Ep. 1185 - The Entertainment Industry Is Collapsing, Thank God
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the media is warning of the impending doom of the entertainment industry as Hollywood actors join the writers on strike. One executive worries that we might soon run out of shows to watch. But if the entertainment industry collapses, will this really be the cause? And either way, would it actually be a bad thing? Also, speaking of impending doom, we're told that the rest of the planet will soon be destroyed as well because of global warming. In fact one prominent Democrat claims that this week we experienced the hottest temperatures in 120 thousand years. Plus, the Pentagon tries to explain why it's so important to provide abortions for female military members. And a beautiful Johnny the Walrus parade float causes chaos and consternation in Alaska.
Ep.1185
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
- - -
DailyWire+:
Get 25% of your DailyWire+ membership with code WOMAN: https://bit.ly/3VhjaTs
Get 30% off Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/3xuFD43
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
ExpressVPN - Get 3 Months FREE of ExpressVPN: https://bit.ly/3VeHvZM
PureTalk - Switch to PureTalk and get 50% off your first month. Use promo code Walsh at checkout! https://bit.ly/42PmqaX
My Patriot Supply - Additional Savings on a 1-Week Emergency Food Kit at http://www.preparewithwalsh.com/
Ruff Greens - Get a free Jumpstart Trial Bag at http://www.FreeRuffGreens.com/Walsh, or call 844-RUFF-700.
- - -
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
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the media is warning of the impending doom of the entertainment industry as Hollywood actors join the writers on strike.
One executive worries that we might soon run out of shows to watch.
Imagine that.
What a horror.
But if the entertainment industry collapses, will this really be the cause?
And either way, would it actually be a bad thing?
Also, speaking of impending doom, we're told that the rest of the Planet will also be destroyed as well because of global warming.
In fact, one prominent Democrat claims that this week we experienced the hottest temperatures in 120,000 years.
Plus, the Pentagon tries to explain why it's so important to provide abortions for female military members.
And a beautiful Johnny the Walrus parade float causes chaos and consternation in Alaska.
We'll discuss that important story and much more today on the Matt Wall Show.
Profiling, surveillance, and data harvesting are a few things not to like about tech giants,
but what can you actually do about it when you rely on so many of their products?
Well, the good news is it doesn't take much for you to take a stand.
For less than $7 per month, you can join me and fight back against big tech by using ExpressVPN.
Big Tech companies make their money by tracking your searches, video history, and everything you click on, and then selling your personal data.
ExpressVPN helps you anonymize much of your online presence by hiding your IP address, a unique identifier that every device has that allows Big Tech to match your activity back to you.
That's why I use ExpressVPN on all of my devices to make it much more difficult for them to exploit my data for their own profits.
Best part is?
How easy it is to use the ExpressVPN app.
I just tap one button on my phone or my computer.
I turn it on.
It's as simple as that.
Look, your data is your business.
You can visit expressvpn.com slash Walsh right now to get three extra months free.
That's expressvpn.com slash Walsh to get protected right now.
Expressvpn.com slash Walsh.
One of the basic but false expectations people have in democracies is that they get to vote on the things that could change their lives forever.
Nothing happens, we think, that reorders the lives of millions of people all at once without some sort of a referendum or an election or whatever.
Now, things have never really worked that way, of course, and for a few generations now, since the advent of modern technology, that has become more and more evident.
What happens in practice is that some new technology arrives and life changes forever all at once for countless people.
In one generation, watching a movie meant driving down to the theater, buying a ticket in person.
It meant doing things like putting on clothes and interacting with other human beings.
No alternative was imaginable.
Then, just a few years later, watching a movie is as simple as sitting inside your house, pressing a few buttons on a remote, or yelling commands at your remote like some sort of schizophrenic.
It becomes archaic to think of anything else.
So we're all used to this kind of rapid social change at this point.
These massive shifts happen before anyone studies the effects that these new technologies might have on our brains or our interpersonal relationships.
The changes just happen.
And very quickly, we all take them for granted.
And that's all very familiar.
What's not familiar, what most people are not used to, is what happens when there's a rollback on all of this.
What happens when a modern convenience, for one reason or another, suddenly just stops?
Well, as of this week, that's no longer a hypothetical question.
After screenwriters in Hollywood went on strike a few months ago, last Friday the Screen Actors Guild joined them on the picket line.
And the combined strike means that, for all intents and purposes, the entertainment industry in the United States has been shut down.
Doesn't exist right now.
The strike affects movies, television shows, video games, and more.
It's the first time that this kind of strike has happened in more than, like, six decades, I think.
In our always online world of Netflix and Hulu and HBO Max and Xbox Live, this is unprecedented.
And for some people, it's quite terrifying.
For journalists and corporate media, who spend more time glued to screens than anyone on the planet, what we're seeing is something of an extinction-level event.
This is a catastrophe approximately on the scale of, like, a Texas-sized asteroid hitting the Earth.
Now these journalists didn't care much about the explosion of that Russian gas pipeline, even though that might have caused a world war.
They didn't care about the strange disappearance of the 9-1-1 call from Jeffrey Epstein's jail the night that he died, even though that raised a lot of questions, shall we say, about corruption at the highest levels of the federal government.
Journalists didn't bother to panic over any of that, but a strike in Hollywood?
Well, they're all over that story.
The Associated Press, for example, just published this dire headline, quote, Hollywood plunges into all-out war on the heels of the pandemic and a streaming revolution.
Well, that sounds pretty serious.
And according to the allegedly venerable Sunday show Face the Nation on CBS, it is quite serious.
Face the Nation just invited the former CEO of Paramount, Barry Diller, on the show to explain the fallout of the ongoing strike in Hollywood.
And here's what the Hollywood shutdown means for you.
And it has really serious implications, okay?
This is what it means for you, according to Barry Diller.
Listen.
At this moment, this kind of perfect storm, it's okay if it gets settled in the next month, but I'll posit what happens if it doesn't.
And there doesn't seem to be enough trust and energy to get it settled soon.
What will happen is, if in fact it doesn't get settled until Christmas or so, then next year there's not going to be many programs for anybody to watch.
So you're going to see subscriptions get pulled, which is going to reduce the revenue of all these movie companies, television companies, the result of which is that there will be no programs.
And at just the time Strike is settled, that you want to gear back up, there won't be enough money.
Terrifying stuff.
So the former Paramount CEO wants you to know that, quote, what will happen is, in fact, if it doesn't get settled until Christmas or so, the next year there's not going to be many programs for anybody to watch.
Do you hear that?
Are you trembling in fear yet?
There might not be any programs for you to watch next year.
The programs are going away.
Think of the programs!
What will you do without the programs?
Now it's kind of funny when you think about it, the implication conveyed with total sincerity is that it would be somehow a bad thing if people stopped staring at screens for 10 hours a day, actually went outside and got some exercise and maybe developed real human interests and personalities.
Barry Diller is assuming that you'll agree with him on that point, that that's all a bad thing, as if it's a given.
If people went outdoors and got some sun, Barry Diller fears then one thing might lead to the next, and after a while they might be, you know, thinking actual thoughts in their brains and interacting with each other.
People's testosterone levels might even go up.
We simply can't have that.
What Diller said is interesting, not because he's worth listening to, but because his desperation is obvious.
Diller and the rest of Hollywood want to make sure that you're always consuming content on one subscription service or another.
These people never pause to consider whether the content they're forcing down your gullet is good or worthwhile.
Whether it helps you to be a smarter, better, more interesting person.
Whether it makes your life better.
These are actually things you should consider before consuming any content.
I know it's sort of unimaginable that you would take these into consideration at all.
They never ask themselves if people actually want to watch and listen to the slop they're putting on these streaming services and in movie theaters.
They just expect that you'll be horrified at the prospect that all this stuff is no longer available, that the morphine drip of content has been shut down.
Unfortunately for these executives, in recent months there have been a lot of data points that contradict Their theory here.
I mean, look at the pathetic box office returns of the new Flash movie, or the Mission Impossible sequel that just came out, performing in a pretty mediocre way, at least when measured against expectations, or the Indiana Jones A Little Mermaid catastrophes.
All of these failures reveal that people are growing weary of what Hollywood is producing.
They're exhausted by it, bored of it.
Do the numbers make that clear?
For example, The Flash had a budget of roughly $220 million, and as of the latest estimates, it's barely broken even.
The latest Indiana Jones film cost around $300 million, made about as much in the global box office, so that's a wash.
The latest Mission Impossible movie, meanwhile, had a budget of around $300 million as well.
As of today, it's only made less than $250 million.
Now, it's only been out for a week or two.
But again, well below expectations.
These kinds of shortfalls happening so consistently for big budget films are unheard of in Hollywood.
I mean, it's bomb after bomb after bomb.
So what's going on here?
What could possibly explain these numbers?
Rather than confront that question honestly, corporate media is rushing to blame, can you guess, COVID.
According to the AP, quote, disaster loomed in Hollywood when COVID-19 in March 2020 shuttered movie theaters, emptied TV studios, and shut down all production.
The recovery is still ongoing.
The box office remains about 20-25% off the pre-pandemic pace.
Now, in other words, by the media's telling, the problem isn't the content of these Hollywood movies.
It's not that people are tired of woke propaganda, or derivative storylines, or franchises that tell one story repeating itself ad nauseum, never coming to a conclusion.
That's not the problem.
The problem is that more than three years ago, COVID happened, and that's what explains all this.
So it's like the same excuse that the government used to fundamentally change the election system in this country is also the same excuse that explains why no one is watching Hollywood movies anymore.
That's what explains everything.
Whenever the corporate media needs it to explain something, they can always pull out COVID and say, well, that explains it.
And it's always COVID, by the way, that they blame, not the shutdowns.
It's not the government's response to COVID, but COVID itself.
It's all a pretty neat explanation, but is it true?
Well, let's see.
Because if that explanation made any sense whatsoever, you'd expect that every movie, regardless of genre, would be having similar problems.
You'd expect that viewers would be tuning out across the board.
But that's not what's happening.
Not even close.
The film Sound of Freedom, which tells a true story about a hero who rescued sex-trafficked children, is currently pushing $100 million at the box office.
Word of mouth is especially strong.
The film's audience in its second week in theaters grew by nearly 40%.
And now, you might say, well, it's $100 million.
It's less than $200 or $300 million that, say, Indiana Jones made.
You said that was a failure.
But the difference is that Sound of Freedom managed to make all that money and build all that buzz on a shoestring budget of less than $15 million.
That's one-five.
Somehow, the pandemic from three years ago didn't cut into their revenues.
How is that possible?
When all is said and done, Sound of Freedom will likely earn something like ten times its production budget.
And to put that into perspective, for Indiana Jones 5 to earn ten times its production budget, it would need to make three billion dollars at the box office.
And to put it simply, that ain't happening.
As it happens, it's not just Sound of Freedom that's reaching a large audience on a small budget.
The Christian horror film Nefarious managed to make it into the box office top ten despite basically no marketing, no budget, no stars.
Nefarious came out at the same time as the Super Mario movie and still managed to beat expectations.
And there are many more examples of this.
Also this year, of course, my own documentary, What is a Woman?, became arguably the most viewed documentary of all time.
Again, with very little marketing compared to something like Indiana Jones or Mission Impossible.
So what explains all this?
The answer is that people are still interested in films.
They are still interested in the art form.
The pandemic hasn't changed that.
No matter what the AP and Hollywood executives tell you, what has changed is that people have grown tired of Hollywood.
Mainstream films are redundant and hollow and blatantly politicized.
It's an industry entirely out of ideas and people are noticing.
And they're also noticing that it treats its customers with contempt.
That's what's really underpinning the crisis.
And it's why, despite what the panic executives and journalists will tell you, The collapse of the mainstream entertainment industry would be no tragedy.
In fact, it's a necessary step in the process of creating something sustainable, an industry that produces content people actually want to watch.
And that industry is coming, whether Hollywood executives and screenwriters want it or not.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
You know what company is looking out for you when they actually upgrade your service and don't charge for it?
This is great news for new and current PureTalk customers.
PureTalk just added data to every plan and includes a mobile hotspot with no price increase whatsoever.
If you've considered PureTalk before but haven't made the switch, take a look again for just $20 a month.
You'll get unlimited talk, text, and now 50% more 5G plus their new mobile hotspot.
You get all of that.
And this is why I love PureTalk.
They are veteran owned, They only hire the best customer service team.
They're located right here in the great USA.
Most families are saving almost $1,000 a year while enjoying the most dependable 5G network in America.
Remember, you vote with how you spend your money, so stop supporting woke wireless companies that don't support you.
When you go to puretalk.com slash Walsh, you'll save an additional 50% off your first month because they actually do value you.
Imagine that.
That's puretalk.com slash Walsh.
Pure Talk, wireless for Americans by Americans.
Well, it's summertime and that means that it's hot outside.
If you hadn't noticed, that's generally how it works.
It's generally how it has worked.
As long as the Earth has had seasons, it's summertime and then it gets hot.
It's a process that we've seen play out a few times now, at least.
And with the summer season comes certain traditions.
People go on summer vacations, and they go to the pool, and they go to the beach, and the more stylish men break out their cargo shorts and all the rest of it.
Lots of great, wonderful traditions.
And then there's the not-so-great modern summer tradition of panicking hysterically because it's hot outside.
This is when the media, as it does every year, claims that the hot weather is a sign of our impending planetary doom.
So here's CNN, just a quick clip we'll play for you, reporting on our, quote, heat hell.
That's what they're calling it.
It's not summer.
It's not just hot out.
It's a heat hell.
Watch.
These long stretches of extreme heat are what they see as cause for alarm.
That extreme heat is not just being felt here in the United States, it's being felt by millions of people all around the world as the heat wave sweeps across parts of Europe and Asia too.
One top climate group warns that, quote, heat hell is worldwide at the moment and that those extreme temperatures Are nothing short of dangerous.
Bill Weir, we don't usually see these record breaking temperatures that we usually until later in the summer.
Why is this summer expected to be hotter than last summer?
Cooling patterns in the Pacific there, which actually hit a lot of the pent-up energy in the oceans, which have been hiding a lot of the heat for the last century or so.
Right now, every second of every day, our planet absorbs as much extra heat as 10 Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs.
Per second.
And now we're seeing the full result of that.
Now we have wildfire smoke, which is a result of drier forests up in Canada and easier burning conditions there.
We have those devastating flash floods that took the lives of those children, as you were describing, north of Philadelphia.
Those are the results.
But heat It's really the engine of all of this.
A warmer planet holds too much water in some places, not enough in others, and the rate that it's going up now, scientists are used to seeing sort of ocean temperature records broken by a half a degree.
It's been shattered by five degrees in the North Atlantic.
So, in other words, it's hot.
Yes, it is hot.
The hottest it's ever been, they tell us.
It's never been hotter than this.
Representative Ilhan Omar tweeted this.
This is the claim that she's making, and not just her.
She said, the Earth just broke the record for the hottest day in 120,000 years.
In fact, we broke in on three separate days.
We broke it, I think she meant to say.
We broke it on three separate days.
National climate emergency now.
Wow.
The hottest day in 120,000 years.
Now, I mean, that sounds pretty bad.
I admit.
If we just experienced the hottest day in 120,000 years, then something's going on.
Like, that's bad news.
Probably.
We still couldn't do anything about it.
You can't actually do anything about it, but that would be bad news.
The hottest day in 120,000 years.
I mean, that's significant, at the very least.
But, before you go building your ark in preparation for the coming worldwide floods from the polar ice caps melting and all the rest of it, you should take some solace in the fact that what Ilhan Omar has claimed here is total, absolute nonsense.
Okay, that's the one, there's really only one problem with it.
The one problem is that it's completely bogus.
Other than that, it's true.
Other than the fact that it's entirely false, it's actually true.
Now, how do I know that it's bogus?
Well, because needless to say, We do not have daily temperature records dating back 120,000 years, okay?
So you can't say it's the hottest day in 120,000 years because that would require you to know how hot it has been every day for the last 120,000 years, and you don't know that.
Nobody does.
In fact, we can't get anywhere close to that in terms of our records.
And that's why it's not possible to go and look and find out what the weather was like on, say, I don't know, August 7th in the year 4000 BC.
Much less the year 40,000 B.C.
That information does not exist.
We have no idea.
It was not recorded.
So, what the hell is she babbling about?
I mean, where is Omar and where is the rest of the media getting this?
Is she getting it from her own fevered imagination?
Sort of, but not entirely.
Her imagination is being fed by the media.
So, The Hill, for example, published an article with this headline a couple weeks ago.
And here's the headline.
We're experiencing Earth's hottest weather in 120,000 years, and it's just getting started.
So that's probably pretty directly where she got it from.
Although even there, you see, that's not exactly the same claim.
She said this is the hottest day in 120,000 years, but the headline is, we're experiencing Earth's hottest weather, which is a little bit more vague.
But even so, how do they know that?
I mean, how could they possibly know that we're experiencing the hottest weather in 120,000 years?
Well, they answer that question, or they pretend to answer it anyway, with this.
So I'm reading now, it says...
How can experts be so confident of these bold assertions?
As a climate specialist, I'll do my best to explain.
It's all fairly simple and fully expected by the climate science community.
First, researchers know using observations that temperatures over the past decade have been warmer than any ever seen since record-keeping began in the 1800s.
Since then, Earth has warmed by 1.2°C or 2°F.
Scientists also note, through sophisticated methods of examining copious climate clues and proxy data like tree rings, ice cores, ocean sediments, etc., that Earth's average temperature has not been this warm since the Ice Age ended 20,000 years ago.
Between 10,000 years ago and today's rapid man-made warming, Earth's average temperature was relatively constant, allowing human civilization to thrive.
There were disruptive regional cooling episodes like the disparate Little Ice Age events, but the impact on overall global temperature was relatively minor.
Since at the peak of the last ice age, Earth's average temperature is about 10 degrees cooler than today, and it's not been this warm since the last ice age, we call that time the last interglacial, in-between glacial periods, which peaked around 125,000 years ago.
Okay.
So that's it.
That's the science.
Using proxy data like tree rings and ocean sediments, scientists can come up with a guess as to the average global temperature dating back thousands of years, supposedly.
But here's the problem.
Well, there are too many problems to count, but let's, I mean, here's one.
Even if these guesses are correct, or approximately correct, and that's a big if, okay?
They are averages.
They are not precise daily measurements.
Okay, Ilhan?
That's not what they are.
You can't look at a tree ring, Ilhan, and find out what the temperature was at 4.56 p.m.
on July 13th in the year 7 A.D.
Tree rings are not that specific.
Just doesn't work that way.
Which means that the claim that yesterday was the hottest day in over 120,000 years is not supported by any science at all.
It just is not.
There's no basis for it.
Even the more ambiguous, more vague version of that claim, there is still no science for it.
There simply isn't.
None at all.
Now, that's all nonsense.
But there's one other point that I have to make here, and this is, so if there's a tradition of panicking over the hot weather, or at least some people, the media, Democrats panicking over it, the other tradition is where it seems like every year I have to explain what I'm about to explain here, and it's this, and I know for a lot of you this is not going to be news to you, but just bear with me because there are some people who need to hear it.
Now, here's what I'll tell you.
If you're wondering about the hot weather, you're looking around and you're saying, wow, man, it's hot out.
Where's all this hot weather coming from?
Where's it coming from?
Is it coming from my SUV that I drive to the store?
Is that where it's coming from?
Is it coming from all the cows farting and sending methane gas?
Is that what it is?
Well, I'll point your gaze in a different direction, although don't look directly at it.
Because in case you hadn't noticed, there is up in the sky, about 90 million miles away, a giant glowing ball of gas, which is big enough to fit a million Earths inside of it, and it burns at its core at about 27 million degrees Fahrenheit.
It is so big and so powerful that its gravitational pull extends 50,000 astronomical
units into space.
And one astronomical unit is 93 million miles.
So 93 million times 50,000, you do the math on that, that's how far this object's influence extends.
In modern terms, you might even say that when I'm talking about here's the sun, if you didn't already guess, the sun is the greatest influencer in the solar system.
You could search all of TikTok and you would find very few influencers who are as influential as the sun.
That's how influential it is.
So here's my point.
That big old thing in the sky, that glowing ball of gas, we just heard a comparison to atomic bombs.
Well, the sun generates the equivalent of like several billion atomic bombs of energy every second.
And that's what calls the shots on Earth.
It determines the temperature.
It determines everything in terms of weather.
And it could get a case, you know, the sun could get a case of indigestion tomorrow and burp and knock out our entire power grid, send us back to the Stone Age.
That thing That thing is what you can blame the temperature on.
And until you figure out a way to literally control the sun, there is basically nothing we can do to intentionally and significantly raise, lower, or otherwise affect the temperature on Earth.
Because they're going to be competing with that thing in the sky there.
We are not as significant as, apparently, we are not as powerful We are not as powerful as many people, especially corporate media, apparently think we are.
Here's a tweet from someone whose ego is about as big as the sun.
Barack Obama posted this.
He said, Today, some of the books that shaped my life and the lives of so many others are being challenged by people who disagree with certain ideas or perspectives.
And librarians are on the front lines, fighting every day to make the widest range of viewpoints, opinions, and ideas available to everyone.
So that's what he tweeted.
And then he included this letter.
Let me see if I can pull it up.
This is very interesting.
You need to hear this.
This is the letter that he posted as well.
To the dedicated and hard-working librarians of America.
In any democracy, the free exchange of ideas is an important part of making sure that citizens are informed, engaged, and feel like their perspective matters.
So important, in fact, that here in America, the First Amendment of our Constitution states that freedom begins with our capacity to share and access ideas, even, and maybe especially, the ones we disagree with.
More often than not, someone decides to write those ideas down in a book.
More often than not.
So, of all the ideas that have ever been had, more often than not, they are written in books?
I don't think that makes any sense, but we're not gonna get, we don't have time to get hung up on all the little details here.
Books have always shaped how I experience the world.
Writers like Mark Twain and Toni Morrison, Walt Whitman, James Baldwin, taught me something essential about our country's character.
Reading about people whose lives were very different from mine showed me how to step into someone else's shoes.
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
Today, some of the books that shape my life and the lives of so many others are being challenged by people who disagree with certain ideas or perspectives.
It's no coincidence that these banned books are often written by or feature people of color Alright, so, the headline here is that Barack Obama has finally come out as gay.
We knew it would happen eventually, and here we are.
It finally happened, officially.
At least, that must be what he's saying.
I can only assume that's what he's saying.
Because he says that the books that are being challenged, quote-unquote, are the ones that shaped his life.
But literally the only books that anyone on the right is challenging are pornographic books about gay sex.
Okay, those books are the focal, not just the focal point, they are the entirety of the discussion about, quote-unquote, banning books that you find on the right.
That's what we're looking at.
Those are the only ones.
That anyone on our side has raised an objection to.
And when it comes to challenging them, we have specifically challenged their presence in schools.
We have challenged the schools that distribute pornographic books to kids.
That is what we are challenging.
That is the challenge that Barack Obama is referring to.
That's it.
That's the whole challenge.
And so if some of these challenged books are what shaped his life, then we can only assume that his life was shaped by pornographic books about gay sex.
That's what Barack Obama is saying.
I'm not going to pretend it's breaking news.
I'm not going to pretend it's a huge surprise, but that's what he's saying.
And that, of course, as always, is when we hear about banned books from the left, that is always what they're talking about.
On the right, are we trying to ban books?
In a certain context, yeah.
We want to ban pornographic books from schools.
Absolutely.
We want to ban anyone, whether they work at a school or not, from distributing pornographic material to children.
That's what we're looking to do.
But when they talk about book bans, that is 100% of the time what they're referring to.
And you notice something else, too, that it's very interesting and convenient that when you have people on the left, like Barack Obama, who talk about the importance of being able to access ideas and access perspectives.
It's our capacity to share and access ideas, even and maybe especially the ones we disagree with.
He says freedom begins with that.
But we can't have the First Amendment without that, without the ability to freely access and share ideas, including ones we disagree with.
Well, it's really interesting that anytime they talk about that, they want to relegate it to books.
And that's why he immediately in the next sentence makes the kind of odd claim that more often than not, These ideas people have are written down in books, which of course, most of the time, that's not the case.
Like, most people have never written a book.
Everyone has ideas and opinions, and the vast majority of people will never write them in a book.
Most people are not authors.
So, they want to relegate it to that.
They want the conversation to be about books.
Physical books that you can go out and pick up and read.
And even then, it's actually, it's a much more limited conversation than that, because once again, No one is trying to ban books broadly.
So what they're really talking about are books and specifically pornographic books in schools.
But you notice what they're leaving out of all this?
What about the ideas and opinions that are shared in every other context?
Like on social media, on the internet.
Because everyone has ideas and opinions that they want to share.
Almost no one, save a very small minority, are writing them in actual physical books.
But most people in the modern world are sharing them online.
And so if you really believe that freedom begins with our capacity to share and access ideas, then before we talk about books, you should be starting with, you know, social media needs to be a place where people can openly share their opinions, especially, Barack Obama says, the ones we disagree with.
But he's not going to say that.
Because he knows that in these forums, you know, the exact forums where regular people actually do go to share and access ideas, most people are not writing books that end up in libraries and most people are not going to libraries these days.
But people are online.
But it's in that forum of the internet where you're not going to hear someone like Barack Obama talk about the importance of free speech.
Because it's exactly there where they want to shut down free speech and they want to shut down the free exchange and expression of ideas and opinions.
That's when their tone suddenly changes really drastically.
And now instead of talking about how freedom begins with our capacity to share and access ideas, now they're going to talk about things like stochastic terrorism, how you can be a terrorist for having a viewpoint that other people find disturbing.
Yeah, they care so much about sharing and accessing ideas, but they think that you should be banned from every social media platform in the world if you say that, you know, a male is a man and not a woman.
That's how much they care about free speech, obviously.
All right, moving on.
Here's Pentagon spokesman John Kirby answering an important question.
Let's listen.
Why is the new DOD policy on abortion critical to military readiness?
I'm really glad you asked that question.
No, I mean, I really am.
One in five members of the U.S.
military are women.
Twenty percent.
We're an all-volunteer force.
Nobody's forcing you to sign up and go.
People volunteer to go.
You raise your right hand, you say, I'm gonna do this for a few years or even for my life.
And it might cost me my life to do it.
And when you sign up and you make that contract, you have every right to expect that the organization, in this case the military, is going to take care of you, and they're going to take care of your families, and they're going to make sure that you can serve with dignity and respect no matter who you are, who you love, or how you worship or don't.
And our policies, whether they're diversity, inclusion, and equity, or whether they're about Transgender individuals who qualify physically and mentally to serve to be able to do it with dignity, or whether it's about female service members, one in five, or female family members being able to count on the kinds of health care and reproductive care specifically that they need to serve.
That is a foundational sacred obligation of military leaders across the river.
I've seen it myself and it matters because it says we're invested in you because you are You're investing your life, your family's livelihood with us?
We owe you that back in return.
I had a chance a couple of weeks ago to meet with some military spouses here at the White House.
Some were active duty members, some were spouses, all were women.
And 201, they told me.
that abortion laws in this country that are now being passed
Wow.
are absolutely having an effect on their willingness to continue serving in uniform
or to encourage or discourage, in this case, their spouses from continuing service.
Wow, so he had a bunch of military members and military spouses, all female,
at the White House or the Pentagon, and every single one said that abortion,
that being able to kill babies is a necessity in order to have women in the military.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Well, all right, here's an easy solution then.
Here's my solution.
If that's the case, I'll adopt your premise for a moment.
Well, then get women out of the military.
You know, ban women from the military.
That's the solution.
Get women out.
I have never heard a better argument for excluding women from the military than this.
There are actually a bunch of arguments for it, all of them quite compelling.
But this is the best argument.
He claims that a necessary prerequisite for having women in the military is killing babies.
That's what he is saying.
That's the spokesman for the Pentagon.
In fact, using tax money to kill babies, tax-funded baby murder, is necessary, Kirby claims, in order to have women serve.
Well, okay, then get them the hell out.
If children must be sacrificed on the altar of female inclusion, then that is the best possible indication that there should be no female inclusion in this facet of society, which is the military.
Best argument you can make.
Now, we know that oftentimes, historically, members of the military have been called on to sacrifice their lives, which is a heroic sacrifice, and we honor that.
What we do not honor is a member of the military or anybody else sacrificing their children for the sake of their own opportunities.
That is an exact inversion.
Okay, that is the opposite of what someone in the military should be doing.
Ideally, you join the military to protect your children and other people's children.
You go there to protect your country, and especially the future generations, the current younger generations' children.
But children being killed for the sake of these members of the military is backwards.
It is, again, a complete inversion of what is supposed to be the basic function and purpose of the military.
And there's a lot of that going on, we know.
The Biden administration wants to invert everything, especially when it comes to the military, so that in every area it does exactly the opposite of what it's supposed to do and functions in exactly the opposite way that it's supposed to function.
But we can begin here.
If that's what it takes, then no problem, just get women out of the military.
Historically, we know that in every thriving and successful civilization that men are the people that go to war to defend it, anyway, to begin with.
And this is not a problem that you have.
When men Are exclusively in the military.
This is not even a conversation we even need to have.
Maybe that should tell us something.
All right, one other thing I want to play for you, another quick clip, and I haven't even seen this whole clip.
I just saw it pop up right before we started filming today.
Speaking of women, Jared Polis, governor of Colorado, and Spencer Cox, who's the governor of Utah, that is a Democrat and alleged Republican, have come together for some sort of PSA.
They have combined their cringe powers.
When their cringe powers combine, it creates this.
Let's watch.
I'm Spencer Cox, Republican Governor of Utah.
And I'm Jared Polis, Democratic Governor of Colorado.
And we're here to help save your family dinners.
You know what we're talking about.
You're halfway through your second helping of mashed potatoes when your MAGA uncle decides to share his thoughts on the latest election conspiracy.
We all have that uncle.
Or instead of passing the salt, your woke niece passes along a particularly controversial fact that you read on social media.
Or maybe you're the one with the strong opinions.
You know you're right, and the other side is a bunch of misguided weirdos.
But there's a healthy way to deal with conflicting opinions.
Actually, it's okay to disagree.
It's not just okay, it's crucial.
Did you just disagree with me about disagreeing?
Healthy disagreement means not assuming that the other side is deluded, misinformed, or actively trying to overthrow America.
A little respect and curiosity keeps resentment off the dinner table.
And out of your social media feeds.
Our nation was founded by people who profoundly disagreed.
So next time your uncle, your niece, or anyone else brings up that one topic that just drives you nuts, take a deep breath.
Be curious.
Ask questions.
If you still disagree, that's okay.
But you might find that you aren't as far apart as you think.
Conflict isn't bad.
It's the way we disagree that matters.
Please join us in showing America the right kind of conflict.
Together, we can disagree better.
No.
I was expecting cringe, but that was overload.
That was a lot.
And I don't apologize for very much on this show, but I am sorry to have inflicted that on you.
I didn't realize quite... Like I said, I didn't read the whole... I didn't watch really any of it before.
I just saw... I saw it.
I saw the thumbnail, and that was it.
And we played it, and now we've all experienced it, and there's no going back.
We can't go back.
We can't go back to who we were before.
We just sat through that for 90 seconds.
First of all, who speaks like, no one speaks like this.
What do you do if your niece passes along a controversial fact that she read on social media?
This is not, it's not how human beings speak.
And we, of course, also don't need politicians to tell us how to function as human beings.
That's not what they're there for.
That's not what we elected them.
We don't need you to help us become better people.
That's not your job.
Which is a good thing, because you two in particular are not equipped for that job whatsoever.
And most of this, you could say, is basically harmless.
It's just your standard cliches and platitudes about, oh, why don't we all get along?
For the most part, that's what it is.
It's cringy, it's embarrassing, all that, but you can roll your eyes and move on.
But what underlies this is really a misconception.
And it is a fact, talking about controversial facts, is a fact that many people are too afraid to face.
Which is that what we just heard from one of those guys there, Well, a lot of times you think you disagree, but you find out you're not that far apart.
The fact is that that is not true.
We want to believe that.
That's what we tell ourselves.
So we look at all the contention in our culture and the disagreements and the culture war battles that rage.
And we want to believe that, you know, we're really all the same at heart and we want the same things and we have the same basic values.
So most of these arguments and everything, but most of this, these are all really grounded in misconceptions, miscommunications.
Really, that's what all this is.
That's not the case.
I wish that were the case.
I wish that was true, but it's not.
Because what we find in our culture, as I have said many times, there is a It is an oversimplification to talk about two sides because each side is fractured into splinter groups, apparently, especially on our side being conservatives, whatever you want to call us, that you find that fracturing and splintering, especially among people on the right.
But if we were to broadly lump the two groups together and talk about left and right, which you can do, and it's coherent, it's a coherent thing to do, what you find in between these two groups is a vast And deep canyon.
And it's far too wide for any bridge to be built across it.
It turns out we as Americans do not share any universal principles or universal fundamental beliefs about life and about the world.
We don't.
We used to.
That used to be the case.
I mean, you could go back 150 years to a time when there were when there was obviously intense disagreement about really important issues and even civil wars that were fought.
But if you get down to it, you would find that there are some basic fundamental agreements.
And we don't have that anymore.
Now obviously, you know, on this show we talk a lot about gender ideology and everything related to that.
And one of the reasons we talk about that is that that is one of the most glaring examples of this total lack of commonality between the two sides.
Because that's one of the things.
You go back to, you know, the Civil War.
600,000 Americans died.
They were killing each other on the battlefield.
But if you had taken a poll of everybody involved in the Civil War on both sides and asked them, do women have penises?
You would find that 0% say yes.
So at least they all understood, like, basic facts of physical reality that they all understood.
They had that in common, at least.
They all also, almost all of them, would have also believed in God, would have believed, therefore, in some of the basic ideas about the meaning of life and the purpose of human beings.
I mean, these things are important.
But we don't have any of that anymore.
At least not shared across both sides and across the culture.
And that's the reality.
And you might find that in your own family.
A lot of people do.
You might have somebody in your own family.
So this is not just annoying conversations at the dinner table.
You might have an uncle or niece or whoever or a parent or, you know, sibling, God forbid, a spouse.
It's not just that you disagree with them.
It's that they might as well live in a different universe.
Their conception of reality is completely foreign and alien to you.
That's what we're dealing with.
And, you know, we have to begin by at least recognizing that.
Let's get to the comment section.
[MUSIC]
In a world filled with uncertainties, one shocking headline spreads panic like
wildfire and grocery stores are empty within hours.
It's crucial to be ready for whatever comes your way.
Having a reliable food storage system can provide you with peace of mind and the insurance that your loved ones will be taken care of.
If anything does happen right now, My Patriot Supply is giving you $30 in savings on your one-week emergency food kit to help you start growing your supply.
Go to preparewithwalsh.com and grab this special price before it ends.
Your one-week emergency food kit provides over 2,000 calories each day for optimal strength and energy in stressful situations.
You can enjoy a wide variety of My Patriot Supply food from buttermilk pancakes, chicken alfredo, rice pudding.
Their meals have you covered for every part of your day.
The best part is each meal is delicious.
Don't wait for disaster to strike before taking action.
By then it might be too late.
Invest in your safety and your well-being by securing your food storage today.
Go to preparewithwalsh.com.
Save $30 in savings with each kit your family needs.
That's preparewithwalsh.com.
Okay, LiftedInFaith says, what is so funny about the height swapping of the seven dwarfs is that in their attempt to not perpetuate the discrimination of little people, they are actively taking jobs away from little people.
Yeah, that's exactly the point that I think I made also on the show yesterday, that this is one of the many ironies here, is that actually Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, but that was an opportunity to actually, we hear about it's so important to have representation and opportunities for all different kinds of people.
Well, if you are someone suffering from dwarfism and you're an actor in Hollywood, it's like there are not many roles that are open to you.
And so if they're making a Snow White remake, well, here's an opportunity.
And in their wokeness, Disney came back around and said, no, never mind.
We're going to exclude you.
In the name of inclusion, we're going to exclude you.
That's often the way it goes.
Knowledge and Faith says, no white and the seven Dwights.
I like that one.
I mean, seven Dwights doesn't make a lot of sense, but it kind of does.
I sort of understand what you mean by that.
Sylvia says, something is wrong with your hair.
Well, I think what's wrong with it is that we're on the road and I don't have hair and makeup.
Not that I use that anyway.
But if there's anything wrong with how I appear, that's who you can blame it on.
Because, of course, I don't know how to groom myself or comb my own hair.
The Cultured Swine says, I don't think you understand how close some of the SPG came to converting to Michael Knowles' creme de la creme while you were gone.
Glad you're back.
Please never leave for that long again.
Well, they're not.
They're SPG for life.
Well, don't insult me by saying SPG for life.
If you're going to then... SPG for life after you just said that after three weeks you're going to convert to Michael Knowles' cult?
So it's not SPG for life, is it?
It's SPG for, you know, three and a half weeks.
How dare you?
Creme de la creme, come on.
That's almost as bad as Candace's attempts.
Look, there's just, there's just, everyone at the Daily Wire has tried to make their own cult, and it doesn't, you know why it doesn't work?
Because it's too intentional.
As I've tried to explain, the SPG was, it was something that happened organically.
It was almost, it's like it fell out of the sky.
It was birthed by the universe itself, I would even say, not to put too fine a point on it.
And what you have from the other people of the Daily Wire is that they look at that and say, I want my own, I want my own.
You end up with creme de la creme, come on.
Christina says, so they don't know who had access to a secure area of the White House and are dropped off hard drugs.
What else did this person slash group have access to?
Sensitive documents?
Talk about massive security breach.
They are trying to cover their ass but end up making the situation look even worse.
Right.
It's whoever left the cocaine in the White House.
And we can assume that it's someone that is close to people in power in the White House, because we can assume that, because if it wasn't, they would just tell us.
If it really was some visitor, and that's what they keep telling us, they keep saying that, you know, visitors, it's an area that visitors have access to, hundreds of visitors.
Do you really want us to believe that a visitor to the White House brought cocaine?
Like someone, what, maybe someone's going for a tour?
Someone is stopping by for a tour of the White House, some tourist?
Decided to bring some coke into the White House, and then realized, halfway through the tour, said, oh crap, I brought my cocaine with me, and then took it out and just left it somewhere.
We're supposed to believe that.
Of course, that doesn't make any sense.
But if it is true that they have no idea, then that does indeed raise lots of questions about security or lack thereof at the White House.
Michael says, honestly, Disney is trying to cater to a much larger and more diverse audience than they did in the 1950s.
The backlash is partly cultural dissonance because things are changing, partly hate speech.
Yes, it's hate speech if you don't want to go watch the new Snow White.
Of course, what you're saying is completely wrong on many levels, starting with the fact that it is not catering to a much larger audience.
OK, I can guarantee you.
That the Snow White remake will not reach a larger audience than did the original Snow White.
How many people have seen the original Snow White that was made in the 1940s or even earlier perhaps?
How many people have seen it?
I'm sure we could probably look that number up.
Hundreds of millions?
If not more than that?
And it's not just people that have seen it, it's the influence that that film has had on the culture and on people.
Do you think that the remake is going to come anywhere close to that?
No, of course not.
These remakes are not even reaching the new generations and the newer audiences.
I know that from my own kids.
They have no interest in watching any of the remake versions of any of these films.
They're bored to death by all of them.
So if this is about reaching a larger and more diverse audience, it totally fails in that regard.
It would be hard to reach a larger audience than the Disney classics have already reached, because they reach everyone.
Everyone knows about those films and has seen them.
So what, they're going to reach a larger audience than everyone?
You know, that's the thing about fairy tales, right?
It's like fairy tales, these are stories that have been written and have been retold and passed down through the ages and that they are designed already to connect with people of all ages and all backgrounds and quote-unquote diverse audiences.
That's what fairy tales already do.
That's why these stories have stood the test of time.
Not just since the original Disney films, which we call original, but they didn't originate the stories.
These stories go back, many of them go back hundreds of years, if not longer.
So you're not going to improve on them.
And often what ends up happening, not often, every time what ends up happening in the Woke Remix is that they take these enduring stories that have stood the test of time and they remove everything about them that made them enduring, that made them relatable in the first place.
And finally, Nick says, Matt, seriously man, I'm starting to think you didn't work on **** for the past, it seems like a month.
Ye of little faith.
All I can keep telling you is that, listen, I know there are many people in media, even in conservative media, that they like to hype things up and they like to say, oh, we got something big's coming, and then they don't follow through.
So I'm aware that that happens.
But I would hope that at this point you at least have noticed that when I say, oh, we got some big stuff coming, like we actually, we're going to do it.
I don't say that if it's not true.
Just patience is all we need.
As many of you know, I wasn't super thrilled when my family got a dog, but they are obsessed with it, which is why, despite my own distaste for the mangy beast, I love making my family happy.
And part of doing that is keeping this freeloader as healthy as possible, which is why I give my dog Rough Greens.
Dr. Dennis Black, the founder of Rough Greens, is focused on improving the health of every dog in America.
Little did I know before I got Rough Greens, dog food is dead food.
Everybody knows that nutrition isn't brown, it's green.
Well, let Rough Greens boost your dog's food back to life.
Rough Greens is a supplement that contains all the necessary vitamins and minerals, probiotics, omega oils, digestive enzymes, and antioxidants that your dog needs.
You don't have to go out and buy new dog food, you just sprinkle Rough Greens on their food every day.
Dog owners everywhere are raving about Rough Greens.
It supports healthy joints, improves bad breath, Boost energy levels and so much more.
We are what we eat, and that goes for dogs, too.
Dr. Dennis Black is so confident Ruff Greens will improve your dog's health.
He's offering my listeners a free Jumpstart Trial Bag so your dog can try it.
A free Jumpstart Trial Bag can be found and at your door in just a few business days if you go to freeruffgreens.com slash Walsh or call 844-RUFF-700.
That's freeruffgreens.com slash Walsh or call 844-RUFF-700 today.
I want to talk to you about something I don't usually talk about.
Hair.
Not mine.
My hair is handsome and brilliant because I use Jeremy's Razor Shampoo and Conditioner.
I'm talking about yours.
Because if you're not also using Jeremy's Restorative Tea Tree and Argan Oil Blend to wash your mane, you're doing it wrong and you are asking to be cancelled.
Jeremy's Razors is more than a razor company.
It's a men's grooming brand that doesn't hate men.
Their shampoo and conditioner, along with their exfoliating charcoal body wash, are all made from high-quality natural ingredients right here in the USA.
They're sulfate-free, and even though I still don't know what a paraben is, or a sulfate for that matter, they're free of those as well.
But most important of all, Jeremy's Razor's hair and body bundles are woke-free.
So stop giving your money to woke companies who hate you.
Head over to Jeremy'sRazors.com and check out their shampoo, conditioner, and body wash bundles today.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
This may very well be my favorite story that I've covered all summer.
Though in fairness, I've only done like three shows this summer, so the bar is not very high.
Be that as it may, we must extend a hearty congratulations to Fairbanks School Board candidate Michael Humphrey, who won the prize for the best political float at the city's Golden Day Festival parade.
Now, I have no idea what the Golden Day Festival is, except that the parade is apparently the largest in the state every single year.
This is a big deal as far as Alaskan parades go.
I mean, it is the biggest one.
Suffice to say that it is an enormous honor for Mr. Humphrey, who won the award, and also for yours truly, as the winning float was apparently inspired by my best-selling children's book, Johnny the Walrus.
As you can see here, I put the pictures up, the float is a massive walrus with the name Johnny emblazoned on the front.
This should be a time of celebration in Fairbanks.
Celebration of the Johnny the Walrus float.
Indeed, it should be a time of celebration across the entire world.
Michael Humphrey's Johnny the Walrus float has achieved the highest honor ever awarded to a giant inflatable walrus.
And yes, we have kept daily records on that, and so I know I can say that.
If we cannot all come together to applaud this man and his walrus in this time and honor their accomplishments, then what does that say about us as a culture, I ask you?
But that is where this story takes a dark turn.
That becomes a tale of treachery and betrayal.
The judges who gave the award to Johnny the Walrus have now come out, after giving the award, have now come out and denounced Johnny the Walrus.
As it turns out, these judges are libs who did not understand until after the fact that the walrus they awarded is based on my children's book.
These poor libs, like so many libs before them, did not even realize they were being owned.
And by the time they found out, it was too late.
The website Must Read Alaska reports, the judges awarded the walrus the top prize, and the fun started.
Someone figured out that this was Johnny from the pro-child book, Johnny the Walrus.
One of the judges, a hardline leftist, went to Twitter to express her utter horror that she had helped Johnny the Walrus win.
She didn't know, she said, that Johnny the Walrus was transphobic.
Quote, so it turns out that the best political float was an anti-trans float.
The judges had no idea.
We had two floats to choose from for political.
You know what I hate?
Hateful people.
Of course, the irony is lost on her on that.
She continued, we both feel sick about it, and especially on how it reflects in our community to those who don't know that the judges did not have context.
We thought, guy has a mustache like a walrus.
We're in Alaska.
That's a walrus inflatable.
Okay.
The controversy quickly spread from there to other social media platforms.
On Facebook, a Fairbanks resident anonymously posted, quote, This was afloat in today's Golden Day Parade in Fairbanks, Alaska, for school board candidate Michael Humphrey.
His giant walrus named Johnny is a reference to a transphobic kids' book that compares being a trans child to pretending to be a walrus.
Please help get the word out about this disgusting candidate and ensure that he does not get elected.
He is running against incumbent Tim Doran.
Soon, TikTok got in on the action, where a man with a Hanna-Barbera cartoon villain mustache expressed his deep outrage.
Listen.
So get a load of this transphobic bullshit that just showed up in Fairbanks.
So you may ask yourself, how does a walrus equate to a transphobia?
Well, let me explain.
So Michael Humphries, he's a conservative Christian Republican who's running for a school board in the Fairbanks area.
He decided to announce his candidacy by running afloat in the Gold Days parade through Fairbanks as a giant walrus.
Oh, neat!
Most people thought that the walrus's name is Johnny.
Well, for those of you who are not familiar, Johnny the Walrus actually means a lot more than it appears.
Johnny the Walrus is a book that was written by Matt Walsh.
Johnny the Walrus is based off of a kid who has an overactive imagination.
One day he wants to be a dinosaur.
One day he wants to be a knight in shining armor.
Well, one day he decides he wants to be a walrus.
He puts spoons in his mouth, tells his mom he's a walrus.
His mom thinks it's adorable, puts a picture of him online.
That's when the internet people come and get her and tell her that she's a bigot if she doesn't help him transition to be a walrus.
So the mom complies and starts forcing Johnny to become a walrus.
And that's when Johnny's like, I don't know if I want to be a walrus.
So this is trying to draw false parallels with the trans community and gender-affirming healthcare and trans kids.
It's utter bullsh**.
It has no place.
And the fact that this guy has the audacity to go out in public and actually announce this is embarrassing.
Unfortunately, this is a dog whistle.
He's meaning to appeal to an extremist base.
Because you go to his website, guess what?
It just backs it up.
He says he wants to fight gender ideology when it comes to kids.
These kind of people have no place in elected office.
Fairbanks, your election is October 3rd.
Do your part, Fairbanks.
OK, first of all, it's not a dog whistle.
You know, a dog whistle is like something subtle and it's a giant inflatable float, parade float.
It's not a dog whistle.
It's, you know, it's it's I don't think it's hiding.
It's not hiding what it is.
Now, not to resort to cliches here, but this guy really does say the quiet part out loud.
He insists directly that people who want to fight gender ideology when it comes to kids have, quote, no place in elected office.
According to Mustacheman, endorsing a radical sexual ideology and indoctrinating children into it should be a prerequisite for holding public office.
You must be a cult member in good standing, an evangelist for the cause.
This, of course, is what everyone on the left believes, but it's always interesting when they state it so explicitly as he does here.
That part of the video is disturbing, but I appreciate the rest of it because he at least offers a pretty decent synopsis of the book, which you can buy for yourself at johnnythewalrus.com.
It's amusing that he meant to criticize Johnny the Walrus, but instead spent almost the entire rant simply summarizing the plot.
In any case, putting all that aside, I do have some questions about this whole saga.
Really just one question, actually.
For the parade judges who accidentally gave the award to a transphobic walrus, what did you think the walrus signified?
I mean, even if somehow you've never heard of the greatest piece of children's literature ever written, didn't you wonder why a giant walrus was submitted under the political category?
Like, didn't you stop and say, hmm, it's a political parade float featuring a 20-foot walrus named Johnny.
What's that all about?
What's the significance?
This is why it's so important to do your own research.
Because if you don't, you might accidentally give the first place prize to a giant transphobic marine mammal.
It happens all the time.
Now, I'm not agreeing that Johnny is transphobic.
Johnny is just an innocent walrus, for God's sake.
He harbors no ill will towards anyone.
But my point is that if these judges feel somehow misled, they only have themselves to blame.
Okay?
Though I can understand why they might have been swept away by Johnny's sheer beauty and majesty.
Perhaps lost their ability to think clearly in the process.
I get that.
I do.
Of course, there will always be something very funny about the claim that my children's book is transphobic, given that the book never once mentions transgenderism or gender at all.
So, if you truly believe that there is simply no comparison between a boy pretending to be a walrus and a boy identifying as a girl, if these situations are, in your mind, truly not analogous at all, then you should have no issue with the book.
Indeed, you could even buy the book for your own children with no fear that it will cause them to question the trans agenda, God forbid.
If, again, you truly believe that there is no similarity between a child pretending to be an animal and a child identifying as the opposite sex, then you should have no issue with this book, no fear about its effect on children.
From your perspective, Johnny the Walrus should then simply be a silly little story about a boy playing make-believe.
But you see, these leftists know better, despite how it may seem.
They know that there really isn't any substantive difference between a young boy pretending that he's a walrus and a young boy pretending that he's a girl.
In both cases, it is nothing more than an imaginative game being played by an innocent and impressionable child.
They know this, which is why they hate Johnny the Walrus so much.
And that ought to tell you something about, or rather tell them something about their own ideology, and tell us.
Because, you know, if you have to fear that a preschool board book about a kid in a walrus costume might somehow undermine your worldview, then there's something deeply wrong with your worldview.
And that is where the problem lies here.
It does not lie with Johnny the Walrus, or Michael Humphrey, or his brilliant, award-winning parade float.
And that is why Johnny the Walrus's detractors are, yet again, his detractors and betrayers, I must say, are, yet again, today, cancelled.
And that'll do it for the show today, or rather, this portion of the show.
