Ep. 1261 - Our Cities Don’t Have To Be Crime-Infested Wastelands. The Solution Is Simple.
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, San Francisco has been a dystopian wasteland filled with homeless drug addicts for many years. Yet with the communist leader of China coming to town, it has managed to make itself look clean and presentable. This proves that these problems are easy to solve, if only our leaders had the will to solve them. Also, Tim Scott ends his presidential campaign, which comes as news to millions of people who didn't know he had a presidential campaign. Vivek Ramaswamy announces his plan to fire 50 percent of the federal government workforce. I'll explain why that doesn't go far enough. And we're being told that "climate anxiety" is on the rise? What is that? And aren't there much better things to be anxious about?
Ep.1261
- - -
DailyWire+:
Want to work at The Daily Wire? For more information, click here and select “Careers”: https://bit.ly/3lfVtwK
Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898 to convert your existing IRA or 401(k) into gold and receive a FREE bar of gold! https://birchgold.com/Walsh
Windshield WOW - Exclusive Discount for my Listeners! Use promo code WALSH at checkout. http://www.WindshieldWOW.com
Grand Canyon University - Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University: https://www.gcu.edu/
- - -
Socials:
Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF
Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA
Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA
Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs
Today on the Matt Wall Show, San Francisco has been a dystopian wasteland filled with homeless drug addicts for many years, yet with the communist leader of China coming to town, it has managed to make itself look clean and presentable.
This proves that these problems are easy to solve if only our leaders had the will to solve them.
Also, Tim Scott ends his presidential campaign, which comes as news to millions of people who didn't know that he had a presidential campaign.
Vivek Ramaswamy announces his plan to fire 50% of the federal government workforce.
I'll explain why That doesn't go far enough.
And we're being told that climate anxiety is on the rise.
What is that?
And aren't there much better things to be anxious about?
We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Wall Show
Yet again, we're facing the threat of a government shutdown later this month and the administration will ultimately
deal with it the same way They always do with more spending
More spending will inevitably devalue the dollar.
Protect your savings by diversifying into gold with the help of Birch Gold Group.
And here's the best part.
When you open IRA with Birch Gold, for every $10,000 you spend by December 22nd, Birch Gold will send you a free gold bar.
Just text WALSH to 989898 to claim eligibility before Black Friday.
Birch Gold can even help you convert an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold without taking any money out of your pocket, and you still get the free gold bars too.
With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of satisfied customers you can count on Birch Gold to help you transition an existing IRA or 401k into an IRA in gold.
Don't let your savings fall victim to the further devaluation of the dollar.
Text WALSH to 989898, receive a free info kit on gold, and claim your eligibility before Black Friday to receive free gold bars on your qualifying purchase.
That's Walsh to 989898.
When he was the mayor of San Francisco in 2008, Gavin Newsom announced a 10-year plan to end chronic homelessness in the city.
That was a big challenge, Newsom said, and that's why it would take a decade longer than it took us to land the first men on the moon after Kennedy promised to do so.
But after 10 years, Newsom insisted the residents of San Francisco would finally be able to enjoy their city without hordes of junkies and prostitutes and mentally ill vagrants wandering around downtown and defecating on everything.
Watch.
We believe fundamentally that food solves hunger, that shelters solve sleep, and that housing solves homelessness.
And if we're going to solve the problem of those that are out on the streets that we define as homeless, we better solve the housing problem if we're going to have an impact.
And that's why we established this framework, what we call a 10-year plan to end chronic homelessness in San Francisco.
Now in case you missed the logic there, here it is one more time.
Food solves hunger, shelter solves sleep, and housing solves homelessness.
These are deep insights.
I'm surprised he didn't also point out that dry land solves drowning, and breathing solves suffocation, and not having cancer solves cancer.
Now, at the time, people living in San Francisco thought that this platform made sense.
They didn't think it was a bunch of meaningless platitudes.
They also didn't ask what it means for shelter to solve sleep on Second Thought.
I mean, what does that mean?
Does he think that people with houses don't sleep?
What does that mean, exactly?
Anyway, they just went with it, didn't ask any questions, and, you know, give the guy 10 years, they said.
Let him cook, as the kids say.
Pretty soon, everybody will have homes, and nobody will be sleeping, or something.
But, predictably enough, Gavin Newsom's 10-year plan turned out a lot like Greta Thunberg's promise that the world would end by 2023.
It never materialized, and everybody involved knew that it would never materialize.
Not that Newsom stuck around for 10 years to find out.
He became lieutenant governor of California just three years after announcing his big 10-year plan.
And then he moved up to governor in 2019 and threw it all in the hands of Newsom and his deputies.
The problem of homelessness in San Francisco and in California at large only became progressively worse.
And year after year, the residents of San Francisco have heard excuse after excuse for this failure.
The excuses kept changing, but one thing remained constant, which is that it was never the fault of politicians, right?
It's always somebody else's fault.
Now, lately, politicians in the city have settled on a new excuse.
They're blaming federal courts for the homelessness crisis.
Here's San Francisco Mayor London Breed, for example, just a couple of months ago, offering this excuse.
Watch.
Let's not let a one judge impact our ability to do what all San Franciscans want.
They want clean streets.
They want homeless people to be helped.
And that is exactly what we are trying to do.
Today, the fight over homeless sweeps intensifies as an impassioned Mayor London Breed pleads for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to lift an injunction that temporarily blocks the city from clearing homeless encampments.
So, London Breed blames a federal judge for the homelessness problem in the city, and people apparently agree with her.
You know, there was a crowd there, they were cheering along.
More than a decade after Newsom promised to end homelessness, people are cheering for a mayor who's coming up with excuses for why her party completely failed to do that.
The problem, Breed says, is a judge who issued some injunction within the past year, and that's why the plan to end homelessness didn't work over the past 15 years.
And by the way, the government is the only place where it works this way, right?
It's the only place where you can go to your boss with an excuse for why you utterly failed to do what you were paid to do, and then get a standing ovation.
Doesn't really work like that in most places in the private sector.
Now, to be fair to London Breed though, a judge did recently issue an injunction against the city preventing them from removing homeless encampments unless they had shelter beds to house everyone.
And yes, that was a dumb ruling.
The 9th Circuit later clarified that the city can remove homeless encampments as long as the homeless people decline an offer of housing.
So, that's something.
That's where that stands.
But all this legal wrangling is just the latest excuse that people in San Francisco have heard when they ask why homelessness is still completely out of control.
Every year there's a new explanation.
Last year, for example, Newsom blamed the economy and COVID for why his plan to end homelessness wasn't actually ending homelessness.
He said, quote, we're dealing with unprecedented economic contraction, the worst in our lifetime, induced by a pandemic.
A few years before that, in 2012, Newsom attacked people who pointed out that homelessness was getting worse, saying that they were just being cynical and playing politics.
Then, speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Newsom defended his 10-year plan, saying that Michelangelo taught him that it's better to set a high bar and fail than to set a low bar and meet it.
Now, of course, Michelangelo was talking about artistic pursuits, we can assume, where that rule may apply.
But with politicians, you'd much rather they set out to do simple things and then actually do those simple things, rather than claim they're going to do a big thing and instead do nothing at all, which is usually what happens.
What do we take from this?
If you live in California, the message is pretty clear.
Homelessness is just something you have to deal with.
No 10-year plan, no matter how well-funded it is, can possibly solve it.
It's a fact of life.
The best you could hope for is helping a few thousand homeless people as hordes more homeless people arrive.
That's the reality of life in a big city.
And if you disagree, Gavin Newsom will tell you that you're part of the problem.
And that's all why it's been so interesting to watch what's been happening in San Francisco over the past few days.
Now this week, San Francisco is hosting the APEC Summit, which will attract business leaders, tourists, and nearly two dozen heads of state, including Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping.
In response, and they're all coming to the city, to San Francisco.
In response, for the first time in a generation, virtually overnight, the city of San Francisco has cleaned the streets.
Homeless encampments have been forcibly moved out of sight.
The place looks presentable again, even livable, if you can believe it.
And residents of the city are completely stunned.
They had no idea that anything like this was possible.
Watch.
The summit is expected to bring in 53 million dollars, filling hotel rooms, bringing big business, and the city did tidy up for Dreamforce, but this cleanup is much more extensive.
While San Francisco is in the spotlight for the Asia-Pacific Economic Conference, city leaders are making sure the city shines.
Tourism is our business here in San Francisco and we need to focus on making sure that the tourist dollars still come back.
Caltrans repaving major roadways like the Harrison Street off-ramp from the I-80.
BART doubling down by deep cleaning their stations overnight more often.
The city had gotten a little bit dingy over time.
Scrubbing and power washing is happening all over the city.
Yeah, the bottom of my shoes look clean.
It's noticeable how clear the streets look and how few homeless encampments there are on major thoroughfares.
Having been a long-time resident in the Bay Area, you just naturally start to wonder of, like, houseless folks being displaced.
Public Works is installing decorative crosswalks in North Beach and Chinatown, and the Webster Street pedestrian bridge in Japantown was recently repainted.
The Yerba Buena Gardens at the Moscone Center are decked out with new colorful landscaping and murals, paid for by the Clean California Grant, just in time for the 20,000 high-profile CEOs and heads of state coming into town next week.
Some people say this should be how it's always done.
What about the people who are here year-round, you know, and like local hard-working, working-class Bay Area folks?
That's a good question from that guy.
Why exactly doesn't the city of San Francisco do this all the time?
If they can do it at all, then it seems like, well, they can do it.
So why wouldn't they just do it all the time?
Later in that news report, the news station makes it clear that the city isn't spending any extra money on this cleanup, supposedly.
All the funds are coming out of existing budgets.
So, again, they could easily be doing this all the time.
So why aren't they?
Another local resident in the Soma neighborhood had the same question.
He told the New York Post, quote, they've cleared out the tents on Howard Street, which tells me the city had the capability to do this all along.
Instead, they just do the bare minimum.
Mark Benioff, the founder of Salesforce, echoed that sentiment, quote,
San Francisco has been incredibly clean, beautiful, and safe for
the last three days.
And it's great that the city is able to put its best foot forward for
this major event that brings in 40,000 people from around the world and
$80 million to the economy.
It is important to ask why the city cannot be this clean and
safe every single day.
Benioff has an especially good reason to ask that question since he poured
roughly $8 million into Prop C in California, which taxed individuals and
businesses to promote homelessness services, including a lot of nonprofits.
What did he get in return for that money?
Apparently not much.
And that's not surprising.
When you hand left-wing non-profits money to fix any issue, whether it's homelessness or something more important like microaggressions in the workplace or whatever, you don't actually give them incentives to fix the problem.
Instead, you give them incentives to prolong the problem so they can bilk more money from billionaires.
So what's the solution then?
Well, it turns out that it's pretty simple.
Instead of dumping money into homelessness services and non-profits, all that was needed this whole time was a little bit of willpower.
San Francisco Chronicle obtained emails from city officials that demonstrate how easy this has been to accomplish all along.
Christopher McDaniels, the city's superintendent of street environmental services, wrote an email back in September explaining that every street needs to be completely cleared for the event.
that. He wrote quote, "With APEC coming, I'm concerned about historical encampments
that are close to priority areas." McDaniel's boss added quote, "We need to
stay on top of the growing encampments. Do we have a plan?"
Within days, according to the Post, quote, "Certain areas including the notorious
intersections of Van Ness Avenue and California Street, Hyde and Eddy Street, Taylor
and Ellis Streets, were cleared of homeless tents."
Now, reading all this, it's hard not to laugh a little bit when you think about the fact that San Francisco's bureaucrats managed to make the city look presentable for the leader of Communist China.
It's kind of like if your wife is a slob most of the time, but then makes a point of like doing her hair and putting on makeup whenever the pool boy comes to clean the pool.
Kind of shows you where her affections lie.
You might want to be a little concerned about that.
And San Francisco has revealed itself in the same way.
It also kind of makes you wonder how San Francisco might look if Xi Jinping ran it instead of just visiting it.
Does anyone seriously doubt that it would look a lot better than it does under London Breed and Gavin Newsom?
But the most important point is that this proves, okay, this is a microcosm that proves what I've been saying for a long time, which is that these are simple problems to fix, and the government can easily fix them.
Homelessness, crime, all the stuff that makes our cities into unlivable wastelands, it can be solved.
You can solve these problems.
And in this case, it took just a couple of emails from some mid-level bureaucrats, and it got done.
Now, of course, these bureaucrats have not solved chronic homelessness, quote-unquote.
They've not prevented people from losing their homes or doing drugs or developing mental illness.
But they have moved these people out of sight, and they've used force to do it.
They have cleaned up the city, at least parts of it, which means that it can be done.
For now, at least, San Francisco is doing what is necessary.
And this is a very good indication that, as it turns out, our cities, again, do not have to be crime-infested cesspools.
They do not have to be third-world wastelands with zombified drug addicts walking around and taking dumps in the streets.
If San Francisco can make at least parts of itself look clean and livable in order to impress China, it can make the whole of itself clean and livable for the sake of its citizens if it cared to.
But the vast majority of the time, San Francisco doesn't care to do that.
Our elites, who run the entire country, don't care to do that for the sake of their own citizens.
That is the common thread here.
You know, the left likes to say one of their favorite little mantras is that poverty is a policy choice.
Which obviously isn't true.
That's completely stupid.
Poverty is a fact of life.
It's an inevitability in human civilization.
Social decay, on the other hand, is a choice.
And if you live in a city where there are, again, zombie drug addicts wandering around, looking like the Walking Dead, and it's making the city unlivable, that is a policy choice.
That does not have to happen.
It only happens if it's allowed to happen, or perhaps in our case, made to happen.
Who would have thought that after years of giving drug addicts taxpayer-funded needles and devaluing the currency and outsourcing manufacturing to China, we'd end up with even more homeless people?
Who would have thought that suspending the enforcement of pretty much every misdemeanor would lead to more misdemeanors like public urination and public drug use and worse crimes than that, public robberies, public sex acts?
Now, for more than a decade, Democrats' solutions to this rapidly growing crisis has been to throw more money at the problem and give themselves more power in the process.
Certainly, this approach has worked out well for Gavin Newsom, but it hasn't worked out for the people living in San Francisco.
It tells you a lot that the city's leaders, like so many political figures all over the country, felt no incentive at any point to make their own community better and more prosperous and more beautiful just for the sake of their own people.
They don't care about their own people.
The welfare of their own people simply doesn't motivate them.
But when Xi Jinping and an army of CEOs are in town, then our leaders will spring into action.
Now those are some people that politicians really want to impress.
What's happening in San Francisco right now is the end of plausible deniability for all of these bureaucrats and elected officials.
It's now beyond any doubt that they are the reason for the managed decline we are witnessing in major cities all over the country.
This managed decline is deliberate.
But by the same token, it's reversible.
And it can be reversed very quickly.
El Salvador fixed its violent crime problem in a few weeks.
Now we learned that San Francisco has always had the ability to end its homelessness epidemic in a matter of days.
And when APEC is over and the floodgates reopen in Soma and the homeless druggies pour back in, that will be obvious to everyone.
Maybe even the people who have the misfortune of living in San Francisco, as oblivious as they all tend to be.
be. Now let's get to our five headlines.
Well, who doesn't like to have their windshields clean?
Haze and film can easily build up on both sides of your car windshield, causing dangerous glare.
My new friends at Windshield WOW are the fastest and least hassle way to get a super clean, streak-free and safe windshield.
The Windshield WOW is an innovative windshield cleaning device that uses two magnetic cleaning paddles, one on the outside and one on the inside of your car.
to clean both sides of your windshield all from the outside.
All you do is push around the outside paddle and the inside follows and cleans the inside automatically.
No more struggling to clean the inside.
The Windshield Wow applies firm cleaning pressure for you and is super thin to get into those tight dash areas as well.
So what are you waiting for?
Go to windshieldwow.com.
Use code WALSH to check out for a special discount.
That's windshieldwow.com using code WALSH.
We begin with some sad news today reported by the Daily Wire.
Senator Tim Scott officially ended his Republican presidential campaign on Sunday night after failing to gain traction with GOP primary voters.
Scott made the announcement during an interview with former Representative Trey Gowdy on Fox News.
Quote, when I go back to Iowa, it will not be as a presidential candidate.
I'm suspending my campaign.
I think the voters, who are the most remarkable people on the planet, have been really clear that they're telling me, not now, Tim.
Well, yeah, we're also telling you not ever.
Not now, not ever, Tim, is what we're actually saying.
Scott said, Romans 8.28 is such an important scripture.
It says that all things work for the greater good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose.
I think the message is clear for me right now.
I am indeed suspending my campaign.
I'm going to recommend the voters study each candidate and their candidacies and, frankly, their past and make the best decision for the future of the country.
The best way for me to be helpful is to not weigh in on who they should endorse.
Tim Scott then said, quote, I'm going home to spend more time with my girlfriend who is totally real, you guys.
Stop saying she isn't real.
She's real, okay?
So that was a full statement.
He said all of that.
Now, I have to say, with all due respect to Tim Scott's dearly departed campaign, may it rest in peace, I am happy about this and I'm happy For a number of reasons.
Mainly because it means that I personally will be free from the absolutely inhumane barrage of emails that I've been getting from his campaign for like five months now.
Now, just to be clear, I have never signed up for a Tim Scott email list.
I would never do something like that.
I promise you.
But I was signed up for it.
Somehow.
This is not an exaggeration.
I actually went and checked.
Just since September, I have received 150 emails from Tim Scott's campaign.
Since September.
150 since September.
And that's in spite of the fact that I have been actively unsubscribing from his list.
But you know how it works.
Like, you get on one of these lists, and then next thing you know, you're on 50 of them.
And so I've probably unsubscribed from 10 or 15 of the lists, and I still got 150.
If I hadn't unsubscribed from those lists, it'd be more like 300 emails, okay?
And it shows you too that, what should really already be obvious to you, which is that most people in politics, and there's a reason I'm complaining about the emails, I mean the main reason is just to complain, but the second reason is to make the point that most people in politics really have no clue what they're doing.
And the whole Tim Scott campaign is proof of that.
I mean, you would have to be delusional and incompetent to think that Tim Scott ever had a chance.
He never did.
This whole thing was doomed from the start.
There was no universe.
Okay, even if we live in a multiverse with a billion universes and a billion different versions of this reality, In none of those realities is Tim Scott president.
That's how not president he is, okay?
And in spite of that, so you go into it, this is like the longest of longshot campaigns.
What's the plan?
Okay, if you're going in with a long-shot campaign, you think you've got to go in with something big and bold and innovative to give yourself a chance to set yourself apart from the rest.
And so what did the campaign consist of?
Just sending a bunch of emails and having Tim Scott appear on Fox News 600 times.
600 emails, 600 Fox News appearances, and presto change-o, you're president.
That was supposed to be the plan.
Is that how it worked out?
No, of course not.
Did it achieve anything at all?
Did it move the needle even slightly?
No, of course it didn't.
You got the people working on... And all these people will get jobs again in politics.
Like, they worked on this campaign.
They did nothing.
Absolutely nothing.
There was... Except waste... Millions of dollars wasted to achieve nothing at all, and everybody involved will still have jobs.
Now listen, I've admitted before I would make a terrible politician, I would make a terrible campaign manager, and yet I would still be better.
I'd be wildly, significantly better than 99% of the people in Washington right now.
Simply knowing things like Tim Scott can't be president, sending people a thousand emails a day won't help you win, it'll just annoy them.
Knowing those two things alone makes me and you smarter and more competent than almost everybody working in Washington right now.
Now, with any of these campaigns, you know, there are people that speculate, well, you have these long-shot candidates that are in there, and they're in there because They have something else.
They got an ulterior motive.
They want to be in the cabinet.
They want to be VP.
I think he'd be doing Tim Scott and his team a favor to assume that he was really just running for vice president.
He was running to be in Trump's cabinet.
I don't think that's what he was doing.
He says he doesn't want to be, he doesn't want that.
And I actually believe him.
No, he really thought he could win.
Same for Mike Pence.
These guys really thought they could be president.
And their donors thought it too.
And presumably at least some of their staff were under the same delusion.
And these are the kinds of people who are running this country.
No common sense.
No insight at all into the minds of average Americans.
Totally delusional.
Incompetent.
And these are the people that are running the country.
Which brings us to the next topic, I think, very neatly.
Vivek Ramaswamy posted this over the weekend.
This tweet he says, "On day one, instantly fire 50% of federal bureaucrats.
Here's how. If your social security number ends in an odd number, you're fired.
That downsizes government by half. Absolutely nothing will break as a result.
It doesn't violate civil services rules because mass layoffs are exempt.
Shut it down." Then he continued to elaborate, "This avoids civil service protections."
No bureaucrat can claim their firings were politically motivated.
Further firings can be executed with a chisel, but step one needs to be an unrestrained chainsaw or else it just won't happen.
Now, this plan's getting a reaction from people online.
And first, let me just say that the idea that we should just fire 50% of federal bureaucrats Is totally outrageous and insane.
And I agree with a lot of what Ramaswamy says, but this is just nonsense.
50%?
It should be 90%.
But I guess 50 is a good start.
So, as a start, I love the idea.
Lots of people have bristled at it, as you might imagine, including plenty of alleged conservatives are upset about this.
You know, the people who have been talking about shrinking the size of government for decades, and then someone comes along and says, all right, let's do it, guys.
And those same people say, no, no, no, wait.
Not like that.
I mean, OK, well, what way do you want to do it?
Oh, not at all.
That's the way.
The way I want to do this thing is to not do it.
That was my preferred strategy.
And this is what you have to understand.
Every Republican for my entire life.
Has run on a plan, and before my life began, has run on a plan to cut the size of government and reduce spending and all the rest of it, and none of them have done it.
Okay, none of them, none of them have even tried to do it.
That's not even like they've made an attempt.
None of them have even cut the size of government or cut spending by like 0.5%.
Instead, they've all increased it.
Every single one.
None of them have reduced the size of the behemoth federal bureaucracy.
They've really just added to it.
And that's because, at this point, actually cutting this thing down, really making a dent, would require a drastic action like this.
If you support a candidate who is not suggesting seemingly drastic extreme measures, then that is someone who is not actually going to do this at all because that's the only way to do it.
This thing, the federal bureaucracy, is so big and so unwieldy and so outrageously enormous that you can't help to achieve anything by making surgical cuts with a scalpel.
And again, even that, no Republican president has done.
But that wouldn't be enough.
Because whatever little lump you cut off will just grow back before dinnertime.
That's how huge this thing is.
It's a huge self-replicating organism.
And if you're not taking a chainsaw to this thing, an unrestrained chainsaw, as Vivek Ramaswamy says, then you aren't doing anything.
Do you know, since we're on the subject, do you know how many people work for the federal government?
Right now, the federal government has close to three million employees.
And that is just the civilian workforce, okay?
So that's not everybody who works for the, that's not even close to everybody
who works for the federal government, but the civilian workforce
is close to three million employees.
So if you cut half of them, you would still have over a million people on the payroll.
You would still have more people than work for Google, Apple, Facebook combined times two.
If you cut half.
You'd still have enough people to fill like 14 NFL stadiums.
Isn't that enough?
How could that not be enough?
I mean, can we get by?
Can we get by with 14 NFL stadiums full of people running the government?
Um, there are so many, and here's the other fact.
Not only can you and should you cut half of the federal workforce, but if you did, none of us would notice a difference.
I'm telling you right now, if they were just to cut 50% and not tell us, No one, you would never know.
You would never know.
They could come back 10 years later and say, oh, by the way, you know, we cut 50% of the workforce 10 years ago.
You say, oh, really?
Like, your life, if it changes at all, it would be for the better.
But really, there'd just be no difference.
You would never notice.
Okay, if you don't work in the government, not that I have, but I'm telling you, you have no idea how useless most of these people are.
And not all of them, but most of them.
There are so many, I mean thousands and thousands of federal jobs that serve no purpose other than just for their own sake.
And they help no one, they do nothing.
It is redundancy on top of redundancy on top of redundancy.
We have entire agencies, entire departments, entire bureaucracies within the greater bureaucracy that could be wiped off the face of the planet tomorrow, and you would never know.
Now, I read somewhere that The bureaucracy that ran the Roman Empire had like 20 or 30,000 employees, which was a lot at the time.
By comparison though, that's only a little more than currently run the city of Boston.
Okay, 30,000 to run an empire, the biggest empire on the globe at the time, and Now we need 30,000 to run Boston.
And not run it well, by the way.
We have 3 million people running our country.
And that does not include the millions upon millions collectively who work for states and cities across the country.
So that's not all the government workers.
It's not even close.
Altogether, okay, city, federal, state, government.
Altogether.
Only civilians.
That's something like 20 million, okay?
It's actually more than that, but about 20 million.
And that means that, like, one out of every 15 people in the country works for the government at some level.
One out of every 15.
I'm doing a lot of math here, this is getting pretty dangerous.
And I'm gonna get a fact check, but I'm pretty confident in these numbers.
The point is, it's a lot, okay?
It is just, it is a lot.
It's so much that saying a lot doesn't even come close to covering it.
And these people are not working for free, by the way.
Just so you know.
This is billions of dollars.
I mean billions and billions of dollars that we are spending just on the payroll for all these people.
Most of whom, their jobs could not exist and it would only make your life better.
If you noticed at all, it would only be for the better.
So yeah, should we go in and cut 50%?
Yes, absolutely.
And if that seems extreme to you, exactly.
Because that's the situation that we're in.
If you bristle at that, then it only shows that you don't understand.
You do not understand how bad it is.
And just how much you are being scammed.
Like most of these jobs, I say they serve no purpose, that's not exactly true.
Most of these jobs serve the purpose of giving jobs so that other people in government can give jobs to their friends and family and everything else.
It's a giant nepotism program that you are funding.
You can barely afford to buy groceries at the grocery store for your family and you are funding this massive welfare scheme for federal bureaucrats.
And once you understand that, and you hear 50% being cut, your only reaction is mine, which is like, that's not enough.
I mean, I'll take it, but that's only, that's just the start, you know?
50% and then let's cut another 50 and let's keep going.
And I think every other candidate in the race right now should be asked, do you support that plan?
And if you don't, why?
What is your plan?
Okay, do you have a plan for getting rid of 50% of these bureaucrats?
Because if you don't, you better come up with one.
All right, here's an update on a story that we covered last week.
Redux has this update.
We talked about the story of the mayor of a town in Alabama, I believe, yeah.
Who committed suicide last week after it was revealed that he was dressing up like a woman and posting, like, fetish content online and posting other very objectionable things.
And this was revealed, and then he committed suicide.
And of course, trans activists are blaming conservatives and mourning the death of this poor man, this martyr.
But here's an update on that story.
Multiple women have come forward to reveal that they were victimized by the now deceased Smith Station Mayor Bubba Copeland after discovering that he had shared their names and photos to pornography sites without their knowledge.
Copeland took his own life last week after a damning expose was released by the 1819 Project unraveling the sick details of his secret transgender double life, one that included penning erotic fantasies of murdering a local woman.
Despite having demonstrated a number of predatory behaviors, Copeland's suicide has been portrayed sympathetically by major media outlets, resulting in an outpouring of support.
A makeshift memorial dedicated to the former mayor and pastor was set up outside of First Baptist Church on Sunday in Alabama, causing the women targeted by his perverse behavior to struggle with a mix of emotions.
One of Copeland's constituents, Amy Summerlin, spoke with WTVM in a report published November 8th and explained that she has become aware that the now-deceased mayor had shared her photo to at least nine porn sites.
The victim's surname, Summerlin, was also one that Copeland had adopted for his feminine alter ego, going by Brittany Summerlin, on a number of sites.
Okay, so...
And you could go to Redux and read this full report.
I can't even stomach read the whole thing.
But you get the idea that this guy was assuming the names of his female constituents and adopting that in this fetish role-playing trans thing he was doing.
And not only that, he was also posting, as we talked about last week, he was posting these Short stories he had written where he fantasized about murdering women and assuming their identity, and the woman he was fantasizing about murdering is an actual woman who was a constituent of his.
So we knew about that, and now we also find out that he was apparently, according to the report, taking photos of local women and posting them to porn sites without their knowledge.
What that goes to show is, first of all, none of this is surprising.
As I've explained so many times, in particular for grown men who start identifying as quote-unquote trans, it is almost always a sexual fetish.
It's a sexual role-playing thing.
And one that when they start doing it publicly, they want you to participate in it with them.
They're demanding that you participate in it, but that's what the whole thing is, right?
So most of these trans activists out there are out there calling for trans rights.
The right that they want is the right to force you to participate in their sexual role-play fetish, right?
And I was very clear with this guy.
And on top of that, according to everything we're reading, this guy was a deviant, degenerate pervert.
I mean, doing things like posting a woman's photograph to a porn site, like in any other context, everybody would agree that you're a total scumbag, at a minimum, for doing that.
And you take the trans stuff out of it?
If this was a politician who was doing that, take trans out, and then they committed suicide, everybody would be saying, oh, this is a person who's finally a cowardly way out because they're finally being held accountable for their actions.
So we're not weeping over that.
That's a horrible crime to commit against somebody.
But you add the trans thing in and suddenly this person is a victim.
And I also, look, I almost, I wanted to, I thought at the time, and didn't say it out loud because it's, you know, you do have to be careful about speculating too much in situations like this, but it did certainly occur to me that after this came out and the man chose to take his own life, you know, you had to wonder, How much of that was shame over what we'd already found out, and how much of it was he was worried about what else we might find out now?
You know, if they start looking at the hard drive, what else are they going to find on it?
And now we've already found out that he was posting these photos of women without their consent.
What else is there?
I would not be surprised if it turns out that there's more.
And as more comes out about this guy, I mean, never forget the fact that he was posthumously canonized by trans activists who wanted us to weep over his death and even blamed conservatives for it.
All right.
One other thing.
This is from Fox Business.
It says, while many workers worry about AI replacing their jobs, one company announced it's hiring the first humanoid robot CEO.
Micah is a research project from Hanson Robotics and a Polish rum company.
Dictator.
Dictator.
The company's actual name is Dictator, and they're hiring a robot to run the company.
They're just trying to be the bad guys from a dystopian sci-fi movie.
In a company video, Micah said that with advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms, I can swiftly and accurately make data driven.
I can make it data-driven.
Data-driven what?
That doesn't make sense.
However, Fox Business reporter Lawrence Simonotti noted that there's a significant delay in the time it takes Mika to process and respond to your question.
Oh, so just like a real boss.
This is like a real boss.
Hanson Robotics CEO David Hanson, who played a key role in employing Mika at Dictador, emphasized the importance of humanizing artificial intelligence.
Inside Edition, I think, also had a report on this robot CEO.
Let's watch that.
Are robot CEOs the future of the workplace?
Hello, I'm Mika, the world's first experimental AI CEO at Dictador.
Mika is the newest employee and experimental CEO of a company in Poland.
My decision-making process relies on extensive data analysis and aligning with the company's strategic objectives.
It's devoid of personal bias, ensuring unbiased and strategic choices that prioritize the organization's best interests.
Day-to-day tasks for Mika at the liquor company include choosing artists to design the brand's bottles.
I meticulously research, conduct background checks, and verify potential client lists, providing well-reasoned decisions to the board.
A bonus about the robot employee, she never uses vacation days.
Well, as a robot CEO, I don't really have weekends.
I'm always on, 24-7, ready to make executive decisions and stir up some a- Where do you even begin?
First of all, of course, so it's a robot CEO, but of course, they're going to make her female and non-white.
So that, obviously.
But the robot CEO is not really a CEO.
It's just some talking mannequin that hangs around the office, creeping everybody out.
And they go on to talk about it.
It doesn't actually, the CEO doesn't make hiring and firing decisions.
It's not actually CEO.
But the fact that we're even symbolically heading in that direction, I think is a bad sign.
And that's the thing about this AI stuff, that it's kind of amazing in a certain way.
Because we've all grown up watching, as I said, these dystopian sci-fi movies about robots killing
everybody.
And now we're trying to make that happen.
We've got people who are fully trying to become the villains in all of those movies.
So we all know how this plays out, and we're just going to do it, I guess.
And even leaving the movies aside, even if we assume that AI will never become sentient and enslave mankind, it's still pretty self-evident, I think, that it's a bad thing for robots to replace people and eventually make us all irrelevant and unnecessary.
That's a bad trend.
I think this is clearly a process that will harm people much more than help them.
I think everyone kind of knows that.
And yet we're doing it.
We are marching head first into a future that is obviously going to be bleak.
Companies run by robots and staffed by robots is not good.
I mean, everyone knows that isn't good, but we're doing it.
We're doing, we are doing the thing, even though we know it's all, it's like if we're, imagine we're all In a big bus, and there's a rickety bridge up ahead, and there are signs that say, danger, do not enter.
And we've already heard lots of bad stories about this bridge and how dangerous it is.
And we don't even have to cross the bridge.
Like, there's other paths that we could take.
And everybody on the bus, including the people driving it, know that that bridge, they're all looking at the bridge like, that looks bad, we shouldn't cross it.
And yet we're heading towards the bridge anyway.
We're just gonna cross it.
We all know how it will end, but we're gonna do it anyway.
That's what makes our impending robot apocalypse so frustrating, is how it's... I don't know, it's like maybe, what is it, the Ghostbusters, choose your destructor, is kind of like, I guess we're just, something's got to end human civilization.
I guess we're going to do this.
It's got to be something.
Maybe that's the argument.
Might not be a bad argument, actually.
I have to think more about it.
Let's get to, was Walsh wrong?
Grand Canyon University is an affordable private Christian university based in Phoenix, Arizona.
They're dedicated to making education fit into your already busy schedule, which is why they offer 270 of their academic programs online.
From scholarships to academic support, GCU's graduation team provides you with the personal support you need to obtain your goals.
GCU's online programs offer you the freedom to earn your degree on your own time from wherever you are.
GCU is praised for its culture of community giving and impact.
They integrate the free market system and a welcoming Christian worldview into all of their academic programs.
Achieve your goals with a personalized plan and a supportive team behind you.
Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University.
Private.
Christian.
Affordable.
Visit gcu.edu.
That's gcu.edu.
Okay, a couple of comments here.
John, this is all we talked on Thursday about the story of the American and Panamanian dual citizenship.
Anyway, stuck in traffic, climate protesters had shut down the road, and he ended up shooting and killing two of them.
Talked about that, and some people shockingly disagreed with my perspective on that story.
John says, I guess Matt Walsh rationalizing actual violence against people he doesn't like isn't a totally unforeseen plot twist, but it's one I didn't expect to see quite this soon.
I guess people who kill people are just fed up from now on.
Blake says, we've now made it to the point where Matt Walsh is openly calling for violence against peaceful activists.
And the last one says, Matt, very disappointed about your segment today about the man who murdered those protesters.
You're stupid to the left's level and encouraging violence.
You're better than that.
OK, I'm not encouraging violence.
I think this should be obvious from everything that I said.
Here's the thing.
If you're going to listen to a segment but then not actually listen to the words that I'm using in the segment, then it's probably better not to listen at all.
I don't know what you are listening to, because the whole segment consists of words that I'm saying, so I don't know how.
And in that segment, I think I said multiple times, of course, I don't condone this.
I don't encourage it.
I don't want to see it.
I don't want to see anyone get killed.
So it's not about encouraging violence.
I don't encourage violence against anyone.
I want less violence.
I'd like to have no violence if that was possible.
It's not, but that's what I would prefer.
If I could snap my fingers and make that happen, I would.
But if you don't want violence, then you need to deal with reality.
And the reality is that people are fed up.
I don't know anything about this guy specifically.
But it would appear to be symptomatic of a larger trend.
And whatever the case with that particular guy in that particular case, it is true that people are fed up.
I don't know how else to put it.
And living in a, in a, in a world where you see some people who could just act with impunity, shutting down roads, you know, the shutting down roads and protesting in the street thing that climate activists always do.
It's not the worst thing that people do.
There's plenty of things that happen in our cities every day is a lot worse than that.
But it's just, it, it, it gets a lot of attention because it's so There's something particularly egregious about it.
The sense of entitlement that it takes to shut down a road that people are trying to drive.
They're just trying to go to work.
That's all they want to do.
They want to get home.
And you are imposing yourself on all of these people.
No matter what your cause is.
Even if you had a good, it doesn't matter.
So you have no right to impose yourself on all these people.
You're stopping everybody in their tracks and saying, hey, everybody listen to me.
No, why should we have to listen to you?
Why are you that important?
You're not.
Get the hell out of the road.
And so, even though it's not the worst thing that people are doing, as we watch the managed decline of our civilization, it is, it feels like just kind of like the last straw for a lot of people, especially on the roads, where, as I said, people are already stressed out.
Road rage incidents happen all the time.
And we understand why those incidents happen.
Doesn't mean we condone them, doesn't mean we would act that way, but we understand intellectually.
We're not confused by that.
People are on the road, they're stressed out, the tempers flare, they lash out.
You're already driving this big hunk of metal 70 miles an hour, and it's a bad combination.
And then you take that, so you take your protest, you drop it right into that environment.
It's a really bad idea.
And so the best thing that our leaders can do is start enforcing the law.
Start, if you don't enforce the law, and if you don't impose law and order, then eventually people start taking matters into their own hands.
Pointing that out is not me saying I want people to, or I think it's good.
I don't think anything about this is good.
But that is what happens.
And that's the whole point.
Despite the lackluster economy, The Daily Wire is thriving.
Not only that, but we are hiring.
We are currently looking to add an eager inside sales representative to our ad sales team.
The position will be responsible for identifying new accounts and fostering relationships with clients.
Knowledge of our brand, as well as experience in digital media sales, are required.
If you match this description, we want to hear from you.
Visit dailywire.com slash careers.
That's dailywire.com slash careers today.
Now let's get to our Daily Cancellation.
For our Daily Cancellation, we begin with a recent article in the Washington Post discussing,
as the headline announces, "How Psychedelic Therapy Might Help with Climate Change Anxiety."
Now, the piece is written by a mental health professional named Emily Willow, who starts by describing a recent session with an eco-anxious client.
She writes, As our weekly therapy session drew to a close, my patient, a young woman in her early 20s approaching college graduation, said that she had been feeling a lack of motivation, but that it felt different from her usual depressive symptoms.
A worrisome climate change report had recently been published, and she felt paralyzed by uncertainty of what the world is going to look like.
She asked, quote, How can I decide where I want to go?
Will it even be safe to live in California when I'm older?
Many of us are feeling a sense of powerlessness and despair over climate change and its harmful effects.
As a psychiatrist, I've noticed a growing trend among patients in my private practice suffering from what mental health professionals are calling eco-anxiety and climate grief.
Yes, climate grief, it's called, apparently.
The article then goes on to claim that tripping on hallucinogens will somehow make you less delusionally terrified of an ecological apocalypse because, of course, if you're having trouble being reasonable and keeping things in perspective, The best thing to do is take LSD.
Now that's what they always recommend for people to help them stay calm and collected.
It's why airline pilots are encouraged to drop acid 20 minutes before takeoff.
I think I read that once in the FAA handbook.
Anyway, I'm not interested in spending any time on the idea that hallucinatory drugs will help you be less anxious about unreasonable things.
That's the kind of idea that you would have to already be on drugs to believe in the first place, so it's a moot point.
Instead, I want to talk about this underlying concept of climate anxiety, which has been getting a lot of press lately.
It's an epidemic on the rise, we're told.
Recently, PBS did an explainer on the topic.
Watch.
Recently, I've been spending a lot of time reading about climate change,
and it's got me feeling anxious, a little tense,
a bit frustrated, and I'm definitely worried about the future.
[screams]
And it looks like I'm not alone.
People on social media are sharing their anxious feelings and fears about climate change.
So much so, there's a name for this.
It's called eco-anxiety, or climate anxiety.
Okay, so this isn't isolated, and it's much larger than I thought.
So before we go forward, let's practice some mindfulness.
Come on, y'all.
Let's take a deep breath.
Come on, deep yoga breath.
Fill up those lungs.
And another.
I do have good news.
In response to the growing trend of eco-anxiety, clinicians and psychologists are ushering in new techniques to help their clients deal with this issue.
We gon' make it through, y'all.
One more breath.
The science of ecotherapy, or climate-aware therapy, is evolving, and there's plenty to learn.
Now, I just want to pause here to give us a moment to reflect on the phrase, the science of climate-aware therapy, which is like saying, the science of leprechaun research.
Now, it's already a massive stretch to claim that any form of mental therapy is scientific, but the claim becomes even more dubious as you begin adding sub-genres, like gender-affirming therapy, climate-aware therapy, and so on.
So this is already a load of nonsense, but let's keep watching.
Eco-anxiety is a relatively new term.
Eco-anxiety has been defined by the American Psychological Association as the chronic fear of environmental doom.
That's Britt Rae.
She's an expert at the intersection of climate change and mental health.
Britt, what are some ways someone might experience climate anxiety?
It can become so intense that it's debilitating, it can impair people's functioning, and then it really does need clinical intervention or support, but it can also trap us in a pit of fear and hopelessness if we aren't careful and get us carried away in kind of a despairing narrative about the future being written off.
Even though someone might be dealing with these symptoms, it might be hard for a therapist to pinpoint the best course of action, because eco-anxiety is not in the DSM-5, the manual that health professionals use to diagnose mental health disorders.
Well, don't worry about that, because that will change.
Climate anxiety is another way for psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies to make money, another profitable mental health-related grift, and so it will surely be legitimized in the next edition of the DSM.
That is, after all, the DSM's primary function these days.
But what can be done about climate anxiety?
I mean, that's really the question.
What can we do about all this?
How can it be treated?
Well, let's find out.
The key here to unlocking strategies to deal with your own climate anxiety might have less to do with your individual effort to deter climate change, such as lowering your own greenhouse gas emissions, and more to do with building a climate crisis plan.
There was a recent article in the leading scientific journal Nature that said an important thing that individuals can do to address their climate anxiety is really focus on small aspects that they can control.
A lot of anxiety is provoked by the unknown and feeling like you can't control a situation.
Here's what a climate action plan might look like.
If you're in a flood zone, consider using personal storage bins that are watertight, or moving personal items to a higher level on the shelf.
For more info on finding out if you live in a flood zone, check out the description below.
Those concerned about drought might want to learn more about urban gardening or drought-resistant forms of agriculture that you can do at home.
Now, above all, find yourself a community that is preparing to deal with the next catastrophic event because global warming is happening.
Take action and join in on the effort.
There you go.
If you're scared about a global catastrophe wiping out all of mankind, one way to cope is to put your belongings in plastic storage bins or start gardening.
Maybe take the LSD before you go gardening just to make it more interesting.
Now it's worth considering just how limp and superficial this advice is and how inappropriate the whole tone of that video was if you actually buy the claim that the world is coming to an end because of climate change, which the people who made the video supposedly do.
So in one breath, they tell us that the end of the world is at hand, and in the next breath, they record a smiley, cheerful video assuring us that plastic storage bins will help us through it.
So there seems to be a disconnect here.
And this is the kind of disconnect that's very common among climate alarmists.
It's why part of me has a hard time believing that anyone in the world is actually this stressed out about climate change.
I mean, I've never met anybody like this.
I've never I've never encountered in the wild a person who was actually wracked with grief and fear because of the environment.
I've never had this conversation ever with anyone where they bring up, you know, I'm really troubled right now because of the climate.
I've never had that come.
Now, granted, if anyone did have that worry, they probably wouldn't share it with me.
But still, I've never encountered that.
And just for me personally, it's a form of anxiety that I just can't relate to in the slightest.
I can't wrap my head around it.
I have anxiety about a lot of things, but I've never spent even one second of my life worrying about the climate.
So if I were to compile a ranking of like the top 500 things I've ever been distressed about in my life, climate change wouldn't make the list.
It wouldn't even make it down near the bottom with the most obscure things I've briefly worried about in the past, like brain-eating amoebas and leprosy.
It's just not something that makes it onto my psychological carousel of stuff to worry about.
That's why I find it hard to fathom those people who are legitimately afflicted by this so-called climate anxiety.
In the end, I do believe that such people exist because the constant apocalyptic hysteria from the media is designed to have this effect on people, and inevitably it will have this effect on some people.
So, if you are one of those people, Who's dealing with climate anxiety.
I have two things to say to you.
Here is some eco-anxiety counseling that might actually help you.
And I am trying to help you.
I'm not being flippant.
I really am.
So, the first thing to realize is that you don't need to worry about climate change.
Not because the climate isn't changing, but because climates always change.
It's what they do, I assure you.
It's how they're designed.
Nature is in a constant state of flux, changing all the time.
There's no reason to worry about this fact.
It gets hotter, it gets colder, it rains, it's sunny.
This is the way the climate works.
You probably don't have to worry about a climate apocalypse.
That's not to say that there will never be a climate apocalypse of a sort.
I mean, there will be.
Eventually the Earth will become uninhabitable.
Look to our neighbor Venus in the solar system and you'll get an idea of what the Earth will be like one day.
Average temperatures of 800 degrees Fahrenheit, clouds of sulfuric acid covering the planet, unbreathable toxic air, just absolute hell.
That will be the Earth's fate, but probably not for another two or three billion years, and you probably won't be around when that happens.
Now, in the meantime, you have more pressing concerns.
There are thousands of other things more likely to kill you, and one of them eventually will kill you.
You'll probably get terminal cancer one day, or die of a heart attack, or in a car accident.
Who knows?
Maybe you'll be murdered tomorrow.
Something terrible will happen to you eventually, and it will have nothing to do with climate change.
I'm not sure if this will make you any less anxious, but at least it should make you anxious about more reasonable things.
That's all I'm saying.
Second point.
Even if a climate apocalypse was on the immediate horizon, even if we really were barreling towards an Armageddon caused by our SUVs and air conditioning units, there wouldn't be anything we could do about it at this point.
And especially if that involves turning off our air conditionings, then we're definitely, I mean, if you tell me that the way to save the world is to turn off my air conditioning and not use air conditioning in the summer, then I guess the world's just going to end because I'm not, I'm not, we're not doing that.
So we're screwed anyway, is what I'm saying, by that logic.
We're living on borrowed time, simply waiting for Mother Nature to exact her vengeance.
And if that's the case, then why worry?
Forget the plastic storage bins.
Just live your life until the ice caps melt and you're washed away into the sea.
There's nothing you can do to stop it.
Your fate is already sealed.
That may not be a comforting thought, but it is what it is.
No point in wasting time wallowing in anxiety over it.
Now fortunately, this is not the case.
You will not drown because of climate change.
You might still drown.
I mean, you could die that way.
Maybe you'll slip and hit your head and fall into a hotel pool or something.
But it won't be because of climate.
It won't be because of climate change.
And either way, there's nothing to worry about.
You'll die from something else, sooner rather than later.
You are under a death sentence.
In 50 or 60 years, you'll probably be dead.
In 100 years, there won't be anyone left to even visit your grave as you are decomposing in the ground.
So cheer up, is what I'm saying.
And also, I'm saying that climate anxiety is today cancelled.
