially to your children.
And it's why we have to hold our children close and never allow it.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
The first step in growing up and being a real man is getting off your parents' phone plan.
Getting your own cell phone plan gives you a sense of independence and responsibility, and if you're an adult, you need to be paying for your own damn phone.
It's a step towards becoming more self-sufficient.
By paying for your own finances, you learn how to budget and manage your money.
There are a ton of cell phone providers out there.
Unfortunately, most of them want to lock you into horrific contracts and will tack on hidden fees any chance they get.
That's why I'm a huge fan of PureTalk.
There are no contracts, no hassle.
You can cancel at any time.
PureTalk is a plan that uses the same nationwide networks as major carriers, so you get the same reliable coverage that you're used to, just without all the other junk.
They offer a range of cell phone plans that best fit Your needs and your budget, you can get unlimited talk, text, and plenty of data for just $30 a month.
Switching over to Pure Talk is so easy.
You can make the switch, keep your cell phone, keep your phone number.
With their U.S.
customer service team, you can make the switch in as little as 10 minutes.
Pure Talk is so sure that you're going to love your service.
They're backing it up with a 100% money-back guarantee.
So, 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.
Yesterday we had news of Tucker Carlson abruptly leaving Fox News, and we now know that he was, as seemed kind of obvious yesterday, but it wasn't confirmed, he was fired.
The reasons are still murky.
Reports in the LA Times and other places suggest that Rupert Murdoch made the decision to get rid of Tucker.
Some in the media are suggesting it has to do with different lawsuits, a discrimination lawsuit that was filed by a former Tucker producer.
But I find that hard to believe, given that, well, Fox itself says that that particular lawsuit has no merit, which we would expect them to say.
And just based on the details that have been reported, it certainly seems, from my perspective, to have no merit.
I mean, this woman complains, for example, about a jokey picture of Nancy Pelosi that was hanging on a wall in an office somewhere.
That's the kind of thing she's offended by and filing a lawsuit about.
So, I don't think that's the reason.
I think that there may have been many things that contributed to it, but I think that basically they pushed Tucker out because of what he stands for, what he says.
That's really what it comes down to.
Tucker is not, not a neocon, corporatist, milquetoast Republican.
Because he's not that.
He's not welcome on Fox.
Looking for a reason to get rid of him for that reason alone.
I really think it's that simple.
Tucker is also interesting, and they seem to have a problem with interesting people.
I mean, that goes all the way back to when they fired Glenn Beck, who committed the crime of being interesting.
There's something else to be said about Tucker too, which is that he's not only a great talent, And he is a great talent.
Like I said yesterday, his monologues make news.
He does monologues on the news and he makes news with them.
This is a rare talent.
Nobody else at Fox is doing that.
Nobody else in cable news has that kind of talent.
It's, as I said, a rare talent.
But aside from the talent, Tucker's also a good guy.
People are sharing different stories about their encounters with Tuck Carlson.
So here's one quick personal story, and I think it tells you a lot about him.
So years ago, this is maybe four years ago, maybe five years ago.
Tucker texted me one day, out of the blue, to tell me that he appreciates my work and he's encouraging me to keep going.
Now, keep in mind, I had a much smaller profile back then.
This was when I believe I was still doing my podcast out of my car, and there was about 30 people who were watching it.
So, relatively obscure, especially compared to now.
I didn't think that Tucker even knew who I was, and yet he took the time to track down my phone number and send me a text, even though I obviously had nothing I could give him in return.
It's not like he needed me to promote his work or something like that.
It was just something that he felt compelled to do and he did.
That is, I cannot stress enough how rare that sort of thing is, probably in any business, but especially in this business.
People will be nice to you, you know, people will be nice to you but it's because they, usually it's because they want something from you.
They're being nice to you because they want, and oftentimes they want you to promote something, they want you to put them in touch with someone who you know, it's like that sort of thing.
So it's very transactional, very mercenary.
It's extremely rare that somebody would just kind of reach out to encourage you when you have nothing that you can give them in return.
And so that alone, I think, tells you a lot about him.
And the question now is what he does next.
Personally, I think the Daily Wire is the best place for him.
I'm a little bit biased, but I do really believe that.
You know, I think if you're Tucker Carlson, you've got, you know, basically two options, or I guess there's a third.
You could just decide you want to get out of the rat race completely.
I hope he doesn't do that.
But aside from that, you can go off and do your own thing.
Or you can join another institution.
And I think that there are other institutions in conservative media that do great work, but I don't think there's any other place like The Daily Wire.
So, that would be my pitch to him, but we'll see what he does.
Of course, there was a lot of celebrating over this on the left, as you can imagine.
Probably don't need any examples of that, but here's just one example from The View as they first learned the news that Tucker Carlson had been fired, and here's how they reacted to that.
Word has just come down that Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways.
We're thankful for his service to the network and hosting a prior contributor.
Wave.
[cheering]
You know, we'll talk more about it tomorrow, because--
but we wanted to make sure that we let you know what was going on.
Well, can I ask the audience if they'll help me do something?
Come on, folks!
Na-na-na-na!
(singing)
(applause)
(singing)
(applause)
I mean, sayonara.
I don't think anyone likes to celebrate the demise of someone's career.
Alright, that's good.
Yeah, we don't want to celebrate the demise of someone's career, but we're going to.
But fortunately, it's actually not the demise of Tucker Carlson's career at all.
I think this is going to work out better for him in the end, to be out from under Fox News and go to a place where there's no one trying to control what he says, whether that's out on his own or somewhere else.
So it's certainly not the demise of his career.
You have to understand, too, that So much of this, the reaction to Tucker Carlson, especially from other members of the media, is driven by pure jealousy.
Megyn Kelly, I think, made this point yesterday, and it's true, especially in reaction to this clip by The View.
Lots of people in media, obviously they hate him on ideological grounds.
He's one of the most effective advocates for true conservative principles in media.
And so they hate him for that.
But they hate him all the more because he gets ratings and he can go on his own and host his own show and carry a show by himself and millions of people will tune in to watch it and they'll talk about it.
So that alone is enough reason for especially the hens on The View to hate him.
Because they're all a bunch of sidekicks.
They could never, take any one of those women individually, and many of them have attempted to host their own shows, and they're all failures.
You could never take one of those women, and put them on their own show, and expect millions of people to tune in to listen to what they have to say.
It would never happen.
So, the fact that Tucker Carlson can be compelling on his own, commanding presence, sitting in front of a camera, and they could never do that, reason enough for them to hate him.
But there was other news in cable news yesterday, going from a guy who didn't deserve to be fired...
Because he was the dominant figure in cable news and getting all the ratings.
So that's Tucker Carlson.
Then we go over to a guy who certainly did deserve to be fired.
He's been deserving it for like 15 years.
Don Lemon was terminated.
And it was pretty devastating to me because I found out right after we finished filming yesterday that Don Lemon was fired.
Which just meant that I didn't have a chance on the air to make fun of him for it.
Yeah, at least now we can.
So CNN decided to get rid of him.
He was not happy about it.
He put out a statement bashing the network, which they then responded to.
And it seems like the two parties don't like each other.
That's my expert media analysis of this situation.
As to what led to it.
There are many people who are speculating that this awkward exchange, which we'll play a little bit for you, between Don Lemon and Vivek Ramaswamy on Friday may have been the final straws.
Obviously it was not the thing that on its own determined that he was going to be fired, but this is kind of the last thing that Don Lemon did before he did get fired.
Let's watch a little bit of this.
The very policies that we implemented in this country in the name of helping black Americans have actually been disastrous for black Americans and all Americans.
And I think that that's something that we need to wake up to.
In 1865, you were talking about the Black Codes, right?
That's right.
Enacted to make it a crime for a black person to carry a gun in the South.
But you're equating that to the current president?
You're referring to economic chains?
What are you saying?
Well, I was referring to Joe Biden's, I think, ill-chosen expression to say they're the party that wants to put you back into chains.
What I'm actually saying is that if you look at the policies of the modern Democratic Party... You just said that about Democrats.
Absolutely.
So what I'm saying is that actually, it's policies like that of Lyndon Johnson and Joe Biden that are actually holding black Americans back.
Lyndon Johnson's The War on Poverty?
Yes, and in particular, his Great Society, where he actually created incentives in the family, where if you're a family, you could actually get more money by not having the father in the home.
Guess what you get?
You get what you pay for.
I think it's been really bad for the black community.
I think it's really bad for all Americans.
Do you have anything on this before I move on to Cheyenne?
I don't see what one has to do with the other, but go on.
I took up a lot of time with Fox News.
No, it's fine.
We have time.
I don't really see what one has to do with the other, especially considering, and using the Civil War to talk about black Americans.
That war was not fought for black people to have guns.
That's not...
That war was fought for black people to have freedoms in this country.
Yeah.
Actually, that's why the Civil War was fought.
Okay.
But that wasn't fought for black people to have guns, I think.
Actually, you know what a funny fact is?
Black people did not get to enjoy the other freedoms until their Second Amendment rights were secured.
And I think that that's one of the lessons that we learned.
But black people still aren't allowed to enjoy the freedoms as well in this country.
I disagree with you on that, Don.
I disagree with you.
I think you're doing a disservice to our country by failing to recognize the fact that we have equality before the law.
All right.
live in this country then you can disagree with me but we're not you mentioned it that
there's three different shades of melanin here. I think we have to be able to talk about these
issues in the open regardless of the color of our skin.
Black Americans today to say that.
Okay so Don Lemon is offended.
We can stop that.
Don Lemon's offended and you're not a black American, you can't say this.
People are claiming that this is part of the reason he got fired.
I don't buy that for a second.
I mean, since when is a left-wing cable news going to fire one of their anchors for playing the race card?
Is that what's happening now at CNN?
You're not allowed to play the race card?
Well, then they have to fire everybody.
I mean, everyone's gone in that case.
So, I don't really buy it.
There's also this from the Daily Wire saying it's less about playing race cards and all that and more about misogyny and sexism.
Daily Wire posts article, CNN insiders took aim at former CNN anchor Don Lemon after he was fired on Monday.
Lemon was unceremoniously sacked, prompting him to issue a statement in which he complained that CNN's management did not have the decency to tell me directly, adding that he was stunned.
And then CNN disagreed with that and said that it was that we did tell him and whatever else who cares.
One source told the Daily Mail, Don was given every indication when he made the fake-ass apology for his disgusting comments and still no one wanted anything to do with him.
This is after, I think, the comments he's talking about is when he said about Nikki Haley that she's Pastor Prime.
No one owes him anything.
He should have had the decency to not be a misogynistic, sexist POS.
Don truly believed he was going to always get out of jail free card because he's black and gay.
Which worked to his advantage until it couldn't.
It doesn't matter what color you are or what your sexuality is, the source continued, he lost the respect of all the women on staff and no one wanted to work with him.
Even after this, he still acted no differently and would give the women he worked with attitude because he could sense that they felt a certain way.
Good riddance and good luck getting a job elsewhere.
Sources from CNN previously told the Daily Mail that women upset at Lemon's misogyny told management that either Lemon had to go or they would.
One source said, It's like every woman over 50 in America has taken this as a personal insult.
The female staffers at CNN definitely have.
He needs to make his vacation a permanent one.
Lemon's various denigrations of women have included suggesting to Bill Cosby's sexual assault accuser Joan Tarshish that she should have bitten Cosby's penis.
What?
Intimating politician Nikki Haley was past her prime because she was 51 years old.
As he stated, a woman is in her prime in her 20s and 30s, maybe 40s.
And also asking panelist S.E.
Cupp whether she was suffering from mommy brain.
So those are his sexist indiscretions apparently.
Especially the last two.
And we talked about this at the time, the thing when he said Nikki Haley's past her prime.
It was incoherent and it was stupid, but it wasn't driven by his hatred of women.
Saying to S.E.
Cupps something about a mommy brain, that's an expression people use.
It's not sexist, okay?
And even on the right, we shouldn't pretend because we're happy that, hey, it's fine to be happy that Don Lemon got fired.
But we shouldn't jump on this bandwagon by saying, oh yeah, talking about a mommy brain.
Well, that's unthinkable.
That's sexist.
That's misogynistic.
Oh, come on.
No, Don Lemon, and this is not a defense of him, by the way, at all.
It's not that he's misogynistic.
It's not that he hates women.
He's talking over women and he's treating women.
He treats everybody that way.
He's just an a-hole.
He's a jerk.
He's a narcissist, like so many in the business.
That's what he is.
And he's also a partisan, untalented hack.
And he has been for years.
That's why he deserves to get fired.
He doesn't even drive ratings.
He should have been fired a long time ago.
On that basis alone.
That's why he should have been fired, but there's some poetic justice in the fact that though he has been a partisan, untalented hack for years and never got fired, this is what takes him down when they pin some bogus sexism charges on him.
This is actually an example of the left eating their own.
And I think it's great.
It is a fitting end to his career, and I think for him.
Now, this is not, as we said, this is not the end of Tucker Carlson's career, because he's got a huge base of support around him, and whatever he does next, millions of people will go with him to that next endeavor.
We know that.
For Don Lemon, there's no one, no one is sitting around saying, I gotta see what Don Lemon does next.
Whatever Don Lemon goes, I'm going with him.
For Don Lemon, it's difficult for anyone to start their own media empire.
Tucker Carlson could do it.
It'd be hard, but he could do it.
Don Lemon could never do that.
He can't start Lemon News or something, and it's Don Lemon 24-7, people can go tune in.
So, that doesn't exist for him.
Therefore, in his case, this is essentially the end of his career.
Especially because he got the misogyny, sexist label on the way out the door.
It's also interesting to see, and I don't know, maybe we don't want to make too much of this, but as you know I'm someone who studies I'm kind of a student of the left's victim hierarchy and this kind of complicated equation that determines who the uber victim is.
And when you've got competing victim claims, how do you decide who triumphs in that situation, who the true victim is?
And on the left, victimhood is power, so the higher you are, On the victimhood hierarchy, it's kind of this, sort of like an inverse pyramid, because the higher you are on it, it means the more victimized you are, but the more victimized you are, the more power you have.
That's the way that it works on the left.
And normally, in fact, as this source at CNN points out, I mean, normally being black and gay, that gives you a lot of intersectional victim power.
And there's the only person who could be above you on the hierarchy is someone who's trans.
That's usually the way it works.
And for a long time, women have been, you know, they're not as far down as white men on the victim hierarchy, but they're pretty far down.
So pretty much any victim claim that a woman makes can be superseded by someone who has more victim power than the woman.
Yet in this case, You have someone who's black and gay, and they're being taken out by victim claims being made by women.
So that's interesting.
Has there been an upheaval in the victim hierarchy?
Are women climbing up the ladder once more?
I don't know.
We'll have to pay attention, see what happens next.
All right, Joe Biden has officially announced his re-election campaign.
He put out a video this morning announcing it.
We'll watch a little bit of that.
Freedom.
Personal freedom is fundamental to who we are as Americans.
There's nothing more important, nothing more sacred.
That's been the work of my first term.
To fight for our democracy.
This shouldn't be a red or blue issue.
To protect our rights.
To make sure that everyone in this country is treated equally.
And that everyone is given a fair shot at making it.
But you know, around the country, major extremists are lining up to take on those bedrock freedoms.
Cutting Social Security that you've paid for your entire life while cutting taxes for the very wealthy.
Dictating what health care decisions women can make.
Banning books and telling people who they can love.
all while making it more difficult for you to be able to vote.
When I ran for president four years ago, I said we're in a battle for the soul of America.
And we still are.
The question we're facing is whether in the years ahead, we have more freedom or less freedom.
More rights or fewer.
I know what I want the answer to be, and I think you do too.
This is not a time to be complacent.
That's why I'm running for re-election.
Because I know America.
I know we're good and decent people.
I know we're still a country that believes in honesty and respect and treating each other with dignity.
That we're a nation where we give hate no safe harbor.
We believe that everyone is equal.
That everyone should be given a fair shot to succeed in this country.
Thank you for choosing us.
Every generation of Americans has faced a moment when they have to defend democracy.
Stand up for our personal freedom.
stand up for the right to vote and our civil rights.
And this is our moment.
[MUSIC PLAYING]
[INAUDIBLE]
[MUSIC PLAYING]
[INAUDIBLE]
(upbeat music)
So if you're with me, go to JoeBiden.com and sign it.
Let's finish this job.
I know we can.
Because this is the United States of America.
There's nothing, simply nothing we cannot do if we do it together.
Alright, so there you go.
Joe Biden is running for re-election.
A not unexpected turn of events.
And this is, the timing's pretty funny because it was just yesterday that the media had this report.
President Joe Biden may be 48 hours away from announcing his re-election bid, but nearly three out of four Americans are hoping he has a last minute change of heart.
According to a new poll put out Sunday from NBC News.
Okay, so this is not a Fox News poll.
This is not a poll from some right-wing source.
NBC News, 70% of Americans do not want Biden to run for a second term, compared to only 26% who do.
Among those who don't want the 80-year-old president to pursue a second term, 69% cite age as a reason why, with 48% calling it a major reason.
And that, in fact, is all the reason you need.
It's all the reason you need, but we also don't need that reason at all when it comes to Joe Biden.
Because as it happens, he is this decaying old dementia riddled husk of a person, a vegetable, and that's true.
But he's also run, and these things are not unrelated, but he's also run the most disastrously incompetent administration, presidential administration, potentially in American history.
It's certainly in the running.
Before we can declare that it's the most disastrous presidential administration in history, we need to see the effects of this administration for years into the future.
But it's certainly in the running.
I mean, it's one of the worst presidential administrations in American history.
By every conceivable measure, no matter what you're looking at, whether we're talking about the situation globally, we're talking about our economy, cultural situation, crime, everything.
Has been on the decline under Joe Biden.
There's really no, there's not one single marker that Biden can point to and say, look, you see, that got better under my watch.
Literally everything got worse.
And that's enough reason, but then also he's going to be 82 years old.
If he takes office again, he'll be 82 years old.
If he survives his second term, which is a big if, I mean, if he wins re-election, the possibility that he makes it to the end of that term, it's not more than 50%.
It couldn't be more than 50%.
The average life expectancy for a man in modern America is, I think, 85, 86, so you're right there on the cusp of it.
But you also happen to be, you know, most men at this age are retired and they're, you know, living a kind of relaxing life.
When you take someone that age and you put them in one of the most stressful jobs in existence, that's not going to increase your life expectancy.
Now, we've all seen the pictures of relatively young men, whether it's George Bush, Barack Obama, who went into the White House, and then you see what they look like eight years later.
They aged eight years, but it looks like they aged 30 years.
The only person that wasn't the case for is Donald Trump.
If anything, he looks slightly younger at the end of it, somehow.
But for everyone else, that's how much it ages you.
If you go into it already in your 80s, by the time you get out, you're 500 years old in president years.
Which is why we, you know, I will know that we maybe are on our way to being a somewhat serious country again when there's an actual conversation about putting laws in place to prohibit anyone over a certain age from running for office.
As I've been saying forever, okay, I've been making this case long before Joe Biden even ran for president.
We have a lower age limit for the presidency of 35.
Obviously, there should be an upper age limit.
We can't claim that age is irrelevant.
Obviously, it's not irrelevant.
And if we're saying that someone who's 28 years old is automatically not fit to be president simply because they're 28, which I agree with, by the way.
I don't want a 28-year-old president.
Then, of course, we could do that on the upper end as well.
There are just physical realities to being a human being.
We are mortal.
And what that means, and it's a scary thing to think about, but what that means is that our minds and our bodies decline as we get older.
They just do.
And that, obviously, is happening with Joe Biden.
Which is also why it could not be, and I know that every single presidential election, you have both sides saying, this is the most important election in history, if we don't win this, America's over.
I'm not saying that America's over if we don't win it, but this, in fact, is going to be one of the most important presidential elections in American history, for a lot of reasons.
But look, if you can take this decaying, 82-year-old, dementia-plagued husk, this vegetable, Who has been a total failure on every level, and if he can win, and who 70% of Americans don't even want him to run for re-election, and then he wins anyway, well then that's just, that really is, how does the Republican Party, how is there any opposition party?
How does the Republican Party recover from that?
That's just the end of the Republican Party, it's over at that point.
So we absolutely need to run someone who can beat him.
That's why I told you that for me in the Republican primary, I'm a single issue voter in the Republican primary.
And my single issue is whether the Republican can beat Biden.
Beat him handily.
I don't even want a close victory.
I don't want you to squeak out.
I don't want you to edge out a victory.
Beat him handily.
That's the only thing that matters in the primary.
We have to nominate the person who has the best chance of beating this guy.
Whoever you support in the primary, that's the argument you need to be making.
I don't care about any other argument.
For right now, the only argument you need to make is, well, here's why my guy has the best chance of beating Biden.
Alright, Postmillennial has this report.
A 2016 medical article documenting the tragic death of one of the participants in the Lynchpin Dutch study, upon which the entire child sex change experiment is based, indicates that puberty suppression was to blame for the young person's death.
The case is that of an 18-year-old trans-identified male whose puberty was blocked by the Dutch researchers at a very early stage, meaning there wasn't enough penile tissue for surgeons to use to create a neo-vagina.
Therefore, a more risky procedure using a section of the patient's bowel was necessary, which resulted in fatal necrotizing fasciitis.
The manuscript begins by saying that the absence of a functional vagina has a negative effect on the sexual quality of life of transgender women and explains that multiple surgical procedures have been described for vaginal reconstruction in these patients.
The patient is described as being a healthy 18-year-old for whom standard vaginoplasty surgery was not feasible due to having undeveloped genitals as a result of early puberty suppression.
Quote, transgender women with early-onset gender dysphoria treated with puberty-suppressing hormones report fewer behavioral and emotional problems and an improvement of general functioning.
Readers are assured at this point.
Major complications began within 24 hours of surgery, and necrotizing fasciitis was confirmed in the days that followed.
Despite large doses of intravenous antibiotics and repeated surgical interventions, the previously healthy patient went into multiple organ failure and died.
Once again, after this harrowing account of a young person's needless death, the researchers assure the reader that vaginal reconstruction has a positive influence on the quality of life of non-transgender and transgender women, but cautions that physicians and patients need to be aware of serious complications that may arise.
The investigation into the young person's death revealed that the deadly strain of E. coli most likely came from the patient's own intestines, but not from a hospital setting, meaning that the more risky vaginoplasty surgery necessary due to early puberty suppression almost certainly caused the fatality.
All right, so this is one case.
And keep in mind, this is something that happened in 2016.
We're just now hearing about it because the Postmillennial had this report.
We are – it's unlikely that we're going to be told about all of the cases where somebody
dies from complications from these Frankenstein procedures.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
But there's very good reason to think that it happens, that it is not a, you know, this is certainly not the only case, okay?
This is not an aberration.
You are taking, in this case, you're taking a male, and you are trying to mutilate his genitals in a way to create the approximation of a vagina.
But of course, you can't actually make that.
It's not possible.
So instead, it's all cosmetic.
You're trying to create something that looks like it, but will never be that.
And there are physical consequences to doing that.
And none of the physical consequences are good.
It's all bad.
This is why, as I've been saying for a long time, it should not be legal for doctors to do this to anyone.
Yes, we should protect children most of all, because they can't consent to it.
And to do it to a child is especially abhorrent.
But once we've done that, The next step is to protect everyone from it.
Now, I know that the response, even from many conservatives, they say, well, it's a step too far.
Oh, you know, don't do this to kids, but adults can do what they want with their own bodies.
Well, first of all, no, that's not true.
Okay, if you're a conservative and you're still using slogans like this, do what you want with your own body.
What you have to understand is that you have bought into, you are making a leftist argument.
You have bought into the left's ideas fully when you're making arguments like that.
It's not true that you could just do it.
That's not the case.
At least it shouldn't be.
So, for example, if there was a person mentally ill and they're trying to cut off their own leg, should we just let them do it?
Should we let a mentally ill person mutilate themselves in this way?
Or should we intervene and prevent it?
Even if that means putting them in some kind of asylum to stop them from hurting themselves.
Obviously, we should.
I think most people would say, if you have someone who's cutting, who's self-mutilating, are you just going to stand off?
If someone's right in front of you, cutting themselves, are you going to stand off to the side and say, well, do what they want with their own body?
What if they were to kill themselves in front of you?
What if someone's about to jump off of a bridge right in front of you?
Are you going to stand there and watch it?
Just eat some popcorn and watch them kill themselves?
Well, it's an adult doing what he wants with his body.
Or are you going to try to prevent it?
Are you going to try to stop it?
Are you going to intervene?
Because this person is not thinking straight.
They're not thinking clearly.
They're about to destroy themselves.
And sometimes we need to do that for people.
We need to intervene to stop them from doing things to themselves.
Obviously we should.
So, no.
It's not true that people should be able to just do whatever they want with their own body.
And in general, the argument, because I want to, that is never a good enough reason to justify something on its own.
The simple fact that you want to do something, that a person wants to do something, that on its own is never a good enough argument to justify anything.
But that's all basically irrelevant, in fact.
Because we're not talking about what people do to their own bodies.
That's a separate conversation.
We can have that conversation.
But that is not what's happening here.
When it comes to gender transition surgeries, it is not a case of people doing things to their own bodies.
This is something that a doctor does to a person's body.
So when I say it should not be legal that gender transition surgery should not be legal for anyone at any age, which is what I believe, it should be illegal across the board, when I say that, that's not a restriction.
That is not, in fact, a restriction that we're putting on the gender-confused person.
That's a restriction we're putting on the doctors.
What we're saying is that it should not be legal for doctors to do that to anyone.
It should not be legal for doctors to perform this experimental, you know, Nazi science, Frankenstein surgery butchery on anyone.
It should not be legal to do that to someone.
And especially when somebody is mentally ill and they're coming to the medical, you know, they are going to a doctor, they're going to a medical institution because they're mentally ill and they're confused.
It should not be legal for doctors to exploit that confusion for financial gain.
When someone is confused and they want something done to them that will harm them, it is never okay for the doctor to say, okay, well, I'll do that to you, sure.
If you can pay for it, or if your insurance can pay for it, obviously that shouldn't be legal.
Obviously that defies any kind of medical, any coherent medical standard.
So if you're saying that, well, we should never make that illegal for adults, are you saying there should be no legal standards for the medical industry?
Is that really what you think?
Because if you think that it should be legal to do this to anyone, what you're saying is that we cannot impose any coherent standards on the medical industry at all.
Because if there are any standards, starting with what's supposed to be the overarching kind of philosophical standard of do no harm, you know, I think that that should be something that we legally enforce in the medical industry.
You don't harm people.
That's the one thing you never do.
You never intentionally harm people.
And this gender quote-unquote gender transition surgery is intentional harm being inflicted on people who are confused.
Clearly it should not be legal.
All right, let's get to the comment section.
Do you know that name?
They're the sweet baby gang You know when it's time to uh get a new job or start a new
career One of the most important things is to try to stand out
from all the rest But standing out can be tough, especially when you're looking for a job or when you're hiring, looking to find that application that really stands out.
That's why you need to check out ZipRecruiter.
ZipRecruiter helps you find the most qualified people for your roles fast.
Right now, you can try ZipRecruiter for free at ziprecruiter.com.
ZipRecruiter's matching technology helps you find the most qualified candidates for a wide range of roles.
If you see a candidate you like, you can easily send them a personal invite so they're more likely to apply.
Their user-friendly dashboard makes it easy to filter, review, and rate your candidates all from one place.
Let ZipRecruiter help you find the best people for all of your roles.
Four to five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
See for yourself.
Go to ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh to try ZipRecruiter for free.
Again, that's ZipRecruiter.com slash W-A-L-S-H.
ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire.
A man says, the concerning part is that as an ordinary person you never think that these people are serious.
You always think this is just surface-based monologue and that they don't, that they wouldn't turn it into a real threat to your life.
However, the past five or so years and more, especially recent times, it's evident that these people genuinely wish harm to you.
Stay safe.
Yeah, I think, well, listen.
We're talking on an individual basis.
You know, the average person who We'll send you a death threat, for example.
They're not serious.
They're just saying it.
They're hiding behind their computer in their mom's basement, all the cliches.
Very often, that's actually true.
And they're not going to do anything.
It's just a lot of bluster.
So on an individual basis, that's correct.
But generally, the left generally They are serious.
They think if you oppose them, you basically have, as far as they're concerned, you have no right to anything.
You have no right to express yourself.
You have no right to a platform.
You have no right to be heard.
And also, you have no right to live.
I mean, they really do believe that.
That is a... I know we don't want to accept this, Because of what it says about so many of our fellow Americans, but it is actually the case that for many people on the left,
If you oppose them, especially on these kind, you know, on issues related to gender and sexuality, the things that are closest to them, that they, you know, the most important parts of the leftist religion, if you oppose them on that, they honestly, many of them think that you don't, that your life is meaningless, that there's nothing that could happen to you that would be tragic, that would be undeserved.
Uh, Ashley says, I find it so disgusting that someone hacked Matt's information and now has access to private photos of his family.
DMs are one thing, but having access to his family's photos and information is so much worse.
That was, uh, the thing that was the most upsetting, is, um...
You know, I know that it's like when they got into my Twitter and there's a lot of people on the left.
Oh, I gotta see the DMs!
Put the DMs out there because they're expecting, you know, they're expecting that they just assume that there must be all kinds of scandalous stuff in the DMs.
There just isn't at all.
Because...
That's just, I'm just a normal boring guy.
Like, in reality and in my personal life, that is actually who I am.
So the dad in a flannel, that's not a put-on, it's not a character, just who I am.
But the most upsetting thing, yeah, it's just private.
Photos of my kids, just, you know, things like that.
Just private.
My private life.
And that is...
That is certainly the thing that makes you feel sort of, that's the greatest violation in a situation like this.
But as I said yesterday, you know, I also, and I've thought about this a lot over the last several days, the fact that Because of the position I'm in, you know, the fact that I had a team around me and we were able to respond to this so quickly and get a hold of the right people and, you know, try to put out all the fires.
I'm grateful for that and I do think a lot about what happens if this happens to you?
People get hacked all the time, their identity stolen.
If you don't have those kinds of resources, what do you do?
Like I said yesterday, you're stuck calling 1-800 numbers.
It's even more of a nightmare.
I can't imagine it.
Now, of course, if I wasn't in the position that I'm in, I wouldn't have been a target in this particular case.
But it still happens to people, even if they're not high profile, obviously.
Miles says, if there was ever a push to get me to become a Daily Wire Plus subscriber, this is it.
I'm with you till the end, Matt.
Well, I appreciate that, Miles.
Holly says, if we all donate a dollar a month for Matt's show, we could keep him, his family, and Daily Wire taken care of, making the money needed to continue our fight.
I appreciate it.
I appreciate the sentiment.
I really do.
It is very meaningful.
But I don't need any GoFundMe.
I don't need any charity work.
Trust me on that.
No, please don't start a fund.
I don't need any go fund.
I appreciate it.
I appreciate the sentiment, I really do.
It is very meaningful.
But I don't need any go fund me.
I don't need any charity work.
Trust me on that.
However, I don't want charity, but I would like you to invest in something
and get something in return, which is a Daily Wire subscription.
That's not charity work.
We have something, and you purchase it, and you're supporting the work that we do, but you're also getting something valuable in return.
So if you're looking to invest your money that way, then that would be my suggestion.
Despite the lackluster economy, or maybe because of it, The Daily Wire is thriving.
And not only that, we are hiring.
The Daily Wire is looking to add another social media content coordinator to our fast-growing social media team.
If you follow The Daily Wire on social media, you've surely seen the work of our skilled content coordinators.
If you have experience in social media marketing or content coordination, specifically with TikTok and YouTube, We want to hear from you.
The position is based in Nashville, Tennessee.
For more information and to apply, visit dailywire.com slash careers.
That's dailywire.com slash careers today.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
Daily cancellation, as you know, is like an onion, partly because it is acidic and obnoxious, but also because it has layers.
Sometimes a person is initially cancelled for one reason, but when we look closer, we see whole new reasons to cancel them.
And that brings us to this viral video of a black man at a restaurant in Georgia.
Accusing a white man of racism for telling him, the black man, to turn his phone down.
Apparently, this alleged racism victim was playing something loudly on his phone at a restaurant, but the bad guy is the other patron who asked him to lower the volume a bit.
Here it is, watch.
Racism is still real in Georgia.
I can't believe Bob tried me like that.
What was it that you said before you interrupted me with my dinner?
What was it that you was asking me before you interrupted me with my dinner?
Because I turned it all the way down for you.
I appreciate it.
Okay, but what was it that you was asking me?
Is there a reason why you were asking me to turn my phone down when there's a band playing music that I don't give a **** about hearing?
Do you think it's appropriate for you to ask me, a 33-year-old, a black man, to turn his ****ing phone down?
That's a fact, Bobby.
You shouldn't know.
You shouldn't say a ****ing thing to me.
That's a fact.
That's a fact.
My hand shouldn't be shaking while I'm eating my ****ing chicken.
Now what you better do is talk to do the do over there and leave me the f*** alone.
You're gonna ask another black man to turn his f*** on down no time soon again.
Now so many questions immediately present themselves, but the first and most important one is why this man is using his knife upside down.
He's holding it by the blade and moving the food around on his plate with the handle.
That's reason enough to kick him out of the restaurant and ban him from ever eating food in public ever again.
I'm also wondering what other basic motor skills You know, is he yet to master?
Does he brush his teeth by jabbing himself in the eye with the toothbrush?
Does he put on his pants by, I don't know, eating them?
How do you get to the age of 33 without ever learning how to use eating utensils?
I was gonna ask if he knows how to tie his shoes, but I think we can assume that they're probably Velcro.
But let's not get hung up on these details.
As I said, this is a cancellation onion, and we have only seen the first layer.
The next layer is the most obvious one.
Here is yet another person who has been conditioned to view everything through the lens of victimhood.
And in this guy's mind, the only reason why anyone would ask him to turn his phone down is because they're racist.
This kind of conditioning, for many people in modern society, has become as deeply ingrained, and in many ways has supplanted, I think, what psychologists have called agency detection.
Okay?
And I'm going to take a little detour here, so stay with me.
But agency detection is supposed to be an instinct or inclination developed in all sentient beings, including humans, to assume that there is conscious agency behind things that we observe around us, even when there isn't one.
So, for example, Classic example, when you hear the floorboards creaking at night, if you're sleeping in an old house or something, and you assume that there's an axe murderer out in the hallway about to kill you.
That is agency detection.
There's no axe murderer, unless there actually is an axe murderer.
I mean, there could be.
But if there isn't, you invented this story of a conscious and usually nefarious agent who's caused an event to happen that was really just the house settling and making sounds, the kind of sounds that houses make.
Some psychologists have extended this idea out, and they've come up with a theory called hyperactive agency detection, which is when someone is constantly and falsely attributing agency where there isn't any at all.
As you might expect, this theory has been used erroneously and absurdly to explain away the development of religion.
In fact, I think that's why they came up with this, as a way of explaining the quote-unquote evolution of religion.
Anyway, here's my point.
I would like to borrow from this concept and coin a new term, Hyperactive racism detection.
A person with this mental affliction is prone to detect racism in every negative experience.
He hears the floorboards creaking at night and assumes it's not only an axe murderer, but a racist axe murderer.
And if you tell him that there is no axe murderer, that it's just the house settling, then he'll insist that the house is racist.
Every bad thing is racist.
No other explanation is even entertained.
The only thing that isn't racist in the mind of the person suffering from HRD is the person himself.
Everyone else's actions can be explained by racism, but never his own.
And this is in spite of the fact that he is almost always the most racist person in the room, and very often the only racist person in the room.
The person with hyperactive racism detection can detect racism everywhere, except in the places where it actually is, like in his own heart, for example.
In an alternate universe, there might be psychologists, there would be psychologists writing papers about hyperactive racism detection, probably prescribing drugs to fix it.
I'm not really in favor of the medicalization of every human character flaw, so I wouldn't actually want that to happen, but it is an interesting thought anyway.
But there's another layer underneath this one.
This man is cancelled because of how he holds his eating utensils, and he's cancelled because he's obsessed with fighting racism everywhere.
He's also cancelled because he was playing something on his phone loudly in public.
This is the most egregious offence of all, by far.
Somehow even worse than holding your knife upside down.
At least this guy's like the only human on the face of the earth who uses his knife like that, but he's certainly not even close to the only person who uses his phone like that.
This has become an epidemic, okay?
I mean, I see this everywhere.
Everywhere I go, there are people on speakerphone, FaceTime.
I was just at the airport the other day, and there was someone standing next to me on FaceTime, having a conversation with some person.
We could all hear it.
People are listening to music, they're playing videos, all out in the open for everyone to hear.
So I want to make this very clear.
Okay, this is the rule.
I should never have to hear any sound that your phone makes.
I never want to hear any sound that it makes.
So actually, I have this rule for phones and for dogs.
Those two things, I don't want, I never want to hear, you can have it?
That's fine.
I don't want to hear any sounds from it.
Ever.
There is zero tolerance for any sounds being emitted from your dog or a phone.
If I'm, if I'm anywhere in earshot.
I don't want to hear the conversations you're having on your phone.
I don't want to hear the crappy music you're listening to on your phone.
I don't want to hear the videos you're watching on your phone.
Unless you're watching one of my videos, in which case exceptions can be made.
God made earbuds for a reason.
And if you don't have earbuds, that's your problem.
Use subtitles.
I don't know.
I don't care.
Just as long as I never have to hear any sounds emitting from that little box you carry around in your pocket.
Or better yet, if you're sitting at a restaurant and You're alone.
Nothing wrong with that, by the way.
I'm a big proponent of, you know, eating alone at a restaurant can be very therapeutic.
But if you find yourself in that situation, and you don't have earphones, and there's no way to listen to something or watch something on your phone without being a monumental jerk to everyone around you, well, have you considered the possibility that you don't need to be on your phone at all?
Have you thought about just sitting there?
Have you considered Sitting there, and eating, and not doing anything else but those two things.
Like, this is something, I mean, I think for a lot of people in modern society, they've never done this.
Have you ever just sat somewhere?
And all you're doing is sitting.
You're not doing anything, you're not looking at anything, you're not listening to anything, you're just sitting.
This is, you know, a lot of people in modern society can't believe this, but this was like a normal occurrence for people All throughout human history up until right now.
There would be many occasions where you're just sort of like sitting somewhere and you're not doing anything else.
And so then you're thinking.
And that's the benefit.
You can actually develop your own thoughts.
So I would suggest that.
Maybe try not injecting noises and images and content into your skull every second of every day.
Have you considered just allowing yourself to be with your own thoughts for maybe three minutes at a time to start?
I suppose you can't be with your thoughts until you develop the ability to have thoughts, but you can't do that unless you take a break from your phone.
Who knows?
You might even become smart enough to properly use a knife.
