The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1113 - Poisons Pour Into Our Water Supply While The Biden Administration Focuses On Identity Politics

Episode Date: February 14, 2023

Click here to join the member exclusive portion of my show: https://utm.io/ueSEm  Today on the Matt Walsh Show, a train derailment sent toxic chemicals pouring into the air and water supply. But the Biden Administration can't put identity politics to the side for long enough to address this problem. We'll discuss. Also, the White House is now officially denying that the UFOs are aliens, which confirms that they are aliens. Nikki Haley announces her candidacy. A Christian group runs a Super Bowl ad calling on people to love each other and get along. AOC says the ad promotes "fascism," somehow. And The Washington Post says that on this Valentine's Day, don't forget about the asexual.  - - -  DailyWire+: Become a DailyWire+ member for 40% off to access the entire content library of movies, shows, documentaries, and more: https://bit.ly/3JR6n6d  Represent the Sweet Baby Gang by shopping my merch here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj   - - -  Today’s Sponsors: Jase Medical - Get a discount on your Jase Case with promo code ‘WALSH’ at https://jasemedical.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, a train derailment sent toxic chemicals pouring into the air and water supply, but the Biden administration can't put identity politics to the side for long enough to address the problem. We'll discuss. Also, the White House is now officially denying that the UFOs are aliens, which confirms that they are aliens. Nikki Haley announces her candidacy. A Christian group runs a Super Bowl ad calling on people to love each other and get along. AOC says the ad promotes fascism somehow. And the Washington Post says that on this Valentine's Day, don't forget about the asexuals. It's very important. All of that and more today on the Matt Wall Show.

Well, if you've been paying attention to the news, you know that the FDA just declared a global shortage of medication. They're warning that critical antibiotics are an extremely short supply. We all had a good laugh when we had the toilet paper shortages at the start of the pandemic. Then when there was a baby formula shortage, things were not so funny. What about when there's a shortage of emergency medications like ibuprofen? Need to be prepared for anything, and our partners at Jace Medical are here to help with that. A great way to start preparing is with the Jace case, which is a pack of five different, courses of antibiotics that you can use to treat a whole host of bacterial illnesses, including

UTIs, respiratory infections, and many others. All you have to do is fill out a simple online form. Your information will be reviewed by a board-certified physician. Your medication will be dispensed by a licensed pharmacy at a fraction of the regular cost. You know, the Jace case gives me peace of mind knowing that my family will have what everything that we need if the worst happens or even day-to-day to be able to know that we've got what we need for our kids.

If you want that same piece of mind, go to jacemedical.com. Enter code walsh to check out for a discount on your order. That's jacemmedical.com promo code walsh. Yesterday afternoon, at a time of crisis in America on multiple fronts, President Joe Biden issued a statement meant to calm our anxieties and let us know that he has everything under control. He tweeted, we're going to end unfair service fees on tickets to concerts and sporting events and make companies disclose all fees up front. In fact, he's been talking about this nonstop since he announced his.

his war on junk fees during the state of the union. On Sunday, he tweeted something similar. I'm calling on Congress to pass the Junk Fee Prevention Act because these unfair charges add up. No companies should overcharge you and get away with it. It's a basic question of fairness.

Wow, what a relief. I mean, inflation is driving Americans into poverty. China is sending spy balloons over our airspace. Mysterious UFOs are hovering in our skies. Trains are derailing across the country. And Joe Biden is working, on making concert tickets slightly more affordable.

He has heard the cries of the American people. He has listened to our pleas. He knows that what we need now is strong and confident leadership. And so he has set to work on the problem of excessive resort fees. I mean, this agenda may seem totally irrelevant to the major problems faced by real people. But then again, you have to keep mind, Joe Biden has lived in D.C. for 50 years. It's been a very long time since he's even met a real person. But while Biden works on making hotel reservations slightly cheaper, arguably larger problems continue to plague the country.

A problem like, for example, the highly toxic fumes polluting the air and water supply in East Palestine, Ohio, and potentially well outside of that area as well. We discussed this story yesterday, but here's the latest from Breitbart says, quote, The fiery derailment of a train carrying toxic chemicals across the Ohio-Pensivian line last week, spewed more harmful pollutants into the water. surface soils and air that originally reported. Fresh data made available Monday suggests. About 50 cars on a Norfolk Southern railroad train derailed in February 3rd while traveling from Illinois to Pennsylvania through the small town of East Palestine, Ohio. More than 2,000 residents were evacuated due to health concerns over the chemical leak, but have since been allowed to return. State health officials were initially concerned about the presence of vinyl chloride, a highly volatile

colorless gas produced for commercial uses which spilled in the accident. Other toxins like hydrogen chloride, emitted in large plumes of smoke during a controlled release and burn, prompting officials to issue mandatory evacuation orders in a one-mile radius of the crash site. Another of the substances released was fosgene, which is a gas deployed as a chemical weapon across First World War battlefields, a list of the cars involved in the derailment and the products they were carrying since released by the Norfolk Southern Company reveals several more toxic chemicals than first made apparent following the crash, according to ABC News. Among the substances were ethylene glycol, monobutal ether, ethyl-hexylacaltrate, acrylate, acrylate, there we go,

and isobutylene were also in the rail cars that were derailed, according to the list. Contact with ethylhexylacrylate, a carcinogen can cause burning and irritation of the skin and eyes, and inhalation can irritate the nose and throat, causing shortness of breath and coughing, according to these Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Now, in other words, the situation sounds very bad. But according to the testimony for people on the ground is actually much worse than it already sounds. TikTok is flooded with lots of videos from people that live in the area or around it and are

talking about the things that they've seen and what they've heard. Here's just one example. Here it is. I see so many people talking about the train derailment at East Palestine, Ohio. and all I'm going to ask is that if you do this, you get your facts right. I literally grew up right down the road from East Palestine. My old childhood best friend lives in the town. My current best friend literally lives right next to the town.

It is so much worse than what the media is telling any of us. I'm getting reports from people that are down there right now. now that they're literally seeing schools of fish floating down streams rivers dead i got a video for my friend okay and she's like walking dude it's all dead all dead and on the top of the water is a really pretty chemical rainbow sheen as i said many videos just like that one of course you can claim, you could watch that and claim that these are, well, it's anecdotal, unreliable, etc. But the question is whether we're better off relying on, on this kind of testimony or the official word from authorities who would have been happy to let most of the country ignore this

story completely. Keep in mind, you know, this originally happened over a week ago. And as far as the corporate media was concerned and the authorities dealing with this, like we would never even be talking about it. They'd prefer to not talk about it at all. These are the same people who have a vested interest in downplaying the extent of this catastrophe. You have the authorities in charge who have, you know, some of these people are the ones who decided to burn the stuff in the first place. And as far as the corporate media is concerned, this is all happening under the Biden administration. So they're not exactly motivated to talk about it. And in fact, they're still downplaying it. For example, chemicals from the derailment have now made their way into the Ohio River

And this would seem to be a rather major problem, given that the Ohio River flows through Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Indiana, and Kentucky. And through its various tributaries, the river provides water to millions of people, reaches down into Tennessee, you know, where I live and farther south. Parts of Virginia, North Carolina could also be affected. You got 50 train cars of hazardous chemicals that were intentionally burned, sending toxins into a river that supplies drinking water to something like 10% of. of the U.S. population, and yet we're told there's nothing to worry about. Spectrum News reports, quote, a low level of hazardous chemicals ended up in the Ohio River because of a train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, earlier this month.

But officials from the Greater Cincinnati Waterworks are working to reassure residents that Fawcett Water will remain safe to drink. Jeff Swartfegger, the superintendent of water quality and treatment of waterworks, told Spectrum News on Monday, samples taken downstream from the derailment showed incredibly low levels of the chemical. The risk of exposure for natural and man-made hazardous substances is determined by the agency for toxic substances and disease registry, which is a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Well, that it's a good thing that the Department of Health and Human Services never gets anything wrong. I mean, these are people we can rely on. Don't worry, folks.

Rachel Levine is on the case. He'll let us know if we're being poisoned by our drinking water. Of course, Levine, you know, thinks it's a good idea to give chemical castration drugs to children, which may be. impact your confidence in his ability to judge what is healthy and what isn't. Meanwhile, experts on the ground who are not directly working for the federal government are painting a slightly less rosy picture of what's going on. Here's one guy explaining that it may not have actually been a great idea to, as he puts it, nuke a town with chemicals. Listen. We now know three more chemicals that were on board the Norfolk Southern train that

derailed here in East Palestine just over a week ago. And we're being told that some of those chemicals are dangerous. We basically nuked a town with chemicals so we could get a railroad open. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sent a letter to Norfolk Southern stating that Ethylene glycol monobudal ethylite and isobutylene were also in the rail cars that were derailed, breached, or on fire. Cajiano says ethyluxo acrylate is especially worrisome. He says it's a carcinogen and contact with it can cause burning and irritation in the skin and eyes. Breathing it in can irritate the nose, throat, and cause coughing and shortness of breath. Isobutiline is also known to cause dizziness and drowsiness when inhaled.

I was kind of surprised that when they quickly told the people they can go back home, but then said if they feel like they want their homes tested, they can have them tested. I would have far rather they did all the testing. Kajiano says it's possible some of these chemicals could still be present in homes and on objects until you clean them thoroughly. There's a lot of what ifs and we're going to be looking at this thing, 5, 10, 15, 20 years down the line and wondering, gee, cancer clusters could pop up, you know, well water could go bad. Kajiano recommends anyone who's in the East Palestine area, get a health checkup. He says, get a record of where your health stands now so that moving forward you have documentation of any possibly related. effects to the train derailment.

Now, the official word is that they burned the chemicals on purpose because they had to do it. Otherwise, it would have set on fire on its own. So this was a controlled burn sort of thing, getting out ahead of it. That's the official word anyway, to the extent that you trust the official word, which for me, I don't at all. Now, what you hear from the hazardous materials expert there is, you know, from his perspective, the way he puts it, is that they did it because they were just trying to get the railroad open and it was the quickest way to do it. Now, what was the real motivation behind it? Was it like, well, we just got to need to get this thing open so we're just going to set all this stuff on fire? Was this extreme callous, recklessness and incompetence that puts potentially millions of people in harm's way?

Or was it like it was the only option they had? We are never going to officially be told the answer to that question. Never. Okay? Just like everything else that goes wrong, there is never going to be any accountability. There might be some Republicans to talk about, we need to investigate this and have a hearing. But there's never, no one's ever going to be put on trial for it. There's never going to be anyone charged with any kind of, you know, recklessness or anything like that.

So we're never going to be told officially. We're going to be left to speculate. And personally, I think the speculation that makes the most sense is that this was, again, extreme callous recklessness and disregard for human life. But anyway, that all sounds extremely disturbing. But at least our fearless transportation secretary has things under control. Pete Buttigieg, who has now been at the helm of the transportation department for at least four transportation-related disasters.

He addressed a group of reporters yesterday where he said absolutely nothing about the train derailment. He did, however, find the time to complain that there are too many white construction workers. Listen. To work with your contractors, to work with your community colleges, on building a workforce that reflects the community. We have heard way too many stories from generations past of infrastructure where you got a neighborhood, often a neighborhood of color, that finally sees the project come to them, but everyone in the hard hats on that project looking like, you know, doing the good, jobs don't look like they came from anywhere near the neighborhood. Right.

You can build community wealth that will help close wealth gaps in this country if we can tear down those barriers. But that happens at the delivery level. Oh, yes, the barriers that are preventing racial minorities from getting into the construction business. Now, of course, and I say this with respect, but Pete Buttigieg is a babbling dumbass. He paints a picture of all white construction crews coming into Sydney. to build things for minority populations.

Meanwhile, I have never in my life seen an all-white construction crew. I don't even know what that would look like. I've never seen it. I'm not sure I've ever even seen a majority white construction crew, let alone all white. The construction industry is well known for being disproportionately Hispanic. In fact, half of all construction workers are racial minorities. White people are vastly underrepresented in the business. And yet, even if it were true that construction,

workers were predominantly white, why would that be a problem? You're telling me it would be racist for white men to build homes for black people? That's racist? That's an example of white supremacy in your fevered mind rather than being an example of white people serving and helping minority communities. But that's neither here nor there. The real point is that trains are derailing all over the country. By the way, there have been more than a dozen derailments just in the last month and a half in this country. A dozen. More than that. Yet the Secretary of Transportation is more concerned with making sure there are fewer white people in the construction industry. This is the fundamental problem.

We are led by people who are these left-wing nihilists who do not value human life. They do not care about the country or the health and safety of its citizens. And whose only goal, aside from maintaining and expanding their own power, is to further their ideological agenda. Anything that falls outside the scope of those interests will be ignored. This is also why you've noticed that the environmentalists have shown very little interest in this story, this actual environmental disaster. Why is that? Well, because it's a practical and immediate problem. The air that people breathe, the water that they drink, that's been poisoned.

And if you didn't know any better, you think the environmentalist brigade would be shouting from the rooftops about the situation. This is their moment. This is the kind of crisis they're supposed to be especially concerned about. But as it turns out, they're not environmentalists because they care about the well-being of human beings who live in the environment. They're environmentalists because they hate human beings. And environmentalism is a tool to control, manipulate, and ultimately eradicate that which they hate. That's why they'd rather talk about climate change rather than, you know, poisoned water supplies. Because climate change is vague, amorphous, ambiguous. It's a concept that can be used to exploit people because it doesn't, it's like doesn't really mean anything. But a poisoned river, well, that's something simple and immediate. You take on that problem because you want to help your fellow human beings. And that's the last thing these left-wing environmentalists are interested in doing. Now, as for the people in East Palestine, Ohio, in those in the surrounding areas who might be drinking contaminated water and breathing contaminated air, well, they're on their own.

You know, unfortunately, that area of the country has made the mistake of being mostly white and working class. So they don't check any of the identity boxes necessary for the powers that be to care about them or pretend to care about them anyway. In fact, they're exactly the kind of people that Pete Buttigieg wants to expel from the construction industry and every other industry to make way for more favored identity groups. Because that's the sort of depraved mentality shared by those. who lead us. They aren't just incapable of solving real problems. They're also totally uninterested. Now let's get to our headlines. We'll start with this briefly, which of course the top headline will continue to be the fact that we are under in alien invasion. We are experiencing the first phases of an invasion from space aliens who have decided that,

You know, these are intergalactic dreamers, you might say, who have come here for a better life. And they've decided, they've seen how welcoming this administration is to the terrestrial variety of illegal aliens. So they figure they'll try their luck as well. I think it's been all but confirmed, as you know, that these UFOs are space alien in origin. They are from another galaxy, potentially another solar system, I don't know exactly. but it's 100% guaranteed at this point. How do I know that? Well, because there are three ways that I know it, okay?

Three ways. I have three pieces of evidence that I will present to you. One, there's stuff flying in the sky. Two, I feel it in my heart. I just feel, I can sense in my heart that this is an alien invasion. And three, here's the first. third. This might be the most convincing. If those two didn't convince you, third piece of evidence is that now they are officially denying that these UFOs are from aliens. Like the one thing that

gave me, as sure as I have been, that these are aliens, the one thing that gave me a little bit of pause is that we played some of the clips yesterday of, you know, the administration and officials, like, sort of entertaining the notion that they might be space aliens. And when I heard that, that made me a lot less confident. But now they've changed their tune and they're officially denying it. So here's Karen Jean Pear issuing the official White House denial. I know there's been questions and concerns about this, but there is no, again, no indication of aliens or extraterrestrial activity with these recent takedowns. Again, there is no indication of aliens or terrestrial activity with these recent takedowns.

Very funny. Let's all laugh about it. him laughing in the room. And then John Kirby, so that wasn't enough. John Kirby is a Pentagon spokesman. And he also had a similar message for the public yesterday. My understanding is that the top officials of the Pentagon, when asked explicitly if they were ruling out any kind of extraterrestrial presence that they weren't ruling anything out. And yet at the beginning of today's briefing, albeit with her usual winning smile, Ms. Jean-Pierre seemed to rule out any extraterrestrial activity.

I don't think the American people need to worry about aliens with respect to these craft, period. I don't think there's any more that needs to be said there. That's a non-denial denial. He's saying, I don't think the American people need to be worried about aliens. You didn't say they're not aliens. You just said, you don't need to be worried about them. Very interesting wording. So what else do you need to know?

There are things in the sky and they're doing weird stuff. I feel it in my heart and they're officially denying it, but also not denying it at the same time. That's all you need to know. Daily Wire report, Nikki Haley, the former governor of South Carolina and one-time UN ambassador, announced Tuesday that she will seek the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. Haley served three terms in South Carolina House of Representatives before she was elected governor in 2010, becoming the youngest governor in the country at age 38. After winning re-election, she served in 2017.

when former President Donald Trump nominated her as the United States ambassador to the United Nations, and she officially announced her candidacy this morning. She released a video at like 6.30 in the morning for some reason, which was kind of an odd choice. But we have a little bit of her official announcement video. It's time for a new generation of leadership to rediscover fiscal responsibility, secure our border and strengthen our country, our pride, and our purpose. Some people look at America and see vulnerability.

The Socialist Left sees an opportunity to rewrite history. China and Russia are on the march. They all think we can be bullied, kicked around. You should know this about me. I don't put up with bullies. And when you kick back, it hurts them more if you're wearing heels. I'm Nikki Haley and I'm running for president. That's always been my take on Nikki Haley.

I'm not a, I have to tell you I'm not a big Nikki Haley fan. Well, I'm not a fan of any politician in general because politicians shouldn't have fans. But Nikki Haley is basically kind of an establishment sort of typical prototypical Republican type yet is a woman, which is not unique at all. and then you get the girl power stuff at the end there. Here's a challenge for you. Like, if you're a woman and you're announcing your candidacy for the presidency or any political campaign, how about, like, you don't need to mention the fact that you are a woman. That's the challenge.

Can you put together the campaign ad without not even one little? And by the way, I'm a woman. We know that, first of all. Well, some of us do anyway. those of us who know what a woman is are able to recognize that. And it is not a qualification for the office. And we're not interested in the White House becoming a forum for, you know, girl power sloganeering.

It's just not the kind of thing that's going to motivate people to vote for you. So we don't need that. And also, I just, this is a stylistic point, but the delivery, I don't know what it is with, Republicans in particular, but this kind of lifeless robotic delivery, I know she's capable of speaking like a normal person and sounding relatively authentic, like she's not reading from a script, but from pure style perspective, she sounds like she's reading a teleprompter that she just was reading then for the first time. And that's going to be a problem

politically. So, and finally, the last point here is that, you know, I think Nikki Haley is going to be, with someone like Harry getting in the race, this is, this is just like floodgates opening, and it's going to be the beginning of a whole bunch of other people, many of them kind of standard Republican types jumping into the race. In fact, I just read an article, Tim Scott, is going to probably announce, I think, this week. And so we're going to get a lot, Tim Scott, Nikki Haley sort of types, who, again, these are just your basic, ordinary kind of establishment Republicans. But with Nikki Haley, established Republican, but she's a woman.

And so that's exciting. And Tim Scott, established a Republican, but he's black. He's a racial minority. So that's supposed to add a bit of excitement and make it something different and new and unique. But it doesn't. So there's going to be a lot of that. And I can tell you right now that this is the number one way to guarantee that Donald Trump gets the nomination in 2024.

This is how you guarantee that result. So if you're a big, in fact, I saw some Trump supporters on social media reacting to this announcement for Nikki Haley and they were sort of angry about it and upset. saying how she doesn't she doesn't have loyalty. In fact, we can guarantee that Trump, if he hasn't already, will issue some sort of statement from his truth social platform,

attacking her for not having loyalty. Which of all the issues might have Nikki Haley, that is not one of the problems. The fact that she lacks loyalty to some other politician who gives it to them. But if you're a Trump supporter,

there's no reason to be angry that she's getting in the race. You should be very happy about that, actually. In fact, you should be encouraging more and more people to get into the race because they're going to split the non-Trump vote. That's how Trump got the nomination in 2016 because he was running against 27 people and all on the non-Trump and anti-Trump vote was split between all those people. And it's looking like that's going to happen again in 2024. Which of course also makes me very much question the

intentions and motivations of people like Nikki Haley. It's like unless you've completely deluded yourself, you must know that you're not going to win the nomination yourself. You must know that. You don't have any real base of support. No one is like there's no maybe

if this was 20 years ago, it would be different but it's not. And right now, especially among conservatives, the people that you need to win the nomination, there's no real desire for this kind of kind of standard establishment Republican campaign. There's no one wants it.

There's not enough of a base out there to carry you through to the nomination. So you're in there and you're just guaranteeing that, you know, Trump will get the nomination. That's how you keep, that's how you keep DeSantis out and you put Trump in the nomination. It's by having a whole bunch of people, and this is what it's going to end up. We're going to end up with, it's going to be yet against me, 2016 and all over again. And there's going to be 19 or 20 people in the race, all taken a little bit of a chunk from it. And it's going to be a chunk. You know, it's going to be mostly be votes that would have gone to Ron DeSantis.

And instead, it's going to be split between all these other people. Trump will, I'd say Trump, at this point, it's looking like Trump will probably walk into the nomination. So again, if you're Trump supporters, no reason for you to be angry about this. You should be very excited, and you should be encouraging more Republicans to get in the race. There was a Super Bowl-related controversy yesterday that we didn't get a chance to talk about, and we'll start with the Daily Wire Report. A Super Bowl message of hope and love from a Christian organization, Drew Mockery from Representative Alexandra Kaysa Kesar Cortez, who likened the commercials extolling Jesus Christ to fascism.

The nonprofit Servant Foundation, it's the name of the organization, servant foundation is the name, sponsored to Super Bowl commercials. as part of the He Gets Us campaign, the first featured photos of children in heartwarming situations, including black and white children hugging, as well as a poignant photo from 2019 of five-year-old Aubrey Burge comforting her four-year-old brother as he underwent chemotherapy. The narrator says, Jesus didn't want us to act like adults. Jesus didn't want us to act like adults. He gets us, all of us, be childlike.

The second ad showed adults arguing and fighting with each other, then state. Jesus loved the people we hate, reiterating he gets, he gets us all of us. In fact, we have that ad. Let's go ahead and play that. Maybe I'm foolish, maybe I'm blind, thinking I can see through this and see what's behind. Got no way to prove it, so maybe I'm lying. Look in the mirror, what do you see? Do you see it clearer or are you to see?

and what you believe because I'm only human after all. Okay, so you see it there. That one ad doesn't really translate for audio very well, doesn't, I didn't realize that. So that's the ad that played, and as it's the way I described it, it just shows a bunch of people like arguing with each other,

different photos, different shots of people in various situations. Oftentimes it seems like they're at, you know, political demonstrations where you've got two sides that are yelling at each other. And then it has that message of hope and unity and how we should all get along and all the rest of it. And the left was upset about this. They were complaining about it, including Alexandria Ocasor Cortez, who said, something tells me Jesus would not spend millions of dollars on Super Bowl ads to make fascism look benign. So what you just saw there is making fascism look benign.

Yes, benign is the right one. I mean, it is a very, it is a very benign ad. I mean, the whole point of the ad is, let's not argue, let's be friends and get along. And say what you want about the value of a message like that. And I'll talk about that in a second. But how exactly that promotes fascism? It's, it's, I can't see it. Except that fascism is, it's a reflex.

These people all have Tourette's syndrome, essentially, a kind of ideological Tourette's syndrome. and they just shout the word fascism at anything that they don't like. And they decide what they don't like, not based on any kind of analysis of the situation. But it's just like coding. It's sort of like they see something and it codes to them a certain way. And so in this case, they see the word Jesus. Maybe they know, maybe AOC realizes that somebody at Hobby Lobby had something to do with the ad. And so immediately, that makes it bad.

doesn't matter what the message is. Jesus, Hobby Lobby, Christian type stuff, bad. And if it's bad, that makes it fascist. And also racist and homophobic and transphobic, though she didn't say that. There were other people on social media that were making those claims as well. There are also complaints like this from Sawyer Hackett, who is appropriately a hack and a Democratic consultant. He tweeted, with the money that he gets us people spent on their right-wing Jesus ads, they could permanently house 1,563 people experiencing homelessness. The right-wing, what in the ad was right-wing exactly? And just so you know, if they were to take their however many millions of dollars

and just buy a bunch of homes for homeless people, That would be a really great way to make sure that homeless people have a home for about three or four days. The amount of time it takes them to completely destroy whatever home you give them. Because the whole reason that most homeless people are homeless is that they have given up their entire lives for the sake of the drug that now stands at the center of their life. and that's how they end up on the street. But most of the time, that's how you end up on the street, especially if you're on the street for any extended period of time. It's because you've given your entire life to a drug,

and it's the only thing you care about, and it's all that matters, and whatever you're given, it's all going to be in service to the drug. So they destroy the house, trash, and maybe sell it so they could buy a bunch more drugs. That's what would happen. That's why it's not as simple. If you have wisdom and intelligence beyond that of a child, you understand that you can't solve. homelessness by just literally giving as if the problem with homelessness is just the simple fact

that they don't have homes. That's it. Just give them a home and the problem solved. That's all. Most homeless people, you idiot, Sawyer Hackett, most of them, okay? Most of them, they weren't born homeless. They had homes. They lived in places. Don't you understand that? They ended up on the street because of the drug problem and the mental illness. And so if you have any solution that does not directly solve that, it's not a solution at all. But what about this idea that the ads are right wing? Well, Breitbart has this report. The campaign's advertisements all centered around the idea that Jesus gets us, according to NPR,

the well-funded campaign discusses how Jesus was a refugee, had disdained for hypocrisy, and was also unfairly judged like other marginalized members of society. quote, the advertisements are part of an effort to shift away from a negative public perception of Christians and towards Jesus, says Bob Smetana, national reporter for Religion News Service in an interview with NPR. Smetana says that the campaign is attempting to appeal to groups that may have felt excluded or repelled by the church in recent years, like members of the LGBTQ community, different races and ethnicities, those who lean more liberal politically, or people who have kept up with these scandals of abuse. So in other words, these are ads that they've put them these ads up for since 2022. And they're pushing for open borders saying Jesus was a refugee. And so therefore we have to open up our borders and all the rest of it. This is, these are ads designed to present Jesus as a kind of left.

They have a liberal message. It's supposed to appeal to left-wing people with talking points that they will find appealing. And of course, it utterly fails. in doing that, which should really be a message for the churches. You're trying to, you are speaking the language of the left. You are abandoning the actual moral truth and moral substance of the Christian faith in order to appeal to the left. In the process, you alienate all true Christians, but you do not succeed in actually winning the minds and hearts you're trying to win, because they're going to hate you regardless. Now, I will say that the one,

You know, open border stuff and all the rest of it, that's one thing. But the message in the one ad we played about, hey, we should all get along and love our enemies. Like that is, like I said, it's benign. I mean, there's nothing, there's nothing offensive about it, unless you're AOC. There's nothing offensive or outrageous about it. But I do think that this kind of message, and I get, this is, sometimes this is what Christians like to lead with because it's the most crowd-pleasing. Love your enemy, love everybody, get along. but it's not a very useful message.

You could say love your enemy, and that is, that's scriptural, it's true. But you should be saying something useful about that. Like, it's not enough to just say, well, love your enemy. What does that mean exactly? What do you mean we should love our enemies? I mean, we have to get along with them all the time and always be smiling and cheerful, and we can never disagree. And they showed a lot of clips of people screaming at each other.

And like I said, in many of those, we don't know the context for those clips, but in many of them, it seemed like these were demonstrations that were they had two sides yelling at each other. Are we sure that both sides were being hateful? Some of those clips that might be people who are standing for the truth and standing for what they believe in and standing up to those who represent evil. So that's not hatred. There's something wrong with that. Just because someone is yelling and angry doesn't automatically make them hateful. And by the way, even if they're being hateful, that's not necessarily wrong because there are things in the world that we should hate.

There are things that God hates. Evil and sin are those things. We should hate evil. We should hate sin. I don't know if any of those clips are from any demonstrations outside of a drag queen story hour, for example. But those are the kinds of demonstrations that sometimes get a little heated. The people that are protesting to, The drag queen story hours or the, you know, the family, so-called family-friendly drag shows, are they hateful? Yeah, in a certain sense, because they hate the sexualization and grooming of children. They are hateful towards that act, and they should be. So, yes, we should love our enemies.

We should have love, but that means standing for what is right, standing for what's true. It means wanting the best for people. But wanting the best for someone also means not going along with those things that are destroying them. And that has to be part of the message. If it's not, then I'm not sure what we achieve. All right, finally, Dylan Mulvaney is on day 300 something of girlhood and, of course, has learned nothing from the actual women who've tried to tell them how degrading this whole stunt is. So here's his latest video. It's day 335 of being a girl. And I want to be a woman.

to go on record to say that this might be the hottest I've ever looked and will ever look in my lifetime. And I'm making this video so that in thousands of years there will be evidence. Is it the dress? It could be the dress. Is it the makeup? Or is it the hair? Because I think it's the extensions. And when I have extensions in, I don't know my name. I don't know where I live. I just know that I love these. And I know that I look like I could steal a husband, But I want to promise you, look me in the eyes. I want to promise you that I would never do that to you. Okay, I am a girl's girl.

And I love you. Woo! But seriously, this is good, right? Okay, okay, okay, okay. Love you, love you. Okay. Now, listen, I know I don't have a reputation for being necessarily the kindest or gentlest person in the world, especially when dealing with people like this.

The truth, though, is that I am a gentle soul at heart, I think. And also, I do feel pity, or I can feel pity for some of these people. And so I wouldn't usually say what I'm about to say, at least not as directly as I'm going to say it, but Dylan Mulvaney is intentionally degrading women every time he does this woman-face minstrel show routine. He is insulting and demeaning them and doing it on purpose and profiting off of it and he doesn't care. And since I have two daughters and a wife, I take this kind of thing personally, which is why I have to say to Dylan, Dylan, if that's a person, is the most attractive you will ever look, then I don't even want to imagine what you'll look like when you're at your ugliest. You do not pass as an attractive woman or as a woman at all,

even with 50 pounds of makeup and plastic surgery and clever lighting tricks. Even then, you still cannot escape what you really are and what you will always be. You have successfully shed whatever parts of you were masculine, perhaps, at least on the surface. Nobody would ever describe you as masculine or manly, so you've got that going. But your feminine, femininity quotient has not increased at a rate commensurate with the loss of your masculinity. You may not be masculine, but you also aren't feminine. Instead, you are weird and artificial. You are manufactured and lifeless. You are unearthly and eerie. You are like some kind of human deep fake. That's what you are. You are a man deprived of all the best qualities of men, but without any of the

best qualities of women. Even your personality is contrived. Everything about you is fake. Nothing about you rings true. Nobody buys the act. You'll never be accepted as a woman by anyone, never by anyone. Even the people who pretend to accept you as a woman are only pretending because they're afraid of being lectured if they don't, or because they want to use you as a platform to virtue signal. But everyone who looks at you will see something pitiable and bizarre, something utterly unfeminine in every way. You will never be able to actually have the identity that you're trying to appropriate, nor will you ever be able to fully escape the identity that you're fleeing. The best you can hope for is some kind of limbo, the worst of all worlds. And yet even in that

limbo state, you will still be a man, just not one that any of us can respect or take seriously. But other than that, champ, you're doing great. Now let's get to our comment section. They're the sweet baby gang. Mary Kane says Matt is a quizzling who will sell out humanity to invading aliens. Yeah, but at least I admit it. At least I'm honest about it. And the other thing, too, is that my selling out the human species to the aliens, it's not even, it's not motivated by cowardice.

It's not motivated by a hatred for humanity. It's really just motivated by the fact that, you know, I've been waiting for this moment forever. and I want to be able to see some of what our post-apocalyptic alien-controlled world is like. I think it would be cool. I'd like to see it. And so if I get incinerated in the first batch of people, then I don't get a chance to see it. So that's really what motive. I don't know if that makes it better necessarily.

I don't know if this is a good moral defense. But that is my motivation. That's all. Frank S. says, why are we not talking about the term, how the term national refers to nation. What exact nation is the black national anthem celebrating? Wakanda? Right. Well, this is one of the many, many, you know, internal inconsistencies with the, with the race hustlers. And this is what they're always doing, right? Like lumping all black people together as if they, as if every black person, as if there is like a black nation, as if every

black person has the same, you know, shared heritage and culture and tradition and all the rest of it. And then they do that while at the same time saying that we have to respect and celebrate and recognize the individuality of every, you know, POC, as they say. And in fact, the term POC is people of color. Well, we say people of color. We don't say colored people. And why is one okay and not the other? And the reason that they give is that we got to put, we want to put people first to recognize the individual humanity of each person. And I believe in recognizing the individual humanity of each person. It just seems that they don't really believe it.

At least they don't believe it all the time. And at the same time, they'll also say that, you know, the reason why you can have black pride and talk about how proud you are being a black person and say all these things, but you can't have white pride or talk about how proud you are being a white person or talk about your white identity. If you ask the race hustlers why they have that view, they'll say that, well, because. Because white people, you know, they don't have the same. It's like white people, they all come from different parts of the world. And like there isn't a one white nation. And if you're white, you could be Italian ancestry or, you know, Scandinavian or Irish. I mean, there's all different kinds of places you could come from.

And so there isn't that one shared identity. And that's why it doesn't make any sense to take pride in your whiteness. And so therefore, if you do, it means that you're racist. Well, okay, but the exact same thing is the case. for black people. Africa is not a country. It is a continent with lots of countries on it. And there are also people who would qualify as black or certainly a person of color who come from outside of Africa.

So the exact same situation. And yet sometimes, you know, you can refer to black people as having a kind of homogenous racial identity and other times you can't. And those rules are, again, always arbitrary by design. And it's up to then, it's up to the left to decide. And they'll tell us, well, here's the rule for this particular moment. Here's how you're allowed to think of this right now. Check back in five minutes to see if those rules have changed. Agis Rick says that cancellation today was very insightful the talk young folk needed to hear but truly i fear they heard it too late this generation wasn't raised right their actions are means to an end instead of intrinsically satisfying in itself

no no no motivation no drive no soul um and yeah i obviously i largely agree with you and we do also recognize that anytime you talk about young people in fact i had that had my whole rant yesterday about it and there were some comments saying oh this is boomer talk get off my lawn that sort of thing And you're always going to run into that. There's always going to be that objection. And it is true that older generations have always complained about younger generations. And that's probably the case through the entire course of human history. However, that doesn't mean that the complaints are always wrong or baseless.

In fact, they're usually not baseless. They're usually based in something. And in this case, there is, you know, what makes me concerned, especially concerned, is that a lot of what we're seeing from the young generation now, these are not your typical follies of youth. And if they were, then it'd be a lot easier to dismiss them and say, well, it's just kids being kids, young people being young people, and they'll grow out of it.

But a lot of this stuff, as we talked about yesterday, having no motivation, just no desire to do anything, no ambition, this is not natural for young people. And so that's what makes me especially worried about it. And finally, Red Falcourt says, I really just want Matt to explain why he cares so much about all this UFO stuff. To me, this is an awfully convenient smokescreen for recent Democrat failures in our country, appearing right as Biden's potential Republican replacements begin their campaigns. But if Matt had a story maybe beginning in his childhood to explain his emotional investment in UFOs,

his interest in them would at least make a lot more sense. Those of us on the right may trust emotions less, but that doesn't mean we aren't sympathetic to personal stories. and the emotional arc of the life of another. Well, I don't have. I wish I could tell you I had some sort of experience with UFOs when I was a kid. Maybe I was abducted by aliens, and I came to know and love my abductors in the sort of intergalactic Stockholm syndrome sort of thing. I mean, if I had a story like that, I would happily share it with you.

I don't. To me, it's just, it's self-evident? I don't know. It's self-evident that this is really fascinating. the possibility of life on other planets, the fact that the universe is incomprehensibly vast, and there are trillions of planets, and we have like no idea what's going on on almost any of those planets, comparatively speaking, that fact is fascinating. And so I don't, I almost have a difficulty explaining why I find it interesting, because to me it's so obvious that it is. And if you

can't be interested in that, then what in the world is interesting if that isn't? So that's my pitch. I don't know if you'll find it convincing or not. You know, fellas, your lady loves you and means well, but without the proper nudge, she just might get you a terrible Valentine's Day gift, like a silly stuffed bear, pair of boxers with her face on it. Then you'll have to pretend it's what you always wanted. How about you get something you actually want, like a Jeremy's Razor's Valentine's gift bundle for 30% off? She'll love the price. You'll love that it's not pink or covered in cartoon hearts. Even on the sappiest of holidays, keep your masculinity intact with the new five-blade sharpest,

Truth, precision five razor. Growing your whiskers instead of shaving them, we'll start dropping hints that you want a luxurious Jeremy's beard kit. Just make sure you do it fast because today is your last chance to get 30% off Jeremy's Razors, Valentine's Bundles. Send her to jeremy'sraisers.com today. You'll both be glad you did. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Today is Valentine's Day in case you didn't realize. In fact, if you're a man listening to this and you just remembered what day it is, don't panic. There's still time to run to the store on the way home from work, pick up a gift. Most of the cards and flowers probably be picked over by now. But fortunately, I've always found that the pots and pans and kitchen

utensil aisle of the grocery store is well stocked around Valentine's Day. So grab a box of forks, a spatula, maybe a new spaghetti strainer. If you really want to spoil her, throw them in a gift bag, you're going to have a very happy wife. And I'm willing to bet a romantic evening as well. Take my word for it. But of course, not everyone is interested in romance. And for some, even a brand new non-stick frying pan wouldn't be enough to peak their romantic interest. This is, the so-called asexual and aromantic community. Unfortunately, they are the ones that the Washington Post

is thinking about on Valentine's Day. This weekend, WAPO published a piece written by a woman named Samantha Cherry or Sherry and titled, it was titled, quote, how asexual and aromantic people make Valentine's Day their own. Now, the article begins by

telling us about a 37-year-old person who goes by the name Obell Pax, O'Dell Pax, rather, and the Post reports this. O'Dell Paxe, identified as both asexual and idem romantic, which means that she does not have any desire for sex and she doesn't make any distinction between romantic and platonic feelings. So what to do with a holiday that assumes romantic and sexual attraction are the norm? This year, she's doing what she usually does on February 14th, making time for self-love

and self-care. For her, that means soaking in a hot bath before curling up in bed with her three stuffed animals, Findle, Marcia, and Sylvia. The last two names are named after trailblazing trans activist Marcia P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera. Yes, why not? I mean, why not tell us the names of this grown adult stuffed animals? And if that's not enough, we're also treated to a picture of Odell with the stuffed animals, along with this caption. This is the caption under the picture.

It says, Odell packs with her three dolphin stuffed animals, Sylvia Findl and Marsha, from left to right. It's a very good thing they specified from left to right, because otherwise we wouldn't know for sure which stuffed animal is named Marsha and which one is Sylvia. So now we know, and we can sleep easy tonight. Sleep easy anyway with the somewhat cruel satisfaction we all sometimes experience after seeing someone else's utterly pathetic and depressing life and feeling deeply relieved that it's not our own life. I try not to delight in the misfortune of others, and I don't delight at all in Odell's misfortunes. I don't. But I will admit that when I read this article and I see that picture, I can't help but think to myself, my God, I am glad I'm not that person. Anyway, here's more from the Washington Post. It says, Pax is not alone in rejecting the notion that relationships acknowledged on February 14th have to include romance and sex. Roughly 1% of lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans are asexual, according to a study from the Williams Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Although experts such as Jennifer Pollitt, Assistant Director of Gender Sexuality Women's Studies at Temple University in Philadelphia, believe the population is undercounted and its influence underestimated because of a lack of awareness. Sexual intimacy is often placed on a pedestal to sell products, especially for Valentine's Day, Pollitt said, but love without romance or sex is just as valid and fulfilling for asexual and aromantic people. As more people understand that, there will be more support for people exploring their relationship wants, hopes, and needs. In the meantime, many people on the A-Spectrum, also known as A-Spec or A-Spec, an umbrella term for anyone who identifies as A-Sexual and A-Romantic, are finding creative ways to define the holiday on their own terms. Now, the article does continue providing along the way more examples and anecdotes of A-Sexual and A-Romantic people celebrating Valentine's Day,

but I think we've probably already heard quite enough. We've heard, for example, this sentence, again, roughly 1% of the same, of lesbian, gay, and bisexual Americans are asexual. Now, let's think about that. Bisexual Americans are asexual. That is exactly like saying that 1% of polytheistic people are atheistic, or that 1% of empathetic people are apathetic. You cannot be something and also the negation of that thing at the same time.

If somebody is sexually attracted to two sexes, or sexually attracted to the same sex. That means they do experience sexual attraction, which would seem to preclude them from claiming the title of asexual. But then again, we must remember the first rule of the LGBT cult, which is that they can make it up all as they go along, and nothing they say has to comport with anything else they say. And they must never be held to even the most basic standard of coherence.

That's why any attempt to nail down a definition of what qualifies as aexual or aromantic, will ultimately wind up as fruitless as any attempt to get anyone on the left to give a definition of literally any other word they use. To prove my point, here's the Cambridge University website attempting to delineate between these two categories of asexual and aromantic. This is what it says. Asexuality is an orientation defined by a lack of sexual attraction. That means that an asexual or ace person experiences little or no sexual draw towards others and is little or no desire to have sexual relationships with other people. The asexual spectrum has many nuanced identities that fall under the umbrella term, asexual. Some of the more common ones are gray sexuality or gray asexuality, where someone experiences

sexual attraction rarely or infrequently. Another common identity is demisexuality or demi-asexuality, where someone only experiences sexual attraction after forming a close emotional, romantic bond with another person. There are many other identities on the ace spectrum, but what they all have in common is the lack to varying extent of sexual attraction. A romanticism, on the other hand, is an orientation characterized by a lack of romantic attraction. While asexuality is a sexual orientation, aromanticism is a romantic orientation, and the two don't necessarily correlate.

Someone may be asexual, but not aromantic, or vice versa, or they may be on both spectrum. An aromantic or aro person experiences little to no romantic attraction towards other people and has little or no desire to form a romantic relationship with anybody else. Like asexuality, aromanticism is a spectrum which includes gray romanticism or gray aromanticism, where someone occasionally or rarely experiences romantic attraction, and demi-romanticism or demi-a-romanticism, where someone only experiences romantic attraction after forming a strong emotional bond with another person. Aromanticism is considered an umbrella term that encompasses all the identities that fall on the aromantic spectrum. Make sense now? Now, there's a lot going on here. Actually, let me amend that

there is nothing going on here. This is a whole lot of nothing, which is trying to sound like something. It's a bunch of narcissistic, fart-sniffing mumbo-jumbo dressed up to sound complex and nuanced, when in fact all the complexities and nuances are just varying degrees of self-contradiction. There's actually no meaningful distinction between sexual attraction and romantic attraction. The two terms are synonyms. If a person told you that they were romantically attracted to you, but not sexually attracted, they will have given you no useful information about their feelings towards you. They will, however, have given you useful information about the tedious inner workings of their own inane and pretentious minds.

As for demi-a-romanticism or someone who feels romantic attraction, especially after forming a strong emotional bond, well, that is simply called being a person. I mean, it's more common that a woman's romantic attractions hinges on an emotional connection. But for men or women, this is a rather normal way for things to work. So here we see again how the LGBT cult, not satisfied to legitimize every degraded fetish they can find, has now set its site on fetishizing even what's normal and healthy. This is a trick they get away with because, as it turns out, plenty of otherwise normal and healthy people want to be members of the cult. The best way to rack up social capital is to claim membership in the Alphabet Club. That's because LGBT people in the modern United States are not only not oppressed,

but are in fact the least oppressed people to have ever walked the face of the planet. But what about actual asexual people? How should we understand those people who really don't experience sexual attraction and who therefore can validly claim the label of asexual? I think there are a few things to keep in mind about this group. First of all, I'm extremely skeptical that most of the people that claim to be asexual are actually asexual. okay, because somebody with a low sex drive is not asexual.

Someone who doesn't desire romantic relationships is not asexual. Keep in mind the left will always do everything it can to inflate the statistics for any of the identity groups that it invents. That's why the leftist group, the Trevor Project, has a page on its website with information about asexuals where they stipulate that asexual people might still, quote, fall in love, experience arousal and orgasm, masturbate, and engage. engage in sexual activity. In other words, lots of people they call asexual are not at all in any definitional sense of the term, really asexual. Most of them are simply just selfish, lonely, depressed people with relatively normal libidos who have chosen asexuality as their identity group in order to give some meaning to their self-centered existence. Like most trendy modern identity groups, this one is for the most part just a cover for narcissism. It is a coping mechanism to cover up a character flaw, which is narcissism.

But assuming that there does exist a collection of people who truly, and through no fault of their own, have no sexual attraction, no desire to, no desire for sex at all, no capacity for sexual arousal, etc., then we could say two things about this group. Number one, it's almost certainly very small. It's not going to be anywhere near 1% or even half of 1%. Number two, it's not an identity, least of all a sexual identity. If you truly lack the ability to experience sexual attraction, then something has likely gone awry physiologically. You have an issue that you might try to fix rather than making it into your whole personality. Now, you shouldn't be ashamed. It's not your fault, but you also shouldn't make your inability to experience sexual attraction into the centerpiece of your identity as a human being.

neither does it make sense to be proud of this inability. I mean, the only thing more bizarre than marching around and claiming to be proud of your sexual attraction is marching around and claiming to be proud of your lack of sexual attraction. And that's why today on Valentine's Day, I will not cancel all asexuals. They have enough to deal with, especially on a day like today. Instead, I'm specifically canceling these flag-waving asexuals like those profiled by the Washington Post, especially the ones who have stuffed animals that they name. They are all today canceled.

And that'll do it for this portion of the show. If you want to become a member, so you can watch the members block, become a member, and use Code Wall, should check out for two months free on all annual plans. Hope to see you over the members block. If not, talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.