Ep. 1297 - UFC Fighter Delivers A Masterclass In How To Deal With The Media
Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a UFC fighter gives conservatives and especially Republican politicians a masterclass in how to deal with the media and the Left's false narratives. It's a class that a lot of them desperately need. Also, a democratic congresswoman claims she was the victim of a racist incident at the Capitol. Her story is a bit dubious, to put it mildly. Plus, Democrats work on a new federal law to ensure the humane treatment of rodents. This is from the same party that supports the mass slaughter of human children. In our Daily Cancellation, a dispute at a drive thru has gone viral. Everyone on all sides is wrong, as usual.
Ep.1297
- - -
DailyWire+:
Watch Lady Ballers, the Most Triggering Movie in America here: https://bit.ly/3R1dM5b
Get your Jeremy’s Razors products here: https://bit.ly/433ytRY
Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Grand Canyon University - Find your purpose at Grand Canyon University: https://www.gcu.edu/
ProVia - Save over 50% Starter Package + Free Shipping + Free Gift
https://www.proviahair.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 Walsh Show, a UFC fighter gives conservatives and especially Republican politicians a master class in how to deal with the media and leftist false narratives.
It's a class that a lot of them desperately need.
Also, a Democratic congresswoman claims that she was the victim of a racist incident at the Capitol.
Her story is a bit...
Dubious, to put it mildly.
Plus, Democrats work on a new federal law to ensure the humane treatment of rodents.
This is from the same party that, of course, supports the mass slaughter of human children.
In our daily cancellation, a dispute at a drive-thru window has gone viral.
Everybody on all sides of this issue is wrong, as usual.
We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Wall Show.
Ken 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 program offers 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.
You can 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.
So it was just a few days ago that a Republican lawmaker from South Carolina named Nancy Mace invoked the invented concept of white privilege in a congressional hearing.
She was supposedly trying to put Hunter Biden in his place by saying that he's the beneficiary of white privilege because he could ignore subpoenas without suffering any consequences.
But as I explained on the show at the time, all Nancy Mace achieved was to legitimize the left's framing, which is fundamentally anti-white and fraudulent.
Hunter Biden does not benefit from his skin color.
He benefits from the fact that he's the son of the President of the United States.
And there's a lot of privilege that goes with that, regardless of what your skin color happens to be, and everybody knows that.
So, all Nancy Mays accomplished was reinforcing a false narrative that demonizes millions of white people and accuses them of having unearned privilege simply because they were born with a certain skin color.
She also managed to derail the entire hearing by allowing Democrats to harp on their own
personal definitions of white privilege instead of discussing the subject at hand.
And they were quite happy to not discuss the subject at hand.
So Nancy Mace kind of threw them a lifeline so that they could change the subject.
Now as counterproductive and idiotic as Mace's stunt was, it wasn't surprising.
Mace isn't exactly a staunch far-right conservative.
She raises money for Liz Cheney.
She came out in support of the so-called LGBTQ movement.
She voted to hold former Trump adviser Steve Bannon in contempt of Congress.
This is the track record of someone you might expect to adopt the left's narrative on white privilege because she's adopted so many of the left's other narratives.
Now, the much bigger problem is that Nancy Mace is just one example of a far larger problem in the Republican Party.
And this is one that affects politicians we're told are considerably smarter and more right of center than Nancy Mays.
So take Matt Gaetz, for example.
Gaetz obviously doesn't comply with the left's new speech code, usually.
He publicly humiliated Mark Milley, who was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the time, for teaching soldiers about white rage.
He also led the effort to oust House Speaker Kevin McCarthy because he wasn't sufficiently committed to the America First movement.
Of course, McCarthy was replaced with a guy who also doesn't appear to be all that committed to the America First movement.
But all the same, Gates is not someone you would normally expect to pull a Nancy Mace and start adopting the left's framing on identity politics.
But this week, that's exactly what Matt Gaetz did.
Appearing on Newsmax, Gaetz began talking about Donald Trump's big win in Iowa.
And he said that based on his experience on the ground in Iowa, Trump is attracting more, quote unquote, diverse voters, meaning voters who are not white.
And Gaetz presents this as a very good thing, not just that he's happy.
That there are minorities voting for Trump.
But in fact, he's happy that according to him, the white voters are being replaced by non-white voters.
Here's how he phrased it.
Listen.
What I can tell you is like for every Karen we lose, there's a there's a Julio and a Jamal ready to sign up for the MAGA movement.
And that abodes well for our ability to be So he says, for every Karen we lose, there's a Julio and a Jamal ready to sign up for the MAGA movement.
Now, if we decode the language there, Gates is saying that in the freezing tundra of Iowa, he apparently didn't see a lot of white women, but he did see tons of Hispanics and black people coming out for Donald Trump.
You know, they were probably waving the MAGA flag around in the blizzard or whatever.
Now, even if you pretend that's true, which it clearly isn't, the language Gaetz used in that clip tells you a lot.
I mean, no Republican, Gaetz included, would ever dream of speaking the same way about black voters in the reverse.
It would never happen.
You would never hear Gaetz say of black voters who don't vote Republican, which is the vast majority of them, by the way, you never hear him say, oh, we don't need those Jamaals.
We've got plenty of white people who take their place.
He would never say that.
Never in a million years would he say that.
He's only going to talk like that about white women, or Karens, as he calls them.
This is a level of contempt and disregard reserved only for white people.
And even Republicans join in.
So, that's what I would like to ask Matt Gaetz.
You would never say the reverse.
You would never say, we don't need the Jamals, we've got white people.
Never in a million years would you say that.
You feel perfectly fine saying that about white women.
Why is that?
Why is it?
Like, in your mind, why is it okay to say it about the one group but not the other?
Here's one Republican who is even considered to be far right in Matt Gaetz, who in that snippet, anyway, entirely adopted the left's anti-white rhetoric and racial double standards.
That's how pervasive this stuff is.
He's happy to attack Karens, but he'd never do the same in reverse, because then he'd be called a racist.
And, well, we can't have that.
And the other remarkable thing about this clip is how it inverts all of the conservative arguments we've been hearing for the past several years.
So we went from, you know, Democrats denying that the Great Replacement was happening to admitting it and saying that it's good, to now Republicans also now agreeing that it's good, apparently, and advocating for a Great Replacement in their own party.
But along with being objectionable on a number of levels, this is also politically suicidal.
Okay, it actually isn't at all even close to true that every white female voter Republicans lose, they're replacing with a black voter.
That is not happening.
That is not true.
It's a fantasy.
White women still support Republicans in far, far, far greater numbers than black males.
It's not even close.
In fact, as Ann Coulter has pointed out many times, the only group that Trump lost ground with in 2020 was white people, specifically white men.
So, they should be trying to win those voters back, but instead their messaging is, well, screw them, we don't need them anyway.
Which is just the dumbest, most politically delusional thing I've ever heard.
Republicans have apparently decided that the key to victory is to pander for the minority vote while alienating, explicitly, their key constituency.
Now, whatever explains this self-defeating embrace of identity politics among conservatives, it's definitely catching on.
It's not just Nancy Mace or Matt Gaetz doing it.
In that same hearing where Nancy Mace talked about white privilege, Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who's another one who, according to the media anyway, they certainly wouldn't say that she's a centrist or that she's a moderate Republican, they would say she's far right, according to them.
So, in that same hearing, she claimed that Hunter Biden was afraid of her because she's a strong, independent woman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Excuse me, Hunter, apparently you're afraid of my words.
-Woo! -Uh, here goes --
[ Laughs ]
-Aww.
-I'd like to reclaim my time, Mr. Chairman.
-Wow, that's too bad.
I think it's clear and obvious for everyone watching this hearing today that Hunter Biden is terrified of strong conservative Republican women because he can't even face my words as I was about to speak to him.
What a coward.
Now, I mean, I can barely watch that clip without cringing to death.
And Republican women, I plead with you to stop this.
Just stop it.
Don't go the girl boss routine, okay?
It's embarrassing as hell when the left does it, but it's even worse when you do it.
Okay, at least that kind of pandering sounds somewhat natural coming from them, because they've been doing it for so long and they sort of own that kind of identity, but they own that.
But it's still cringey.
For you, it's like, what are you trying to achieve?
Who do you think that this is appealing to?
He's not afraid because he's a criminal.
He's afraid because we're girl bosses, independent women.
He doesn't want any part of us.
It's hard to think of a better way to torpedo the case against Hunter Biden than to use lines like that.
Like, when you have a strong case against somebody, you don't say they're afraid because you're a woman.
You say they're afraid because of the damning facts and evidence that you've assembled.
This is the exact opposite of what Republicans should have done in this hearing, but one after another, they did it.
They kept committing to these vapid displays of identity politics over and over again.
By the way, Nancy Mays played the girl boss card, too, in that same exact hearing.
So this is two Republican women in the same hearing playing the sexism card for no reason.
It's like you're on the right side here.
The other side has nowhere to hide.
Hunter Biden's a criminal.
That's all you need to say.
You don't need... This is... What's even the point?
Just a humiliating performance all around.
And it's not just confined to that one hearing or to that Matt Gaetz interview.
By now we're all familiar at this point with Nikki Haley's constant use of this kind of rhetoric.
And in case you somehow missed it, here's just a mercifully short clip, and I'm using this because it's one of the shortest clips, just to show you what I'm talking about.
Listen.
To say is the fact that I think this is exactly why Margaret Thatcher said, if you want something said, ask a man.
If you want something done, ask a woman.
Now, of course, Nikki Haley says stuff like this constantly, just like the remarks from Nancy Mace or Marjorie Taylor Greene or Matt Gaetz.
It's totally indistinguishable from something that AOC might say.
It's the most cliched form of gender politics imaginable.
It's not just stupid.
It adopts the left's basic narrative.
And what we're hearing over and over is left-wing identity politics, which is a narrative that has cost millions of people jobs, and college admissions, and contracting jobs, and federal financial assistance, and so on.
It's been a disaster for this country and needs to stop it.
Instead of saying that, Republicans more and more embrace it and reinforce it at every turn.
Why is this happening?
Well, at some level, this is, of course, an attempt to win over voters.
You know, it's a political thing.
But on that level, It's obviously a terrible idea.
It doesn't work.
You may remember that Donald Trump triumphantly pushed something called the First Step Act when he was president, which Gates also promoted.
And the Trump team even ran a Super Bowl ad featuring a drug trafficker that Trump had let out of prison.
The idea, according to Trump's inner circle, was to improve the GOP's voting share among black Americans by letting more criminals out of prison.
So at a time when crime is rampant and getting worse, the idea was to let more criminals out of jail to win votes.
Now, of course, it didn't work.
Black voters in 2020 did what they've done in every modern election, which is that they voted overwhelmingly for Democrats.
And Trump got basically the same percentage of the black vote that George W. Bush did back in 2004.
So, the big win is supposed to be that he got more black votes than Romney or McCain, at least.
Well, hooray!
What a triumph!
So, if identity politics is a ploy for votes, it doesn't seem likely to work.
It certainly doesn't work at the level you would need it to work to really shift things politically in this country, because it just doesn't convince anyone.
But if you take a few steps back, it's not hard to see that identity politics is just one part of a much larger problem among conservatives.
Increasingly, conservatives are embracing the narratives of the left wholesale.
Left-wing identity politics is just one of those narratives.
But this is a problem that is much more far-reaching than that.
You know, we saw when Nikki Haley mourned the death of George Floyd.
She immediately bought the official narrative.
And then she went on to say, as American cities were burning down, that George Floyd's death needed to be personal and painful for every American.
We also saw this from Mitt Romney, who marched with BLM and chanted their slogans.
And the guy who replaced Kevin McCarthy, Mike Johnson, did a media tour after George Floyd's overdose death, calling it a heinous murder and repeating a bunch of BLM talking points about how racist our country is.
In fact, when it comes to 2020 and BLM and George Floyd, it's very difficult to find a single elected Republican anywhere who did not immediately adopt the left's narrative about that incident.
So the Republican Party is led by people who can't help but adopt the left's premise at every turn.
And sometimes people you don't expect fall into this trap.
So take this clip of Ron DeSantis at a CNN town hall a couple days ago.
And I want you to watch as CNN's Wolf Blitzer asks DeSantis a question that's premised on a completely false narrative.
And then notice how Ron DeSantis responds and how he doesn't respond.
Listen.
Over the weekend, a woman and two children drowned near Eagle Pass, Texas, as they simply tried to cross the Rio Grande.
After the drownings, federal authorities got a distress call about two more migrants in distress, but agents were physically barred by Texas authorities from entering the area.
What obligation does the United States have to protect the lives of these migrants?
Well, first of all, I think this is part of the problem with an open border, because you're incentivizing some really perilous behavior.
There's people that are paying large amounts of money to coyotes and drug cartels to be brought into this country.
There are people being abused sexually.
There are people that are being trafficked.
We're in the country.
The U.S.
is incentivizing this.
It's madness.
So stopping the migration and having a closed border is the humanitarian thing to do.
Now, I am going to empower the states to be able to enforce immigration law.
I don't think that Texas should have to sit there and deal with all the consequences of the federal government neglecting their duties.
And I think that's been a problem with the Biden administration saying we're not federal immigration laws just for the feds.
You can't do it.
But they're not doing it.
So what?
We're just supposed to let this happen?
So we're going to work together with the states and the local sheriffs?
So you're not going to have these conflicts like that exist right now between Biden and Texas or between Biden and local sheriffs and places down in Texas?
Now as Mike Cernovich has pointed out on X, CNN is flat out lying about what happened and in response, probably because nobody briefed him on this, which by the way is inexcusable for his team to not have briefed him, but DeSantis just kind of accepts the premise and he pivots.
He pivots from there, but he accepts the premise which originated from the Biden White House, even though it was completely wrong.
What happened is that the White House originally claimed that, quote, a woman and two children drowned near Eagle Pass and Texas officials blocked U.S.
Border Patrol from attempting to provide emergency assistance.
That was a report that millions of people heard from CBS News, which broadcast the narrative first.
But shortly afterwards, Joe Biden's DOJ contradicted that version of events entirely.
As Fox's Bill Mulligan pointed out, the DOJ made it clear that, quote, the migrants had already drowned at 8 p.m.
and the Border Patrol didn't inform Texas until an hour later at 9 p.m.
The DOJ now confirms those migrants had been deceased for an hour before Texas was even alerted about it.
So, you know, it's just like the false claims that the Border Patrol had whipped illegal immigrants.
As Bill Mulligan pointed out, you know, this is another one.
The narrative is a total lie, as the Biden administration has now implicitly admitted.
But even after the DOJ admitted that, CNN asked DeSantis about it on the debate stage, and, you know, everybody proceeded to operate under the assumption that it was true.
And DeSantis usually does a very good job of not accepting the left's premise, of not taking them at face value or adopting their narrative.
But the point is that there are so many lies and there are so many false narratives that even someone like DeSantis can fall into them.
And this can happen in even more subtle ways.
Like, we live in a culture that is so totally dominated by leftism.
Often even the language we use, our vocabulary, has leftist assumptions embedded into it.
So take a phrase like biological male, for example.
You hear all the time from conservatives, I've used the term myself plenty of times, and obviously when we use the term our intention is not to suggest that there are any other kinds of males besides biological ones.
I mean, usually we're arguing the exact opposite.
But when you take a second to think about it, you realize that the phrase does imply that.
I mean, if you're saying biological male and you're putting that qualifier on it, it would seem to imply that there are non-biological males, which there aren't.
So, if it requires this much care and precision to avoid implicitly accepting a leftist premise, and if even Republican politicians who are usually very good on that score can trip up in blatant ways, The situation is hopeless for most Republican politicians who are by and large not very good and who have not exhibited a capacity for anything close to that level of care and precision.
They're too busy running around shouting girl power slogans, right?
But every once in a while we do get an example of somebody on the right totally refusing to go along with the left's narratives.
And it's just that you usually have to look outside of Congress to find it.
And I want to show you this because this is what it sounds like when you completely refuse to give these people even an inch to go along with their narrative even a little bit.
So you can look this week to UFC fighter Sean Strickland for this example.
Strickland is an American who just arrived in Toronto for the UFC fights this weekend.
And he's talking to the press at a press conference, the Canadian press, And they tried to corner him and talk about some things that he's tweeted or things that he said in the past that they find to be homophobic or whatever.
So dumb gotcha questions that also, by the way, have nothing to do with UFC, have nothing to do with him as an athlete.
And we know how this normally goes when people are backed into a corner or they're given these gotcha questions.
We know how it usually goes, but let's hear how it went this time.
We've got a pretty supportive gay and lesbian community in this city.
I did want to ask you about something you wrote a couple of years ago.
You said, if I had a gay son, I would think I'd- Oh, look, another- another- each time I'm saying it, you get in a swamp, you guys.
A swamp.
You become a champion, you become a star, and someone says- Let me ask you something.
Are you- are you- are you gay?
I've never had the chance to interact with a more diverse crowd.
Are you- let me know- are you gay?
Can I hear- can I get an answer to that?
Well, no, I'm asking- this is a part of- are you- are you a gay man?
I'm an ally of the community.
Okay.
If you had a son and he was like, you know, you had a son, he was gay, you'd be like, oh man, you don't, you don't want a grandkid?
No problem with it.
Oh man, well, dude, you're a weak f***ing man, dude.
You're like, you're part of the f***ing problem.
You elected Justin Trudeau.
Like, would you f*** me when he seized the bank accounts?
Like, you're just f***ing pathetic.
And, and the fact that, the fact that you have no f***ing backbone, and, and has he shut down your f***ing country and seized bank accounts?
You ask me some stupid s*** like that?
Go f*** yourself.
Move the f*** Here's the thing about Bud Light.
I didn't want to ask also things you said about the trans community.
You said this past October when they announced the Bud Light sponsorship that you'd go so
hard on Bud Light in your next fight, they'll have to accept me or denounce me when they
know what they stand for.
This guy's like, "This Canadian's not that Canadian."
Are you still going to use your fight time to speak on that?
Here's the thing about Bud Light.
Here's the thing about Bud Light.
Ten years ago to be trans was a what?
A mental f***ing illness.
And now all of a sudden, people like you have f***ing weaseled your way into the world.
You are an infection.
You are the definition of weakness.
Everything that is wrong with the world is because of f***ing you.
And the best thing is, is the world's not buying it.
The world's not buying your f***ing bullshit you're f***ing peddling.
The world is not saying, you know what?
You're right.
Chicks have d**ks.
The world's not saying that.
The world's saying, no, there are two genders.
I don't want my kids being taught about, you know, who they can f**king school.
I don't want my kids being taught about, you know, their sexual preference.
Like, dude, this guy is the f**king enemy.
You want to look at the f**king enemy to our world?
It's that motherf**ker right there.
We have to ask, how many conservative politicians could hold their ground in a situation like that and affirm In the face of an ally, quote unquote, of the LGBTQIAXYZ plus community, that transgenderism is a mental illness.
I mean, how many would do that?
You'd probably count the number on one hand, if that.
Most Republicans are faced with that same line of questioning.
You know, they would say something like, well, I support and love all people, especially members of our LGBTQ plus community, who so often face persecution and intolerance and blah, blah, blah, et cetera.
But notice how Strickland doesn't even remotely accept the premise of this hack's questions.
He doesn't concede that he was wrong to speak his mind or to think unimproved thoughts.
He treats this person with contempt and scorn, and the person deserves it because he understands what this person's trying to do.
These are not innocent questions.
This is not a normal interview where he's, hey, gee, what do you think about the fight?
It's not anything like that.
This guy's just trying to destroy him.
He's trying to embarrass him.
This guy's trying to embarrass Sean Strickland.
He's got bad intentions.
And so Strickland responds accordingly.
He immediately identifies the reporter as a propagandist and laughs in his face.
And he reaffirms what he said before, because it's what he believes is true.
It's his view on the matter.
He's not going to change it now just because someone's upset about it.
And then afterwards, at his second press conference in Toronto, after there had been a full media cycle about this and a lot of outrage, and it came up again, here's how Sean Strickland responded the second time.
You've said a lot of things about Canada, but coming here to that ovation, what does it feel like to be a hero to these people?
You know, man, let me tell you.
Let me tell you.
Let me tell you guys something.
And this is what the media doesn't understand when it comes to me and you guys and Australian fans.
Let me tell you guys something.
You guys don't care about me fighting.
Yeah, me and Drikus, we're gonna have a death match.
Someone's gonna get their hand raised.
Someone's gonna get their hand raised.
But when have you ever seen A UFC champion, George St.
Pierre or anybody else, stick up for you f****** guys.
I f****** do it.
I do it.
I am not chasing the Chinese check mark of Nike.
I don't give a f**k about that.
I care about you guys.
I care about you guys being free.
I care about you guys having freedom of speech.
I give a f**k about you guys.
And I'll tell you what, you guys are f**king awesome and I cannot wait to see this man go to war for you f**king guys.
Let's go!
Now you can hear the crowd loves it.
I mean at one point a guy runs up to the stage to shake his hand.
So he doesn't back down.
Everyone in the audience recognizes that and appreciates it.
He makes a mockery of the people who wanted him to cower and apologize.
And there were a lot of them in Canada, particularly in the media.
He makes it clear that hate speech isn't real.
It's not.
Which is bold to say in Canada, where transphobia, quote unquote, can get you charged with a crime.
And so there you have a UFC fighter who's a more vocal supporter of freedom of speech than pretty much any conservative politician in America.
You're not going to find him talking about white privilege or strong conservative women.
This is what resonates now.
If the Republican Party wants to win elections, this is the path it needs to take.
If they reject all of the ways that the left wields skin color and gender and sexuality Reject that, rather than trying to play that same game themselves, then voters will respond.
You know, we don't need another First Step Act or any pandering to quote-unquote Julio and Jamal, as Matt Gaetz would put it.
We need politicians who are capable of acting like normal people and of just standing on the truth.
And if a UFC fighter can do it, we should expect and demand The exact same of the people we have elected to represent us.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Are you one of the millions of American men and women dealing with premature hair loss?
Maybe you're scared about inheriting that thinning look because it runs in the family.
Well, you can start 2024 off the right way with a real solution that delivers on its promise without the harsh side effects, unwanted chemicals, and no need for a prescription.
Provia uses a safe, natural ingredient called Procapyl to effectively target the three main causes of premature hair thinning and loss by supporting healthy scalp circulation, the delivery of nourishing nutrients, and healthy hair follicle Follicle anchoring to your scalp.
Provia guarantees more hair on your head than in the shower or on your comb, and it's effective for men and women of any age and safe on colored, treated, and styled hair.
It's that easy.
And right now, new customers save over 50% plus free shipping on Provia's introductory package at ProviaHair.com slash Walsh.
Every package includes a full 60-day supply of Provia Serum for daily use, plus the Provia Super Concentrate for faster, more noticeable results, and every order includes your choice of Okay, we were just talking about false narratives, which leads us quite smoothly into our top headline.
Don't wait, order now and save an extra 10% and free shipping at probiahair.com/walsh.
That's probiahair.com/walsh.
OK, we were just talking about false narratives, which leads us quite smoothly into our top
headline.
And this is a big headline, because apparently, if you can believe it, a United States congresswoman
was a victim of a racist incident inside the Capitol building.
I mean, you really can't go anywhere these days to escape from racism, can you?
It's just, it's everywhere.
So, here's Democratic Representative Barbara Lee last night.
Listen.
These are not little kinks, first of all.
Racism, institutional racism, is in the DNA of this country.
When you look at what has taken place, look at our Native Americans, the genocide of Native Americans, when you look at what has taken place as it relates to African Americans, the 250 years plus of enslaving African Americans, and then you look at the disparities now in our community in terms of health care, unemployment, the wealth gap, Housing.
You can't tell me that systemic racism does not exist.
It's not just a little kink.
I do want to cut that off just for a second.
We haven't gotten to her personal story of racist victimization yet, and it's quite a, it's a doozy, so we'll get there in a second.
But we have to note that the preamble she offers here about systemic racism is totally false.
Speaking again of leftist premises that are false, we hear this familiar trope about the genocide of Native Americans.
There was no genocide of Native Americans.
We are the only country in the world that would invent a genocide that we perpetrated.
Okay, like our modern fables of American history are all centered around making us the bad guys.
Our new sort of foundational myths are all centered around making us the bad guys.
And that's the exact opposite of how these myths and fables usually work.
But, you know, we're the most self-loathing society that's ever existed on Earth.
It's a sickness.
And that's where you get this Native American genocide thing.
European settlers and later Americans fought wars against the Indians.
These wars lasted for many, many years.
These were wars with lots of hostility on both sides.
It was a war.
It was a battle.
Many, many battles.
Hundreds of years, really.
It was a series of battles.
And that's it.
It wasn't like one war.
It wasn't a constant state of all-out war all over the country.
All over the continent, rather.
But this land was conquered, partly, through a series of battles over many years.
That's not a genocide.
That's how a land is conquered.
Fair and square.
It's how the native tribes conquered it themselves, and then it's how they themselves were conquered.
And also, besides, more Indians died by disease than anything else, and that also is not a genocide.
These were not biological weapons.
They weren't dropping bombs or whatever.
This is not that.
They weren't making viruses in a lab in Wuhan.
A lot of this was happening before the germ theory of disease had been fully devised.
So, it's not a genocide, all right?
And speaking of things that didn't happen, but speaking of things that also didn't happen, let's continue.
Secondly, you have personal racism, which is hard to address, but I'll give you one little story that shows you why we need to understand that I don't think she really understands racism.
I was walking from the House building on Capitol Hill to the Capitol, and a man, a white guy, stopped me and told me I could not get into the members' elevator.
You know, we have pens, and I was going to vote.
And he blocked me from getting into the elevator and told me I was not a member of Congress and it was for members only.
I said, sir, I'm a member of Congress.
And I showed him my pen and he said, whose pen did you steal?
Now, this is an example of what personal racism is and how People of color constantly have to deal with this each and every day.
But systemic racism is in the policies of this country.
And just look at what they're trying to do in terms of eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion.
They're trying to not allow for an equal and level playing field.
And so it's a very dangerous position that she has.
She's clueless.
Well, that's a shame.
And I'm sorry that you had to deal with that, Congresswoman.
Thank you for sharing that with us.
Now, of course, Caitlin Collins, the anchor, just sits there staring blankly and doesn't ask any follow-up questions at all.
It's almost like she knows the story is completely made up, so she doesn't want to pry.
Because, actually, if you believed it, then you'd have a lot of questions.
Like, who was this random white guy blocking the elevator?
Just a guy?
Was it a security guard?
And if it was a security guard, did you report this incident to his superiors?
Is the guy fired?
And if he's a security guard when he works there, how could he not recognize you and know that you're a representative?
Was this his first day on the job?
And if it was, was he stopping every non-white member of Congress who walked by?
Like, did he not know?
Is this a security guard working on Capitol Hill who is not aware that non-white people are also representatives?
Was this a security guard who came here in a time portal from the year 1803 and just was unfamiliar with the concept of non-white congressional representatives?
I mean, we've had black people in Congress since, like, 1870, okay?
So this guy, I guess he came from before that.
This is a, you know, he came in a time machine.
Or maybe the guy's like 200 years old.
He's a 200-year-old rookie security guard who was looking for a change of career later in life.
And he got to Congress and he looked around and he said, what's going on here?
Maybe it wasn't a security guard.
Was it a staffer?
Did some white staffer go up to a black congresswoman and accuse her of stealing her pin?
Is that it?
So this is someone who just decided randomly out of nowhere to completely nuke their own future political career?
Did some staffer decide to commit a suicide bombing of his own career?
That seems very strange.
Or was it another member of Congress?
And if so, who?
Are we supposed to believe that Barbara Lee was accosted by some racist congressman?
And what, through her abiding sense of mercy, she's decided to not tell us the guy's name?
Really, is that what we're supposed to believe?
A white, Republican, racist congressman accosted her, but she's not going to tell us who.
She's, you know, I don't want to get the guy in trouble.
Right.
Of course, it's impossible to believe any of these scenarios, or at least, well, I'm not going to say it's impossible to believe because, you know, it is technically possible.
Look, anything's technically possible.
She could have told me that.
She was walking through the halls of Congress, and she saw somebody levitating off the ground.
It's technically possible, in the sense that anything that's logically possible is therefore possible.
In fact, well, that's actually even more, because that would bring to mind demonic possession or something.
And so that, in fact, I would probably readily believe that.
So maybe that's not the best example to prove my point, but you get it.
So anyway, are any of these scenarios, here's the real question, are any of these scenarios remotely close to as likely as the far more plausible scenario that Barbara Lee just made it up?
You know, so you've got all these, it could have been a security guard from a time machine from the past.
Could be.
Like, I can't, it's possible.
Time machines could exist, maybe.
Could be a staffer who just decided, like, I'm going to ruin my entire career for no reason.
Could have been a congressman whose identity she's protecting because she's just so kind.
Or it could be that she just made this up.
And, of course, that's what's happening.
She made it up.
Like, none of this happened.
She made it up.
So, what could possibly... The more interesting question, the question of whether or not that happened is not interesting, because we all know that it just flat out didn't.
I mean, I'll bet $10,000 right now that it didn't happen.
But the more interesting question is, what could possibly possess her to randomly invent this racist incident that definitely didn't happen?
That, to me, is the interesting question.
And I think the answer is that it's a reflex at this point.
Like, on the left, inventing stories of victimhood is instinct.
It's reflexive.
It's like a hiccup.
Okay, it's this almost involuntary physiological response.
They blurred out race hoaxes without even thinking about them.
That's how severe the self-victimhood obsession has become.
It's how ingrained their desire for victimhood is.
And that's why it must be great.
You know, to be a black person in a room full of libs, it's got to be great.
I'm a little bit jealous, I have to admit, because the trolling opportunities are tremendous.
Because if you're a black person in a room full of libs, you can make up any story that you want and they will accept it at face value with no further questions.
Which is amazing.
You could walk in and say, hey guys, sorry I'm late.
I was just assaulted by a group of five racist Nazi ninjas on the way in here.
And fortunately I was able to fight them off with my superior swordsmanship, which I learned from my years studying martial arts in Japan.
No matter what you say, they'll accept it.
And without any follow-up questions at all.
And it's possible to do because this kind of self-victimization, whether it's racial, whether it's race-based self-victimization, it's gender-based, sexual orientation-based, whatever it is, it just reflects it.
It's interesting to think, did Barbara Lee go into that interview?
Having already invented this fake story and planning on saying it?
That's possible.
But I also think it's quite possible that she didn't even plan on making that up.
She just did.
She could hear herself making this up while she was saying it.
And then she said, OK, I guess this is what we're doing.
Because it's such a reflex for them.
Pretty amazing.
It's also, you know, you look at, go on Twitter or, in fact, Caitlin Collins tweeted out this This video herself, obviously in a non-skeptical way, and I mean every single comment is from people saying, oh did they yell, did he yell this is MAGA country too?
Barbara Smollett, that's like every comment.
Like nobody believes this stuff anymore.
No one falls for it.
And it also shows you how out of touch the media is, that like Caitlin Collins, if she had any kind of awareness, She would know that most people are not going to believe that nonsense.
And so she wouldn't tweet out the clip.
She would rather just pretend it never happened, because it's embarrassing.
But she, Caitlin Collins, lives in a world where people still buy this garbage.
All right, here's something important.
Tweet from Representative Ted Lieu.
Glue traps are among the cruelest ways to eliminate rodents.
They're inhumane and can be dangerous to humans and their pets.
Pleased to introduce a bill today to place a national ban on glue traps.
Okay, so we've got members of Congress making up racism stories while others are working on a bill banning glue traps.
And it really tells you everything you need to know, doesn't it?
Americans are suffering, American humans are suffering, and Congress is busy working on protecting the well-being and dignity of rats.
Like, never mind the fact that obviously this does not fall under the purview of the federal government.
Clearly, the federal government shouldn't be in the business of legislating what sort of methods we use to catch rodents.
If anybody should be policing that, and I'm not convinced that anyone should be, but it should be local and state authorities, if anyone.
But that's not the important takeaway.
The most important takeaway is that Democrats are pushing this bill to protect rats and mice from inhumane treatment, And what does inhumane mean?
means like literally means non-human, un-human.
And so we're treating them in a, what it means is like we're treating them
like they're not humans, which they aren't.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
And yet these are the same people who support the killing of human beings in the womb at every stage of development.
So in the mind of a Democrat, and this is a fact, this is not hyperbole, They really do believe that rats, actual rats, have more rights, are entitled to better treatment, more humane treatment, than actual human beings in the womb.
Now, think about this.
Even if you think that abortion should be legal, you're wrong if you think that, but if you do, well, when's the last time you heard any of these people ever say that we need to have more humane abortion practices for the babies themselves?
So again, you go along, for a second, for the sake of argument, if you were to go along with their position on abortion, wouldn't you at least be concerned about the humane, quote unquote, termination of human life, given that you are, when it comes to rats, But when have you ever heard any of them express one word of concern about that?
Ever.
They care about humanely killing convicted criminals.
They care about that.
We've got to be humane in the way we kill convicted criminals.
They care about humanely killing rats.
But babies in the womb?
Well, they could be dismembered and tossed in a hazardous waste dumpster, which is exactly what happens.
Nobody on that side has – I've never heard any of them.
And I've been in the pro-life movement essentially my entire life.
And I've talked to a lot of people on the other side and I've never heard any of them even whisper a single word of concern about at least preventing the babies in the womb from feeling pain while they're being killed.
Not that that would make it okay to do, obviously, but my point is simply It's like, you're not telling us not to kill rats, but you're saying we've got to be humane in how we kill rats, and you care so much about it we have to have a national ban on glue traps.
That small amount of concern that you have for rats, you don't have that for humans, at least that much.
No, they don't.
They really do put rodents above, because the way they look at it, the human in the womb has zero rights, not just zero legal rights, but also zero moral rights.
The human in the womb is not a moral entity.
We don't have to take that individual into account at all.
And look, I know there are plenty of people on the right who Foolishly want to move on from the abortion issue and they don't want to talk about it.
You're scared of it.
You're intimidated.
You think it's a political loser.
I mean, talk about adopting the left's narrative.
There's a lot of people on the right who have done that with this issue.
But you tell me, how do we move on from this?
How do we do it?
Our leaders quite literally believe, and have put into law, or are trying to put into law, The idea that rats are entitled to more humane treatment than human children.
How do you move on from that?
How do you put that to the side?
How do you worry about anything else when we haven't at first established, at a minimum, that human life is more precious than rodent life?
How do you say, we'll worry about that later, let's move on?
Any other issue that you claim to care about is going to be premised or based on the assumption that human life is more valuable than rodent life.
Because everything else, whether you want to move on to taxes, you want to move on to the border, you want to move on to the economy, you want to move on to gun rights, you want to move on to anything else, foreign policy, If human life is not more valuable fundamentally from its inception than rodent life, then none of that other stuff matters.
Who cares about any of that?
Oh, we've got to protect the border.
Why?
Well, because it's hurting Americans.
What do Americans matter?
Fundamentally, you're no better than a rat.
Who gives a **** about you?
Who cares?
Oh, we need gun rights.
Why?
I've got to protect my family.
What does your family matter?
Family doesn't matter.
From birth, your children are no better than rats, which means inherently they're no better than rats.
Right?
That's the assumption we're working with.
And if that's not your assumption, which if you're on the right, I certainly hope it isn't, then you can't just abandon that argument or surrender it or give it up or try to table it for now.
That's a battle that has to continue to be fought.
It doesn't mean it's the only thing we talk about.
There's no risk of that.
There's no risk of abortion being the only thing that conservatives talk about.
It's increasingly becoming the only thing we don't talk about.
But it is a battle that has to continue to be fought, protecting the intrinsic value, because that's why abortion matters.
If you can't see that and you're on the right, then I don't know, you're hopeless.
You really are.
If you can't see that what it actually is about is it's a fight over the intrinsic value of human life and really whether human life has any intrinsic value.
And That is a battleground that we simply cannot surrender.
You surrender that battleground, you've given up everything.
Everything falls if you give that up.
Okay.
Briefly, Daily Wire reports Star Trek actor LeVar Burton was shocked to discover that one of his ancestors was a white Confederate soldier.
The 66-year-old star was told the surprising fact about his lineage during an episode of the PBS series Finding Your Roots.
The former Reading Rainbow star told show host Henry Louis Gates Jr.
that he didn't know much about his family tree, as he was estranged from his father.
But it turns out that he's got white in his background, he's got Confederate in his background.
Here's Burton getting the news.
Wow.
That's him.
You are looking at your great-great-grandfather, James Henry Dixon.
It's difficult to make out, but that is your biological great-great-grandfather.
I'd have fought you five minutes ago if you told me that I had a white great-great-grandfather.
You do.
You can fight me, but it's the truth.
And ain't nothing you can do about it.
What?!
Kunta!
Kunta.
Got white ancestry!
That's right.
What?!
Yeah.
Skip!
You know, you took two DNA tests.
The two major commercial DNA tests almost never have tested an African-American who was 100% sub-saharan African.
Wow.
We all have white ancestors.
But this is close!
That's right, but this is close.
And by name.
So, LeVar Burton is, just for the background on this, he's of course a big time leftist.
He's a race grifter type.
He's a fan of, quote, racial justice, as they put it.
He's tweeted in the past that racism and xenophobia, quote unquote, preside over every aspect of America.
And that's where he's coming from.
And now he's found out that he's partially white and also confederate at the same time, which is hilarious, you know.
I don't know why.
Like, if you are a famous person, or marginally, LaVar Burton, if you're even marginally, if you're an F-list celebrity, whatever it is, or even if you're not a celebrity, why would you want, what would possess you to take part in this?
I understand you want to know your family lineage, but why do you want to find out the news on camera?
Not only are you giving this TV show, Like, you're giving them your blessing to go through your family ancestry, but then you're going to let them tell you about it and frame it however they want, live on camera.
It's like, for the life of me, I cannot understand why you would want to do that.
I don't know how much they're paying people to appear.
I guess LeVar Burton is probably pretty desperate these days.
So they put themselves in this position and there have been others, I forget who it was, but there was another, there have been a few incidents like this of someone kind of like LaVar Burton finding out that if their great great grandfather was a slave owner, was a confederate or whatever.
Which is very funny, but then also the point that we take away from it is, I think, pretty obvious.
Those are a few points, but one of the big ones is how this relates to the reparations debate.
Or really, any debate.
The white guilt in general, all the things that grow from that root.
If you were to start assigning, handing out money, and compensating people for their supposed ancestral trauma, how does that even work?
Like, what do you do with somebody like LeVar Burton?
What do you do with someone, whoever it was, you know, great-great-grandfather was a slave owner?
Do they pay themselves?
Do you, like, take money from them and give it back to them?
How does it work?
Well, of course it doesn't work, which is why the only real answer is to let the past stay in the past and to move on from it.
To learn lessons of the past, which is an important thing to do, to honor our ancestors, And it's also important for you to know about your own ancestry and your own bloodline.
All that is great.
But other than that, living in the present and certainly not trying to cash in on the suffering and persecution of people in the past.
Suffering and persecution that you yourself have never experienced.
I think that's the lesson.
Lady Ballers is the hilarious story about how a group of male losers who can't win against other men decide to identify as women and join a women's basketball league.
Yes, it's absurd, it's ridiculous, it's laughable, and it's happening right now in the world.
So here's a quick look at what's being called the most triggering movie of the decade.
Watch.
Leftists are losing it over Lady Ballers.
Nothing's changed.
This movie is a straight-up and intentional transphobic hate crime.
What?
I see you.
The Lady Ballers movie needs to be banned.
I'll cancel you.
Can I get the blinds, please?
Total 11.
The most toxic B.S.
you've ever seen.
You're a monster.
Yeah!
Next-level hate speech propaganda.
That's it?
That's the pitch?
Watch the most triggering comedy of the decade.
Lady Ballers, streaming exclusively on DailyWirePlus.
Don't wait!
Watch Lady Ballers, the movie that Hollywood didn't make so we did exclusively on DailyWirePlus.com right now.
Now let's get to our Daily Cancellation.
[MUSIC]
So our Daily Cancellation today on a Friday is all about a dispute at a drive-through lane.
And needless to say, this is a deeply important issue, and it's one that has evoked strong feelings from the public.
There's a lot to say about this random video of two people arguing in a drive-thru lane.
Still, most people seem to be missing some of the nuances and complexities of this issue, so we'll go through them today.
As the New York Post reports this week, a video has gone viral of a mom at a Panera Bread drive-thru trying to order her meal, while the Panera Bread employee on the other end refuses to take the order because the woman's daughter is allegedly screaming.
And I should tell you that, perhaps as you'd already expect, thousands of people have reacted to this clip, and the Peanut Gallery's verdict is almost unanimously on the Panera Bread employee's side.
So everybody agrees that the customer, who some have dubbed Panera Bread Karen, is in the wrong here.
And let's watch the video and see if the internet got this one right, which of course they didn't, but let's watch it.
So you are going to refuse to take my order because my child was screaming?
Yes, I have the right to do that.
You're more than welcome to come inside or you can place an order online and we'll make it for you.
And what is...really, like, you're gonna not take my order?
Yes, ma'am, that is what I'm saying.
Okay.
Alright, well, I do have this on video and I will be emailing corporate because that's just, like, completely rude.
I cannot come inside because my daughter does not have shoes on.
Do you understand that?
No, ma'am, I understand, but you're also more than welcome to order through online as well.
So you want me to take an extra 20 minutes and order online?
That's not convenient to me.
It's your job to take orders and stuff and this is ridiculous.
So I'd like you to take my order please.
Okay.
I will be happy to take your order as long as your daughter doesn't scream, alright?
I think that's a pretty good decision on your part.
Okay, I don't need this attitude.
Okay, now, let's walk through this.
Three points of analysis.
First of all, we can't even talk about the dispute until we deal with the fact that this woman went to a Panera Bread drive-thru in the first place.
Like, there is simply no good reason, there's no valid excuse to ever go to a Panera Bread drive-thru.
Panera sells high school cafeteria-caliber food at sit-down restaurant prices.
I mean, it's the worst of all worlds.
You get the prices of a sit-down restaurant place With sub-fast food quality meals.
The sandwiches are bland.
The baked goods are stale and depressing.
The soups are Campbell's tier at best.
I mean, they taste like something that was in a can that's been sitting in your pantry.
The salads are salads.
So it's a disaster all around.
And Panera is awful for every meal, but I think breakfast is the worst.
Panera breakfast tastes like the Continental breakfast that you would get at, like, the Comfort Inn down the street.
Except that the comfort in the breakfast is complimentary at least, and also the comfort in coffee would be far better than what they serve at Panera.
Panera coffee is an abomination that cries out to God for vengeance.
If I served you, and I think this is true, if I served you Panera coffee and I didn't tell you it was coffee, you wouldn't know what it was supposed to be.
You would be flummoxed.
You would have no idea what you're ingesting.
It's this lukewarm, dull, weak, uninspired, sort of vaguely caffeinated liquid substance.
And again, Panera commits all of these culinary sins while charging premium prices for them.
So that's what makes it so bad.
So Panera's terrible.
That's the first thing.
You shouldn't be there.
Second, with that established, We move to the employee.
Now, as mentioned, most people are on his side, and that's no surprise given that most people are stupid.
Now, the woman is not blameless here, which I'll explain in a moment, but neither is the employee.
Okay, we can't know for sure what was happening before the video began.
We can't know how much screaming the child was doing, but I think it's fair to assume that it was on par with what we heard in the video.
And yes, we can hear a couple of outbursts from the child in the background.
And children do that sometimes.
They're known to do that.
But it's nowhere near a level of noise that would make it impossible to take the woman's order.
It's a little annoying and slightly distracting, but you can still do your job.
You can still do the thing you're paid to do.
The only thing you're paid to do is to stand there and take the orders of the customers.
And the idea that you could have someone say, well, I'd rather not.
I'd rather not with you.
You displease me.
You displease me.
Please continue on.
I'm displeased.
I won't take your order.
And the fact that everyone's on this guy's side, are you kidding me?
Even if the screaming was a little worse before the video started, that's also possible.
Still, it seems unlikely that the drive-thru worker was literally unable to complete the order.
All signs point to the fact that the Panera employee simply found the child's whining irritating, and so he decided that he wasn't going to do his job.
And he says, I have the right to not take your order.
No, you don't, bud.
Actually, you don't have the right.
Panera Bread decides.
You work for them.
They decide.
And I'm pretty sure Panera Bread, does Panera Bread have a policy that you don't have to take an order if there's a child crying in the background?
Is that their policy, really?
I'm pretty sure it's not.
So no, you don't have the right.
Do your freaking job.
That's just not how it works, or at least not how it should work.
But increasingly, it does work this way because the sense of entitlement in this country is out of control.
And it's particularly glaring in the service industry where, and you know, nobody wants to call us out or talk about it because like you sound elitist or something, but we all know it.
You go into these places, the workers are visibly and audibly angry.
They're already angry that you showed up in the first place to make them do their job.
And everyone demands a tip for everything, no matter how shoddy their performance is.
And employees think nothing of openly complaining about their customers and lecturing them, sometimes on social media.
And so I see this incident as part of that whole picture.
I'm more old school, as you know.
I have a traditional mentality about these things, which is to say I have the right mentality about these things.
And my mentality is this.
Do your damned job.
Just do your job.
Yeah, it's difficult.
The kid's crying.
I don't care.
Do your job anyway.
It's still your job.
Just do it.
You're annoyed.
You're sad.
You're upset.
Your tummy hurts.
I don't care.
Do your job.
I say this as a general principle.
It applies to everybody.
All industries.
We have reached a crisis level of people not simply doing their damned jobs.
You know, but this is how I was raised.
In fact, I can remember when I first started working as a teenager and I would work these kind of service jobs, and I did a lot of them, and I would come home after my shift and I'd complain to my parents about all the annoying customers and the incompetent managers and how unhappy I was in my job and I don't want to go on.
My dad would look at me and say, do you think the point of your job is to make you happy?
Do you think that's why you're there?
No.
The point of your job is to fulfill your responsibilities, to do what your boss asks you to do, and to earn a paycheck.
So it doesn't matter whether it makes you happy or not.
That's what you're supposed to do.
News for you is millions of people go to work every day, and they're not happy doing what they do, but they do it anyway because it's their responsibility.
But this is what I would hear growing up.
It's glaringly apparent that many people today do not have dads at home who will give speeches like that.
So instead we end up in exactly the situation we find ourselves in.
You know, like that guy, I don't know who that guy was.
It sounded like a younger guy.
Sounded like probably a teenager or something.
I would hope that if he's got a dad at home, like if that was my son and I heard that video, that kid's gonna have problems when he gets home with me.
Okay, because I want to say, first of all, do your job.
Second of all, don't speak that disrespectfully to someone.
This woman, do not disrespect her that way.
Telling her to adjust her attitude.
Who the hell do you think you are?
Like, this is the kind of thing, the kind of message that kids need to hear, and they don't.
Third, with all that said, I still cannot take this woman's side.
My contrarianism can only take me so far on this one.
Now, yes, I think she's right to expect that her order should be taken.
Yes, I understand why she doesn't want to go in in order, because her kid doesn't have shoes.
And I know there are some people online who are saying, why does your kid have shoes?
You know, because if you're a non-parent, you might be judgmental about that, but parents understand that sometimes you need to leave the house, your kid has lost her shoes for the 97th time this week, and you gotta go, and you're not gonna be going inside anywhere anyway, so you're like, forget it, never mind, you don't need your shoes.
We've all been there.
So, I'm with this woman every shoeless step of the way, except for one point.
She recorded and posted it.
You know, not every minor dispute with a stranger needs to become content for public consumption.
It is possible, believe it or not, to simply have a disagreement with another person, one where they are wrong, and have a contentious back and forth, and then it ends, and you move on with your life.
And that's it.
It's possible to do that.
And before the internet, that's what everyone did all the time.
Can you believe it?
People would have, you'd get into conflicts, you'd get into arguments, you would get, you know, someone would wrong you in some small way, and it just happened, and you experienced it, and it kind of sucked, and then you kept living, and that was it, and it was over.
Not everything needs to live forever on the internet, not everything needs to be discussed, not everything needs to be content, and recording it and posting it, it's like the adult version of being a Tattletail.
You know, oh, yeah, I'm telling TikTok on you.
So the moment you do that, you automatically become the bad guy or at least one of the bad guys.
So in this case, as far as I can tell, they're both the bad guys.
The employee is wrong for not taking the order.
The woman is wrong for recording it and snitching to the Internet.
The Internet is wrong for siding with the employee.
Panera Bread sucks.
Everyone is wrong.
Everything is bad.
Everyone involved is canceled.
Happy Friday.
And that'll do it for the show today.
On that note, and this week, hope you have a great weekend.
