The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 582 - Leftism Is Indistinguishable From Insanity

Episode Date: October 14, 2020

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, desperate Democrats, grasping for any reason to hate Amy Coney Barrett, have now decided that her use of the term “sexual preference” is offensive and horrible. The entire Left decided in the span of 24 hours that this term is offensive. We’ll talk about the implications of living in a culture where words change meanings so quickly, and also why the Left’s theory of sexual orientation completely contradicts their theories of gender. Also Five Headlines including a new Biden ad reaching out to black voters that is, without exaggeration, the most patronizing and degrading political ad I’ve ever seen. And in our Daily Cancellation, the NBA is cancelled. Not just by me. This is a decision we all have made, and for good reason. 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

Today on the Matt Wall show, desperate Democrats grasping for any reason to hate Amy Coney-Barrant have now decided that her use of the term sexual preference is offensive and horrible. The entire left decided in the span of 24 hours that this term is offensive. We'll talk about the implications of living in a culture where words change meaning so quickly and also why the left's theory of sexual orientation completely contradicts their theories of gender. So that's, we'll discuss all of that. also five headlines, including a new Biden ad reaching out to black voters, that is, without exaggeration, the most patronizing and degrading political ad I think I've ever seen, and we'll play it for you.

And in our daily cancellation, the NBA is canceled, not just by me. This is a decision we all have made, and for good reason, I think. So we'll discuss that to all that coming up. But first, let's talk about light stream. Now, I think many of us can say that we have interest rates on our credit cards that are higher than we prefer. We carry the balance on the cards, and we're losing money by the second with the interest rates. That's why you need Lightstream. Lightstream offers credit card consolidation loans from 5.95% APR with auto pay and excellent credit. The rate is fixed, so it will never go up over the life of the loan. And the application is 100% online. You don't have to leave your house. You don't have to put on pants. It's great. You can get a loan from

$5,000 to $100,000 and there are absolutely no fees. Look, I think debt is a problem for a lot of us, and I've seen it really prevent people from moving on with their lives and careers. Don't let that happen to you. There's no reason for it. My listeners can save even more with an additional interest rate discount. The only way to get this discount is to go to lightstream.com slash walsh. L-I-G-H-T-S-T-R-E-A-M-S-T-R-E-A-M-S-R-C-R-Sach. Subject to credit, subject to credit, low-est-R-R-R-E-R-R-E-M-S-WH for more information. Well, you know, it's immensely tempting to say that Democrat senators questioning Amy Coney Barrett during her confirmation hearings this week are engaging in quite a lot of mansplaining. The condescension is there, the unnecessary, long-winded lectures, the interruptions.

They're even using poster boards and other visual aids to get their points across. The only reason I won't call any of this mansplaining is that the term is vapid and stupid and used unironically only by people whose minds have been warped by policy. politics and ideology. Still, by the left's rules applied equitably, as they like to say, it must be concluded that Barrett's inquisitors are sexist bullies, even the women who are apparently infected with internalized misogyny, or some such nonsense. But if the meaning and application of mansplaining changes according to the political needs of the moment, at least the word is contrived and meaningless from the start. The left invented that term. I suppose they could do whatever they want with it. The far more disturbing thing is to witness how real words, words that

existed before our era of woke politics, are now redefined with rapid speed on the fly and with coordinated efficiency. The hearings have provided us with perhaps the most glaring and most striking example of the left's language manipulation scheme that we've seen yet. And we talked about the game they're playing with the term court packing already. But this is way worse than that. So on Tuesday morning, as you ate your breakfast burrito. The term sexual preference was perfectly normal, perfectly acceptable, perfectly common. And if you used it anywhere, everyone would know what you meant and almost nobody would think to be offended by it. By bedtime, as you crawled beneath

your covers, sexual preference had become an unspeakable slur. In the span of 18 hours, this new meaning had been adopted by the media, politicians, even the dictionary itself. Anyone who wasn't paying attention to the news on Wednesday will no doubt use this newly minted gay slur at some point in the future and be utterly baffled and horrified by the looks and breathless chastisements that follow. That, of course, is part of the plan. So how did this happen? During the course of the confirmation hearings early on Tuesday, Amy Coney Barrett responded to a question about gay rights and she said that she would, quote, never discriminate on the basis of sexual preference. Here she is in her own words. Listen. I do want to be clear that I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference

and would not ever discriminate on the basis of sexual preference. Like racism, I think discrimination is important. Gasp. Shocking. Well, not really. To most observers, this seems like a totally normal statement. Hardly noteworthy. But some on the left, sensing that Barrett would give them few opportunities to be offended, decided to make do with what they had.

So leftist Twitter accounts began setting the stage, claiming that the judge's use of the term sexual preference is somehow abhorrent. All of a sudden. It wasn't before it is now. Kyle Griffin, an MSNBC producer with almost a million followers, was early on the bandwagon tweeting, sexual preference, a term used by Justice Barrett is offensive and outdated.

The term implies sexuality is a choice. It is not. News organizations should not repeat Justice Barrett's words without providing that important context. Various others joined the chorus. Eventually, they seemed to have attracted the attention of Senator Maisie Hirono, who leapt into action. That evening, Hirono circled back to Skull Barrett,

calling her choice of language offensive and outdated, repeating Kyle Griffin's tweet verbatim. She then explained that only, quote, anti-LGB activists use the term because they want to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice, when in fact says Herono, it is a key part of an individual's identity and it is, she says, immutable. Listen. This morning, Senator Feinstein asked you a question about the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in a Borgafel v. Hodges,

a case in which the court recognize the constitutional right to same-sex marriage. And I was disappointed that you wouldn't give a direct answer and whether you're agreed with the majority in that case or if you instead agree with your mentor, Justice Scalia, no such right exists in the Constitution. So even though you didn't give a direct answer, I think your response did speak volumes. Not once, but twice. You use the term sexual preference to describe those in the LGBTQ community. And let me make clear, sexual preference is an offensive and outdated term. It is used by anti-LGB activists to suggest that sexual preference is an offensive and outdated term. It is used by anti-LGB activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice. It is not. Sexual orientation is a key part of a person's identity, that sexual orientation is both a normal expression of human sexuality and immutable, was a key part of the majority's opinion in Obergefell, which, by the way, Scalia did not agree with. So if it is your view that sexual orientation is merely a preference, as you noted, then And the LGBTQ community should be rightly concerned whether you would uphold their constitutional right to marry.

And then, expectedly, Corey Booker, never missing an opportunity to grandstand, also jumped in to register his objection to the term. Judge Barrett, five years ago, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution protects the rights of same-sex couples to marry. This was a Burgerfell case, which has been discussed today. The court declared the Constitution grants LGBTQ Americans equal dignity in the United States. of the law. Hundreds of thousands of couples have built their lives on this decision. I've married some of them myself. On that day five years ago, the court fulfilled really that ideal of equal justice under law. And yet now the same-sex marriage is legal. We've seen efforts to try to undermine that decision. Justice Ginsburg wrote about legal rules that would, quote, create two kinds of marriage,

full marriage and skin milk marriage. I firmly believe that our laws shouldn't allow discrimination against people on the basis of who they are. I have a number of questions on this topic if I can get through them, but I wanted to offer you a further opportunity to address the issue that I don't think you got to fully address that my colleague brought up when you did use the term sexual preference earlier today rather than sexual orientation. Is there a difference and what is it? Senator, I really, and using that word, did not mean to imply that I think that, you know, that it's a matter, not a matter of, that it's not an immutable characteristic or that it's solely a matter of preference. I honestly did not mean any offense or to make any statement by that.

But by what you just said you understand about that immutable characteristic, in other words, that one's sexuality is not a preference. It is who they are. Is that what you're saying? Senator, I'm saying I was not trying to make any comment on it. I fully respect all the rights of the LGBT community. A boogerfell is an important. precedence of the court. I reject any kind of discrimination on any sort of basis. And then it was off to the races. Slate, Jezebel, Vox, other outlets all join the dog pile publishing articles condemning sexual preference as offensive, degrading, bigoted, a dog whistle.

We must say orientation, not preference, they all suddenly agreed. Our sexuality is not a preference. It is ingrained. It is fundamental. It is an unchangeable part of our essence as human beings. And to cap it all off, Webster's online dictionary changed its definition of the word preference at the end of the night to note that it is offensive what applied to sexuality. Now, of course, dictionary definitions change to reflect evolving meanings and common usages, and that's fine. But the usage and meaning of preference has not evolved. The left, to include now the dictionary, is not merely noting a change in common usage, but trying to affect a change by pretending that it has already occurred. Words evolve gradually and organically over many years. Changes in language in our society are, rather than gradual and organic, sudden, artificial,

orchestrated, ideological. And this is a very different sort of thing. Now, it's probably no use to point this out, but many of the people, and and media outlets lambasting Barrett for her use of sexual preference have themselves uttered or written it many times over the years. The advocate, for example, blasted the anti-LGBQ plus language only two weeks after publishing an article that makes uncritical use of that same term. Slate professed to be so alarmed by Barrett's language after years of using the exact same language in its articles. Indeed, just this year, Slate's advice column, featured a question from a 65-year-old straight man wondering if his, quote, sexual preference

may have changed over time as he finds himself fantasizing about men. And he decided to write Slate about this. The response from Slate writer Rich Jusweak certainly does not sound consistent with sexual orientation as an immutable characteristic. This is what he says. Quote, from Slate, some people keep evolving sexually, finding different things they're into at different times. In an episode of Netflix's Sex Explained, Fantasies are compared to language. Research suggests we don't unlearn old ones, but we can learn new ones. Dr. Justin Lay Miller, who has studied fantasies extensively, suggests that one way of picking up new sexual interests would be exposure,

via porn, for example, to something novel when on the brink of orgasm. For many, that's when the disgust response is reduced. The ensuing orgasm could prompt the stimulus to be sought again, and a new fantasy slash kink is born. Okay, that's Slate. Evolving sexually, new sexual interests, a new fantasy is born. This makes sexual orientation sound an awful lot like a preference that can be changed, and in many cases does change.

There are many real-world examples of this happening. Slate itself provided one of them. Sexual orientation is immutable is dogma, impotently asserting itself against the reality that clearly contradicts and disproves it. Besides, there is an inescapable logical problem for adherence to left-wing gender theory who also claim sexual orientation as ingrained and unchangeable. The problem is that their gender theories cannot coexist with their theory of sexual orientation. These are mutually exclusive propositions for reasons that should be obvious. Take the example of a gay man who transitions into a woman.

If he is really a woman now, he is no longer gay. Thus, sexual orientation can change. If he must always be gay because orientation is immutable, he must always be a man. There is no way around this without undermining or denying his self-identity somewhere along the timeline. In order to make both propositions work, you must point to this individual and say that he was wrong about being gay or wrong about being a man or he's wrong about being a woman now. But that is to claim that it's possible for a person to be wrong about their own self-identity, which would cause the whole artifice of left-wing gender theory to collapse. The scheme doesn't work if outsiders are able to judge a person's identity as incorrect

based on our own logical or physical observations. This is a problem that cannot be overcome, though it can be blithely ignored. The advantage, after all, to being a relativist is that you get to invent your own truth to suit the moment. Different moments call for different truths. The relativist feels no need to maintain any common logical thread from one moment to the next. Now, you may say that this is also the hallmark of insanity, and you would be correct. But insanity, as we have discovered, is our culture's most powerful political ideology. Let's get to our five headlines.

You know, nothing beats a good, comfortable sofa, as far as I'm concerned. This is an argument I have with my wife all the time, because when it comes to sofa, A lot of times she's looking for style over comfort. And my point is, you know, it's really more of a comfort thing. It doesn't matter what the sofa looks like. We have to sit in it. We're not looking at it. It's got to be comfortable.

Well, what if you could have both? What if you could have a sofa that looks great and is also very comfortable? That's where all form comes in. You know, if you've been listening to this show for a while, you've probably heard me talk about Helix mattress, which Helix mattresses are, you know, we want to talk about style and comfort. Very, very comfortable. Well, Helix has left the bedroom and started making sofa. They've...

Sophos. They've just launched a new company called All Form, and they're already making the best sofas we've ever seen or sat on. So what makes an all-form sofa really cool? For starters, it's the easiest way you can customize a sofa using premium materials and at a fraction of the cost of traditional sofas. You can pick your fabric, the sofa color, the color of the leg, sofa size. You can shape everything to your exact specifications.

They've got armchairs and love seats all the way up to an eight-seat sectional. So there's something there for everyone. All-Form sofas are also delivered directly to your home with fast, free shipping. In the past, if you wanted to order a sofa, it could take weeks or even months to arrive, and you would need someone to come and assemble a thing for you at your house. I've been through that before. It's not fun. All-Form takes just three to seven days to arrive in the mail, and you can assemble it yourself in a few minutes.

No tools needed. It's just that simple. And the other thing, if you go to the All-Forum website, which I've been on, very easy to navigate and you just put yourself it's a lot of fun you put put together the sofa you want and you can have one that looks great and it's real comfortable to sit in if getting a sofa without trying trying it in store sounds a little risky you don't need to worry you get a hundred days to decide if you want to keep it i think that's enough time uh that's more than three months and if you don't love it which i think you will anyway but if you don't love it

they'll pick it up for free and you'll get a full refund it's that simple they even offer a forever warranty literally forever there's a warranty on this thing to find your perfect sofa but check out all forum.com slash walsh. And Allform is offering 20% off all orders for our listeners. If you go now, all forum.com slash walsh. Okay. Where are we? Let's find our headlines here, if I can.

Let's see. Okay, good. Big report here in the Daily Wire says newly published emails allegedly show that Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, leveraged his relationship with his father, then Vice President Biden, to increase his pay at Ukrainian gas company Burisma. The email comes from a laptop computer that was dropped off at a computer repair store last April

in Biden's home state of Delaware. The person who brought the laptop into the store never paid for service, never retrieved the device. Federal law enforcement officials reportedly seized the laptop in December after the store owner alerted them to it, but not before the store owner made a copy of the hard drive. The New York Post, which was given a copy of the hard drive

on Sunday, reported, quote, Hunter Biden discussed leveraging his connection to his father in a bid to boost his pay from a Ukrainian natural gas company in a lengthy memo to his then business partner Devon Archer, who already sat on Burisma board. Biden repeatedly mentioned my guy while apparently referring to then-vice President Joe Biden. Under President Barack Obama, the elder Biden was the point person for U.S. policy towards Ukraine and held a press conference there with Prime Minister, the prime minister on April 22nd. And then it goes into the specific.

You could read the New York Post report, but it goes into some of the examples quoting from these alleged emails. Sounds to me like, I don't know, a massive scandal, but the deflating thing is that political scandals are, of course, meaningless if they aren't reported. For this to do any damage against Biden, it would need to be reported by more than just Fox News

and the New York Post and us. It would need to be reported on the massive. media, which it won't be, of course. So you want to talk about influencing elections, while the mainstream media refusing to cover massive scandals when they pertain to one particular candidate, that is certainly one way to influence an election. And that is also most of the time the essence of fake news. I say this all the time. Fake news is usually not inventing stories. That's not generally how fake news works. Fake news is in the stories they choose not to cover. It's in pretending that something isn't news.

That's the fake news part most of the time. All right, Joe Biden is continuing his outreach to black voters. And as is often the case, when white Democrats reach out to black voters, the results are pretty patronizing. And you have to just hear this to believe it. This is the Biden ad on his YouTube page featuring two guys having a rap battle where they discussed Joe. Biden's policies in the rap battle. Take a listen. Yo, why you ain't been answering your phone? You know why I'm calling you. You have to vote. You know why I don't vote? Because as a black man, I just feel like there's no hope.

Our president telling people to go back to China taking the coronavirus as a joke. And that's the part that frightened me. When you choose the president, it's supposed to be a knockout. Then why this situation doesn't enticing me? If you got the answer to get me out this dark path, my brother, enlighten me. We're always telling each other to stay woke. That's why this time we got to use our voice and you have to vote. The facts should show. Biden has a plan for African Americans.

We're not dealing with your average Joe. I see the way you looking right now. You know exactly where I'm going with this. For four years, we had Trump in office and we made the most of it. But we finally got somebody that could be in office that can give us a chance to have home. ownership. I'm talking to all of you. $640 billion over the cost of 10 years so we can finally get housing that's affordable. Okay, a couple of things here. First of all, you have here in this

ad, two black men on a basketball court having a conversation through rapping. If this isn't the most stereotypical and insulting political ad we've seen in decades, I don't know what is. What would you What earns that title, if not what you just heard right there? Second, you know, maybe beside the point, but the freestyle, most of what you just heard there didn't even rhyme. So he says, but we finally got somebody that can be in office that can finally give us the chance to have home ownership. I'm talking to all of you, $640 billion over the course of 10 years, so we finally get housing that's affordable. That doesn't rhyme.

Isn't a rap supposed to rhyme? If you don't have music and if there's no background music and it doesn't rhyme, then that's just speaking. You're speaking is what you're doing. You're just speaking with hand gestures. So, I mean, I guess I'm, I freestyle all the time, I guess. I freestyle at my house to my wife. I already took the trash out.

Please stop asking me. That was my freestyle. Just a, I dropped a bar right there, as the kids say. Is that what you do? You drop the bars? Spit the bar. How's it go? I don't know.

So that's, man, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, that's, we've done the cringe challenge before. Try to get through that whole video. That's like four minutes, I think, the whole thing. I played 30 seconds of it. So, see if, see if you can get through the whole four minutes. It's difficult. All right. Boy, kind of.

NBC is currently trending. We've got another boycott going. And the reason is even dumber than you think. Reasons are always dumb for boycotts most of the time. But the reason is they're boycotting NBC, the left is because they're having, NBC is having a town hall with Trump, which will run opposite of a different town hall on ABC with Biden.

And so that's the reason for the boycott. This is bad because, well, The real reason it's bad is because it involves Trump. And so that's why it's bad. But the reason they're giving is that if you do both town halls at the same time, people won't be able to watch both. And so this is really a form of voter suppression because voters are not able to inform themselves because you've got both town halls going on at the same time. And that's a reason to boycott. Yeah, well, the problem is, for one thing, who the hell actually wants to watch either of these town halls, let alone both of them. Who would willingly sit and watch a politician's town hall

for fun? And second point, do you not have DVR? Is there anybody left in America who doesn't have the capability to digitally record programming? And even if you don't, don't you have the internet? If you're boycotting, if you're hashtag boycott NBC, you probably have the internet. You can go on and find the clip of it later and watch if you really want to. So obviously a very stupid reason for a boycott. Number four, more big news here. Oreo is defeating discrimination by releasing a rainbow-colored cookie. I feel like they've done this before. Maybe I'm wrong, but either way, remarkable. Just all you can do is marvel at the courage and boldness to have this rainbow-colored cookie. And the good thing is, whatever distracts them from making

more double-stuffed Oreos, that's good to me. If they focus their energy on making the rainbow Oreos instead of the double-stuffed, I consider that a win because double-stuffed Oreos are disgusting. And I say that as a loyal Oreo eater going back decades. The problem with the double-stuffed Oreo is that, you know, when you have that much of the cream, you start to realize that the cream is not really cream. It's some sort of hideous, synthetic goop. It's really the same problem with the quarter-pounder McDonald's, I think. Like the Big Mac is great because it's mostly just bread and the sauce with two little slivers of would-be meat. But then you get the bigger cut of the meat, and it becomes obvious that this is not meat,

but rather salty, greasy styrofoam. So it really becomes too much of a good thing. Why are we talking about this? I forget. Oh, yeah, rainbow-colored Oreos. So there you go. Five, finally. More big news.

An innovation, almost as impressive as the rainbow-colored Oreo. the iPhone 12 was unveiled yesterday. Moment we've been waiting for. Here it is. You can look at it right here, spinning around and dancing for you. So there it is. So it's, you know, you look at that, you think,

well, it's a lot like the iPhone 11 and the iPhone 10 and the iPhone 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3,21. Very similar to that, except this time with more cameras. This is all they're doing. doing now with the iPhones, I guess. They've run out of ideas. They just add new cameras each time. Every successive iPhone from now on there's just another camera they add on. The thing is pockmarked with cameras at this point. And all of this camera technology only so that narcissists can take

clearer pictures of their own ugly faces. That's all anybody uses it for anyway. Pretty soon it's going to be, you know, like, pretty soon it's just going to be just a camera. I think that that's where we're headed, that the phones, we're going to, we're sort of transitioning back, we're going full circle, and by the iPhone 20, it'll be just a Polaroid camera dancing around there on the screen for you. Personally, I would like a phone, here's my crazy idea. I would like a phone that's a phone and also has the internet. I like the internet part of it. So just a phone with the internet. That's all I need. I don't need anything else. And also, and this would be the advantage, you don't have any of the other technology, then it also maybe will have a battery

that lasts more than 14 seconds. That's my dream. That's what I'm waiting for. Because the problem is that with all this new technology added, you need more power so that now you have to plug your iPhone directly into the core of the earth in order to get a charge that lasts even, you know, a few hours. So that's what I would like to see. Battery life, internet, phone, text message, that's all I need. I'm a simple man. Okay. We're going to get a lot. get to our daily cancellation in just a second. But first, we've been telling you about DailyWire's Old Glory baseball bat, which is back. If you haven't gotten yours yet, you've got to do that. This is our limited edition, handcrafted, custom-painted baseball bat,

emblazoned with the DailyWire logo. And since we relaunched on Monday, they've almost sold out again. Today is the last day they'll be available. So you can still get yours, if you hurry. Text the keyword baseball to 83400 to purchase your bat today. All right. time for our daily cancellation. So today I'm canceling the NBA. Well, I'm not really canceling them or it isn't just me. This is a democratic cancellation. We have canceled the NBA together. I think for me, I'm just sort of a typical case. Probably I never qualified as a diehard NBA fan to begin with, but I did enjoy the sport and typically became more invested during the playoffs. I loved watching the NBA finals especially and had missed probably very few NBA finals in the

past decade or so. I never had a home team, but I rooted for my favorite players. I had followed LeBron James' career in particular, since his first stint with the Cleveland Cavaliers. But I didn't watch a single minute of this past NBA season, which just concluded. LeBron and the Lakers won the trophy on Sunday. I didn't realize the game was even happening or that the Lakers were up in the series. I didn't know anything about it. I found out the next day due to the viral footage of Lakers fans rioting and celebration, because again, apparently Revelers, celebrating a basketball team's victory are immune to COVID, just like BLM activists and attendees of memorial services for Democrats. All of them are immune. Very fascinating science. So this was the first

NBA season that I've ever ignored. And I have to tell you, I didn't miss it. Being a sports fan is like being under some sort of trance. You care immensely about this thing for reasons you can't quite explain. But if the spell breaks and you stop caring, you'll wonder why you ever did or why you should start again. So for me, the spell broke because of the NBA's ceaseless political propagandizing. Too aggressive, too wearying, too irritating, just too much. This sort of thing may be tolerable up to a certain line. I'm not sure where that line is exactly, but it has surely been crossed when a league canonizes an accused rapist and serial abuser like Jacob Blake and its top star tries to foment more division in chaos by telling wild tales about racist cops hunting black men.

And nearly all the players and coaches decide to turn the national anthem into a forum for self-aggrandizing political stunts. That's, you cross the line. I can deal with a little bit of politics from professional athletes. But if getting smacked in the face with an ideological two-by-four is the price of admission, I'd rather just go do something else with my time. And I'm not alone. According to Nielsen, this was the lowest rated NBA finals in 40 years. A mere 5.6 million viewers tuned in to watch the game that I didn't know was even being played.

To put that in perspective, double that number watched a regular season Sunday night football matchup on the same night. Game six of the finals last year had three times the viewership. Back in the Michael Jordan era in the 90s, the championship round would routinely draw four, five, six times as many viewers. There's no mystery about why people are tuning out. Now, some in the sports world have tried to rescue the NBA from the consequences of its own politicizing, claiming that viewership is down because of other things like COVID, you know, for example. Yahoo Sports published an article yesterday, arguing that the ratings decline suffered by other professional sports leagues like the NFL and MLB prove that politics can't be the driving

factor. But other professional sports leagues like the NFL and MLB have also engaged in political sermonizing to one degree or another. If the NBA is being hit especially hard, it's because they've been especially loud while screeching from their soapbox. Besides, just ask the fans why they're turning away. They'll tell you. There was one poll done recently, has nearly 40% watching fewer games because of politicization. And that poll separately counts the fans who've switched off because of the NBA's dealings with China. So China hypocrisy and political posturing, which are two very interconnected issues, together account for almost 60% of fans.

These are not small numbers. And this is not a small problem for the NBA. Now, it's probably true that COVID isn't helping matters. The absence of fans does tend to make the games less exciting, even without all the social justice stuff. But COVID, the election, the riots, all of the other unpleasant and worrisome subjects dominating the news are major reasons why so many Americans would like to turn to sports for an escape.

And major reasons why we have little interest in our sports escapism being served to us with a side of left-wing moralizing. It's like going to Chucky Cheese as a child only to be told that you can't jump in the ball pit or go on the jungle gym until you complete your multiplication tables and finish a plate of Brussels sprouts. You know, Chucky cheese exists precisely to be a place where multiplication tables and Brussels sprouts don't exist. You have defeated the purpose by combining these two universes. Now granted, that may not be the best analogy because vegetables and mathematics are good for you, even if you don't like them. BLM talking points, on the other hand, promoted so relentlessly by the NBA, are not good or true or healthy or helpful in any way. It's just that when we turn on the news or we enter into a political debate with someone, we're prepared to encounter and engage with that kind of rhetoric.

They're part of the bargain. They should not be. Need not be part of the sports bargain, which makes our tolerance in that setting much lower. we would rather sit and watch the game, enjoy the sport for its own sake, focus on a fun and frivolous and pointless thing for a while, and that's it. And if that's too much to ask, so be it. We'll turn the TV off and turn our energies elsewhere. And, you know, it's probably for the best on second thought. So the NBA is really just canceled. As I said, I'm not doing it. They've just been canceled. And it, it's just been canceled. And it, it, it's, It honestly is like a trance because once you just say, okay, I don't want to watch this anymore. And then you look back and you think, why was I even watching it to begin with?

In what way is my life now without watching the NBA playoffs, especially, in what way has it been harmed? Am I worse off now without this in my life? No, I'm not. In fact, I just have more time to do other things. Of course, I end up wasting that time too, but still. I can waste it in other potentially more fruitful ways. So that's why the NBA is canceled.

And that's going to do it for us today. Thanks for watching, everybody. Thanks for listening. 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 Podcast, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, we're there. Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcast, 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, producer Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling. Our technical

producer is Austin Stevens, edited by Danny D'Amico, and our audio is mixed by Robin Fenderson. The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright Daily Wire 2020. Hey everyone, it's Andrew Claven, host of the Andrew Claven show. Watching the Senate confirmation hearings is like watching some cheap 1960s science fiction movie, Slamy Coney Barrett versus the stupid people. How stupid are our stupid Democrat senators? Stupid. And we'll take a look and answer all your questions in the mailbag on the Andrew Claven Show.