Ep. 1245 - While We Look Overseas, Terrorists Are Streaming Across Our Own Border
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, as we have our focus trained on events overseas, terrorists are streaming across the border in this country. What's more, the Biden Administration is facilitating this invasion. I'll explain. Also, Biden is in Israel bumbling around and mumbling to himself. This is the man who is supposed to help us avoid world war three. And Britney Spears has a new memoir where she reveals that she got an abortion at Justin Timberlake's request years ago. In our Daily Cancellation, a young woman complains that her business marketing degree has not resulted in an immediate six figure salary right out of school.
Ep.1245
- - -
DailyWire+:
Check out Bentkey here: https://feedlink.io/bentkey
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
PureTalk - Switch to PureTalk and get 50% off your first month! Promo code WALSH https://bit.ly/42PmqaX
BULLETPROOF EVERYONE - Get 10% off plus a FREE bulletproof backpack with any clothing purchase. Use promo code WALSH at https://www.bulletproofeveryone.com
Tax Network USA - Take the first step toward resolving your tax debt!
http://www.TaxNetworkUSA.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, as we have our focus trained on events overseas, terrorists are streaming across the border in this country.
What's more, the Biden administration is facilitating this invasion.
I'll explain.
Also, Biden is in Israel bumbling around and mumbling to himself, this is the man who's supposed to help us avoid World War III, which means, of course, we're screwed.
And Bernie Spears has a new memoir where she reveals that she got an abortion at Justin Timberlake's request years ago.
In her daily cancellation, a young woman complains that her business marketing degree has not resulted in an immediate six-figure salary right out of college.
We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Walsh Show.
Last week, Pure Talk announced that they would alleviate $10 million in veteran debt by Veterans
How are they going to do it?
By giving a portion of every new order to this cause.
Thanks to your support, Pure Talk is 27% to their goal with three weeks to go.
Our veterans gave everything to protect our nation, and Pure Talk understands the sacrifices they've made.
When you switch to Pure Talk, And their lightning-fast 5G network, they'll donate a portion of every new order to this noble cause.
You can make a real difference just by choosing Superior Cell Phone Service.
A win-win for everybody.
Pure Talk's plans start at just $20 a month, offering unlimited talk texts, more data, and a mobile hotspot as well.
Just go to puretalk.com slash Walsh and make the switch.
Let's rally together, show our unwavering support for our veterans.
Visit puretalk.com slash Walsh and switch to Pure Talk today.
It's the right move, and it's the American way.
Most of the attention at the moment is focused on events overseas, and this is understandable to some extent, as the current conflict in the Middle East is obviously very important and has far-reaching implications.
The problem is that, first of all, our own leaders do not appear to be focusing on the right things as it relates to that conflict.
Namely, they should be focusing on doing everything they possibly can to avoid World War III.
That should be the top priority, but they seem entirely uninterested in avoiding a global conflict.
If anything, they're motivated In the opposite direction.
Many of them seem to want a world war, and if they want it, then they'll get it.
Second, as our gaze is directed at events thousands of miles away, our own country finds itself in an increasingly dire situation.
We may soon have a sort of Middle East-style chaos in this country, thanks to our own undefended, unprotected borders.
In fact, I probably shouldn't use the word may.
There's no may about it.
It will happen.
We are inviting it.
And I'll show you what I mean.
But first, let's go back to one of the biggest lessons from 9-11, which is that hindsight bias can get people killed.
So here's how a lot of people thought prior to 9-11.
They figured, well, no terrorist has ever hijacked or has hijacked a U.S.
commercial aircraft anywhere in the world for well over a decade.
You know, at that point, it's been a decade.
And they certainly have never flown them into buildings.
And therefore it's crazy to worry about any terror group hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.
They haven't done it before.
Pretty much everyone in aviation thought like that.
In fact, Just months before 9-11, the leader of a major pilot safety association publicly opposed the idea of reinforced cockpit doors.
And he said, quote, even if you make a vault out of the door, if they have a noose around my flight attendant's neck, I'm not, I am going to open the door.
So there's no point in having the reinforced doors was his point.
The 9-11 Commission put that quote in their report because the pilot's attitude reflected FAA guidance at the time, which stated that airplane crews Should basically just do whatever hijackers want because there's no way that they're going to grab the controls and turn the plane into a missile, for example.
Well, the moment the terrorists hijacked four commercial airliners and flew three of them into buildings and one of them into the ground, everybody on the planet immediately understood how wrong the old way of thinking was.
You don't discount the risk of a particular type of terrorist attack by saying it hasn't happened yet.
Instead, you look for vulnerabilities in the existing system that we have, because obviously, you know, the bad guys are doing the same thing.
And that was supposedly all learned and settled after 9-11.
But apparently, this lesson has not been learned.
Or at least it's been forgotten.
Or just ignored.
At least in Washington.
Last month, Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing to investigate how an operative with ties to ISIS had managed to smuggle more than a dozen migrants from Uzbekistan into the United States through the southern border.
Now, the FBI still has no idea exactly how many Uzbekistanis this ISIS smuggler allowed into this country, nor do they have any way to track them all down.
They're lost in the wind, which isn't surprising given that this past fiscal year there were more illegal crossings at the border than at any other time in the history of this country.
Well, how are Democrats' preferred quote-unquote immigration experts responding to this development?
For a lesson on that, here's a clip from last month's House Judiciary Committee hearing in which a vice president at the Libertarian Cato Institute explains that Republicans are fear-mongering about the border.
Why?
Well, because illegal migrants haven't conducted any terrorist attacks yet.
Watch.
The title of this hearing is Terrorist Entry Through the Southwest Border.
When I first heard that was the title, my reaction was, What terrorist entry to the southwest border?
Zero people have been murdered in attacks committed by terrorists who entered as illegal immigrants.
Zero people have been injured in attacks committed by terrorists who entered illegally.
Zero attacks have been carried out by immigrants who entered illegally.
So that's the logic.
It's kind of a pre-911 logic, and Democrats are nodding along.
Terrorists haven't used the wide-open southern border to conduct a large-scale terrorist attack so far, and therefore you're paranoid for thinking that it's a possibility.
That's the idea.
And pretty much every Democrat in Congress endorses this view, which is, you know, it's kind of like...
Saying that you should just leave the door of your house wide open at night while you go to sleep Because well you've never been the victim of a home invasion robbery before It hasn't happened yet, and therefore it will never happen and therefore there's no reason to do anything to prevent it from happening This is how they're responding to the news that ISIS is bringing in migrants from Uzbekistan that are completely unvetted.
We don't know anything about them.
That's despite the fact that Uzbekistan has a long history of exporting terrorists to this country.
On Halloween night in 2017, for example, a 29-year-old Uzbek migrant who was here on
a visa drove a truck into pedestrians and cyclists in Manhattan, killing eight of them
and wounding many more.
That attack followed the sentencing of another Uzbek migrant, also here on a visa, who was
found guilty of terrorism charges for planning to bomb Coney Island.
Democrats and libertarians, apparently, want you to ignore all of that because those Uzbekistani
terrorists didn't arrive through the southern border.
They came on a plane.
Therefore, they're saying, you have no reason to worry about border security because they would come on a plane.
It's a totally nonsensical approach, obviously, but that's what they're going with.
Republicans, for the most part, they're not focused on it one way or another.
They want you to focus on Ukraine and the Middle East.
Mitch McConnell, who somehow is still in office, says Ukraine is our top priority right now.
As a result of this bipartisan consensus in Washington, this decision to focus on every other border except our own,
there's now a very real risk that Americans will die.
In fact, Americans are already dying, if not from terrorism, then from gang violence
and other kinds of violence that comes across the border.
As CNN reported, the episode involving the ISIS smuggler was so alarming that an urgent
classified intelligence report was circulated to President Joe Biden's top cabinet officials
in their morning briefing book.
For some counter-terrorism officials, is deeply vulnerable to the possibility that terrorists could sneak across the southern border by hiding amid the surge of migrants entering the country in search of asylum.
Now, to be clear, the Biden administration, they aren't simply ignoring the problem, that'd be bad enough.
They are actually facilitating it.
After 9-11, the U.S.
government started using a category called special interest aliens, which is kind of a funny euphemism, but the idea is to flag migrants coming from countries that promote terrorism, such as Uzbekistan.
These are the special interest aliens.
The idea was to be transparent with Americans about who exactly is coming into this country and from where.
But the Biden administration has decided to hide all of that data because they don't want us to know.
At the same hearing we just showed you, Todd Bensman of the Center for Immigration Studies also testified.
He told lawmakers that, quote, the Biden administration has taken steps to obscure the number of special interest aliens from the U.S.
public, ending routine reporting of these apprehensions by nationality.
And indeed, on the Border Patrol website, they don't list the number of special interest migrants coming from the vast majority of Muslim countries.
They don't want you to know how many people ISIS could be bringing to this country from places like Uzbekistan and other places.
But many of those numbers have leaked out anyway, in spite of the Biden administration's best efforts.
And Tom Benjamin told the House Judiciary Committee what those numbers show.
It turns out that our southern border is so overwhelmed with migrants that we're not able to effectively screen special interest aliens at all.
Watch.
Expect those screening programs to be degraded indefinitely because vast numbers of special interest aliens are currently pouring through the Darien Gap between Columbia and Panama.
Usually 10,000 migrants or less pass through the gap.
In 2023, however, 300,000 plus have gone through the gap.
And whereas only 3,000 or 4,000 special interest aliens among them reached our southern border annually, the Daily Caller just reported that 75,000 came in just the last nine months.
DHS cannot possibly vet or even interview a fraction of these numbers, raising the terrorism risk.
And whereas about 20 aliens on the terror watchlist were caught at the southwest border in prior years, since this crisis began in 2021 through the end of July, Border Patrol apprehended an almost implausibly large number of them, 258 as of now.
Those watchlisted 258 are just the ones Border Patrol managed to catch.
Border Patrol failed to apprehend a record-breaking 1.8 million migrants who slipped into the interior.
Now, those numbers don't seem even possible.
Between October 2022 and August 2023, that's less than a year's time, more than 75,000 special-interest aliens were encountered by Border Patrol.
Before the current border crisis, that number of special-interest aliens encountered by Border Patrol officials was closer to 3,000.
And these are just the migrants that were encountered.
The actual number of special-interest aliens arriving at our borders is far larger, though it's impossible to know how many.
And again, these are just the people coming from countries that the U.S.
government believes are a high-risk terrorist state.
We're also importing the rest of the third world, too, without any vetting whatsoever.
Along with de-policing, that's leading to a drastic increase in violent crime rates in this country, all over the country.
We're not taking in families or stable households.
We're taking in mostly young men with no ties to this country, no loyalty to this country, and very little to lose.
And in response, a lot more migrants are coming our way.
This was the scene in Mexico recently, as yet another large group of migrants, apparently from Haiti, broke through barriers at a refugee office.
Look at this.
[NOISE]
So you see that there.
And you can see the crowd for yourself.
When Democrats talk about illegal immigrants, they want you to imagine mothers with young children fleeing poverty and oppression.
You know, the huddled masses yearning to breathe free, they tell us.
Because they think that a poem engraved on a large statue carries the weight of law and should actually determine our immigration policy.
But that does not really describe a great number of the migrants pouring across the border.
There are some mothers with young children, okay, but what you just saw in the video, there was a bunch of young military-aged males.
And one of the things about those people is that these are the sorts of people who could be of use in their own countries.
They could be trying to improve their own homes, fighting to make their own countries prosperous, or at least livable.
I mean, imagine if these countries actually retained all of their young, able-bodied, strong males to help actually, literally, and in every other sense, build the country.
But instead, they all come here to take advantage of the welfare state.
And they come here not always with the best intentions.
This is what happens when politicians promise free health care to illegal aliens, as every Democratic Party presidential candidate did in the last election.
It's what happens when the President of the United States announces his commitment to making America less white and decides to defame any Border Patrol officer who tries to enforce the law.
It's what happens when we are more concerned with other countries' borders than our own.
This is why people from Haiti and so many other countries are heading for the U.S.
border, which is not even remotely secure.
ISIS sees this happening, every terrorist organization on the planet sees it happening.
They saw the atrocities that Hamas was able to commit against Israel, which has one of the most closely surveilled and guarded borders on the entire planet.
There's no doubt that they're looking at that, and then they're looking at our open border, and they're seeing an opportunity to commit similar acts of barbarism in this country.
It's not fear-mongering, it's just the reality.
Courtesy of ISIS, there's reason to believe that many of these terrorists are already here.
And we can respond to that reality either by closing and militarizing the border and beginning mass deportations, or we can do nothing and just get ready for the inevitable.
There will be an attack.
The left will pretend again to relearn the lessons of 9-11 all over again.
And American citizens, who are the only citizens our leaders are supposed to protect and defend, will die as a result.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
I know many of you might be dreading the stress of filing your taxes.
Filing your taxes can be a long, excruciating process, but if you fail to file, you'll start to pile up penalties on your tax debt.
That's why you need to check out Tax Network USA.
The team at Tax Network USA has a track record of success.
They have reduced tax debt for numerous clients, totaling over $1 billion.
Whether you're looking at a $10,000 or a $1 million tax debt,
they can help you with a settlement.
It doesn't matter if you haven't filed in one year, five years, even a whole decade,
Tax Network USA is equipped to secure the best settlement for you.
The experts, attorneys and tax professionals at Tax Network USA can help resolve all tax cases
no matter how they started.
Don't let tax debt control your life any longer.
Take the first step toward resolving your tax issues by visiting TaxNetworkUSA.com slash Walsh.
That's TaxNetworkUSA.com slash Walsh today.
It's from the Daily Wire.
Hundreds of Lebanese demonstrators waving Palestinian and Hamas flags surrounded the U.S.
Embassy in Beirut Tuesday night after Hamas falsely accused Israel of hitting a Gaza hospital in an airstrike.
The protesters gathered at the U.S.
Embassy hours before President Joe Biden was scheduled to arrive in neighboring Israel to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in a show of solidarity with Israel as it responds to the devastating Hamas terrorist attack on October 7.
The demonstration also came after the terrorist group Hezbollah, which is based in Lebanon, called for a day of unprecedented anger at Israel and the United States.
The demonstrators scaled a fence to plant a Palestinian flag at the U.S.
Embassy and set a building on fire just outside the security gate.
On Tuesday, legacy media outlets and leftist politicians ran with the story, pushed by Palestinian officials, claiming that Israel targeted a hospital in the Gaza Strip in an airstrike and killed 500 civilians.
However, video footage of the explosion shows the area near the hospital lit up with fire moments after a barrage of rockets launched from the Gaza Strip towards Israel, meaning one of Hamas's rockets likely malfunctioned and landed on the hospital.
Okay, so on this hospital thing, First of all, I have to say that I'm extremely impressed with the peanut gallery on Twitter.
You know, because I used to think that social media was full of a bunch of ignorant loudmouths shouting into the abyss about stuff they don't know anything about.
I used to think that, but then this war in the Middle East started and suddenly it turns out that everyone on the internet is an expert in Middle East relations and they know everything about it.
I had no idea.
I didn't realize I was dealing with People who are so well versed, very well read on the topic, and with this incredible intuition to just know exactly what's going on all the time.
And anytime anything happens, they know exactly who's to blame for everything.
Not only that, but when there's some kind of new development, like let's say a hospital allegedly is hit with a rocket, they know exactly what happened even before any solid information is available at all.
Like, all we know, well, all we think we know, is that a hospital was hit with a rocket, and that's the only information, supposed information, that has been released.
And you've got all these people on Twitter, who they know exactly, they know who did it, they know why they did it, within seconds.
I mean, it's amazing.
The intuition, it's like magical.
But me, you know, I admit, I'm not an expert.
I don't have...
In fact, I don't have any first-hand knowledge of what's going on over there right now.
I'm the only one in the country, apparently, who's out of the loop on this.
I don't know where the rest of you guys are.
I don't know how you all have this first-hand knowledge of everything that's happening over there.
You know exactly who's to blame for everything.
I don't have that.
So I'm the only non-expert.
And I'm just over here.
I can only go based on the information that filters to me.
And either it's coming from corporate media outlets for the most part, or it's coming through social media accounts.
And many times these accounts, I don't even know who they are.
They're in foreign languages.
That's the situation I'm in.
Apparently I'm the only one.
So, I must say that when I heard about the hospital explosion, I didn't know exactly what happened.
Israel said Hamas did it, Hamas said Israel did it.
Some media reports, actually many media reports, blaming Israel for it right away.
I saw a few that were I didn't see any initially that blamed Hamas, but I saw a few that indicated, you know, maybe Hamas did it.
Didn't have any first-hand knowledge myself.
And then we get more information, what we think is information anyway, this morning, that after we were told that a hospital was blown up, like the dominant narrative On social media anyway, and in corporate media, was that a hospital was leveled, it was blown up, 500 people were killed in the process, and that it was likely because of Israel.
That was the dominant narrative.
What we see online right now is actually indicating, and now we have video footage, and we have things that seem a little more reliable, because you can actually see for your own eyes, and that all indicates that the hospital wasn't blown up at all.
That the hospital's not blown up.
Now, what we're seeing now are images of a parking lot next to the hospital that is partially damaged.
So we went from a hospital leveled and 500 people killed to a partially damaged parking lot.
That, you know, likely, if a missile or rocket hit a parking lot next to a hospital, it probably killed some innocent people, which is a terrible thing.
Unlikely that it killed 500 people, though, in a parking lot.
So, no matter what, no matter what, the initial story seems to have been false, which isn't a surprise.
Okay?
Because this is information coming out of a war zone.
We're getting information out of a war zone.
And if you're the sort of person who just accepts the first bit of information you get out of a war zone from clearly biased sources.
Not just biased, but these are people who are in a war.
They're killing each other.
So they obviously would have no compunction about lying.
I mean, that's propaganda.
It's part of any war.
It's especially part of wars now in the information age.
So the only Honest and intelligent way to respond in that situation is just to be very cautious.
And when you hear, especially hear a dramatic story, you hear about a hospital being blown up.
It could have happened.
These things happen in wars.
It's not like it's impossible.
It's not like you heard this story about the hospital being blown up.
There was no reason for you to automatically assume that it isn't true.
Because it could be true.
That kind of thing could happen.
But it is a dramatic kind of story, and so the intelligent and honest way to handle that is to say, well, let's wait for more information.
Let's hold off on drawing conclusions.
But then again, you're a human being, you have a mind, and so you can't help but try to understand things as you see them, and you arrive at at least tentative conclusions.
And so, here's how I kind of navigate this.
Going back to yesterday, I heard the news about the hospital.
Didn't know what was going on.
Neither did you, okay?
Neither did anybody.
And so, you can only really use your common sense to arrive at kind of an educated guess.
And my common sense told me, first of all, that It would make no sense at all for Israel to intentionally blow up a hospital.
So, the story that Israel targeted a hospital and leveled it, technically possible, with no other information.
I can't say for sure it didn't happen.
Technically possible.
It's not like some sort of logical impossibility.
Very, very unlikely, though.
Just very unlikely.
Common sense tells you it's very unlikely.
Because they have no incentive.
Even if you think that Israel is the evil empire, even if you think that Darth Vader is in charge over there, just from a pure self-interest standpoint, they gain nothing from blowing up a hospital.
So, your common sense should tell you, when you first hear that story, why would they do that?
How does that help them?
I mean, they're fighting a war, that doesn't, whatever you think about the ethics of it, And obviously blowing up hospitals, to call it unethical, would be a massive understatement, but it doesn't help any objective.
All it does, it would turn the world against them, turns world opinion against them, makes it less likely that other countries help them or take their side.
There's no reason to do it.
So it's a bizarre claim.
It also seems unlikely that the Palestinians would blow up their own hospital.
So we're left with, one way or another, most likely a misfire, a mistake, someone accidentally did it, right?
This is your common sense, is what should tell you that.
It's just like, most likely, seems like this was probably, no one, probably was not a targeted situation.
And then you have to ask yourself, okay, which side has the more sophisticated rockets and technology?
Well, it's Israel, which makes it less likely that they'd be the ones to make that kind of mistake, which means, yeah, it was probably Hamas.
Just seems like the common sense assumption in light, in lieu of additional information.
Given the alleged target or given what happened, very unlikely that it was targeted on either side because neither side gains anything from doing that.
And so it's a mistake.
Which side is more likely to make that kind of mistake?
Which side has the cruder technology?
Well, there's no question about it.
That's what your common sense should tell you, and then more information comes out this morning, and then it seems like, OK, well, yeah, if that was your common sense sort of assumption, then it seems like it's being vindicated.
Um, one thing we certainly can't rely on is our leaders to help us out or lend any clarity.
Um, as I already mentioned, you know, uh, our leaders are, we, we, we cannot, uh, one thing we cannot assume is that they're going to help us navigate through this.
And just to make that point clear, uh, Biden is in Tel Aviv now, and here he is, we've got a couple of clips from here.
Here he is, first of all, talking about this, um, alleged hospital explosion launch.
Deeply saddened and outraged by the explosion at the hospital in Gaza yesterday.
And based on what I've seen, it appears as though it was done by the other team, not you.
But there's a lot of people out there not sure.
So we've got to overcome a lot of things.
Great insight, Biden.
Thanks for that.
So we have to overcome a lot of things.
We have to overcome.
He can barely stay awake.
He's half asleep.
He could barely wake himself up enough to speak, which really came through in this next clip especially.
Watch this.
You know, years ago I asked the Secretary of State when he and I were working in the Senate to write something for a man.
He said, he wrote a line that I think is appropriate.
He said it's not we need to.
Not just a problem could wait a little bit.
Take it too much time.
(swoosh)
What?
What?
We are so screwed.
I hate to say it, we really are.
I mean, this guy is barely awake and we have him overseas right now on the brink of a world war, sleepwalking and babbling to himself.
Meanwhile, Israel is trying to fight a war and now they have to babysit grandpa.
How much did they hate it when they heard the news that Joe Biden's showing up?
They're like, can you send someone else?
Really?
I can't really babysit right now, guys.
Does anyone believe that this brain-dead vegetable is going to steer us through this crisis in a competent way?
Does anyone have faith in that?
Nobody does.
And worst of all, there's no indication that they would even want to steer us through it.
But who's they?
We don't know.
Who's actually in charge?
Who's calling the shots?
We don't know.
It's not Joe Biden.
It's like his handlers behind the scenes using Joe Biden as this half-dead, semi-conscious puppet as the world teeters on the brink of a world war.
I don't know how else to put it.
It's just a really dire situation that we're in.
It truly is.
All right, moving on to slightly less important news.
Britney Spears has a book coming out, and you know, everything going on in the world, this is the good news at least, that all of the most insufferable women in the country apparently have memoirs coming out.
We have Jada Pinkett Smith has a memoir, Britney Spears has a memoir.
Now we just need one from, I don't know, Joy Behar, and we'll really complete the trifecta.
But there's one revelation from the book that's getting a lot of attention, and here's NBC News.
We're back now with a major revelation from pop icon Britney Spears.
In an excerpt from her new book called The Woman in Me, provided to People Magazine, Spears said she had an abortion as a teenager after a pregnancy with Justin Timberlake.
For more on this, let's bring in Callan Rosenblatt.
She's NBC News' youth and internet culture reporter.
Great to have you with us.
Good morning, Callan.
So this abortion bombshell is really what everybody is talking about so far in what we've seen from the book.
What exactly does she say happened and how does she feel about it now?
Good morning, Savannah and Joe.
So, Britney Spears talks about being deeply in love with Justin Timberlake at the time, and although they weren't really ready for this, she said she'd always anticipated starting a family with him and that they were going to share their futures together.
So, when he said that he wasn't ready to be a father, she said it was a really difficult decision for her.
She said she has since agonized over this decision and that it's been a really big challenge for her.
And fans are really empathizing with what she says in this book about being really conflicted about having this abortion after falling pregnant in her either early teens or, sorry, her late teens or her early 20s.
And has Justin Timberlake responded at all to the book or to this claim?
People Magazine had reached out to Justin Timberlake, but no reps have responded yet for him.
All right, so the free Britney movement, of course, was a huge part of her being released from her conservatorship.
How are they reacting to this revelation?
Yeah, so fans online are really heartbroken for Britney.
They say, you know, Justin Timberlake has in the past been under scrutiny for some of his treatment around Britney Spears or how some of that relationship shook out.
So now fans are really reassessing some of the music from that time.
They're saying they're really heartbroken over the song Crime.
All right, so this is good news.
The Free Britney movement is on the case, and that makes me feel much better.
You know, the idiots who demanded that a mentally unstable woman be freed from her conservatorship because they saw a documentary about her and assumed that, you know, they saw a documentary and that was enough for them to sum up, like, years and years and years of court cases and everything else, and they knew everything they needed to know based on that, that we need to free Britney.
And now they're chiming in, which is fantastic.
This is an interesting story, though, and it's a sad one.
Apparently, Britney Spears, at some point as a young adult, maybe 19 or 20 is the assumption, had an abortion at, she
says, Justin Timberlake's insistence.
Now, a few things here.
Number one, Britney Spears was, we must say, a multi-millionaire at the time.
So the idea that she had to kill her baby because she couldn't care for the child without Timberlake's help just doesn't fly.
She was a very wealthy woman who had an abortion rather than care for her child.
And that's what happened.
And she's responsible for her own choices.
Trying to pawn this all off on the guy, or acting like she was a destitute, desperate, poor woman with no other choice or whatever, all of that is wrong.
Not that an abortion would be justified if she was poor, but she wasn't.
So, that's the first thing.
Now, that said, if the story is true, then Justin Timberlake carries an equal amount of the blame, as it was equally his child, and they're both responsible.
Which needs to be said.
Uh, but there's this thing that happens in the pro-life movement where pro-lifers don't want to be seen as villainizing women, and they especially And they want to be able to reach women, especially before an abortion happens, be able to reach out to them.
This is what pregnancy resource centers are all about, which is good.
It's like you want to be able to reach women, especially when you're dealing with a woman who is contemplating abortion but hasn't gone through with it yet.
Then the approach is certainly not to shout at them and scream at them and heap guilt and all of that, because if you do that, then it's just going to send them into the arm.
That's what the abortion industry wants you to do, because it sends the woman into their demonic arms.
And pregnancy resource centers and you've got sidewalk counselors that go to the abortion clinics, they know all of this and they're very good at reaching out to these women and not sugarcoating the issue at all.
But at the same time reaching out in love with grace and patience and all that.
And that's all good.
But there's a segment of the pro-life movement that goes too far in wanting to completely absolve the women entirely.
Of any guilt whatsoever, and to paint and to present it as though the women are just as much victims of abortion as the child, as if they have no agency.
And I'm seeing this, and it's true, it is true that oftentimes women are exploited by the abortion industry, are lied to, and we should keep that in mind.
As well.
But I'm just seeing that with this story as well.
I'm seeing some pro-lifers that are, well, this is all about Justin Timberlake.
He's the villain here.
Let's talk about him.
Well, no, hang on a second.
She was a 19 or 20-year-old woman, filthy rich, and decided, well, if Timberlake isn't on board, then I'm gonna kill the child.
I mean, to absolve her of guilt is not the right approach either.
I mean, the answer is that this is, Every baby has a mother and a father.
And if both the mother and father are on board with killing the child, then they're both, as far as I'm concerned, equally to blame.
But what I really want to focus on is the sadness, the heartbreak that we're hearing about.
Britney Spears says she's still torn up about it.
The media is reporting this as sad news, heartbreaking news.
We just heard that people are heartbroken, fans are heartbroken.
And it is very sad.
And it is heartbreaking.
Anytime a child is killed, it is sad and heartbreaking.
I don't have any problem with people taking that tone when talking about abortion.
That's the appropriate tone.
It's a terrible thing.
But it's interesting that people who support abortion, people who defend a woman's quote-unquote right to abortion, will describe it this way.
You know, we talked about this recently.
And it's something that the pro-abortion side, if you're on the pro-abortion side, you should really think about that.
And I know that there are, in fact, plenty of people on the pro-abortion side who watch this show, because I hear from them.
So if you're in that camp, ask yourself this.
If abortion is not the killing of a human child, then why is it sad?
Why is it such a mournful, difficult subject?
I mean, either way, no.
It's either or, okay?
It's a binary choice.
Either abortion kills a human person or it doesn't.
And if it doesn't, which is what you claim, then there's nothing sad about it.
If the quote-unquote fetus is a lifeless, inhuman clump of cells with no value, then an abortion is no different from getting like a wart removed.
And why would anyone talk about a wart removal like it's some tragic thing?
Why would a woman still be mourning the loss of a wart 20 years later?
It's absurd.
So, if you see this kind of story as sad, then you must realize at some level that the child is not a wart, that the child is not some lifeless growth, but is indeed a child.
And if you recognize that intuitively, then how can you support abortion at all?
I mean, how can you defend the killing of a human child?
The only thing that could ever make abortion defensible is if it is not the killing of a human child.
That's the only thing that could make it defensible.
And even then, I wouldn't say that it's defensible.
I've talked about this before, the claim that it's not a child, but merely a potential child.
Well, abortion still is not justified, even if what we're dealing with is the potential.
But that's the only way you can even get halfway to making an argument in support of abortion,
is first you have to make the case successfully that the child is not a human child,
which you can't make that case because it's ridiculous.
But if the child is a human child, then killing a human child is wrong self-evidently.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
It's like, it's the definition of an evil act.
It's the kind of thing where if that's not wrong, then I don't know what the word wrong means anymore.
If it's not wrong to intentionally and deliberately kill an innocent human child, then what could possibly qualify as wrong?
You've taken the worst kind of thing, and you have excused it, and in so doing you have excused everything else down the line before you get to the worst thing.
So that is really the dilemma.
And the only consistent position, if you're pro-abortion, You have to see abortion as like a happy or at least neutral thing.
But I think most people, even if they claim to be pro-abortion, they intuitively recognize that it is sad, it is heartbreaking.
And if your mind is telling you that, that it's sad and heartbreaking, you should really ask yourself why.
Finally, a new poll released on Tuesday has revealed that with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
now running as an independent candidate instead of a Democrat, he's taking a chunk of Trump support, pushing Biden into the lead.
According to the NPR-PBS NewsHour Marist National Poll, in a two-way race between Trump and Biden for the 2024 presidential election, 49% of registered voters said that they would vote for Biden, while 46% said that they would vote for Trump, with 5% being undecided.
With Kennedy thrown into the mix, Biden's support dropped to 44% among registered voters, while Trump's sunk to 37%.
Okay, that's how far his support sank with RFK Jr.
in the race.
And this is exactly what I said would happen.
You can ignore the poll if you want, but as I said, RFK Jr.
in the race is a disaster for Trump.
I don't want to say it seals it.
I don't want to say that it makes it a foregone conclusion he's going to lose.
Anything could happen in politics, but it puts him in an even deeper hole.
I mean, a really deep hole.
It just does.
Independent candidates always take more from Republicans than Democrats, but it's an especially major problem for Trump, in this case for a number of reasons.
To begin with, RFK is uniquely able to exploit the areas where Trump is weakest.
Especially when it comes to big pharma and the vaccine.
So Trump has called himself the father of the vaccine.
He actually said that about himself.
He's also the guy who made Fauci into a star.
And we know how Biden feels about the vaccine and Fauci.
So, these are two pro-vaccine, pro-Fauci people, at least in action.
Now, Trump now says he doesn't like Fauci, but in his action, he was pro-Fauci, put him on TV every single day for, it felt like, 10 years.
So, if big pharma corruption and the COVID vax are big issues for you, and they are still big issues for a sizable portion of the electorate, then, you know, on that issue, there's not much daylight between Trump and Biden, and then RFK jumps in, and for a certain portion of those people, he's your guy.
Now, I'm not saying he should be your guy.
He shouldn't be.
You know, if you vote for RFK Jr.
in the general election, you are ensuring that Biden will be re-elected.
You just are.
You're putting Biden back in office.
That's all you achieve.
Because you've got to, as I always say, we've got to deal in reality.
It's all we have.
And the reality is, if Trump and Biden are the nominees, it's going to be one of the two of them.
RFK Jr.
is not going to win.
I said nothing's certain in politics.
That's pretty much certain.
He's not going to win.
So it would be a very stupid thing.
To throw your support to, um, to RFK Jr., but people will do it.
People will make that stupid decision.
And, uh, there's not a lot of margin for error for either Trump or Biden.
So, yeah, the six, what was it, 16% they're claiming for, uh, RFK Jr.
Uh, yeah, 16%.
That to me strike, like, I'd be very surprised if he actually got 16% of the vote, but he doesn't need to get 16%.
I mean, if he gets, 3%?
4%?
5%?
It probably seals it for Biden, because neither one of the major candidates have room for error on this.
So you've got to face that.
I mean, if you're still telling yourself that, oh, RFK Jr., he hurts Biden more than he hurts Trump.
That's crazy, OK?
There's no argument for that.
I'm sorry.
Um, and I think you need to face reality for what it is, because first of all, just on its merits, you should be the sort of person that faces reality.
But also, it's not like they're, once you understand that, once you understand who RFK Jr.
is a threat to, um, the game's not over.
So there's a lot, not even close to over, so there's a lot that can be done.
And now you need to start thinking, Trump campaign should be thinking very carefully about how do they actively court those voters, those potential RFK people.
How do you get them over here?
And as I said before, they should be offering him a cabinet position as well, publicly.
Maybe he probably won't take it, but you make the offer, try to get him out of the race.
But that also shows to his voters that, hey, you know, this is a safe space for you.
Come here.
That's what needs to happen.
My fear for Trump is that once he starts seeing poll results like this, that he's going to start lashing out at RFK Jr.
in typical Trumpian fashion.
And that kind of strategy works for a lot of politicians, but I think it would backfire majorly for RFK Jr.
All right.
Let's get to, was Walsh wrong?
Bulletproof Everyone is a premier American body armor manufacturer and supplier.
Their unique armor systems offer 25% more coverage than standard armor while maintaining flexibility and wearability.
Bulletproof Everyone is designed for everyday wear.
Their ultralight armor system is so light and thin that you might just forget you're wearing it.
Your safety and discretion is their top concern.
Unless someone puts their hands on you, no one will know that you're wearing body armor.
With Bulletproof Everyone, you're not a walking billboard.
There are no visible logos, no flashy designs.
The clothing is designed to make you blend in, not stand out, which is what it should do.
Whether for work or for play, Bulletproof Everyone has the perfect armor system to fit your lifestyle and your budget.
Right now, my listeners can get 10% off plus free Bulletproof backpack with the purchase of any Bulletproof clothing.
Go to bulletproofeveryone.com, use code WALSH to check out.
That's bulletproofeveryone.com, promo code WALSH.
Okay, this is from, we just talked about reality.
Here's Mr. Reality, as he calls himself.
I think I win the was Walsh wrong section.
Texas penal law absolutely does specifically allow what the Houston store owner or that Houston store owner to shoot the robber in the back.
Technically, by letter of the law, the guy is not guilty.
Okay.
This is one where I want to be wrong because, as we talked about yesterday, I think it's a miscarriage of justice to throw this guy in prison.
I think what he did should be allowed and I very much do not want to see him go to prison.
I think that he will because the system is stacked against people like that.
And if they have, you know, if they can find it, if by the letter of the law they can send you to prison for the rest of your life, they're going to do it.
But Mr. Reality here shares the section of penal law that he thinks lets this guy off the hook.
Here's what it says.
Deadly force to protect property.
I kind of wish it would just end there.
You can use deadly force to protect land or property.
to using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible movable property.
If, and here are the conditions, I kind of wish it would just end there.
You can use deadly force to protect land or property.
But it doesn't end there.
So, if he would be justified in using force against the other under section 941,
and when and to the degree he reasonably believes that deadly force is immediately necessary,
to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery,
theft during the night time or criminal mischief during the night time,
or to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery,
aggravated robbery, robbery or theft during the night time from the other.
from escaping with the property, and he reasonably believes that the land or property
Okay.
cannot be protected or recovered by any other means, or the use of force other than deadly force
to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another
to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Okay, it sounds like that covers this guy, except you're missing the caveat, at nighttime.
Now, that's what it says.
To me, it's completely stupid that daytime or nighttime would factor in at all.
Who gives a damn if it's daytime or nighttime?
Why should that matter?
So the idea that what this guy did, if he had done it eight hours later in the day, it would have been okay, is nuts, but that is what the law says.
It says you can shoot someone to recover I don't think.
Or rather to stop them from escaping with your property if they commit theft at nighttime.
Now these other things don't require the nighttime, I don't think. So it looks like arson,
robbery, aggravated robbery, you know, that can be day or night.
But for theft and criminal mischief, it specifically says during the nighttime.
Again, I hadn't read the actual section of the law until you posted it.
I'm glad you did.
To me, it's like mind-boggling.
It's a totally arbitrary requirement that they put in there.
But it's in there.
And that's what I'm saying.
Now, prosecutors, they don't have to charge the guy.
Or they could slap on the wrist.
I mean, there are ways around this if they wanted.
And if I was in charge, I wouldn't be charging them.
But the system is specifically interested in putting guys like that in prison.
So that's the unfortunate reality.
Dog, is the username, says, My three-year-old took Tic Tacs from a gas station store one time.
Do you think we should give the store owner the ability to shoot my child to get the item back?
There needs to be limits on the use of force against thieves by store owners.
I went back and paid the owner, FYI.
No, I don't think they should be able to shoot your three-year-old.
I think they should be able to shoot you.
I'm joking, of course.
You're taking extreme scenarios to try to make it seem like it's impossible to decipher this issue.
But no, obviously, it would be very easy to write the law in such a way that would empower people to use force to recover their property, to use force against people who are infringing on their rights by stealing their property, while also ensuring that we are not giving people license to shoot three-year-olds.
Okay, you put that requirement in there.
This doesn't count for toddlers.
Like, put that in the law, that's fine.
I think we would all agree on that.
And there are other qualifications you can put in there as well that just, you know, things that I think are just basic common sense.
But I think you understand, I think you understand what I'm talking about.
I think you understand that we're not interested in empowering people to shoot three-year-olds for taking Tic Tacs.
And again, it'd be very easy to open up the law to empower people to better protect themselves without giving them license to kill three-year-olds.
Clearly, I think we could, clearly you could write a law in a way that would be very clear about that.
No, what I think we should actually be interested in doing is empowering people in the situation that this guy was in.
This is a grown man, comes in, steals from the cash register.
Or how about all these stories, videos that we see of these organized looting campaigns where people just come in and they take whatever they want and they walk out.
I think that the law should allow you to use deadly force in those situations.
Both to recover your property, because no one has any right to take it, and that is your livelihood, and so it is your life, but also because it's the only way that I can see to restore any semblance of order in our society, and to stop these sorts of things from happening in the future.
It's really the only way to dissuade people from acting this way.
And finally, Nikki Nick says, Was Walsh wrong that Kennedy will take bites from Trump's candidacy?
Was incorrect.
I knew it when you said it, Matt Walsh.
The Democrats don't want Biden.
Kennedy is still representing some of the things they want and believe in, and he's not 187 years old.
Well, this is unfortunate timing for you to leave that comment because I just, we just talked about the polling that seems to indicate that I'm 100% correct.
Yeah, he might take a little bit from Biden.
He'll take a little piece of Biden, but I think clearly he takes a lot more from Trump.
And that's what the polls show us, and I think that's what common sense tells us as well.
Well, if you haven't heard the news, BentKey, our new kids content app that launched Monday, is now officially the number one kids entertainment app.
You should know this because it was you that made it the number one downloaded app.
Just when this was announced and it's only been a couple of days now, you once again have a space with shows made for kids that they will love and that you can trust and that you will actually love as well, the kind of content that we had growing up.
And just like when we were growing up, new episodes are released every Saturday morning so your kids can experience the magic of Saturday morning cartoons, which I think is really cool.
That's right, Benkei has brought back Saturday morning cartoons.
You can wake up and watch new episodes from A Wonderful Day with Mabel McClay, Gus Plus Us, Yeti Tales, and much more.
If you don't have the Benkei app, consider this your invitation to join the number one kids app by downloading it today.
And if you're already a Daily Wire annual member, I have exciting news for you.
You already have full access to all of Benkei's incredible shows at no extra cost.
This will typically cost $99, but it's included in your annual Daily Wire membership for free.
You can get Bent Key now at dailywire.com slash subscribe.
Now let's get to our daily cancellation.
[MUSIC]
We begin our daily cancellation today with a viral video making the rounds on
This is apparently a TikTok influencer named Allison, who seems to have a decent size following.
And I'm not looking to pick on her personally, but she does set us up for a broader conversation I think is worth having because the attitude that she displays here is certainly not representative of every young adult entering the workforce, but she does represent a sizable portion of that group.
And if you're in that group, If her complaints resonate with you, then I think this segment is for you.
With that in mind, here's the video.
Watch.
I have a bone to pick with America!
So I'm headed to my serving job.
I f***ing hate it.
I f***ing hate it.
Tell me why I make more money serving.
I have my literal business marketing degree that put me in a cute $80,000 in debt and I make more serving sushi rolls because I've been applying to marketing jobs for weeks now and the pay cut is insane!
Insane!
But the jobs that are like a cue $150,000 to $200,000 a year I'm not getting those.
I'm a 20, almost 25 year old, my birthday's soon, almost 25 year old chick going against, you know, corporate ass America, people with so much experience.
All I got is my degree.
You know, people say, get your degree, but then they don't talk about how you need experience.
The degree was the experience!
Honey, relax.
Okay, so there it is.
Now, I'm going to once again assume my role as dad of the internet and give this young lady and any young person in her position some advice.
There are a lot of young people in her position, so I think it's worthwhile.
So just to restate the dilemma, Allison has a degree in business marketing, and this is not a metaphorical degree, she tells us.
It is a literal degree, a literal, whole-ass degree, as she might say.
She currently has a job as a waitress, which she effing hates, and she wants to land a position in her chosen field, but the problem is that all the jobs she can get would pay her less than she makes as a waitress.
She's been applying to jobs for effing weeks now, but all the positions that pay big money, 150, 200K, she can't get because she doesn't have experience.
Plus, as she says, she's competing against corporate-ass America.
But she feels that it's unfair because she feels she does have experience, as the degree was the experience, she says.
Now, let's sort through this.
I'm gonna try to help Allison and anyone else in her boat.
So here's some advice, three points.
First of all, clean up your language, young lady.
Dropping multiple F-bombs in a one-minute video makes you sound low-class and stupid.
You might not actually be low-class and stupid, but that's what your language conveys.
This is especially true for women.
You can say it's sexist all you want.
Doesn't matter.
It's worse for women.
Men shouldn't be shouting vulgarities all over the place either, but if you're a woman, it makes you look and sound especially ridiculous.
It makes people cringe all the more.
Men especially are repulsed by foul-mouthed women.
You should know that.
And employers, especially if they're men, are going to be repulsed by them too.
So it's just, it's repulsive.
We don't like it.
Second, I cannot emphasize this enough.
Never publicly complain about your job.
I say it again, never publicly complain about your job.
It is never a good idea to declare to the world that you effing hate your job.
If I was an employer and my employee made a video announcing that they hate their job, then I would immediately help them out by relieving them of this thing that they hate.
Now it's not that I Would be under the illusion that all of my employees love their jobs.
I don't think that I would see a video like that and say, I can't believe it.
I thought everyone loves their job.
Especially if I'm running a restaurant.
I'd be well aware that a large percentage of my workforce hates being there.
I used to work at a restaurant.
I know that.
But I expect you to pretend that you love it.
It's your responsibility to pretend that you love it.
Yes, imagine that.
You should pretend.
But I don't really feel that way.
Doesn't matter.
Pretend that you do.
Jobs are not places for emotional honesty.
As an employer, I expect you to have a positive attitude about your job, regardless of how you feel about it.
That's because I expect you to have greater emotional maturity than a three-year-old.
And actually, even with my three-year-olds, I don't accept this.
If I tell my children to do a chore and they are sulking and sullen and they stomp their feet, I tell them, come back here, let's try it again without stomping your feet.
But I don't want to do the chore.
I don't care if you don't want to do it, you have to do it.
And you know what else?
You're going to do it with a positive attitude.
But this isn't just about the job you currently have.
More importantly, if I'm the boss that holds the key to the better job that you want, I am definitely not going to give the key to you if you're out there crying about how you hate your current job.
In fact, if you come to the interview, and even in private, complain to me about your current job, I will not hire you.
This is how most employers operate.
You should know that.
If you present yourself as a whiny, sulking, complaining sort of person, you're not going to get hired.
Even if you have reasons to hate your former job.
Even if you have the most valid complaints in the world.
We all have valid complaints about our jobs.
Even if they're valid.
And you tell it to the person that's interviewing for the new job.
You're probably not going to get the job.
You know why?
Because why would anybody want to bring your bad attitude into their environment?
Bad attitudes are a virus, a sickness.
They destroy morale.
I'm not an employer, but I can tell you that I don't want anyone on my team who has a bad attitude.
I want people who are ambitious, eager, who want to be there.
They want to be where they are.
They want to keep moving up in the world.
If I have someone on my team who seems to not like being there, then they're not going to be there for very long.
I don't want to be around that.
This is why you should never complain about your job in any context where a current or future potential employer might hear you.
If you want to move up in the world, present yourself as eager, ambitious, positive, and grateful.
Even if you aren't really that kind of person, pretend that you are.
And after a while, you may even convince yourself that you actually are eager, ambitious, positive, and grateful, which will mean that you've really become all of those things.
This is known as the fake-it-till-you-make-it approach.
And I'm here to tell you that fake it till you make it is in many ways the key to success in life.
Believe it or not, if there's one cliche that you should cling on to that will help you through life, it is that one.
Fake it till you make it.
Third, your generic business marketing degree is mostly worthless, I'm afraid.
You have every right to be frustrated by that.
I would be if I was in your shoes.
The system lied to you.
You were duped.
They charged you a lot of money for this piece of paper.
They told you it would unlock all kinds of opportunities, and now you're discovering that it doesn't exactly work that way.
It's not that simple.
Why?
Well, because the fact that you sat in classrooms and learned about business marketing in textbooks does not mean that you actually have any skill or ability in any field related to that very broad and somewhat ambiguous category.
Employers look at your business marketing degree, and it tells them nothing about you.
You could be a brilliant, ambitious, innovative, highly skilled genius with a business marketing degree.
You could be.
Or you could be an incompetent, lazy moron with a business marketing degree.
Either sort of person can get a business marketing degree.
And there are, sadly, many more in the latter category than in the former.
Which actually is not that sad, come to think of it, because if you are competing in the job force, in the job market, the fact that there are so many incompetent, lazy, sad sack sort of people is an advantage for you.
It makes it even less difficult to get a leg up over them.
And what all that means is that you need to prove yourself in your chosen industry the same way as anybody else.
You have to start at the bottom and work your way up.
Your degree is not work experience, Allison.
It doesn't count.
Your degree only proves that you have experience getting degrees.
You are very qualified to go out and get a business marketing degree.
So you have experience doing that.
But as for performing in an actual job, getting real-world results, you have not demonstrated any aptitude there.
Your degree doesn't prove your abilities in that area one way or another.
And I realize this is disappointing to hear, but you just have to accept it and get on with it.
You're going to have to start at the bottom of the ladder and climb your way up.
You thought, you thought like so many other graduates, you thought that the degree was an elevator that would take you to the top floor effortlessly and automatically while you look down and pity all of those poor wretches trudging up the steps one step at a time.
But now, you find yourself at the bottom of the same staircase.
One of those poor wretches yourself.
The place you never wanted to be, you thought the degree would get you out of that, and now here you are.
Except with a lot of debt weighing you down.
You don't like that, which is fine.
You don't have to like it.
Nobody would.
But nobody cares if you like it or not.
Now you just have to decide if you're going to get moving or stay at the bottom of the steps whining while life passes you by.
No one's going to hand you a $200,000 salary.
You have to earn that.
And yes, it might mean taking an opportunity in the short term that pays you less than you could make working for tips at a restaurant.
Imagine that.
That's part of being a successful person.
Sometimes you take an opportunity where it seems worse than what you had before, but you're doing it for the long term because you have a strategy in mind.
You're losing the battle to win the war type of situation.
That was my situation when I first started working in media at pretty much the lowest possible level.
I wasn't even at the bottom rung of the ladder.
I was beneath the ladder, down in the basement.
And I was earning less at that time than I had a few years earlier as a teenager delivering pizzas.
But these are the kind... And I could have just... If I had the same attitude as Allison, I would have said, well, I'm just going to keep delivering pizzas.
I made more money doing this.
And you know what I'd be doing right now?
Delivering pizzas.
I'd still be there.
But these are the kinds of sacrifices you have to make and risks you have to take if you want to succeed.
I keep using the latter analogy, but that's probably not the most accurate image because the path to success, any kind of success in any area of life, is not a simple linear movement from point A to point Z.
With each step bringing you clearly closer to your goal.
Actually, the path involves going up and then going down again, then going up higher than you were before, and then down a little bit, and so on and so on.
It's less a ladder and more like chutes and ladders.
Now, we would all prefer if this was not the case.
It would be nice to live in a world where the next job you get after serving sushi rolls always paid better than the one you had before.
It would be nice if you could hang out in college for four years, party most of the time, get a low-effort degree like business marketing, and then be handed a corporate job with a corner office and an $850,000 salary at the age of 24.
That would be pretty great.
What a world that would be.
Unfortunately, that's not the world we live in, or will ever live in.
And if you want to succeed in this world, you need to deal with its realities.
So, to review.
Clean up the language.
Stop complaining about your job.
Don't waste your money on a generic worthless degree.
And if you already did waste your money, then I'm sorry about your luck.
You got screwed.
That's it.
It happened.
You can't change it now.
But either way, you have to start at the bottom and climb your way up painstakingly, one step at a time.
And pretend that you like it the whole way up.
That's the way.
There is no other way.
So get on with it, or else you are today cancelled.
