The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1096 - Hockey Player Commits Heresy By Refusing To Wear The Pride Flag

Episode Date: January 19, 2023

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm  Today on the Matt Walsh Show, an outraged media calls for a hockey player to be punished and fined for refusing to dress up in rainbow colors to celebrate gay pride. It's not enough to tolerate anymore, or even celebrate, you must participate. Also, Alec Baldwin has finally been charged with a crime, over a year after killing a woman on a movie set. Plus, Al Gore warns that the oceans are boiling away. Is that true? We'll fact check. In our Daily Cancellation, I announced the birth of my twins last week and this was somehow a source of outrage for many people on the internet. - - -  DailyWire+: Use code DO NOT COMPLY to get 40% off annual DailyWire+ membership plans: https://bit.ly/3dQINt0   Get 40% off Jeremy’s Razors Shave Kits at https://www.jeremysrazors.com/  Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj   - - -  Today’s Sponsors: Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/walsh, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit. Innovation Refunds - Learn more about Innovation Refunds at https://getrefunds.com/. - - - 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, an outrage media calls for a hockey player to be punished and fined for refusing to dress up in rainbow colors to celebrate gay pride. It's not enough to tolerate anymore or even celebrate. You must participate. Also, Alec Baldwin has finally been charged with a crime over a year after killing a woman on a movie set. Plus, Al Gore warns that the oceans are boiling away. Is that true? We'll fact check. In our daily cancellation, I announced the birth of my twins last week, and this was somehow a source of outrage. outrage for many people on the internet. We'll talk about all that and more today on the Matt Walsh. The current administration's new year's goals are to tax, spend, and turn a blind eye to inflation. If this is at odds with your goals, then, and if you're tired of the government playing games with

your savings and your retirement plan, then you need to get in touch with the experts at Birch Gold today. For over 5,000 years, gold has withstood inflation, geopolitical turmoil, and stock market crashes. Now you can own gold in a tax shelter retirement account. Birch Gold makes it easy to convert an IRA or 401k into an IRA in precious metals. Text Walsh to 9898-98 to claim your free info kit on gold. Then you can talk to one of their precious metals experts. With an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau, thousands of happy customers, and countless five-star reviews.

You can trust Birch Gold to help protect your savings. Text Walsh to 98-98-98-98-8 and protect yourself with gold today. That's Walsh to 98-98-98 today. Welcome to the show. As you know, I've been gone for the past several days as we welcome two new children into the world. It's a joyous time in my family, even though my wife and I have both slay. I've got to combined three and a half hours since last Friday. So if I start hallucinating during the course of the show today, don't be alarmed.

It's just a bit of mild psychosis caused by sleep deprivation. Nothing to be concerned about. The most important thing is that both babies and my wife are healthy and recovering well. I am also recovering well, for the record, though admittedly I wasn't a very active participant in the actual birth. But anyway, we thank all of you for your prayers and well wishes. Now, let's talk about hockey. And I confess that I know almost nothing about the sport.

I'd always thought of it as sort of like soccer on ice and involving athletes who won't collapse to the ground, writhing in pain at the slightest hint of physical contact. So hockey is colder than soccer and tougher and manlier, and you get to punch people. So like slightly less boring. That's been my general impression of hockey from a distance. And it may have been a generally accurate impression for, a long time until wokeness got a hold of the sport as it has with every professional sport and began to destroy it as it has with every professional sport and everything else in society.

And these days apparently the most basic qualification for anyone who wants to be a professional hockey player, the first prerequisite is not that he's tough or talented on the ice, but that he shows sufficient fealty to the new state religion of the United States of gay. So Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Yvonne Prevorev sparked intense backlash this week after declining to participate in the team's Pride Night festivities. The Daily Wire reports Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Yvonne Pavorev refused to take the ice during warmups to observe Pride Night on Tuesday, citing his Christian faith. Prev chose not to participate in the team promotion intended to show support for the LGBTQ plus community. The pregame skate included players wearing pride-themed jerseys that displayed their names and numbers in rainbow colors and holding hockey sticks wrapped in rainbow-colored tape before the Flyers home game against the Anaheim Ducks. Rainbow jerseys, rainbow numbers, rainbow hockey sticks.

One wonders if they're actually really getting the message across enough. This seems a little bit too subtle to me. Can they dye the ice a rainbow color? Can they sprinkle rainbow confetti from the roof? Can they set off rainbow fireworks outside the building and inside the building? Can they give mandatory rainbow tattoos to every player and fan in attendance and summarily execute anyone who refuses? Perhaps these are some ideas that they can take advantage of for future Pride Nights.

This week they went with the bare minimum, merely asking every player to adorn themselves in a flag, meant to express pride in the sexual behavior and lifestyle choices of LGBT people. But this one player refused. And after the game, he explained his reasoning to a deeply offended media. Here he is. Everybody, I respect everybody's choices. My choice is to stay true to myself and my religion.

That's all I'm going to say. Any, like I said, that's all I'm going to comment on that. If you have any hockey questions, I would answer those. Can you just get a fire at religion? Russian Orthodox. Russian Orthodox. So Pravarov cites his religious beliefs as a reason to decline participation in Pride Night. He's asked which religion he belongs to, and rather than responding by saying something like,

none of your business, you god-awful parasite, which would have been, you know, he would have been perfectly justified in responding that way. He instead answers and says that he's Russian Orthodox. Now, this is obviously a very good and very valid reason to say no to Pride Night. But any reason would have been just as good. Okay, we should be really clear about this. He could have just said that he didn't wear the rainbow uniform because he thinks the colors are ugly, or because he just didn't feel like it,

or because he finds it absolutely bizarre and deranged that he's being asked to express pride in other people's sexual preferences. He could have said, I don't even know what it means to express pride in someone else's sexual preferences. That emotion doesn't even like make sense to me. I don't know what you mean. He could have said that. Literally any reason would be valid. Because there is no valid reason for a team to ask a player to participate in this kind of stunt in the first place.

It's bizarre enough that gay people have their own flag. And I mean, having your own flag for sexual orientations, of course, not just one. flag, many. That's bizarre enough. Marching around announcing your sexuality to the world is also bizarre enough, but it's absolutely psychotic that people who are not gay would be expected to participate in this kind of charade. The point is that Pravrov doesn't owe an explanation to anyone. Much less does he have to actually tell them what his religion is. What needs to be explained and defended, but can't be, is the existence of Pride Night in the first place. But that's not how the media sees the situation. Of course, to them, his refusal to adorn himself

with the rainbow flag is an unspeakable act of apostasy. So sportswriter Marcus Hayes over at the Philadelphia Inquirer, along with many other media personalities, he's echoing, you know, the sentiments of so many. He demanded that the player be benched for this infraction. Hayes wrote in his column, quote, let's not complicate the issue. Probably. Ravrov refused to warm up Tuesday night against Anaheim because he does not support the right of LGBTQ plus people to even exist. He cites his devotion to the Russian Orthodox Church in his, in his eyes, their life is a sin. About that. Patriarch Creel, the church's leader in Russia and reportedly a former KGB agent in May justified Russia's invasion of Ukraine because Ukraine allows gay pride

parades. And if Russia and other homophobic states do not oppress LGBTQ plus persons, that human civilization will end there. This is homophobia at its most extreme. If you subscribe to this belief, you are a homophobe. A little rainbow tape on Pravarov's hockey stick wasn't going to send him to hell. So yes, if the flyers were staunch in their advocacy, Pravarov should have been benched. From its hockey as for Everyone initiative to hosting a transgender and non-binary hockey tournament, the NHL has spent millions of dollars in the past decade to erase its image as a non-inclusive, racist, homophobic business that prefer straight white players to entertain its straight white audience. The Flyers have been leaders in this initiative, and they shined all day and night Tuesday.

In addition to the warm-up jerseys, the team held a pre-game skate for LGBTQ-plus youth, provided complimentary tickets for members of nine LGBTQ-plus organizations to attend the game, and hosted a meet-and-grit with players. And then Pravaraov. Pravarov's refusal came from his dedication to an oppressive religion, apparently. I like the apparently at the end. So he makes all of these wild assertions that are not grounded in reality at all. And at the very end, he says, apparently, as if that it makes it okay. Yes, let's not complicate the issue, says Hayes.

Let's not complicated by being reasonable, sane adults. When instead we could be, you know, we could engage, in spittle-flecked half-drunk temper tantrums, which are then somehow published in the newspaper. But Hayes' perspective appears to be shared by the majority of the hockey media and others who work around and in the sport. Here's a very brief sampling of a couple of tweets.

Matt Lark, I don't know who any of these people are, but apparently they work in the hockey world. Matt Larkin tweeted, this is on the flyers as much as it's on Pravarov. One, host Pride Night. Two, learn of a player whose religion preaches hate toward the community supported by Pride Night.

Three, learned that that player rejects Pride Night. Four, let him play on Pride Night. What a slap in the face. Aaron Ambrose wrote, let me get this straight. You have a player that openly declines to participate in an inclusive initiative for a community I am proud to be a part of, and you still dress him in the game? Be better NHL Flyers. Charlie O'Connor says, the whole point of a team wearing Pride jersey is to send a unified message that LGBTQ people who like the Flyers are, seen and welcomed, that the team supports them and has their back.

Pravarov made it abundantly clear that he didn't want to see or welcome that group of fans. Meanwhile, on the NHL network, an analyst said that if Pravrov is a Russian Orthodox and he doesn't want to take part in a pride parade, then he should just go back to Russia. And Ivan Proberov can get on a plane any day he wants and go back to a place where he feels more comfortable, take less money, and get on with his life. life that way. If it's that problematic for him, and he's been in North America for a long time. He played in the Western Hockey League. He's now been in Philadelphia for many years. If this is that much of a problem for him to maybe assimilate into his group of teammates and in the

community and here in this country, that's okay. Listen, you can feel any way you want, but the beauty is if it bothers you that much, there's always a chance to leave, go back where you feel more comfortable. I understand there's a conflict of sorts going on over there. Maybe get involved. So. Go back where you came from is now a perfectly acceptable response, not xenophobic at all,

apparently, provided you're speaking to a white man and the sin the white man committed is that he isn't gay enough. But then you can say that. But only a white man. I mean, by the way, if this was a player from Uganda, I mean, I don't know, probably aren't a lot of hockey players from Uganda. If this was a basketball player

from Uganda or something, and it was a similar situation, I can guarantee you that that dude, that doofus would not be on TV saying, if you don't like it, why don't you go back to Uganda? But it's okay because he's from Russia originally, so you can say that. Elsewhere in media, another sports journalist was, I mean, he was practically in tears over this issue. And this rant goes on for like three minutes. We'll only play just a quick sample of it.

Here it is. The theme from the National Hockey League is hockey is for everyone. The theme is not hockey is for everyone, dot, dot, dot, unless you don't believe in gay rights, then do whatever you want. If the National Hockey League is going to do this, if any league is going to do this, do it properly, or reevaluate what you're doing. Because there's not a lot of repercussions that I'm seeing from any league. Now, it could change with the NHL.

Could change with the NHL. I think you find the flyers a million dollars for this. I'm not kidding. Figure this out and stop the game. offending people on nights where it's not about that. It's supposed to be about inclusivity. The National Hockey League need to attack this and figure

this out. Because what I heard last night was offensive and didn't make any sense. Because, for instance, if that was a military night, okay? Right. If anyone in Canada or in the States on a military appreciation night wouldn't wear a jersey pregame,

do you have any idea the uproar that would have happened on that? Well, I'm glad you brought that up because I do have something. I do actually have an idea of the response. And we know that if someone didn't show appreciation for the military or, you know, didn't want to show appreciation for the United States, didn't want to be patriotic, these very same people in the media would be defending and celebrating that person as a hero. And we know this for a fact, because that's exactly what happened, of course, with Colin Kaepernick. The only difference is that the military

fights for our country, which means they fight for all of us, provided the military is being properly utilized and not being sent overseas to fight battles that have nothing to do with us. But, I mean, that's a subject for another day. The point is that when we show appreciation for the military, what we're doing is we're showing appreciation for the service that it provides to the country, notwithstanding the way that the military is abused by the bureaucrats. So that's the idea of the military, right? Well, what service has the LGBT cult provided?

What are we supposed to be appreciative of? Appreciation night for LGBT? Why? Why should I appreciate them? What have they ever done for me or for you or for anyone? What exactly has the LGBT club? What have they done for the country? What service are they providing? What are we thanking them for again? I mean, I'm asking the question. If you're saying it, well, we've got to have appreciation. Okay, for what? I mean, I'm sure, look, I am perfectly, I believe in gratitude.

I believe in, I think gratitude is an underrated virtue. So I, if you're telling me, you should be grateful for this person or this group. Great, tell me why. You should be grateful for LGBT people. Okay. Because we're thanking them for having sex with each other. That's what we're supposed to appreciate. That's what you want Yvon Pravarov to be proud of?

You want him to be proud of that. Again, what does that mean? If you're a heterosexual and you're expressing gay pride, you're proud of someone else's sexual activity? It doesn't make sense to start with. Oh, but it's not about that, they say. It's about showing respect. If you don't wear the pride flag, you don't respect gay people. All right, then.

Cool. So then if you don't wear. a crucifix and proclaim Jesus Christ, your Lord and Savior, you don't respect Christians. Indeed, if you don't actively engage in demonstrative acts of Christian worship, you not only don't respect Christians, but you don't think we have a right to exist. Your refusal to wear a cross around your neck is a statement that you want all Christians killed in a genocide. Is that how this works now? If you're not actively participatory, you're not actively participating, in some group's event, then you hate them.

That's how it works, evidently, but only for the LGBT cult. It's been given pride of place. And, you know, it's a special case. Because LGBT is indeed the state religion. And the state religion demands participation. Remember, this is the process. We've talked about this before. This is the trajectory for all things where the left is involved.

It always goes this way. First, you're made to tolerate, and then you're made to celebrate, and then you're made to participate. First, you must merely, you know, put up with some, even if you object to it, you're supposed to just put up with it and not say anything and not object. You know, acquiescence, basically. And that's the first step. And then as soon as they get everyone on board with that, they say, well, no, that's not enough. You also have to applaud. We need you to really actually applaud.

And then, even after you're applauding, they say, no, no, we need you out there. You need to be in the game, okay, participate. You have to involve yourself in what they're doing. And with the LGBT cult, we have long since reached this third stage of participation, involvement. We are way past you'll be made to care. Now it's you'll be made to be a participant in. And that was inevitable ever since we started on the first stage. Just put up with don't say anything, don't object.

Don't express your own viewpoints. We should have said no back then. Some of us did, but not enough. So we better start saying it now. Now let's get to our five headlines. If you own a business, you know, the past few years have been a bumpy ride, to put it mildly, from COVID lockdowns to Biden inflation, you could probably use a break. And innovation refunds can help. If your business has five or more employees and managed to survive COVID, you can be eligible to receive a payroll tax rebate of up to 26,000.

$6,000 per employee. This is not a loan. There's no payback. It's a refund of your taxes. The challenge is getting your hands on it. How do you cut through the red tape and get your business the refund money? Well, you've got to go to getrefonds.com. Their team of tax attorneys are highly trained in this little-known payroll tax refund program have already returned $1 billion to businesses and they can help you to. They do all the work, no charge up front, and they simply share a percentage of the cash that they get for you. Businesses of all types can qualify, including those who took PPP, nonprofits, and even those that had increases in sales also can qualify.

So just go to getrefonds.com, click on qualify me and answer a few questions. This payroll tax refund is only available for a limited amount of time. Don't miss out. Go to getrefonds.com, getrefonds.com. Well, I know I already said this, but I just want to say again, if you'll forgive me for being sappy and sincere for a moment. Thank you to everyone who's been praying for my family for my wife and the babies. and I know there were a lot of you out there keeping us in your prayers, and I'm very grateful for it.

And I'm not going to get into a lot of details, but I will say that your prayers ended up being, as prayers always are, but in this case, especially important, even more than I anticipated, because the delivery was complicated. They had to do an emergency C-section to get the second baby, to deliver the second baby. And not an ideal scenario when you've got to go into a C-section in the middle of a delivery of twins. So quite a scary situation for several moments. there. But fortunately, everything worked out okay. As mentioned, the babies are healthy. My wife is healthy and recovering. And the babies are also, I'm pleased to say, quite opinionated, like their

old man. They take after me. They've enjoyed sharing their opinions with us in the form of crying quite a bit, very much like adult leftists, you know, newborn infants and adult leftists. I tend to communicate in similar ways. And the first night back from the hospital, you know, the babies took turns sharing their opinions with us all night. One would cry and then fall asleep, and then the other would take a shift. So there was a kind of a shift. There was a divide and conquering thing where they said, okay, now it's your turn. And they were just passing the baton back and forth the entire night, divide and conquer. So it's a method we're obviously familiar with this being our second set of twins. But there's an added twist now of trying to keep track of which baby is which,

because our first set were fraternal, and these are identical. So this has been a very fun wrinkle. And especially late at night when you're sleep deprived and it's dark. And you're like, wait, which baby is this again? And I've suggested, you know, there's like different problems, different solutions to the problem of how do you keep the kids apart when they're identical twins? And by the way, identical, I don't know if you knew this, because this came as a little bit of surprise to me. Identical twin means like they're literally identical. They actually look exactly the same.

I guess I knew that, but then it's different when you actually have kids. And we were examining, we're looking at the way they're, you know, even things like how their ears are shaped. And can we see a difference there? No, 100% the same, which is pretty amazing. So we've had different ideas for keeping everything, keeping track of everything. One solution that I had suggested was, well, what if we just give them the same name? And then there's no way, then it doesn't matter. There's no way to get whatever name we use. We know it's the right one.

So that was, look, it's just a brainstorm as all. You're throwing ideas out there. Now, admittedly, when you are sleep deprived in the middle of night, babies are crying. It's not always the best brainstorming environment, I will admit. But that idea was shot down, frowned upon by the family and probably will be frowned upon by society. So I'm sure what we'll figure it out as we. And we just have to deal with the fact that this is something that the twins as they get older, the identical thing. I'm quite sure they're going to be exploiting that to no end. I would if I was them.

I mean, I couldn't blame them. All right. Let's begin with this. This is hot off the presses. I just saw this story come across my desk in that I just, it popped up on Twitter, actually. So this is the headline from the Wall Street Journal, Alec Baldwin to be charged with involuntary manslaughter in the rust shooting. I'm just reading this now for the first time.

It says prosecutors plan to charge Alec Baldwin with involuntary manslaughter in the fatal shooting of a cinematographer on the set of the movie Rust in New Mexico in 2021. The district attorney in Santa Fe set on Thursday, the film's armor overseeing weapons. Hannah Gutierrez-Reed will also be charged with involuntary manslaughter in the incident, according to a statement from Santa Fe area district attorney Mary Carmich Altwise. The charges are expected to be filed by the end of the month. And that's not all. The film's first assistant director, David Hulls, has agreed to plead guilty to the charge of negligent use of deadly weapon, according to the statement.

And of course, the shooting occurred on the set of the low-budget Western outside Santa Fe, New Mexico in October 2021. So it's been well over a year. During preparations for a scene, Mr. Baldwin discharged a live round from a revolver killing 42-year-old Helena Hutchins. the film's director Joel Suzzo was wounded. And in New Mexico, involuntary manslaughter is a fourth degree felony that carries a maximum sentence of 18 months in prison, which is absurd by the only 18 months in prison.

That's the maximum. My God. The maximum for killing someone, the most you could expect to get, is a year and a half in prison. And we know with near certainty that Alec Baldwin will not be, he probably will not spend a day in prison

him, I guess. He's going to plead down and get probation or something like that. The fact that they even, you know, it took them a year, over a year, almost a year and a half to even decide to charge him, we can be pretty sure that if any one of us were in a similar situation, it would not have taken that long. And we'd probably be facing steeper charges than that. And I say this as someone who, yeah, I'm not even as, like, there are, there are some people who want to fully throw the book at Alec Baldwin and give him like first degree murder charges. And I've never advocated that because I, because I do think that the blame here is, it's not just Alec Baldwin.

I do think he obviously shares the blame with other people on the set. And you're handed a gun and someone says, apparently what happened? They handed the gun. They said it was a cold gun. meaning that it's not loaded with a live round, and he was handed and he was told that. Now, he's still supposed to check it, especially before pulling the trigger,

but you share the blame. I think a manslaughter charge makes sense, but 18 months in prison has a maximum for killing someone. It's completely absurd, especially because, again, we know that he's not actually going to most likely serve that time. All right. Daily Wire headline,

Al Gore goes on unhinged climate rant condemns detainment of Greta Thunberg. Former Vice President Al Gore ranted about climate change during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and condemn the purported detainment of activist Greta Thunberg. Of course, that detainment was entirely inact, and that was all fake. Anyway, it was all a pageant, which is all that Greta Thunberg ever does. The former Democratic presidential candidate said in an impassioned Jeremiah at the conference that carbon emissions are raising the temperatures of the troposphere, the part of the atmosphere that contains oxygen,

to an unsustainable degree. He claimed that increased emissions are linked to extreme weather events and the apparent boiling of the oceans. We have that clip. Let's listen to that. When are we going to bring these emissions down? And just to put the science in a slightly different context, people are familiar with that thin blue line that the astronauts bring back in their pictures

from space. That's the part of the atmosphere that has oxygen, the troposphere, and it's only five to seven kilometers thick. That's what we're using as an open sewer. If you could drive a car straight up in the air at interstate highway speeds, you'd get to the top of that blue line in five minutes. And all the greenhouse gas pollution would be below you. We're still putting 162 million tons into it every single day. And the accumulated amount is now trapping. as much extra heat as would be released by 600,000 Hiroshima-class atomic bombs exploding every single day on the earth. That's what's boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers and the rain bombs,

and sucking the moisture out of the land, and creating the droughts, and melting the ice, and raising the sea level, and causing these waves of climate refugees predicted to reach one billion in this century. Look at the xenophobia and political authoritarian trends that have come from just a few million refugees. What about a billion? We would lose our capacity for self-governance on this world. We have to act. So in answer to your question, I would say we have to have a sense of urgency much greater than we have yet had and we need have had and we need to make some changes. Yeah, the oceans are boiling. I don't know if you knew that. I didn't know that. I didn't know the

oceans are boiling because that's what's the word for it? Insane. That's an insane claim to make. are not boiling. Just so you know, by the way, in order for the oceans to boil, you would need, we would need an average temperature on Earth of, I guess, 212 degrees. A little bit more than that, actually, because I think the boiling point for salt water is slightly higher. So it would need to be over 200 degrees before we get to the point we've got to worry about the oceans boiling. And of course, if we got anywhere near that temperature, then the oceans boiling would somehow actually be the least of a lot of our concerns because we'd all, in fact, we'd already already be dead. Most life on Earth would

be dead if we got anywhere near that average temperature. And you hear things like that, and you might want to assume, if you really don't know any better, you haven't been paying attention at all, you might hear that and say, well, he's being metaphorical or this is like poetic license, hyperbole. No, none of this is meant to be seen as hyperbole or as metaphor or making a vivid illustration. This is all supposed to be taken literally. And so when they say that, and he's not the first person to make this claim,

about boiling oceans, you are supposed to actually imagine in your mind the Pacific Ocean looking like a tea kettle, a giant tea kettle. That's what you're supposed to imagine. And we often say about these people, Al Gore and all the right, Greta Thunberg and all the rest of them,

that they're, that these are doomsday prophets. And it's very similar in a lot of ways. this is part of the modern day, you know, the new American state religion. And so many religions have their own doomsday prophets. This is, these are ours, our doomsday prophets. And there are a lot of interesting similarities between these doomsday prophets and the doomsday prophets of old, especially the ones that were more directly religious.

All the various doomsday cults that have popped up over, over the years, especially modern society. And one of the through lines here, one of the similarities with these doomsday people, is that they make these predictions. The world's going to end at this point because this and this are going to happen. Like here's what's going to happen, and this is how we'll know the world's about to end, and then it will end. And they make these prophecies and these predictions.

And they don't come to pass. But the Doomsday prophet never admits that and says, oh my gosh, I was wrong about that. Thank God I was wrong about that. Turns out we're okay. They never do that. All they do is just change. You know, they move the goalpost.

In increasingly absurd ways, there was that, I forget the name of the doomsday prophet 10 years ago or so, who said that there was going to be a rap. He gave an actual date for the rapture. He said, on this date, there's going to be a rapture and you're going to see people floating up into heaven. and if you're left behind, you're screwed. And then the day came and nobody was floating.

And so then the goalposts was moved and he said, oh, it was a spiritual rapture. So you didn't see it was invisible. It was an invisible rapture. And you thought, what does that mean? Some people, their souls left up to heaven, but their bodies are still walking around? Well, the climate change alarmists do a very similar thing. Keep moving the goalpost. Now, all that said, so that, you know, we say that their doomsday prophets, the

religious doomsday cult thing. And it is that. But it's also not just that. There's something even more sinister brimming below all of this, which is that this is, you know, an anti-human conspiracy. There's a reason why they're saying all of this and why they want you to believe that the oceans are boiling and that we're all on the verge of global destruction. It's because they want to make you afraid so that they can control you, which is a tale as old as time from tyrants. They make you afraid, and then they exploit the fear. We saw the same thing with COVID. We see the same thing with the tyrants who run our civilization in many different, you know, manifestations. But this is a, this is really a global conspiracy among governments across the

world and to make us terrified that the end is nigh so that we will surrender, you know, control over our everyday lives. Which is what makes things like, I don't mean to bring the gas stove discourse back, but it's what makes things like the gas stove important because that's no small thing. and if it is small, it's the fact that it's small that makes it significant. Because that is the, that is how detailed they want to be in their control over our lives. Like every aspect, even the way that you, the tool that you use in your house to boil water to make pasta, they want to control that too.

They want to control over that. And if they want to control those little smaller things, then, then certainly it's the bigger things they want to control most of all. Right, here's a headline from The Daily Wire. Gay couple allegedly pimped out and made child porn with adopted children. This is a very difficult story to read. It's one of the most horrifying news stories I've ever seen. But here is the story anyway.

A shocking investigation has reportedly uncovered disturbing new details about a gay activist couple in Georgia who are charged. with raping their adopted sons and pimping them out to a local LGBTQ pedophile ring. A months-long town hall investigation published Tuesday viewed recorded jailhouse calls and new court documents and spoke exclusively to a family member revealing that the alleged sexual abuse went much deeper than previously reported. The investigation will have three more installments according to town hall. The married couple, William Dale Zulock Jr., 33, is a government worker. his husband Zachary Jacobi Zulak, 35, a banker,

were arrested last summer on charges of sodomizing their two elementary-age sons and prostituting the children. They were indicted by a grand jury on charges of incest, aggravated sodomy, aggravated child molestation, felony sexual exploitation of children, and felony prostitution of a minor. If convicted, they face more than nine life sentences each. Both men have pleaded not guilty. Then we get into some of the details.

The Zulaks adopted the brothers now 9 and 11 from a Christian special needs adoption agency. Before their arrest, the couple lived in affluent life in Oxford, Georgia, and Atlanta suburb. The children were enrolled in third and fourth grade when their adoptive fathers were arrested. According to a 17-count indictment, the two men allegedly performed oral sex on both their adoptive sons, forced the boys to perform oral sex on them. They raped their sons anally at least once the older boy was allegedly injured from the rape. The sexual abuse allegedly began in late 2019 and became worse in 2021. Williams has since admitted to forcing his 11-year-old son to perform oral copulation on him.

In a sworn affidavit, he admitted this. I can't even keep reading this. It's an important report from Town Hall. And you can go, and this is, as I said, there are multiple installments of it. And it's good that Town Hall is following this story. The Daily Wire is following it. because we know that this is the kind of story that the corporate media is not interested in. They, this is not something they want to talk about.

Especially when you, I mean, it's bad enough for their narrative anyway that the culprits here are, is a gay couple. But then also when you, when you add in this LGBT pedophile ring, that just makes it all the more certain that the corporate media is not going to want to talk about. about this. What can we say about it? Well, to begin with, public execution for both should be the penalty. I just think every time I read someone who does something horrific like this and then they get charged with multiple life sentences, every time I read that, it makes me furious. Not only because of what they've done, of course, but just the absurdity, this charade of giving multiple life sentences? As if that's supposed to, oh, no, now we're really serious.

Life in prison isn't enough. So we all acknowledge that life in prison isn't enough for these demons. And so we're not just going to give them life prison. We're going to give them nine lives in prison. Well, if they were cats, then maybe that would mean something. But they're human beings. And so they only have one life to live. And you're not making the sentence any harsher by adding on life sentences.

It's totally symbolic. And I think it's a it's a grotesque, just. mockery of justice. Because what they should be doing, if you are admitting, if the justice system, the court system is admitting that a life sentence is not enough of a punishment, which it isn't, then there is only one other step up. And it's not to add on, whoa, we'll give them 90 life sentences. That'll show them. No, if the one life sentence is not enough of a punishment and we all seem to agree that it's not, then the next step is execution. and it should be done publicly and it should be done pretty quickly.

Charge them, you convict them, they're convicted, you take them out, you take them out back shortly thereafter, you parade them out, you prayed them out in front of a crowd, you want a crowd there because we want them to know that this final disgrace of them being killed, we want them to know that it's being seen, we want them to know that. and we want them to have that additional bit of suffering. We want all the suffering for them possible. We want to cause them immense suffering because that's justice. And we also want society to see that.

We want society to see this is what we do with people who treat kids this way. Anyone else in the LGBT pedophile ring. When we find you, this is what we're going to do to you. So that's what it should be. first of all. And the second point is that this is not surprising. This is horrifying. It's infuriating.

It's evil. It's nauseating. It's disgusting. It's a lot of things. But it's not surprising. You're putting children into a disordered environment. And when you do that, you can't be surprised by the horrible things that follow. Look, children need a mom and a dad.

That's what children need. They need a mom and a dad. Children, every child has a mom and a dad. Every child biologically has a mother and father. Not every child has a mother and father who are willing to or able to care for them for whatever reason. And so does that mean that we say, well, you know, your first, your biological set of mother and father that didn't work out. So we're just going to be, so that whole arrangement, you don't need that. We'll do something else for you.

you know, we'll give you two dads or two moms or one mom or whatever. You know, it's fine. You'll settle for something else. That cannot be the solution. Now, yes, is it if you can mother, father, couples, can they abuse their children? Does that happen? Of course it does. But you want to give kids the best chance possible. You want to put them in the most ideal possible situation to start with. And, horrific things will still happen even when you do that. We all know that. That's one of the, that's just, that's one of the terrible things about living in a fallen world, but you still want to give kids the best chance possible, which means you give them a mother and a father. And by the way, you know, and I made this point on Twitter, and there were people pretending, as always, to be offended by it.

And yet, as always, you know, I say this and most other people, they listen, they, it's like, they know that I'm right, even if they won't say it out loud. And the point is that I would not, I would, I would not hire a man to babysit my kids for two hours so that my wife and I can go out for dinner. I would never do that. Now, if there's a man who's a close family member, a close friend who I know very well and trust, it's obviously different. But I would not hire. When it comes to like hiring a babysitter, someone you don't really know, and you're hiring someone, this is what they do for a job. and you're bringing them in to watch your kids.

I wouldn't hire a man for that. And almost no parent would or ever has. So they could hear that and say, oh, that's, I don't, well, no, almost no parent would. You know, you go on some babysitter service and, you know, you're looking for a nanny service or whatever it is. And there's a lot of them out there. And you're looking for someone to care for your kids. If you see a man's profile come up, you're scrolling right past that one. Almost everyone does.

Because again, it's about putting your kid in any situation in the most ideal possible situation. You're playing the odds. You're looking at statistics. And so, almost no one would hire a male babysitter to babysit their kids. And yet we're giving male couples kids to adopt. Does that make sense? Like, would you have hired these two guys to come watch your kids for a night? If you were on, let's say you're on a, you know, babysitting nanny service or something, someone's a recommended to you maybe. So, oh, you need a babysitter.

And you said, well, who you got? And then they named these two 30-year-old men. Would you say, okay, y'all have them come babysit my kids for three hours? Almost nobody would. Whether they admit it out loud or not. And yet we're giving or adopting kids out to them. All right. Let's get to the comment section.

We'll do something a little bit different for the comment section today. It's been a week since I did a show, so instead of reading comments from my last episode, instead I want to focus on something that happened while I was away, some drama involving The Daily Wire, in fact. And kind of the elephant in the room. This is a segment of the show dedicated to the SBG. And so it seems relevant to bring up the fact that there was a literal insurrection against the SBG while I was away on my lengthy paternity leave trying to qualify to become the next Department of Transportation Secretary.

The insurrection, which, by the way, was worse than January 6th at 9-11 in Pearl Harbor and the COVID pandemic combined times three, was launched by none other than Candace Owens. And Candace has apparently been attempting to start her own gang, with her own fans, and now she's soliciting her audience for suggestions in what to call. all her gang. So she posted this to her page a few days.

Go watch this. Matt Walsh is my arch-nemesis at Daily Wire, and we will continue this pursuit of trying to name my gang. It's definitely not going to be cravings. Please send in more suggestions, guys, you got to get to the bottom of this. I just feel like, you know, whenever I see Matt, I saw him yesterday, he's walking around. He's just super confident because he knows he's got this sweet baby gang.

I'm sick of watching him walk around, like so Jordan Peterson, lobster style, because he knows. he's got this sweet baby gang behind him. It's disgusting. We've got to end this. We need a gang name. Sending me suggestions. Okay, now, first of all, I didn't realize I was Candace's arch nemesis at the company. My wife always tells me that I'm oblivious and not very observant of my surrounding. So I guess it's, I mean, this is another example. I became an arch nemesis without even noticing it. That's fine. But now trying to supplant the SBG, and I just want to read to you some of the suggestions that her audience is coming up with,

for her gang. And I'm not, I'm not making this up. I'm on Candace Owens' Twitter, her podcast Twitter page. And this is what they're suggesting. Okay. So it makes, it's just conclusion, too long didn't read. Spoiler, it, we don't have anything to worry about. Okay. The sweet baby gang is not being taken over. So here's some of the suggestions. Red, candied black, the hot chocolate gang, sweet candy gang, the empowered pack, Candy's kids, candy crushers. There's a lot of candy.

As far as I know, Candice doesn't go by candy, at least not in public, so I don't know where this is coming from. The Candy O's, the Candice Committee, fierce Owens posse, lit Owens Legion,

Candace's candy crushers. Okay, now, some of these sound like names my grandmother would come up with if she played fantasy football. Some of them sound like, team names for some kind of god-awful team-building exercise at like a Christian youth camp. And some of them just sound creepy.

None of them hold a candle to the sweet baby gang. So here's the thing, Candice. You can't just, and I've tried to explain this, you can't just fabricate the magic of a sweet baby gang. You can't create it by committee or by pole. The sweet baby gang formed organically out of the earth like a great tree. You know, it grew from the soil and it became this something. gigantic and formidable, which will live for thousands of years, will outlive any of us.

It was born, okay, the Sweet Baby Gang was, much like a real baby. It was conceived. It was given to us by the universe, not by a Twitter poll. That's what you don't understand. That's what nobody understands. And it's why the SBG will live forever and never be defeated. while Candy's kids will at best become the name of like a discount daycare center or something. In conclusion, SBG for Life. This month, we are celebrating the anniversary of one of the greatest moments in Daily Wire history after months of us leading the legal battle against the federal government and a national do not comply campaign. The Supreme Court ruled in our favor and blocked the Biden administration's outrageous vaccine mandate. This mandate would have said a dangerous precedent giving the unelected OSHA power over the personal medical.

decisions of American citizens. The Supreme Court recognized this gross power grab and they made the right decision. And we are so proud to have led the charge in this fight, but we could not have done it without you. Thousands of you join the DailyWire and over a million Americans signed our petition against the mandates. To celebrate, we're offering 40% off our annual memberships with the code do not comply. So celebrate one of the greatest moments in DeliWire history with 40% off your annual membership. Join now at DailyWire.com slash subscribe and join the winning team as we continue to crush the left. Remember, do not comply for 40% off. Do not comply. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. One objection I've often encountered over my years as a talking head, and this is

something that everyone in media hears at nauseam, is that, you know, I spend too much time focused on the negative. Why don't you ever talk about positive things, the objector asks? Why not spend time discussing encouraging and wholesome topics? That's what I really want to hear about. Now, the truth is that I do sometimes talk about positive things. I do, in fact, spend time on my show and on other platforms discussing more lighthearted and happier topics on occasion. At least lighthearted and happy to me. But the people who demand such content are nowhere to be seen once it's provided. They don't say, hey, thanks for this.

It's just what I asked for. Instead, they say nothing. Because the truth is that they've probably changed the channel. They closed out the video. Because the further truth is that they don't really want these more wholesome themes. say they do, but when they get it, they're bored. That's part of the reason why you don't see more of the sort of cheerful and uplifting content that so many people pretend to want, but rarely support whenever they get it. But the other potential reason for a lack of such content is that

when someone in the public light shares an encouraging thought or a happy moment with the public, it is nearly certain that he will be ripped to shreds by a million crazed vultures who seek to devour happiness like scavengers on roadkill. Now, the point here isn't just to whine and say, woe is me. There's a larger point I want to make. But case and point, consider the happy moment that I experienced and shared with the world and have talked a little bit about on the show late last week. The day after our twins were born, I announced the news on Twitter.

And since I'm a dad of six now, I can't help but include an extremely lame dad joke in moments like this. compulsion. And also you might say a solemn responsibility to ruin a profound moment with a corny joke. This is just, it's what we're supposed to do. So I tweeted, kids number five and six were born last night. The males in the family now outnumber the females five to three. My master plan is complete. Mom and babies are healthy and doing well. Thank you for all your prayers. That's why I said. That's all I said. The totally hilarious joke about the boys outnumbering the girls and the bit about how I somehow planned this from the start is a version of a joke that approximately, I don't know, 700,000 people have said to me whenever they find out

that we're having two more boys. In fact, it's the sort of Battle of the Sexes type joke that families with boys and girls make all the time amongst each other. It's all very normal. But as we've seen, there's nothing that the internet hates more than normal, which is why this tweet announcing the birth of my children attracted hundreds of outraged responses. People outraged. So to be clear, these are people who are actively mad. about a stranger announcing the birth of his children. That emotion, okay, outrage over a birth announcement. It's an emotion that a healthy human being has likely never felt.

It's an emotion not even available to a healthy person. They wouldn't know how to generate that emotion if they wanted to. And yet many people who are apparently capable of experiencing such an emotion or wish to pretend that they experience it made their voices heard. And I'm not going to go through and read them all. Just suffice it to say again, hundreds of people, comments, sending me messages, very upset. Wanting to, taking time, by the way, it's like I just had kids. It's like to me, so here, it takes mind to lecture me about, you know, the manner in which I announce it.

Because I have time to really think about that. So I think this one tweet, selected at random, is a fairly representative of the whole. So this was the general tenor. A woman responded, imagine your twins being born and you tweet that your master plan of having more boys than girls in a family. is finally complete. As the oldest of five girls, I am completely effing sick of men celebrating male babies as inherently more valuable. Very sorry for this man's daughters. I think it's also worth singling out this other response, one other, from a woman who pretends to be a reverend. Reverend Kim Chafee tweeted, reverend in quotes, reverend in big air quotes there. Kim Chafee tweeted, it might be humorous

where not for his patriarchal history and attitude towards women. Not appropriate, not funny. By the way, this is a woman named Kim who responds to a joke like that by saying, not appropriate or funny, you already have in your mind an image of what this person looks like, and it's exactly that. You're exactly right. It's that person. And there are plenty more where these came from. And this is to say nothing of the people who took the time to publicly wish that my children

turn out gay or trans. That was another big response. It's quite interesting, actually, that those who pretend to support gay and trans people are also the ones most likely to accuse you of being gay or trans as an insult. or to wish it on your children as a curse. Now, over the following week, I posted a few more times about the birth. Each time I was rebuked for one reason or another, and always there followed many ill wishes to me and my family and my newborn sons.

Most of this came from the left, but not all of it. For instance, in response to a picture of me simply sitting and holding the babies, is it? And I don't usually post pictures of my kids online, but they're infants and you can barely see them, so, you know, it's fine. But a YouTuber from the Manosphere named Ryan Stone tweeted, showing off the F trophies for clout. F trophies like the F word, trophies.

That's what I was, so the babies are trophies that I'm showing off for clout. He then went on a multi-tweet tirade complaining about men who take pictures with their own children. It's not manly, apparently. To love your kids and be proud of them is not male. It's perhaps not a surprise that a picture of a proud father would be so upsetting to the sort of man who clearly never had one. Now, all of this reached its apotheus a few days ago when I answered a question about whether I'd be taking a long paternity leave. And I said in reply, and here I directly quote myself, I said, nope, I'll be back to work in a couple of days. That's what I said.

That was it. I'll be back to work in a couple of days. End of statement. And yet, even that was offensive to some people and not a small number. So here we can use this response as representative. One man said, Matt, my man, I'm happy for you. For real, congratulations. Twins, a lot of work, a lot of fun. Good luck. You do know, I hope, that you could just be gracious and not dog whistle malign people who take paternity leave. Yes, to say when you're returning to work is to dog whistle malign men on paternity leave. You can't even say when you're coming back to work without offending people who are not coming back to work yet. This is ludicrous for many reasons, beginning with the fact that I don't need a dog. to malign anyone. If I want to do it, I'll do it openly. I think I've proved that, if nothing else, during my career. Now, you might listen to all this and say, okay, sure. Of course, this was the response you got. It's the internet. It's not real life. That's just how people are on the internet.

Besides, the vast majority of people were encouraging and positive and congratulatory, and these trolls are in the minority. And on that latter point, I agree. Most people have been very supportive of sending their well wishes and prayers. And for that, as I said, I'm profoundly grateful. as to the former, I certainly do not agree. If many people are vicious and vile and insane on the internet, then they are, by definition, vicious and vile and insane in real life because the internet is real life. It exists in reality.

It is used by people in reality. So if you say something to somebody on the internet, you have said it to them in real life. This idea that it's some sort of dream or alternate dimension, It doesn't count. It doesn't make sense. It is a communication device. Saying the internet isn't real life.

It's like writing an insult on a piece of paper and then handing it to someone and then telling them they have no right to be upset about it because you didn't insult them in real life. You only insulted them on the piece of paper. Relax, man. It's just a piece of paper. Now, it's certainly true that many of the trolls who say heinous things on the internet

would never do it face to face. Nobody would come up to me in person and say, for example, I hope your newborn children end up being trans. Nobody would do that. I'm out in public all the time, and nobody comes up to me and says anything like that to my face.

Many have said it to me on the internet. Never would say it to my face. That, however, doesn't make the statement any less real, and it also doesn't make it any better because it just makes them cowards on top of being perverts and degenerates and psychos. But let me get to my real point. And the real point isn't simply

to just complain about people being mean and weird on the internet, Instead, this has been, I think, yet another opportunity to learn a very valuable lesson about the modern world, which is this, that many people hate happiness. And this is really what lies at the root of the psychotic backlash that I received for committing the sin of talking about my children in public. I'm a family man, and I'm happy in that role, and I'm proud of my family. That's why I talk about it. And that makes certain people very upset. Why? Why do people get offended by the way? Why get offended by happiness? Because they're deeply unhappy and miserable themselves, and they take your happiness as a personal affront. You know,

the adage about misery-loving company is true, but I think it's important to understand why it's true. That this sort of miserable, selfish person has given up on striving for anything better in life. Instead, they try to attain happiness by using this kind of bell curve method. If they can drag everyone else down, if they can spread their misery around, then they'll have increased their own happiness in comparison to the average. It's like if you earn more money, you'll have made yourself richer, but if you earn the same amount while everyone else loses money, you'll have closed the gap between yourself and the richest person, thereby making yourself richer on average. Many people in our culture choose the latter approach, both metaphorically and also literally

when it comes to money. Yet, of course, not all forms of happiness are equally as threatening to the miserable, selfish person. In fact, he'll be very encouraging to you if you are seeking pleasure in selfish pursuits or if you're doing things that are materialistic or shallow or, you know, that aren't that meaningful and you're happy about it and you talk about how you're happy about it. These sorts of people, they'll be very encouraging of that. They're happy, okay? Because that's, that is a non-threatening sort of happiness that you're experiencing. But this sort of person is especially offended by the happiness you derive from good, true, fulfilling things, from a life of service to your family. That's the most offensive kind of happiness to them.

They hate that. They really hate it. That is the kind of happiness that this sort of person hates most of all, because he has told himself that that sort of happiness is impossible. He's either childless and lonely, facing the prospect of dying alone and unloved, trying to convince himself that this is the preferable option. Or he has a family, but his family is broken and poisoned by resentment, and his kids hate him and his wife left him or whatever, or husband left him, if it's a man or woman, and just everything's in shambles. And they're trying to convince themselves that it's not their fault. That this is always how it ends up with families. All families end up this way.

well your happiness in your family life interferes with this mental narrative and so they will hate you for it they're trying to lie to themselves and you're getting in the way of the lie and that's what lies at the root of all of this and it's why these pathetic miserable wretches not to add insult to injury you know not that they need anymore but they are all canceled. And that'll do it for this portion of the show. As we move over to the members block, hope to see you there. If not, we'll talk to you tomorrow.

Godspeed.