The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 990 - Democrats Vote To Redefine Marriage, Republicans Obediently Agree

Episode Date: July 20, 2022

Today on the Matt Walsh Show, top HHS official Rachel Levine appears on TV again this week to push castration and sterilization on kids. But instead of being a high ranking federal official, Levine should be in prison. Also, 47 Republicans get on board with the federal government redefining marriage. Many people on the Right have changed their minds on the marriage issue in recent years. But why? What compelling argument convinced them? And the heroic Squad, led by AOC, are arrested and frog marched in front of cameras with invisible handcuffs. A harrowing scene. Plus, CNN discovers something known as “summer,” and blames it on climate change.   Become a DailyWire+ member today to access my documentary “What Is A Woman?” and the entire content library: https://utm.io/ueMfc    Check out Morning Wire on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, DailyWire+, or wherever you listen to podcasts. — Today’s Sponsors:  40 Days for Life is one of the largest pro-life grassroots organizations in the world. “What to Say When: The Complete New Guide to Discussing Abortion” Available on Amazon OR at 40DaysforLife.com Charity Mobile sends 5% of your monthly plan price to the Pro-Life charity of your choice. Call at 1-877-474-3662 or chat online at Mention offer code: WALSH Epic Will is partnering with the DW to protect our staff and their families. Get 10% OFF Your Will! Use Code ‘WALSH’ at EpicWill.com 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, top HHS official Rachel Levine appears on TV yet again this week to push castration and sterilization on kids. But instead of being a high-ranking federal official, Levine should be in prison. We'll talk about why. Also, 47 Republicans get on board with the federal government redefining marriage. Many people on the right have changed their minds on the marriage issue in recent years. But why? What compelling argument to convince them? We'll try to figure that out.

And the heroic squad led by AOC are arrested and frog marched in front of cameras. with invisible handcuffs, a harrowing scene indeed. Plus, CNN discover something known as summer and blames it on climate change. All of that, and more today on the Matt Wall Show. The Supreme Court decision overturning row is a huge step in the right direction, and it's long overdue, obviously, but there's still a long way to go to rid our country of abortion

and give all unborn children the right to life that they're guaranteed by the Constitution. Did you know that if you're currently on a phone plan with one of the major carriers, you may be helping these left-leaning companies donate to pro-choice causes of candidates, or you may be paying for their employees' travel expenses to get abortions. Don't let abortionists use your money to fund policies you don't believe and switch to the pro-life pro-family cell phone company instead. CharityMobile sends 5% of your monthly plan price to any pro-life charity of your choice.

You don't have to compromise on values or services because Charity Mobile offers the latest 5G phones, no device or service contracts, great nationwide coverage, and exceptional live customer service base right here in the U.S. as well. The fight for the right to life continues, and pro-life causes need your continued support. You can help by simply switching your phone service over to Charity Mobile today. And you could do that easily call 1877-474-374-362 or chat with them online at Charitymobile.com. Mention offer code Walsh to redeem the free cell phone offer. That's CharityaMobile.com and mention offer code Walsh. The Biden regime is not competent in very many areas except one.

It is very good at embarrassing itself and by extension the rest of the country. This is its core competency, I would say. The dementia administration constantly finds new and creative avenues of mortification. It is historians agree, I think, the first White House in American history with an actual sexual fetish for humiliation. Actually, this White House has many fetishes, even more than it did when Clinton was in charge. And that was on full display and rather grotesque display, I would say, over the weekend, when administration officials attended a party at the home of a French diplomat. Two of the most prominent and publicized officials of the Biden administration were there,

and they took a photograph together, and that image has circulated rapidly online. In it, as you can see, Assistant Health Secretary, quote-unquote, Rachel Levine, and Department of Energy officials Sam Britton, both males, both in women's clothes, are there together, smiling for the camera. Britain, who I've introduced you to in the past, as an LGBT activist who identifies as gender fluid and also sometimes as trans, I guess, I think. He's also a drag queen who goes by the stage name Sister Radioactive and belongs to a drag group called The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, where all of the drag queens dress like demonic

sexualized nuns. And Britain has been very public about his sexuality, of course, which is how he got the job than Biden administration in the first place. And because of his thirst for public notice, we know, though we don't want to know, that along with being a gender fluid drag queen demon nun, he's also a dog fetishist who enjoys having sex with men dressed in leather dog outfits. He calls himself a pup handler and teaches classes on kink at universities. That is the career path that led directly to a position in a presidential administration. At one time, it would have led directly to an insane asylum.

Today, it takes you straight to the White House, though the distinction between the White House and the insane asylum is granted increasingly hard to discern. But Sam Brinton is merely a pervert and a weirdo. Levine is something even worse. At least Britain cannot use his position as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition in the Office of Nuclear Energy for the Department of Energy.

That's his whole title, to advocate for and push dog fetishism. I mean, he may yet make me eat my words on that. I'm sure he's looking for a way perhaps he'll find it. I'm not sure what the intersection is between spent nuclear waste disposal and being a dog fetishist, but I'm sure there's something there and he'll find it. Levin, on the other hand, as one of the highest ranking officials and certainly the most visible at the HHS, can actually, in a much more direct way, use his position to impose his life. lifestyle on the public and especially on children. That indeed is what he's trying to do. Like so many of his ilk, his primary goal in life is to justify himself and rationalize his life choices by

recruiting others to behave as he does. So he made headlines again this week while appearing on MSNBC with a message of empowerment, quote unquote, for children. Listen. I want to ask you also about transgender Americans because you're the first openly transgender official confirmed by the United States Senate. In a recent op-ed, you urge people to base medical decisions and public statements on real data and compassion rather than slander. And you spoke to trans youth in Florida recently. Tell us what you told them.

Well, you know, trans youth are vulnerable, and they suffer significant harassment and bullying sometimes at schools or in their community. They have more mental health issues, but there's nothing inherent with being transgender or gender-diverse. which would predisposed youth to depression or anxiety, it is that harassment and bullying. Now they're suffering politically motivated attacks through state actions against these vulnerable transgender youth. This is not based upon data. These actions are politically motivated. And so we really want to base our treatment and to affirm and to support and empower these youth, not to limit their participation in activities and sports, and even limit their ability to

get gender affirmation treatment in their state. Now, it really sounded like he said, we really want to debase our treatment, which is a Freudian slip, if I've ever heard one, and probably the first true thing he's said in decades, if accidentally, of course. His claim that the suicide rate among, quote, gender diverse youth is, and he says that it's, you It's entirely due to bullying. There's nothing inherent in these identities that would cause suicidal thoughts. That claim is totally baseless, of course, and contradicts the data at every turn.

The so-called gender diverse have sky-high rates of suicidality, no matter how affirmed they are by society. That's what the data actually says and has said in study after study after study, but Levine simply lies with abandon, disseminating propaganda, making wild and dangerously false claims constantly. and doing so behind the magical force field of his transgender identity. It is a force field that served him well. After all, even his critics rarely mention that Levine earned his promotion into the federal government after a disastrous tenure as Health Secretary of Pennsylvania. Like so many other health officials in blue states, he responded to COVID by making the crisis significantly worse every chance that he could.

instituting the same policy in Pennsylvania that Cuomo put in place in New York, Levine sent COVID-infected people into nursing homes, which led directly to many deaths, countless deaths. We'll never know how many, because during his federal confirmation hearing, it was revealed that much of the information and data related to his nursing home policy had gone missing. Oops, it's all gone. Can't find it.

In fact, at the time of the confirmation hearing, the death in case numbers for over one, 100 of Pennsylvania's nursing homes were missing from the record completely. But we do know at least one resident in an elder care facility in Pennsylvania who did not fall victim to Levine's murderous policy. And that would be his mother because Levine moved his mother out of the system right as he was moving COVID patients into it. Far for the course in Pennsylvania, though, after all, the governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Wolfe, shut down most businesses in the state in 2020 while allowing his own business that has his his name on it, a cabinet supply company called Wolf Home Product to stay open. It was granted the status of a life-sustaining essential business, because everyone knows that our lives depend on

high-quality cabinetry. Now, both Wolf and Levine should be in prison on charges of corruption, as well as for the mass murder of their state's elderly population. Instead, Wolf is still governor, and Levine is being rapidly promoted up the federal ranks. They both possess, obviously, the Democrat get out of jail free card. They have the letter D next to their names, which goes a long way. That's enough to shield Wolf from any accountability for his policies. But Levine can add the ultimate resume enhancer. I mean, 10 years ago, he was a 54-year-old white dude named Richard.

No victim points, no social credit, languishing all the way at the bottom. bottom of the victim hierarchy. But then he grew out his hair and took the name Rachel and everything changed. Four years later, he got his first job in government. Now he's in Washington, D.C., fighting to drug and castrate children. It's not exactly what we would call a classic success story, but it is a very modern one. Now, let's get to our five headlines. You know, as a parent, I know that one of the most important and sacred responsibilities that I have is to instill values, the right values, in my children. And we certainly, as we talk about all the time on this show, you know, you can't rely on anyone else to do. You certainly can't rely on the state.

But what if I or my wife were not around to raise my kids and instill those values? Well, I don't want the state deciding who that responsibility goes to. That's why having a will is so important. A will, it's not about you. It's about your loved ones. It's about the really hard decisions that need to be made if something were to happen to you. You need to lay out all the answers to questions like life support or pull the plug, buried or cremated. Do your parents get the kids, your in-laws, or maybe neither if they're all crazy? But here's the deal. The judge doesn't, who's deciding these cases, he's not going to know who your best friend is or who you trust to raise your kids. A will is something that could take as little as five minutes

to set up. And if you don't do it, you're acting selfishly, to be honest with you. So go to Epicwill.com, use promo code Walsh, and I'll even save you 10% at the same time. You can have a comprehensive will starting at $119. And if you don't have will, you're gift wrapping money to the state by letting the state use its will to decide everything for you and your family and your kids. You don't want that. Don't trust the state to make any decision for your family. Go to epicwill. com, use promo code Walsh, and get it done today. All right. A few more days out here in our undisclosed log cabin in the woods. It's been good. It's been refreshing. It's been educational, you know, for everyone here, especially for my producer, Sean,

who's sitting five feet away from me and can do nothing as I throw him under the bus here. He's more of a city slicker type, so not as accustomed to the rustic life. So yesterday we had all the kids together, and we were, you know, just hanging out and Sean tried to roast a marshmallow over a citronella candle. And, of course, we warned him it would infuse citronella flavors into the marshmallow. And it did, you know, so that's fine. It's a learning curve. Okay. We all have learning curves in life. And there could be worse ones out here in the woods, I think we can we can say. All right. We're all learning. We're all learning some difficult things.

some difficult things about the Republican Party, if you didn't already know this. The Daily Wire has the report. The U.S. House Representatives on Tuesday voted to pass a bill that would codify same-sex marriage. Lawmakers passed the Respect for Marriage Act. That's what they're calling it. We're going to respect marriage by destroying it. And it was passed 267 to 157 with 47 Republicans joining Democrats, including GOP leader, Congresswoman, Elise Stephanic, and National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Tom Emmer.

They were on board. CNN reports House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, quote, it is critical to ensure that federal law protects those whose constitutional rights might be threatened by Republican-controlled state legislatures. LGBTQ Americans and those in interracial marriages deserve to have certainty that they will continue to have their right to equal marriage recognized no matter where they live. The bill now moves to the Senate where at least 10 Republicans would need to join Democrats before reaching President Joe Biden's desk, and I see no reason why they couldn't get

10 Republicans or more. It would also legalize interracial marriage, even though the Supreme Court protected interracial marriage in a ruling back in the 1960s. So legalize something that's already completely legal in which no one in the country is trying to make illegal. So that's very important as well. C-SPAN Capital Hill producer Craig Kaplan reports the Biden administration's support for the bill, White House official said, no person should face discrimination because of who they are or whom they love, and every married couple in the U.S. deserves the security of knowing their marriage will be defended and respected. Now, on this interracial marriage bit, because, well, what does that have to do with so-called gay marriage? This is something that's a connection

that Democrats have been trying hard to make. Representative Jerry Nadler did this when he was speaking on the floor of the house, and he brought up interracial marriage as well. Let's listen to what he had to say. The substantive due process logic by which the court overthrew Roe v. Wade applies equally to Obergefell, to loving, to Lawrence, in other words, to the right to contraception, to the right to gay marriage, to the right to interracial marriage, for that matter. And Justice Thomas mentioned all that specifically. Yes, he said this case does involve that. We're not deciding that yet, which is what the portion of his concurrence that Mr. Johnson read, but read the rest of his concurrence, where he said specifically that we should

overrule or reconsider Obergefell and Lawrence, which is consensual, which is gay marriage, which is consensual sodomy. He didn't mention loving, though the, for some reason, which is interracial marriage, maybe the fact that he's into married. So is Senator McConnell? Maybe that had something to do with it, but the same logic applies there. Okay, so Nadler even says that there's that, that, uh, you know, what, Clarence Thomas, his, his, uh, his statements are being used as the basis for this law that they're trying to pass.

But he even says that Clarence Thomas never mentioned anything about interracial marriage. Of course he didn't. So no one is talking about interracial marriage. Interracial marriage has nothing to do with it because interracial marriage, and this is why there is, again, nobody in the country advocating for making interracial marriage illegal. And the reason is that interracial marriage does not create any problems for or pose any challenge to the definition of marriage. There's no definitional problem when it comes to interracial marriage, which is why nobody's talking about it. no one's making an issue out of it except for the Democrats. Now, they want to lump these things together because they are the ones who want to draw a correlation between interracial marriage and same-sex unions. They're the ones doing that. Nobody on the right is doing it.

Of course, many people on the right, as we just discussed, have just thrown their hands up on the marriage thing altogether. That's why 47 Republicans are now on board. And what they're on board with, okay, let's be clear about what they're on board with here. they're not on board with giving the issue back to the states, quote, unquote. That's not what we're talking about here. Or, you know, the common libertarian refrain of get the government out of marriage. That's not what they're doing.

They want the federal governments to redefine marriage from Washington, D.C., and impose that definition on all of the states and all of the people against their will. That's what Republicans are now getting behind. This is a position that would have been too radically far left for Barack Obama when he ran for office the first time in 2008. And this now is what Republicans are saying. One of those Republicans is Representative Nancy Mace. She says, this is what passes for conservatism in 2022. Okay, this is, this was her tweet.

If gay couples want to be as happily or miserably married as straight couples, more power to them. Trust me, I've tried it more than once. So I'm making a joke about her multiple divorces and then say, yeah, yeah, let's get on board with this radical far-left legislation that affects one of the fundamental building blocks of human civilization. By the way, Nancy Mace, I mean, it's kind of neither here nor there, but she's the politician who claimed a couple of years ago that she had been, her house had been targeted by Antifa. And Antifa, there had been all this graffiti and stuff at her house. And it was always kind of strange because you think, like, why would Antifa worry about Nancy Mace? She's the most, if you're on the left, she's the most non-threatening, she's on your side. So why would you care about her? And it was just, it was strange.

It seemed like a little bit of a potential Jesse Smolett thing, that Republicans don't do it very often. That's what it seemed like. And then she said that the police were looking into it. And we never heard anything about it again, you know, these Antifa, that showed up and they only vandalized her house, nobody else. Interesting. Now she's coming out in support of the federal government redefining marriage. Look, here's the problem with all this quote-unquote marriage equality stuff. And this is, again, all something that conservatives understood. Actually, everyone understood. Everyone in the world understood until Barack Obama and a bunch of other people suddenly discovered otherwise right around 2012 or so. And they never explained why.

And all of these people on the right and left who have changed their mind about something as fundamental and basic as marriage never really explain why. What is it that convinced you otherwise? You thought that marriage was our particular thing, right? And then you decided that it's not. And so why? What changed your mind? Just like all the people that decided that, oh, you know what? I think actually men can have babies.

Why did you decide that? What happened that made you decide? What did you discover? What can you tell me about? I'm very interested. When it comes to men having babies and marriage being redefined, I'm very interested in hearing about your Road to Damascus moment when you saw the light. Can you tell me about it? No one ever does. Can Nancy Mays tell me about it? She can't. Here's the problem as I see. And this is how I've

always seen it. And I haven't changed my mind because no one's convinced me to change my mind. I haven't heard any argument that I would find it all compelling. I've been shouted at a lot. I've been labeled names, I've been called a homophobe. Those aren't arguments, though. See, I don't find that persuasive. For a lot of people on the right, they do find that persuasive. All you have to do is shout at them, especially call them a homophobe. You know, there might be some labels that conservatives are comfortable ignoring, but many of them are not. You can get them with homophob. You call them a homophobe. They, oh, no, no, no, no, no, no, I'm not that. I don't find that convincing. See, I don't care if you call me that, or any other label. Doesn't matter to me.

So, as it seems to me, if two things are equal, they are the same. We heard about the demo, you know, we just heard that marriage is equal, the marriage equality. Our same-sex unions, the same as equal to heterosexual unions, is so-called gay marriage equal to what is now, deemed traditional marriage or biblical marriage, which I just call marriage. But are these two, whatever labels you put on them, are these two categories the same? Clearly not. Why aren't they the same? Well, because the union of a man and a woman has in principle the potential to create of itself a whole new life. The union of two people of the same gender does not have that potential, period. Okay. So these are two, not just different things.

radically, drastically, fundamentally, definitionally different things. The potential of the heterosexual union to create people is largely why marriage exists. It's why society has cherished and protected this institution because it has been understood that a union which might create a person has to be protected by a society. It needs to be stable. It needs to be permanent. It needs to be protected. It needs to be a faithful relationship.

It needs to be monogamous because marriage exists as the foundation of the family unit. And the family unit exists as the foundation of human society. And so that's why you take it, you give it a different name and you put it, you give it a status that no other kind of coupling possesses because none of them have that inherent power. If marriages are strong, families are strong. And if families are strong, society is strong. You know, we know that from history. We know that from our own experience in this society.

One of the most crucial functions of marriage is to create the basis upon which and the context within which children are created and born and raised. This is why society has a or had a vested interest in marriage and why the state has a vested interest in it. Because bad marriages or non-married procreative unions hurt everyone. They create poverty. they feed the prison system, they create drug abuse and crime and suicide and everything else. The union between two men cannot of itself create anything. Therefore, the state has no real interest in it. Society has no real interest in it.

And you'll notice that the people who tore down so-called traditional marriage, they never did offer a new definition of marriage. And they never explained what marriage's new purpose is. Like we had the definition before. You might not have agreed with it, right? You might not have agreed with what the definition of marriage was up until 15 seconds ago. But it had a definition. And we could speak coherently about the fundamental purpose of marriage.

I just did. it's easy to understand what I'm saying. Again, even if you don't agree with it, you can still understand what I'm trying to say because it's very clear. Union between a man and woman has, in principle, the potential to create human life. Serves as the foundation of the nuclear family,

therefore serves as the foundation of society. Okay, that's it. And then the other side comes along, as they always do, and they say, well, no, no, no, no, marriage isn't that. That's not what it is. It's something else. And then we say, okay, well, what is it then? What is, what's the new thing that it is?

You know, it's just, it's whatever. They never had a new definition. And as I said, they never had a new purpose either. I can tell you what the purpose of marriage was before. Foundation of the family foundation of human society. Pretty big purpose, pretty important purpose. What is it now? So the most we could ever, most we've ever been told is that, well, you know, it's when two people

love each other? What does that mean? And why do you need to be married to love each other? And if love is the one prerequisite here, then on what basis do you limit this union to two people or, uh, or to adults or whatever? You know, on what basis do you? Now you're, now you're drawing a bunch of other arbitrary lines. Whereas before, you didn't need any arbitrary lines anyway. There were lines, but they weren't arbitrary. There was a sensible boundary before. Now there's none. What are the new boundaries. And why are they there, not somewhere else? Marriage went from a coherent thing with a certain purpose and function in society to this vague and ambiguous thing defined only by love, which also they cannot define, nor can they explain why love should necessitate marriage

in the first place. And in spite of all of these problems, so many people on the right were still convinced. They came along and said, we don't want the old definition of marriage anymore. We don't know what the new definition is, and many people on the rights say, oh, okay, sounds good to me. I'm convinced by no argument. It's pathetic. All right. This is something. Let's move from that pathetic display to something more inspiring.

This is, I think, the most inspiring story of the week. Pro abortion protesters in D.C., out on the streets again. They promised a summer of rage, but that kind of fizzled out. Instead, they have settled on more of a summer of a summer of, mildly annoying people. And so that's what they've been doing. And they were doing that in D.C. They were out blocking traffic.

And sit in the street blocking traffic. And the protesters were given multiple warnings by police. Say, you got to get out of the street. We're going to have to arrest you. And they stayed there because they wanted to get arrested because it's all a publicity stunt. And so the police ended up arresting a bunch of people, including 17 House Democrats who were there for the pageant. And we're taking part in it. None of them were put in jail or anything like that.

None of them were charged with anything serious or anything at all. But they were arrested technically because that's what they wanted. That's why they were there. That's why they came out to participate in the stunt. And that's why video went viral of Representative Alexandria Ocasio Kortez, she of Big Booty Fame, being marched away in handcuffs. Let's watch this. If you haven't seen this footage yet, you have to see it.

So let's play it now. Okay, so you see her being marched away there by the cops. And she's in handcuffs. But actually the handcuffs are invisible. Okay, and then she raises her fist there. So she forgot that she was pretending to be in handcuffs. And she raised her fist. They said, oh, oops, sorry.

But, you know, so they're invisible handcuffs. And they also allow for full range of motion. That's possible. Now, some are looking at this footage and they're saying, the Empress has no handcuffs. But I look and say, wow, what an inspiration. Because listen, even if she isn't technically handcuffed, and we don't know that, because can you prove that she didn't have invisible handcuffs? Can you prove it? Do you have evidence that they have not invented invisible handcuffs and put up? You don't have that evidence. But even if she wasn't,

okay, even if she was, even if it is as it seems that she was pretending to be handcuffed, she is still handcuffed by the invisible restraints of systemic racism and the patriarchy and toxic masculinity. Okay. I think that's the message here. This was a symbolic gesture meant to communicate all of the many ways that she is oppressed by our society. And then you can also see it. There's a different video with Ilhan Omar where you see her getting, carted away as well. So you see, you see Alexandria Keza-Kortez. And then you see Ilhan Omar,

also with hands behind the back. Yep, there she is. She has not only invisible handcuffs, but an invisible cop also. That's an escorting her. An invisible cop is escorting her away in invisible hand restraints. These people will stop at nothing to keep the squad down. They're pulling out all the tricks, invisibility cloaks and everything. Now, the joke's on you. If you do think this was all a stunt, okay? If you're more of the cynical, pessimistic type and you think this is all a stunt, if you think that this was, that it didn't work, well, that's where the joke's on you, because they did this to get headlines exactly like this from ABC. It says, just in, representatives Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, and other House Democrats arrested in abortion rights protest at the Supreme

Court. And then we see the photo of them from the front, hands behind the back, no mention that they're to stand like that, that they're faking the handcuffs, no mention of that. So they got the photo up they wanted, and that's all that matters. Most people will never read far enough into it to find out that she faked it. Most people aren't on Twitter, so they're not going to see that Twitter was making fun of it for a day and having fun with it. So most people are going to see that. This is what most people will see. They'll see just that image.

Representative Ocaso Grettez, arrested at abortion, and they see her just standing there with hands behind the back. She got what she wanted out of it. just as most people probably still don't know that she was crying over an empty parking lot down at the border at the very beginning of her public career. It makes it easier to pull stunts like this when you have, you know, the media as your propaganda arm. All right, this is from New York Times. It says, with few able and fewer willing, U.S. military can't find recruits. It says, these are tough times for military recruiting almost across the board. The armed forces are experiencing large shortfalls and enlistments. this year, a deficit of thousands of entry-level troops that is on pace to be worse than any

since just after the Vietnam War. It threatens to throw a wrench into the military's machinery, leaving critical jobs unfulfilled in some platoons with too few people to function. COVID-19 is part of the problem. Lockdowns during the pandemic have limited recruiters' ability to forge bonds face-to-face with prospects, and the military's vaccine mandate has kept some would-be troops away. The current white-hot labor market, with many more jobs available than people to fill them, is also a factor. But longer, term demographic trends are also taking a toll. Toll less than one quarter of young American adults are physically fit to enlist and have no disqualifying criminal record, a proportion that has

shrunk steadily in recent years. And shifting attitudes toward military service mean that now only about one in ten young people say they would even consider it. Now, this article starts with a very real problem, which is that we can't find people to join the military. You can't recruit for your military, which is a problem, to say the least. Doesn't even begin to scratch the surface, though, of the root causes of the problem. Military recruitment is falling dramatically. Why? Well, yeah, the fact that people are fat and slow and diseased in this culture is certainly one aspect of this issue.

But there are other aspects also. Like, for example, patriotism is not being instilled in the younger generations or in anybody else at this point. In fact, it's quite the opposite. People are being taught to hate the country. Kids are being raised to believe that America is systemically racist, that it's the worst country in the world, that it's oppressive, and all these things. Well, the kids that are raised to believe that, they're not going to sign up to defend a country like this.

There's no sense of honor or sacrifice or selflessness being instilled in kids. These are not virtues. that anyone cares about anymore. Certainly the institutions that have been put in charge of raising and forming and shaping the next generation of Americans, they don't care about these things.

Honor, sacrifice, selflessness. When's the last time you've even heard anyone talk about those virtues? Honor and sacrifice. Honor especially. And what this all means is that the actual pool of applicants is extremely small.

But then the problem is even worse, than that. Because what about those candidates? Okay, what about the physically fit, tough, patriotic men who are willing to sacrifice? What about virtuous, physically fit patriotic men? Those are the sorts of people you need in the military. Despite anything we're told and all the girl power stuff, the people that you need in the military absolutely are physically fit, tough, patriotic men. That's who you need in your military. If you don't have those, then you don't have a military and you don't have a country pretty soon. But what about them? Well, those are exactly the sorts of people that are being alienated. These men, many of them don't want to join the military and be subjected to

anti-white indoctrination and discrimination, equity and diversity training, and all the rest of it. They don't want to go to some foreign hellhole and serve and die alongside a platoon of non-binary trans genderqueers, you know, like that's not what they're signing up for. It's just a fact. That's these men who we need in the military, that's not how you recruit them. That's not how you entice them to serve. We are alienating those men. And it's being done on purpose, by the way.

Okay. What else do we have? We have CNN with this headline. More than 100 million in the U.S. face excessive warning or heat-ins. advisories as a dangerous heat wave continues. More than 100 million. It says heat alerts cover more than 20 states today and Wednesday as well, across the southern plains and parts of the northeast.

And temperatures will soar above the century mark for 60 million people over the next week, all while similar heat wave is bringing all-time record temperatures to Western Europe. The Weather Prediction Center said, dangerous heat will continue to impact a large portion of the U.S. this week, with now more than 100 million people under excessive heat warnings or heat advisory. Excessive heat. Yeah, so CNN has discovered the sinister phenomenon known as summer. So it's July. Excessive heat.

I'm not really sure what that means. Excessive? I mean, first of all, isn't that sort of in the eye of the beholder here? Isn't that kind of a subjective? For me, excessive heat is over like 70. I consider that excessive. but it's just a strange way of phrasing it when you're talking about weather excessive like walking out your house.

This is like, hey, come on, come on weather. This is excessive. Take it easy a little bit. And the way that they're framing this talking about the number of people who are experiencing, quote, excessive heat, you know, that's clever. I mean, it's, you know, it's a clever trick that. will fool you if you're very stupid. So I guess it's not a very clever trick, but it is a trick. Because, of course, the more people you have in the world than the more people who are going to experience hot temperature. So you could say, certainly, that billions more people this year will

experience hot temperatures than experience hot temperatures 100 years ago or 1,000 years ago. That's obviously correct because there are a lot more people around to experience temperatures in the first place. But heat in the summer, all the same, whether there are 7 billion people on Earth or one person on Earth, heat in the summer is not shocking and, in fact, it'd be much more alarming if the summer came and went and no one ever broke a sweat. On the same topic here, Thomas Massey had a wake-up call yesterday for the climate alarmist. I thought he raised a good point here. We were talking yesterday about the give and take here. The climate alarmists, the environmentalists are always proposing this supposed green technology, so-called green technologies.

And then they propose them as if they're utopian and there's no downside. And this is going to save the planet and all upside, no downside kind of thing. But there are always, there's always a give and take. There's always a downside. There are always side effects. and Thomas Massey talks about some of those. Let's listen to this. The average household uses 17% of their electricity for air conditioning. And that would mean the average household uses 1,870 kilowatt hours per year for air conditioning.

If that average household plugged in electric cars, do you know how much more electricity they would use in comparison to the the air conditioning, that air conditions their whole house. No, but again, I would emphasize it will be less energy overall. Let me help you with that first before we go on, because the numbers are important. It would take four times as much electricity to charge the average household's cars as the average household uses on air conditioning. Do you think that could be, so if we reach the goal by 2030 that Biden has of a 50% adoption instead of 100% adoption, that means the average household would use twice as much electricity

charging one of their cars as they would use for all of the air conditioning that they use for the entire year. Yeah, it's a pretty good point, actually. You know, you switch over to electric cars. And this, by the way, was in a conversation with Pete Buttigieg, who has said many times, and he said during this hearing as well that the high gas price and everything is actually, it's great because it's an opportunity for everyone to switch over to electric cars, because that's something that's within the realm of possibility for average Americans, apparently. You know, the average working class American can just, because they can't pay for gas. And so a reasonable solution for them is to go out and buy very expensive, to go out and buy a Tesla.

That's Pete Buttigieg to, you know, working class family, three kids making $55,000 a year, can't afford $5 a gallon for gasoline. Well, you know what you can do? Just go buy a Tesla. Yeah, no price. See, that's what I did. Why can't you do that? But even if that were feasible, okay, even if it were possible, now you have the, a whole bunch of households, millions of households using a lot more electricity than they were in the past four times as much. And where does the electricity come from? Electricity is not magical. It comes most of it. Over 60% percent of the electricity in this country is generated by the dreaded fossil fuels, coal, natural gas, petroleum, and so on. So by switching over, everyone over to electric cars, you are still depending on fossil fuels. And if everyone is using electric guitars, you need much more electricity, then you're generating capacity for electricity needs to go up also by like 400%, which means you need a lot more of the fossil fuels. or if you're going to increase your electricity needs by 400% or more,

and not increase your generating capacity, that means that what do you have then? You have rationing. Then you say to each household, this is how much electricity you get to use up, and once you're done for the month, you're done. Now you have the basically rolling blackouts nationwide in perpetuity forever. And of course, the Democrats, they would hear this. And although they're not going to say it out loud, what they would say among themselves is, yeah, exactly.

That's exactly what we're going for. Energy rationing is the ultimate goal for them. You want to talk about being able to control and manipulate people. I mean, you control their energy consumption, then you control them. Because life, modern society is powered by energy. Control that, you control everything. That's the ultimate goal. All right, let's get to the comment section.

First comment says, Matt, if you had a time machine, would you rather go back in time to see how it used to be or forward to see how it will be? Love your work. You know, honestly, if I had a time machine, I would go, if I would just use it to drive to the supermarket, you know, if it was like that kind of, if it was a back-to-the-future-type vehicle,

I would just use, I would stay right here in modern times. I wouldn't go anywhere with it. And not because everything is perfect in modern times. Not at all. We have a lot of problems, which I spend every single show talking about. But I still don't have any great desire to live 100 years ago. Nor do I have any great desire to just like leapfrog all the way into the abyss of our dystopian future and live there. So I think I'm just going to stay here and kind of ride it out and go where it takes me, I think.

Cool Papa J Magic says, I admit I get pretty annoyed when people say things like, man, look at how crazy everybody is on both sides. No, there's no comparison between far left or far right. I'm so tired of this rational centrist act. This is not a game of stay in the middle. This is a battle of good and evil. Be on the side of good because compromise with evil is evil in itself. Couldn't have said it better myself.

The problem on the right is not that people are too radical or too far right, you know, have taken their, what have taken the conservative principles too far? Is that the issue that we have on the right? No. I mean, what do we just talk about a few minutes ago? 47 Republicans getting on board with the federal government. Wanting to give it the power, not just to the federal government in general, which is bad enough. They want to give the power to Joe Biden to come up with a definition of marriage and impose it on.

they want to give the power to the federal government, right? Run by Joe Biden to impose a definition, a redefinition of marriage on the entire country. So that's what's happening on the right. That's what's happening among conservatives. So I would certainly agree with you. The problem is not radicalism on the right. Far from it.

The fish says, S is for shut the hell up, you damned cry babies. We need that in the merch shop for sure. I can see that. We workshop that a little bit. Yeah, can we take S's for shut the hell up, you damn cry babies. If you could do it in like the Sesame Street style, I don't know if that might be a copyright issue. We could talk about that. I always appreciate suggestions for the

merch store and many times. This is like really a, this is an effort. This is kind of a crowdsource effort with the merch store. Lying Cat says, oh, and does the definition for male have the same nonsense definition as female now? Wouldn't that end up in a circular definition? Yeah, it does. So we talked about yesterday, trans activist succeeded finally in pushing for a redefinition of female in the dictionary. And so now it says the gender identity opposite of male. What's the definition of male? Well, yeah, the definition of male now is the gender identity is the identity opposite of female. Now, the interesting thing is that actually opposite of male is an essential part of the definition of female. It's good to include that. If you want to have a more complete definition

of female, that should be in there because it denotes that there are only two options, which is important. And it also shows that in some ways, each sex is defined by the fact that it is not the other sex. So it shows kind of the complementary nature of the sexes, and it also shows that the sexes are, in fact, binary. So that's an important part of the definition. It can't be the the only part of the definition, though. Obviously. It can't be the only thing that defines it, because if it does, then we have no idea what this thing even is. And to see how that's the guess, I mean, just imagine, if I said, if I was using the word hugabaloo, and you said, what's a hugabaloo? And I said, well, it's the opposite of a bugabaloo. And he said, well, what's a bugabaloo?

That's the opposite of a hugabaloo. I have no idea what these words means. It's just nonsense now, which is what they've done with male and female. And Jordan says, does art even exist on the right, don't the constricting principles of conservatism preclude any real artistic expression? Who are the biggest right-wing artists, physical, musical, theatrical, etc., of the last decade, or the last century? Well, your point is partially valid. It's hard to go back a century for this question as the delineation between right and left, according to modern standards anyway, gets more complicated. When you're applying, you know, are modern ideas of right versus left a century ago, becomes more difficult. But certainly, in current times,

there's no doubt that all of the arts are dominated by the left. And the artistic output in our country has generally gotten weaker over time, partly for the reason I described yesterday. For whatever reason, great art often seems to be born partly from pain and frustration, people figuring out how to work both within boundaries and break them. But our artists today are all fat and comfortable. they've achieved total cultural victory. They're now living life as the victor,

and it doesn't make for an interesting art. But your statement that being on the right precludes artistic expression is obviously not true. Okay? I mean, just think about the great... How many examples from history do you really need? I mean, think about the great Renaissance artists, right? Would they count, by our definition today,

Would they be considered left-wing liberals? You know, if you could go back in time and talk to Michelangelo, would you think he qualify as a leftist by our standards today? Now, there may not be much artistic expression on the right today. We're trying to change some of that here at Daily Wire, making films and so on, but there isn't much of it. Like, that's a problem that we've identified, which is why we're doing what we're doing. But it doesn't necessarily have to be this way.

because what's really needed to create great art is beauty and truth. Art is a reflection of an expression of beauty and truth. Which isn't to say that all art has to be happy. It doesn't mean that art can't be sad and difficult and painful and all that, but it must be beautiful to really count as art, to be art. That's what art is. And in fact, this makes conservatives the most naturally equipped to create great art even if in this culture they don't.

The left is hamstrung by what we discussed, by how fat and comfortable they are, but also even more fundamentally by the fact that on the left, they reject beauty, they hate it, they worship ugliness, and because of that, they can't create great art. So the left can't create great art.

The right right now is, for the most part, not even trying, and so what do you end up with? You just end up with no real art at all. You end up with Marvel movies and ugly, you know, architecture and people vomiting onto a canvas and calling it a, you know, a painting. Like that's what you end up with. Well, a couple of notes I want to need to tell you about. One is that over at the DailyWire, the DailyWire.com, you can go to the store section, go to shop, or you just go to dailywire.com slash shop. Go to the Matt Wall store.

I'm always telling you what's going on to the store because we always have new things we add to it. and many exciting new additions. So here's the latest. We have our, finally, our definition of a woman shirt, which is adult, human, female. And especially with, you know, we can't rely on Miriam Webster anymore. We can't rely on the dictionary anymore

to define these words. And so that's why you have to put it, just emblazoned it on a shirt and wear it around and preach this, the gospel of the fact that words have meanings everywhere you go. So go to Dailywire.com. slash shop, go to the Matt Walsh store and get your definition of a woman shirt today. And I also have to note, because if I don't, I'll hear about it, that this idea for the

shirt came from my wife. My wife was the one who came up with this and said, we need to have this in the store. So this is her. All the proceeds go to her. Actually, they don't. They go to the Daily Wire. But still, she gets the credit. Also, in case you haven't heard already, last month, we launched DailyWire Plus. It's our ever-expanding multimedia universe. And the reason the DailyWire app on your phone now looks a little bit different is because of this, Daily Wire Plus. Daily Wire Plus is everything you love about the DeliW Plus, the new home of Jordan Peterson, the new home of Prager You, DW movies, and coming soon animated and live action content for kids. It's where you'll find fearless documentaries like My Brilliant Gripping and Necessary Film.

What is a Woman? I say necessary because even amongst our supposedly elite academic institutions, there's considerable confusion on this issue, evidenced by the University of Pennsylvania nominating former men swimmer and current trans swimmer Leah Thomas for NCAA woman of the year. In fact, he's former and current

men swimmer, even if they call him a woman now. And while many are quick to endorse Leah for this prestigious award in just his fourth year of womanhood, there are others who are less than impressed by Leah's achievements, including one of Leah's own teammates who I interviewed in my film. There's a reason what is a woman is currently one of the most streamed

and talked about films of the summer, and now's your chance to see why. Watch what is a woman by becoming a DailyWire Plus member and you can get 35% off when you sign up right now. It's time to build the future you want to see. We need your help to do it. Become a member at DailyWireplus.com today. Now let's get to our daily cancellation. Although virtual reality has always been featured prominently in fictional versions of our dystopian future, for a while it seemed like it wasn't really going to catch on in the real world. Sort of like how all the sci-fi writers in the mid-20th century universally agreed that we'd have flying cars by the early 21st century. And yet here we are in the actual 21st century.

And the technology exists technically. And there are companies that are actually trying to build these contraptions, flying cars. But most of us have come to realize that having everybody fly around in their own personal aircraft would be a disaster. I mean, most drivers can barely manage to pilot their vehicles on the ground. it's horrified to think about what would happen if these drivers had access to the sky. I guess those who made these predictions about the future also assumed that the average driver would have mastered the fundamentals of using a steering wheel by now, but that has not been the case.

And so flying cars have not taken off figuratively or literally and probably never will. And if they do take off, most of them will certainly crash and burn about 45 seconds later. I had always hoped that virtual reality would suffer the same failure to launch. And I felt heartened in recent months as Mark Zuckerberg unveiled his metaverse, which is his virtual reality vision. And I was encouraged to see how boring and dull it is. As we talked about on the show, Zuckerberg's great vision is to create an immersive internet experience where people can enter inside it, like the Matrix, crossing through a portal into a limitless 3D virtual reality world where they can have meetings and conference calls. Zuckerberg's cyber universe is considerably more boring than the regular universe. And this is what happens when you put like Spock in charge of designing our VR utopia.

But I've probably taken too much solace in this. The fact is that there are other VR platforms aside from the hellish corporate seminar universe that Zuckerberg is creating. And VR is, like it or not, catching on. There are currently about 50 million VR users in America today. The whole industry is worth about $8 billion. projected to be to grow to nearly 30 billion in the next five years or so. More importantly, the most powerful corporations in the world, companies that have literally made a science out of understanding and predicting and manipulating

our behavior, they are investing more and more into VR technologies. We already know about what Zuckerberg and Facebook are up to. Apple has its own design. So does Microsoft and Google. These companies want a future where we are all wearing their devices. vices on our heads blocking out the entire physical world from our view and living our lives entirely within the alternate reality that they create for us. It's not hard to see why they find that so appealing. The entertainment industry is buying in now too. HBO Max will soon release

what is what is being called a groundbreaking documentary. And it's groundbreaking because it is the first film made entirely in virtual reality. The website VR Scout has more. It says shot during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, we met in virtual reality as an upcoming documentary from the director hunting that follows the lives of five specific individuals using VR chat and modern VR technology to connect with others in a variety of unique ways.

The 90-minute film was shot entirely in VR at no point do we learn the real-world identities of its subjects, says the director, the film presents an immersive journey through the world and different VR chat communities. Each individual that you meet shares really unique experiences on VR and each engages with their community in different ways for them. VR means very different things. Through their eyes, the film presents a very broad portrait on how

social VR can affect our emotional and social relationships with each other, but also within ourselves. The trailer was released a few days ago. Here's a peek at that. Making friends here is sometimes what saves people's lives. Or what gets him up out of bed in the morning. I'm a teacher for helping hands, a sign language community here. in VR chat and rested under our elbow and we're gonna go like this. Christmas. Slow, quick, quick, slow.

If I had confidence that I could teach dance as a living in VR, I totally would do exactly that. With a long-distance relationship, having VR is a game changer. We are 5,000 miles apart, but we're gonna try our best to make it work. This year has been really hard. The thing that has kept me sane has been VR and the VR community. I would not have weathered this without you guys.

Three, two, one, you can be who you've always wanted to be, and you can, in a way, start over. We can come together and support each other. This community means a lot to me, and I really want them to know that they're loved. It's been a year since I've seen Kevin's IRL body. Sounds funny.

Well, isn't that beautiful? People connecting, forming communities, falling in love. You can start over, says one of the VR fans. You can be reborn. You can be whoever you want to be, provided that you want to be a weird, creepy anime avatar. Like, if you want to be that, you can be that. This all sounds like a utopia with no downside at all, right? So what's the problem? Well, there are many problems, it turns out. We've talked about some of them before, but let's review. first of all, the documentary is filmed in the platform, on the platform, VR chat. But based on the trailer, it seems to give a rather glossy and carefully curated view of this VR chat platform.

An article on the site Engadget gives the other side of the VR chat story. Headline is, Investigation of VR chat finds rampant child grooming and other safety issues. They report, quote, one of the more popular VR apps you can download through Steam and meta's Oculus Quest store has a child safety problem. VR chat styles as the future of social virtual reality. Our vision for VR chat is to enable everybody to create and share their own social virtual worlds, the games developer says on its Steam store page. With some understanding of unity, players can create their own social spaces and avatars. That means you can see a lot

of creativity on display in VR chat, but there's also a dark side to it as the BBC found out. Posing as a 13-year-old girl, BBC researcher Jess Sherwood said she entered a virtual strip club where she saw adult men chase a child while telling them to remove their clothes. In many of the rooms Sherwood visited, she frequently saw condoms and sex toys on display, and on one occasion even saw a group of adult men and minors simulating group sex. She also saw instances of grooming. Well, it turns out that virtual reality is, even in its fetal stages, infested by perverts and pedophiles, of course. No surprise.

Just look at what happened in our real-life cities when we told everyone to wear a mask. Anonymity removes accountability and removes shame, which invites chaos. Now, put people in virtual world with full anonymity, an entirely new and fake identity, and also empower them with the false notion that nothing is real in cyberspace, as if the human beings they're interacting with don't even count as human beings. Tell them that the normal rules of morality and decency no longer apply, and suddenly it becomes like the purge every day, all day. except more sexual and with a lot more child molesters.

This is just one of the problems with virtual reality. The fact that the internet is a hellish place where people act monstrous towards each other because they feel empowered to do so. But that's not the full indictment. I mean, in theory, putting all the sex predators aside for a moment, which is very hard to do when you're talking about anything related to the internet. But putting that aside, there's nothing wrong with VR in small doses as a fun, gimmicky little diversion. but we know that people in our culture don't engage in escapism entertainment in small doses.

They turn it into a lifestyle. That's why even in the trailer for the documentary, we begin with some users discussing practical applications for the technology, teaching sign language, for instance, seems like a, okay, yeah, that's one area where it seems like that would be, that would make sense. But very quickly, we start hearing how VR is really an opportunity to form loving bonds and find community and reinvent yourself and restart your life and find meaning and everything else. So the pipeline from escapism entertainment to lifestyle choice is short, and the transition from one to the other happens at near lightning speed. We are a culture obsessed with escaping.

VR offers the most complete form of escape short of suicide. The user can block the entire physical world from view, enter into the internet, recreate themselves according to their own vision, Or rather, according to the vision of Apple or Microsoft or Facebook, which they will be tricked into thinking is their own vision. This grants almost unlimited power to these tech giants, allowing them to control, manipulate, track, and monetize your every movement, literally. I mean, think about for a second what they do on the social media platforms, the way they're able to predict your behavior, just based on what you search for and, you know, the kinds of posts you click on and everything. That's why people often think when they see ads pop up and they think, oh, the phone's listening to me. No, it's not listening to you. It's even worse than that.

They've built technology that can just predict what you are going to want. They can predict the kind of ad. Like you were just talking about something you want to buy. You've never searched for it before. And then the ad pops up. No, the phone didn't hear you say that. It just predicted based on your behavior that you would want a product like that. And then you did, which is a lot scarier.

Now give them that kind of predictive capability when they can also track your movements, everything. What happens then? But worse, it further severs you from your physical existence and your actual true physical self. Now, it sounds like sort of new age clap trap to say that people need to be reconnected with themselves, you know, find themselves. And it is new age clap trap. But in this case, the new age clap trap is inadvertently true. As human beings in modern culture, you know, we find. various and ever more elaborate ways of hiding from ourselves, shrinking away from our actual

lives and bodies. And as that happens, the job of rescuing society from collapse and despair revolves more and more around encouraging people to live authentically. Be yourself. Not in the bumper stick or slogan kind of way, but in a deeper, more urgent sense. Inhabit your own life. Be yourself, yourself. Live in and interact with and see the world, a physical world. Accept it and understand it and appreciate it for what it is. These days, we're always outlooking for any kind of reality, but our actual reality. And that's why our actual reality never improves. And that's why virtual reality is, once again, today, canceled.

And we'll leave it there for today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Have a great day. Godspeed. Well, 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. Also, tell your friends to subscribe as well.

We're available on Apple Podcast, Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts, were there. Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire Podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro show, Michael Null's show, the Andrew Claven Show. Thanks for listening. The Matt Wall Show is produced by Sean Hampton, executive producer, Jeremy Boring. Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, production manager Pavel Vodowsky. Our associate producer is McKenna Waters. The show is edited by Jeff Tomlin. Our audio is mixed by Mike Coromina. Hair and makeup is done by Cherokee Hart. The Matt Wall Show is a Daily Wire production, copyright DailyWire 2020. Hey there, this is John Bickley, Daily Wire editor-in-chief and co-host of Morning Wire.

On today's episode, an historic shift is taking place among voters about which party they trust more with education. Texans are asked to conserve energy and water amid energy grid and drought struggles, and L.A. County takes steps to remove its tough-on-crime sheriff. Join us and get the facts first on the news you need to know with our show, Morningwire.