The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1367 - Women Are Having Temper Tantrums And Calling It A 'Rage Ritual'

Episode Date: May 13, 2024

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, something called a "rage ritual" is gaining popularity. It sounds stupid and insane, and it is, but you have to see and hear it to fully appreciate it. Also, the polls have shifted so dramatically in Trump's favor that even CNN is admitting that Biden has a major problem. And a school district in Virginia has voted to put Confederate General names back on their schools. And, in our Daily Cancellation, the media tells us that there is a new Rosa Parks. A persecuted black woman was told to go the back of the plane by a racist flight attendant. That's the claim, anyway. But, as you can imagine, there's a lot more to the story.   Ep.1367   - - -    DailyWire+:   Introducing the Newest Daily Wire Venture: Emerson - A Premium Multivitamin for Men: https://bit.ly/3WlNWgs   Watch the brand new animated sitcom Mr. Birchum only on DailyWire+: https://bit.ly/4akO7wC   Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://bit.ly/3EbNwyj     - - -    Today’s Sponsors:   Birch Gold - Text "WALSH" to 989898, or go to https://birchgold.com/Walsh, for your no-cost, no-obligation, FREE information kit.    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

Today on the Matt Wall Show, something called a rage ritual is gaining popularity. It sounds stupid and insane, and it is, but you have to see and hear it to fully appreciate it. Also, the polls have shifted so dramatically in Trump's favor that even CNN is admitting that Biden has a major problem. And a school district in Virginia has voted to put Confederate general names back on their schools. And our daily cancellation, the media tells us that there is a new Rosa Parks. A persecuted black woman was told to go to the back of the plane by a racist flight attendant. That's the claim anyway. but as you can imagine, there's a lot more to the story.

We'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Wall Show. Can your savings weather another economic storm? Think about what you've put away for the future. Inflation can render cash worthless and real estate can crash as it did in 2008. During times of economic uncertainty or market volatility, investors tend to flock to gold as a safe haven asset. Its value tends to increase during turbulent times, providing a buffer against market downturns. This is why people are flocking to gold now and why Birchgold is busier than ever. Birchgold understands that navigating financial decisions can be daunting.

That's why their dedicated in-house IRA department is there to guide you every step of the way. Birchgold is committed to addressing your questions and concerns promptly. Their team is always ready to provide answers and clarity. Whether it's about fees, taxes, and rollovers, or the timing of the process, they're here to ensure that you feel valued and well-informed. Text Walsh to 9-8-98 to talk to one of Birchgold's experts and claim your free info kit on gold. You'll learn how to convert an existing IRA or 401k into a tax-sheltered IRA in gold. Best part is it doesn't cost you a penny at a pocket. Just text Walsh to 989898-9-8-9-8.

That's Walsh to 9-8-9-8-9-8. Usually I begin the opening monologue with a preamble to set up the topic that we're going to discuss. But this time, I think I'd rather just jump right into it. I'm going to play you a video without context, and then we'll circle back around and fill in the blanks. Here's the clip from USA Today that went viral over the weekend. And if you didn't see it yet, well, then I'm sorry to have to do this to you, but here it is. Now, if you're watching the video podcast on Daily Wire, YouTube, Rumble, or Twitter, you're probably pretty confused.

If you're listening to just the audio podcast on Apple or Spotify, then you're very extremely confused. Your mind is conjuring all kinds of images to go along with the psychotic assortment of sounds that you just heard. You might imagine that, you know, it was a video of a bunch of rabid spider monkeys at the zoo, or maybe it was footage of an exorcism. And if you guessed either of those top two possibilities, then you weren't too far off. it turns out. Actually, that was something, that was a glimpse into something known as a rage ritual. Here's the USA Today headline on the accompanying article, quote, women are paying big money to scream smash sticks in the woods.

It's called a rage ritual. Now, you hear that and you may be wondering, what and huh, and why? And more specifically, why would you pay big bucks to go into the woods and bang sticks on the ground? If ever there was an activity, that you could do for free? Like, wouldn't that be it? Unfortunately, no satisfactory answer to any of those questions will be provided, but we'll read on anyway. Quote, Kimberly Helmiss still gets chills thinking about her first rage ritual. Two and a half years ago after her divorce, the cybersecurity engineer embarked on a retreat to Scotland with Maya Banducci, an author and self-described spiritual fairy godmother, better known online as Mia Magic. As part of the retreat, Banducci

held a rage ritual, a ceremony which participants scream and beat large statured, sticks on the ground in the woods. Pitsidents are encouraged to think of people and experiences that have wronged them and to scream and swing the sticks for at least 20 minutes or until they can no longer move their arms. Rage rituals have garnered attention on TikTok where they have resonated, particularly with women. In comments, women describe how moving it is to see other women embody their anger. And emotion experts say society often discourages women from expressing. Quote, there's no place where you can see women be able to be angry like that in it not be condemned. Helmas says, she's just hormonal, she's just unhinged, she's just unhinged, she's just

crazy. She's just on her period. She's just whatever. This was a place where you were probably for the first time in a really, really long time, if ever, able to scream out loud things about how you felt. Now, that's true. In polite society, you are not encouraged to roll around on the ground screaming at the top of your lungs. That is a temper tantrum, and we try our best to prevent three-year-olds from engaging in temper tantrums. An adult having a temper tantrum is and should be viewed with bewilderment and disdain. Like, do these people actually think otherwise? Do they really think that it would be better

if adults were encouraged to have psychotic screaming spasms of rage in public in front of people who did not sign up for the opportunity to witness such a spectacle? Like, how do they think we should react if we were just walking down maybe a sidewalk in the park one day and we saw a woman with a stick just beating it and screaming. Like, how are we meant to react to that?

Well, we'll return to that point in a moment, but here's one more quick passage from the USA Today piece. Quote, Banducci has led rage rituals for several years and began doing them first for herself, then for friends. And eventually, as part of her days-long retreats, which include other activities and can range in price from around $2,000 to $4,000. Her one-day version, she says, costs $222 per ticket. The process of a rage ritual is pretty simple. First Banducci says participants gather large sticks while conjuring to mind every person who's ever crossed you, who's ever hurt you, who's ever ignored your boundaries, or taken advantage of you, or abused you in any way.

After some warm-up breaths, the screaming and swinging begins. The ritual is held in the woods so participants can make noise without fear of bothering people nearby. Banducci isn't the only person who leads events dealing with rage. Secret Sanctuary will host a sacred rage ceremony in Alberta, Canada in July. And Jessica Ritchetti, an author and self-proclaimed mystic, will host a sacred. sacred rage women's retreat in North Carolina in June, quote, when people do this and give themselves permission to release their anger, their capacity for joy actually expands. They're able to feel more happiness and pleasure, and they go home to their families with more gratitude and ease and peace. So these women pay over $200 per ticket for the privilege of screeching maniacally and

banging sticks on the ground. In a way, you almost have to respect the grift, I guess. Like, I'd like to say that whoever first saw a toddler having a tantrum in the grocery store and thought, I bet I could get middle-aged women to pay me thousands of dollars so that they could do that in the middle of the woods is a marketing genius. But I may be giving them too much credit because, in fact, the rage ritual scam isn't especially unprecedented. Rage has been a booming business for a while now. Rage rooms have been around for years, offering paying customers the opportunity to go into a room, clad in helmets, and protective gear and break stuff for a generous fee, of course. Here's a Canadian media report from several years ago about the rage rooms watch.

Having one of those days? This may be the place for you, Toronto's first rage room. The idea is from Serbia. I've never seen anything like this. And in everyday life, you get stressed out. So I said, you know, let me check it out. It seems like a cool concept. $20, you get 30 minutes in the rage room.

And you also start off with five plates and the protective gear you need. Okay. After you're geared up, it's time to choose a weapon. We have a golf club, a crowbar, a baseball bat, and even a hockey stick. The old crowbar meets a ball. And that's a strike. Christine Pinkowski, now she hit a homer. Are you less angry?

Yeah, I feel like I could hit a couple more plates, but yeah, I think I definitely released some stress. Was that one guy wearing a gas mask for this? I mean, they've got full on, like, COVID, not even, they've got full on, like, it's like they're going into Chernobyl after the meltdown with the protective gear. I cannot think of anything lamer than getting in your car and driving to a special venue where you pay money and wear protective gear to smash place. with a baseball bat. But this is what some people are doing. And in fairness, they don't always pay money for the privilege. A couple of weeks ago, a TikTok influencer documented her own rage

ritual, which, and this went very viral, in fact, and lots of women were responding to it with how emotional it made them. And this is something that she performs for free in her bathroom with a bowl of ice. Watch. Daddy, the ice tray is empty and mommy is screaming in the bathroom. Well, yes, son. She's doing it again. Again, mommy's just a bit mentally unbalanced. Nothing to worry about. Now, we've mostly seen examples so far of women having allegedly therapeutic tantrums. And I should mention that, tragically, this is not a trend relegated only to the female sex.

Indeed, there are many workshops available for men who wish to get in touch with their feelings by paying hundreds of dollars to humiliate themselves in this fashion. Here's just one. Now, those shirtless dudes screaming out of waterfall are apparently part of something called. called the amend movement. And the organization's website provides this explanation, quote, when we're asked, how are you doing? We instinctively respond, I'm okay, despite the reality that we may not be fine at all. Society has taught us to hide our true feelings and reply with the usual simple solution. These workshops provide a safe and nurturing space to express any built-up emotions,

as well as teaching you how to manage emotions day to day. Now, as a man myself, I can say that the last thing in the world that I'm looking for is a safe and nurturing space to express my built-up emotions. That sounds like a nightmare. I can honestly say that I would rather be drowned in that river than gather there with a bunch of men to get in touch with my emotions or whatever. But not all men share my preferences. In fact, some men are apparently willing to pay $250 to do what you just witnessed. Now, there's probably no point in debunking the science behind banging sticks and breaking plates and throwing ice or screaming at waterfalls. But I will take just a moment to point out that there is no evidence that anyone's mental

health is improved by these embarrassing spectacles. In fact, it's pretty obvious that our mental health is harmed this way. Extreme random, broad, undirected bursts of rage are not healthy. And indulging that impulse only makes you feel the impulse even more. This is a basic fact of human psychology that everyone, should understand, but few people in our culture seem to. Indulgence leads to more indulgence. You aren't venting or getting it out of your system. You're introducing it into your system. You're feeding the urge, which makes it grow stronger. What adults need to learn, well, these adults in

particular need to learn, is how to channel your anger and frustration in a useful, constructive way. A successful, well-adjusted person knows how to harness that energy and use. use it as fuel in the pursuit of a goal. If you need a more immediate and physical outlet, then especially if you're a man, go to the gym and lift. Don't scream and cry while you're lifting. Just lift. And you're at best wasting, you know, you are at best, I would say, wasting that energy with fruitless, futile expressions of blind, uncontrolled, untempered emotion. And at worst, you are training yourself to act like a toddler. Well, there's one other point that needs to be made. And we hear from the advocates of these forms

of quote-unquote therapy, just as we hear constantly from the culture at large these days, that, you know, our society is, they say, repressive and too often encourages people to suppress their emotions and put on a false front and fake a smile and pretend that everything is okay. You know, we just heard that on the website for the amend movement. You know, when people ask you how you're doing, we just say that we're fine, but really we're not. But actually the opposite is obviously the case. There has never been a society in the history of the world more open to and welcoming of emotional expression than ours. If you think that the pressure to suppress your emotions in our culture is too great, you would have hated living literally anywhere else at any other time.

Because historically, most societies, civilized ones anyway, have been governed by, rules of dignity and decorum. And those are two words that are barely even used to, you don't even, you don't even hear those concepts brought up verbally. When's the last time you heard anyone condemned for not having dignity or a sense of decorum? It's almost never said. There is simply no doubt that we live in the most emotionally open society that has ever existed on the planet. And yet, it turns out that people are not happier and are not more fulfilled are not reaping the rewards that we're supposed to come from this emotional honesty. When people are encouraged to wear their emotions on their sleeves and dump their feelings on

everybody constantly, holding nothing back and making sure that everyone knows how sad and angry and put upon they are all the time, it turns out this only makes them feel more sad and angry and put upon. So we should try going the other way. Bring back a sense of stoicism. Learn how to suffer silently. at least some of the time. Now, that doesn't mean that we should be emotionalist robots. It does mean that we should get in a habit of should should should be should should in a habit of shouldering our burdens with poise and dignity and strength,

control our emotions rather than allowing them to control us. Because, yeah, even if you feel angry and sad, you should still walk through the world acting like you don't. That's not phoniness. It's called maturity. It's called being an adult. And the great thing is that if you get in the habit of acting like a mature, emotionally stable person, eventually you'll actually become one.

Now let's get to our five headlines. If you owe back taxes or still have unfiled returns, that can really weigh on your mind, especially when the IRS has become more determined than ever. Their chief data analytics officer revealed that the IRS is focused on an enforcement project with an average return on investment of about $6 for every $1 spent. They're targeting individuals and businesses that currently owe back taxes or haven't yet filed their 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 for their clients,

their team is knowledgeable in handling any type of tax issue. Whether you owe $10,000 or $10 million, they can help. 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 Audi 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. Daily wire has a report as many as 100,000 people flooded the Jersey shore to attend former president Donald Trump's rally in deep blue New Jersey on Saturday, according to official estimates, spokeswoman for the city of Wildwood, New Jersey, which hosted the Trump rally, told the Associated Press that based on viewing the crowd and comparing it to dozens of other events in the same place, she believes there were between 80,000 to 100,000 people in attendance to see the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. New Jersey Republican

Representative Jeff Van Drew called the rally the biggest political gathering in state history. Wildwood is in New Jersey's second district with Trump won in 2016 and 2020, after Barack Obama previously carried the district. Here is Trump at this rally addressing the crowd watch. So many people here. There's so many people here. Man, over 100,000 people. This is supposed to be, you know, they thought they'd hit 40.

So they more than doubled it. But you can't even see the end. I wish we didn't have the press here. I wish we moved them to hell back so they'd have, because they can't see in the back. You know, I always tell the press, Turn your cameras around to show the audience, okay? They never do it.

Look, look, fake news. They never do it. They never do it. So Trump is always heckling the press, which is great, never gets old, and it's always very well deserved. And now, you know, this huge turnout in New Jersey has prompted some people on the right, on social media in particular, to claim that, you know, New Jersey is a winnable state for Trump. It isn't, by the way.

You know, we don't have to get hung up on this, but let's just be clear about that. Trump lost New Jersey by double digits in the first two times. Every Republican has lost New Jersey since 1992. And I'm not looking to rain on anyone's parade, but it is important from a strategic standpoint. Because doing the rally is great, drawing a big crowd is great. It does, you know, that helps you far beyond New Jersey. But it should go without saying that Trump shouldn't waste any real resources on trying to actually win New Jersey because he won't. He doesn't need to. This election will come

down to a small handful of states, and New Jersey isn't one of them. You don't need it. So forget about it. Although, again, the rally is great. Even so, you can see the enthusiasm. And the really terrifying thing if you're a Democrat is that there is none of that enthusiasm, obviously, for Joe Biden. Just like in 2020, all of the enthusiasm for Biden is really enthusiasm related to Trump. Negative enthusiasm in that case, like people are going to vote for Trump because they like Trump, and people are going to vote for Biden because they don't like Trump. Nobody is voting for Biden because they like Biden. I, like a true Biden voter, someone who really loves Biden and wants more Biden, I've never met that person, I've never heard from that person.

I don't know who that person is, which is why even Biden's surrogates, which includes all of corporate media, their argument for Biden is always just, well, he's not Trump. Look, it all comes back to Trump. And everyone knows that there's really nothing you can say in Biden's favor on his own. That's why there are no big Biden. There are big Trump fans, obviously.

There are no big Biden fans. This is a realization that is starting to slowly dawn on some of the leftists in the corporate press, much to their horror, which is very amusing to watch. For example, listen to this from, and this is like a four-minute monologue that he gave, and it's all worth listening to,

if only because you just very rarely hear this from anybody on CNN. We'll play about a two-minute clip of it. This is Fareed Zachariah on CNN, again, slowly starting to realize what's happening and very distraught about it. Let's listen. Admit, none of this is playing out as I thought it would.

Trump is now leading in almost all the swing states, but behind those numbers lie even more troubling details. As someone worried about the prospects of a second Trump term, I think it's best to be honest about reality. I understand that polls are not always accurate, but in general, they have tended to underestimate Donald Trump's support, not overestimated. I doubt that there are many shy Biden voters,

in the country. The economy has been in a robust recovery for more than two years now, with unemployment hitting a 54-year low in 2023 and increasing only slightly since then. But Biden is getting little credit for it. The shift here is stark. On the question of who voters trust more to deal with the economy, Trump has a 22-point lead over Biden, according to an NBC poll from January. This marks a 15-point bump for Trump compared to to the same poll in 2020. Perhaps this is because inflation is a far more pervasive problem than unemployment affecting all Americans every day.

Perhaps it's because people's views on the economy now are largely derived from their broader attitudes towards the candidates. But whatever the reasons, it's a stunning reversal in the midst of a relentless stream of good economic news. The one that troubles me the most is on the question of who was the more competent. Joe Biden led Donald Trump by nine points in 2020,

but Trump now leads by 16 points in January 2024. That 25-point shift could be a reflection of people's sense that the president's age is affecting his capacity to govern. And there's very little that Joe Biden can do now to change that perception. So, yes, the numbers are very bad for Biden, and when even CNN is abidding that, then that's, bad news, even more bad news for Biden. Admitting that the election has swung wildly in Trump's favor, so is public opinion.

Takes a lot for them to admit something like that, but it's true. And why is it happening? Well, there are several factors. Zacharias correct that none of them are fixable for Biden. One is, as he mentioned, his age. Trump's only a couple years younger, but he sounds and appears like someone who still has his mental and physical faculties, whereas Biden doesn't. and everybody knows that.

And, you know, that is the main thing, I'm pretty certain. Biden is mentally and physically falling apart, and everyone can see it. It's unmistakable. And of course, that's going to affect him gravely in an election. Also, the economy, you know, the Biden campaign brags about the unemployment rate, but inflation is the problem. Inflation impacts everyone, as you mentioned there. Whether you have a job or not, you know, quality of life for everybody suffers.

And Biden hasn't done anything to fix that problem. Also, immigration, a major problem that Biden not only doesn't take seriously, but is actively trying to make that problem worse and thereby make everyone's lives worse. Crime is another one. I mean, all these things. People are looking and saying Biden has either done nothing on these issues or most of the time has taken active steps to make it worse. And then on top of that, the media has spent, of course, years now, relentlessly attacking Trump. And their attacks just aren't landing. Like nobody, partly because so much of it is sort of baked into the cake now.

And so, you know, maybe seven years ago you could get some, a little bit of traction by saying, listen to this offensive thing that Trump said, it just doesn't matter anymore. It's all baked in. nobody cares. And also, they, from the very beginning, they decided that their primary narrative about Trump is going to be that he's a fascist dictator in league with Putin. And he wants to, you know, he wants to usher in a handmaid's tale dystopia and all that. Like that, they decided from the very beginning that's going to be their narrative. And it just doesn't, it doesn't work. work in 2016. It doesn't work now because we all, at least in 20, at least before Trump was

elected, you know, it was all speculation. So we couldn't really, even though it was absurd, to claim that he's some sort of fascist, racist, dictator and he wants to oppress everybody, was absurd back then. But we had nothing to, we couldn't prove that it was false because he hadn't been president. But now we have four years of him being president. And so when they're telling us, oh, this is what it's going to be like under a Trump presidency, they're doing that. and they want us to forget the fact that he actually was president. So we can go back and look and he was the opposite of a dictator. As I've said many times about Trump, I think the real criticism of him is the opposite of that.

He went too far on the other extreme of not getting involved enough and not wielding his power enough. So if there's any criticism, it's that. But that's not the criticism they're making. And they can't pivot to that now. it's way too late. So instead they want us to believe that he's, you know, some sort of dictator. And also, as part of the fact that he was president for four years, we can all remember that time. And we can remember that it looked like it was pretty good.

Wasn't a utopia, but it's never going to be. It was pretty good until COVID. Now, I've been critical of Trump's response to COVID, but also people can look and say, well, Biden wouldn't have been any better. In fact, he would have been worse. All the worst things about Trump's response to COVID, what made them bad is that it was what the Democrats wanted. So if you had an actual Democrat in office during that time, it would have been so much worse. As we saw, when Biden actually did take over. So that's what they're running into. It is unfixable. And then probably on top all that too, that's all that really needs to be said. Those are all the

problems, but I think even on top of that, the fact that Biden is the incumbent in general probably hurts them. I know the, hurts him. I know the accepted wisdom is that the incumbency helps a candidate, and I guess that's been true historically with presidential elections. But I wonder if that's changed. And not just because of the state of the country this time around. I mean, that's the main reason why him being an incumbent doesn't help him. But I wonder if we're also at a point where, you know, just people can't pay attention to anything very long. We always want things to change. We just get bored with things.

And so I wonder if, in general, being the incumbent actually hurts you. I wonder if, you know, when we look, let's say it's 2060, we'll look back in the year of 2060, And we will be saying then that even in 2016, the last president to win re-election was Obama in 2012. Not that this is an excuse for Biden, of course. He's a decrepit vegetable. His poll number should be 0% across the board. So this is more of an academic point, but be that as it may. All right.

Yesterday was Mother's Day. So happy belated Mother's Day to all the mothers out there, the real moms, actual moms. And yet because this is the year of our Lord, 206. Mother's Day cannot just be about mothers anymore. There are non-mothers, men, trying to infringe on the territory. And so on Sunday, there was a deluge of videos and Reddit posts and everything else and TikToks from self-identified, quote-unquote trans women, men who were demanding that they be celebrated as well. And let's watch just one of those videos. Here it is. This Mother's Day is especially significant for me because it's the first Mother's Day that I am celebrating since coming out as trans and starting H.R.T.

So it's kind of special. At church this Sunday morning, they gave all the mom's carnations and letters saying, happy Mother's Day, and I was happy to be a recipient of one of those. I took it home and showed my daughter, and who was eight. and she said, but you're not a mom. I said, well, yes, I am. She said, no, you're not. And the reason she said that is because my wife doesn't allow her to call me mom. I'm known as parent.

So not dad, not mom, just parent, which seems kind of makes me sad. I wish she would call me mom, but she doesn't. So I said to her, well, I'm a mom, whether you acknowledge that or not. I am still a mom. And to all those who are going through a similar situation, I see you. You are valid. If you are trans female and have kids, you're a mom. You're no less a mom than anyone else.

Okay? So insist upon your identity. If you are a mom, you are valid. That is who you are. Okay. Shut up. No, you're not valid. And just a general rule of thumb, if you have to insist upon your identity, think about that phrase, insist on your identity.

You know what? I've never had to insist on my identity as a man. I've never had to insist on it one time ever in my life. Least of all, is it like a constant struggle all the time to get everyone to recognize and affirm me as a man because I just am. It's just it. I don't have to insist on it. Not one time have I had to insist on it. insist on it. So if you find yourself insisting on your identity, it's a pretty good indication that it is not your identity that you're insisting on. And you know, I want to kind of laugh at the prospect of this based eight-year-old making this man cry, which is great. But of course, there's actually nothing funny about this. And the sad reality is that this eight-year-old child, although she knows now that the trans stuff is silly and nonsensical, and she just naturally

responding to it that way because that's anyone, if they haven't been indoctrinated yet, that's how they respond to it. But, you know, she will lose that recognition over time if this man goes to work on her with the intense psychological manipulation and indoctrination. If that happens, and that's not a comment about this girl specifically, like she can't withstand it. It's, it's, this is a comment about all eight-year-olds that have ever existed. If they're put in an environment where they are relentlessly manipulated into believing something, they will believe it. It's just that simple. And that's true, in fact, of most people of any age, let alone third graders. Now, the advantage this young girl has is that for now, apparently, her mother, her actual mother, seems to at least be partially on Team Sanity with this.

And hopefully the mother is in the process of getting a divorce and getting out of there. And you know me, I'm as anti-divorce as a human can possibly be. But, you know, if your husband announces that he's a woman, then you need to divorce and move. on and keep your child away from him as best you can. Every day you spend in the house with him is another day where severe damage is inflicted on your children and yourself and need to get out. And this is one time when the fact that family courts are stacked against men, well, it would be one time where that actually works to your advantage because you should try to take full custody of the children. But because the man pretends to be a woman, he actually, the course, this would probably would favor him even above actual women, so it's all confused. But

that's what you should do. And this is also why I think it should be illegal for an adult with children to transition. And as you know, I believe that all medical and surgical transitions of anybody of any age should be banned. But that's a prohibition, as I've tried to explain many times, that that's a prohibition on the medical industry. Doctors should be banned from doing that to patients no matter their age. But I would go a step further. What I'm saying is that an adult with a child, a father and a mother, a father or a mother, if you're an adult and you have a child,

then you should be legally barred from any kind of quote-unquote transition, including the so-called social transitions. You should be legally barred from claiming to be a woman if you're a man, from identifying as a woman, anything, because it is a form, it is a severe form of child abuse. You are damaging your children in profound ways. And you're also trying to force your child to participate in your fetish, in your fantasy. It is also a form of sexual abuse of a child. It's every form of abuse, actually, of a child that you are inflicting on your child all

at once all at the same time. And it just should not be allowed in a sane society that would just be illegal. You cannot be a father and go around saying that you're a woman. You can't even say it. You can't even say it because you have a child. And society should force you to put your child first before anything else. We have a freedom to express myself. No, doesn't matter. Your child comes first. That is your obligatory. And in most other circumstances, we recognize that if a parent refuses to put their child first, refuses to do the bare minimum to care for their child, we put them in prison. You go to prison for that. And it should be no different here.

All right, NPR has this report. The Shenandoah County School Board in Virginia will restore the names of Confederate generals Thomas Stonewall Jackson, Robert Ely, and Turner Ashby to two local schools. the controversial reversal comes nearly four years after the name was changed. Mountain View High School will revert to its former name, Stonewall Jackson High School, and Honey Run Elementary School will go back to being Ashby Lee Elementary School. The board approved the change by a five-to-one vote, with supporters saying the Confederate figures' names had been taken off the schools in 2020 in a knee-jerk reaction amid protest of George Floyd's murder by police.

I'm going to put scare quotes around murder, but it's not in the report. but opponents, including some current students, warned the board that Confederate names would brand the schools and their county as a haven for backward racist thinking. But they'd change it back anyway. Now, I'm glad they're changing the names back. Everyone should be happy about that. Though, of course, I know not everyone will be happy,

but you should be because, first of all, even if you object in principle to schools being named after a conservative, Confederate generals or to statues or whatever else. The fact is that this change was made, like so many similar changes, in obedience to the mob. It was a panicked, cowardly move done to appease a mob, and that is never okay. You should never do anything at all in accordance with the demands of a mob. I don't care what it is. I don't care if it's something that would be otherwise justified.

I don't care if it's something purely neutral. Like if there's a pitchfork mob for some reason demanding that you wear a blue shirt today, then you should wear a red shirt just to spite them. Then normally putting on a blue shirt that would have no moral significance whatsoever. But in that case, putting on the blue shirt means that you are, it's an immoral act all of a sudden because you are appeasing and encouraging the mob. It is your moral obligation to defy pitchfork mobs at every turn. and to defy mob mentality.

Mob mentality is always bad. It is always an evil every single time. So that's reason enough to change it back. And that's the reason they're giving. The reason they're giving is that we did this, not because we thought it was the right thing, like that's a separate debate maybe we could have, but we did this because George Floyd case,

which has nothing to do with the name of our school. But so that, That's the reason that's all that needs to be said about it. But I suppose that's the safest thing to say about it. You know, if you're going to publicly support changing a name back to be named after a Confederate general, the safest grounds for defending that decision is what I just said about the mob mentality. But I also think that even on the merits, those were good names for schools. Stonewall Jackson, in particular, Robert Lee, also. Some of the greatest generals we've ever had, great men, brave men, brilliant men, and in their estimation, also not fighting to preserve

slavery. And this is a distinction that for many years, after the Civil War, people understood. It's only in the last few years that they don't, because, as I remarked before, somehow, people today, and this will never cease to be somewhat mind-boggling, that people today are more bitter about the civil war, are somehow more resentful about it, are more emotional about it, than Americans were 100 years ago. Like, back when many Americans had grandfathers

who actually fought and in many cases died in the civil war, back then Americans across the country, North and South, were less emotional about it. We're more able to think rationally and in a nuanced way about the country. about the conflict than they are today. How is that possible? I mean, how can we have people who are in their like 20s,

you know, running around in modern day America? They were born after the turn of the millennium and act like you can't even bring up the Civil War around them without them flying into a rage. You can't have any conversation about it unless the only thing you're saying is, oh yeah, they were all terrible. The Confederates are terrible people, every single one.

They are incapable of hearing anything else. You are not allowed to be that emotionally attached to this. Sorry, you're just not. Like, you can be, but we're not going to take that seriously. At least we shouldn't. Your emotional performance about a subject like the Civil War will not be taken seriously. Okay? It happened far too long ago to justify.

Like, you need to be able to think rationally about it and have a lot of it. a conversation about it, and you need to be able to say more about it than Confederate's bad, union, good. The end. No serious academic, no serious scholar, no serious historian who's looked at this, has that view. Okay, none of them do. It's not a serious viewpoint. And especially now, like, if you get emotional, it's too painful to talk. Why is it? It's not painful for you. What's painful about it? Like, how connected are you to this historical event? That might as well happen in ancient history at this point.

Especially in a culture, this is what makes it even more confusing. We live in a culture now where stuff that happened six months ago may as well been six thousand years ago. And yet this one event that happened a century and a half ago is, it's like it might as well just been yesterday. With the way we talk about it's ridiculous. Okay, it's just ridiculous. So there is a distinction here. There's a distinction between the political reasons for the war, of which slavery played a major part, but certainly not the only part, and the personal motivations of the men who fought it. And the men who fought it were not fighting it from their personal perspectives to abolish or defend slavery.

Like most of the guys, most of the young men from the north, most of the Yankees fighting for the union, they weren't coming down south in their estimation to fight a war to free the slaves. That's not how they looked at it. And I got news for you, most of them wouldn't have been there if they thought they were fighting for that. And most of the young men who were fighting for the Confederate side, they didn't see it as them fighting to preserve slavery. here's how they looked at it. On the union side, they looked at it as we are fighting to preserve the union. We are fighting to preserve our nation.

I mean, that's something people will fight and die for. Even in the year 1861, especially in the year 1861, men would fight and die for that. There were just not a lot of, there weren't a lot of people in the year 1861 who necessarily would consciously fight a war just to free slaves. And that's across the entire world. That's the case. And then on the Confederate side, how did they perceive it? Well, they perceived it as they were fighting to defend their homeland. And certainly men like Robert Lee and Stonewall Jackson, that's how they saw it. That's how they, that's the calculation that that was the,

equation for them. Robert Lee, as everyone knows, could have fought commanding the armies of the north, but he chose not to. And his reason was not that, oh, no, I got to, I got to, no, we have to keep blacks enslaved. And so I have to fight for that. That was not his reason. His reason was simply Virginia is my home. Virginia is my country. That's how they looked at it. It's my, this, this, my state is my country, essentially. And I'm not going to, draw my sword against my homeland, and I'm not going to draw my sword against my children and my family. Because if I do that, then if I fight for the North, I'm going to be killing my own family. That's what's going to end up happening. And he wasn't going to do that. And I don't know.

Again, all these many years later, we should be able to look at that and at least understand the thinking a little bit. we should at least be able to, in a non-emotional kind of removed way, we should be able to look at that and say, well, yeah, I mean, especially in the, you know, back in those days, the mentality of someone in 1860, 1861, face with a choice like that, like fight against your homeland or for it, march against your own community, your own family, like that's a, can we not at least admit that's a really difficult choice to make? And also, by the way, you know, some of these men were actually among the most uncomplicated and least problematic of historical figures from that era or before. Because if you go back 150, 200 years, you're not going to find any historical figure anywhere on the planet who does not have what we would consider now to be racist views. Bigoted views about race. all did everywhere on earth. And if you go back especially 200 years and before that, almost everyone had views about slavery that we would abhor today.

And most of them were totally in favor of slavery. So that's just shared by almost all historical figures if you go back mid-19th century and before. But then there are many great historical figures that we admire today who even, even beyond that in their personal lives and in some of their behavior were, you know, sometimes brutal people. These are some of the flaws that come with being, you know, historically came with being a great figure. And, you know, someone like Stonewall Jackson in particular, This is a very buttoned up person, loyal family man, so on and so forth. So we should be able to recognize that.

And the fact that we can't is just, I just have no patience for it. I really don't. Finally, we premiered our new animated series, our first animated series on Daily Wire on Sunday. Mr. Bircham, Adam Crollo show. A lot of great feedback on the series, very, very funny stuff. but there was one moment from the series that, the series premiere, rather, that I think really put the show over the top. And I think that's been the critical consensus about the show is that there's one moment,

one scene that makes it stand alone. In the history of television, many have argued. Let's watch that scene. But we need to ask ourselves one simple question. Is it okay for one? one of our faculty members to exploit students while the rest of us have to follow the rules? Great question.

Because one of the rules, really? Miss Boddica, were you following the rules when you had me fix your grandfather's dresser? I used it to teach my students to do half-blind dovetail joints for the drawer. And Ms. Melina, I seem to remember something about you, my students, and a spice rack. And Mr. McCorkle, it seems like only yesterday,

you asked Brad Heard. installer to carve you a doorstop that looked like Lady Gaga. Pokerface, best song ever. I had to look up this Lady Gaga. Turns out she's not even a baby or lady. I'm teaching kids how to build things while I'm building their character. That's what America is all about.

Building things, or at least it was. For the kids, Birch. Way to call, Mr. Pete. Now, I don't know if you could tell, but that was me. I gave that line. I know it's pretty subtle. That was my voice acting. And I know what you're thinking.

You're thinking, wow, Matt, you're a terrible voice actor. Let's be honest. I'm pretty bad. I can't even pretend otherwise. I like to think I have some skills in this business, but voice acting isn't one of them. And so, I mean, I'm not going to deny it. I'm just a really bad voice. It's a strange thing.

You think like it must be easy to do because it's just your voice, or at least if you're done. like me, you might think it's an easy thing to do. But then when you're sitting in the little booth room and they give you a line to read, you realize, like, there's some actual, there's some real skill that goes into this, and I don't have it. But everybody else was very good.

The good news is I only appear in the series one time. That's it. So you don't have to listen to it again. And my crappy voice acting actually stands out because everyone else killed it. Even like Megan Kelly, who's not a trained voice actor, did a stellar job. Tyler Fisher's tremendous. Brett Cooper is great.

Adam Crollow, of course. And then, so all that, and then there's me. So anyway, the show is, the show is very good. Aside from that. And you have to be a DailyWire subscriber to watch it, though. So go to DailyWire.com right now and sign up. Responsible Man is our first true joint venture with our friends at Legacy Box, one of DailyWire's first advertising partners.

Co-founders, Nick and Adam came to us with the idea of bringing a world-class men's lifestyle company to the market, something premium, something that speaks to the mind and the body. responsible man is a men's vitamin and supplement brand that isn't just for Jim Bros, but for every man on a journey to be his best as a husband, as a father, and as a citizen. And the Emerson multivitamin may be the finest men's multivitamin on the market. The problem is that your modern diet is often deficient in key vitamins and minerals, leaving you weakened and diminished, unable to reach your full potential. The solution, the Emerson multivitamin. It's a physician-formulated, robust supplement made up to 33 key premium ingredients that helps fill nutrient gaps to support. your immune system, maintain energy production, sharpen brain cognition, and support the health

of your heart and your muscles. Emerson comes in an exceptional matte black aluminum tin. The manly green vitamin capsules are smooth, easy to take, and the best part, they are mint-essenced for a great smell and taste. The woke left loves to celebrate when men fell with so much wokeness, causing chaos and uncertainty. It's crucial that you take charge of your mind and body, and you can start with the Emerson multivitaminate, simple daily discipline to make the most of yourself, live up to your responsibilities, and exceed the expectations of others. Visit responsibleman.com and save 30% on your subscription of the Emerson Multivitamin with this exclusive launch sale. It's still in stock and ships immediately when you purchase at

responsibleman.com. There's a limited number available, so take advantage of this launch deal and save 30%. That's responsibleman.com to take responsibility today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. There have been a lot of very forced, heavy-handed efforts over the past few years to engineer a new George Floyd type situation. We've talked about some of them. None of these attempts from Jacob Blake to Dexter Reed to many in between ultimately have worked out, probably because nobody trusts anything the media or BLM says anymore. That doesn't mean that the left has given up on their dream of trying to create a new folk hero to gin up racial resentment in this election year. Instead, they're adjusting their strategy a bit. Specifically,

they're going back in time about 70 years for inspiration. In the most ham-fisted way imaginable, They're currently doing their best to create a new Rosa Parks out of thin air. So instead of George Floyd 2.0, they're actually going for a Rosa Parks 2.0. Except this time, Rosa Parks wasn't told to go to the back of the bus. She was told to go to the back of an American Airlines plane. The drama began back in February. Watch. A retired black female judge on an airplane harassed by a flight attendant. It is a hell of a story.

Put up the picture full mask. A lot of twists and turns here. Per Atlanta Black Star, they did great reporting on this. Pamela Hill, Ville. A retired black circuit court judge from Chicago is now suing American Airlines for racial discrimination claiming a male flight attendant told her to quote, use the bathroom in the back of the plane, even though she was booked to fly in first class. The federal civil complaint against the airline alleges that the flight attendant, whose name and race were not disclosed, racially profiled her during a flight from Chicago to Phoenix. This happened on February 10th. The incident recalls the historical injustice of Rosa Parks being told to move to the back of the bus.

That was almost 70 years ago, which sparked the Montgomery bus boycott, Gavinow, Civil Rights Movement. And despite the passage of more than six decades since the situation involving parks, incidents like this continue in 2024, highlighting ongoing challenges with racial equality in the United States. So a male flight attendant allegedly told this esteemed black judge named Pamela Hill Veal to use the bathroom in the back of the plane, even though, quote, she was booked to fly in first class. And therefore, according to a report, it's something called the Atlanta Black Star. We have a new Rosa Parks in our hands. Before I go more deeply into the facts of this case, let's just pause for a second to analyze what we've learned so far.

First of all, it's not clear what booked to fly in first class means. Presumably it means that she was also seated in first class and didn't get bounced from her seat before the flight boarded. Although we don't know. It's phrased in a way that, and it's important to the case, like, was she even in first class? from the way it's phrased there, you would think she was. There's been some other reporting that makes it a little bit unclear where she even was seated on the plane. But anyway, also, she's going from Chicago to Phoenix, which is less than a four-hour flight. That's a detail that will become important later.

And during this flight, she was, quote, racially profiled, but a flight attendant who told her to use the bathroom in the back of the plane. It's a hell of a story with many twists and turns, we're told. And I'll get into some of those twists and turns in a moment because they undercut the claim that this retired judge is making. but already there are some red flags. For example, why doesn't the complaint state the ethnicity of the flight attendant? This is a claim about racial discrimination. Surely the flight attendant's race isn't a secret. So what do you look like?

Why aren't they telling us that? We could be pretty sure that if the flight attendant was a white guy, that that would be the headline of the story. They'd make sure to tell you that. They'd certainly include that detail in the federal complaint. But we can only guess, apparently. The anchor at the young Turks doesn't seem bothered by the... this little omission in any way. And neither does NPR, which wrote up a sympathetic article about this passenger. So let's continue with the allegations against this mystery flight attendant

because here's where it really gets good. Listen. The lawsuit claims that the flight attendant accused the judge of slamming the laboratory door slammed it. When she used it the first time and began hounding the woman as she continued to use the same restroom, even as, as, as she was rightfully seated in first class with members of her family. Quote, the flight attendant stopped me as I was returning to my seat and told me I slammed the restroom door and I was not to do it again since passengers were slipping on the plane. The judge told NPR during a recent interview about the incident. The flight attendant's insolence didn't provoke Judge Hillville, who said she ignored the remark and proceeded to walk back to her seat. believing the man was simply mistaken because she knew she had not slammed the door behind her.

So this is the first twist and turn of this mile high bathroom drama apparently. It turns out that this woman, according to the flight attendant, slammed the bathroom door in first class. And that's what bothered pastors who were sleeping. So the flight attendant told her not to do it again. The pastor apparently understood that because she didn't say anything in response. And she thinks he's wrong or whatever. In any event, it seems like the incident is over, but it wasn't over. because for some reason, on a flight that lasts less than four hours,

this retired judge had to use the bathroom again, and that led to a second encounter at the lavatory watch. Later during the flight, the judge got up to use the restroom again, leading to a second encounter with the male flight attendant who attempted to dress down the judge again as she left the restroom and headed back to her seat, the complaint says. However, this time, the reprimand, was more severe and had clear racist undertones.

He began to berate me by pointing his finger at me toward my face saying, I told you not to slam the door. So from now on, you are to use the restroom in a back of the plane. While they pointed in the direction of the restroom and coach, the judge said, by now the judge said she felt the flight attendant was clearly using the restroom as a pretext to harass her. Now, I found it quite interesting. Sir, the flight attendant is. If the issue is slamming the door and people need to be able to enjoy their flight

or get rest on the flight, why would you not care about those at the back of the plane who are resting? I just don't understand the logic here. Well, you don't understand the logic because it's pretty clear that so much of this is totally made up, at least from my perspective. If I had to guess, the idea that a flight attendant is shaking a. finger in her face. I told you not to do that. Go to the back of the plane. Now, if that actually happened, like, I would love, I've never been on a plane and seen anything like that before.

There's so many of these, like, especially viral incidents and stuff that you see on planes, and I've never seen that. I kind of want to, you know, just to break up the bored of them a little bit, it would be boredom a little bit. It'd be nice to see something like that happened. I wish that I'd be on a plane where the flight attendant was that strict about enforcing just basic decorum so that people aren't acting like jerks to those around them. I don't see that very often. But here we have the alleged smoking gun. The black woman supposedly slams the door again, and that does it. The flight attendant has had enough. He tosses her like an umpire, except instead of throwing her out of a baseball game or out of the plane in this case, he's just tossing her from the

first-class lavatory. And so far, nothing about this is remotely racist, even if you assume that all of these facts are true. There's not even a claim that the flight attendant said anything derogatory about the woman or her skin color. He just told her to stop slamming the door, and she He kept slamming the door, and so he told her to use the other lavatory. But apparently, we're supposed to believe that properly closing a bathroom door is a dog whistle for white supremacy, alongside timeliness and respect for authority and everything else that you could possibly do. Because he pointed at her and told her to stop using the bathroom, the flight attendant is clearly racist, we're supposed to believe. The whole bathroom thing is just a pretext. So he was just sitting there waiting for an excuse to stop this black woman from using the bathroom.

Of course, any time you get a claim like this, you always think like, So this is a racist flight attendant who stops black people from using the first-class bathroom. Does he do that on every flight? How does he still have a job if that's the case? And why is this the first time we're hearing about this? Now, an attempt to support that non-argument, the anchor jumps in to claim that it makes no sense to banish this woman to the back bathroom. After all, aren't people sleeping back there, he has? You can tell you, he thinks this is sort of a gotcha moment.

He's exposed the secret Klansman lurking in the ranks of American airline flight attendants. But his argument doesn't really work. I mean, maybe fewer people are sleeping in the back of the plane. Maybe the back of the plane is empty. Maybe the bathroom door in the back is farther removed from passengers. Maybe first-class passengers pay extra money so that they're not disturbed in their sleep by angry, entitled women looking for victimhood. Maybe the door has something wrong with it.

And this woman clearly hasn't figured out how to use it. There's a bunch of explanations. All of which are more plausible before you get to, he's racist. And these news outlets are skipping past all of these possibilities and landing at the most unlikely scenario, which is that American Airlines has a raging white supremacist flight attendant, who, by the way, probably isn't even white, because again, they would have told us if he was. And he's choosing to take out his rage on this black woman using the lavatory as a pretext, supposedly. But if you thought the saga ended there, you'd be wrong. Turns out that on this four-hour

flight, our modern-day Rosa Parks, with an overactive bladder, had to use the bathroom a third time. Watch. She said she never noticed any other first class passengers complaining about the restroom or the door being slammed. She also pointed out that while that white passengers used the same first class restroom without ever being confronted. However, she said the intensifying clash with the flight attendant ultimately caused the other passengers to become annoyed with her. The judge said she felt the flight attendant was singling her out for no other apparent reason than her skin color and believes beyond the shadow of a doubt that the confrontation was racially motivated. The flight attendant got back in the judge's face a third time when she used the first class restroom again about 30 minutes before the flight landed. Defying his earlier command for her to use the laboratory at the back of the plane, this time, while walking back to her first class seat, the judge said, the flight attendant shadowed her and then put his hands on her before vowing that she would be arresting. as soon as the plane reached the airport.

The judge said she withheld in the response and walked back to her seat. The complaint states that the flight attendant didn't like the way Hillville talked to him and accuse her of assault, which the judge denies. Quote, this was a complete fabrication. So there's an amusing detail in there. The intensifying clash with the flight attendant caused the other passengers to become annoyed with her. Well, good luck with the lawsuit or federal complaint or whatever. is if the whole plane hates you and wants you to stop slamming the door, it's probably going to be pretty tough to convince a jury that the flight attendant is a white supremacist who just uses

the bathroom door as a pretext to reenact Jim Crow. It's also going to be tough to argue that he put his hands on you and not the other way around. That's especially true, given that this retired judge is not some esteemed jurist, despite what we're told. In fact, she has a reputation, apparently, for having a temper and grossly overreacting in court. Quoting from a 2012 article in the Chicago Tribune. Judge Pamela Hill-Ville refused to cooperate with Bar Association evaluations, a signal she's counting on clout, not voters, to keep her on the bench. Four years ago, the appellate court admonished her for wrongly jailing an attorney for contempt of court. The Judicial Performance Commission of Cook County, which evaluates judges with an eye

towards improving their effectiveness, says that her reputation for bad temper is undermining her ability to function as a reputable jurist. The commission recommended anger management counseling and mentoring by a peer, but added that it wonders whether Judge Hillville's judicial performance can be remedied by such a plan. On top of all this, the judge was found to be not qualified by a majority of Bar Association evaluators. And these kinds of findings are extremely rare. You don't often see judges who are deemed incompetent by their peers and told to take anger management courses.

This is the woman that NPR and the Young Turks are telling us as a serious judge who was racially profiled by American Airlines. They won't tell you that she was told to get anger management classes because she's incapable of controlling herself. And this is apparently a case on the airplane where conflict escalated, and she's claiming it was the other guy who escalated it. And yet what they don't tell us, the media reports, is that she has a history of doing exactly that. But there are some extra details that the media will add to the story, apparently in an attempt to bolster their hit job against American Airlines and further this narrative of rampant white supremacy. watch. American Airlines faced two discrimination accusations just last year,

2023. One was involving track star, Shikari Richardson, and the other involving musician, David Ryan Harris. Richardson was kicked off in American Airlines flight January, 2023, after an alleged verbal altercation with a flight attendant whom she claimed was harassing her for filming a video. American Airlines has faced accusations, discrimination, against, against black travelers of discrimination against black travelers in 2017, the NWACP issued a travel advisory urging black people to not fly American Airlines due to complaints.

Sharon, thoughts here? My thoughts are that if people keep saying American Airlines is being racist towards them, American Airlines is being racist. Well, of course, yeah. I mean, where's the flaw in that logic? If enough people make a claim, then against, to company, then it must be true. Never mind the fact that, you know, we have a culture where people are conditioned to find

racism everywhere they go. So you condition people to find racism everywhere they go. And then if enough people do find racism everywhere they go, that is proof that the racism is there. That's the way it works. That's the entirety of the logic on display here, as you heard. There's no need to look closely into any of the claims. If you have enough claims, then you're racist.

Sorry, American Airlines. Those are the rules. Open up your checkbook or the NACP will declare travel advisory against you. this is how mob rule works. They make these rules, of course, because they know that pretty much all of these claims are meritless. They know they wouldn't withstand any scrutiny. For example, you heard in that clip that American Airlines is supposedly racist in part because of an incident involving a track star on one of their planes. This is also one of the incidents that NPR sites in their article in Rosa Parks 2.0.

Here's how they spin it. In 2003, American Airlines was targeted after two separate incidents, one involving track star Shakari Richardson, another with musician David Ryan Harris, made headlines. Richardson was forced off her American Airlines flight following an argument with a flight attendant who said the athlete was harassing her and trying to intimidate her. Axios reported. In September, Harris, who was traveling with his two biracial children, was stopped in question at Los Angeles International Airport after an American Airlines flight attendant suspected he was trafficking. That second allegation is supposed to bother us for some reason, even though it's evidence of only one thing, which is that the airline at least attempts to stop child trafficking. It's a process that inevitably is going to involve some amount of profiling because you're looking for patterns. When you're looking for human traffickers, you look for adults and children who don't appear to be related.

That's what happened in this instance. And apparently it was a, it turns out that that was not the case, but generally speaking, it's like we want people to be looking out for this kind of thing. But then if someone's wrong, then supposedly they're racist. But the first allegation is really the incredible one, because it's on video. Shakari Richardson recorded herself causing a scene on a plane that had nothing whatsoever to do with her race. Watch. way under the seat in front of you lying larger carry-on luggage flying not working today if you have small vacation time such as cell phones

tablets and smart watches please switch them recording me but you jumped in my video so I caught you because you jumped in my video you're harassing me at this point so I think you should stop I think you should stop I think you should stop you see him right y'all see him right okay okay but I'm sorry it's not me Talk to him. No, no, no, man, don't talk to me like that. I'm not, do not talk to me like that. Do not talk to me like that. Tell him to stop. If you do not know what's going on, do not yell at me. You can stop recording. No, I'm not going to start recording because I was making a video to myself. I'm going to not start recording. And this video will show what you're doing. So I,

who the fuck are you talking to me? We don't need other people to get involved. Thank you. Like, no. I want to talk to the captain because he was very unprofessional. I notice how she tries to get the rest of the pastors on board with her. You see what he's doing to me, guys? You see this? But they're all against her, of course. So she pivots away from that very quickly. She accuses the flight attendant of getting in her video,

even though she clearly pointed her camera at him, and then she won't stop screaming. This is supposedly evidence that American Airlines is a racist cesspool. But it's not evidence of that, of course. It's evidence of extreme entitlement and a victimhood complex. And at the time, the media pretended otherwise, and American Airlines kind of rolled over and took it. So this nonsense is continuing.

Now, I've reached out to American Airlines to see if this retired judge with anger management issues actually sued them or if she filed something like a DOJ civil rights complaint instead. As of last night, I couldn't find her complaint in the federal court system in Illinois, which is a shame because I really wanted to know what the requested damages were going to be. What's the dollar value attached to having to use a back bathroom because you kept slamming the front one? Probably a few hundred million dollars, we can assume. But if that works for this retired judge on these non-existent facts, then it can work for anyone. And that would be a disaster for the flying public, as beleaguered as they already are.

Many more lavatory doors will be slammed in first class as a result of this woman's complaint. It'll be the new slip and fall type of accident, endlessly repeated all over the country for a quick payout. And it'll make flying an even less appealing proposition than it already is. And for that reason, retired judge Pamela Hill Veal and all the media outlets who have nominated her to be the next Rosa Parks are today. Canceled. That'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to tomorrow. Godspeed.