The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1019 - Hollywood Film Celebrates African Slave Traders

Episode Date: September 12, 2022

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm  Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Indiana University celebrates a psychopathic pedophile while Hollywood celebrates a gang of blood thirsty slave traders. These are our new historical heroes to replace the old and much better ones. Also, the regime uses the solemn occasion of 9-11 to further demonize their political opponents. Ron DeSantis upsets the Left and libertarians with his latest speech. BYU has completed its investigation into the invisible man who silently shouted the n-word at a volleyball game. In our Daily Cancellation, that new Hillary Clinton show on AppleTV is far worse than you could have ever imagined. Check out the brand new DailyWire+ podcast CANDACE OWENS on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, DailyWire+, or wherever you listen to podcasts.   Get the brand new Johnny the Walrus Plushie here: https://bit.ly/3CHeLlu     - - -  Today’s Sponsors: Charity Mobile sends 5% of your monthly plan price to the Pro-Life charity of your choice. Call at 1-877-474-3662 or chat online at charitymobile.com Mention offer code: WALSH  Protect your identity with LifeLock. Save up to 25% OFF Your First Year at www.LifeLock.com/WALSH.  - - - Socials: Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF  Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA  Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA  Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today on the Matt Wall Show, Indiana University celebrates a psychopathic pedophile while Hollywood celebrates a gang of bloodthirsty slave traders. These are our new historical heroes to replace the old and much better ones. Also, the regime uses the solemn occasion of 9-11 to further demonize their political opponents. Ron DeSantis upsets the left and libertarians with his latest speech. BYU has completed its investigation into the invisible man who silently shouted the N-word at a volleyball game. And our daily cancellation, that new Hillary Clinton show on Apple TV, is far worse than you. you could have ever imagined. All of that and more today on the Matt Wall Show. The Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe is a huge, albeit long overdue step in the right direction,

but there's still a long way to go to read our country of abortion finally. Many companies are bowing to the woke mob by donating to pro-choice causes and candidates or reimbursing their employees' travel expenses so that if they live and work in a pro-life state, they can travel to a pro-abortion state, get an abortion, and be back at work on Monday. Well, what if I told you that if you're currently on a phone plan with one of the major carriers, you might be supporting these companies and their pro-abortion agendas with your monthly phone bill. Don't let abortionists use your money to fund policies you don't believe and switch to CharityMobil instead. Charity Mobile is a pro-life, pro-family cell phone company that sends 5% of your monthly plan price to the pro-life charity of your choice.

You don't have to compromise on values or good phone service. Charity Mobile offers the latest 5G phones, no device or service contracts, great nationwide coverage. and live customer service based right here in the USA. The fight for the right to life continues, and pro-life causes need your support. You can help today by simply switching your phone service to CharityMobile. Call 1-877474-374-362 or chat with them online at CharityMobile.com. Mentionitiamobile.com. And that's CharityMobile.

com and mention code Walsh. The war on history ongoing for years now has two phases. The first phase is to demonize all of our culture's historical. historical heroes, turn them into cartoon villains, basically, downplay their successes and virtues while emphasizing their shortcomings. And if they did not have enough shortcomings to emphasize, then simply invent evil deeds that they didn't actually commit. And this is easy enough to do.

It's not like they're around to defend themselves from the slander, so you can say whatever you want about them, and tear down their statues, take their names off of buildings, turn them into sources of national shame, whereas before they were sources of national pride. the left has a word actually for this first phase. It's problematize, which is to make a problem out of something or someone that was not a problem before. Now it's safe to say at this point that phase one, the problematization phase, is complete. That moves us to phase two. With the old heroes smoldering on the historical ash heat, their monuments all knocked over and decaying like the Statue of Liberty and the planet of the apes, the next step is to replace them with new heroes. And where the old heroes were great men and women who accomplished magnificent and world-changing things, yet also being human-possessed flaws, sometimes

great flaws, the new heroes accomplished nothing worthwhile at all. They are selected not because of their achievements, but because of their usefulness, their utility to the leftist cultural narrative. Obviously, the George Floyd murals and statues are the prime example of this. And also this, Indiana University proudly announces on their website today, quote, A new bronze sculpture memorializing Alfred C. Kinsey's significant and enduring contributions to Indiana University now sits on the Bloomington campus, marking the 75th anniversary of the Institute that bears his name. Kinsey revolutionized the scientific study of sexual behavior and provoked an international conversation about sexuality. He founded the Kinsey Institute, the world's leading sexuality research

Institute in 1947. The life-size bronze is the work of Melanie Cooper-Pennington, a lecturer in sculpture in the IU School of Art and Architecture and Design. The sculpture's installation on the Bloomington campus demonstrates the university's pride and the living legacy of research and academic freedom Kinsey helped to forge and the Institute's ongoing commitment to equity regarding sexual diversity established by Kinsey's research. Equity regarding sexual diversity. One way to put it, the other way to put it, is that Alfred Kinsey was a deviant lunatic and a pedophile who enjoyed researching, quote-unquote, the orgasms of children and babies. The notorious Table 34 from the book Sexual Behavior and the Human Male documents the number of orgasms allegedly experienced by children from the ages of 15 down to five months old. And he acquired this information by working with rapists who would abuse children.

keep a journal about the experience, and then report back to Kinsey. So in other words, he enlisted pedophiles to rape kids so that he could get the data he wanted. And why did he want this data? Well, because he wished to prove that children are sexual beings from birth, and that all forms of sexual activity, literally all forms, including pedophilia, beastiality, all of it, are legitimate. Now, you can learn more about this in my film, What is a Woman? and where we discuss in more length, Alfred Kinsey and also John Money. But this is the man that Indiana University honors with his own statue. He was the most prolific groomer of the 20th century.

There's a reason that the left still celebrates him today. But of course, calling them groomers is hate speech. I mean, they're making statues to Alfred Kinsey, but calling them groomers as hate speech. Yet it's not just child-raping psychopaths who were being told to honor this week. They're also slave traders. We mustn't forget about them. Well, only certain historical slave traders are worthy of our admiration, specifically the ones whose story is being told in a major Hollywood film,

which is set to premiere this coming Friday. The movie is called The Woman King. And the absurdity of the title, The Woman King, is really the least of its problem, so we don't even have time to talk about that. The official description on Rotten Tomatoes tells us this. The Woman King is the remarkable story, of the Agoji, the all-female unit of warriors who protected the African kingdom of Dahomey in the 1800s, with skills and a fierceness unlike anything the world has ever seen.

Inspired by true events, the Woman King follows the emotionally epic journey of General Nanaseka as she trains the next generation of recruits and readies them for battle against an enemy determined to destroy their way of life. We'll have a little bit more on their way of life and what exactly that way of life was in just a second, but here's a little bit of the trailer. Fool is coming that threatens our kingdom, our freedom. But we have a weapon they are not prepared for. The Europeans wish to conquer us.

They will not stop into the whole of Africa is theirs. We must fight back for our people. Asking me to take some things are worth fighting for. You are called to join the king's guard. No kingdom in all of Africa shares this privilege. Train hard, fight harder. We fear no one. And we fear no pain.

I offer you a choice. Fight or we die. Now, to be clear, this film is about as historically accurate as like the power rangers. But we'll get back to that in a second. It's, of course, a foregone conclusion that this movie will be critically acclaimed. It has to be.

I mean, it's essentially a matter of law, or might as well be at this point, that a story about female African warriors killing Europeans must be praised in the most rapturous terms possible. Any critic who dares to utter a critique or whose applause is judged to be lacking in enthusiasm will be branded a racist and a sexist.

And they'll probably throw transphos, and homophobic in for good measure also. Mainstream film critics, who as a group, are some of the most pathetic cowards in all of media, which is really, really saying something, certainly got the memo about this. Reviews of the film were released on Sunday, and the Woman King now boasts a 100% fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

If it keeps going at this pace, which it probably will, it will go down as one of the most best-reviewed films of all time. Right now, it's ahead of, like, Citizen Kane and the Godfather, in terms of its reviews. Critics are saying things like, The Woman King is a sturdy, rousing piece of studio entertainment that makes both the new feel old and the old feel new. Then also thrilling and enrapturing, emotionally beautiful and spiritually buoyant,

the Woman King isn't just an uplifting battle cry. It's the movie that director Prince Bythwood has been building toward her entire career. And then fierce, furious, and feminine, an action picture that isn't so much released as unleashed. Talk about a movie of its moment. Another critic adds that the movie is so spectacular, so perfect, so wonderful, so miraculous and beautiful, he's planning to jump out of a window as soon as he submits his review,

having decided that his life has reached its pinnacle and there's no point of living anymore. It's all downhill from here. Another one said that watching the movie was more glorious than seeing the birth of his own children. And in fact, after the watching movie, he wishes that his children had not been born. because they're white.

Now, admittedly, I made up the last two reviews, but they're not very far from what the critics are actually saying. All of this, in spite of the fact that the kingdom of Dahomey, who are the heroes of this movie, were ruthless killers and slave traders who conquered and murdered in pursuit of slaves, which were then used as labor within the kingdom or sold to buyers outside of the kingdom.

As the Encyclopedia Britannica notes, before they edit this passage, which I'm sure they will. The kingdom was not just that they had slaves. The kingdom was fundamentally organized around war and slavery. That's what the whole thing was about. Quote, Dahomey was organized for war, not only to expand its boundaries, but also to take captives as slaves. Slaves were either sold to the Europeans in exchange for weapons or kept to work the royal

plantations that supplied food for the army in court. From approximately 1680, a regular census of population was taken as a base. for military conscription, female soldiers called Amazon's by the Europeans, served as royal bodyguards when not in combat. So the transatlantic slave trade could only exist because it was furnished by Dahomey, along with other tribes and kingdoms. This is one of the little-known inconvenient facts about African slavery that we've talked about before on the show.

It was a system supported, encouraged, promoted, facilitated by Africans themselves. Now, in the homies case, I should be fair, I guess, and admit that they didn't always sell their captives into slavery. Sometimes they would, instead of selling them, butcher them in human sacrifice rituals. Human sacrifices were killed for various rituals to honor kings, and then also there were other forms of human sacrifices like the concubines of a king would be killed and buried with him when he died, those sorts of things. Now, naturally, all indications are that this movie does not really grapple with any of these unfortunate historical realities. On the contrary, they paint the female warriors of Dahomey as as freedom fighters. According to one review I read,

they do acknowledge that the kingdom had slaves, but they pretend that the woman warriors were abolitionists, that they were pushing for the end of the slave trade, which is pure fiction, of course. Actually, not only is it fiction, but the slave trade only ended in the king's of Dahomey because British blockades forced it to end. Here's another inconvenient fact. Europeans abolished the slave trade above the objections of many African and Middle Eastern nations. So Europeans said, none of us are doing slave trade anymore. It's done. While many African and Middle Eastern nations said, no, we want to keep doing the slave thing because it's profitable to us. Now, as for the woman warriors of Dahom,

they were easily crushed in their first military engagement with the French. And that was the end of that story. Now look, there's nothing on the surface wrong with, you know, making a movie that fictionalizes historical events. But it is unthinkable, of course, that anything like this could ever be produced, much less receive rave reviews if the roles were flipped around. Imagine a Civil War movie where the Confederates are not only the heroes of the film, but are portrayed as the true abolitionists. You know, that's just that movie could not possibly exist. And if it did exist, there would be literal riots in the street.

I mean, it's not an exaggeration to say there would be riots. Buildings would be burning if a movie like that came out. Any theater that was crazy enough to play it would be burned to the ground. Except that wouldn't even be on par with this. film because the Confederates were not nearly as brutal as the Kingdom of Dahomey was. But this is all a part of our cultural rewrite of history. Some men who had slaves were bad, no matter what else they did, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, no matter what else they did, even as the founders of our country, they had slaves,

so we got to tear down their statues, they were scumbags, that's it. while other people who organize their whole societies around the capture sale and ritualistic murder of slaves were good and deserving of their own hagiographical films. So once again, our culture designates new heroes for us. And those new heroes might be criminals, drug addicts, child rapists, even slave traders. Not much to admire there, but we're told to admire them. all the same. Now let's get to our five headlines. Well, these data breaches just keep coming. This one is regional, but it's big, and it includes social security numbers. NellNet servicing, a technology service company used by Oklahoma Student Loan Authority and

Ed Financial, announced a breach affecting 2.5 million student borrowers. Breached information includes social security numbers, emails, phone numbers, addresses, all that stuff is included. That's why it's so important to understand. how cybercrime and identity theft are affecting our lives every day. Your personal information gets exposed so often that it's dangerously easy for a cybercriminal to steal your identity. That's why protecting your identity is so important and is also easy with LifeLock by Norton. LifeLock detects and alerts you to potential identity threats that you may not spot

on your own, like if a loan is taken out in your name. If you do become a victim of identity theft, a dedicated U.S.-based restoration specialist will work to fix it. Nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses, but it's easy to help protect yourself with LifeLock by Norton. Identity Theft Protection starts here. Join now and save for 25% off your first year at Lifelock.com slash Walsh. That's Lifelock.com slash Walsh for 25% off. Well, yesterday was, of course, the 21st anniversary of 9-11 each year that we move farther away from it. The more it becomes, especially for my kids' generation and genesis. in historical event, which is kind of strange to think about for those of us who live through it. It's very strange to consider that when our twins are born, our latest set of twins anyway, 9-11 will be farther away from them than the moon landing was for me when I was born.

And the moon landing always felt like ancient history to me from the first moment I learned about it. It felt like it might as well have been 600 years ago. And it's sort of sad to reflect on that for a few reasons. It's sad to reflect on just how far back the moon landing was, not only because we really didn't haven't done anything else with manned space exploration since then, but also because the moon landing was the last, so far as I can think, was the last truly great moment of national celebration that this country has had. The last one was in 1969.

We haven't had another one. It's hard to think of any moment since then when the whole country together celebrated something. A landmark occasion where we all celebrated. We've had landmark occasion since then, but every landmark occasion since the moon landing, and especially in my own life, has been bad. You know, the times that you can think of, big news events that you remember years after the fact, Columbine, 9-11, the Iraq War, those sorts of things. So that's a very tragic thing. And it actually helps explain why my generation and generations after mine have sort of turned out the way they have. As for 9-11, it's sad to think of how long ago it was, not because

it's something we want to relive, obviously, but because the farther we move away from 9-11, the farther we move from pre-9-11 America, and pre-9-11 was simply a different world in a lot of ways, a different country. And I think a better one in nearly every way. The country we all knew, the lives we knew fell with the towers. That's the truth. And these are all things. that I think are worth reflecting on, but these are not the things that the current regime wants us to reflect on or think about on 9-11. Instead, they want us to think about the new enemy, you know, the new al-Qaeda, which is even worse than the old al-Qaeda.

And we're not talking about a new al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the Middle East, but no, right here in this country, because the new enemy is you and me. as Biden made clear in a not so subtle way in his 9-11 speech. Let's listen to this. It's not enough to gather and remember each September 11th, those we lost more than two decades ago. Because on this day, it is not about the past, it's about the future. We have an obligation, a duty, a responsibility to defend, preserve, and protect our democracy. the very democracy that guarantees the rights of freedom

that those terrorists of 9-11 sought to bury in the burning fire and smoke and ash. Now, if you didn't know any better, if you maybe had been stranded at sea on a desert island or something since the actual 9-11, and you heard that from the president, you might think, okay, well, that's fine. You know, he's talking about defending,

democracy and freedom. Pretty standard political boilerplate stuff, you might think. Except we know what he actually means when he talks about the threat to democracy because we know in context every other time he's talked about that what's actually meant. He's made clear what that threat is and who it is. Kamala Harris on 9-11, I think was even more explicit about this. Let's listen to that. Look, we're at the 21st marking, if you will, of the September 11th attacks. This was a foreign terrorists attacking our democracy, attacking this country. We're now as a nation battling a threat from within. Is the threat equal or greater than what we faced after 9-11?

That's an interesting question. I have held many elected offices as district attorney, attorney, general, senator, now vice president, and there's an oath that we always take, which is to defend and uphold our constitution. against all enemies foreign and domestic. And we don't compare the two and the oath, but we know they both can exist, and we must defend against it.

Well, the correct answer to that is no. I mean, he's saying the threat from domestic enemies to the Constitution, meaning MAGA Republicans, meaning half of the country, if not more, is it on par with, the threat of, you know, the terrorist pose on 9-11. Now, Camel Harris stops herself from saying, oh, yeah, it's definitely on par. She doesn't need to say it.

Because this is what the left in the media have been saying for the last two years. That January 6th was just like 9-11, or in fact, even worse than 9-11. You could go through, no reason for me to do. You can go through on Twitter, go look at clips from cable news. many examples of people on the left saying that actually January 6th was worse than 9-11. But the anniversary of 9-11 comes along and we see the remembrances and you see again the footage of the planes flying in to the towers. And if it wasn't already clear to you how absurd that claim is, just seeing the visual again. Like just compare the visual, the experience,

of watching passenger jets fly into skyscrapers in America's largest city. Almost 3,000 people killed. And then on the other hand, there's the experience of watching a bunch of Yahoo's walk around the Capitol and take selfies at Nancy Pelosi's desk. How could those things be compared? Well, they could be compared by the left because, you know, these are soulless propagandists, and they're trying to demonize their political opponents. So that's part of it, obviously.

The other part of it also is that from the perspective of the elites, from the perspective of Democrats in Congress, them being scared and traumatized on January 6th was far worse than 3,000 people dying. Because their own lives and their own comfort is simply, simply worth more than the lives of countless people. As far as they're concerned, they equal like the lives of each of them individually equal the lives of maybe 50,000 people.

Hillary Clinton was there also on 9-11 to bring all this home for anyone not catching the winks and nudges. Here she is being, I think, the most explicit at all of all about it. What's going through your mind today, 21 years later? Well, Dana, every time we approach September 11th, I do think about everything that I saw, all the people that I met, the families of those who lost loved ones. So it is indelibly part of my memories. And I feel grateful that we were able to come together as a country at that really terrible time. We put aside differences.

I wish we could find ways of doing that again. We rebuilt New York. We have done our best to take care of the families that lost so much on that terrible day. And we have also, I think, been reminded about how important it is to try to deal with extremism of any kind, especially when it uses violence to try to achieve political and ideological goals. So I'm one who thinks that there are lessons still to be learned from what happened to us on 9-11 that we should be very aware of during this time in our country and the world's history. So she starts by saying, and I really can't stand listening to these people talk anymore about

the unity after 9-11, and that's something that people still reminisce fondly about on the right and the left. Well, why can't we be united like we were after 9-11? First of all, it should be clear to everyone by now that that unity was an aberration. It was, I remember it too. I remember the feeling. Now, I was a kid, you know, I was in high school, but I remember the feeling for a very fleeting moment in time when everyone was united. And the next day, people were flying the American flags and singing the anthem and all that kind of stuff. There were a lot of patriotic displays going on.

But the reason why I was so fleeting is because it wasn't real. It was just people caught up in the emotions of the moment. If the unity was real, if there was actual unity, like we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were, we were. together around something real. We had a, we had all of a sudden, some kind of shared value system, which, you know, the reason we don't have unity in this country is that we don't have a shared value system. And you're not going to suddenly come up with a shared value system because of a tragedy. That's not how it works. But if it was real unity, then it wouldn't have dissipated as quickly as it all, as it formed, which it did. But I especially can't stomach

hearing it from people like Hillary Clinton, Democrats. I remember the unity after 9-11. So you want unity and this is your way of doing it? Immediately after talking about the unity and how much she wants unity, immediately after doing that, she equates half of the country with al-Qaeda terrorists flying planes into buildings. That's the kind of unity she wants. And in a way, it's true. I mean, they do, on the left, they do want unity, in a sense, but they want unity. But they want unity in the form of submission. They want you to submit to them, and then we can be unified like that. On a bit of a lighter note, more news from the regime. Here's Kamala Harris. We always enjoy these clips. Here she is babbling nonsensically again. Today, the business of our work

is for the council to report on the work that has occurred since our last meeting across these areas. We will today also discuss the work yet ahead, the work we must still do to continue to move forward. Have you noticed what she does in these clips? Because I love this move. It's the tell. You can always tell that the Kamala bot is about to go on the fritz and start malfunctioning, because here's what she does. She nods like she's agreeing with her own statement. And that's what she does when she's on the verge of launching into some nonsensical ramble. She always does that. Watch, she always does that. So she'll go, today, the business of our work is to work on the ways we work and together to work as people who work.

And we will work on working and continue to work and work in the future. on the work yet ahead and the work still to do and the work we must do in the future. Because the work's not complete. This is the format. She begins with the nod. Like she thinks she can trick us. It's like this, she thinks she can trick us into agreeing with whatever nonsense she's about to spew by nodding that way. Right.

And then at the end of the ramble, she always ends, always by restating a certain phrase in four different ways. days. The work still to do, the work yet to come, and the work in the future. That's the format. All right, so Ron DeSantis gave a speech at the National Conservatism Conference this weekend, rather. Some of his remarks, well, all of them really, but one portion in particular has both leftists and libertarians in a bit of a tizzy about this. So here's someone with Reason Magazine on Twitter reporting on one portion of DeSantis' speech. This is Stephanie Slade, who says, some of these are quoting DeSantis, some of these big companies are now exercising quasi public power, DeSantis says, the latest example of a trend in which conservatives conflate

private actions with government coercion. Wow. DeSantis says large businesses aren't really private and thus don't have First Amendment rights because they're doing the bidding of the regime. So I saw many other quotes and clips from that portion of his speech. And the whole speech, by the way, was excellent. But the point he's actually trying to make, and it's a very good point, and it's something that Republicans need to start talking about more openly. And it's a, now libertarians might lament it and mourn it, but it's a good sign that Republicans more and more are getting away from this kind of reflexive defense.

of corporations. That was a problem among Republicans for decades. They felt they had to reflexively defend any corporation that comes under attack or criticism because in order to defend the free market, you have to defend all the big corporations. And it was also a response to, on the left, or they're demonizing anyone who's wealthy or any big corporation and the millionaires and billionaires. It was a reaction to that as well. But the point he's making about the big corporations, it's more nuanced than the criticism of big corporations that you hear from the Bernie Sanders type. The point that he's making is that the big corporations, specifically big tech, often work as an arm of the government. So if the government realizes that it can't do something constitutionally,

not that that usually stops the government from doing what it wants, but if it feels that it can't get away with doing a particular thing, then it will go to the big tech. monopoly, which again, functions as an arm of the regime and say, well, we can't do this, so we need you to do it. Perfect examples. What we heard from Mark Zuckerberg. You know, they wanted to, the inconvenience revelations about Hunter Biden's laptop. Now, the government couldn't come and like start arresting people if they post about Hunter Biden's laptop. The FBI couldn't come and start arresting you for that. And they might get to the point where they'll do something like that and be more open about it. But at the time, they felt like

they couldn't really do that. They were being constrained. Like it or not, and they didn't like it, they were being constrained by the First Amendment. So they went to Facebook and said, we need you guys to take this stuff down. Because just call it misinformation. It's not really misinformation, but take it down anyway. So this is the way of, this is the way that the tyrants sidesteped the Constitution is by getting their allies, their functionaries in big tech to do it for them. That's what the Santhus is pointing out. That's the workaround that is unacceptable.

And Republicans need to start talking about and need to talk about plans. What are we going to do to stop that? Moving on to this, the crime wave isn't just hitting the continental United States. Here's a report. I want to play some of this out of Hawaii about the crime over there. Let's watch. Just six weeks ago, a thief assaulted and made. a long-time employee of Casey Market, leaving the elderly woman's eyes burning and injuring

her back. But the incident was just the beginning of a series of thefts, including a burglary this morning at the 40-year-old neighborhood store. They live in trepidation and fear every day now. It's not safe for them. These people prey on the elderly. Over the past several months, the owners of Casey Market says crime has exploded in the Kalihi area. Roy Chang's parents who asked not to be identified. have run the mom and pop shop peacefully for years. The couple know most of their neighbors and customers by name. I come back.

Yes. Oh, okay. You know, all the kids from the elementary come over here, grab mousou bees and get all the drinks, and it's convenient for all of us. All the crimes is really sad. And then it's affecting, you know, everybody, not only the stores, but the neighborhood too.

One of the most disturbing aspects of this trend, this crime wave, which, again, affects not just the continental United States, but all the way out in Hawaii as well, is that so often the elderly are targets of it, which is, I suppose, not a surprise. They're vulnerable and can be easily overpowered. And so these criminal, deviant, degenerate psychopaths and sociopaths, you know, they don't care. They're going to, they're going to, you know, go after the weakest person that they can.

Which is why, talk about things that we should be discussing, one of the things driving this crisis is, the fact that we are producing as society so many people who are utterly indifferent to human life indifferent to the suffering that they'll cause indifferent altogether. They just don't care. This is why I've always said that instead of making a special case out of hate crimes, we hear so much about hate crimes, we should be focusing on indifferent crimes. That's what we're actually plagued by as a society.

crimes of indifference crimes motivated by hate aren't as bad as crimes motivated by indifference I mean they're terrible but on one hand you have a person driven by hate and on the other hand you have someone

who's driven by being totally empty and hollow inside without even the energy to hate. Now the person driven by hate there's something there's like some hope there maybe you want to talk about rehabilitation Maybe that's someone who could be, well, they need to be punished severely. But maybe that's someone, if it's hate that's inside their heart, then maybe that's something that you can, you could take that.

That's something you could grab onto and maybe there's hope for that person. You can rehabilitate them. You can, you know, they could see the error in their ways. Maybe. But someone who just doesn't care at all. There's no concern whatsoever for other people. their violence is motivated. And they're not even, a lot of this, you know, the crime that you saw there,

a woman gets, elderly woman is maced. A guy takes something out of the cash register. Is he desperate and starving? Not that that would make it okay, but he's not even desperate. These people are basically comfortable. They don't even need what they're stealing. They're just doing it because. That's an even bigger challenge when you have people like that.

When you have a whole society full of people like that, then you have true. chaos, which is what we're dealing with now. All right, BYU has finally released the results of its investigation into the phantom N-word shouted by an invisible person at a volleyball game. This is the incident that was talked about quite a bit on ESPN and Stephen A. Smith was shouting about it and LeBron James was talking about it. A bunch of athletes, celebrities, ESPN, they were all over this story.

But now that we have the conclusion of the story, this is how this generally works. They jump on the bandwagon at the very beginning when all we have is a claim that somebody made. And then when the claim is actually investigated and now we have the result, that's when the media jumps off. They're not interested anymore. So here's what BYU. This is the statement they released. As part of our commitment to take any claims of racism seriously, BYU has completed its investigation into the allegation that racial heckling and slurs took place at the Duke versus BYU women's volleyball match on August 26th. We reviewed all available video and audio recordings, including security footage and raw footage from all camera angles taken by BYU TV of the match, with broadcasting audio removed to ensure the noise from the stands could be heard more clearly.

We also reached out to more than 50 individuals who attended the event. Duke Athletic Department personnel and student athletes, BYU athletic department personnel and student athletes, event security and management and fans who were in the arena that evening, including many of the fans in the on-court student section. From our extensive review, we have not found any evidence to corroborate the allegation that fans engaged in racial heckling or uttered racial slurs at the event. As we stated earlier, we would not tolerate any conduct that would make a student athlete feel unsafe. That's the reason for our immediate response and our thorough investigation. As a result of our investigation, we have lifted the ban on the fan who was identified as having uttered racial slurs during the match. We have not found any evidence that the individual engaged in touch an activity. BYU sincerely apologized to that fan for any hardship the ban has caused.

Oh, BYU sincerely apologizes for the hardship of baselessly labeling this guy a racist. And not just a racist, but somebody who is so suicidally racist, someone who is so overcome by their hatred for black people, that he would sit in the stands and shout the N-word over and over again, ruining his own life in the process. That's the level of racism that this guy was accused of. But now BYU apologizes. So they essentially convicted this kid of racism. And then after the conviction went back to investigate to see if that really happened and then realized that, oh, this didn't happen at all. And as I said when this, you know, before the investigation was complete,

we talked about it a couple of weeks ago. Yeah, I'll be curious to see what the investigation turns up. And they turned up, you know, nothing, because nothing happened. This was entirely invented. But even before seeing the investigation, like, if you're going to jump to a conclusion about something like this, it makes the most sense, far and away the most sense, to jump to the conclusion that it's made up because these cases are almost always made up. And as I said at the time, if you, if you just have the basic understanding of human nature,

you would realize how likely it is that something like this is a hoax. Because we know that there's an enormous social incentive to invent hoaxes like this. But then on the other end of the spectrum, there is no social incentive whatsoever to engage in the behavior that this kid was accused of engaging in. You would have to actually be a lunatic. You would have to be a suicidal, crazy person to do that, even if you're racist. Because you are forfeiting your life. You are ruining your life. Now, is there going to be any accountability?

Is ESPN going to come back around and apologize? Stephen A. Smith, LeBron James, of course not. Because, again, it goes back to social incentive. There's no incentive. There's no reason why they should apologize or own up to what they did. They jumped on the hoax bandwagon, turned out to be a hoax, and they pretended that never happened and move on to the next thing. Same story repeats over and over and over again.

All right. Finally, here's a familiar lecture that we hear a lot on TikTok, but each new rendition adds a new wrinkle. And so this is a TikToker explaining why it's transphobic to not date trans people. You know, if you don't date trans people, then you're transphobic. And he says that this is true, even if your preference for members of the opposite sex is driven by a desire to have children, he says that's not a good enough excuse. That's not going to let you off the hook.

And he explains why here. I disagree with this and I still think it's harmful to trans people. You can still have biological children with a trans partner in the same way that like two lesbians can have a biological child. Two gay men can have a biological child. Yes, it's a lot harder to have biological children when you're not in a cis-hete relationship. But it's still possible. Is it expensive? Yes.

But that's something that I feel like a lot of people in the LGBT community go through if they want kids. I don't. I know. I'm too poor to have children. But for my LGBT people that do want to have kids and you want a loving partner to have those children with, I feel like you still shouldn't be discriminating against your partner if they're trans when looking for a partner. It still feeds into this stigma that trans people are not their gender when they are. A trans man is a man and a trans female is a female.

It just makes the community more loving and accepting. Okay, just to clarify a few things here. First of all, the idea that you shouldn't discriminate when looking for a partner is obviously nonsensical. The whole process of looking for a partner is a process of discrimination. Because what does discriminate means? Discriminate means simply to make distinctions, to differentiate. That's all discrimination means. So we all discriminate in our lives every single day.

I mean, practically every second of the day you are engaging in, as a thinking person, as a rational agent, you are engaging in discrimination in that you are differentiating, you are recognizing distinctions. It wouldn't be possible to operate in the world if you couldn't do that. And especially when you're deciding on a partner, you're choosing a mate, you're choosing friends, whatever, choosing a job. It's a whole parade of discriminatory decisions that you're making. You're differentiating. You're deciding, I want this, I don't want that. I'm looking for this. I'm not looking for that. Now, what we're being told on TikTok is that you should go into the dating scene with no preferences at all. Period. Like, you're just walking in blind and you'll take the first person that you stumble across. It doesn't matter who it is makes no difference to you. Another thing to clarify is that two men cannot have a biological child together. Neither can two women.

even if a gay couple has all the money in the world. It's not just that it's expensive. It's that it's physically impossible. Now, a man can combine his sperm with a woman's egg and create a baby in a petri dish, but then it's not the gay couple's biological child. It's the biological couple of one of the gay guys along with some random woman. So same goes the other way with lesbians. It's not possible.

Two men cannot have a biological child. It's impossible. you to really think about the fact that I need to explain this. I need to explain. It actually needs to be explained that two men can't make a baby. It needs to be explained to a person who looks to be an adult or nearly an adult and probably is educated. Still, we need to explain that two men cannot make a baby. He also says it's transphobic to not date trans people. This again is something we hear a lot now. The correct answer to that charge is okay. And, I mean, if that's how you define transphobia, you can define it however you want.

You made up this stupid term, so I guess it's up to you to define. Fine, that's cool. If you're saying that transphobia is when someone doesn't want a date a trans person, then, okay, then I'm a transphobic. That's fine. You're admitting? Yeah. Sure. That's all you have to do with these kinds of charges when they're made against you.

That is the one sure way to disarm the person who's coming in. after you. Because once you accept that, wow, that's transphobic. All right, fine, then it's transphobic. So are you admitting you're a transphobic? Yes. Well, but that's, you kidding. That's not good. Okay, well, that's your opinion. I just really wish, if I had a $100 billion to start my own social media site, I'd tell you what I would do. I would de-platform people and ban them purely on the basis of being stupid. That's the kind of de-platforming that I would like to see. If you are this damned stupid that you think, for example, two men can have babies, putting ideology aside for a moment, if you are that level of stupid, you don't get to be on any platform. That's it. You shouldn't

have access to an audience. Just think about that. There are people who are this stupid, and yet they have an audience that they're offering guidance to and advice. You shouldn't be speaking to thousands or millions of people if you're one of the dumbest people on planet Earth. If I had the ability, that's how I would de-platform people. Let's get now to the comment section. Hope you had a good weekend, by the way. Mine was quiet. My wife and kids were out of town, so I really went crazy, cut loose, got a little wild.

You know how it goes. I finished a book I'd been reading, and I watched a documentary. and then I was in bed by nine. That's how I spent my time, my freedom. Oh, and I did some research on what sort of freshwater fish work best in a 75-gallon community tank. So that was about two hours of entertainment in between the book and the documentary. That's my life.

That's who I am. It's a sad state of affairs. But at least my aquarium will be pretty great. I also noticed somewhere in the midst of all this, I checked Twitter briefly, and I was trending for some. I don't even know why. I checked because someone text me and said, well, why are you trending on Twitter? I said, I am. I don't know. I haven't even been on.

And I went and looked and I honestly couldn't tell why I was. I just knew that if I'm trending, it's never because people are saying nice things about me. I've never been trending because everyone is, there's never been a day. It was like, let's all say nice things about Matt Walsh today. Let's make them feel good. Never been trending for that reason. It's always because people on the left are upset or whatever. It's always something like that.

And I got to say, it's somewhat freeing. The fact that the pitchfork mob exists almost entirely on the internet. There's just a certain comfort, certain freedom and knowing that I can go and look at my phone and say, oh, a bunch of people on the left are upset. I have no idea why. They're all talking about me. They're upset. I don't care.

Just put the phone down and get back to the book you're reading. To know that there are a bunch of people out there attacking you and talking about you and saying how upset they are. and you're not even paying attention to it. You're off somewhere else completely. That's kind of nice. Jeff says, Matt, you never explained why you support the woke NFL. You rail against woke corporations and then go on and on about your favorite NFL team. I support you on most things, but this seems like a blind spot.

Well, I don't think it's accurate to say I go on and on about it. I think I mentioned football and the fact that I'm a Ravens fan once a year or something, if that often. It came up a lot during the fantasy draft with Craning Company, but that's just because I'm bad at drafting, and all I did was draft Ravens players, which is why I ended up with like nine total fantasy points this weekend. And also why I'm going to end up being the one who has to go to a WNBA game, which I have to admit is maybe the funniest outcome. So not that I want to go, but I just, as someone who can appreciate a fun trolling thing, I do admit that that is kind of funny, even if I'm the one who is to suffer through it. As for the NFL, it seems to me that they've, first of all, dialed way back on the political stuff. They responded to the fan outcry in that way. Fans didn't want it. They dialed back, not because they wanted to, but because they had no choice. Also, the players aren't generally woke.

Now, some are, but there are a lot of conservatives. There are a lot of outspoken Christians, actually, in the NFL. So this is kind of a misconception. It's not all professional athletes as a group are woke. Now, you get a lot of that in the NBA, a lot of that in the double. NBA, if you can call them professional athletes. Not as much in football, actually. Also, the product that they're putting out is not woke. It's not like Disney putting out a product meant to indoctrinate people, especially kids. The product that the NFL puts out is football. It's a game.

There's nothing leftist about the game itself. Now, sure, the company makes woke gestures from time to time. But if you're saying that we should boycott any company that even gestures in that direction, I can respect that. I can respect that point of view. I can respect that if you actually put it into action. But putting into action means that you certainly aren't going to be using any streaming service except for the Daily Wire. You're not, you can't be watching any movies by any Hollywood production companies at all or going to any retail stores or using an iPhone or any other smartphone or any internet provider

or it's like, now, if that's how you're living, I really do respect it. I don't know how you're communicating with me right now, if that is how you're living, but I respect that if that's what you're doing. I somewhat doubt it, though. Which doesn't mean that we as conservative

shouldn't boycott any companies at all. We talked about this last week. I'm fully in favor of that. It just means we should be a lot more targeted in our boycans. All right, Matt Hayden says, Hey, Matt, just to clarify the Bluey story you were unsure about it,

it's actually quite the opposite of injecting wokeness. Disney Plus has removed several episodes from the show's catalog, including an episode where Bluey's parents teach her and her sister about teasing because it promoted bullying. The show is charming, beautifully written and animated, and provides great lessons for kids.

As a conservative and Catholic father, I cannot recommend it enough. My wife and I's favorite episode is Sleepy Time if you want a sample to get an idea of the show's quality. So you're saying that this is an actual anti-woke children show that's popular that's out there. I will check it out. I will take you up on the recommendation. Scott says, so Flannel Friday is actually a thing now. Is this the first time in history Matt didn't stand his ground on such an important issue?

No, it's not because I had no ground. I was very clear about that. I had no ground on this whatsoever. I care less about what I wear than almost everyone else, apparently. This is something that everyone else is fighting about. I'm caught in the middle with people like literally tearing at my clothes. It's a very disturbing situation to be in. I don't care that much myself.

But that is the spirit of flannels in general. It's like you don't wear flannels because you're passionate about flannels. You wear them because it's like it's just something to put on. And it's comfortable. And like I said, you usually don't have to iron it as much. Let's see. Nate says, Matt, in the members portion, you talked about how our culture belittles stay-at-home mothers and mothers in general. My favorite take on this is from G.K. Chesserton, from his book, What's Wrong with the World?

Quote, it's not difficult to see why the female became the emblem of the universal nature, surrounded her with very young children who required to be taught so much as anything as everything. Babies need not to be taught a trade, but to be introduced to a world. To put the matter shortly, woman is generally shut up in a house with a human being at the time. when he asks all the questions that there are and some that aren't. How can it be a large career to teach other people's children about the rule of three and a small career to tell one's own children about the universe? How can it be broad to be the same thing to everyone and narrow to be everything to someone? I hope someone reads this and finds it enlightening.

Well, I do. But I also somewhat resent when I'm rambling about something and then someone sends me, you know, a passage from G.K. Chesterton says, As long, you know, G. K. Chessner was talking about the same thing you were talking about, and then it's way better and more eloquent than anything I could ever say. Makes me feel worse. It's harmful to my self-esteem. But I do appreciate it, although you are banned from the show, of course.

We have a big announcement today. Candace Owens is back from maternity leave with a vengeance. Her brand new show, Candice Owens, launches today at 3 p.m. Central on Daily Wire Plus, and we'll take on the big topics of the day, uncover lies, and expose the hypocrisy and news and politics. And, you know, it's going to be done in typical Candace style, fearless and resolute. This is everything you love about Candace. Only now she's streaming five days a week. You'll not want to miss her explosive first episode, which premieres today. Trust me when I say,

this is huge. So check out Candace Owens' podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Daily Wire Plus, or wherever you listen to podcasts. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Well, a few weeks ago, we told you about a new show on Apple TV called Gutsy. It follows the adventures of Hillary Clinton and Chelsea Clinton as they sit around planning Gis Lane Maxwell's murder in prison. Sorry, that was the show concept that Apple turned down, which is a shame because it would be much better than what they ended up with. The real show documents the Clinton girls as they traips around the country talking to women who inspire them. Women like Kim Kardashian, Amy Schumer, Wanda Sykes, Gloria Steinem, serial killer Eileen Warnas. Actually, that last person was executed, which means that Hillary will have to wait a few years to talk to her.

Anyway, it is without question. The worst show or film concept that anyone has ever had. I think I can say that. It makes Batgirl look like a good investment by comparison. If you didn't catch the trailer, or even if you did, we're going to watch it again. Here it is. We're hitting the road to shine a light on women who inspire us to be bolder and braver. Leadership doesn't look one way.

You're not going to break me down. You get worn out before I do. I believe in second chances. Every single person makes some impact on the planet every day. We can choose what difference we make. Well, we can only assume, based on the trailer, that the name of the show Gutsi is meant to describe the courage required of the viewers who are watching it. And I'm being very generous by saying viewers with an S.

Now, we knew that a show starring the likes of Hillary Clinton and Kim Kardashian would, just by its very existence, be brutal and torturous enough as to violate every protocol of the Geneva Convention. But even the darkest imagination could not have anticipated just how bad it would actually be. because the show has now been released, a fact that comes as news to everyone, just as it will come as news to any residents of Connecticut, that your state has a WNBA team, by the way, and it's currently competing in the finals. And I learned that myself this morning when I looked it up so that I could make that joke. Hillary's new show debuted, and People.com has a summary of what we're all missing by not watching it. Here's what it says. She might be a champion of gutsy women, but Hillary Clinton doesn't think it should be an act of courage.

for women to talk openly about the health and function of their lady parts. As Clinton's gutsy docu-series with Daughter Chelsea premieres Friday on Apple TV Plus, including episodes with Wanda Sykes talking about menopause, and with Migan de Stalian talking about her sex-positive WAP, the former Secretary of State recalls her own experience with menopause and that provocative rap. Now, we do have a clip of Hillary's discussion about WAP. Believe me, I would like to spare you from having to watch it, but I have no choice.

Your own sins have brought you to this crossroads. You must watch as atonement for whatever evil you have done in your life. But before we endure that trauma together, let's hear what Hillary has to say about menopause. This should be at least slightly less devastating to listen to. Going back to the article says, after a certain age, we all seem to inherit these new things on our bodies. Hillary 74 tells people,

it was towards the end of the second term after I turned 50 in 1997 that I began to go through menopause. And it was something that you didn't talk about in those days. My friends and I would talk about it or roll our eyes, but not publicly. That's why we really wanted to talk about it with Wanda, because it's a universal experience for us. Thank goodness we're getting into a time when women's health, and especially now with all the challenges about reproductive health, are forcing this conversation out of the shadows and into the daylight. Now, Hillary insists that somehow her menopause has something to do with the abortion conversation, continuing, quote, it's astonishing to me how ignorant a lot of these men legislators are in a lot of these states making

these laws about women's bodies, she says, the things they say, the things that they think, the ignorance that they display is breathtaking. So the more we can talk about it, Chelsea jumps in, it's dangerous. Stigma is so deadly when it comes to public health. Hillary acknowledges stigma played a role in her silence in the White House. Quote, looking back, I mean, it wasn't yet at the point of our social or psychic development that I would have said, oh, okay, the first lady is going through menopause. Here I go. Watch out, everybody. Now, a couple of things here. First, to fruitlessly reiterate, it's not just men who support pro-life laws. It's actually not even mostly men. Also, I'm not sure of a single example where pro-life legislation has betrayed an ignorance of women's bodies.

We're all aware that women's bodies bear children. We know that. I mean, we know that. Those of us on the right are aware of that. It's actually on the left where there's confusion on that point. But on our side, we know that our point is simply that these children should not be killed. That's all we're saying. But second, perhaps more to the point here, Hillary says that back in the 90s, we weren't at the point of our social, psychic development where the first lady would announce her menopause publicly. Well, are we at that point now? Should we be? Why would you want to make a public announcement about your menopause?

She says that she talked about her menopause with her friends, but she didn't talk about it. it on the public stage. Yes, and? What else would you have done? Held a press conference? Issued an official statement on White House letterhead, called for a national day of morning. Obviously, you didn't talk about your menopause publicly. That would have been totally bizarre and weird and inappropriate. Besides, the public was hearing more than enough already about the various bodily functions occurring in the White House during the Clinton administration, so we didn't need to hear more. We have this totally ridiculous idea in our culture that if we don't discuss something publicly, then it's stigmatized. Feminists will say the same thing about

their periods. They lament the stigmatization of a woman's menstrual cycle. But again, there's no stigma. We're all aware that it's a thing that happens in and to the bodies of women. That doesn't mean that we all need to talk about it over the dinner table or that you need to announce it into a megaphone. You also don't need to make a public pronouncement about every fart or burp or bowel movement. These are all things that everyone does, yet we are discreet. from making a spectacle out of these activities doesn't mean we're oppressed. It just means that we're expected to be at least moderately civilized. But there are those for whom moderately civilized is a bar too high to get over, those like

Migan the Stallion, who appeared in another episode of the show where she and Hillary and Chelsea had the conversation that you were hoping I would forget about and not play the clip of, but today is not your lucky day, so here it is. Chelsea follows rap music. She has, ever since she was a little girl. But I kind of came to awareness of you with the Cardi B. Weap. I've always wanted to do a song with Cardi. As soon as she sent me the song, I think I sent it back to her like the next day. And it was just so exciting.

The men, they seem so confident in what they're saying, and they don't have no problem with talking about their sexuality and how they're going to have sex with you. So I was like, well, I could do that, and it's going to sound fire coming from a woman. It's great to see women be so kind of fierce. That is my... life's mission to make sure that I'm always unapologetically mean. Yes, well, on the bright side, Migan says that she took a day to write her verse of the song,

which is a lot longer than I thought it would have taken. She put more thought into it than I assumed. I'll give her that. After all, her contribution to the song, indeed the whole song itself, is the sort of thing that an illiterate crackhead could scribble on a bathroom stall in about 95 seconds while in the middle of overdosing. But she was more thoughtful than that, which, I mean, perhaps makes it all. all the more pathetic, but whatever the case, and if we can somehow move past the intense revulsion we feel about the way this subject is being discussed, and especially about who is

discussing it, the lessons being taught here are truly terrible. First, Migan notes that male rappers are disgusting pigs, constantly, you know, saying very crass and sexual things. Her way of correcting this problem is to be an even more disgusting pig herself. This truly is the feminist mantra. I hate it when men behave in objectionable ways. so I will behave in an even more objectionable way. She then claims that her life's mission is to be unapologetically me. That is, of course, the worst sort of mission you can have in life. It is a recipe for failure in 99.9% of cases.

The rap and pop industries package this kind of message, and they sell it to kids forgetting to mention that almost none of them will end up as successful as the celebrities they're emulating if they continue to emulate them. because unapologetically me in this context means I'm going to be a stupid, boorish, self-centered, obnoxious idiots and expect everyone to just fall over themselves and worship me anyway, because I'm me. The celebrities who promote this message will indeed themselves be worshipped, no matter how dumb and repulsive they are. But for most people, being dumb and repulsive just means that nobody will want to be around you or be your friend or marry you or hire you for a job.

You will be alone and bitter and miserable forever. But you will have helped me gone the stallion get rich, and that's all she cares about. And that's why she is canceled, and Hillary Clinton is canceled, and this show is especially, most certainly, in the end, canceled. And that'll do it for this portion of the show as we move on to the member segment. Hope to see you over there. If not, talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.