The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1330 - Virtually Every Medical Expert Is Lying To You About Obesity. Here's The Proof.

Episode Date: March 21, 2024

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Oprah is out shilling diet pills, claiming that you need medicine to beat obesity because obesity is a disease. That lie has been used to scam people for years. And the biggest medical organization in the country has even admitted that it's a lie. I'll explain. Also, an American intelligence officer declares that crossdressing at work makes him better at his job. The federal government prosecutes a man for killing bald eagles. Because bald eagles have more legal protections in this country than unborn humans. And Planet Fitness bans a woman from their gyms after she complains about a man in the women's locker room. Now the company has lost hundreds of millions of dollars.   Ep.1330   - - -    DailyWire+:     Leftist Tears Tumbler is BACK! Subscribe to get your FREE one today: https://bit.ly/4capKTB   Unlock your Bentkey 14-day free trial here: https://bit.ly/3GSz8go   Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj    - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   PureTalk - Get 50% off your first month when you make the switch! https://www.puretalk.com/Walsh     Helix - Get 20% off your order + 2 dream pillows. https://helixsleep.com/Walsh   Tax Network USA - Seize control of your financial future! Call 1(800)245-6000 or visit http://www.TNUSA.com/Walsh    - - -   Socials:   Follow on Twitter: https://bit.ly/3Rv1VeF   Follow on Instagram: https://bit.ly/3KZC3oA   Follow on Facebook: https://bit.ly/3eBKjiA   Subscribe on YouTube: https://bit.ly/3RQp4rs   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

How many discounts does USAA auto insurance offer? Too many to say here. Multi-vehicle discount. Safe driver discount. New vehicle discount. Storage discount. How many discounts will you stack up? Tap the banner or visit usa.com slash auto discounts. Restrictions apply. Today on the night wall show, Oprah is out shilling diet pills,

claiming that you need medicine to beat obesity because obesity is a disease. That lie has been used to scam people for years, and the biggest medical organization in the country has even admitted that it's a lie. I'll explain. Also, an American intelligence officer to clear. that cross-dressing at work makes him better at his job. The federal government prosecutes a man for killing bald eagles because bald eagles have more legal protections in this country

than unborn humans. And Planet Fitness bans a woman from their gym after she complains about a man in the woman's locker room. Now the company has lost hundreds of millions of dollars. We'll talk about all that. And more today on the Matt Wall's show. $20 barely gets you anything these days. You can't get a burger and fries for less than that.

But do you know what $20 will get you from the cell phone company I use, Pure Talk? You can get unlimited talk, text, and plenty of 5G data for just $20 a month. Pure Talk gives you the same quality of service as your current cell phone provider, but for half the cost. The average family saves almost $1,000 a year, all with no contracts and no activation fees. You can switch to Pure Talk and keep the phone number you currently use, or you can take advantage of their great deals on the latest iPhones and Android's. Making the switch is incredibly easy.

Their U.S. customer service team can help you join Pure Talk in as little as 10 minutes. Choose to spend your hard-earned money with a wireless company that shares your values. supports our military and veterans creates American jobs and refuses to advertise on fake news networks. Stop spending ridiculous amounts on your phone plan. Go to puretalk.com slash walsh. Right now my listeners can get an additional 50% off their first month. That's puretalk.com slash walsh. So you may have seen this week that Oprah was back on primetime television. She hosted a special on Monday called Shame, Blame, and the Weight Loss Revolution. And really it was more of an infomercial for drugs like OZempic, which millions of Americans

are taking to lose weight. Now, previously, I've gone into the various side effects of these drugs. Osemic, for example, can potentially cause thyroid tumors cancer, projectile vomiting, maybe even more alarming as the fact that we also don't really understand how these drugs work. Ozemic essentially tricks the pancreas into releasing more insulin, and in turn, Ozembeck's artificially created hormones, quote, appear to actually bind to receptors on neurons in several parts of the brain, according to a biologist quoted last year by the Atlantic. Now, what do these hormones do when they buy into receptors in the brain. Apparently, they reduce people's urge to, not simply reduce the urge to eat, but also to shop, to engage in a range of other

compulsive behaviors. And if that's true, no scientist in the world has any idea exactly why it's happening or what other modifications this drug might be making to the brain. As if to prove that point, as recently as this month, the Atlantic published a follow-up piece entitled, The Science behind OZempic was wrong. Now, it all sounds very much like an elixir, a wonderful drug that's a wonder drug that can magically solve all of your problems. But if you're the cynical type, or if you just paid any attention at all to Big Pharma over the past few years, you might have some questions. And these are the questions that Oprah's infomercial on Monday was intended to address. And to be fair, some of the side effects did come up. One woman in the special said that

she had to stop taking one of these weight loss drugs due to nausea symptoms, for example. But by and large, this was a puff piece that centered on a lie. It's a lie that Oprah repeated several times that every television medical expert in this country repeats as well. It's the claim that obesity is a disease rather than a symptom of poor life choices. Watch. Number one thing I hope people come away with is knowing that it's a disease and it's in the brain. When I tell you how many times I have blamed myself

because you think I'm smart enough to figure this out and then to hear all along, it's you fighting your brain. For CBS Mornings, I'm Jamie Yucats. For more on what we just saw, let's bring in our Dr. John Lafou. Good morning. How you doing? Morning. How's it going, Nate? Good. So why does medication help more so than people? asking, just change your lifestyle.

Just change your lifestyle, right? Well, this is a chronic disease. Go to the CDC website and to all these experts. I interviewed Dr. Amanda Velasquez, who's on that time, for about an hour and a half. She was terrific, and everybody will tell you the same thing, which is this is not something that you can just say, oh, I'm gonna snap out of it.

Would you ever go up to somebody who has asthma or diabetes and say snap out of it? Well, you can't snap out of obesity. So Oprah uses this idea that obesity, is a disease to justify treating it with drugs instead of die and exercise. This is an idea that if you listen to medical experts is something you're not supposed to question. As you just heard from that CBS doctor, it's a chronic disease. Go to the CDC website. Everybody will tell you the same thing. It's just like asthma or diabetes.

That everybody at the desk just sort of nods along with it. Except that obesity is nothing like asthma or diabetes, actually. People with obesity can cure themselves. Actually, you can. That's true in literally every case of obesity that's ever existed. You could lock somebody in a room and feed them 1,000 calories of fruit every day, and they will be cured of obesity with 100% certainty. All you have to do is eat a healthy diet and you're cured. Every single person who has eaten a healthy diet and has exercised has been cured of obesity.

Every single one. You cannot say the same for everybody without. or diabetes, at least not type 1 diabetes. And, you know, if obesity is a disease, you also need to explain why almost nobody in the country had this disease in the 1930s. Why is that? Like, why can you look at footage of, you know, from any street corner in any major city in the 1930s to see people walking along?

No fat people. None. So apparently this disease didn't exist back then. That's interesting, isn't it? Why doesn't anybody in Ethiopia have this disease today? So there seems to be a very curious correlation here. The disease of obesity only takes hold in places where people eat a lot of food and don't get a lot of exercise. And in each individual case, if you have someone who's obese, what you're going to find is they eat a lot of food and they don't get a lot of exercise.

Every single time. You know, they say that correlation isn't causation, but I think that's a lot of exercise. in this case, the causation is pretty clear. And this is such an obvious self-evident point that, you know, made me wonder, when exactly did medical experts suddenly decide that obesity is a disease? And why did they decide that? What definition were they using exactly? Well, it turns out that the esteemed medical journal, The Lancet, has already answered this question.

Back in 2013, the American Medical Association simply decided to arbitrarily classify obesity as a disease, even though they admitted that it didn't meet the scientific definition of a disease. Quoting from the Lancet, quote, A disease by definition needs to have characteristic symptoms and signs, and even though excess body fat is a characteristic sign, there are no symptoms that are unique to obesity. The American Medical Association applied a different approach to this conundrum in 2013. Instead of trying to determine whether obesity fits specific definitions of a disease,

the AMA used a utilitarian approach to determine whether the recognition of obesity as a disease would have a positive impact on the individual patient, the healthcare system, and the wider society. So did you get that? In other words, they realized that obesity is not a disease. It does not meet the definition because there are no unique symptoms that only obese people suffer from, but they just decided to call it a disease anyway in order to raise awareness, otherwise known as to sell more medication. And that's what one of the top medical journal says, in the world is admitting. And by the way, it wasn't just the AMA that took this approach.

The Lancet continues, quote, in the UK, the Royal College of Physicians recognized obesity as a disease in 2019. The main argument of RCP and those in favor of this recognition is that unless obesity is defined as a disease, the funding for effective treatment options will be inadequate to stop its increasing prevalence and the health and socioeconomic costs associated with it. I mean, this is almost too absurd to be real, but it is real. leading medical associations all over the world decided to lie about obesity being a disease

and they admitted it out loud and everybody just went along with it and now you've got people like this on CBS that quote the AMA so I you know they're the ones who say it's a disease except they said it's not a disease but they're going to call it one anyway

and we're still seeing this today of course with nonsense like long COVID And in fact, there are many examples. Many of the so-called mental illnesses that we talk about a lot on the show, the same sort of bargain has been made where they say, well, you know, it doesn't really fit the definition of a disease, but it's helpful to call it one, and so we will. The only difference is that with obesity, they've just come out and told us that they were going to lie about it. And nobody saw a problem with it. So take, for example, this remarkable clip from 2013, which is the year the AMA decided to just invent the idea that obesity is a disease. Watch as Charlie Rose asks the medical expert about this.

And you can tell that Charlie Rose is a little confused as to why the AMA has suddenly decided to make this decision out of nowhere. What science has changed all of a sudden, Rose wants to know, that explains why the AMA abruptly decided to label obesity as a disease. And I want you to watch how this in-house medical expert responds. Well, we know as obesity researchers that obesity is a disease, but the fact that the American Medical Association has recognized it will have tremendous impact on legislation in Washington with insurance companies. It carries a lot of weight. One in three American adults has obesity overweight. Do you think this will cause insurers to pay for some of the treatments for obesity?

I think so. If you look at insurance policies, they generally exclude obesity treatments. So people come in, they think they should be treated because they have health problems like diabetes, high blood pressure, even cancers are caused by obesity,

and yet that treatment is excluded. Within the medical community, there's been a clear understanding that obesity is a disease. That's right. Or not. It's become very clear. clear in the past few years that as people gain weight, damage occurs to the signaling

pathways between the fat cell, the stomach, the intestine, and the brain. The brain can't tell how much food is coming in and how much fat is stored. Then why is it taken so long? Because it takes a while before these types of research findings are translated into a group like the AMA recognizing this. But the fact that this was overwhelmingly recognized, by the AMA, I think, says volumes about this. It's been premature. So it's just one non-answer and non-sequitur after another.

It's a disease because it hurts your body, exclaimed the TV doctor. But that's not what a disease is. Okay, shooting yourself in the foot would hurt your body too. That doesn't mean that shooting yourself in the foot is a disease. Drowning yourself in the river will hurt your body. But when they pull your corpse out of the water, they aren't going to say, wow, it looks like he died from the drowning disease. It doesn't make sense.

So when Charlie Rose put some more mild pressure on this guy, he just says, well, the AMA overwhelmingly agrees with me. So shut up and accept the fact that obesity is a disease. Science commands it. You don't get to ask questions. Now, it's not hard to see what's going on here. The point is to medicalize the human condition and remove human agency by turning all vice into an illness. And in the process, Big Pharma makes a lot of money, which is not incidental, by the way. Now, it's less clear why exactly anybody would take Oprah seriously concerning this topic.

Back in December, Oprah disclosed that she has been taking a nonspecific weight loss medication herself. More recently, just weeks before this primetime infomercial aired, Oprah stepped aside from her role on the board of Weight Watchers, claiming that it would present a conflict of interest. And in reality, the conflict is so obvious and so significant that it completely undercuts the integrity of Oprah's special, no matter what she does or says. So last year, Weight Watchers purchased a telehealth startup called Sequence that connects customers with doctors who are ready and willing to prescribe OZempic.

So Weight Watchers realized that its model of preaching personal willpower and self-control was going out of style. So in a last-ditch effort to save the company, they started selling $99 a month subscriptions to connect their customers with these weight loss drugs. And Oprah was on the board of Weight Watchers during that period. Given that background, it's hard to be impressed with the fact that Oprah left Weight Watchers board right before airing a special that stands to benefit both Weight Watchers and their new partners in Big Pharma. This would be a little bit like Hunter Biden suddenly leaving his extremely well-paying job on the board of a Ukrainian oil company a few days before flying Joe Biden into Kiev on a private jet to fire the Attorney General looking into the oil company, just taking one random example. It doesn't really look good under any circumstances, the point. the possibility that Oprah is a corrupt saleswoman isn't really the story here. Everybody knows that already. The fact that virtually every medical expert in the country has been lying to you about obesity is the story. It is not a disease. They know it's not a disease and they have said so. It's not a chronic disorder that can only be fixed by some miracle drug. The whole idea, that whole idea is a scam, one that they have said so. One that they have. AMA deliberately started more than a decade ago.

And they told us that they were starting. And everything we've heard from the medical community since then, including this transparent, cringeworthy Oprah infomercial this week, has been designed to perpetuate that scam, that very profitable scam. They want you to believe that you don't have any agency over your body or your life. So they can sell you a supply of drugs that cost $1,000 a month. But don't fall for it.

Now let's get to our five headlines. You know, amid the chaos of my daily life, I find solace in my Helix mattress. It's not just a mattress. It's a sanctuary that prepares me for the challenges of the next day. Helix harnesses years of mattress expertise to offer a truly elevated sleep experience. The Helix Elite Collection includes six different mattress models, each tailored for specific sleep positions and firmness preferences. If you're worried about buying a mattress online, Helix has you covered with a unique

sleep quiz that customizes your mattress based on your body type and your sleep preferences. No more generic mattresses made for somebody else. I took this Helix quiz and I was matched with a firm but breathable mattress. I love this mattress and I'm confident that you'll love yours too. Plus, Helix has a 10-year warranty and you get to try it out for 100 nights risk-free. Helix's financing options and flexible payment plans ensure a great night's sleep is never far away. Helix is offering my listeners 20% off all mattress orders and two free pillows. Go to helixsleep.com slash walsh. That's helixleckslep.com slash walsh. This is their best offer yet. It won't last long. Heelix. Better sleep starts now. Here's an exclusive report in the Daily Wire published yesterday.

Agents at the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and throughout the intelligence community, were distributed a newsletter that celebrated an intelligence official for cross-dressing, saying that dressing up in women's clothes makes him a better intelligence officer, according to an internal document obtained by the Daily Wire. the Office of the Director of National Intelligence sent its internal newsletter called The Dive and obtained by the Daily Wire through a Freedom of Information Act request to personnel across the entire intelligence community featured in the newsletter was an article by an anonymous official claiming that cross-dressing makes him a better intelligence officer. The article reads, I'm an intelligence officer and I'm a man who likes to wear women's clothes sometimes. It's titled, My gender identity and expression make me a better intelligence

officer. The author goes on to argue that his decision to cross-stress, quote, merits attention, given the climate of discussion around the topic and where it sits in the larger conversation about gender identity and expression and professional appearance. The unclassified newsletter, which specifies on each page that it is for official use only and not cleared for public release, was released to Daily Wire last week through information, though information such as names of authors are redacted throughout. It was created by the Office of the Director of National intelligence, I see, diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility office and sent to the entire intelligence community. I think my experiences as someone who cross-dresses have sharpened the

skills I use as an officer. The anonymous intelligence officer claims going on to say that he is now, quote, more aware of and hopefully more supportive of my women colleagues. So he needs to wear their clothes to be aware of them and to support them. He expands on the point saying that he has a better appreciation for how it can be uncomfortable to wear women's clothes sometimes. I know firsthand how wearing heels can make your feet hurt and make it take longer to walk somewhere. And that makes him a better intelligence officer. Having that knowledge. That's a piece of intelligence that he's gone undercover. And he has obtained a piece of intelligence that tells him that wearing high heels is uncomfortable.

But guess what? I've never worn high heels, and I could already tell you that it's uncomfortable. Like, I can just look at it. I don't know how anybody does that. How do you do that? Looks uncomfortable to me. I don't need to try them on to find that out. The anonymous intelligence officer also admits that cross-dressing in the workplace

causes a distraction within the intelligence office, but he pleads that those around him will grow more supportive of his choice to wear women's clothes. He writes, quote, when I cross-dress, it still distracts people, though it is professional. It's my hope that we can learn to accept a wider range of gender identities and expressions, even though it's professional. I'm dressing up in women's clothes at work. It's distracting, but it's professional. That's the exact opposite of professional. In fact, as a general rule, you know that you're dressing in an unprofessional way if it is distracting

to those around you. The whole point of professional attire, or at least one of the primary points, is that it's not distracting. The anonymous intelligence official went into even greater depth on his cross-dressing habits. Although I like wearing a bra,

I know it isn't comfortable for everybody and is less comfortable after a few hours. On top of the biases that women often face at work, it must be hard to be uncomfortable too. He went on to claim that cross-dressing also makes him a better ally for those who identify as LGBTQIA plus saying that everybody's better off if they can bring their whole self to work. I definitely felt that and now have supportive allies.

I am part of a community that is not the majority and sometimes feels discriminated against. Okay. And then the Daily Wire article has a link to the whole document if you want to see it for whatever reason. So one thing here is, of course, the Biden administration could. continues to be a literal clown show, just a freak show. And I don't know if there's a Guinness World Record for this, but I mean, the federal government right now under Biden must have a record number of cross-dressers and drag queens. Like, it must.

I don't know what the record was before, but they've certainly, they've certainly beaten it. And notice how this man, he isn't even saying that he identifies, as trans, right? This isn't a man who identifies as a woman. And it's bad enough when intelligence officers, people in government, particularly people in the intelligence agencies, identify as trans. That's concerning enough because that means that we have people in the intelligence field who are deeply confused about the basic facts of reality and of themselves.

And so that makes you question everything else that they say. Any intelligence that they do obtain, you have to question it. Because it's like, well, in what reality did you obtain this intelligence? Like, what reality are you operating in right now? Because, you know, you're trying to live in a reality that doesn't exist. You're living every day in a fantasy land where you're a woman when you're not. So you're confused about that. And we have to ask, what else are you confused about?

Because if you can be confused about something as basic as that, about who you are, what you are, about what a woman is and so on. if you can be confused about that, then you could plausibly be confused about anything, which makes you unfit for this job, and it makes you unfit for, frankly, most employment. Because, I mean, there may be some jobs out there where it doesn't really matter if you're grounded in reality or not while you do it. Yeah, there are some jobs like that. But any job where the reality actually matters, seriously you're seriously called into question so that that's a problem that's bad but this is arguably even worse or at least it's it's very bad in a slightly different way because in this case it's not

even a man who identifies as a woman it's a man who knows that he's a man and yet who gets a thrill out of wearing women's clothes so this is explicitly straightforwardly a fetish And, you know, that's the case with a lot of transgenderism too, obviously, but here it's just outright. This is a fetish. He has a fetish for wearing women's clothes. He's doing it at work on the job. So intelligence agencies have become a forum for fetishists to perform in public. It's sick. This is truly fall-of-empirate stuff that we see. And we never did get around to an explanation or he never got around to an explanation of how exactly this makes him a better intelligence officer. That was the headline. That was sort of the thesis that cross-dressing and performing his fetish in public makes him a better intelligence officer.

Never explains how. How does that work? And I think that the closest he could come to explaining it was that line about how people should be able to bring their whole selves to work. Which, yeah, of course you should bring your whole self as opposed to bringing like a third of yourself. That would be kind of strange. Yeah, you want to bring your entire self. Like, you know, don't come to work without your arm. Don't come to work without your big toe. If you can help it, bring your entire self to work. But does that mean that at work you should be able to express every thought and desire that you happen to have?

obviously not. Okay? There's nowhere in public. There's no place in public that is a forum for that. Like every place you go, really, you're expected to conform, or at least you should be expected to conform to one degree or another, the standards of conduct, which means subordinating your own personal inclinations and desires and compulsions. That's the case anywhere you go in public. That's what it means to live in a civilized society. That's especially the case at work. And even more the case when you allegedly have an important job that deals with allegedly

national security. So that's what he means when he says it makes him a better officer. It doesn't mean that at all. That's just a... What he means is that it makes me feel better. That's what he means to say. He says, it makes me a better officer. He really means it makes me feel better.

I like how it feels is what he's saying. And he can't... Because he's a leftist, and this is the leftist religion, the religion of the self, he doesn't draw a distinction between feeling good and performing well. He doesn't distinguish between those two things. To him, those are one and the same.

To perform well, to do your job, to do your duty, is to feel good. Because as far as he's concerned, that's your only job in life is just to make sure you feel good all the time. And these are the people that we have in our intelligence agencies. I wanted to mention this from MSN. A man is set to plead guilty Wednesday

to killing 3,600 birds, protected eagles and selling their body parts and feathers on a black market. Travis John Branson of Washington State admits they participate in a killing spree of golden eagles and bald eagles, so he and his alleged partner could sell pieces of the birds and their feathers, according to Montana federal court documents. Pleaded guilty, not guilty in January. The indictment reads, the bald eagle is not merely a bird of biological interest, but this country's national symbol, which reflects America's ideals of freedom. And so that's why they are,

that's why he's looking at probably prison time and all the rest of it. You know, you probably know where I'm going with this. If you've listened to the show at all, you probably know where this is going. But anytime I see a story like this, I can't help point it out. That, you know, We have the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, which by the way, prohibits not just killing bald eagles, but it also, it even prohibits taking their feathers, even if you don't kill them. It's actually a crime, it's a federal crime, to confiscate bald eagle feathers, even if the bald eagle is unharmed in their procedure. So we have this law protecting them, and what's the reason? Let's look at the two reasons that the indictment. This is the indictment of this guy who killed the bald eagles.

And also, I don't condone that. Killing 3,600 bald eagles? I don't condone that. You shouldn't do it. I'm opposed to it. In fact, I'll go so far as to say, I'm opposed to it. I'm opposed to going on a killing spree of bald eagles. I'll even say that it feels excessive.

Killing 3,600 birds. That seems like a lot. That's a lot of birds to kill, you know. Really, once you get over 10, I'd say, that's probably too many. There's probably too many bald eagles to kill. So that certainly is a lot. But let's look at the reasons they give, the federal government for going after this guy to prosecute him.

What do they say? Well, they say, the bald eagle is a bird of biological interest. I don't know what that means exactly, but a biological interest. And it's a symbol. It's a symbol. So this is something, you know, that is,

sort of esoteric, this is like something that's not a solid idea, just it's symbolic. Those are the two reasons that they give. And then I can't help but think, well, yet according to the federal government and the people running it, and according to the law is still in many states, unborn human beings do not fall into either of those categories. You know, there is less protection in many states, and according to pro abortions, it should be this way in every state, less protection for actual human beings

than for birds. And again, go to the reason. Why do we have to protect the bald eagles? Because they're of biological interest. Okay, is an unborn child not of biological interest? Whatever that means exactly, and I'm still not sure precisely what it means, that the birds are, but is an unborn human child,

not of biological interest? And then if we're going to go to something as ambiguous as it's a symbol, you know, it has symbolic significance, can we not see any symbolic significance in a human child? I mean, I can see a lot more than symbolic significance, but is there no symbolic significance there? But in fact, if I were to make the argument for protecting unborn children, particularly protecting them on the federal level, if I were to make the argument for we need a federal law, which I do believe this, we need a federal law protecting unborn children. And I were to say that we need to protect them because they have symbolic significance.

Everybody would laugh. They would laugh at that. Pro-aborts would laugh. It's ridiculous. Oh, but for a bird, for a freaking bird, we can have a federal law because of their symbolic significance. So that's okay for a bird, but not for a person. I mean, this is the kind of thing. This is the kind of contradiction that it's just, it is quite literally indefensible. You cannot defend it. The fact that there are federal laws protecting bald eagles, that there's more federal protection for an eagle than there is for a for a human at its earliest stages of development is completely insane and i think

everybody knows that which is why you know the left they won't you know this is not an argument they want to engage with they're not going to they're not going to speak up and like defend this they just want to ignore it but this is also why despite what so many conservatives say now the cowardly conservatives who um you know we get a bit of major pro-life victory with a robeing overturned and they've done nothing but complain about it ever since. Oh, no, we won something. We won something. This is terrible.

Now the left is so mad at us for winning something. Pathetic. Despite what they say about how this is an unwinnable argument, we can't win it, you know, I've got to leave it alone. Really? This is not winnable? Like any conservative in media who's telling us that they are so incompetent that they can't figure out a way to win with this argument,

well, then like, you shouldn't be, then what are you doing? You're not qualified to be speaking about anything publicly, frankly. You're not qualified to be any kind of thought leader. If you can't figure out a way, like, really, can you at least make an argument that human children have more worth than bald eagles? You think that's a losing argument for us? Really?

I don't think it is. I think the vast majority of people, when you tell them, and it's a fact, It is a fact that bald eagles have more federal protection than human children at the earliest stage of development. I think when you tell most people that, most people recognize that as inherently absurd. It's just that you have to make the argument. And it's not often made. The problem with people on the right is that they allow the left to define the terms of the argument. They argue about things like abortion, you know, on the law.

left's terms and using their language and using their rules and using their framing. And if you do that, you'll lose. But this is a winning argument. I would love to see this. Maybe it's happened before and I don't remember. I would love to see this at a debate. The Republican up on stage, Democrat, if there is any presidential debate, if that even happens, if we have it, even one presidential debate, which I don't think we will. I'd love to see this. You say to Biden, You know, there's a federal law protecting bald eagles. Do you believe that eagles should have more legal protection than human beings at their earliest stages of development? Is that what you believe?

Do you believe that eagles have more moral worth and more symbolic worth than human beings? Do you believe that? That's a great question. Isn't that a great, isn't that a really good question? Seems like a fantastic argument to me. It's a fantastic argument. You know why you know it's a good argument? Because there's nothing your opponent can say that's not going to sound insane.

Other than to just agree with you and abandon their argument entirely. But anything else they try, it's going to sound crazy. So, yeah, it's a winning argument, but you have to be a, but you just have to make it. All right. The Hill has this, just over a week before her new country album is released, Beyonce Knowles Carter is Is she doing the whole Is she doing the hyphen thing now?

Is that a new thing? Beyonce Noles Carter? When did that start? Has it always been? She did the hyphen? Anyway, Beyonce Noles Carter is reflecting on the hate she received performing at the 2016 country music awards

with the Chicks. Formerly the Dixie Chicks, I believe. This album has been over five years in the making, a multi-grammy winner posted on Instagram. It was born out of an experience that I had years ago where I did not feel welcomed, and it was very clear that I wasn't. Though the CMAs and some country artists said that they had no issue with Beyonce's performance,

country music fans took it to social media to share their outrage and in some cases racism over her performance. Wrote one user, figures they would pair up, one who has no respect for the American military and another who has no respect for the American law enforcement. Another wrote, she does not belong. When have they ever invited any country singer to their BETT awards? Never.

Beyonce and native of Houston announced her eighth studio album, Act 2, Cowboy Carter in February to the delight of fans. She says, The criticism I face when I first entered this genre forced me to propel past the limitations that were put on me.

This is what I get. I defended Beyonce's country song. I stand by that. It's an okay song. I said it. I don't take it back. It's catchy. Sorry.

Sorry if you want me to lie to you. I'm not going to lie to you. The song is okay. What do you want me to do? It just is. I tell it like it is, and that's one of the things. It just is.

But of course, after I bravely withstood the wrath and mockery of my own audience by defending Beyonce. Now she has to turn around and play the victim and make me regret going out on this limb for her. In fact, you know, I got to say, I'm out of the beehive. I'm out of it. I won't know part of it. I thought Beyonce was done with her self-victimizing ways. It had been three weeks since the last time. I thought she was done. I thought she turned a new leaf. I believed in her. And apparently not. And now she's saying that, you know, she was experienced racism with her first foray into her.

the country. Beyonce wants to experience racism so much. I mean, she's been begging her whole life to be the victim of racism, and it's never happened. And now here she is claiming that she wasn't welcomed in the country music scene. Worse, she's now revealed that her foray into country is fueled by resentment. So she's doing it out of pure scorn and resentment. I thought she was doing it as a cynical marketing ploy just to make money, which, like, you know, that's what you do. Apparently it's worse than that. And to be clear, Beyonce was welcomed into the genre just fine. I mean, Beyonce's been welcomed everywhere she's gone her entire life.

She's never not been welcomed somewhere. She's never not been celebrated in every room she's walked into. Some people don't like her country stuff. That's fine. They're allowed to not like it. And the examples that the article gives of racism were just a couple of kinds. saying Beyonce doesn't belong in the genre. And that shows you how unracist the criticism was. Like they wrote this article, they combed through comments looking for racism against Beyonce.

And the best they could find was Beyonce isn't a country singer. This isn't her genre. Which is kind of amazing. Because you'd think that you could cherry pick at least one or two legitimately racist comments. Just, you know, odds are you would think statistically you'd be able to find a couple. But they didn't find any. That's how completely free of racism Beyonce's life has been. Which, by the way, even if there had been a legitimately

racist comment here and there about Beyonce, it still would not justify her making a victim of herself because the fact would still remain that she is loved and celebrated by like 99.99999.99% of everyone she comes in contact with or here's from.

But that's how celebrities work these days. They need to be worshipped by 100% of everyone all the time. And if they're not, then they're victims. And of course, it's not just celebrities that have that attitude anymore. And I always think it's funny to contrast this with my own experience, being, of course, nowhere close to Beyonce's vicinity when it comes to fame. But I just think about the fact that, you know, if I'm not. I were to go and name search myself on any social media platform and read like the first 100 comments that pop up about me, if 30% of them, if 30 out of 100 were positive, I would be

shocked. I would, I'd feel like I'd gone mainstream. I mean, I wouldn't know what to think. I don't know if I'd be happy or not. For someone like Beyonce, if she reads 10,000 comments and one of the 10,000 is negative, then she'll write a whole song about it. I mean, she doesn't write her own songs, but you get the point. All right, we just talked about obesity. So before we move on, I think this is a video that is relevant.

Here's a viral TikTok related to the issue of obesity. Here it is. And plus I isn't on a plane. Of course, I can't food the tree down now. And plus I'm going to synthesize the smallest member of my family. and plus size and on a plane of course the armrest is digging it and plus size and on a plane of course i have to shoot me down the aisle sideways and plus size and on a plane of course i need to see beltic center um okay just a few things here uh first of all and i don't mean this as an insult i really don't uh no offense intended but i think plus sized doesn't really tell the story here. Some of these people, I think, you know, that go by plus size, like they're a little bit beyond

plus sized. I think plus is an understatement. We need more of a multiplication sign for her. Like, we got to go to Pemdis and find a different, find something different for her. But second, how are these TikTokers not overwhelmed with embarrassment when they're filming these things in public. That's the first thing I think every time I see one of these videos. First thing I think before you get to the substance of it, which is always stupid, is how are you not humiliated to be doing this in public where people are sitting on the plane? It's quiet. Obviously,

the plane hasn't taken off yet. And everyone's just sitting there quietly and you're filming your little TikTok video. I work in front of a camera for a living. And even for me, it's always a little bit awkward if I'm filming something in public and people, it feels a little bit weird. So how do they not die of embarrassment? I guess that requires you to have some sense of some capacity for shame, some self-awareness, which these people lack. And but of course, the main thing is, and I hesitate to say this, and I'm not sure if it's even true, but part of me feels like the fat acceptance, fat rights people are even more insanely narcissistic than the trans activists. And I understand what a statement that is.

You know, maybe I'm getting caught up in the moment here. Maybe it's recency bias. But it's a close race between the two either way. We can say that, no question. But think about what these people are doing. You know, they are gorging themselves to an extreme degree. I mean, it takes a lot of effort to get that fat. Let's be honest about it.

We're not talking about, I mean, to get sort of out of shape and a little bit pudgy, Like, that's easy. I mean, that can happen to anybody. And especially when a lot of the food we're eating, even if you put some effort into your diet, it's still easy to get caught up eating a lot of garbage food and all the rest of it. But we're not talking about that. We're talking about, you know, this is not a eating a little bit too much fast food, having a midnight snack or whatever. We're talking about eating just an extraordinary volume of food every day. The amount of food that it takes to maintain. That That is obesity you have to maintain. You have to like put the effort in to maintain it. And you have to basically be constantly eating all the time in order to be that fat. We're talking thousands and thousands of calories every single day, deliberately putting much more lard on your body than your bone structure was ever meant to hold. And then after doing all of that, despite what we're told about obesity as a disease, it's not, as we've covered. It is a, it's deliberate. Now, you might, when you're eating,

you might not be thinking to yourself, I want to be fat, but you are deliberately making yourself fat. You are doing something that you know will make you fat, and it does, and that's it. So, after putting in all of this deliberate effort and ballooning to that size, and then you turn around after all of that and demand that society must rearrange itself to accommodate you, is, I mean, if it's not more narcissistic than the trans activist, it's at least narcissistic in the same sort of way. I mean, it's a, it's a tight competition between the two, we'll say. Do you owe back taxes or still have unfiled returns? Not only is owing back taxes stressful, but the IRS has also become more determined than ever, the IRS's chief data and analytics officer

revealed that they're focused on an enforcement project with an average return of investment of about $6 for every $1 spent. They are targeting individuals and businesses that currently owe back taxes or haven't filed their tax returns. Tax Network USA, the nation's leading tax relief firm knows the tax code and will fight for you with a record of negotiating over a billion dollars in tax relief from their clients. Their team is knowledgeable in handling any type of tax issue. Whether you owe $10,000 or $10 million, they can help you. Even if you don't have all your personal or business records from over the years, they can get you filed up to date. Facing the IRS with without a professional is not a smart move, contact Tax Network USA for the best strategic advice

to help reduce or even eliminate your tax debt. Call today at 1-800-245-6,000 or visit their website at tnusa.com slash walsh. They'll give you a free private consultation on how you can settle your tax debt today. That's tnusa.com slash walsh. The iconic leftist-ears tumbler is back and sending shivers down the spines of woke baristas everywhere. But wait, because there's a twist. It's yours for free when you become a Daily Wire Plus.

annual member. Now, I know what you're thinking, membership, but I just want the legendary Leftist Tears Tumblr. That's all I want. Well, sure, unlimited access to ad-free, unsensored shows from the Daily Wire hosts you love is great. Having hit movies, series, and groundbreaking documentaries on demand is awesome, but what you've really been waiting for is the Leftist Tears Tumblr, and now it's yours for free with an insider annual membership. Want more? Well, new All-Excess members get two Leftist Tears Tumblers free. That's right, double the cred, double the liberal meltdowns. Become an annual member today at DailyWireplus.com We are iconic leftist tears tumbler and drink to triggering the left.

Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Today for daily cancellation, we have Planet Fitness. Now, we know that Planet Fitness has been woke for a while, perhaps for as long as it's existed, but it has survived in spite of its vogueness up until now for the same reason that, you know, for the simple reason that there are so many of them around and they're so cheap. And even if you hate the politics of Planet Fitness, it can be hard, especially in this economy, to resist a gym that offers memberships and 24-hour access for like 13 cents a month or whatever it is. But as we saw with Bud Light, being cheap and convenient will absolve you of most sins, even the sin of offering a crappy product, but it won't absolve you of everything.

And that is what Planet Fitness is learning this week. So backing up a few days, a woman named Patricia Silva went to her Planet Fitness location in Fairbanks, Alaska, and discovered a man in the women's locker room. And, you know, not that this matters that much. A man is a man no matter what he looks like. But this particular man wasn't even making any attempt to look like he wasn't a man. In fact, he was standing at the sink shaving. Here's Patricia Silva explaining. I came in Monday. There's a man in the women's locker room.

Shaving. A little girl sitting in the corner. She could have been 12 years old. I don't know how old she was. In a towel. Kind of freaked out that there's a man shaving in her locker room. Well, I was offended. I took a picture of him.

and I asked him, why are you there? You're a man with a penis. Why are you in the women's locker room? And he justified by saying, I'm queer LGBT, and I said, you shouldn't be in the woman's locker room. Well, I left. And as I said this morning, I got canceled. Planet Fitness is defending the man in the woman's locker room,

the man with a penis, rather than the child sitting in the corner with a towel wrapped around her. So people, I just want you to know. This is weird. It's not good. It's rather disturbing. So I would like for you, women, to stand up and have a voice and stop the shenanigans. You have authority.

Use your authority. I took that picture because I was, I was, I felt like I was in a, I felt like I was in an unsafe space. Well, yes, of course she felt like she was in an unsafe space. There's a man in her locker room acting out his sexual fetish. By the way, here's what the man looks like. You can see the pictures there. And yeah, that's just a dude. I mean, even if he did a slightly better job not looking like a dude, he'd still be a dude.

But with a guy like this, I mean, you see the farce on full display. This does not appear to be a man who thinks he's a woman or feels like one or is confused about his gender identity, quote, unquote. Although, again, he still wouldn't be one even if he thought he was. one, but in this case, like so many other cases, this does not seem to be confusion. This is simply a much like the intelligence officer we talked about earlier in the show. This is a sexual fetish being performed in a locker room with children present. So of course, Planet Fitness responds by banning the woman who complained about it. In a statement, according to the Daily Mail, Planet Fitness said that although some members may be uncomfortable having dudes in the women's locker

room, quote, this discomfort is not a reason to deny access to the transgender member. Of course, as always, this logic has never applied the other way, because we could just as easily say, in fact, much, much more easily say, that the alleged discomfort the man feels in using the men's locker room is not a reason to invade the privacy of women. It's one way or another, something is going to happen that makes somebody uncomfortable. Somebody's discomfort has to take priority. Either the man must be made uncomfortable by being denied access to the women's facilities, or all of the women in the women's facility must be made uncomfortable by allowing him access to it. Now, Planet Fitness says that the discomfort of the man takes precedence.

It's better for 100 women to be uncomfortable than for one gender-confused man to be uncomfortable. That is the logic. Now, even by framing it this way, I may be inadvertently doing the man a favor. After all, as mentioned, I don't even buy that this guy is gender-confused. and I also don't buy that he's actually uncomfortable in the men's room. I'm guessing this dude has used men's rooms hundreds of times over the course of his life without a problem. But the point is that by the logic of Planet Fitness, according to their way of thinking, they are weighing the discomfort of one group versus the other,

or rather one group versus one individual, and the individual wins out, because that is how the left-wing victim calculus works. Now, the Daily Mail reached out for comment about all this, and this is what Planet Fitness said in response, Quote, as the home of the judgment-free zone, Planet Fitness is committed to creating an inclusive environment. Our gender identity non-discrimination policy states that members and guests may use the gym facility that best aligns with their sincere, self-reported gender identity. The member who posted on social media violated a mobile device policy that prohibits taking photos of individuals in the locker room, which resulted in the membership being terminated. Now, you notice two things in that statement.

The first is the phrase sincere self-reported gender identity. Never mind the fact that gender identity is a nonsensical concept. You might as well say that members have the right to use whatever bathroom that best aligns with the wishes of their invisible pet unicorn. But more interesting is the qualifier, sincere self-reported. Because if the gender identity is self-reported, then how do you know that it's sincere? Planet Fitness is essentially claiming that if a gender identity is self-reported, then it must be sincere. as if it's impossible that any man could ever claim to have a gender identity he doesn't really have for the sake of gaining access to the women's locker room.

Granted, nobody has a gender identity, so anyone claiming a gender identity is automatically pretending. And that's exactly the point. Planet Fitness assumed sincerity. The problem is that the sincerity of a man's belief in his own womanhood is irrelevant. And also, there's no possible way to know whether he's sincere. And assuming that he must be sincere simply because he claimed it is that. Now, the second thing you notice is the trumpeting of their judgment-free zone slogan. In reality, you know, there's no such thing as being judgment-free. Everybody exercises judgment. To be a conscious human being is to have judgment. Indeed, Planet Fitness passed judgment

when it banned the woman who complained. Planet Fitness makes a judgment call when it allows men into the women's locker room in an effort to respect the man's, quote, sincere gender identity. That is judgment. It's just that it's very poor judgment. Planet Fitness, like much of the rest of the culture, is not a judgment-free zone. It is a poor judgment zone. It is a zone for judging people and situations wrongly, which is not the same as not judging them at all. And now Planet Fitness, thankfully, is paying the price for their poor judgment. Here's the latest from the Daily Mail, quote,

Planet Fitness' valuation has plummeted $400 million in five days after they banned a member who shared a photo of a trans woman, quote unquote, using a female locker room. The company's value dropped from $5.3 billion on March 14th to $4.9 billion on March 19th, and its shares are down by 13.59% compared to a month ago. The client follows Planet Fitness's refusal to walk back its decision to ban a member who exposed a, quote, trans woman shaving in a female locker room earlier this month. The company's stock fell by 7.8% on Tuesday, going from its opening price of $59.44 to a five-month low of $54.80. It then rebounded slightly. So hopefully this trend continues.

Planet Fitness has the advantage that unlike Bud Light, their wokeness has already been, to some extent, baked into the cake. But if people are really tired of the cake, then it could be a problem for Planet Fitness. The fact is that allowing men in the women's locker room is an indefensibly stupid, reckless and dangerous decision. Almost everybody in the world understands that and always has. It's just that so many of them have been too afraid to say so. And that seems to be changing, which is good news for team sanity, but bad news for planet fitness. And that is why they are today canceled. But do for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening.

Talk to you tomorrow. Have a great day. God's sweet.