Ep. 1315 - We Need To Respect Black Culture By Getting Rid Of Laws, Says MSNBC
Today on the Matt Walsh show, a new MSNBC special about race in America claims that we can solve crime overnight by simply getting rid of the legal concept of crime. This is how we respect black culture, we're told. Also, the head of the Department of Homeland Security has been impeached, in an unprecedented but highly warranted move. A Democrat congresswoman calls for a 50 dollar minimum wage. And students at Harvard inspire the world with a 12 hour hunger strike.
Ep.1315
- - -
DailyWire+:
Get 15% off the Jeremy’s Skincare Line here: https://bit.ly/3uxY6Po
Unlock your Bentkey 14-day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go
Shop my merch collection here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj
- - -
Today’s Sponsors:
Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/Walsh, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit.
Ragati River Fly Company - Exclusive Discount for my Listeners! Use promo code WALSH at http://www.RagatiRiverFlyCompany.com
Windshield WOW - Exclusive Discount for my Listeners! Use promo code WALSH at checkout. http://www.WindshieldWOW.com
Provia - Click here for FREE GIFT CHOICE + FREE SHIPPING with your order
https://www.proviahair.com/Walsh
Regina Caeli Academy - Join me at the Courage Under Fire Gala! Use code DAILYWIRE for exclusive access to your tickets at http://www.courageunderfiregala.org
- - -
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, a new MSNBC special about race in America claims that we can solve crime overnight by simply getting rid of the legal concept of crime.
This is how we respect black culture, we're told.
Also, the head of the Department of Homeland Security has been impeached in an unprecedented but highly warranted move.
A Democrat congresswoman calls for a $50 minimum wage, and students at Harvard inspire the world with a 12-hour hunger strike.
All of that and more today on The Matt Walsh Show.
(upbeat music)
We're experiencing a lot of global instability North Korea is testing missiles.
Iran is growing increasingly aggressive.
And by the way, we have a presidential election coming up in November, if you haven't heard.
So how do you protect your family in the midst of all this chaos?
A great place to start is by protecting your savings.
It's not too late to invest in gold with Birch Gold Group today.
Unlike many other investments, gold can act as a safe haven during turbulent times by providing a hedge against inflation and economic uncertainty.
Birch Gold will help you convert your existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold, and it will cost you nothing out of pocket as well.
While diversification does not eliminate risk entirely, Birch Gold's experts can help you manage and reduce, providing a more resilient foundation for your financial well-being.
That's why I urge you to talk to one of their trusted experts today, Tex Walsh.
to 989898 and Birch Gold will send you a free info kit on gold with an A+ rating with the
Better Business Bureau, countless five-star reviews, and thousands of happy customers.
I encourage you to check out Birch Gold today. They've been the exclusive gold company for the
Daily Wire for the past seven years. We trust them. You can trust them too. Text Walsh to 989898
to claim your free info kit on gold. That's Walsh to 989898 to secure your savings now.
One pattern that has emerged over the past four presidential elections, ever since Barack Obama,
is that the national conversation, as directed by the media, shifts back to race right around
the time that the primaries are wrapping up.
Of course, the primaries are still happening on the GOP side, technically, if you count Nikki Haley as a real presidential candidate.
If you realize that she is at this point simply running to be the next overpaid CNN contributor, you understand the primaries ended weeks ago, which means that it's now time for the race cycle to begin anew.
And right on cue, MSNBC released a new special this month called Black Men in America, The Road to 2024.
Now, based on the title and based on the timing, And based on the fact that it's MSNBC, you might assume that the show automatically is going to consist of a bunch of mindless race-baiting.
You might make the presumption without seeing a single second of it.
You might just write it off without giving it a chance under the assumption that it's going to be nothing but idiotic, dim-witted, racial grievance-mongering.
You might assume all of that.
And you would, of course, be entirely correct.
Yet, as you'll see in the clip that I'm about to show you, it still manages to limbo its way under the incredibly low bar that you have already set for it in your mind, which is quite a feat.
Watch.
We can get rid of all the crime in America overnight, just like that.
And people ask, how, Attorney Crump?
Change the definition of crime.
Of course, if you get to define what conduct It sounds like we're criminal though.
Our existence is criminal.
I did nothing!
We sitting here the whole time running our business!
What are you talking about?
Who do I sell cigarettes to?
to criminalize our culture.
To fit us. - Black culture.
I mean, and so when I think of Eric Garner, I always think of stuff like that.
Lucy cigarettes.
I did nothing!
We sit here the whole time, minding our business.
Who you talking to?
I'm watching you.
You watching me do what?
Who'd I sell cigarettes to?
Don't touch me, [bleep]
Hey, Moe. - Do not touch me.
[bleep]
Guy lost his life.
Yeah, and then George Floyd was trying to buy cigarettes and so forth.
So you have to think about the profiling things that they come up with, the profilers, for pretextual reasons.
And it happens every day, y'all.
They will come and say, you can't wear baggy pants.
Make that a crime.
You can't have milk cartons in your yard.
Make that a crime.
Now, as you can see, that's Ben Crump pretending to shoot pool with Al Sharpton.
In other words, it's the neo Al Sharpton with the old Al Sharpton.
It's like broadband Al Sharpton with dial-up Al Sharpton.
And Ben Crump is what happens when you clone Al Sharpton, but you remove his hair and the three brain cells that he had, and you end up with Ben Crump, because that's the thing you notice about Crump, is that he is objectively speaking, and I say this in a medical sense, I don't mean this as an insult, it's just like a medical term, he's a moron.
In fact, his very existence, single-handedly and ironically, disproves systemic racism.
Because there's simply no way that a black guy, this aggressively mediocre, this consistently unimpressive, This simple-minded and ridiculous could ever achieve the success he's achieved in a country that was systemically racist against black guys.
Now sure, even in a country with systemic racism, you could still end up with brilliant and innovative people who managed to succeed in spite of it.
So the existence of successful black people doesn't in and of itself disprove systemic racism.
A million other things disprove it, but not that.
But Ben Crump specifically?
I mean, this guy?
You want to tell me this guy rose to the top despite having the entire system arrayed against him?
No.
I mean, obviously the truth is quite the opposite.
The system favors guys like Crump, which is the only reason anyone knows his name.
By all rights, the pinnacle of this dude's career should have been like a position no higher than shift manager at Wendy's, with no disrespect intended to shift managers at Wendy's.
The point is that his wealth and success is entirely a product of a system designed to move mediocre halfwits like himself to the front.
And as if to prove my point, what does he say?
Well, what's the great insight that he offers the world?
Well, he says that we can get rid of all the crime in America overnight.
By changing the definition of crime.
Now, he's right, of course, technically.
Crime is a legal designation.
If you stop applying that legal designation to things, then it will not be applied to things anymore, and therefore, you will have gotten rid of the designation.
Stop calling murder, robbery, and rape crimes, and just like that, presto chango, the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape have disappeared.
This is evidently what Trump, a guy with a law degree somehow, wants to see happen.
The problem is that by getting rid of the crimes of murder, robbery, and rape, you have not gotten rid of the actions of murder, robbery, and rape.
People are still being murdered, robbed, and raped.
In fact, at an even higher rate now, most likely.
But it doesn't count in the books.
The assailants aren't being brought to justice.
The victims have nowhere to turn for redress.
All the bad things are still happening, but the law is covering its eyes and plugging its ears and pretending that it's not happening.
And that's what happens when you get rid of crime, as Trump suggests.
And, in fact, we don't even need to speak of this theoretically.
Every major city in America has adopted a strategy like this, to one degree or another.
Every major city, thanks in large part to Soros-funded Marxist DAs, has decided to reduce crime by not fighting it.
They've decided to create fewer criminals by not calling the criminals criminals.
As a result, most of these places are unlivable hellscapes, which is not a problem for Ben Crump, whose firm rakes in tens of millions of dollars a year, so he's not living in these crime-infested sewers that ambulance-chasing con artists like himself have helped to create.
Now, Crump then goes on to claim that laws, any law, I guess, has the effect of criminalizing black culture, he says.
He gives the example of Eric Garner, who died, as you'll remember, one of the, not the first, but one of the first BLM martyrs.
And he died while police attempted to take him into custody for selling loose cigarettes.
Now, the law against loose cigarettes, it's not as important or essential as laws against murder and robbery, but the policy does make perfect sense.
You aren't allowed to buy a pack of cigarettes from the convenience store and then stand outside that convenience store selling each individual cigarette to people walking by on the street.
Why can't you do that?
Well, that's not very fair to the convenience store for one thing.
And for another, there are all kinds of additional laws governing the sale of tobacco products.
Laws that cannot be enforced if people are allowed to walk around hawking individual cigarettes on the street corner.
Now, it's not the most important law, but it is a law, and it's a law that makes plenty of sense.
The question in this case is why Eric Garner couldn't just follow the law.
Like, why can't you just follow?
It's not hard.
Most of us have no problem following that law.
It's not a difficult law to follow.
It's not onerous.
Is it black culture, quote-unquote, to simply disregard whatever law you personally find inconvenient?
That seems to be the claim that Ben Crump is making.
But all that is irrelevant anyway, because Garner didn't die because he sold loose cigarettes.
Cops, despite how it's always framed, cops did not show up and stage a public execution as a penalty for selling loosies, as they're called.
No.
They tried to arrest him, because he's committing a crime, and their job as police officers is to enforce the law.
That's it.
And he resisted, and in the struggle he lost his life.
Why resist?
What's that going to achieve?
What possible good can come from it?
Even if you disagree with the law that you broke.
Even if you didn't break a law.
Even if you're being falsely accused.
Even if you're completely innocent.
Okay?
No matter the situation, how does resisting arrest help your case?
What good will it do for you?
Like, what is the plan?
Walk me through the steps.
Step one.
Resist arrest.
Step two, unknown.
Step three, you get to go home and have a pleasant day.
All right, I guess that's the thought process, right, for all these BLM martyrs.
What is the second step, though?
We really gotta fill in the blank there.
Can Ben Crump explain that?
What is it that you think will happen at step number two that will lead to step number three, now that you've started with step one, which is resisting arrest?
What should it be?
Did Eric Garner think that if he declined to be arrested, the cops would just say, oh, so you don't want to be arrested.
Oh, you'd prefer not to be arrested this particular afternoon.
Well, never mind then, good sir.
Please be on your way.
Our apologies.
Was that the idea?
Well, we know the answer.
There was no thought process behind it.
He didn't have any ideas at all.
He just was acting in a totally thoughtless, self-destructive manner, responding to a situation in a way that was guaranteed to make the situation worse, no matter what.
Like, no matter what happens, even if you don't die in the process, the result will be worse than it would have been if you had just complied.
So, making the situation worse, intentionally, is that black culture, according to Crump?
Crump also mentions George Floyd.
He says that Floyd was another man arrested for participating in black culture.
What was the culture in that case?
Floyd was trying to pass off a forged $20 bill.
I mean, this is what a, this is what a, just a, Liar, this guy.
This is what a dumb liar Ben Crump is.
They said, well, George Floyd was just trying to buy cigarettes.
Yeah, with a forged $20 bill.
That was the problem.
It's not that he was buying a cigarette.
They weren't showing up.
He didn't go to buy a cigarette.
And then the convenience store called the cops and said, hey, someone just came and bought a cigarette.
Go arrest him.
That's not a crime.
You're allowed to do that.
But using forged money is a crime.
Shouldn't it be?
Like, should we be okay with that?
Should we just get rid of the laws against forged dollar bills?
So you can go in with Monopoly money and buy something and no one's gonna stop you?
So, is that black culture?
Using forged dollars?
Is that the black culture he's talking about?
He was overdosing on fentanyl.
Is that black culture?
Now I'm not asking these questions rhetorically.
I would really like to hear Crump's answer.
I'd like to hear the answer from any of these race baiters who talk about black culture.
What is it?
I'd like to know what you consider black culture to be.
Now, I wouldn't personally call any of that black culture, but I will say that if it was black culture, Then guess what?
The culture needs to change.
Okay?
If your culture, as Ben Crump seems to think, let's just go with Ben Crump's argument for a minute.
This is what he's saying.
He's saying that all these things are black culture.
Committing crimes, using drugs, overdosing, resisting arrest, going out of your way to make your life more difficult, being insanely self-destructive all the time.
It's his argument that that is black culture.
Okay, well then, what I would say to that is that if that is black culture, then your culture is deeply flawed.
It is terminally sick, and it needs to change.
You see, the law doesn't need to change to accommodate your culture.
Your culture needs to accommodate the fact that it exists in a civilized society with laws.
That is the job of you and your culture to accommodate.
We don't need to get rid of all the laws and make exceptions and say, oh, you know what, actually, you don't have to get arrested if you don't want to, and thereby invite the collapse of civilization itself just for your culture.
Your culture needs to get with the program, if that is what your culture is.
Now, naturally, Crump only talks about the laws against loose cigarettes and milk cartons and baggy pants, he mentions, as if anyone is actually being arrested for having baggy pants.
When's the last time that happened?
He completely ignores the obvious fact that black men are arrested every day in every city in America for committing actual violent crimes.
Okay, young black men are not landing in prison because of their milk cartons.
Okay, there's not a lot of people that are in the prison yard right now.
Oh, what'd you do?
How'd you get here?
Ah, milk cartons.
Yep, too many milk cartons in the yard.
Got 10 to 15 for that one.
Hard time.
No, that's not what's happening.
But Crump, of course, doesn't want to acknowledge that.
Because he's a liar, and he's evil, and he doesn't care how many people die, or how many black men get themselves killed by making the worst possible decisions.
He doesn't care about any of that, as long as he can personally profit off of it.
Now, I began this by saying that Crump is stupid, and he certainly is.
Just like Al Sharpton is stupid, many of these race baiters are just very, very dumb.
And you can't listen to them talk for more than five seconds without arriving at that conclusion.
It's inevitable.
But like any other race baiter, he also knows exactly what he's doing.
He pretends to speak up for black culture, whatever he thinks that is exactly, while at the same time doing everything he can to make black communities more dangerous, poorer, bleaker, more miserable.
It's not the white man keeping black communities down.
It's men like Ben Crump.
And he deserves to be held accountable for it.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
[MUSIC]
Starting to feel like a spring here in Tennessee, which means that I'll be back
out on the lake soon, probably fly fishing with my kids and I'm looking forward to it.
This year I'll be armed and ready for a successful season with flies from Rigotti River Fly.
Rigotti River Fly is a veteran-owned and operated company that sells high-quality, handcrafted, affordable flies.
They partnered with Expert Fly Tires in Kenya to produce custom region-specific flies.
They even offer a subscription service called Fly Club.
This service sends you flies every month so that you always have them stocked and ready to go.
One of the coolest things about Rigotti River Fly is that you can have their team create custom flies for you as well.
Not to mention, unlike some of their larger competitors, Rigotti River Fly shares your conservative values as well.
They support conservation, they give back to veterans, and they're not going to go woke like some of the other guys obviously have.
I personally use Rigotti River Fly Flies when I fly fish with my kids, and I encourage you to subscribe to the Fly Club today.
Sign up now before the season starts.
Visit RigottiRiverFlyCompany.com.
Use promo code WALSH to receive 10% off your order.
That's R-A-G-A-T-I RiverFlyCompany.com with promo code WALSH.
Okay, it's good to be another fun show where my voice sounds like a dying toad or something, even more than it usually does.
And, you know, it's like a bi-monthly tradition at this point, which is a consequence of having six kids.
Having a large family is a great joy.
I highly recommend it.
There are some challenges that come with it, and one is that, you know, when you have six kids, it's like It is like opening a Wuhan virus lab in your living room.
It's just a constant petri dish for every disease that kids love to bring into the house.
So that's one of the challenges.
But you know what?
There's downsides to everything in life.
I think it's a small price to pay, ultimately.
Last night the House of Representatives voted to impeach the Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, and he became the first sitting Cabinet Secretary to be impeached in the history of the United States.
So this is a big deal.
This is actually a historic political event.
It maybe doesn't feel like that, for one thing because the media doesn't have a lot of interest in talking about this.
But also because we're at a clip right now where there are historic political events happening every three or four weeks.
We've got former presidents being indicted and all, they're trying to send them to prison.
So it's like, we have reached a point in history where there's unprecedented things happening a lot.
Which, by the way, is not a good sign.
Okay, it's maybe a little bit more boring when you don't have a lot of unprecedented political events and just things are going on as normal and it's kind of as it's always been.
A little bit more boring that way.
But that's a sign of stability, which is what you want.
You actually don't want the political landscape to be very interesting.
Now, it's good for the media.
It's good for if you are in my business.
So it's actually not a good sign or a good thing when there are interesting, fascinating, unprecedented political events happening all the time.
As advantageous as it is for the media and even in my business, it gives us a lot to talk about, but I'd much prefer for it to be the other way.
You think back to the 90s.
The big political scandal, of course, of the 90s, the thing that was the most fascinating political event of the 90s, certainly the latter half of the 90s, was Monica Lewinsky.
But you look back on that now, it's quaint by comparison.
Same thing happened again.
It would not get that level of attention.
Again, not a great sign.
He's being impeached and the charges willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law and breaching the public trust.
And now if you read the Washington Post or you watch CNN.
You'll hear that this impeachment is futile.
A two-thirds supermajority in the Democrat-controlled Senate is needed to convict Mayorkas.
And, of course, that isn't going to happen.
So just like the two Trump impeachments, this will ultimately die in the Senate.
And that, of course, is true.
He's not actually going to be convicted.
But there's a big difference between Trump's impeachment trials and the upcoming trial of Mayorkas.
And it's that Mayorkas' trial Isn't really about him.
The point of the exercise, it's not to prevent him from running for office or anything like that.
I don't think we're too worried about that.
Now, he's the one named in the impeachment, but Mayorkas' trial will inevitably focus on the Biden administration and their broader effort to facilitate a foreign invasion.
That's what it's about.
This is a policy that has flooded hospitals.
You know, it's totally destroyed American sovereignty, it's cost thousands of American lives, gang violence, drug trafficking, human trafficking, which is to say nothing of all the job opportunities that have been stolen and everything else.
Which is why, you know, an impeachment trial done right can answer some really important questions.
And that's why I think that this is, I think it's smart politically.
For the statement that it makes.
And I also think that it, again, answers questions that need to be answered.
And you could say, by the way, you could say that, well, we shouldn't just be impeaching people to make a political statement.
We shouldn't be impeaching someone if we know that they can't be convicted.
It's a waste of time.
It's a waste of taxpayer dollars to do it sort of symbolically as a statement.
We shouldn't be doing that.
You could say that.
But, unfortunately, no matter how you might feel about that, that particular toothpaste is out of the tube, and it's not going back in.
Because this is the precedent that the Democrats set with Donald Trump.
This is how they decided that this is how the game is played.
And so, if you're on the other side, you have two choices.
One is you can let them operate by their own set of rules, and you can give them that advantage, Right, so it's like you could sit down and play Monopoly with them, and you can play by the rules of Monopoly while they just make up their own rules.
And they say, well, I can take money from the bank whenever I want, or I don't have to go to jail when it says land, go directly to jail.
No, for me, I don't have to do that.
Oh, for me, instead of getting $200 every time I pass Go, I get $200 every time I pass around a turn.
So, I get $200 four times around the board.
Those are the rules for me.
So, if you're playing Monopoly, let's just say, with someone like that, you can either continue respecting the rules and let them just make up their own rules.
And then you'll definitely lose, and the whole thing is pointless.
It's like you're not even playing Monopoly anymore, because they've decided not to play by the rules.
So whatever this is, it's not even Monopoly.
That's their choice.
So you could do that, and just volunteer to lose.
Or you could say, okay, well, if those are the rules that you've made up, then I'm gonna take advantage of those too.
Of course, in my Monopoly scenario, the real option would be just stop playing.
They're not going to play.
It's a game's point.
That's not going to play.
Unfortunately, in the Monopoly board that is American politics, not playing isn't an option.
So you can't not play.
You got to play.
And so now you're stuck with follow the rules while they break them, and then you automatically lose every time no matter what.
Or they make up rules for themselves, and you say, OK, if those are your rules, they're mine too.
And I think that option is obvious.
It's really the only choice.
And so, this is what impeachment is now.
Now, if I had my way about it, I'd prefer if it wasn't.
I wish we could rewind the clock.
If I could rewind the clock, I'd like to go back to a time when impeachment is a very, very rare occurrence.
And it only happens when an actual crime has been committed.
And I'd even say, Even then, I would say, if I had my way about it, you only go through with the impeachment if you know there's some reasonable chance of actually getting a conviction.
So if I could rewind the clock and flip a switch and make things happen the way that I want, then that's what I would do.
But I can't.
You know?
I can't.
And none of us can.
So, we're here, we're in the world that the Democrats have decided to set up, and so this is the rules that they've set up, and they'll be held to them too.
It's the way it goes.
Does that mean there's going to be impeachments for every presidential administration from here on out?
Probably.
That's what it means.
Either the president or cabinet officials are getting impeached.
Probably for every administration till kingdom come.
Wish it wasn't that way.
But the only other option is that every Republican administration gets impeached and none of the Democrat ones do.
Well, that obviously is just not acceptable.
We can't allow that.
So going back to the questions that could be answered.
Through this trial, because again, this is not just symbolic.
There is actually a function here.
Who exactly was Mayorkas taking orders from?
What have they said in private about Joe Biden's stated goal of permanently changing the demographics of this country?
What have they been doing with the $120 billion that taxpayers are giving DHS every year?
Why, for example, is DHS sending hundreds of millions of dollars to NGOs that help illegals get into the country?
All of this information could be explored by GOP impeachment managers and committee chairs with expanded subpoena powers.
They'll be able to investigate all this.
They'll be able to investigate also why federal border patrol agents were captured on camera cutting razor wire with heavy machinery to let the illegals into the country and then even giving them fist bumps as they entered the country.
The impeachment managers can look into why the Biden administration abruptly reduced the number of questions that border guards are able to ask illegal immigrants when they come in from China, specifically.
You know, all of these kinds of questions can be explored, and they must be.
And that's what's going to happen now that he's being impeached.
And on top of that, You can make an argument about, did he commit an actual crime?
With Trump, there's no crime committed, nor even alleged, to go through with the impeachment.
In Mayorkas' case, you could easily make the argument that I would find very compelling, that this is negligence to the point of actually being a crime.
It's not just refusing to enforce the law.
Is actively undermining it as part of an overall plot to destroy American sovereignty and import voters for your political party.
I mean, there's a bunch of crimes tied up in all of that.
So I guess what this comes down to is that probably even if the Democrats hadn't set this precedent that every administration is getting impeached, someone's getting impeached, whether it's the president or cabinet official, even if they hadn't set this precedent.
There still would be grounds, in this case.
All right, Daily Wire has this report.
A boy who was a high school sophomore took first place in the girls' high jump competition at the New Hampshire Interscholastic Athletic Association Indoor Track and Field Championship.
Mayel Jaquez, who celebrated as a female competitor, failed to jump to match his winning jump, jumped five foot two inches, which was one inch higher than any girl, but, here's the important part, Roughly a foot lower than the winning jump in the boys' competition.
This is a boy competing against girls.
He's an inch higher than any other girl.
A foot lower than the winning jump in the boys' competition.
Which, in the high jump, a foot is an enormous length.
Twelve-time All-American swimmer Riley Gaines slammed Jacquez's parents posting on X. How could the parents of this boy allow their son to cheat?
And why don't the parents of the girls stand up and say no for their daughters?
The country is full of failing, gutless mothers and fathers.
And she's exactly right.
The question from Riley Gaines is a good one.
It's one that many of us have been asking for years.
I know I certainly have.
Where are the parents?
It's at the point now where if you are the parent of a female athlete, now yeah, the parents of the boy who's doing this, they're the worst.
They should not be allowing this under any circumstance.
And, you know, if you have a child who falls into the gender cult, Not by your doing, you know, much to your chagrin that this happens, because the kid goes to public school and gets sucked into the cult.
Many cases of this happening, for sure.
And as I've always said, I have an immense amount of sympathy for parents whose kids are brainwashed in that way.
It's heart-wrenching.
But when you go along with it, To go along with it at all is deeply evil as a parent.
To go along with it to this extent is all the worse.
So, those parents are awful, clearly.
But, if you are the parent of a female athlete, and you allow a male competitor to sabotage her game, or her match, or race, or whatever it is, and you don't say anything, and you don't do anything, Then the whole thing is your fault.
Like, it's on you now.
So at this match, when they were doing the high jump, you know, and all these parents presumably are there and watching, I didn't read any story, unless I missed it, unless I didn't see it, I didn't read any story of any parent walking up and confronting any of the officials, causing any kind of scene.
You know, as far as I know, most of them were on the sidelines cheering on.
Maybe some of them did begrudgingly.
I'm sure they all did begrudgingly.
But as far as I know, nobody made any real effort.
To put a stop to this.
Now, I know that people don't like to make a fuss.
You know, they don't like to be confrontational.
They don't like to cause a scene.
I get all of that.
And that's an aspect of human nature that trans activists have been able to exploit.
Because people are generally polite, and they are generally non-confrontational in real life.
Now, on the internet, it's a different matter.
But in real life, the vast majority of people are much more subdued, and they actually don't like to be the center of attention.
Like, most people, they don't.
In real life, they don't.
They certainly don't like confrontation, most people.
Trans activists, on the other hand, they don't have that problem, because they're narcissists.
So, they're raging narcissists, all of the trans activists are, without exception.
So, they think that they're the main characters of the world, and if they walk into a situation, they have no problem saying, hey, this is all about me, guys, look at me.
Because they think that they're the protagonists of the whole story of the human race.
So, for them, causing a scene, being the center of attention, is second nature.
For normal people, though, it's not like that.
But if you're a normal person, you need to just get over that, or some of it.
Your allergy to confrontation, your aversion, you need to get over it in this kind of circumstance.
Especially when your kids are concerned.
This should be an easy exception.
You know, I know, I mean, it may surprise you to learn this, but I don't like being the center of attention either, which may seem odd given what I do for a living, but when I'm out living my life, I just want to go about my day.
I just want to be a normal person.
I don't want to have the spotlight on me when I'm going about doing my normal things.
I'm not looking for drama.
That's the last thing that I want.
When I'm going about my daily life, I don't want to have any dramatic incidents occur.
I'd rather just go do my thing and keep to myself, and that's how I want to be.
You know, if my kids are being abused, that's a different story.
And when a man is invading your daughter's sport, or her locker room, or both, because they come together, she's being directly abused.
And that should flip a switch in your mind.
It should shift you into another gear.
And you should automatically be ready to stand up and say, no.
Hell no.
Absolutely not.
You know, I don't like causing a scene usually, but I'm going to make an exception in this case.
This cannot be allowed to happen.
I'm not going to sit here and tolerate this.
I'm not going to sit here and cheer and act like this is normal.
I'm not going to let you do this to my daughter and sit there and applaud.
I'm not going to do it.
And some parents have responded that way, to their credit.
Some parents have spoken up, but not nearly enough.
Not even close to enough.
Especially when we know, again, that every single parent, I don't care what they say, I don't care what claim they might make, I don't care what side of the aisle they're on politically, I don't even care what they would say if a pollster or surveyor were to ask them, you know, give them a survey, and, well, how do you feel about trans athletes in sports?
And certain, especially if they're liberal, a certain number of them will say, in fact, most of them will probably say, oh, yeah, I fully support it.
I don't care about any of that, because they're lying.
And what I know for a fact is that every single parent of a girl, you know, any parent who has a daughter, does not want Boy in the locker room, boy in the bathroom, boy in the sport, none of them do.
None of them want that.
They all know that it's completely wrong.
They know that it's insane.
They know that it doesn't make any sense.
This is one of the deeply frustrating, one of the many deeply frustrating things about this whole issue, is that almost every, you know, those of us who have been arguing against the trans agenda, All we've been doing for years is saying what everyone already knows is true.
All the people we're arguing against, they all know that it's true too.
So often it's just that's the frustration.
I'm arguing with you, and I'm making my point.
You and I both know that what I'm saying is true.
Why are we even doing this?
Why are we pretending?
You know this is wrong.
You see the boy running down the track or doing the high jump, you know that's not really a girl.
You know that.
Of course you know that.
So, given that everybody knows that it's wrong, given that nobody really needs to be convinced, actually, the number of parents who speak up, the number of parents who try to do anything about it, the number of parents who have any kind of protest at all that they offer, that number is just vanishingly small, and it's pathetically small.
And so I think Riley Gaines, gutless, is a good way to describe a lot of these parents.
All right.
Fox 40 says, minimum wage is a topic that draws a lot of attention, especially in California, a state that has one of the highest minimum wages in the United States.
In a debate Monday night, Representative Barbara Lee defended her previous advocacy for a $50 minimum wage.
Here's the clip.
Let's watch.
You're calling for a $50 an hour federal minimum wage.
That's seven times the current national minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.
Can you explain how that would be economically sustainable for small businesses?
You have 60 seconds.
First, let me say I owned and ran a small business for 11 years.
I created hundreds of jobs.
Benefits, retirement benefits, also health care benefits.
I know what worker productivity means, and that means that you have to make sure that your employees are taken care of and have a living wage.
In the Bay Area, I believe it was the United Way, came out with a report that very recently, $127,000 for a family of four It's just barely enough to get by.
Another survey very recently, 104,000 for a family of one.
Barely enough to get by.
Low income because of the affordability crisis.
And so just do the math.
Just do the math.
Of course we have national minimum wages that we need to raise to a living wage.
You talk about $20, $25, fine.
But I have got to be focused on what California needs and what the affordability factor is when we calculate Okay, $50 minimum wage is what she's asking for.
Sure, why not?
Why not $50?
Why not $100?
Why not $1,000?
Let's do $1,000.
$1,000 minimum wage.
Once we get to $50, there's really no reason to not continue.
Make it a $1,000,000 minimum wage.
Pay people $1,000,000 now.
We could all be billionaires before long.
Wouldn't that be great?
Once we get to 50, there's really no reason to not continue.
Make it a million dollar minimum wage.
Pay people a million dollars now.
We could all be billionaires before long.
Wouldn't that be great?
Wouldn't that be fantastic?
Of course, you know, we're all billionaires, and so if you want to go and buy a roll of
paper towels or something, it's going to cost you $70 trillion.
But, you know, still, at least we all have all that money.
And this is how you solve the affordability crisis, right?
There's a crisis where things cost too much money, things are not affordable, and the way you solve it is by vastly increasing the cost of doing business for every business in your state.
Okay, you like 7x their costs, and that's how you make things, the cost of things go down.
That's the math.
Barbaralee's math is about as fuzzy and imaginary as the white guy who supposedly harassed her on the elevator in the Capitol building a few weeks ago, if you recall.
She's the same person.
So, her math skills exist in the same way that that guy exists, because they don't.
You know, this is obviously completely insane.
Raise the minimum wage to $50, and that's just the end of California.
That would be the end of the state.
Because every business would have to leave, and it would be the end of commerce in the state.
And if you don't have commerce in the state of any kind, then you just don't have a state.
Like, no one can live there.
It can't exist anymore.
So maybe that's the silver lining.
Maybe we should just go ahead and do it, and put California out of its misery, and we can all, you know, move on.
And maybe that's the way we do it.
But if you don't want to, if you don't want to just destroy the state completely and finally put the final nail in its coffin, it's a terrible idea.
But anytime this subject of minimum wage comes up, it's important to remember that the whole topic is a red herring.
The whole thing is irrelevant.
Now, yes, I agree that it's difficult to support yourself on minimum wage.
I've done it, so I know that it's hard.
You know, it's very difficult.
And it's even harder, if not basically impossible these days, to support a family on minimum wage.
You know, you basically, it's essentially impossible.
You can't do it.
You can support yourself.
I mean, it's very, very difficult, but you can do that.
It is possible.
A family?
No, you just can't.
It's not enough money.
But here's the thing.
The minimum wage, that's not what it's for.
That is not the point of minimum wage.
That's not why it exists.
Minimum wage jobs don't exist for that.
Raising minimum wage, you know what it's like?
It's a bit like It's a bit like trying to invent training wheels for bicycles that would allow a child to go 30 miles an hour on the bike.
Okay, that's what it's like.
It defeats the whole purpose of the training wheels.
If he's ready to go that fast, it's long past time to take the training wheels off.
Okay, the whole point of training wheels, it's the assumption that the kid can't go even a mile an hour on the bike.
It's like, so the training wheels are designed for that.
So, you don't need faster training wheels, you just need to have no training wheels.
Take them off.
Same with minimum wage.
Minimum wage, it's like these are the training wheels of income levels.
You don't need a higher minimum wage, you just need to not be on minimum wage anymore.
You need to graduate beyond minimum wage.
Minimum wage Is not for adults with houses and kids and car payments.
It's not for that.
So when we're saying to ourselves, well, even on $15 an hour, there's no way that an adult could have a mortgage and pay for the car and have a kid.
It's impossible.
It's not a living wage.
Yes, you're damn right.
Of course it's not.
It's not for that.
That's not what it's for.
It's not why it exists.
Minimum wage is for teenagers.
It's for college students working part-time.
It's for high school students.
You're not supposed to camp out on minimum wage and try to build your life on it.
Yes, of course you can't.
But that's why you don't stay there.
And earning $50 an hour is more than possible.
I mean, it's a great goal to have, especially if you're starting at minimum wage.
And it's entirely feasible.
I mean, there are many different paths you could take in life.
There are many different careers you could go, you could explore.
Many of them don't even require, certainly don't require college degrees.
And you could end up making $50 an hour.
You know, it's not outside the realm of possibility at all.
But you can't make that while staying on the minimum wage job.
It's just not...
Standing at a drive-thru, or standing behind the cash register, you know, at Wendy's.
We've already picked on Wendy's, so we'll do it again.
Standing behind the cash register at Wendy's, and somebody comes in and says, oh, I want a number one, please.
Medium Diet Coke.
And then you press it in, and you know, you take, you swipe the card, you hand them the... That's not... That is not supposed to be a career, just doing that.
It just isn't.
And that action of typing the thing in, swiping the card, and handing a bag of food to somebody is not worth $50 an hour by any metric.
Like, in no possible universe is that worth $50 an hour.
It just, it isn't.
It's a job that has almost already been entirely replaced by automation.
Most of the job can be done already.
McDonald's has the automated, you know, the screens that you can press when you go in.
that are smudged with fingerprints and it's disgusting.
But then again, the whole experience is disgusting, so who cares?
Already, it's like, half of the job can be replaced with a screen,
and pretty soon the whole job will be replaced.
So it's not for that.
You're not supposed to build a career on it.
Which isn't to say that you can't build a career in the restaurant industry, the food industry.
Of course you can.
It's not even to say that you can't build a career in fast food.
You could do that, too.
You could work your way up.
You could become a manager, a system manager, a general manager.
You could go to the corporate side.
It's certainly not to say that you can't create a career in customer service.
There are plenty there.
You could have quite a respectable and noble career.
The minimum wage job itself is not supposed to be the career.
And this is where I'm always accused of being cruel and callous and out of touch and everything else.
Even though, as I said, you know, people can say that all they want.
You're out of touch.
You have no idea.
All right, that's fine.
I guess you know more about my own personal history than I do.
I don't know.
I guess I should listen, wait for internet comments to tell me about what my own biography is, because as far as I'm aware of my own biography, I've done all these kinds of jobs.
That's where I started.
I know what it's like.
I get it.
And I also know that You know, it's not that hard to graduate above minimum wage.
It just requires, especially when you become, now if you're 15 years old it's going to be more difficult, but if you're not, if you're older, if you're an adult, you should be able to launch yourself off of that launching pad pretty quickly.
And so if you're 26 years old and you're getting paid minimum wage, you should look to see if the problem is with you a little bit.
And I know that these are all things we're not supposed to say anymore.
We're not supposed to say.
When people complain, the only thing we're supposed to do is say, well, yeah, your life's terrible.
It's horrible.
It should change.
Everything should change for you.
I feel so bad for you.
I know it's the only thing we're supposed to say.
You're not supposed to put any onus on the individual at all.
I understand that.
But I don't, maybe you've noticed, I don't respect those rules.
And so, don't want to get paid minimum wage.
I totally get it.
I wouldn't want to either.
So go out and earn more than that.
That's the solution.
It's the only solution that's available.
Or, you know, the other option is that you could say, well, I don't know.
I don't want to.
It's too hard.
I think that minimum wage should be increased to $50 an hour.
Well, OK, well, then let's just do that and destroy everything.
That's the other option is just to destroy everything.
And then in the end, you're still exactly where you are right now.
We could just completely ruin the economy.
In the name of being compassionate towards you and being gentle.
And then you are still screwed and everyone else is screwed too.
Maybe that makes you feel better because everyone else is in a bad spot also?
Is that the plan?
I guess so.
Misery loves company, I suppose.
It's just that that's not a very good economic philosophy, is my take on it.
Let's get to Waswall Strong.
Keeping windshields clean is always a pain, especially in the winter, and that's why I'm so grateful to have Windshield WOW.
Windshield WOW is an innovative windshield cleaning device that uses two magnetic cleaning paddles, one on the outside, one on the inside of your car, to clean both sides of your windshield, all from the outside.
Being able to clean both the front and the inside window at the same time, It's a big game changer.
I wish I had one of these years ago.
Seriously, all you got to do is push around the outside paddle.
The inside falls automatically, leaving your windshield squeaky clean.
We had a pretty big snowstorm here in Nashville recently with all the dirt and salt that piled up on the road.
Washer fluid just couldn't get the job done, and that's why I was lucky to have my Windshield WOW in my trunk to save the day.
That's what's awesome about Windshield WOW.
It's so easy to throw these in the back of your car, so you always have them ready to go to clean the windshield when you need it.
The Windshield WOW applies firm cleaning pressure.
It's super thin to get into those tight dashboard areas.
So what are you waiting for?
Go to windshieldwow.com, use promo code WALSH and check out for a special discount.
That's windshieldwow.com, promo code WALSH.
It's never too late for a New Year's resolution.
Make 2024 the year you will stop your hair from premature thinning.
The new Provia Hair Thinning Therapy from Chaminix is here, and it works wonders for follicle health and thinning hair.
The Provia secret is a powerful natural ingredient called Procapil that effectively targets the three main causes of premature hair thinning and loss.
Procapil supports healthy scalp circulation, the delivery of nourishing nutrients, and strong hair follicles.
Provia guarantees more hair on your head and less in the shower.
It's effective for men and women of any age.
And it's also safe for colored, treated, and styled hair.
During Provia's Valentine's Day promotion, new customers save over 50% plus free shipping on their introductory package.
Every package includes a full 60-day supply of the Provia Serum and Provia Super Concentrate for faster, more noticeable results.
Plus, you get Provia's Perfect Beard Treatment or Provia's Eyelash Enhancing Serum as your exclusive free gift at checkout.
Don't wait!
Your full, thick hair starts today.
Visit ProviaHair.com.
First comment says, while I agree with much of your foreign policy take, part of me feels complete isolationism is not the correct approach either.
The tax money, the amount, is all ridiculous.
Yes, but if we don't intervene in world wars or we let the Soviets run wild, how much different is our world?
That's a good question.
How much different is our world if we're not intervening in everything all the time?
Very good question.
Hard to say because we're speaking theoretically because we do intervene in everything all the time.
I will say it's hard to imagine how it's much worse.
Another way of looking at it is now that we have decades and decades of this interventionist approach to foreign policy, What is the evidence that it's made the world a better place at all?
What's the evidence that it's made America?
I mean, forget about the world for a second.
First priority is, where is the evidence that it's put the United States of America in a better position?
Where's the evidence that it's made us more prosperous?
That it has aided in the well-being and prosperity of American families?
Is there any evidence of that?
Trillions of dollars in debt, you know, inflation sky-high.
We don't have to run through the whole thing.
I think we know that it's a pretty rough position that we're in.
So, how has this worked?
How has this made the country any better?
I guess you could always speculate that, well, yeah, it's pretty bad, but it'd be even worse if we weren't shipping billions and billions of dollars off to foreign countries and getting involved in every conflict and all the rest of it.
You could say that, but I think the speculation is on your end, and there's not a lot of evidence for it.
As far as what happens if we let the quote-unquote Soviets, as you call them, run wild, how much different is our world in that case?
Well, I think our world, you and I in America living our lives, would be really not much different at all.
Now, yeah, if Russia went on to try to invade and conquer all of Europe, then that would certainly affect us.
I think we could say that.
If the whole European continent is conquered by Russia, it certainly changes the balance of things in a way that will affect all of us.
But that's not going to happen.
That is not the intention.
There's no evidence it ever was the intention.
You know, the idea that if we didn't, if he's not stopped in Ukraine, eventually Putin would be marching into France or something is just ridiculous.
He has certain pieces of land that he wants in Eastern Europe, and whether he has them or not, I think doesn't, how does it affect our lives?
Like, not at all.
I just don't think it does.
I don't think it, I don't think you would, you know, I, here's what I would say.
Let me put it this way.
If we didn't have 24-hour cable news, and we didn't have the Internet, and, you know, maybe we have newspapers, but many people don't read them or have access to it.
Like, basically, if we were in the spot we were in before the invention of modern media.
And Putin conquered Ukraine, took the whole thing.
That's all Russia now.
I think that you would never know it.
Nothing in your life would change, right?
You know, you could find out ten years later, oh, you know, Putin, he actually conquered Ukraine.
And you would say, oh, he did?
I didn't know.
Nothing in my life changed at all.
I had no clue.
So, apparently, whatever happens in Ukraine has zero impact on me or my family.
Alright.
This is silly.
You're allowed to be for or against foreign aid, but we are a republic.
And this is how all taxation and all spending works.
We never get a direct say.
We get to elect representatives.
Silly point.
Someone else says, you're high.
We provide foreign aid because it's in America's self-interest.
This is obvious.
You just don't agree with the assessment of America's interests.
Vote harder next time.
First of all, I don't know what to say to you other than, you know, you're either too stupid to understand the point or you're pretending not to understand it.
But there is a difference between our government spending money Ostensibly, in America, on things that will benefit Americans.
Now, they do waste a lot of money.
A lot of this money goes off into the bureaucracy and just disappears, as far as we're concerned.
So, yes.
But, in principle, there's a difference between our government spending the money in America and our government sending the money to another government, 4,000 miles away, For them to spend on their own people.
Like, I don't know how to explain that difference other than to just say that.
It's quite, one is a foreign country, this is our country, those are foreign citizens, our citizens, like, these are different things, okay?
And that's what we're talking about.
And that's also why I say it's taxation without representation.
Because once that money goes to that foreign country, We have no control, no say over how it's spent, and we do not benefit from it.
It's not for us.
Now, I know you could say, well, this is all in America's interest.
Yes, okay.
Yes, that is the line from the politicians and the bureaucrats.
Do you believe it?
Do you actually still believe it?
Have you been living in this country all this time?
I don't know how old you are.
Maybe you're five years old.
That's why you're so naive.
But if you're an adult, Are you really an adult in the United States of America in the year of our Lord 2024?
And you still believe that this is all in our interest, really?
I mean, you know, I just pulled up this list out of, just for, out of interest.
The top recipients of foreign aid.
So the most recent thing we have is for 2022, top recipients of foreign aid.
Top, in 2022, top recipient was Ukraine, about $12 billion.
Then Israel, $3 billion.
Ethiopia, $2 billion.
And then we got a bunch of people that are in the billion-dollar range.
How did you, let me ask anyone that just left one of those comments.
Let's just take Nigeria, about 1.1 billion dollars.
How did you benefit from that?
You say America's interest.
Well, America's interest means the interest of Americans.
You're an American.
So, what did that do for you?
The fact that Nigeria got a billion dollars.
How did it make your life any better?
Can you articulate at all, other than just at a blind faith saying, it's in our interest.
They have told us it's in our interest.
It's for us.
Like, this is a Scientology cult level stuff.
I can't explain it, but we have been told that it's in our interests.
Or maybe you can explain it.
So explain to me, Nigeria getting a billion dollars, how does that help you?
How does it help your family?
How does it help your neighbors?
How does it help your community?
Can you look around at your community and say, you know, we're in a better spot today because Nigeria got a billion dollars in 2022.
You can't say it's absurd.
It's an absurd thing to even claim and you know it.
So we get rid of all the foreign aid to everybody, doesn't hurt you at all.
Yeah, it may hurt a lot of these foreign countries.
It may.
It certainly hurt a lot of the wealthy politicians and corrupt politicians in those countries who take that foreign aid and waste it and squander it.
But, you know, it may also even, you know, the average citizen of Nigeria may be harmed by not having that foreign aid.
Well, that's Nigeria's problem, isn't it?
They're not our citizens.
Let their government take care of them.
With their own damn money.
Courage Under Fire is going to be one of the biggest events of the year.
You don't want to miss it.
Come and join me on May 24th in Nashville, Tennessee for a night of encouragement and camaraderie.
Courage Under Fire will host some of the top leaders of faith, pro-life movement, and culture to share what's true, good, and beautiful.
I'll be speaking alongside Dr. Abby Johnson on how to have courage and stand up for the truth in our culture no matter what adversity you face.
We'll be joined by some of the most influential leaders in the conservative movement.
for a night of connection inspiration.
All proceeds from the gala will directly benefit students in need of tuition assistance at Regina Chaley Academy,
which is the premier classical homeschool hybrid for Catholic families.
VIPs will have access to an exclusive meet and greet with guest speakers and live music during a cocktail hour.
If you haven't grabbed your tickets yet, you need to for tickets.
Visit courageunderfiregala.org and use code dailywire at checkout.
That's courageunderfiregala.org and use code dailywire.
Can't wait to see you there.
Also, well, I've got good news and bad news for you.
The bad news is most of the products in your bathroom have gone woke at this point.
The good news is Jeremy wants to help you wash off the woke with 15% off all of your essentials, along with Jeremy's skincare products as well.
The facial cleanser and moisturizer are made with natural ingredients like aloe vera, bamboo charcoal, and some other thing I can't pronounce.
And Jeremy leaves out toxic chemicals like parabens, sulfates, and phthalates.
P-H-T-H.
Like, how do you pronounce that?
That's too many consonants in one thing.
Anyway, whatever that is, it's not in there, which is good.
So, or it is in there.
Is that in there or it's not in there?
Let's go up a little bit.
It leaves out though, so it's not in there.
You don't want that for phthalates.
Because how can you wash off toxic values if you're using toxic chemicals?
So head on over to jeremysrazors.com to get your Jeremy's skincare for 15% off today, along with all of your other essentials.
Now let's get to our Daily Cancellation.
First, a bunch of student groups signed a petition defending a terrorist attack, and then the university's DEI president was exposed as a serial plagiarist and had to resign in disgrace.
Not to be outdone, a few weeks later, Harvard's head of DEI was also proven to be a plagiarist.
Harvard just ignored that story because by that point they realized half of their faculty is probably plagiarizing, you know, all the time.
This all happened shortly after Harvard's affirmative action policy was struck down by the Supreme Court in a landmark case that revealed Harvard systemic discrimination against white and Asian applicants for the past several decades.
Given this background, if you were a student at Harvard, It would seem logical to lay low for a little bit.
To the extent that Harvard's reputation could possibly get any worse, you don't want to contribute to that decline.
You don't want to have a new round of media scrutiny of Harvard, along with all the jokes and mockery that all that inevitably entails.
But Harvard's students are taking a very different approach.
They are evidently committed to decolonizing Harvard, by which I mean completely destroying it and leaving nothing behind whatsoever.
Which, you know, fine, if that's what they want to do.
That's the leading theory at the moment for why Harvard student newspaper, the Harvard Crimson, just ran this headline.
Quote, more than 30 Harvard students hunger strike for 12 hours in solidarity with Brown protesters.
That's right, we're told that more than 30 Harvard students did not eat for a grand total of 12 hours.
Outside of Harvard, you know, this is called skipping lunch or, like, eating a late breakfast.
And some people have joked that this is just intermittent fasting, really.
But the truth is, it's not even that.
Intermittent fasting usually involves going without a meal for longer than 12 hours.
It could be 16 hours or longer than that.
So, this is a hunger strike that doesn't quite rise to the level of fasting for weight loss.
Yet, even still, at Harvard, this is a breathtaking act of solidarity with the deeply oppressed students at another Ivy League university, Brown, where the cost of attendance is more than $80,000 a year.
You know, we're all supposed to be very impressed that these Harvard students claim that they didn't eat three square meals for one day.
And we're supposed to be very inspirational to those other Ivy League students who were also on a hunger strike.
Now, here's how the story in The Crimson covers the strike.
Quote, more than 30 pro-Palestinian Harvard students participated in a 12-hour hunger strike Friday in solidarity with 17 students at Brown University who refused to eat for eight days to pressure the Brown Corporation to divest from Israel.
Of course, it's not in my nature to be cynical in any way, as you know, but even so, this paragraph did raise my eyebrows a little bit.
According to the Harvard Crimson, 17 students at Brown didn't eat for eight days because they're mad at Israel or whatever.
Admittedly, not eating for eight days, that's impressive.
That's more impressive than skipping one meal.
Eight days, that's legit.
That's a legit hunger strike.
We're not talking about skipping a meal.
We're talking about a real fast.
But, of course, we don't have any proof that this actually happened.
It's just a claim that the Brown students are making, which means it's almost certainly a lie.
I mean, obviously, anyone can just claim that they've been hunger striking for eight days.
I can tell you right now that I've been on a hunger strike since last April.
You can't prove me wrong, unless you happen to be behind me in line at Chipotle last night.
But the rest of you can't prove it.
Even so, I do love the idea of these Harvard students joining an alleged 8-day hunger strike in solidarity, but only maintaining their solidarity strike for 12 hours.
They skip lunch while these other students are supposedly starving themselves.
So it's like if somebody is self-immolating as an act of protest.
They're setting themselves on fire.
And you go up and stand next to them and say, I stand with you in solidarity.
And then you give yourself, I don't know, a mild burn by dipping your pinky finger in hot tea.
It's the thought that counts, I suppose, but probably would have been better to just do nothing at that point.
And what about those students at Brown?
How did their strike end?
Well, here's what the Crimson article says.
Quote, 19 students at Brown began the strike, which was originally indefinite, on February 2nd, ahead of the Brown Corporation's planned meetings beginning February 8th.
The students intended to strike until the Brown Corporation considered a resolution to divest from companies which profit from human rights abuses in Palestine, but they ended the strike after Brown University President Christina H. Paxson denied their request, citing now obsolete demands.
That's a little embarrassing.
They starved themselves for eight days in order to force Brown University to comply with their demands, but then Brown University just said, uh, nah, sorry, no.
And so they ended it awkwardly.
The article continues, the 17 students ended their strike at 5 p.m.
on February 9, along with Harvard demonstrators and more than 200 other Brown students who fasted for 32 hours in solidarity.
Quote, to send solidarity to Brown Divest Coalition for their incredible hunger strike, 30-plus Harvard students committed to a day-long hunger strike to prove to university corporations that we will not back down, the Harvard undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Coalition wrote in an Instagram post on Friday.
So they wanted to prove they wouldn't back down, but of course they did back down.
This is one of the problems with a hunger strike, because if you're not prepared to go all the way, if you aren't ready to actually starve yourself to death, then the whole thing is meaningless.
Because then your threat is not, well you all better do what I want or I'm going to die, which even that threat is not, I mean that's not the best leverage to use against somebody.
You're threatening, you know, that's your own peril.
You're putting yourself at peril, in peril, to try to get someone else to do something.
And I think very often the other person's going to say, well, okay, I mean, I hope you don't starve yourself to death, but that's your choice.
It's not going to affect what I do.
That's not even the threat.
Instead, the threat is, y'all better do what I want, or else I'm going to have to end this protest without getting any concessions, and then I'll be really embarrassed.
You better do what I want, or I'm going to be very embarrassed.
I'm not sure why either blackmail strategy should be successful, but the second one is especially impotent.
Now, granted, to be completely fair, by the standards of left-wing activists, 12 hours is still pretty impressive.
You may remember last summer when a Texas congressman named Greg Kassar made the bold decision to go on an eight-hour thirst strike in protest of an alleged law in Texas that was eliminating water breaks for construction workers.
And I think we talked about this at the time, but it was a lot of fun.
Let's just revisit that episode again.
Congressman Greg Kazar is holding the first strike for workers' rights on the steps of the U.S.
Capitol.
I'm on first strike all day today, meaning no food, no water, and no breaks off the Capitol steps in the sun and in the rain to push back against Governor Abbott taking water breaks away from Texas workers in this historic heat wave.
The Austin area congressman wants OSHA to establish federally mandated heat protections for workers.
We call on and push the Biden administration to solve this once and for all and put in a federal heat standard.
Kassar was joined in Washington D.C.
by union leaders from Texas and across the country.
Now, politically, this eight-hour thirst strike didn't accomplish anything, but it did give us this enduring image of a pained Greg Kassar getting his vitals checked by a nurse on the Capitol steps, which was a lot of fun.
And this is a photo that the congressman tweeted out, by the way.
He was proud of this moment.
He was proud he went eight hours without drinking water, something that nobody has ever done, except for when everyone in the world does it every night while they're sleeping.
But if it wasn't for the fact that, you know, this was the least impressive political demonstration of all time, it would actually be pretty impressive.
Not that it matters, by the way, but the reason for Greg Kassar's strike was totally fabricated, obviously.
And you should know that without even looking into it.
Texas did not pass a law eliminating water breaks.
Why would they do that?
If you really see your political opponents as actual cartoon villains, then maybe you would believe that.
But they didn't.
In fact, they didn't pass a law that says anything about water breaks at all.
So the whole thing was completely made up.
But that's okay, because Greg Kassar's water strike wasn't about the non-existent law.
It was about Greg Kassar.
It was an opportunity for him to virtue signal, which is, of course, the primary motivating factor behind virtually all left-wing activism.
