Ep. 1766 - The Return Of Wokeness? Amazon BANNING Books Is Just The Start
Matt Walsh critiques Amazon's selective book bans while defending James Carville and Ketanji Brown Jackson against Democratic political maneuvering. He condemns reliance on foreign labor for Idaho farms and rebuts Brandon Straka's insults regarding conservative views on surrogacy. The host then champions restaurant policies banning phones to restore family connection, arguing smartphones create an oppressive "on-call" mentality that destroys communal dining. Finally, he asserts Confederate traitors like Jefferson Davis should not be honored in the Capitol, contrasting their actions with Robert E. Lee's military genius and honor. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Survival Tax and Gerrymandering00:14:43
Let's be honest, the cost of living isn't just high, it's exhausting.
If you've been leaning on credit cards lately just to cover the basics like groceries, gas, and utility bills, you're essentially paying a survival tax of 20% interest or more.
Why keep handing your hard earned paycheck to big banks when you could keep it for your own family?
My friends at American Financing have a better way.
They're helping homeowners tap into their equity to pay off high interest debt with mortgage rates currently in the fives.
On average, American Financing is saving their customers $800 a month.
That's nearly $10,000 a year back in your pocket.
It's not just a loan, it's a total financial reset.
It takes just 10 minutes to find out what you could save.
There are no upfront fees and no obligation to talk to a salary based mortgage consultant.
Here's the kicker start today and you could even delay two mortgage payments.
American Financing, America's Home for Home Loans, 866 569 4711.
That's 866 569 4711.
Or visit AmericanFinancing.net slash Walsh.
A few weeks ago, I briefly talked about a book called The Camp of the Saints.
It's a dystopian novel by a French author that was first published in the 1970s.
And the Camp of the Saints is unlike every dystopian novel that's taught in schools because the villain of the story, in this case, is not the surveillance state or fascism or anything like that.
Instead, the primary threat in the Camp of the Saints is a massive migrant horde from the third world.
It's a book that was banned and censored relentlessly upon its release for obvious reasons.
You're not supposed to see foreign invaders as a threat, and you're certainly not supposed to mock the naive Westerners who want to open the borders, which the book.
Invites you to do, invites you to mock them.
And now that many Western countries have been overwhelmed with foreigners, The Camp of the Saints isn't really even a dystopian novel anymore.
It's more like a lightly fictionalized version of real life, which makes it even more depressing.
Your universe has no meaning to them, one passage from the book reads.
They will not try to understand.
They will be tired.
They will be cold.
They will make a fire with your beautiful oak doors.
It's a passage from the book, which again rings very true these days.
Now, after I mentioned the book on the show, it moved quickly to the top of the Amazon's bestsellers list.
The publisher, a small outfit called Valbin Books, was thrilled, as you might expect.
They invested a lot of time and money into translating a definitive edition of the book.
Their goal was making it accessible and affordable after every other publisher had dropped it.
And indeed, it was catching on.
Various conservative commentators were praising the novel on social media.
Have been for a while.
The reviews were almost universally positive with a 4.8 star rating on Amazon, which controls about 50% of the physical book market.
And then about 24 hours ago, the book simply disappeared from Amazon entirely without any explanation.
If you tried to navigate to the latest edition of The Camp of the Saints, here is what you would see on the website.
There was no indication of what happened, only that the webpage was down for some unknown reason.
It was unavailable for most of the day yesterday.
Only the older out of print versions, the ones that cost more than $100 in most cases, were available for purchase.
But the affordable definitive edition of The Camp of the Saints was simply deleted from Amazon.
And predictably, none of the leftists who claimed to care about banned books, including politicians like Gavin Newsom, said a word about it.
According to the publisher, Valbin Books, Amazon specifically claimed that the novel violated their offensive content policy.
Amazon told the publisher that, according to the publisher, that it had reviewed the book's content and believed that it was unacceptable.
But again, they didn't elaborate on that.
Apparently, it's not enough for every public school to ignore the camp of the saints.
It's not enough for the media to call you a racist if you read it.
Amazon evidently believes that the only solution is to erase the book from its shelves entirely.
It's just too offensive.
Now, at the same time, if you're looking to pick up a copy of You know, Mein Kampf, that's no problem on Amazon.
You can buy that.
You can see the store page right there.
Amazon will happily sell you the Essential Mein Kampf, a new English translation of the classic work by Adolf Hitler, one of the most consequential leaders in world history, as it says in the description.
So you can still buy that.
And of course, Amazon will sell you all kinds of deranged left wing propaganda, thousands of books like this one called My Child is Trans.
Now what?
A Joy Centered Approach to Support.
So, it's not offensive to encourage parents to mutilate and castrate their children in the name of gender ideology.
The Red Line apparently is a fictional book about mass migration from third world countries like India in particular, which is what the Camp of the Saints is about.
The Great Replacement is their red line.
You can't talk about that.
They'll tolerate Hitler's book, probably because it's a historical document.
They'll tolerate child mutilation, obviously, because they agree with it.
But they definitely won't tolerate a contemporary, highly accurate portrayal of Western decline and the people who enable it.
That's simply unacceptable to these people.
Now, we reached out to the editor of Valbin Books, the publisher, to see if we might be missing something.
We asked him what, if anything, Amazon could have possibly been referring to.
And he told us that yes, the migrant horde, consisting of a million foreigners, is indeed depicted in unflattering terms, but there are several non white characters who are depicted as nuanced and cultured individuals or even heroes, including the Indian government minister, as well as a fully integrated French national of Indian origin who joins the remnants of France's state and military in putting up a last stand against the invasion at the book's end.
So, as a factual matter, this is not a book that argues that Indians or people from the third world generally are all fundamentally inferior or anything along those lines.
Instead, to quote the editor, the intent of the author was never to slight the Indians or migrants, instead, it was to warn of attitudes common in his era.
And our own that would necessarily lead to demographic submersion should such masses of people ever appear on Western shores, quoting from the publisher.
Of course, if you actually read the book, you'd recognize all this.
So, the goal of Amazon and the left in general is to make sure you can't actually read the book.
They'll just tell you that it's offensive, and that's the version you'll get, and that's it.
And that brings us to an issue that's much larger than this one book.
Make no mistake about it, the censorship of the Camp of the Saints is a clear signal of the left's intent.
Should they ever Take power again.
They haven't undergone a change of heart, even after their campaign of lawfare failed and Trump won the popular vote and returned to office.
They're not going to moderate their psychopathic drive for power, and they won't hesitate to punish their political enemies.
They will intimidate, censor, and destroy conservatives at every opportunity.
Now, in the case of the Camp of the Saints, the hit job was fairly well organized.
A few weeks ago, a political operative for the French paper Les Mondes wrote a lengthy article about the influence of the Camp of the Saints.
In the Trump administration specifically.
The article was translated into English.
And then shortly afterwards, just one day before Amazon pulled the book, New York Magazine ran an article entitled, Why Orban's Loss Was So Devastating for the New Right.
And it made the same arguments as the Le Monde article.
It was clear the author either hadn't read the book or wasn't remotely interested in portraying it fairly.
The article just regurgitated the same old talking points about the novel without any context.
And the point was to give Amazon a pretext.
To delete the book.
And Amazon got the message, and that's what they did.
So we're very familiar with this kind of campaign.
We've seen it play out many times, and it's still going on.
But in this case, too many people noticed what was happening.
So late last night, after sustained outrage from conservatives and social media, Amazon relented.
They created a new listing so that people can once again purchase the physical edition of The Camp of the Saints, which you should do if you haven't read the book.
And then around midnight, Amazon finally replied to my producers after delaying the response for several hours.
Amazon claimed that some kind of error had caused the book to be taken down.
They didn't explain why they told the publisher a completely different story.
Nor did they elaborate on the nature of this error and why it only affected this one book, which is kind of strange.
That's a heck of a coincidence.
I mean, you have a coordinated campaign by the media to explain why this book is offensive.
And then the next day, there's an error that erases the books from the website.
What a coincidence.
So it's obvious they didn't expect the backlash.
And that's why they offer no actual explanation for anything they did.
And therefore, there's no doubt that they're going to try this kind of censorship again and soon.
Amazon got ahead of itself here, but they're absolutely going to continue censoring wrong think as soon as they feel like the political winds have shifted.
This is how Democrats are going to operate the moment they return to power.
We've already talked about their Project 2029, which has been endorsed by J.B. Pritzker in Illinois.
The idea is to imprison everyone who's upset the Democrat Party, including ICE officers who are lawfully enforcing immigration law.
And on top of that, Democrats are now openly floating the idea of granting statehood to D.C. And Puerto Rico for the purpose of gaining more representation in the Senate so they can pack the Supreme Court.
This is James Carvel's latest rant.
Watch.
The Democrats win the presidency in both houses of Congress.
I think on day one, they should make Puerto Rico, D.C., a state, and they should expand the Supreme Court to 13.
Eat our dust.
They've done everything they could that they held up to the 2000 election.
They stole it.
They've stolen Supreme Court seats.
They've gerrymandered everything that you can, and the only way to fight.
This is don't run on it, don't talk about it, just do it.
She's okay, we got 54 senators and we got 13 court members.
Thank you, goodbye.
Because you're not going to get a fast shake any kind of way in this system.
18% of the United States elects 52 senators.
Well, you're not going to make it equitable, but you'll make it better by adding Puerto Rico and D.C. Don't run on it, don't talk about it, just do it.
So he wants them to keep a secret as he says the entire plan out loud.
And meanwhile, you have Republicans who are refusing to pass the SAVE Act.
Because they wouldn't want to disrespect the hallowed traditions of the Senate.
While Republicans are hiding behind the rules as an excuse for their complete failure to do anything productive, Democrats are planning to simply ignore the rules and remake our entire system of government so that Republicans can never hold power again, which a lot of Republicans don't even want to hold power.
That's very clear now.
Now, it's worth paying attention to just how flimsy his justification is.
Carville says that Republicans have gerrymandered everything.
That's his rationale for why Democrats should transform the country into a one party authoritarian state.
And he's making this argument at precisely the same moment that Democrats in Virginia are trying to redraw their congressional maps so that they have a permanent 10 to 1 advantage.
There's a vote on that today.
This is a state where 46% of the voters supported Donald Trump in the most recent election.
Pretty soon, 90% of the congressional seats will belong to Democrats.
And of course, Many other Democrat run states already work like this.
California's congressional delegation is around 18% Republican, even though Trump won nearly 40% of the vote in the last election in the state.
43% of voters in Illinois supported Trump, but only 17% of the congressional delegation is conservative, and on and on and on.
But Carville simply doesn't care about any of this.
He also doesn't care about the rampant anti white gerrymandering that was mandated under the Voting Rights Act, which Has allowed Democrats to effectively steal more than a dozen congressional seats.
Instead, Carville's goal is to manufacture a narrative that sounds persuasive enough to most Democrat voters, which isn't exactly difficult.
Now, if you're tempted to dismiss Carville as an irrelevant old hack, which he is, you need to realize that Democrats at the highest levels are saying basically the same thing.
They're repeating the same deranged argument about gerrymandering, which they plan to use as a justification to do whatever they want.
Watch.
And we're urging everyone to vote yes to stop the MAGA power grab.
And the voters of Virginia have an opportunity to ensure that there's a fair national congressional map.
Because we believe that it's the voters of Virginia and the people of this country who should decide which party is in the majority in the aftermath of the midterm elections, not Donald Trump and his extreme.
MAGA sycophants in state legislative bodies across the country who were ordered by Donald Trump to gerrymander the national congressional map as part of their effort to rig the midterm elections.
This effort has failed because Democrats haven't stepped back.
We fought back.
The constant hand motions, the can talking points, the complete lack of charisma none of it matters to Democrats because they don't want people who can think.
Don't want intellectual arguments.
They want craven, simple minded leaders who will destroy the Republican Party.
That's what Democrat voters are looking for.
As long as you're advancing their political interests, Democrats simply don't care about the logic you use or lack thereof.
And nowhere is that more obvious than the Supreme Court.
We've talked a lot about Kentonji Brown Jackson, but it really needs to be emphasized that in every single case, she disregards the law and votes based on what Democrats want.
The most recent example came down yesterday in an opinion where Kentonji Brown Jackson wrote a dissent all by herself, no one else joined it.
There were no other dissents either.
Brown Jackson Dissent Explained00:03:33
So here's a quick rundown of the facts of the case to set the scene.
Let's all play Supreme Court justice for a moment to see if we're as dumb as Kintanji Brown Jackson.
The case was about a Washington, D.C. police officer who got a dispatch call to check out a suspicious vehicle at a specific address in the middle of a winter night.
This is from yesterday's opinion.
Quote Officer Vanterpool reached the apartment building at that address around 2 a.m.
As he turned his marked police vehicle into the parking lot, he saw two people immediately flee from a car unprovoked after police had not done anything other than simply pull up.
The runners left open at least one of the car doors.
The driver then began to back out of the parking space, rear door still open.
Officer Vanderpool decided to investigate.
He parked directly behind the car, left his own vehicle, ordered the driver to put his hands up, and drew his service weapon.
And, Dino, it turned out that the car, of course, was stolen.
Now, under these circumstances, maybe we have some police officers in the audience.
Do you believe that the police officer had a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity was taking place when he ordered the driver to put his hands up?
That's the standard here because this wasn't an arrest, it was just a stop.
It's an extremely low standard.
And you might think, well, yeah, of course, there's reasonable suspicion that some crime may have occurred here.
Running away from the police suggests that you committed a crime.
It's not a thing that people who have not committed crimes generally do.
And if you're in a car and your friends run away when the police pull up, the appropriate response is to stay in the car.
On the other hand, if you start backing out with the door open, then it's reasonable to think.
That you're involved in criminal activity.
By itself, it's a crime to drive a car with the door open.
It's completely reasonable for the officer to conduct a traffic stop and ask you some questions in those circumstances.
He's not arresting you, he's just detaining you.
And somehow, though, Kataji Brown Jackson disagreed.
She accused her colleagues on the court of wordsmithing, as in they used words that she didn't like.
That's the level of legal analysis this woman is capable of.
Democrats aren't ashamed of this.
They aren't bothered by the fact that they picked a Supreme Court justice on the basis of race and gender, and shockingly enough, she turned out to be a complete moron.
All they care about is that they managed to place a true believer on the Supreme Court.
They have a committed activist on the bench.
And given the opportunity, they'll put 10 more Kentonji Brown Jacksons on the court.
Once they have a compliant Supreme Court, there's nothing stopping Democrats from carrying out the campaign of lawfare and political violence that they're already planning and already engaging in to a large extent.
Now, Republicans can take action now to prevent this.
Kind of thing from happening.
We could have three new young Supreme Court justices if the oldest Republicans on the bench retired right now.
Additionally, we could abolish the filibuster and pass the Save Act, which would do more to secure the future of this country than any other piece of legislation, hands down.
We could abolish D.C. entirely and return it to Maryland so the Democrats can't turn it into a separate state.
We could cut all ties with Puerto Rico and make them independent for the same reason.
Now, would this guarantee the Democrats can't pack the court?
No, it won't.
But it would make it much, much harder to do because they'd have a much more difficult time rigging elections and adding more Senate seats.
Harder to Rig Elections00:03:19
So it's worth trying.
I mean, it's something.
But the particular policies don't actually matter.
At this point, we just need to see something.
Anything from Republicans that suggests they understand what's coming.
Right now, if there's enough outrage on social media, we can get companies like Amazon to back off.
But if these people take control of the government, complaining isn't going to fix the problem.
By that point, no institution in this country, whether it's Amazon or the US Supreme Court, will even pretend to care what conservatives think.
They certainly won't pretend to care about John Thune's respect for traditions of the Senate or whatever.
They will care about one thing and one thing only power.
And they will destroy everyone who is too weak to stand in their way.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Most guys are told they have to choose either look sharp or be comfortable.
Thankfully, that's just not true anymore.
Our sponsor, Mack Weldon, is here, and they're bringing you the best elevated basics on the market.
They make classic, understated pieces that actually feel good to wear.
No flash, no nonsense, just clean lines of performance materials that do what they're supposed to do.
Take their ACE collection.
These are sweatpants, hoodies, even blazers that look perfectly put together, but feel like you never left the couch.
It's comfort upgraded.
They've truly taken the basics and made them better.
Stretch twill chinos that look tailored, but Feel effortless and button ups that last from your first cup of coffee to an evening out without missing a beat.
Upgrade your wardrobe with pieces that are built to last and designed to impress.
So, if you'd prefer to look like you've got it together without overthinking it, Mac Weldon is a pretty smart place to start.
Get moving with Mac Weldon.
Comfortable anywhere.
Go to macweldon.com and get 20% off your first order of $125 more with promo code WALSH.
That's M A C K W E L D O N.com.
Code WALSH.
Apparently, getting a decent night's sleep now requires adding 100 useless things to your bed.
You need the right pillow, the right gadget, the right app to track how poorly you're sleeping.
It's all very scientific and very exhausting.
Guess what?
You probably don't need any of it.
All you need is a solid pair of sheets and bedding, but you don't always realize how bad your box store sheets have gotten until you finally replace them.
That's why you need to upgrade to our sponsor, Bowl Branch.
If your sheets are pilling, thinning, slipping off the mattress, or making you overheat at night, that's your sign.
Bowl Branch's signature sheets are made from 100% organic cotton.
And they're actually designed to hold their shape, stay breathable, and feel luxuriously soft night after night.
You'll fall asleep faster, stay comfortable all night long, and notice the difference the moment you get into bed.
My wife and I have had their signature sheets on our bed for a while now, and they're really worth it.
I was skeptical of the idea that they would get softer with every wash, but time has proved me wrong.
They really are phenomenal quality and comfort combined.
Plus, they don't wear out instantly like box store sheets do.
Upgrade your sleep with Bowl and Branch.
Get 15% off your first order, plus free shipping at bullandbranch.comslash Walsh with code Walsh.
That's Boland Branch, B O L L A N D Branch.com slash Walsh, code Walsh, to unlock 15% off exclusions apply.
Farm Labor Wage Reality00:14:12
Let's start in Idaho, where incidentally, I will be next week with Michael Knowles at the University of Idaho on Tuesday for Turning Point.
Also, incidentally, Idaho is one of the remaining two U.S. states that I have not yet visited, so I'll get to cross that off the list.
And then I just need to get out to Hawaii, and I'll have all 50 states.
And then maybe I can finally give my definitive ranking of U.S. states from worst to best.
I have a pretty clear idea of it already.
I don't actually need to go to those two states to do it.
I certainly know that my bottom five are New Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey, New Jersey, and New Jersey.
So those are the bottom five.
And then we got to figure out everything else.
Anyway, so back to Idaho, where the local news gives us this profile of a struggling farmer, which is supposed to make us feel bad about deporting illegal immigrants.
It's because the farmer is struggling because there are no illegal immigrants to hire for slave wages.
That's the gist of it.
I don't mean to spoil it, but here it is.
Watch.
It's been a tough year for Idaho farmers.
Less water, higher fuel prices, and now fewer workers in the fields.
I'm your Mountain Home neighborhood reporter, Sahana Patel, speaking with a local farmer who says crackdowns on immigration enforcement has made it much harder to find help.
It's just been harder and harder and harder to find those people to work.
Bethany Gotz owns Quay's Farm in Mountain Home.
A 500 acre family operation she took over after her father passed away.
But now, with fewer workers, a lot of the manual labor is left up to her.
She tells me she's tried hiring locally, but it's been difficult to find people willing to do the hard work.
Finding a legal American here that is going to work as hard as an immigrant is nearly impossible, and I don't know how to say that kindly or well.
She even posted job openings on Facebook, but says interest dropped quickly.
I had seven people contact me about it, and when I sent them the description, I had no people respond.
Gott says the increase in immigration enforcement has made it harder to find migrant workers.
The community has definitely been on edge around here, and it's just heartbreaking because they are living in fear here.
She says hiring undocumented workers is not an option with serious risks for both sides.
The repercussions are too bad because, one, you're going to get fined.
You're going to, you have a, unfortunately, an employee living in fear, and I don't blame them, but.
They could get picked up at any moment, and then you're without an employee.
To keep her farm running, GOTS is hiring high schoolers and is now looking into the federal H 2A visa program, which allows temporary agricultural workers into the U.S.
This year, I have endeavored to spend $200,000 to build a small, small worker housing.
Okay, so she's building, and we see the housing that she's building.
So she's building a small shack to house foreign third world labor so they can work for dirt cheap on her farm.
Where have I, what does that remind you of?
Where have you heard, stop me if you've heard this one before.
You're going to build a shack and then bring in workers from the third world to work your farm.
What does that remind you of?
I mean, it's actual slave labor.
I mean, that's, that's, or, you know, she's trying to run an old school plantation, basically.
At least it's as close to slave labor as you can get these days under the law.
And it's facilitated by, in this case now, she wants to facilitate it by these visas for agricultural workers, which is a thing that should not exist, should not be allowed.
That's totally absurd.
I mean, it's one thing to claim that we need to allow special visas for highly skilled workers.
And I'm also opposed to that, by the way.
I think we have plenty of highly skilled people here.
And if you want highly skilled workers, you should hire American workers.
But it's even more ridiculous to claim that we need visas for people whose specialty is what?
Picking fruit off of trees?
I mean, you don't even have the pretense in that case that, well, we need the best of the best.
And it just so happens that, you know, we don't have the best year.
We got to go to Asia or something.
That's the pretense when you hear about, well, we need highly skilled workers.
And it's totally bogus.
But in this case, you don't even have that pretense.
Look, wait, you got to go 10,000 miles away to find someone who can.
Pick fruit.
And this is why I have no sympathy for this woman at all.
I got to tell you.
I have no sympathy.
I mean, I have all the respect in the world for farmers generally.
We need farmers.
But for this woman, no sympathy.
And, you know, as I've been talking about this, you hear from some people say, well, the farmers are the backbone.
We shouldn't be criticized.
Okay.
Yeah, no, we're allowed to criticize her.
Like, there's no profession you can have that puts you above criticism.
Sorry.
She's whining because she can't import cheap third world slave labor.
That's what she's whining about.
And we're supposed to feel bad for her?
So she can't find Americans willing to do the job.
Well, here's an idea.
Here's an idea.
Here's a crazy idea, okay?
Pay the Americans a fair wage, and then maybe they'll work for you.
If you have a job and you're having trouble finding people who are willing to do it, The first thing I would look at is the wage you're offering.
That might be the problem.
It's not that Americans won't work on a farm.
Does anyone really believe that?
Does anyone really believe that there are no Americans in Idaho who are willing to do this kind of work?
No, it's that they don't want to work on a farm for the amount of money that you're paying them.
And that makes sense.
Okay, because if I'm looking for a job, And I can choose between monotonous physical labor with long hours on the one hand and a job that's much easier with maybe shorter hours and pays more or even the same.
I'm going to choose the latter.
Obviously, that's not laziness.
It's like no one is born with an obligation, with some calling, some obligation to go work on your farm.
You have to convince them that that's the best option for them.
And if they have another option where it's like, okay, I get to be in air conditioning and the hours are shorter, it's not as demanding, I'm sitting down for part of it, like whatever, and the money is the same or even better, of course I'm going to take that.
Why wouldn't I take that?
Easier job for more money.
Huh.
I could do a harder job for less or an easier job for more.
Which one am I going to go with?
Anyone in their right mind would take the job.
Now, the only way you take the harder job for less money is if you're really passionate about it specifically, or if you see it as a stepping stone into a career.
I mean, there are cases where it makes sense actually to take the job for less money that's harder.
If that's the case, if like you're passionate about it, you want this to be your career.
But menial farm labor probably isn't going to be a stepping stone into a career.
I mean, it could be, but it probably isn't.
And it's not something that most people are especially passionate about.
So you take the job that pays more in that case.
Now, how much is this woman willing to pay?
And well, there's, so this is circulating online.
As far as I know, it's legitimate.
I'm not exactly sure, but according to this listing, if it's accurate, which is purportedly the listing for the job on the farm that she's trying to fill.
She's offering up to $3,000 a month, which, if you do the math, that's $36,000 a year.
And there are no hours listed.
So we can assume that this is probably a job that will be more than 40 hours a week.
If it was just 40 hours a week, it's probably more.
If it was just 40 hours a week, that's $17 an hour.
If it's, say, 50 hours a week, seems more likely, then the wage would be like $13 an hour.
Now, to put that into perspective, And I looked this up.
The starting full time wage at Chick fil A, just for example, is usually like 16 bucks an hour.
So that's more, or at best, basically the same as what this woman wants to pay for farm laborers.
But Chick fil A is a much less demanding job.
And honestly, it's more likely to become a career opportunity between the two.
Of course, I'm not saying that there are no careers in agriculture.
I'm just saying that menial farm labor is not itself a career, and the path to a career from there is not very wide.
Now, go to Chick fil A, be punctual and competent, and you could be a shift manager very quickly.
You could move from there to an assistant manager, eventually a general manager, and they get paid like double what this woman is offering for her job.
A job which, by the way, also on the listing, it says that it requires two to five years of experience.
Now, so that's the problem here you're not paying a fair wage.
And you can find low skilled third world workers who don't even speak English and have no other prospects and can't do anything else.
And yeah, they'll take that job.
For them, it's a lot of money.
And that's why you want those workers here.
But that's not a sympathetic story for Americans.
And look, I'm on the record many times saying that I think the minimum wage is a retarded concept.
The government arbitrarily mandating a living wage, quote unquote, is ridiculous and counterproductive.
But I still think people should be paid a fair and decent wage.
I think that they should be paid that.
I don't want bureaucrats mandating it because that creates far more problems than it solves.
In my view.
But in this case, I'm not calling on the government to force this woman to pay her workers a decent wage.
She can pay whatever she wants.
What I'm saying is that she has the option to pay a decent wage and then she'll be able to attract workers.
So I believe that companies should be able to pay whatever they want and then you can choose to take the job or not.
But they should be required to only choose from a pool of actual American citizens.
And within that pool, as far as what the wage is, well, the market determines that.
But you can't really talk about how the market determines the wage if that is a fair concept if we're talking about America and Americans.
In that context, the market determines the wage.
But if the context is the entire world, and now you have Americans who have to compete for even these kinds of jobs with the entire third world, And people who will take any job, well, that's not obviously not fair.
And look, if she doesn't want to do that, if the only option that she wants is to hire foreign slave labor, well, then guess what?
Your farm doesn't deserve to exist.
I mean, it's that simple, really.
If you can't keep your operation running, By paying Americans a fair wage, then your operation should not exist.
Whatever the operation is, it's a farm, it's a restaurant, whatever it is, I don't care.
It's a gas station, it's a retail store, whatever it is.
If you can't keep it running by hiring and paying Americans, then it shouldn't exist.
It should not exist in America.
Go take it somewhere else.
That's an option, too.
How about that?
Lady, you want to have a farm and only hire third worlders?
Move to the third world.
Take your farm to the third world.
Start farming there.
If that's all you want to do.
So, when you hear from these business owners and say, Well, what am I supposed to do?
I can't stay open if I can't hire third worlders.
If I can't flood my community with invaders and hire only them, then I can't stay open.
Well, then I guess you shouldn't be open.
I don't know.
I guess your business should not be open in that case.
Or find a way to make it work because I'm sure you can.
No, you just prefer to hire the third world immigrants.
Because it's cheaper for you.
That's it.
You prefer that.
It's a lot easier.
But you don't need to.
Conservative Movement Decline00:11:02
You don't need to be Abraham Lincoln at Gettysburg or Winston Churchill rallying a nation to make a powerful point.
You just need to know how to use your words.
The truth is, language is one of the best tools we have.
And when you learn to wield it well, it can move minds, shape culture, and even change history.
If you ever wanted to sharpen your ability to think clearly, speak persuasively, and argue with precision rather than passion, Hillsdale College has you covered with their brand new course, Classical Logic and Rhetoric.
One of their professors is leading this completely free online course that walks you through the tools of sound reasoning and rhetoric, the same skills that form the backbone of every good debate and every civilized society.
It's easy to access, and once you're in, you'll find Hillsdale offers over 40 other courses for free on everything from the book of Genesis to how the Allies won World War II, the rise and fall of the Roman Republic, the American founding.
And the Constitution.
And in short, it's a rare opportunity to actually learn to deepen your understanding of truth and history and the ideas that make the West worth defending in the first place.
In an age when universities push ideology instead of truth, Hillsdale still teaches what actually matters faith, reason, and the foundations of liberty.
Their free courses don't just act as lectures, they're also an antidote to the cultural decay peddled by modern academia.
If you care about preserving truth and reclaiming common sense like I do, sign up.
It's time to start thinking clearly again.
Go right now to hillsdale.edu slash walsh to enroll.
There's no cost.
It's easy to get started.
That's hillsdale.edu slash walsh to enroll for free.
Okay, here's something I wanted to quickly mention.
Yesterday, we talked about the issue of gay surrogacy relating to the homosexual country music guy who purchased a baby and is now using the child for content.
And by the way, here's another horrifying video from this guy, Mac Anally, which again is his real name.
Somehow that's his actual name.
I guess it's kind of a self fulfilling prophecy.
Your name is Mac Anally and now you're gay.
But anyway, here's another video that's making the rounds.
Watch this.
Who yells the loudest?
Who says yes the most?
Who's the best dancer?
Who's hornier?
Who's richest?
Who is on their phone the most?
So, another video that Shane McAinally took and recorded, posted himself, hideously disgusting, talking about being horny in front of your kids is just revolting.
And there are a ton of videos like this, proudly shared by Mr. McAinally.
And so, I was talking about this issue on X, where I said that surrogacy for gays should be banned, and also all surrogacy for everybody should be banned as well.
It shouldn't be legal to purchase children, and that shouldn't be a controversial opinion.
And I got a response from a lot of people, including this guy, somebody named Brandon Straka.
And he's one of those former liberal guys.
He's, I think, openly gay, New York leftist, who a few years ago decided to leave the left.
And he started a walkaway campaign encouraging other liberals to leave liberalism behind, right?
So he's one of those guys.
And which, on the surface, all that is.
Or at least most of that is good.
I mean, leaving the left and encouraging others to do the same, that part, good.
I'm in favor of that.
And yet, he's been very upset by all the conservatives speaking out against gay parenthood and surrogacy generally.
And he posted this in reply to me, unprovoked.
I wasn't talking to him.
I don't know this guy.
But he posted this.
He said, About once a year or so, like Groundhog Day, the right has to go full retard for a couple days and do a factory reset back to 1992.
Within about seven days, these systems reboot and we enjoy many uninterrupted months of normalcy until the next retard reset.
It's a beautiful and natural part of our fragile ecosystem.
So, what he's saying in this snide way is that when I say that surrogacy is bad and that letting gay men buy babies is bad, I'm going, quote, full retard.
That's retarded.
It's like 1992 because to him, 1992 is the dark ages.
Right?
The conservatives of 1992 were all a bunch of absurdly backwards, primitive bigots.
That's how he sees it.
What he doesn't understand is that actually, and that's why it's always funny when people do this.
So, you sound like people in the 90s.
Well, social conservatives of 1992 were right about literally everything.
Every single thing.
They have been vindicated on every imaginable point.
Prove me wrong.
Point to one point or position that social conservatives in the early 90s took, generally, that they were proven to be wrong about.
Can you point to one?
What were they wrong about?
I mean, gay marriage, abortion, pornography, Hollywood, the public school system, you name it.
They were right about everything.
But Brandon doesn't understand that because he just showed up to conservatism very recently.
And this is the point I want to make, not to pick on this guy in particular.
Like I said, I don't really know him.
I don't know him at all.
But I got to just tell you, I'm getting very, very sick of these former liberal types.
Showing up to conservatism and then 10 seconds later trying to set the ground rules for us.
You know, showing up to the party way late and then trying to issue instructions.
These former liberals who show up and say, no, no, no, no, I'm here now and this is the way it's going to be.
All right.
Trying to set up guardrails.
I mean, this has been the story of the conservative movement for the past decade.
It's been a big problem for at least a decade now.
Where we've been overrun by leftists who allegedly left the left, and then they come here and they try to drag conservatism over to the left.
Well, here's a thought.
If you are this hostile, if you have this kind of contempt for the basic tenets of conservatism, if conservatives advocating for the family and for marriage, as we've done for decades, somehow offend you, makes you angry.
Reduces you to calling us retards, then might I suggest that you didn't actually leave the left.
You're still very much a part of it.
And let me also suggest that if you were a member of the radical left and by your own admission, wrong about everything until very recently, then consider the possibility that you might also be wrong about this.
For the same reason you were wrong about all the other things.
Okay, the fundamental premise that you built your whole worldview on was wrong.
You've admitted that.
Thank you for admitting it.
But your attachment to something like gay surrogacy, you think maybe that's part of that fundamental premise that you actually have not let go of?
That's what blows my mind about these people.
They say, hey, I was wrong in my entire worldview, wrong about everything for years.
But I'm definitely not wrong when I say that gay parenthood is okay and abortion is okay up to a point and whatever.
It's like, did you actually learn anything?
Have you actually disavowed the fundamental premise of liberalism as you say you have?
Because if you think that it's okay for gay men to purchase babies, you have not disavowed the premise.
You haven't.
You just haven't.
And how about have a little humility?
Like, you're showing up to those of us who have been here the entire time.
We've been fighting for conservatism the entire time.
And you show up here and you have the gall to say, You're all a bunch of retards.
No, no, you were the one that was wrong about everything.
You were wrong about everything.
And you're showing up and calling us retards?
Like, who do you think you are?
And look, I fully support people changing their minds.
I welcome it.
I'm not someone who, if you change your mind, I'll hold it against you or rub it in your face.
I don't.
I don't do that.
But to claim that you changed your mind and switched teams and then come to our team and call those of us who've been here the whole time retards and demand that we accept degenerate insanity because it offends you that we don't, that I can't abide.
I just can't abide that.
That we just can't accept.
And like I said, this is just, it's all over the place.
Like we're invaded.
We're invaded by these people.
It feels like half the commentators now who are out there are the influencers or like these people.
I left the left.
I left the left.
Here's why it's okay for gay men to buy babies.
Oh, but I thought you said you left the left.
I thought you said you left it.
I abandoned the left, but I still hold to like the most extreme views of the left.
Believing that it's okay for two men to not only get married, but to be parents and to buy a baby, that's not just one thing that liberals believe.
That is one of the most extreme left wing positions that you can hold.
In fact, it's so extreme that 20 years ago, no elected Democrat held that position.
You currently hold a position that was too extreme for Democrats 20 years ago.
But you left the left.
Okay.
Sure, you did.
Extreme Left Wing Positions00:02:25
Starting something new can be daunting.
When we launched the Matt Wall show, we had all the usual fears, but it worked out well.
It's possible for others too, using our sponsor, Shopify.
Shopify is the e commerce platform powering millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e commerce in the US, including our very own Daily Wire shop.
Getting started is incredibly easy with hundreds of ready to use templates.
You can build a beautiful online store that matches your brand style.
Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write products.
Descriptions, page headlines, and even enhance your product photography so you can accelerate your efficiency, whether you're uploading new products or improving existing ones.
Need to get the word out?
Shopify helps you find your customers with easy to run email and social media campaigns.
What's more, you can tackle all those important tasks in one place from inventory to payments to analytics without juggling multiple websites or platforms.
And if you ever get stuck, Shopify's 24 7 customer support is always around to help.
It's time to turn those what ifs into with Shopify today.
Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at shopify.comslash Walsh.
Go to shopify.comslash Walsh.
That's shopify.comslash Walsh.
Have you ever thought of just how much you really have to keep track of on the daily?
You've got 12 different passwords, your kids' sports schedules, a grocery list that never stops growing, among many other things.
But for all the stuff we manage to remember, we often forget something much bigger.
What happens to our families financially if something happens to us?
The responsibility of protecting your loved ones and planning for the future is heavy.
Trying to navigate life insurance on your own can be a mess.
Our sponsor, Policy Genius, Makes the process dramatically easier by acting as an online insurance marketplace, not an insurance company.
So you can compare quotes from some of America's top insurers side by side for free, actually understand what you're buying.
Their license team works for you, not for the insurance carrier.
So they care about your needs, your budget, your family.
They help you figure out coverage amounts, prices, and terms.
So there's no guesswork.
Policy Genius will help answer your questions, handle paperwork, and advocate for you throughout the process, which is why they've racked up thousands of five star reviews on Google and Trustpilot.
Protect your family with a policy that grows with your life with Policy Genius.
You can see if you could find 20 year life insurance policies starting at just $276 a year for just a million dollars in coverage.
Head to policygenius.comslash Walsh to compare life insurance quotes from top companies and see how much you could save.
That's policygenius.comslash Walsh.
Dinner Table Phone Distractions00:10:30
So the post millennial has this increasing number of restaurants and bars across the U.S. are asking customers to put away their phones or even lock them up in an effort to encourage face to face interaction.
According to a report by Axios, at least 11 states have individual restaurants or bars that have implemented some form of phone restriction or incentive aimed at reducing.
Device use while dining.
Some larger chains are also exploring similar policies.
The supper club chain Delilah's has adopted a no phones, no posting policy.
In Maryland, a Chick fil A location, Towson Place, is offering free ice cream to families who refrain from checking their phones during the meal.
And there are other examples as well of the Charlotte, North Carolina bar antagonist has taken a stricter approach.
The establishment requires customers to lock their phones away for up to two hours.
The bar told Axios the policy is meant to build a place that kind of forces you to connect.
So, I'm obviously a big fan of this.
People sitting at restaurants with their families and staring at their phones or tablets is just one of the saddest and most common spectacles in modern society.
I was at a restaurant with my family the other day, and we saw this like you see it everywhere.
There was a table next to us, two adults, mom and dad, two kids, all of them looking at screens.
I mean, I think the kids were on tablets, the parents were on their phones.
Why even go out to eat at that point?
Why are you going out to a restaurant?
Like, I remember back in the 90s when TV dinners were a thing, and you don't really hear about TV dinners as much anymore, but TV dinners were, I guess they still sell them.
They were usually a frozen meal that you heated up, just glorified dog food in a tray.
But the idea was that you would eat the TV dinner on the couch in front of the TV.
And I remember that my parents were adamantly opposed to the idea of families eating dinner in front of the TV.
We never did it one time.
Growing up, not once.
The thought of it, the thought of it horrified them.
And not just because of the worry about getting food on the couch, it's also just the thought of sitting down for dinner when you're supposed to be with your family and just watching TV.
We never did it.
Now, I was a dumb kid, so I saw like my friends' families that did this frequently, and I was kind of jealous.
My friends would eat TV dinners or fast food dinners in front of the TV.
And as a kid, I was envious.
I'm getting delicious home cooked meals that we ate around the table as a family.
And I'm looking at the kids in broken homes watching Jeopardy while they eat chicken nuggets silently next to their mom or whatever and thinking that they were living like kings because I was stupid as a kid, as kids tend to be.
But anyway, that was bad.
But even that was vastly preferable, a lot better to what we have now, this current version, which is.
Eating dinner while looking at your phone.
Because at least with a TV dinner, now you're not talking and you're not sitting around looking at each other.
You're looking at a screen, you're looking at the TV.
That's not great.
But at least you're all watching the same thing.
At least there's some kind of communal shared experience.
At least there are commercial breaks.
Maybe you could fit a little conversation in during the commercial breaks or something.
I mean, it'd be better to sit at a table and have a conversation, but that was better than every member of the table.
Every member of the family at the table being absorbed in an entirely different stream of mindless content.
So it's, I mean, it's just, it's awful.
Like it's very bad.
And if you ever do this at the dinner table or if you allow your kids to do it ever, you just need to stop.
I mean, this is one pretty simple improvement you can make to your life.
And it's not that hard.
But put the phones away when you're, at least when you're sitting at the dinner table with other people.
So, I'm a big fan of any attempt to fight back against it.
Not so much the reward idea.
Like, I don't think we should be giving adults little treats to reward them for refraining from checking their phone for 12 minutes.
But the general idea is a good one.
And, you know, locking the phone away in a separate location is the best approach.
Or even here's an idea that you could think about, we could all think about.
If you're going out to dinner as a family and multiple members of your family have a phone, You don't even need to all bring your phone.
You consider that.
That's a revolutionary idea.
That's a shocking idea.
What if you just didn't even bring your phone?
What if you didn't bring your phone in other contexts?
Like, what if you just didn't always bring your phone with you everywhere?
And I was thinking about this the other day because I'm trying to be intentional, more intentional about reading at night, you know, reading like actual physical books.
I've always been a reader, but recently I've tried to devote more time to it.
Because over the past few years, like a lot of people, I found myself reading less and even having trouble focusing on reading more than I have in the past.
And that really distresses me.
I don't like that.
So I'm trying to counter program myself.
And what I found, this is like the most obvious revelation of all time, but it's kind of a revelation for me because, like I said, I'm stupid.
But I found that I will read probably 300% more in a night.
And be much more focused on it, retain more if my phone is simply in another room.
If I have my phone in my pocket or sitting next to me on the table or whatever, I will read much less and I'll be much less focused on it.
But the simple step of just putting the phone in another room, preferably on another level of the house, that makes an enormous difference.
You don't even need to lock it in a safe or anything, but just have it somewhere else.
Because this is one of the most underrated aspects, I think, of the phone, one of the underrated aspects.
Hazards of it, which is that, I mean, we think of the phone, we think of all the problems of the phone that come with the phone, and all that is related to when you're using it, when you're looking at it.
But the problem is that the phone, the cell phone is a loud, oppressive, pushy, demanding presence in your life, even when you're not using it.
If it's sitting there next to you or in your pocket, it still claims your attention because at any moment, Someone could text you or call you, or you could get an email, or there could be something that you just want to look up real quick and check, or it pops into your head.
And this is my Achilles heel, especially if I'm reading.
This is what distracts me.
So, reading something and I encounter a thought related to what I'm reading pops into my head, or a question, or anything like that.
And so, I just look it up on my phone real quick.
That's an interesting thought.
I wonder, you know, and I'll just look it up on the phone.
And then 47 minutes later, like you're watching a video of cats being surprised by cucumbers or whatever.
And that's the way that it always works.
It's this attention sucking black hole that just sits there next to you, lingering over your shoulder.
And anyone can barge into your life at any moment through the phone.
I mean, this is the thing that we, younger people who weren't alive in the before times, have no appreciation for this.
And I think a lot of us who were alive in the before times, before the smartphone, have.
Have lost our appreciation of it, but it's just very weird to be walking around all the time and where anyone can get a hold of you always.
Like you're never out of reach, you're always reachable.
That's very bizarre.
And human beings never lived that way up until very, very recently.
And now we're all living our lives like on call surgeons or something.
And that's why you feel, even me, like I'll try to leave the house without my phone.
I feel weird about it.
What if someone needs to get in contact with me?
Why would someone?
Okay, so what if they do?
You're going to be gone for an hour.
What could they possibly need to talk to you about that's so urgent that it couldn't wait for an hour?
What's the likelihood that if you're running to whatever, running to Rite Aid or something to run an errand, you're going to be gone for 47 minutes?
What's the likelihood that something's going to come up that's so urgent that you must be able to respond in that moment?
Very small likelihood.
And yet, this is how we all live our lives now.
We all live like Batman, waiting for the bat signal at all times.
Except for us, the bat signal is just any text from any random person who feels like contacting us at any time of day or night.
Or it's a group thread, you know, a meandering conversation that goes on for years with no point or purpose.
But that, again, could just Barge into your life, into your day at any time.
It's totally insane.
And I think we've all become slaves to it.
So put the phone away.
That's my message yet again that I preach from the mountaintops.
After you watch the show, I mean, obviously watch the show, clearly watch the show, obviously consume my content.
That's the good part of the internet.
And then, but after you've done that every day, put the phone away.
And which you can do right now, because I guess we'll wrap the show up there.
And I'll talk to you tomorrow.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
I do believe that if people have committed treason against the United States of America, their statues should not be in the Capitol.
History is written by the victors.
And since the 1960s, we've been told, mostly by people whose ancestors didn't even live here during the war, the South committed treason.
Treason Statues Removed00:00:30
But if the Confederates were traitors, then why was Jefferson Davis never put on trial for treason?
What were Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson afraid of?
Did they know something they're not allowed to say today?
It's time for the truth.
So here it is.
Robert E. Lee was a military genius and a man of immense honor.
He was beloved by Americans from the North and South for a century after the war.