The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 206 - The Democratic Party Officially Endorses Infanticide

Episode Date: February 26, 2019

The Democrats shoot down a bill that would protect infants born alive after abortions. To be clear, the Democratic Party has now officially come out in favor of infanticide. Also, two biological males just won first and second place in a girls' track and field championship. Almost everyone thinks this kind of thing is crazy, yet it keeps happening. Why have we allowed the tiniest minority to impose itself on the majority? Date: 02-26-2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today on the Matt Wall Show, the Democrats shoot down a bill that would have protected infants born alive after abortion. So to be clear, the Democrat Party has now officially come out in favor of infanticide. That is what happened. We'll talk about that. Also, after two biological males just won a track and field championship in Connecticut, this question arises, and that is, why is this happening considering the fact that almost everyone is opposed to this? Almost everyone thinks this is crazy to have men racing against women, yet it continues to happen. Why are we allowing a small minority to impose its will on the majority? We'll talk about that as well today on the Matt Wall Show. I was just reading an email from somebody calling me a climate denier because yesterday I said on the show that I don't think the world is coming to an end anytime soon due to global warming.

I don't think you need to go building an arc because the polar ice caps are going to melt. And so that makes me a climate denier. Yes, I deny the climate. That's right. This is one of my favorite phrases the left uses. Of all their euphemisms and their misleading and flatly dishonest labels and terms that they use,

this may be my favorite when they call you a climate denier. Like, yes, I deny the climate. It's true. I deny that the climate exists. I don't believe in the climate. I don't think there is such a thing as a climate. I think that we live in a giant artificial dome, much like the Truman Show,

except this dome, according to my theory, was built by aliens, you know, billions of years ago. And they're actually, the aliens are on platforms in the sky. What looks like the sky anyway, it's actually just painted blue, but they're up there on, the clouds are actually these platforms, and the aliens are up there, and they're dumping a bucket. of water to make rain, and they're rolling bowling balls across wood floors to make thunder.

And that's my theory. I deny the existence of the climate. Now, of course, for most people, though, when you call them a climate denier, what you really mean is they are apocalyptic changes in climate caused specifically by human activity deniers. And that's what most people are denying when they're denying the climate. And it may seem like semantics to quibble over this, but it's really not, because climate denier makes you sound insane, whereas anthropogenic, anthropogenic, that's the word, climate change denier sounds much more rational. And that's a little bit more difficult to say, I admit. But there's a reason. When someone says climate, or even just climate change denier, nobody denies that either. Everyone knows that climate's changed. We all agree that climate's change all

the time. The issue is, why do they change? What causes the change? And to what degree are these different causes to blame? And where is it all leading? And is the world coming to an end soon? I mean, these are the questions that we're arguing. No one's arguing about the existence of the climate. And no one is arguing even about whether or not climate's change. Okay. And in fact, you know what? Nobody's even arguing about whether or not humans have some kind of effect. I mean, of course, we are part of the world. We have an effect. Farting cows have an effect. Volcanoes have an effect. The ocean has an effect. The sun has a huge effect. All of these things have an effect. The question is, to what extent, to what degree do these things affect the climate?

That's what the issue is over. All right. Quite a lot of material to cover today. But before we do, I want to tell you about Hair Club. It's important to have confidence, of course, to feel comfortable with yourself. And sometimes one change, it seems like a simple change, maybe to some people seems even like a small change if you're not going through it, but it makes a huge difference. And that's what Hair Club is all about. Hair Club is the leader in total hair solutions. So you know you're in good hands. And if you're looking to revitalize your hair growth, the hair that you already have, or if you want to learn more about hair restoration, or anything else related to this.

Hair clubs professionally trained, stylists, experts, and consultants, they can get with you, and you can consult with them, and they will craft a personalized solution to ensure that you feel your best and you get the most out of your hair. It can be a difficult thing, you know,

for people to go through, losing their hair. It's not something people like to talk about, but I know guys who lost most or all their hairs, you know, even when they were pretty young, and it can be a real blow to your confidence and to your perception of yourself. But the point here is that there are steps you can take. So go to hairclub.com slash walsh today for a free hair analysis and a free take-home hair kit. It's all valued at over $300, but that's for free.

That's hair club.com slash walsh for a free hair analysis and free hair kit, Hairclub.com slash walsh. Experience your hair and your life at its best. Okay, let's turn to something utterly outrageous and horrifying. There's a bill called, this is difficult. It's hard for me to even talk about these. I have to try to control myself when I talk about this sort of thing because it makes me so angry. And I have to watch what I say.

A bill called the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. failed in the Senate last night. Maybe you heard about this. If you rely on the mainstream media for your news, you probably did not hear about that. We'll talk about that aspect of it in a minute. But Senate Democrats blocked the bill. It was a bill sponsored by Ben Sasse. Every single Democrat, except for three, Manchin, Casey, and Jones. Those are the ones who voted for the bill. But all of the rest of the Democrats, every single one except for those three, voted against it. Now, what would this legislation have done? Just like it says. It would have required doctors to give medical treatment to infants that are born alive after a failed abortion. This is

something that happens, especially with late-term abortions. You could have babies that survive it and are born alive. And then the question is, which should not even be a question, but what do you do about the child once he survives. According to the exact language of this bill, it would prohibit a health, I'm reading now from the bill, prohibit a health care practitioner from failing to exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or attempted abortion. It goes on, if an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States and entitled to all the protections of such laws. Any infant born alive after an abortion,

or within a hospital clinic or other facility, has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn or for any person who comes to a hospital clinic or other facility for screening and treatment or otherwise becomes a patient within its care. It also prescribes criminal penalties for anyone who intentionally performs or attempts to perform an overt act that kills a child born alive. Now, there is something called the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which was signed into law in, I think two years.

2002. That, by the way, was passed unanimously. Okay, so every Democrat in the Senate back in 2002 voted for the Born Alive Infant Protection Act. And what that law did is it defines any child who's born, whether after an abortion or in any other scenario, as a human being. But it does not specifically prescribe what must be done for these children. It doesn't specifically require doctors to give medical care to the child. It doesn't, it doesn't prescribe penalties for doctors who fail to deliver that treatment. And so that's what this, that's what this law was supposed to do. Kind of following on the heels of that one and saying, yeah, that's a human being. By the way, it's a human being. And if it needs medical treatment, you need to give medical treatment.

And you cannot kill this human being. You'd hope it wouldn't be necessary, right? to pass a law like this, you'd hope that you wouldn't need a law that actually specifically says, hey, don't leave babies to die. But in recent weeks, we've seen that Democrats have come out in favor of infanticide. And we've seen them push the boundaries further and further and further on abortion, legalizing later and later abortions so that it did become necessary to add these protections. Except Senate Democrats voted it down. Every Senate Democrat running for president, just to be clear, Every Senate Democrat running for president voted against this bill. Cory Booker, Sherrod Brown, Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris,

Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders. I might prefer getting a couple. All of them voted against the bill. Which means, just to really emphasize this, what we're talking about here is the Democrat Party has officially, unambiguously, without question, come out in favor of infanticide. They are saying, now this is not just some random, crazy, radical,

infanticidal Democrat out there on the fringes. Okay, this is the mainstream of the party, the majority of the party, is now saying that babies who are born out of the mother, living and breathing, out in the world, that those babies should not be given legal protection and that it should be legal to kill them. That's what they're saying.

Now, remember, Democrats spent the last few weeks denying, denying with great moral indignation the claim that they support infanticide. After Ralph Northam was interviewed and he very clearly advocated for infanticide, but all the Democrats said, no, that's not what we think. That's not what he said. How dare you? And when Republicans accuse them and said, you guys support infanticide, Democrats said, that's ridiculous. No, we don't. and then what Democrat or what Republican said last night was okay well so you don't support infanticide well then just I'm sure you'll support this bill then that makes infanticide illegal and Democrats said um about that what does that tell us

it tells us that Democrats are pathological liars as well as a moral baby murder apologists. And listen, I know that we're supposed to reach across the aisle. You know, we're supposed to try and be bipartisan. We're supposed to see the best in the other side and look for common ground and blah, blah, blah, blah. But I'm just telling you how I feel in this moment, and I'm being brutally honest, this is how it seems to me

that you cannot be a good person and remain affiliated in any capacity with the Democrat Party if you see a vote like this and you still call yourself a Democrat I don't care if you're just an average Joe Blow Democrat voter or politician whatever after a vote like this

if you still remain affiliated with the Democrat Party then you are a bad person you are simply a bad person. And I am ashamed to share a country with you. And I wish that I didn't. And if I'm calling 40 million or 50 million Americans bad people, then so be it. Now, that said, I recognize that many average Americans who call themselves Democrats may be extremely ignorant. So I guess maybe ignorant or evil are really the only. I mean, if you're voting Democrat, if you're a Democrat, those are the only options. You're extremely extraordinarily, clinically ignorant, or you're a bad person. There's not any, there is no third option. There's

no option C here, right? Well, the option C is both maybe. There's no option D. And we know that the media is constantly running cover for Democrats so that if you rely on the mass media for your news, you might not even know about this vote. A lot of mass media outlets are just ignoring it, saying nothing about it. Others are blatantly lying. A quick look at the news. I just looked this up on Google just to see what the headlines are about this vote. And I'll just read a few headlines. Senate defeats anti-abortion bill as GOP tries to jam Dems.

anti-abortion measure dies in U.S. Senate. Democrats block Senate GOP anti-abortion effort. Senate vote on abortion legislation fails to advance measure. U.S. Democrats block born-alive anti-abortion bill. Okay, so you get the point. The media is calling this an anti-abortion measure, which is just simply a lie. It actually has nothing to do with abortion at all. It deals with infants that are born alive, already born infants. And liberal, are the ones who are saying there's a distinct. Now, yes, I believe that there is no difference between an infant born who's born

and an infant who's not born yet. It's the same thing, morally, physiologically, philosophically, all of that, right? But they're the ones who say that there's this huge distinction between the two. So by their own standards, this was not an anti-abortion bill. This was a bill that was dealing with born infants,

with human beings that even they, up until now, would call babies, not fetuses, babies. So these headlines, they're not just misleading. These headlines are blatant fabrications, totalized. These are headlines that are literally based on abortion industry talking points. The abortion industry is writing their PR talking points and handing them out to the media, and the media is taking those talking points and making them into headlines. That's what's happening here.

Nairal, which is an abortion lobbyist group, and a collection of despicable disgust, scumbags, tweeted this after the vote. They said, breaking. The Senate has voted down Senator Sass's extremist anti-science bill that attempted to inflict medically unnecessary restrictions on clinics, spread dangerous anti-choice lies, and threaten health care providers with jail time. Extremist. Yes, it's extremist to refrain from murdering already born infants. Right? But this is the line that the Democrat party and the media has taken. The abortion lobby gives them their talking points and they repeat them dutifully. It's just, these are just lies, a lies that are meant to protect the slaughter of children,

born children. So the point is, if you're not informed, if you're lazy, it's easy to be duped by this and to not realize. So there are probably average voting Democrats who don't realize how radical far left the party has gotten, but that's no excuse. You see, you see, we live in the information age. You have no excuse to be ignorant. You have no excuse to not know about these things. I don't care who you are. I don't care where you live. I don't care what your situation is. Unless you're in a coma, you have no excuse to not know what has become of the Democrat Party. All, I mean, just, it doesn't take that much research. So the thing is, you know, yes, I acknowledge that there are Democrat voters who are extremely ignorant and don't realize how evil the party is.

But that ignorance now, that is a moral failing as well to be that ignorant. It's got to be that you want to remain ignorant. I mean, look, we've reached a point where if you're a decent person, you cannot. support this. I don't know how else to put it. The Democrat Party is endorsing the killing of born children. That's where the line is drawn. I'm not saying you've got to become a Republican. I'm not shilling for the Republican, but I don't care about that. Be whatever you want to be. Do whatever you want to do. But you can't support this. The Democrat Party, this is what they're about, killing babies, infanticide. And so that's where the line is drawn. It's just, are you going to be a decent person or not?

and if you're going to be decent, you cannot possibly affiliate yourself. The Democrat Party is an evil institution with no morally redeeming aspects about it at all anymore. Speaking of being informed, I want to play for you an exchange between, and this also came out yesterday as it happens, this is an exchange between fake Christian abortionist Willie Parker. Well, he's a real abortionist and a fake Christian, just to be clear. And Dr. Mike Adams. So they had, interestingly enough, they had a debate at the University of North Carolina. And Willie Parker, who's an abortionist, volunteered to publicly debate.

It's very rare that you get a working abortionist who's going to get up on stage and debate somebody about abortion. You rarely see that. These people, these guys, they do not want. to be in that situation of having to defend what they do against someone who's hostile to them. And we're going to find out why here. I think Willie Parker is regretting, putting himself in this position. And so I want you, I'm going to play just one little clip from this exchange. I want you to watch this. So when you crush a human skull, it's not really gray matter. It's white brain matter that oozes out? What's your point? No, I'm asking you a question. Is the brain

matter that oozes out when you crush a human skull white? What does it matter? You've described what I do. So what is your point? My point is that an intentionally kills an innocent human being. Would you concede the point? I started my, my, my first concession was to your first two syllogism, that abortion kills a human being. It is the intentional disruption of a pregnancy that kills human being. How many innocent human beings have you intentionally killed? in your life's work? I don't know.

I don't measure my work. I don't. If it's a million, 20,000. What's the difference? What's the difference between 20,000 and 30,000? 10,000 dead human beings. That's the difference.

Okay, so you see, the abortionist admits that it is the killing of a human being. He says that crushing skulls is an accurate description of what he does. Remember, Dr. Adams says, okay, well, you're crushing a skull, the brains who's out, and Willie Parker says, I won't call him doctor. Willie Parker says, you're just, you're describing what I do. So you don't have, the point is, you don't have to search hard. You don't have to spend a lot of time to discover that even the

people in the abortion industry admit, if you catch him at the right moment, in the right mood, They will admit that this is what they do. This is killing, that they kill people. It is violence, it is death, it is bloody, it is gruesome, that is what they do. In the abortion industry itself, they're not having debates about personhood, right? They know that they're killing people, persons. They know that. They're not, you know, those are debates for the rubs.

for the pro-abortion rubs who are being manipulated, they're going to have those debates and make those kinds of arguments. The people in the abortion industry, they know they're not that stupid. They know better. All right. But look, as I'm saying, if you can watch a video like that, what I just played for you, and be on Willie Parker's side, I mean, if you can watch that and come away from it and saying, yeah, I'm on that guy's side. The guy who has lost track of the number of human beings

he's killed and doesn't even think the body count matters. If you can be on his side, again, how could I call you a decent person? I mean, the word, the phrase, decent person would lose all meaning if I could apply it to someone who supports that. All right, a little bit more liberal madness to talk about here. transgender sprinters, that is male sprinters, guys, dudes, fellas, they finished first and second at the girls' indoor track championships in Connecticut a few days ago. And this is, we see these headlines, of course, all the time now. These particular, at least one of these guys, I think both of them, but at least one of them, was in the headlines last year for winning the girls' track championships last year. year. It might have been outdoor the spring events last year. So this guy is, he's just dominating.

He's just dominating the female circuit up in Connecticut, racing all these girls who, you know, I laugh at just the absurdity of it because what else can you do? But it's actually not funny because these girls are being, they're having, you know, these girls are working hard. I ran track. You know, I ran against men when I was when I was in high school. And it's a, it's a, It's hard. Running is hard. And to be a competitive runner is a hard thing. It's very challenging. It takes a lot of work, a lot of effort, a lot of exercise, eating right. I mean, you're running all the time. It's a really difficult sport. And these girls are working their butts off and putting everything they have into it. But all for nothing. Because they can't compete against the guy. They biologically, physically, can't. If you compare, you look at any state, right, and you compare, you look at the girls championships in whatever, in any track event, whether it's the 200 meter or the 800 meter or the mile, whatever it is, and you look at the boys versus the girls, and assuming that they're

actually, that they actually are all boys and all girls. And you compare the top times for the boys to the girls and it's just like you a time that would get you first place in a girls event you wouldn't even make it on to the track

in the boys event in the boys champion you wouldn't even place you wouldn't even get sixth place that's how much of a gap there is and this is not an insult I'm not insulting girls or anything no no it's just it's there are biological

limitations. Men are simply built in a certain way where they're going to be faster and stronger. And so these girls have no chance. And all of their hard work is being stolen. And this is cheating is what it is. But here's the interesting thing. Look, I saw this story on Twitter, saw whatever news outlet reported it. And this is all anecdotal, of course.

but I, you know, I looked at the comments under the headline. And in fact, I looked at a few. I went and checked a few headlines about this particular story, these transgender is winning against the girls. And I was looking at the comments on Twitter, and every single comment I saw was expressing some version of, this is crazy, this is cheating, totally ridiculous. I feel bad for those girls.

every single comment, hundreds of comments. I couldn't find one single person. And I know, again, it's anecdotal, but I could not, in my brief check, I could not find one single person who was defending this and defending these guys and saying, yeah, I think this is right. Yeah, I think we should have guys racing against girls and taking their championships. And that's interesting, isn't it? Because we're told that this is a controversial issue. And for any other controversial issue, whether it's abortion or anything else, if I go on Twitter, I can easily find people on all sides of it,

expressing all the different views. But with something like this, it's very difficult to actually find a real human being who will come out and say, yeah, I'm in favor of this. I think it's a good idea. When you do a quick survey of what everyone's saying about a topic like this,

it seems like everybody is against it. Nobody thinks that this makes sense. And what does that tell you? it tells you that when it comes to this issue especially, a transgenderism, and especially when it comes to, you know, to boys invading girls' sports and girls' locker rooms and girls' bathrooms, what you have is a tiny, tiny, tiny minority which has imposed its will on the majority.

This is the tiniest minority of people. And I'm not speaking just about the, the, transgender themselves, who themselves are a tiny minority. But then you also have a tiny minority in the LGBT lobby who are pushing this. The kind of extremist LGBT activists, they're the ones. This is their agenda. This is what they want. And they are in a, obviously, in a very small minority, yet they're getting their way. And there's no reason for it. There's no reason to allow this. If the folks up there in Connecticut were to pass a rule saying,

you know what, we're done with this. If you are a biological male, you cannot compete against girls. If they were to pass that rule in Connecticut, 99% it seems, of the country and of the people in Connecticut would be totally in favor of it. And they would say, that makes a lot of sense. There would only be that one crazy percent that says, No, this is bigoted. This is unfair to those boys who now aren't going to have the opportunity to race against girls.

You would have that one loud but small percent. There's no reason to listen to them. They don't really have any. They only have the power we give them. That's the thing. So it's kind of even more pathetic in a way. On one hand, I'm glad that we don't live in a country yet where a majority of people are in favor of something like this.

But on the other hand, it's really pitiful and sad when you think about it, that almost all of us disagree with it, yet we're just going along with it anyway. All right. I'm going to jump ahead to some of your emails now. Matt Wall Show at gmail.com. Matt WallShow at gmail.com. If you want to offer your opinions, questions, whatever it may be. And a bunch of interesting emails, so I want to get to them before we run out of time. This is from Brandon.

It says, Dear Matt, why does the Libertarian Party suck at everything? Well, you know, Brandon, I think the Libertarian Party has two problems. Actually, three. The first is that everyone's high all the time, so I think that's getting in the way. Second is the perceived lack of cogency or focus. I have noticed, it's interesting when you think about it, that the Libertarian Party has not gained more attention and attracted more people. but I think it's, most people can't figure out exactly what the Libertarian Party is or what libertarianism is or what it stands for.

And I think libertarians themselves don't know exactly, especially when it comes to these really hot button important social issues, like, for instance, abortion. Now, libertarians should be the first ones getting up there and saying this is wrong, because libertarian is supposed to be, you know, the do no harm, right? the anti-aggression principle, is supposed to stand for individual liberty. And when you have something that is an assault on human life, then that obviously is also an assault on liberty. And there are some pro-life libertarians, but they're also radically pro-choice libertarians. And if you don't have a coherent viewpoint on an issue as fundamental and important as that,

then it's going to be really hard for you to attract people, because everyone else, we don't know what you're all about. And the third thing is, I think Libertarian Party needs more compelling figures to carry its banner. I mean, Gary Johnson, who is the Libertarian Party not Gary Johnson? It's the Libertarian Party. You need to find someone who's young, exciting, interesting, kind of weird. That's what the Libertarian Party should be. Not Gary Johnson.

This is from Gareth says, hi, Matt, big fan. of your show. I love your dry humor and down-to-earth and common sense approach to religion and politics. I've noticed that it seems like Daily Wire is giving you more lately with a table to sit at and a fancy new microphone. Actually, the microphone's gone as you notice. And yesterday, you even got to have a sponsor. Is there any chance Ben will let you in the studio to do a backstage with the other guys? Yeah, I go to the, I've been going to the studio every day for the last year and a half and it's been locked. But in fact, recently they let me in the lobby, but they lock the doors to get actually back into the studio. So I'm making up. No, actually, the,

you see, I, what's actually, the interference here is 3,000 miles where I live in, on the East Coast and the Daily Wire is headquartered out there in Los Angeles. So that's where the, you know, that's where the separation comes, comes from. Although, I will mention that I will soon be a part of one of the backstage show, so I'm looking forward to that. But I have to fly all the way. out there for that. So that's the only thing. This is from Mike. Says, yesterday you said that you approve of alcohol and tobacco use for relaxing

when done responsibly and in moderation. The same rationale could be used to justify marijuana use. I'm curious what your position is on this, since some people prefer to smoke weed to relax instead of drinking whiskey. That's an interesting question, Mike. I don't know the answer. I don't know enough about it to answer.

I've always thought that there's a definite difference between alcohol and marijuana or tobacco and marijuana certainly in that alcohol for one thing is a much more at least my impression a much more social substance and it seems that you can have one drink and be barely affected by it at all just feeling a little bit relaxed but other than that you're completely lucid and fine whereas marijuana it seems will have a much more profound effect much quicker but whenever i've made that argument i've been informed by people who smoke marijuana that that that I'm totally wrong and I don't know what I'm talking about. And maybe that's true. I don't smoke the stuff personally, so I suppose I'm just giving my general impression, which could be wrong.

I will say, this is what I'll say. Okay. I think a substance can be perfectly fine, perfectly moral, and even actively wholesome in a certain context, if it is possible to consume it without being intoxicated by it, losing control of your reason and your senses, and if it is not physically dangerous, at least within moderation, if it's not immediately addictive, and if it has some positive effect, such as, as I mentioned, facilitating healthy social interaction, relaxation, and so on. So whatever that applies to, I would say in moderation, it would seem to me to be perfectly moral. Does that apply to marijuana? I have thought no, but I could be wrong. So I'm not short. This is from Derek. Hi, Matt. I'm a huge fan of your show. I love the religious and political

commentary, but must admit, my favorite part are your rants about the idiosyncrasies of marriage and the ever elusive male understanding of the female psyche. My wife is a soap addict as well. The struggle is real. Yes, it is. I just wanted to offer an opinion about the Bill Maher clip from yesterday. I agree with everything you said, but what stuck out to me most was how thoroughly convinced he is that all of the feelings he mentioned are universally desirable. What's sheer and utter arrogance to assume you know what other people desire. I was born and raised as a liberal in California. I have a career that keeps my family and I moving around the country quite a bit. I have lived in many major cities, most in very blue areas.

When I retire, my wife and I plan to move to the country, buy a piece of land, own 12 dogs, and enjoy the tranquility of rural America until we die. My point being, I have experienced living in all sorts of geographic economic regions and can say with objective certainty that I desire the rural life. In this clip, Marr says there's no CSI Lubbock. It turns out that exorbitant amounts of murder don't take place in rural America.

Interesting fact, Lubbock is where Buddy Holly was born. He can keep the red carpet that all of those self-engrandizing narcissists he is so fond of like to walk down. It seems he just can't conceive of people valuing church, family, and community more than a Tesla. up. They wear Target instead of Louis Vuitton, not because they're downtrodden, but because they know

the true value of material items and couldn't give a rip about whose name is embroidered on the rear end. They'd probably be far happier spending the money they'd saved buying Target clothes on Budweiser or whatever other beer Bill finds beneath his standards. I dislike the two America's perspective as well. There are good and not so good people from every walk of life. I dislike vast generalizations, but for Bill, I will make an exception. The difference between elitist celebrity like Bill Marr and Red Staters is that elitist celebrities like Bill look down on the rest of the country, making fun of it with unwarranted hubris and misguided disdain. The Red Staters, while often in a similar state of disbelief of the chosen lifestyles of their fellow Americans, offer people like

him prayers in return. Thanks for what you do. Keep up the good work. Very eloquently put, Derek, I wish that maybe you should just be doing the show because I think you had a lot more interesting things to say about that clip than I did. And that is one thing that struck me as well. you're watching that clip, and especially the red carpet line where Bill Marsh says, we have red carpets. Okay. You think the rest of us want red carpets? You think that's what we care about?

We have celebrities. It is, Bill really doesn't understand that. Most people don't care about that. I don't care to live in a place, but, oh, there's a celebrity. What is a celebrity? A celebrity is just a person who a lot of people are aware of. That's all a celebrity is. So I don't need

I don't need to live in a place where there are a lot of people who a lot of other people are aware of. Who cares? Doesn't make them bad people, doesn't make them good people. It's a totally neutral thing. It could be that whatever you do for a living,

if it happens to be in the public eye, a lot of people will be aware of you. Who cares? And I think, Derek, the point you bring up is a good one, that Bill is so disconnect. from the experience of many average people that he really doesn't understand,

that we don't care about that. If we did, we could easily. Look, if any one of us wanted to move to California, we could. We live where we live as a choice, right? Well, some of us. I mean, I do live on the East Coast, and so I live in a more liberal area. I mean, you know, there are aspects of the West

There are aspects of where you live that is, but the point is, if it was really, here's what I mean, if it was really a priority, like if we, you know, if we listened to that rant from Bill Maher and we said, yes, that's what I want. Yeah, that's what I, Wolfgang Puck and Red Carpets and I want to be around that. I got to be around that. Organic food, you know, if we really cared about that and it was a huge priority in our life, then we could move and go and pursue that. But we just don't. So that's all. All right. Thanks for that email, Derek. And thanks everybody for listening and watching. Godspeed. Hey, everybody. It's Andrew Claven, host of the Andrew Claven show. The left keeps screaming, Orange Man bad. But right now, Orange Man is outwinning the left by being a little less the Donald

and a little more President Trump. That's on the Andrew Claven show. I'm Andrew Claven.