Ep. 1197 - How Big Pharma's Marketing Machine Is Fueling The ADHD Surge
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, the media is panicking over an Adderall shortage in the United States. Apparently many Americans aren't getting their daily doses of stimulants, and this is leading to catastrophe. But what this story really demonstrates is that Big Pharma has a stranglehold on the population. Also, Ron DeSantis accepts a debate challenge from Gavin Newsom. Is that the right move? Justin Trudeau announces his separation from his wife. Lizzo is accused of sexual harassment and fat shaming. And two new and highly disgusting TikTok trends take off.
Ep.1197
- - -
Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm
- - -
DailyWire+:
Want to work at The Daily Wire? For more information, click here and select “Careers”: https://bit.ly/3JR6n6d
Get 25% of your DailyWire+ membership: https://bit.ly/3VhjaTs
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898, or go to https://bit.ly/3LjDxuA, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit.
Headrest Safe - Save $100 today with code WALSH at http://www.theheadrestsafe.com
ZipRecruiter - Rated #1 Hiring Site. Try ZipRecruiter for FREE!
http://www/.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
Today on the Matt Wall Show, the media is panicking over an Adderall shortage in the United States.
Apparently, many Americans aren't getting their daily doses of stimulants, and this is leading to catastrophe, we're told.
But what this story really demonstrates is that Big Pharma has a stranglehold on the population.
We'll talk about that.
Ron DeSantis accepts a debate challenge from Gavin Newsom.
Is that the right move for him?
Justin Trudeau announces his separation from his wife.
And Lizzo is accused of sexual harassment and fat shaming.
Plus, two new and highly disgusting TikTok trends take off.
all of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
We are days away from the Durbin Accords, the greatest threat to the U.S.
dollar's global dominance in the past 80 years.
On August 22nd, the BRICS nations are expected to announce the launch of a new international super currency fully backed by gold or other commodities.
This is part of their long-term plan to supplant the U.S.
and the dollar as cornerstones of the global financial system.
You can protect your IRA or 401k from the fallout from this landmark announcement
by diversifying with gold from Birch Gold.
Historically, gold has been a safe haven in times of high uncertainty, which is right now.
When currencies fail, gold is a safe haven.
How much more time does the dollar have?
Protect your savings with gold.
Birch Gold has an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau and thousands of happy customers.
Find out why by texting WALSH to 989898 and get your free info kit on gold.
If a central bank digital currency becomes a reality, it'll be nice to have some gold to depend on.
Again, text WALSH to 989898.
It's hard to think of any industry that's enjoyed more success over the past 20 years or so
More than 131 million people, that's two-thirds of all adults in the United States, report that they're taking at least one prescription drug currently.
That's a significant increase from the year 2000 when around half of American adults said they were doing so.
The percentage of people taking five or more prescription drugs has nearly doubled since the turn of the century.
Spending on prescription drugs in that period has more than tripled.
Drugs that supposedly treat psychological issues like unhappiness or lack of self-control have done especially well.
From 1991 to 2018, SSRI prescriptions increased by over 3,000%.
Roughly half the country either takes the potentially mind-altering drug Ozempic to lose weight or knows someone taking it.
Now, given Big Pharma's tremendous success, you'd think that by now they would have solved a lot of the health problems facing Americans, or at least made progress in resolving these problems.
But the opposite is true.
Average life expectancy is declining.
Suicide rates are going up.
So are the rates of obesity, drug addiction, cancer among young adults.
How is that possible?
How is the pharmaceutical industry succeeding financially while failing in every other area that matters?
How can they have so many people on so many medicines and yet at the same time everyone is only getting sicker and less healthy?
Part of the answer is that many drugs created by big pharma aren't even intended to alleviate health problems anymore.
They're designed instead to cause more death and suffering.
Big Pharma is churning out record amounts of sterilization drugs, abortion drugs, suicide drugs, especially in Canada, where the government has begun putting down the undesirables who don't even have a terminal illness.
They are euthanizing human beings like stray dogs and hardly anyone is objecting to it.
More than half of all abortions are now performed using drugs from pharmaceutical companies.
So-called puberty blockers, which can cause lifelong complications, are now prescribed to children under the age of 18 more than twice as often as they were just a few years ago.
The rest of Big Pharma's catalog, the drugs that are at least allegedly beneficial to patients' health, have had a lot of marketing behind them.
Other than New Zealand, we are the only country that allows drug companies to market directly to consumers.
This means that the pharmaceutical industry can sell not just the medication, but also the illness that the medication is supposed to cure.
Do you have such and such symptoms?
Then you might have this disease.
Here's a drug that can help.
Diagnosis and prescription in one 30-second advertisement.
How convenient.
Fortunately for Big Pharma, the U.S.
government has also granted them immunity from lawsuits, even when their products injure people, which they quite often do.
Maybe the most important single reason for Big Pharma's success, though, is media coverage.
And in particular, media coverage that the drug companies have paid for.
Pharmaceutical companies recently began spending more on advertising than they do on research and development.
In 2020, the year of the great pandemic, Pfizer spent $12 billion on marketing compared to just $9 billion on R&D.
Companies like AbbVie and Johnson & Johnson and Bayer and many other pharma companies posted similar numbers.
Now, what does all this money buy you?
If you turn on any cable or network news channel, you know the answer to that question.
It buys incessant advertisements that air during every commercial break.
And although the networks, of course, will never admit it, it also buys positive coverage.
After all, if the networks criticize Big Pharma, they stand to lose millions in advertising dollars.
Every single news report you see on TV is sponsored by Big Pharma.
Now you might have noticed that the entire national news media, kind of staying on this point here, is currently freaking out over the shortage of the drug Adderall.
Adderall is manufactured by Teva Pharmaceuticals, although there are competitors that make other versions of the drug.
All of a sudden, Adderall is really hard to find, and here's one recent report from ABC Action News on the shortage, and I want you to see and watch how they frame this issue.
Listen.
A shortage of ADHD medication is leaving some parents in limbo, and they're wondering if they're going to have enough pills to help their children.
Yeah, experts say shortages of medications are not rare, but the shortage of ADHD medications is in a category of its own.
Our Vanessa Ariza spoke with one mother who says it's a game of roulette when it comes to her daughter's medicine.
She also spoke to an expert who may have a better idea of when the problem will slow down.
Meet six-year-old Ayana, a beam of light with a love for lyrics.
Her mom, Jessica McBride, says this is her lovable daughter on a good day when she's on her ADHD medication.
They finally found one that works well for Ayana last fall.
Within about a week of being on it, she was finally able to memorize her sight words that she'd been working on for months.
You know, she was finally able, her brain was able to slow down enough for her to focus.
Hmm.
What will that six-year-old do without her stimulants?
This is a medical crisis.
After all, the six-year-old has trouble sitting still to memorize sight words when she's not drugged.
Which makes her very similar to almost every other six-year-old that has ever lived on the planet.
But this mother wants her six-year-old to be less like a six-year-old because it's very inconvenient to have a six-year-old acting like a six-year-old in the home.
And that's why she desperately needs the drug.
And by she, I mean the mother, not the child.
The mother needs the child to be drugged so that the child is not such a burden on her, the mother.
The anchor says that the shortage of ADHD medication is leaving parents wondering, quote, if they're going to have enough pills to help their children.
But of course, ADHD drugs for kids are really meant to help the parents.
Think about what a revealing line that is, though, for a moment.
Well, there's two lines there.
The first is about the sight words.
By the way, if your six-year-old has not memorized all of her sight words in a few months, that's normal.
That is a normal six-year-old thing.
I've had three six-year-olds.
I know what I'm talking about.
But there's also the statement from the news anchor, which assumes, as a matter of fact, that the only possible way for parents to help their children is by giving them pills.
Now, what's the scientific basis for that claim?
Later on, ABC Action News provides an expert, and here's what this expert has to say.
This is a really, really difficult shortage.
A lot of patients require this medication just to function on a daily basis.
That's Michael Daniel.
He's with a non-profit organization, American Society of Health System Pharmacists.
Initially, he says the shortage of ADHD medication was due to manufacturing.
Now, he says one aspect of the drug drought is due to demand.
More people being diagnosed with ADHD, resulting in more people needing the drug.
In this case, it's really hard to understand how much demand is out there.
So manufacturers can scale up production, but they really don't know how much to make.
So, the expert who affords legitimacy to the idea that six-year-olds need ADHD medication is named Michael Gagno.
He's with the American Society of Health System Pharmacists.
He says that a lot of patients, quote, require this medication just to function on a daily basis.
Therefore, he says, the ADHD shortage is very difficult.
Soon we might have an epidemic of six-year-olds not memorizing sight words.
Think of the devastation.
Now what's left unstated in that report is that the American Society of Health System Pharmacists is sponsored by Big Pharma.
They admit it on their website.
The most recent mid-year conference lists Pfizer as a platinum sponsor.
So these are the experts that the pharmaceutical industry launders through so-called news reports in order to convince you that ADHD is a real disorder and that your kid has it and needs the drugs.
This is the quality of medical professional they throw on television to tell you that your six-year-old needs a lifetime supply of psychiatric medication so that she'll be docile and compliant as if that's how a six-year-old is supposed to be.
But these experts are really PR people.
This is marketing they're doing.
As if to prove that point, the same expert, Michael Gugnino, popped up in a PBS News article on Adderall.
It's entitled, A Perfect Storm Led to an ADHD Medication Shortage.
Here's why.
Once again, the expert explains that the Adderall shortage is really frustrating.
Presumably because patients desperately need the drug.
PBS agrees.
They reported that millions who rely on the drugs have been left with uncertainty, frustration, and bureaucratic hassles.
National Geographic was even more melodramatic.
They wrote, quote, As Adderall shortage continues, people with ADHD struggle to stay afloat.
The article quotes an adult who says that, who's been diagnosed with ADHD, and he says that, quote, It doesn't take much for us to drown.
National Geographic added that, quote, some adults with ADHD are now forced to navigate life while unmedicated.
Oh man, can you imagine?
American adults are having to figure out how to navigate life without their regular dose of stimulants?
God forbid!
The horror!
Navigating life unmedicated!
How will you ever do it?
I mean, how can these people possibly live and deal with normal distraction and boredom without their chemical crutches?
Now of course, prior to the invention of ADHD medicine and ADHD itself, everybody lived without these drugs and not one single person died because of it.
Yet now a shortage of these drugs, the ones that everyone was fine without since forever, represents some kind of existential crisis.
People are drowning without them.
This is how a pharmaceutical company wants you to feel.
They want you to feel that this drug they're giving you is a life raft that you have to cling to, and if you don't have it, you will drown somehow.
The Biden administration, of course, agrees that this is a major problem.
They want everybody hopped up on as many drugs as possible.
Accordingly, CNN reports that the FDA and DEA are now calling on drug makers to boost manufacturing amid ongoing shortages of prescription stimulants.
CNN blamed the shortage on the, quote, surge in demand for prescription stimulants during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among adults.
Of course, this is not the first time there's been a rush to manufacture and push out drugs, allegedly because of the pandemic.
And we all know how well it worked out the first time.
In any case, it's the pandemic's fault, they say.
They're blaming the shortage of the Adderall on the pandemic, just like they blame everything on the pandemic.
But here's the thing.
If the pandemic increased ADHD by such an enormous degree, then that only shows that ADHD is not a real disease.
It's a concept invented by the medical industry and its never-ending pursuit to medicalize and subsequently profit off of every inconvenient human trait and behavior.
You know, the fact that more people suddenly came down with ADHD when they were locked in their homes absolutely proves that this disorder is simply a way of categorizing normal boredom and restlessness, which is all extremely human and, again, normal.
That would explain why ADHD diagnoses somehow increased by two-thirds from 1998 to 2016.
It would explain why these diagnoses increased again during the pandemic by roughly 20% for some demographic groups, including young women.
You might notice a pattern here that as we have more and more distractions in life, that's one of the changes from the 90s into the 2010s and into 2020, is that there are more and more distractions.
Okay, you introduce smartphones and social media and people are on their screens constantly, 10 hours a day of screen time, okay?
So as there are more distractions in life, people become more distracted.
Is that because we all have a mental disorder or are we just responding to our environments in ways that are actually pretty normal?
It's not like some new objective ADHD test was developed that explains these numbers.
They're just making up criteria that mean nothing and diagnosing every patient who walks in the door.
Take a look at how the CDC defines ADHD if you're skeptical.
The CDC says that children have ADHD if they do the following.
Make careless mistakes or take unnecessary risks, daydream a lot, forget or lose things a lot, squirm or fidget, and have a hard time resisting temptation.
My God, the epidemic is worse than I thought.
I mean, apparently literally every child who has ever lived on Earth is infected.
Apologists will try to claim that the diagnostic criteria isn't really that broad.
You know, there are other ways of determining whether a child really has it or not.
They'll even claim that ADHD can be detected in the brain with brain scans.
And yet, you'll notice something, that the disorder is never diagnosed with brain scans.
Why is that?
Supposedly it's in the brain, you can see it in the brain, then why don't, why don't you diagnose it that way?
Just take, you don't need to talk to a psychologist, a therapist, anybody, counselor.
There's no conversation to take a child to get a brain scan.
But they never diagnose it that way, ever.
That's because it really is as broad as it seems.
Every child can be diagnosed with it, every single one.
If you want your child to have it, they have it.
If you want the drugs, you can get them.
Apart from the shortage, of course.
You can indeed diagnose every kid on the planet with ADHD, just like you can diagnose every unhappy, masked, middle-aged woman with long COVID.
The diagnosis is about as rigorous.
That's because ADHD, like long COVID, is not a real medical diagnosis.
It is a category error.
Okay, these are real human behaviors.
ADHD describes a set of real human behaviors, real human traits, But then the determination has been made by the medical industry, by the pharmaceutical industry that profits off of this determination to categorize these behaviors and traits as disordered.
That is a value judgment on their part.
It's not a medical judgment.
And it's a value.
The value judgment is, oh, people shouldn't act this way.
It's bad to act this way or be this way.
So, which all amounts to this being a made-up illness that's used to describe normal human responses to a modern environment which is filled with distractions.
The solution, which no one ever talks about because it wouldn't make Big Pharma any money, is to either change your environment to the extent that you can, or learn to deal with it.
Learn to cope with it.
If everyone did that, it's very possible that the pharmaceutical companies would lose money.
In fact, a lot of money.
But maybe the metrics that matter, like suicide rate, life expectancy, drug overdoses, and so on, maybe those would finally start moving in the right direction.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
(upbeat music)
When it comes to carrying your valuables or self-defense items in your vehicle,
most people feel that they have to choose between safety or convenience.
Someone breaking into your car will typically check the glove box, under the seats, the center console.
Well, now we can outsmart them with the Headrest Safe, which gives you convenience and peace of mind.
This is a headrest.
The headrest safe is exactly what it sounds like.
You can place your standard headrest in your car with our easy access safe.
The access safe, you just pull the side part and then you can either use your fingerprint, use a key, or manually type in the code to open the safe.
And that's it.
There's all the stuff in there that you need.
Right there.
Very...
Very convenient and also tricky.
They'll never know the criminals unless they're watching this ad.
So let's hope they don't.
I don't have a lot of criminals watching the show.
That's the good thing.
There's no way that anyone could know that your headrest safe is even there.
And even if they did, there's no way they could get it open without using one of the three methods to unlock it.
So the headrest safe has a universal design that allows it to fit all vehicles.
And the best part is, These come in a variety of colors to make the interior of your car and match it perfectly.
I have their black leather Vulcan headrest for my vehicle and I love it.
I took my family out to dinner last week and the restaurant only had valet parking.
Well, thanks to my headrest safe, I was able to leave valuables in my car that I wanted to keep extra safe.
Depending on the day, I'll put self-defense items, cash, or medications in this safe.
It gives me peace of mind knowing that it'll stay out of the hands of our kids, valets, or intruders.
What are you waiting for?
Save $100 at TheHeadRestSafe.com with promo code WALSH at checkout.
That's TheHeadRestSafe.com promo code WALSH.
Politico reports governors Ron DeSantis and Gavin Newsom have tentatively agreed to debate, one that would be hosted by Fox News.
The Florida Republican and California Democrat have repeatedly sparred over policies in their respective states, each representing one side of the ideological spectrum, though occupying different political perches.
DeSantis, a Republican, is trailing former President Donald Trump for the Republican presidential nomination, while Newsom, a Democrat, has brushed aside questions about his own presidential ambitions to become a super surrogate of sorts for President Joe Biden.
A showdown between the two seemed unlikely as DeSantis ramped up his presidential campaign, but Newsom still has spent months trying to entice his counterpart into joining him on stage.
And now, on Wednesday, DeSantis agreed to it.
We have that clip.
DeSantis with Sean Hannity last night agreeing to the debate.
Listen.
You heard Gavin make the offer.
Your answer is?
Absolutely.
I'm game.
Let's get it done.
Just tell me when and where.
We'll do it.
And here's the thing, Sean.
I mean, in one respect, the debate between California and Florida, you know, has already been had, as you suggest.
People have been voting on that.
They've been voting on it with their feet.
They have fled California in record numbers.
Florida has been the number one state for net in-migration.
We have the number one ranked economy, number one now in education, crime rate at a 50-year low.
But in another sense, this is the debate for the future of our country.
Because you have people like Joe Biden, they would love to see the Californication of the United States.
Biden may not even be the nominee.
You could have Gavin Newsom.
You could have Kamala Harris.
And I think if we go down that direction, that's going to accelerate American decline.
We can't see America decline anymore.
So first of all, he's right that in this contest between California and Florida, the decision has already been made.
There's not much of a debate here.
People are leaving California for Florida.
So the people have decided.
It's not going the other way around.
I mean, there may be a few stragglers here and there.
A few confused and hapless poor saps who have left Florida and gone to California for, you know, God knows what reason.
But for the most part, you know, the it's the tidal wave is going in one direction and people are leaving California and they're going to Florida.
They're going other places.
Sometimes they're going to Tennessee.
They're going to Texas.
But they are almost always going to red states.
That's the general kind of national picture is that you've got people fleeing blue states for red states doesn't really go the other way around.
And there's a reason for that.
I mean, the proof's in the pudding here.
Everyone knows.
You can see what's happening in Florida, or rather in California.
And unless you have to be there for work, which some people do, or if you've just grown up there and you can't imagine living anywhere else.
But if you have a choice about where you're going to live, and especially if you have a family, there's just no way.
I don't care what your politics are.
And this is the great thing about this kind of metric.
When you look at where are people moving to and where are they moving away from, it transcends politics.
Because the fact is that if you have a family and you have kids, you can't afford to really take that into account.
What you're thinking about is like, where are my kids going to be safe?
Where's my family going to be the safest?
Where can we have the best life, you know, the greatest, where will our well-being as a family be the highest?
Where can we, you know, Where will we be happiest and most prosperous?
In what part of the country?
And there's just no way you could look at California right now and say, I think it's there.
You look at the news reports coming out of San Francisco or Los Angeles or any of these cities.
Who's going to look at that and say, you know, I want, yeah, I want my kids to be right in the middle of that.
That's what I want.
Yep.
That's what we need.
You know what we're missing, honey?
You know, what we're missing is homeless people defecating on the street.
We're really missing that in our lives.
Our kids are missing that.
Let's go find some of that.
No one is saying.
So, the debate there, there's not much of a debate.
It's already been settled.
But as far as the actual debate between these two guys, I think this is a smart move for DeSantis politically.
I agree with a point that I think Ben was making during backstage this week, which is that Which by the way is an episode you should watch, not because of anything but the fact that we did have our alien debate, even though they only let us go for about seven minutes.
But literally put a timer on the alien debate and then next thing you know we're talking about Barbie and that goes on for like 47 minutes.
Anyway.
Still, I absolutely decimated Ben once again in the Alien Debate.
So this is just, every person that's taken me on here in the Alien Debate has been, has left practically in tears.
I can tell you that, and I shouldn't even be talking about this, but when we left backstage, you know, I, you know, Ben, to me, to me, from my perspective, looked like he was, might have even been in tears.
He was so upset about it.
That is a fact.
That is true.
Anyway, what were we talking about?
Oh, yeah, DeSantis.
So, one point that Ben made, his point about aliens is totally wrong, but the point that he made that's correct is that DeSantis needs to be doing more of this kind of thing, like getting out there, taking the fight to the left in these kinds of face-to-face, one-on-one ways.
Now, obviously, DeSantis has taken the fight to the left his entire term as governor.
It's why I like him.
It's why I support him.
But he needs also, you need the show, right?
You need the display of it.
You need people to see it.
And that means sitting down across the table from, you know, going to MSNBC, going to CNN.
He's already done some of this.
Sitting across from Gavin Newsom.
And not, by the way, this is not in order so that they can have a conversation that's very nice and civil and it proves that really we could all get along.
We're not that far apart in the end.
That's not the point.
No, you're going in there to embarrass him.
You need to go in there and, like I do with Ben or Michael when it comes to aliens, you need to go in there and just humiliate him.
And then that becomes, in the primary anyway, for DeSantis, his argument to the voters.
It's like, this is what I can do.
I'm capable of doing this.
And not only that, but I can do it better than Trump can do it.
And if you actually go out and do it, if you go out and you sit, you know, if you square off with Gavin Newsom and you destroy him, then the fact that you can do this and Trump can't, you don't need to say that.
People can put that together themselves.
And also, it's good in general, the more that in a primary it's inevitable that people on the same side are going to be going after each other.
Some of that's inevitable, but the more that that can be directed back out at the actual opponent here, the better.
But this is something that the scientists can do.
Look, I mean, well, I was going to say that even Trump's most ardent supporters would admit this.
That probably is naive.
I don't think they would.
But I think most people can admit that for Trump, taking someone on, one-on-one, in a debate, like, that is not his strong suit.
It's just simply not.
Like, it would be a very bad idea for Trump to face off with someone like Gavin Newsom in a debate.
He's got a lot more to lose, and the chances that Gavin Newsom could just kind of talk circles around him are pretty high.
For DeSantis, he's much more incisive.
He gets right to the point.
He's able to kind of methodically—this is what he's—this is his great skill, his talent.
It's being able to methodically sort of dissect things one by one in this very systematic way that people can understand.
Doing that in the form of debate can be very compelling.
I think it was a good move by him.
All right, Daily Wire has this report.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced on Wednesday that he and his wife Sophie Trudeau are
separating Hi everyone
Sophie and I would like to share the fact that after many meaningful and difficult
conversations where we have made the decision to separate Trudeau wrote on Instagram as always we remain a close
family with deep love and respect For each other and for everything we've built and will
continue to build For the well-being of our children we ask that you respect
our and their privacy he added. Thank you The two met when they were children and reconnected when
they ran into each other at charity drive 20 years ago They married in 2005, so they've been married for about 20 years.
And now they're separating.
I don't know what happens from here, but I wouldn't be surprised if ultimately it turns out that they split up because they both would prefer to be with men.
That's just one theory.
That's all.
I'm not spreading any rumors.
I'm not accusing.
It's nothing like that.
I mean, there are a lot of rumors about Trudeau in this vein.
A lot.
But I don't know.
I can't confirm it.
I have no idea.
I'm just wondering out loud.
Maybe that's ultimately what happens.
I will say that I hate this line, and it's inevitable.
You know it's coming every time.
But I hate this line you get in every statement from a famous person announcing a divorce.
We always get this.
Well, we still love each other deeply.
We still deeply love each other.
No, you don't.
No, you definitely don't.
I'd prefer for you to at least be honest about it.
Just say in the statement, we don't love each other, we hate each other.
We resent, despise each other, we have for a long time.
That's why we're getting divorced.
It still wouldn't be a good thing, the divorce.
You still should not be getting divorced.
And if you really care about your children, and that's the second thing you always get in these statements, is we're focused on the kids now, and please respect our kids' privacy.
Okay, well, you're focused on the kids and you want to respect their privacy, and yet you're very publicly blowing up your marriage and announcing it to everybody.
So you can't really have it both ways.
If you really cared about the kids, then you would stay together.
But, so it's a bad thing either way, but I would at least, I could at least give you credit for honesty if you would just put out a statement.
I'm waiting for one famous couple to do this, and at least get the one point for honesty where you put out the statement and said, we're breaking up, we despise each other, with years of resentment, we can't stand to be in the same room as each other, we definitely do not love each other at all, we don't want to be around each other, and we're getting divorced.
Be honest about it.
Because if you love each other, then you don't get divorced.
Getting divorced is the opposite of love.
The whole point of marital love, and the love that you pledge to someone, is that you are committed to them.
That's what it means, being committed, being faithful, being loyal.
Making sacrifices for them, for the sake of their happiness.
That's all love.
The moment you cut bait and run, the moment you say, I'm done, I'm out of here, that's you.
There's no love there anymore.
That is an act of, at the very least, indifference to the other person.
And so, that's certainly not love.
There is no such thing as a loving divorce.
It doesn't exist.
And I wish again we could at least be honest about that.
Here's a story from NBC News.
The gunman who opened fire on a Pittsburgh synagogue, killing 11 and wounding seven others, will be sentenced to death, federal jurors decided on Wednesday.
The tragedy nearly five years ago was the most heinous anti-Semitic attack in U.S.
history.
For months before the attack, the gunman, Robert Bowers, posted ceaselessly on social media about his hatred of Jewish people and immigrants, armed with an AR-15 and other weapons.
He then barged into the Tree of Life congregation in the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh on October 27, 2018, and surrendered only when he ran out of ammunition.
I think we all remember this case, and now he's being sentenced to death, as well he should be, obviously.
Mass murder needs to be sentenced to death.
The only thing I'm wondering when I read about this and the sentence is, where are all the people on the left objecting to this death penalty?
Are we going to get protests?
Are we going to get protests like we do very often with people that are sentenced to death?
And now oftentimes it happens days before the person is executed.
We start getting all the tearful protests and then the protests are outside when the execution is being carried out.
We're a ways away from that with this guy, with Robert Bowers.
Because actually carrying out the execution takes years and years.
It shouldn't.
It should be like you're sentenced and then, I mean, the way they used to do it in the old days is you're sentenced and then dawn, the next dawn, you are going up the, you're walking up and they're tying the noose around your neck and they're pulling the lever and then that's it.
And that's the way that it should go.
Um, but it doesn't, so, you know, there still are years.
So maybe, maybe years from now, when it's actually time for this guy to be executed, maybe that's when the leftists will show up and protest tearfully.
The state is killing someone, this is a horrible tra- but I, but I doubt it.
I doubt they will.
They don't protest this.
Um, Dylann Roof was another one.
Dylann Roof was sentenced to death.
He tried to appeal his, uh, his, uh, death penalty sentence, and the appeal was rejected.
Interestingly enough, nobody on the left is tearfully objecting to that.
And yet, they should, because these are the people who claim to be, in principle, opposed to the death penalty.
And if, in principle, you're opposed to the death penalty, and you say things like, the state should never kill anybody, this is murder, I mean, if that's your position, then you need to stand up for these men, and say, no, this is wrong, you're murdering them, this is terrible, don't do it.
If you won't, then that means that you're not really opposed to the death penalty.
You're only opposed to the death penalty for certain people, which is not the same thing as being opposed to death, which means you're not opposed to the death penalty at all, it turns out.
So which is it?
As it turns out, you know, this is one of the reasons why our discussions and debates over the death penalty, like our debates on pretty much every other issue, they don't go anywhere.
And one of the reasons they don't go anywhere is because people aren't even being honest about what their actual viewpoint is.
You can't have a productive debate with someone if they're not being honest and upfront about what they actually think.
And what we find out when you look at this guy or Dylan Roof or someone similar to that, what you find out is that actually, Almost everyone agrees with the death penalty in principle.
It's really just an argument about when do you use it, not whether you should use it or not.
And if we could narrow it down to that, and we could all admit that that's what we're actually arguing about, not whether we should.
Like, almost everyone agrees that, yeah, well, there are some people who need to be executed.
When it comes to Dylann Roof, no one has spoken up for this guy and said he shouldn't be executed.
Everyone agrees he should be executed.
So it's almost universal agreement that the death penalty is necessary in some cases.
Then the argument becomes, what are those cases?
That could be a productive discussion.
Because now we're on sort of the same playing field.
We have some shared principles here.
You know, we got some, foundationally we have some things in common that we all agree that, you know, obviously some people need to be executed.
Now it's how, who should those people to be?
And what sort of crime should qualify you for that?
But we can't have what could be that productive debate because you've got one side of it pretending that they object to it in principle.
So when they don't.
So when they come out and they're crying about someone who's going to get the death penalty, and it's almost always a black guy.
I mean, they don't do this for white people usually.
So it's a black guy who killed a cop or something.
It's like always somebody like that who, you know, the left comes out and defends and says we shouldn't execute him.
But the arguments they present It's like, the arguments they present, it's usually not defending that person individually or making a case related to that individual case.
It's always broad.
It's like, this is government-sanctioned murder.
When what they really mean is, yeah, it's okay for the government to kill people, but I don't think they should kill this guy.
And the reason I don't think they should kill this guy is because I don't think what he did is all that bad, actually.
He killed a cop.
I don't think it's that bad.
That's their real position.
Once again, if they would at least say it out loud, as horrifying as it is and as wrong as it is, if they would at least say it out loud, now we're being honest with each other, maybe we could have some kind of real conversation about it.
All right, finally, this is a report for the Daily Wire.
This one's getting a lot of attention.
Former backup dancers for Lizzo filed a lawsuit on Tuesday against the singer and her production company alleging sexual harassment and a toxic work environment in a lawsuit obtained by People Magazine and filed in Los Angeles Superior Court against the 35-year-old singer, born Melissa Jefferson.
The three backup dancers are suing Lizzo, her production company Big Girl Big Touring.
That's G-R-R-R-L Big Touring.
That's the name of the company.
Big Girl Big Touring, and Lizzo's dance team captain, Shirlene Quigley.
The three dancers, Ariana Davis, Krysta Williams, and Noelle Rodriguez, in the suit allege that Lizzo pressured them to engage with nude performers at an Amsterdam club in February of 2023.
According to the AP, Lizzo began inviting cast members to take turns touching the nude performers.
During the sexually-themed show in Amsterdam's Red Light District, the good-as-hell hitmaker allegedly led a chant pressuring Davis to touch the breasts of one of the nude women performing at the club, despite the dancer expressing her desire not to touch the performer, People noted.
The complaint states, Plaintiffs were aghast with how little regard Lizzo showed for the bodily autonomy of her employees and those around her, especially in the presence of many people whom she employed.
Another part of the filing reads, quote, things quickly got out of hand.
Lizzo began inviting cast members to take turns touching new performers and interacting with objects launched from the performers' vaginas.
And then there's a lot of other, so it's getting into details we probably don't need.
And then they also allege other things as well.
They say that the rehearsals are very long, 12 hours is excruciating.
They're being worked like slaves, they say, and there was also Inappropriate conversations that went on, and now I'm just summarizing.
Ironically, they claim that Lizzo fat-shamed one of the dancers and said that she needs to lose weight, and other things as well.
I'm just... I'm shocked.
I'm flabbergasted.
I mean... There's no way.
You're telling me Lizzo did all of this?
You're accusing Lizzo of being a deviant?
Of being a pervert?
Of being disgusting and inappropriate?
I can't believe it.
You're accusing Big Girl Big Touring Inc.
of cultivating an inappropriate work environment?
I don't believe it.
That doesn't sound like the Big Girl Big Touring Inc.
that I know.
That's not the Big Girl Big Touring Inc.
that I worked for, okay?
I just can't believe any of this.
I mean, you're telling me that Lizzo, along with her company, Big Girl, Big Touring Inc., they went to a sex show in Amsterdam with all their dancers and inappropriate things happened?
Unbelievable!
You know, what I always say is that if you're going to go with your colleagues to a sex show in Amsterdam, you've got to make sure that things are very appropriate the whole time.
You've got to respect boundaries.
Respect those boundaries while you're at the sex show in Amsterdam.
So, of course, like, there really isn't any victim here.
There's really no one to root for in this thing.
I mean, you went to, you're in Amsterdam, and you went to the red light district to a sex show with your boss.
Did you think things would be, like, what boundary?
All the boundaries are obliterated already.
So, walk it in the doors.
Like, no one should be there in the first place.
And I also just don't, I don't have a lot of sympathy.
Oh, they were chanting and they told me, so just leave.
Just leave.
But it's not right, assuming all this happened.
I don't know if it happened or not.
All joking aside, all of this sounds exactly like what I would expect.
Every part of this is like, oh yeah, well that's, you're on tour with Lizzo.
This is exactly what I assumed happened.
So, if the allegations are true and they were chanting and they were being pressured to touch the performers, that's very wrong and gross and bad.
And also, you're an adult and you're in that situation, you shouldn't have gone in the first place, just leave.
I didn't know what to do, they were chanting at me.
So?
They were chanting at you so you can't just leave?
Leave immediately!
You know, it's a lot more compelling to me if, well, if you don't go in the first place, but even if you go, and then And this all happens, you're being pressured to engage in, like, sexual activity, essentially.
And you refuse, like an adult, and you say, I'm not going to do that.
And you leave, and then you immediately go and tell people what happened.
You say, this is what I just experienced, I left the situation, this is wrong.
But when you do the thing, and then months later, you come out and say, I was really uncomfortable with that.
All that means is there's just blame to go around for everyone.
No one's a good guy in this.
Everyone's just a bunch of horrible, deviant, disgusting perverts.
Essentially, that's my judgment of all of this.
And it's not a surprise, of course, even though Lizzo has her whole brand about body positivity and respecting people and all of that.
Of course that's all nonsense.
Or rather, Maybe I wouldn't say it's nonsense.
It's very narrow, okay?
When she talks about body positivity and respecting people and all these things, she means it in a very narrow sense.
In that it only pertains to her.
It's all about her.
So she wants you to be positive about her body.
And she wants you to be respectful of her.
Because all that matters is her.
It is all focused on her.
That's all.
She doesn't care about anybody else.
Obviously.
Still, I'm wondering, if we're supposed to believe all women, what do we do here?
Like, how do we navigate this one?
Believe all women.
So we believe all of them, I guess?
That's what we're left with.
Everybody's right, turns out.
Let's get to the comment section.
And now more than ever, it's important to hire the right people faster and more efficiently to keep overall costs down.
Well, thankfully, ZipRecruiter is a hiring partner who is focused on you and your needs.
From pricing to technology, everything that ZipRecruiter does is for you.
Right now, you can try them for free at ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh.
ZipRecruiter's smart technology identifies the best matches for you and your job and lets you invite candidates that you really want to apply to your job before other businesses can snag them.
I love how their pricing is really straightforward.
You can stick to your budget without any surprises at all.
Hire the best with the help of a partner who's all about you with ZipRecruiter.
Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
You gotta go to this exclusive web address to try ZipRecruiter for free.
That's ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh.
Again, that's ZipRecruiter.com slash Walsh.
ZipRecruiter, the smartest way to hire.
First comment says, the only time I was ever liberal was when I was completely blind to what was going on and still pretty well a child.
This is their only following, dumb people or people who don't understand or look into anything before voting.
There's a lot of truth there.
Leftism relies mostly on a total misapprehension of the realities of the world and especially of human nature.
And so if you're naive to those things, you don't understand how the world works, then you're more likely to fall for it.
You're more likely to buy what they're selling.
That's another advantage that we have, is that the left has ceded all of the normal common sense ground to us.
We talked about one of the great advantages that we have on the right right now is the fact that If you want to be rebellious, if you have that rebellious instinct as young people tend to, especially young males tend to, then it means being conservative because that is the culturally rebellious position.
Another advantage that we have is that the left has, again, they've surrendered all of the, if you want to be, even if you don't care about being a rebel, you know, if you just want to be like normal and have common sense and you're not all that political and you don't think in those terms, Well, you still end up being conservative.
You cannot even believe that only women get pregnant and only men have penises.
You can't even believe that without being a full-on right-winger now.
And us on the right, we didn't say that.
We didn't determine that.
I wish it wasn't that way.
I very much wish that the position that only women could get pregnant was not an ideological position, that it was not political, that it was not contested.
I wish it was the way it was before the world lost its mind, and it was just a fact of life that we didn't even talk about.
It didn't enter into these conversations at all.
I prefer it was that way, but this is how the left has set it up, and it puts them, again, at a disadvantage, ultimately.
They've just given it all to us.
All common sense, everything.
They've said, that's all your guys, but that all belongs to you guys.
And to that I say, okay, I mean, I'll take it.
Mooney 9869 says, as a 12th grade boy, I know this is true, the conversations we have at the lunch table would make national news if it was ever leaked.
Yeah, you and every other high school boy.
And I've known that was the case from when I was in high school, and I'm happy to hear that it's still the case.
I've always kind of wondered, is it like, you know, when I was in high school, it's like the ways that you joke around and the things that you say would just be shocking to most people.
And apparently that's still the case.
That's still how it works.
And, you know, that's good.
And this is especially the case if you see, you know, what we would call now a diverse group of male friends, of any age, by the way, not just high school.
Diverse group, you know, different races and all that, and they're all friends.
And you see it from the outside, and maybe, especially if you're a woman, I don't know, you might see that and think, oh, they must be, they're very tolerant, and they all, it's like, no, the kinds of racist things they say to each other, constantly, Would make Robin DiAngelo cry.
It's just constant.
But it's funny.
For guys, it's funny.
Finally, Final Comment says, Now we just need to figure out how to fix the issue regarding teen girls and young women being so liberal.
That whole demographic appears to be done for.
No, not done for.
I would never say they're done for.
The issue is that women are more relational by nature.
They're more empathetic.
And they're less decisive.
And this is why men in many contexts are more equipped to be leaders.
You need someone who doesn't care as much about how people feel and who isn't focused on people-pleasing to come in and say, we're going this way, we're doing this.
That's what you need.
And so if women are falling ever more prey to leftism while men go the other direction, it only goes to show why men should be leaders in the culture.
And we need the lead right now.
Because you need that decisiveness.
You need to say, this is wrong, this is stupid, we're not doing this, this is dumb.
And you're going to hear from the women, well, it hurts people's feelings.
Okay, well, so what?
It does.
Every once in a while you might run across a woman who kind of has that attitude, but it's very rare.
Men are much, it's much more of a masculine attitude.
And so you need men to take the lead.
And that's, so no, they're not, certainly not lost.
But this is just a call for male leadership in the culture.
I think of all those books that I love to read about explorers, and you guys know I'm a nerd for that stuff.
I like to read all books about explorers, exploration, and every captain who ever piloted a ship to an unknown part of the world or around the world, as Magellan did, or up to the Arctic or down to the Antarctic, all these people were men, and they had to be.
Because when you're alone out on that uncharted sea on this vessel and you're vulnerable and you're at the mercy of the elements, you need a leader who can set the course and stick to it and be harsh and sometimes even brutal if the situation calls for it.
You know, when Magellan had made it across the Atlantic on his journey ultimately around the world, you know, they make it across the Atlantic and he faces a mutiny.
And they're out there in the wilderness out, you know, in the middle of nowhere.
He put it down violently, and he had the ringleaders of the mutiny dismembered and beheaded, like their body parts chopped up in front of everybody.
Very brutal thing, but it needed to be done because if he lost control of the ship all the way out there, everybody dies.
And so he had no choice.
And this is why men lead.
In our culture right now, we are very much floating out in a stormy sea.
And I'm not saying that we need to literally draw and quarter people.
I mean, I can think of a few candidates, but I'm not saying that.
That's not the point.
The point is that we need culturally decisive, masculine Perhaps sometimes even aggressive leadership.
That's the lesson.
Give your son and his values a fighting chance with Jeremy's Back to College deals.
Get up to 20% off select razor and men's care bundles.
Get Jeremy's shampoo, body wash, conditioner, all paraben-free, sulfate-free, woke-free, and made right here in the USA.
And get him a Precision 5 razor with welded steel blades, a sturdy tungsten handle, and flip-back trimmer.
Go to Jeremy'sRazors.com for major deals on Back to College bundles today.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
It seems that every week we hear about a new TikTok trend.
They always have a different name.
They're always annoying and weird in slightly different ways.
But the one thing that most of them have in common is that they are very thinly veiled excuses for being lazy.
The TikTok community works hard at only one thing, and that is finding new ways to make their laziness seem trendy.
And now they have a new one.
It's called bed rotting.
And it's as bad as it sounds.
CBS News explains.
Watch.
There's a new TikTok trend that could trigger depression in some people.
It's got a rather interesting name.
I know.
Have you heard of this bed rotting?
No.
It's not something that sounds like something I would want to do, right?
But I guess people want to do it.
And it's actually the practice of lying in bed for long periods of time, sometimes for days, while binge watching TV or scrolling through social media and eating, of course.
Now, influencers tout it as a form of self-care.
But experts say the behavior is more typical of someone who's depressed.
Once again, the experts are on the scene to point out the immensely obvious.
Thank God for the experts.
What would we ever do without them?
And we can certainly trust the experts on this one.
As it turns out, it is not a healthy practice to become a voluntary invalid.
Actually, it's better for a human, it turns out, to do things like move around and walk and maybe get some sun on occasion.
If you're getting less fresh air and exercise than a prisoner in solitary confinement, that's a pretty good indication that you're making some very poor life choices.
But then again, how bad can your life choices be if other people are doing the same thing?
Have you ever heard of bedrotting?
It's something that I learned about last week, but it's something I've been doing for years off and on.
And I didn't know it had a name for it.
I just thought it was like just depression.
And I'm sure you've been doing this too.
It's a form of self-care, but you shouldn't do it too often because apparently it can be laziness.
But basically, it's where you just sit or lay in bed all day.
You can eat snacks, watch Max, but some of the girlies, they're like high-tech and high-end version where they like do skincare and some spa treatments just from their bed.
Normally in the past, if I stayed in bed all day, I would feel so guilty, but now that I've learned that this is a thing, I'm no longer gonna feel guilty for bedrotting.
Yes, why feel guilty for being an unwashed sedentary bum?
There are so many other unwashed sedentary bums after all.
It's a thing.
It's a whole thing.
How bad can a thing be if it's a thing?
These are important philosophical questions, but bedrotting is somehow not the worst, or at least not the most overtly grotesque TikTok laziness trend to gain traction recently.
A different but closely related trend is called depression rooms.
And the depression room phenomenon involves TikTokers showing off their cluttered, filthy, bug-infested bedrooms, which have become unsightly garbage heaps because of their depression.
Sometimes in the video, they'll clean their room and congratulate themselves for performing this basic daily chore for the first time in nine months.
In other videos, they make no attempt to clean and they simply just give a tour of the toxic waste dump that they sleep in.
Here's one example of the genre.
I've had a lot of people comment on my room and how messy it is.
I'm pretty sure it comes from the aunties who are like, are you proud of this?
You're disgusting.
How can you let it get like this?
I'm not proud of, you know, how messy I let my room get.
I think if you have depression or you suffer from depression or anxiety or any kind of mental health disorder, you understand that sometimes we just can't get up.
She just can't.
She can't get up.
Can't do it.
She can record TikTok videos and edit them and post them and scroll the comments to see what people are saying about them, but she can't get up and clean her room.
She just can't do it.
Until she does it, of course.
But the times that she doesn't do it, it's because she simply can't.
This is a theme that emerges in many of these videos, like this one.
Okay, so I don't want to hear any slander or any hate on this video because I know a lot of you guys, a lot of people in the comments are going to deal with something like this.
And I'm going to give you a sneak peek into my life.
This is what happens when I get particularly stressed or anxious or depressed.
I cannot clean anything, get organized.
I can't do it.
Can't do it.
Can't do it.
She's physically incapable somehow, in some way.
Again, this is a, this is a theme.
By the way, I'm fine.
I want to clean my room really, really badly.
I can't.
And I know some of you are gonna understand that, and some of you are just gonna be like, get up and do it.
Just do it if you want to.
I can't!
Does anyone know what I mean?
I can't!
Yeah, some of us are gonna say get up and do it, because that actually is the answer.
Just get up and do it.
Stop whining and do it.
You can do it.
You can.
Shut up and do it.
So that's why your room is filled to the brim with useless junk that you bought because you can't clean up after yourself?
Well, I saw an Old Navy shopping bag.
You somehow managed to go to Old Navy.
Against all odds, you figured out how to walk out of your house, get into your car, drive to Old Navy, walk around Old Navy, buy all those clothes with your dad's credit card.
You could do that?
You weren't too physically immobilized and crippled by your depression to do that thing you wanted to do, and yet when it comes to things you don't want to do, somehow your depression turns into paralysis.
What an interesting medical phenomenon.
I'm crippled by depression when I don't want to do things.
Hmm.
Is it depression crippling you or are you just lazy?
That's called being lazy.
That's like the definition of lazy.
Actually, it's not a very interesting phenomenon because, again, you're just lazy.
I mean, you may be depressed or you may not be, but one thing you definitely are is lazy.
Let me ask you this.
You say that you can't clean your room.
What if I walked up to you with a giant bag filled with $10 million in cash and I said that I would give it to you if you cleaned your room?
$10 million right here, I will give it to you right now if you clean the room.
I bet you'd find a way to do it, wouldn't you?
See, this is the difference between things like depression, ADHD, anxiety, and something like cancer or diabetes.
Because if I offered you $10 million to not have cancer anymore, you couldn't take me up on the offer no matter how badly you wanted to.
But if I offered you $10 million to no longer be crippled by depression, you would magically find a way.
The same goes for ADHD and anxiety and similar quote-unquote mental health disorders.
If you feel properly incentivized and interested, you can become a functional human being.
You might walk around saying, I can't do this, I can't do that, I'm so depressed.
And yet if the incentive was high enough, you'd figure out a way, wouldn't you?
It's like the parents who insist that their 12-year-old son has ADHD and can't sit still.
And yet, even as they make that claim, that very same son has been sitting nearly motionless for five hours in front of a TV playing video games.
He can sit still, it turns out.
It's just that a lot of the time, especially in school, he doesn't want to.
This is an important point.
You know, one of the great curses of our age is that people have been convinced that they don't have agency, that they are not rational, conscious agents making choices and acting freely in the world.
The medicalization of every human foible we talked about at the beginning, every bad feeling, every unpleasant emotion, plays a big part in this.
People don't want to do things, or they don't feel incentivized to do them, and then they're convinced that because of some kind of invisible disease, they can't do those things.
This is the main reason why I object to depression being categorized as a disease.
Depression is a feeling.
It's a thought process.
You decide how much power it has over your life.
You decide that.
The same cannot be said for other diseases.
You have absolutely no power to decide how, say, Hepatitis affects you.
You can take medicine, you can do other things to try and manage it, but you can't use the force of sheer willpower to mitigate its impact on you.
Yet that is exactly what you could do with depression or anxiety or one of these other things.
You can get out of your bed and clean your room.
You can do the thing you say you cannot do.
You absolutely can.
There is nothing physically preventing you.
You choose not to.
But you know, the real problem with chalking up all this to, you know, depression is that it masks the real epidemic that has long since gripped hold of American society in general, and especially the younger generations.
Zoomers are not depressed.
They are apathetic.
And this may seem like a distinction without a difference.
Except that depression is supposedly a chemical function in the brain, even though the chemical imbalance theory has been shown to be bunk.
But the apathy choking the life out of the youngest generation is a cultural problem, something ingrained in them practically from birth.
This is the thing that ties together bedrotting and depression rooms and quiet quitting and all the rest of it.
Not depression, but a general philosophical apathy, a nihilism.
They don't care.
They don't see meaning or purpose.
It's a serious problem, no question about it.
In fact, it's much deeper than any kind of chemical imbalance.
And that's not the thing that's led them here, but rather a life full of digital stimulation, yet devoid of any kind of spiritual or moral formation.
They don't really want anything.
They have no goals.
Not because they're so deeply fulfilled, but because they're so deeply empty.
Now, I don't say this applies to everyone in Gen Z, but it's a widespread epidemic, one that extends far beyond their generation, of course.
We've all heard these complaints from Employers who hire young people say that they have no useful skills.
But even worse, they don't care enough to learn the skills.
They just don't care.
They don't care about anything.
Or at least they don't care about any of the right things.
Now, the good news is that this is a problem that can be overcome, on an individual level especially.
It means that all the people lying around complaining that they can't get up, they can't clean their room, they can't go to work, they can't put in effort, they can't move out of their parents' house, they can't become real functioning adults, they can't find true success, they can't find fulfillment in life, they can't do this, they can't do that, they can't, they just can't.
All of these people are mistaken.
They can absolutely do all of that.
They could do it starting tomorrow, they could do it starting right now, this moment.
They might be depressed, but they can act like they aren't.
And the great thing is that in so many cases, the more you act like you aren't depressed, the less depressed you will be.
The more you act like you care about the things in life that you should care about, the more you will actually care.
The more you work hard, the more you will want to work hard.
You just have to start.
You have to put one foot in front of the other and start doing it.
And you can start especially by getting out of bed,
