The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 431 - Can Bernie Win?

Episode Date: February 24, 2020

Bernie Sanders is probably going to be the nominee. On the surface, this seems like great news for Trump. But I have a word of caution for conservatives who think Bernie has no shot of winning. Also, Pete Buttigieg pulls one of the creepiest and most tasteless political stunts I've ever seen. And I'll explain why Clint Eastwood is officially canceled. Check out The Cold War: What We Saw, a new podcast written and presented by Bill Whittle at https://www.dailywire.com/coldwar. In Part 1 we peel back the layers of mystery cloaking the Terror state run by the Kremlin, and watch as America takes its first small steps onto the stage of world leadership. If you like The Matt Walsh Show, become a member TODAY with promo code: WALSH and enjoy the exclusive benefits for 10% off at https://www.dailywire.com/Walsh Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Oh, hi. Sorry, you caught me reading my book, Church of Cowards, which comes out tomorrow. Very embarrassing that you caught me in this organic, unstaged moment where I just happened to be reading this on camera. It is, as I said, does come out tomorrow, Church of Cowards, and you can still pre-order it, though, go to Amazon and get that pre-ordered. Now, today, let me set that up there. Today we're going to talk about a few things. We're going to talk, first of all, about the 650-year-old communist who is about to be the Democratic nominee. and conservatives are gleeful about it, giddy, because they figure that a geriatric socialist

who has repeatedly publicly fantasized about turning the United States into Soviet Russia will be very easy to beat. And maybe he will be, but I have a word of caution that I'd like to share with conservatives. Also, the left's campaign to sexualized children never ceases.

And today we're going to talk about one of the creepiest examples we've yet seen, this one courtesy of Pete Buttigieg, and I have five other news stories worth knowing about. Plus, I'll explain why Clint Eastwood is officially canceled. All of that coming up. Now, first, Bernie Sanders. Sanders won the Nevada caucus, which after Iowa and New Hampshire puts him pretty much in the driver's seat for the nomination, with the support he has in the ground game, the infrastructure, you know, it's hard to see him losing the nomination at this point,

unless a number of the other candidates drop out before Super Tuesday so that the anti-Bernie vote can coalesce around somebody like Buttigieg, but that's probably not going to happen because these are all power-obsessed narcissists and they're going to stay until the bitter end. So we see that the echoes of 2016 with Trump, with the anti-Trump vote in the primary being split between several people allowing Trump to coast to victory. Speaking of 2016, as I said, I want to offer a word of caution to conservatives because I am seeing this excitement and confidence as people on the right are seemingly quite sure that Bernie will lose in a landslide to Trump. And I've seen people saying he's going to lose, you know,

he's going to lose 40 states or 45 states or whatever. And I understand that feeling. I have felt it myself. I have myself said that there's just no way. You know, there's no way most Americans are going to vote for a communist. No way. It just isn't going to happen. I have said. A lot of people are saying. But there are many things that I thought Americans would never do and yet have done in recent years. And here we are as a culture because of it. I'm not saying that I think Bernie will beat Trump. I think the smart money is against him. But I am saying that he could win. And I think that his chances are probably better than we want to think. And in fact, you could make the argument that he's Trump's toughest opponent. So let's think about this. How did Trump win in 2016? What happened? Because according to everything

we thought we knew about American elections, he should not have won. The people who were predicting that he would lose, myself included, it's not like it was irrational. Based on everything we thought we knew. He was utterly despised by a large number of Americans. He had no governing experience whatsoever. He was a reality TV show host. There was even a tape of him talking about grabbing women by the genitals that came out just a few weeks before the election. Now, that kind of stuff is supposed to bury a candidate. Candidates have been buried under scandals and things much less dramatic than that. But it didn't bury Trump. Why is that? Well, I think there are three reasons. Number one,

he had a core of extremely motivated and loyal supporters who were very excited about him. And as far as those supporters were concerned, it really didn't matter what came out about him or what he did or what he said. Number two, he was running against a widely despised opponent. Number three, he seized on the moral outrage that people felt in society. Blue-collar workers against the elite and people feeling, you know, the swamp in D.C., people feeling taking advantage of and so on. Well, what do you know? Bernie Sanders has a core of extremely motivated and loyal supporters. And as far as they're concerned, it doesn't matter.

We talk about all the dirt and the apo and so on that's going to come out about Bernie Sanders in the next few months. Yeah, I'm sure it will come out. But as far as the people that go to the Bernie rallies and are practically in tears of agulation, doesn't matter. There's nothing that could come out about him that's going to dissuade them. Also, Bernie Sanders will be running against a widely despised opponent in Donald Trump. And Bernie Sanders is all about moral outrage. So Bernie has these ingredients as well, and he has them authentically. And what I mean is it's not like he's trying to rip off Trump.

He's not borrowing from Trump's playbook like somebody like Bloomberg is futile. This is who he is and what he's been doing for decades. Do I think he's going to win? And again, no, but I have, you know, I really have no idea. And neither do you, neither does anyone. Recent history has shown us that you can't really predict what's going to happen when you throw a person like Bernie Sanders or like Donald Trump into the mix. And that's why conservatives who dismiss him, I think, are making a mistake. And I say that as somebody who has dismissed him as well. Because it's hard to, it's hard to put to the side all the things we thought we knew about the way politics are supposed to work. And it's also hard to put to the side the fact that this guy's a communist.

and so he really should not win. It would be crazy for him to win. But just because he shouldn't, and it's crazy, doesn't mean it won't happen. Now, I want to focus on this third point about Bernie, the moral outrage. This is the most important thing, I think, to understand about Bernie Sanders and about leftism generally. And so I think we need to go deeper into this. But first, a word from life lock. You know, tax season can be a pain, and that's to put it mildly, of course.

but it's all worth it when you open the mailbox and you see that one envelope you've been waiting for unless it turns out someone else already filed your return, which can happen. During taxis and your personal info like your name, your social security number, may be emailed and shared more than usual. And every time you do that, you're opening yourself up to bad things happening. Criminals can steal info from your devices. They can sell it on the dark web. They can use it to commit identity theft.

You need life lock. the number one most recognized branded identity theft protection. Life lock monitors for use of your personal info. They alert you to possible suspicious activity. And if you become a victim of identity theft, they've also got a dedicated identity restoration specialist team, and they're going to work to help you fix the problem. So, you know, no one can prevent all instances of identity theft

or monitor all transactions that are happening everywhere. But having lifelock means one last thing that you have to stress about during tax season. and there's enough already as it is. So join now and save up to 25% off your first year. Just go to lifelock.com slash walsh. That's lifelock.com slash walsh for 25% off. Okay, so Bernie Sanders, and this is the thing that I think we need to understand about someone like Bernie. And as I said, leftist in general.

He's making a moral argument, okay? And that's what resonates. Yes, the unemployment rate is down. The stock market's doing fine. And so when we hear all these things from conservative, oh, the economy's great. And so Trump is fine. Yeah, the traditional economic indicators are good news for Trump. But that stuff doesn't really matter because there's still an enormous amount of anger and dissatisfaction out there and a deep feeling of unfairness. Now, whether we think that should exist or people should feel that way, it doesn't matter. they do. And that's why Bernie Sanders is resonating. And that's why Alexandria

Keza-Cortez is the biggest star in politics. There's a reason for this. Bernie Sanders is pointing to a generation that is starting adult life deep in debt from student loans. And he's pointing to the health care industry and the fact that even people with insurance are finding themselves bankrupted if they actually have to, you know, go out and get medical care. And he's pointing to income inequality. And the billy millionaires in their yachts and so on and so forth. And he's saying, this is morally wrong. This isn't right. That's his argument. It's not an economic argument. It's just a moral one. That's all he ever talks about. Now, yes, I believe that his prescriptions to fix these problems

are wrong. But that's not the point. The point is that the problems exist and people feel them and people are affected by them. And that's what's going to send them to the voting booth. And when they're at the voting booth, these are the things they're thinking about. Now, I think conservatives need to have a response to this that is more than just, oh, shut up, your whiners, your losers, your snowflakes, your entitlement mentality. If that's our response, we lose. Okay? And we deserve to. I think our response needs to begin by recognizing the fundamental legitimacy of the moral outrage that people feel about this stuff. Because they're right. It is completely unjust and ridiculous for banks to be giving out massive loans to kids who don't understand what they're doing, have no income,

have no assets, and you're going to go and let them sign up for a lifetime of debt. It's crazy. It's unjust. It's wrong. And it's unjust and ridiculous that, you know, I have insurance, health insurance, but we had flu going through the house. And so we needed to go and get flu medicine for our kids, including an infant who could die from it. And it was $100 per bottle with insurance. I got four kids. And that's just one anecdote. People go through this stuff all the time. And you find, you know, it's, you think, well, what's the point of the freaking insurance? What am I paying all this money for?

And it's wrong. You know, it is. People are being taken advantage of. We have to acknowledge that. If we don't, we lose. And worse than losing, we're also just wrong. We've put ourselves in the position of being wrong. So, you know, I've been saying this for years.

Liberals make moral arguments. What conservatives so often do is they counter with practical arguments. And guess which ideology has won the culture and won my generation and thus already won the future? It's not the side that always tries to speak to your wallet. It's the side that speaks to your heart and to your conscience. This idea that people vote based on their wallets, I don't know who came up with this originally, but they're wrong. They're flat out wrong. They don't understand how people work, which is interesting because we're all people. So we know. We know what actually motivates us on the most basic and fundamental level.

It's not money. It's deeper than that. And if people feel like there's injustice and there's things happening in the world that are wrong, you know, that's what's going to motivate them the most. And they're going to be willing to make. So even if you come and say, well, yeah, but if you do this, if you try to solve the problem this way, it's not the best economic. it's going to be, there are all these economic problems.

People are going to respond to that and say, so what? It's kind of the same thing that pro-lifers say. You know, when we're talking about the fact that we shouldn't be killing babies, and you hear the response sometimes from people saying, well, but if we don't have abortions, then you're going to have all these unwanted pregnancies, and you're going to have all these poor children. They're going to add to the welfare roles,

and eventually they're going to add to the unemployment rate and so on and so forth. are those counter arguments convincing to pro-lifers? No. Because what do we say? We say, so what? That's not the point. Even if you're right about that, that doesn't justify killing people. So yes, leftism's moral arguments are bad. That's true. But the answer, I don't think, is to refuse to engage on a moral level. It's to counter with better moral arguments. I don't know if you've noticed this, but this refrain that you always hear about, you can't legislate morality. We can't talk about morality on a public policy level because you can't legislate morality. Who are the people saying that? Liberals don't say that.

No, this is, these are, this kind of weak sauce is what you get from conservatives. Now, the left, they used to say that because they tricked them. conservatives. This is what the left used to always say. I can't legislate morality. Can't legislate morality. And they tricked dumb conservatives into believing that. And so now, while the left is off legislating morality, conservatives are standing back and say, oh, you can't, no, no, no, we don't legislate morality. Well, we don't, right? That's what the left told us, we don't. We can't think for ourselves. But of course, we do legislate. Every piece of legislation is legislating morality. Every law that has ever been written anywhere in the world in any country under any government,

including ours, is legislating morality. Every single one. Because we make laws based on what is right, what we think is the right thing to do. Everything that is illegal is illegally primarily because we believe it's wrong. And you might say, well, no, it's illegal. We only make things illegal if it hurts people. That's why it's wrong to kill people. Okay, but why should it be illegal to hurt people? Because it's wrong to hurt people, because it's immoral. So at the bottom, there's always morality. Student loans, as I said, is perhaps maybe the most important example of this as far as the left goes. Bernie's success so far, like it or not, is due largely to this issue. Disaffected young people who are drowning in debt. feel taken advantage of, they feel lied to.

And in Bernie, they see someone who not only promises to take the debt away, but also just takes their situation seriously. Whereas what they get from the right mostly is, shut up, you whiners. The problem with Bernie's solution, though, just like his solution to everything else, is that it is itself immoral, and it will only make the problem he's trying to solve worse. Bernie wants to wave a magic wand and forgive all the debt. First of all, that isn't just a bailout of college grads.

You're bailing out the universities who take advantage of young people by charging them these exorbitant rates. You're bailing out the politicians, the government, which backs the irresponsible loans given to kids right out of high school. And in the meantime, you're taking money from people who don't have the debt and you're forcing them to pay other people's debt. And then everyone who didn't go to college in the first place because they were trying to make wise financial decisions. And so they sacrificed the college education because they knew they couldn't afford it and they didn't want to have all that debt. And they weren't going to take that on. Now you're making them into suckers. You're making them into losers.

So this solution isn't just impractical. It's not just economically infeasible. It's that, you know, it's wrong. It's immoral. It's unjust. It's unfair. And I think that's the language we need. to be using. That's the point we need to be making. But then what is the solution? Well, this is

something I want to get into more deeply tomorrow. There are a few ideas that have been proposed to address the student loan crisis and the whole issue of higher education. A few ideas that are much better, more moral, fairer, and more financially sound than what the socialists are suggesting. As I say, I want to talk about that tomorrow because it's a larger conversation, but for now, suffice it to say that I think we need to be addressing not just the past, not just the people who already have taken out the loans, but the future also. We need to find a way to stop the bleeding. We need to talk about how to put an end to this entire absurd, unsustainable program

of pushing kids into these four-year institutions to get degrees that most of them won't ever use and won't need in the first place. So I have some ideas on that score as we continue the conversation this week, but I'll talk about that tomorrow. All right, coming up, I want to talk about Pete Buttigieg's extremely creepy sexualization of a child, which is something that happened right on stage at one of his rallies over the weekend. But before we get into that, I want to run through five other news stories worth knowing about in a new segment that I'm going to call news.

Took me a long time to come up with that name. This is why I'm known as a creative genius. Number one, Alexandria Ocaso-Ca-Cortez is being criticized for wearing a designer dress on the view on Friday. Some conservatives on Twitter have pointed out that her dress supposedly cost $500. $500, if you can believe it. Look, there are a lot of very good reasons, very good reasons, to criticize Alexandria Ocaso-Ca-Cortez. I mean, pretty much everything she says provides you a reason. But let's not be a bunch of losers and get bent out of shape because of it.

woman who does a lot of TV appearances spent a few bucks on a dress. I think there's a general rule here. When you're attacking somebody for what they're wearing, rather than for the ideas they're presenting, you're losing. Number two, the commandant of the Marine Corps on Friday announced the most important issues that Marines need to address in the coming year and beyond, according to him. Those issues include parental leave for adoptive same-sex parents, obviously a huge priority for the Marines, you know, really important stuff. And also, this is the most important thing. He wants to get more women in the ranks. So we have to increase the number of women in the Marines. He says he wants at least 10% of the ranks to be comprised of women. Now let me ask you this.

Can anyone argue, I mean, can anyone with a straight face argue that increasing the number of women in the Marines will help the Marines be a more effective and lethal fighting force? And if you can't argue that, if nobody can argue that, then what's the point of increasing the number of women? What's the point of making any changes to the Marines that are not in the service of helping it become better at the one thing that we need it to do? Well, I understand the point, of course, for the left, the fundamental purpose of every institution in America is to advance cultural leftism. That's no institution can have any purpose higher than that. Number three, a sad story here at Daredevil, who goes by the name Mad Mike Hughes,

died on Saturday after shooting himself into the air in a homemade rocket to prove that the earth is flat. And I'm not sure exactly what the plan was. I guess the idea was to get really high up in the air and take a picture of the earth to show that it's flat. You know, you could take a plane, and do the same thing. But he crash-landed and died. I'm not going to make any jokes about a man's death, as a lot of people have been doing online, as you can imagine. But I do continue

to find it remarkable that flat-eartherism exists. Remarkable until I remember that the human capacity for self-deception is basically limitless. We can convince ourselves to believe anything, really. And we're also storytellers. You know, we're very good as human beings. One of the best, one of the things we're best at is telling stories, which is a very important part of this because flat eartherism

is not a theory. It's a story. So flat earthers have this whole story they tell, this myth they've constructed about global conspiracy. Well, not global conspiracies, but, you know, conspiracies anyway. And they made up this story and they tell it to each other. And because they find

story interesting and compelling, they figure it must be true. Number four, Mike Bloomberg has been getting criticized for having a bunch of women under NDA's non-disclosure agreements. Now, these are women who have sued Bloomberg's company for harassment and those sorts of things, but now they can't talk about their experiences because they were made to sign a contract, binding them to silence. Well, Bloomberg now says he will release three women from their NDAs if they ask. Just three. So this whole thing is starting to really have the feel of a hostage negotiation. In fact, I heard that Bloomberg will release two more women if the cop cars move back another 500 feet. And five, finally, the biggest news of the week, of course, of the year really, of the century,

is, I don't know if I mentioned this, but my book, Church of Cowards, officially goes on sale tomorrow. But you can pre-order it now on Amazon. Otherwise, you can find it tomorrow, wherever books are sold. or online, of course. Okay, now, speaking as we were before, making the moral argument, I believe the left's sexual exploitation of children is one of the great moral issues of our time, which is why I point to it and highlight it quite frequently. And I think this is one thing that as conservatives we should be talking about

and exposing. And this is the kind of thing that motivates voters. People will go to the polls to put. to stop to this. It's the kind of thing that makes people angry. And they're going to care more about this than about the unemployment rate. And more importantly, putting politics aside, we have a moral duty to protect children. So let's take a look at the latest example of this exploitation, courtesy of Mayor Pete Buttigieg. At a campaign rally over the weekend, Buttigieg decided to pull a nine-year-old on stage so that the nine-year-old could talk about his second

And it's the kind of thing you have to see to believe. Watch this. He says, thank you for being so brave. Would you help me tell the world I'm gay too? I want to be brave like you. Well, I don't think you need a lot of advice for me on bravery. You seem pretty strong. To see you, it took me a long time to figure out how to tell even my best friend that I was gay, let alone to go out there and tell the people. world and to see you willing to come to terms with who you are in a room full of a thousand people thousands of people you've never met that's that's really something so let me tell you let me tell you a couple things that might be useful the first thing is that it won't always be easy but that's okay because you know who you are and that's really important because when you know who you are you have a center of that can hold you together when all kinds of chaos is happening around you. That's the first thing I want you to know.

The second thing I want you to know is that you'll never know who's taking their lead from you. Who's watching you and deciding that they can be a little braver because you have been brave. Nine years old. Nine years old. Children at nine years old haven't gone through puberty. yet. They don't know who they are or how they feel. They don't have sexual desires yet. They don't know anything about sex. A nine-year-old doesn't have a sexual orientation. So if a nine-year-old tells you that he's gay, you know, we can talk about the best way to handle that. But I'm very certain

that the best way to handle it is not to pull him on stage in front of an audience. on camera and have him announce it to the world. That you don't do. There is no good reason to do it. And when I say no good reason, good as in no morally or ethically good reason, it's not going to help the child. There is no way that it could possibly benefit the child for him at the age of nine to publicly announce his sexuality.

There's nothing good that comes of it for him. But of course, it's not about the child. In this case, it's mainly about Pete, a creepy Pete, who has no compunction about exploiting a child's emotional confusion for the sake of winning a few brownie points with the media and with voters. And it's also about, as always, trying to reshape our fundamental understanding of childhood as a culture. The forces of evil in our culture. They want us to see children as people who have the emotional and psychological capacity to make profoundly important and life-altering decisions for themselves. that's how they want us to see kids decisions like declaring a sexual orientation even if they haven't gone through puberty yet decisions like choosing a quote gender identity so in the area of sex and gender at least

the left wants us to see children as people who possess all the competence and self-knowledge of um of of adults now where do we think this goes I mean, do we think it stops here? Do we think they say, yeah, toddlers can choose their gender and third graders can declare a sexual orientation in front of the entire world. But that's it. That's as far as it goes. No more.

No further. No, of course not. One thing we've learned about progressivism is that there's a reason it's called progressivism. It progresses, progresses in the sense so that cancer progresses. It keeps going. It keeps moving. It keeps eating away. And in this case, it's not a far leap to go from here, from very young children being able to decide a gender and a sexual orientation, to arguing that children have the capacity to consent sexually.

Now, I don't think your average leftist right now today necessarily in his mind wants to legalize pedophilia. I don't think that. I don't think he's thought it through that much. But I can say, I can predict that nearly every leftist who today is arguing that three-year-olds can choose their gender, nearly all of them, 10 years from now or even five years from now, will be arguing in favor of legalizing pedophilia. It is without question the logical conclusion, the end point, the last stop on this particular. train. And we will get there unless, of course, the sane and decent among us rise up finally in defense of our children and put a stop to this madness. Unless those of us who know better can actually respond, we're talking about moral outrage. We need to respond with the appropriate

amount of moral outrage. We should be pissed. furious when we see this kind of thing. When we see what Pete Buttigieg did, when we see these kids being taken advantage of by their parents, and three-year-old, three-year-old boys being told, oh, you could be a girl. Our response should not simply be, oh, we disagree with that. We should be blind with anger because that's how exploitative and evil and critical. crazy this stuff is. But this is also part of what the left does. You know, it's all about normalization. So they keep shoving in our face over and over and over again. And eventually, even if we, that what the hope, the hope is that even if we don't agree with it, we become

desensitized to it. And so we throw up our hands and say, hey, I don't like this, but it's just the way it is now. Moving on. We can't, we can't allow that to happen. All right. finally today um debuting another new segment on the show and uh in this segment each day i will be canceling something or someone you know a lot of people are critics of cancel culture but i personally am a huge fan of it i'm i you know i i love the idea anyway my only problem with all the canceling is that other people are doing it i think that i should be the one deciding what's what gets canceled I have a lot of experience, hating things, and so I feel that I'm uniquely qualified to make these decisions. So today, we'll start off by canceling Clint Eastwood.

Now, in an interview over the weekend, Clint came out in support of Mike Bloomberg for president, throwing President Trump overboard, basically. In fact, Eastwood said that he's a little fed up with Trump, and he wishes that Trump would act, quote, in a more genteel way without tweeting and calling people names. he said, quote, is a real quote. The best thing we could do is just get Mike Bloomberg in there, which marks, I believe, the first time in history that anyone has ever uttered that sentence.

The best thing we could do is get Mike Bloomberg in there. But that is not why Clint Eastwood is canceled. I want to be clear. Personally, I couldn't care less who anyone in Hollywood supports for president. Makes no difference to me. Eastwood is canceled finally for being the most overrated director in Hollywood. This is a long time coming. And the only reason I'm canceling him

now is that I'm hoping that he, now that he's dumped Trump and gone to Bloomberg, that conservatives will stop pretending that, you know, his films are good. Because I believe that's what's been going on here. We've all been pretending to like his movies because we have the idea that he's conservative or Republican or whatever. Now we can finally, now we can finally be honest. if you go down Eastwood's list of films that he's directed. Now, there are a few bright spots in there. But most of his filmography is mediocre and sometimes bad. And in one case, literally the worst.

That film, by the way, is the movie the 1517 to Paris that came out a couple years ago. Eastwood film directed it. It's about the four guys who stopped the terrorist attack in 2015 on a train. And a very heroic moment, you know. but also a moment that took about 30 seconds. And so Eastwood tried to turn 30 seconds into a whole movie. And he actually hired the guys themselves, the actual real-life heroes.

He hired them to play themselves in the movie. Now, the problem is that they're not actors. And as it turns out, it does actually take some skill to act. Even to act as yourself, it takes talent, which unfortunately these guys didn't have. So it's the worst acting in a major Hollywood film that I've ever seen in my life to go along with some of the words. writing and some of the worst pacing that you'll ever see, a monumentally bad film. But this has been

Eastwood's MO of late. You know, he takes a real life dramatic moment and he tries to turn it into a whole movie, even if there's not enough of a story there. Sully, he made a movie called Sully Sullen about Sully Sullen, Sullen, a few years ago. Now, another very dramatic moment that took about two minutes in real life, which leaves you with another about 100 minutes to fill. Unfortunately, there's just not a movie there. Million dollar baby. Another bad movie. Where at the end,

Clint Eastwood's character heroically kills Hillary Swank because she's disabled. That's the end. It's supposed to be heartwarming. Him performing a mercy killing on a disabled woman is the end of the movie.

And people are supposed to leave in tears of joy at this beautiful ending. American sniper. takes a fascinating story of Chris Kyle, the most prolific sniper sniper in history, somehow manages to make a dull, repetitive, bland movie out of it that barely scratches the psychological or emotional surface of the man at the center of it. Even Eastwood's good movies are problematic, mainly because Eastwood has all the subtlety

of a bag of hammers falling out of the sky. So you take Richard Jewell, for example. I watched that movie. Pretty good movie. Important story. but he wants to make the point that the media is irresponsible and reckless, which is a good point. So he takes a real-life reporter, Kathy Scruggs, and he turns her into a cartoon avatar of an unscrupulous ambulance chaser. She's portrayed as essentially a sociopath with no morals whatsoever, who's happy when people die, openly happy when people die and when tragedies happen because it will make for a good story.

And it may be true that the news media operates that way. But, you know, these are actual human beings in the news media. And human beings are rarely so explicitly evil and callous because humans have a deep need to at least convince themselves that they're decent, virtuous people. Yet the bad guys in this movie are just bad all the way through. No shades of gray, nothing human in them, no nuance to their personality.

until the reporter who is, you know, through the entire movie, again, a sociopath, a psychopath, absurdly cartoonishly evil, the entire movie. And then out of nowhere, in the span of about 45 seconds, she has a change of heart. Not explained. How did it happen? Just out of nowhere. She becomes, she goes from a literal psychopath to a compassionate humanitarian. And at the end of the movie, she's crying because she's so remorseful about how she's been acting. This is what Clinisewood does. His characters are almost always lazily drawn, one-dimensional, just there to sort of do their job for the story. You know, hey, I'm the bad guy, yada, yada, evil stuff.

And it's just not good. And that's why Clint Eastwood is canceled. I'm sorry to do it, but it had to be done. And that's it for today. I don't know if I mentioned this, but my book, Church of Cowards, goes on sale tomorrow. So go order that to all of you who do buy the book. Thank you. And I hope you have a great day.

to those of you who do not buy the book, you bring shame on yourself and your family. How dare you? And to everyone, Godspeed. If you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe, and if you want to help spread the word, please give us a five-star review.

Tell your friends to subscribe as well. We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, we're there. Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Null's show, and the Andrew Claven show. Thanks for listening.

The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer Jeremy Boring, supervising producer Mathis Glover, supervising producer Robert Sterling, technical producer Austin Stevens, editor Danny Domeico, audio mixer, Robin Fenderson. The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020. As Bernie Sanders racks up victories all around the country, conservatives struggle with whether to root for the radical socialist so Trump can sweep all 57 states plus Greenland in November, or whether it would be better to root for one of the also-rans

on the off chance Bernie could somehow win in November. We will examine the conservative case for Bernie. Then Pete Buttigieg has a prepubescent boy come out on stage at a campaign rally. AOC likes luxury for herself, but not for anyone else, and so much more. Check it out on the Michael Knowles Show.