Ep. 1553 - Exposing The Coordinated Terror Campaign Against Elon Musk And Tesla

Today on the Matt Wall Show, there is a coordinated campaign of terrorism against Elon Musk and Tesla.

The media won't tell you about it, so we will talk about it today.

Also, Trump launches an attack on one of the most conservative members of Congress, Thomas Massey.

Why is he doing this, and is this a good political strategy? We'll talk about it.

A speaker at a protest in D.C. tries to turn the what-is-a-woman question back around on conservatives.

It doesn't work well for him, and a viral clip exposes a major problem for the left,

along with all the other words they can't define. They also can't define America.
We'll talk about all that and

more today on The Matt Walsh Show. You know what's really fascinating? When your metabolism is working properly, you feel the benefits in literally every aspect of your life.
I've discovered an incredible tool that gives me insights to create a healthy metabolism for my body. It's called Lumen.
Lumen is the world's first handheld metabolic coach. It measures your metabolism through your breath, and the app tells you if you're burning fat or carbs.
It then provides personalized guidance to improve your nutrition, workout, sleep, and even stress management. Using it couldn't be simpler.
I breathe into my Lumen first thing in the morning to understand my metabolism and get a personalized nutrition plan for the day. I can also check before and after workouts and meals to know exactly what's happening in my body in real time.
Here's why this matters. Your metabolism is your body's engine.
It's how your body turns food into fuel. When it's optimized, you'll experience better energy levels, improve fitness results, and even better sleep.
Lumen gives you all the recommendations you need to improve your metabolic health, helping you to make informed decisions about your nutrition and your lifestyle. Take the next step to improve your health.
Go to lumen.me slash walsh to get 20% off your lumen. That's l-u-m-e-n dot me slash walsh for 20% off your purchase.
Thank you, Lumen, for sponsoring this episode. One of the hardest things to do, especially when you've got a million other things going on in your life, is to think about the political tactics of people that you don't agree with.
If you're a conservative with a full-time job, it's hard enough to keep track of what Republican politicians are saying and what policies they're implementing. It's even harder to track what's going on with the other side, especially since, if we're being honest, we usually don't want to think about it.
But there's a significant change in tactics that's taken place recently on the left in this country that, at this point, cannot be ignored. We've known for a while that the left is now once again openly celebrating political violence.
That's been obvious since the BLM era and before. What's changing more recently is that the left is becoming far more targeted in its attacks.
Instead of torching random car lots in Kenosha and shooting security guards in St. Louis to demonstrate their solidarity with George Floyd, leftists are now becoming more specific, if not necessarily discerning, in their attacks.
Like all terrorists, they're carefully choosing their victims to maximize political impact. They tried to assassinate Trump twice, as we all remember.
But now that Trump, as president, has the full protection of the Secret Service, what good it did him the first time around, still they're unleashing targeted violent attacks on people that they perceive to be, if not Trump himself, supporters of Trump or enemies of their ideology at least. That started with the murder of the United Healthcare CEO.
But as we predicted, it's not stopping there. We're entering a potentially long-lasting phase of deliberate, targeted left-wing terrorism in this country, like the weather underground, but on steroids.
This is a change that is not happening by accident, obviously. In some cases, it's coordinated and very well-funded.
But I want to start by highlighting exactly what's happening, because for the most part, the national news media is not doing so. And what's happening is this.
All across the country, Kamala Harris voters have made the conscious decision to attack anyone who owns a Tesla or who works at Tesla. And I'm not talking about one or two people here.
We're not talking about just one or two incidents across the country. We're talking about mobs of Democrats who are assaulting people in public because of their perceived political views.
And they're perceiving those political views just based on the fact that these people own a Tesla. You may have seen the footage of shootings, fire bombings, and riots that have taken place at Tesla stores all over the country.
I'll get to that in a second. But some of the most remarkable footage in this respect comes from New Orleans this past Mardi Gras weekend.
And as part of the Orpheus parade, five Tesla Cybertrucks were carrying passengers through uptown New Orleans. And as the vehicles passed for several miles, onlookers pelted the trucks with objects they found on the street, everything from beads to road barriers.

And at one point, a man charged the trucks and began punching the glass, which he ultimately shattered. He also threw an object at one of the passengers after he gained access to the back of

the vehicle. The footage from this convoy of Cybertrucks, it's truly incredible to watch.

It's like something out of a foreign country. Here's some of it as recorded by the camera on one of the trucks.

Watch.

What's that?

Is it on?

You want to get off the rock set?

Yes.

We'll be get off. We're getting beat to s*** by certain people throwing stuff, jumping on the car, kicking the car, hitting the car.
The other three cars in the convoy are off. On the next slide right there, you'll see a sergeant.
Oh, the s*** is playing, but apparently there were no arrests made. They sat by doing nothing as the mob inflicted thousands of dollars worth of property damage solely because of the politics of the CEO of the company that made those trucks, which, again, does not even necessarily reflect the people that are driving the trucks, obviously, you would think.
As you might have seen at one point in the footage, a mother encouraged her young child to join in with the mob and pummel the truck. And here's what one of the vehicles looked like afterwards.
I'm going to play some more footage from this parade, this time from the mob's perspective. And as you watch this, listen to the glee in their voices as they throw

objects at people inside the Cybertrucks. Then ask yourself, when was the last time a mob of

right-wing protesters decided to team up and attack somebody solely because that person had purchased

a product they don't like. Has it ever happened in the history of the country? I mean, as critical

as we were about, say, Bud Light, did any mob of conservatives ever chase somebody down and pummel

them for ordering a Bud Light at a bar? I don't think so. But that's basically what happened in

New Orleans just a few days ago. Watch.
Why is everyone doing it?

Oh, yes, I love you.

She's out of your beat.

Wait, I love New Orleans. You can see the cops standing right there.

You have the female cops standing right there.

I'm pretty sure throwing objects at a car is illegal.

I don't think that that, I think that's against the law.

I think there are like several laws you're breaking when you do that.

No arrests.

No one even say, no cops even, hey, guys, knock it off. Now, beginning with this footage, not because it's the most extreme example of violence I could find.
We'll get to that. But because it illustrates how widespread this mob-like mentality has become on the left.
It's not just a handful of left-wing NGOs who are pushing this, although that's also certainly happening. In reality, we're talking about hundreds, if not thousands of people who

are willing to make an American city feel like Fallujah for people who happen to be inside a

truck they don't like. Not even a truck they don't like, but a truck that was made by someone they

don't like. And of course, this footage received thousands of positive upvotes on Reddit, which has

become a central breeding ground for organizing and promoting left-wing terrorism like this.

Y'all see what happens. And of course, this footage received thousands of positive upvotes on Reddit, which has become a central breeding ground for organizing and promoting left-wing terrorism like this.
You also find a lot of support on Reddit for the 41-year-old man who allegedly just threw Molotov cocktails at a Tesla location in Oregon before returning shortly afterwards to open fire on the business with an assault rifle. Watch.
41-year-old Adam Lansky Tuesday saying they've linked him to two separate incidents at the Salem Tesla dealership. The first happened on January 20th when authorities say someone threw Molotov cocktails at the dealership.
Here you can see a suspect lighting an incendiary device in these new surveillance images. That explosion eventually causing all of this damage.
Then a month later, on February 19th, documents show someone shot at the building and a vehicle, leaving behind even more damage. Authorities say the suspect used an AR-15-style rifle with a suppressor.
Investigators say Lansky is the suspect captured on surveillance video throwing the explosive devices in January and his car could be seen parked near the dealership during the second attack in February, linking him to both incidents. Now, Andy Ngo has reported that Adam Lansky, the man accused of committing these attacks, is a Portland trans activist who uses the alias Allison Tesla in his activism and in his pornography career, unfortunately.
Meanwhile, other trans activists, another trans activist, Justin Thomas Nelson, aka Lucy Grace Nelson, is accused of repeatedly attacking another Tesla dealership in Loveland, Colorado. Justin Nelson allegedly spray painted the words Nazi cars on some of the vehicles and then returned days later with, again, Molotov cocktails before he was arrested.
So he was booked and then let out on bond, and then he attacked the same Tesla location again. Of course, local news reports refer to Justin as a woman because even when trans-identifying males are allegedly committing acts of arson, we have to respect their false identities, apparently.
Odds are, if you get your news from the mainstream press, you probably were not aware of any or most of this. You didn't know that two trans-identifying Antifa activists are accused of attempting to firebomb Tesla dealerships in just the past month.
And for that matter, you certainly weren't aware that a trans-identifying suspect named Ryan Michael English, otherwise known as Riley English, was arrested just a month ago after arriving in D.C. with, again, Molotov cocktails with the intention of assassinating members of Trump's cabinet.
And that's according to court documents which state that Ryan has confessed to that crime. So this is not just leftists attacking people, but it's very often trans-leftists.
So that's an awful lot of violence that's coming from a small subset of the population in a very short period of time. It's enough to make you wonder if men who pretend to be women might not be the most mentally stable individuals.
And as these are just the suspects we know about, just a day after the FBI identified the suspect in the first attack on the Tesla store in Oregon, there was another shooting at a different Tesla location near Portland. Watch.
Police taped bullet holes and shattered glass. Crews spent the day cleaning up the Tesla dealership after investigators say someone shot it up overnight Thursday, causing tens of thousands of dollars in damage.
When employees showed up to work this morning, that's when they discovered the damage. Tigard police say someone fired at least seven shots, damaging three cars and shattering windows.
Fortunately, it happened overnight when employees were gone. I think the concerning thing for the employees is that it happened at all, and that one of those shots went into an office and into a computer monitor.
Ultimately, we're just thankful that nobody was hurt. These attacks are not just happening on the west coast, of course.
In Massachusetts, someone set fire to several Tesla supercharger locations, which Tesla owners use to charge their vehicles away from home. They're like gas stations for electric vehicles.
Listen. Each charger charred in various shades of black.
Evidence of the fire that broke out in this Littleton parking lot last night. And the fire chief says these flames were no accident.
At this point, it does appear that it was a set fire. Around 1 a.m., firefighters were called to Constitution Ave and found seven Tesla charging stations up in flames.
They burned for nearly an hour

until electricity was finally cut to the units,

a challenge for firefighters.

The electricity is one of our bigger issues

that we're dealing with in making sure

that not only the public, but the firefighters are safe.

So we kept our distance

from the charged electrical equipment.

And although investigators won't say

what evidence was left behind,

they do say it suggests arson.

It's suspicious based on the evidence

that was found on scene. Going back to the Bud Light analogy, can you imagine, can you imagine if during the Bud Light boycott, if even one Bud Light warehouse had been vandalized by just one incident.
Or can you imagine even one person drinking a Bud Light had something thrown at them by an angry conservative? One incident like that, just one. And I mean, the FBI would have been knocking on my door as one of the people leading the boycott.
Like there would have been FBI investigations, mass media hysteria. Meanwhile, you have these Tesla locations across the country that are being set on fire.
And the local media will report it as isolated incidents, but there's nobody in corporate media saying, hey, look what's going on here. There's a campaign underway here.
So within about 48 hours, by the way, Tesla had that location that we just saw up and running again. So they were able to recover quickly from this particular act of vandalism, which every sane person would object to.
But if you go on the Boston subreddit, you'll find that, which is not a place for sane people, you'll find they don't object to this arson attack at all. Here's one post on the Boston subreddit, for example.
As you can see, they're sarcastically saying that weather probably caused the blaze and that it's no big deal. Thousands of people are upvoting posts like this.
There's similar enthusiasm in New York where protesters were just removed after attempting to shut down a Tesla store there. And those are protests, according to Elon Musk, that involved at least in part organizations that have received substantial funding from George Soros' nonprofits over the years.
But regardless of Soros' culpability, there's really no other way to interpret what's happening here. We are witnessing a campaign of terrorism by the left, which is openly being celebrated, if not coordinated, by thousands of other leftists using platforms like Reddit.
And it's leading everyday people to physically assault Tesla owners at every opportunity. So this is footage from New York, for example.
We don't have sound for this one. So in case you can't see it, it's some guy running alongside a cyber truck, punching it repeatedly, and giving the middle finger to the occupants.
And then at the end of the footage, a police car appears in frame, and of course the officer does absolutely nothing. These kinds of attacks are becoming so common now that it's impossible to keep up with all of them.
Late Sunday, the reporter Jonathan Cho uploaded this footage of Cybertrucks on fire in Seattle in yet another suspected arson attack. Oh my gosh, a Tesla cyber truck is on fire.

All right.

There's a fleet of cyber trucks right now.

Unbelievable.

Seattle fire on the scene.

Now this probably goes without saying,

but no matter how hard you look,

you will not find a single Democrat Party politician who is willing to condemn any of this. Not a single one.
Not one. Not a single one.
The party of democracy is completely silent as left-wing terrorists commit acts of political violence all over the country for the express purpose of intimidating Elon Musk and anyone who dared to vote for Donald Trump. And we all know why that is, because they all endorse it.
The Democrat Party and the media outlets they effectively control have no problem with destroying the property of anyone they believe is a conservative. We know that.
We know they don't respect property rights or human rights in general. We saw how they reacted when entire city blocks were being burned down.
So, you know, a Tesla dealership is nothing to them. They also don't mind destroying Tesla, one of the most important companies in the United States, which employs more than 100,000 people in the process of all this.
And these are people who are not interested in progress or the advancement of human civilization. They are the enemies of both.
And as if to prove that point, MSNBC anchors recently celebrated the explosion of SpaceX's Starship during a recent test launch. And this is a test launch that, in case you missed it, included the catch of the booster rocket, which is one of the most remarkable technological achievements of all time.
Being able to catch these rockets out of the air is one of the most significant scientific advancements anyone has ever achieved in the entire history of humanity. But over at MSNBC, they don't even mention the booster catch, of course.
Instead, they burst out into song because the Starship itself had exploded. Watch.
On Musk, on Thursday, a SpaceX Starship rocket exploded just minutes into its test flight.

FAA temporarily stopped air traffic around Miami, Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, and Orlando.

It is the second consecutive Starship test flight from Elon Musk's company to end with destruction.

All I could think about was, oh, I can't think.

No, please don't.

That's good. That's good.
We got it. We understand how painful that was for y'all out there.
My suggestion for Elon, his response to all of this was rockets are hard. And Mr.
Musk, if they're so hard, why don't you go back to your day job and work that out and leave those of us who do government to do government? Because you can't do both. And clearly you're failing right now at both.
Your rockets are blowing up and the government's blowing up. So I suggest you concentrate on the one thing you think you know more about and do that and leave the rest to those of us who know a little bit of how to provide services to people who need them and make the government function.
Did you guys see the tweet from Representative Jasmine Crockett about this? Oh, yes. Who is it the guy that keeps blowing stuff up literally and figuratively is firing people claiming that they are failures.
We know his failures have nothing to do with DEI because he doesn't believe in it, but he'd possibly be succeeding right now if he did. You see, clearly there's a lot of unqualified people running this thing.
Yeah, go back to your day job, Elon Musk. Go back to your day job.
You're clearly failing. You're building rockets that are going to go to Mars and catching them out of the sky, which NASA never figured out how to do in decades.
Just go back to your day job. You know, just speaking about the end of that clip there, we've done a lot of segments recently about how utterly dumb and inane Jasmine Crockett is, but really all we had to do was play that clip.
If only Musk had more DEI hires, maybe Starship wouldn't have

exploded. That's the logic they're going with in the Democrat Party and at MSNBC.
It's just how

utterly shameless these people are. Because as we all know, when you need to achieve something

that's never been achieved before in human history, you call in the DEI hires. After all, DEI hires are how NASA landed on the moon.
Oh wait, no, that's not how that worked, is it? It's exactly when they weren't doing DEI, when all the astronauts were just white men. That's when NASA was actually achieving things.
But it's the exact opposite of that, the exact opposite. Anyway, of course, none of these people, even Jasmine Crockett, believe any of this nonsense for all their demonization of billionaires and corporations.
The truth is that the left has this intense hatred for Elon because they see him as a class traitor. They know that the wealthy are supposed to be on their side.
Elon, as not only an uber wealthy guy, but also a man of great scientific achievement, should be a devotee to their cause. That's why they kind of reserve for him this special kind of hatred, the special kind of hatred that you have, not just for enemies, but for traitors.
That's how they see him. Just think for a moment about the absurdity of the clip we just watched.
Again, this man is building reusable rockets for the purpose of making space travel affordable enough that we can colonize Mars in the near future. The whole point of these test launches is to gather data so that the next launch in just a few weeks can be a success.
That's why nobody, no person was on board the Starship. It's a test flight.
And these test flights clearly work, as anyone familiar with SpaceX's history and its progress in just the past decade understands very well. But increasingly, few people on the left actually care about SpaceX or Tesla or Elon Musk or any of that.
Instead, they care about political control, which they're obviously losing. So in some cases, they're resorting to terrorism instead.
And on television, they're turning to juvenile, barely literate criticism of a space program they can't begin to comprehend. It's difficult not to be reminded of Teddy Roosevelt's famous speech on insufferable people like this from all the way back in 1910.
It's not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. I won't recite the whole thing for you, but if you don't know it, you should Google it, because there's no better way to describe cable news hosts who laugh while a man builds rockets to Mars.
Shut out of political relevance, leftists are turning to violence and terrorism. And they're only going to intensify their efforts in the coming weeks.
But what we know is that with every arson attack and every insufferable segment on MSNBC, they're only highlighting two things. First of all, they are irrelevant.
And second, the men in the arena, the people who are actually committed to moving this country forward and achieving things, aren't going anywhere. Now let's get to our five headlines.
If you want a handgun, you know the dilemma. You either keep it locked away somewhere secure, but tough to access, or you compromise on security for quick access.
Neither option is ideal. That's why I've been using the Stopbox Pro for a while now.
It's 100% mechanical. No batteries to die at the worst possible moment.
No keys to lose or fumble with. Just reliable access when you need it.
What really sold me was testing it out at home. The build quality is exceptional.
It's durable and well-built, and it should be since they make everything right here in the USA. Stopbox is creating American jobs while keeping our family safe.
I can access it quickly in the dark, which gives me real peace of mind while simultaneously making whoever is breaking and entering learn what regret is very rapidly. Plus, for those of you who travel, it's TSA compliant, so you can actually fly with it, properly secure it, and check baggage.

Because it turns out TSA is not a fan of just throwing loose weapons into your bag.

For limited time only, my listeners are getting a crazy deal.

Not only do you get 10% off your entire order when you use code MATTWALSHOW at stopboxusa.com,

but they also are giving you buy one, get one free for their Stopbox Pro. It's 10% off and a free Stopbox Pro when you use code MATTWALSHOW atboxUSA.com.
Discover a better way to balance security and readiness with Stopbox. As you know, I've been really impressed with Trump's first couple of months in office.
I've supported most of what he's done and said during that time. But look, nobody bats a thousand.
And this one from Trump, this one is a big swing and a miss, I gotta say. New York Post reports, President Trump on Monday called for a fellow Republican to challenge Representative Thomas Massey in a primary election over the congressman's opposition to a continuing resolution that would keep the government from shutting down.
Massey, a hardline conservative, has pledged to vote against a Trump-backed measure that would increase defense spending while decreasing most non-defense spending below 2024 levels through the end of September. The bill, which cleared the House Rules Committee on Monday, has earned the support of the conservative House Freedom Caucus and would keep a government shutdown from taking place at midnight Friday if it passes the full House and Senate.
Trump said thanks to the House Freedom Caucus for just delivering a big blow to the radical left. Sometimes it takes great courage to do the right thing.
Congressman Thomas Massey of beautiful Kentucky is an automatic no vote on just about everything, despite the fact that he's always voted for continuing resolutions in the past. He should be primaried and I will lead the charge against him.
He said that the congressman is just another grandstander who's too much trouble, not worth the fight. He reminds me of Liz Cheney before her historic record-breaking fall.
The people of Kentucky won't stand for it. Just watch.
Do I have any takers? Says Trump. Okay, this is wrong.
Trump is wrong on this. Thomas Massey is one of our best congressmen by far and away.
He's one of the most, if not the most conservative members of Congress. He's extremely principled and consistent.
He doesn't want to vote for the CR because it increases spending. And he's against that.
And so he's voting against it. And you can agree or disagree with him, but to call for him to be ousted from Congress and primaried is just wrong.
It really is wrong. And that is, again, regardless of how you feel about the continuing resolution and the budget and if you think that it's okay that they're going to increase defense spending or not, regardless of that.

if Trump had just put out a tweet or a truth, what do they call it? A truth.

If he put out a post on his platform and said,

hey, we're trying to get this CR passed. Thomas Massey is not for it.
I really disagree with him.

Why don't you reach out to him and try to convince him? Whatever. I know that's not Trump's style to approach things that way, but if he had said that, I wouldn't be talking about this.
I don't think it'd be a big deal. Okay, he disagrees with Thomas Massey.
That's fine. You can criticize him harshly if you want to.
That's fine too. It's always okay to criticize politicians.
But this is going way beyond that. You're trying to get him ousted from Congress.
But you're throwing down the gauntlet that you personally will try to get him removed from Congress through a primary. And listen, I know that guys like Massey can be frustrating if you want him to go with the program.
Because he's not a go with the program type. But you need guys like that in Congress.
I don't care. Even if you find them annoying sometimes, you need them.
Massey is very much in the Ron Paul kind of tradition. He's not going to vote for increased spending.
He's not going to go along with stuff just to go along with it. Right? When all the Republicans are saying, hey, come on, Tom, we're all doing it.
Jump in. The water's fine.
Thomas Massey is going to be one of the few guys who's like, I don't agree with it, I'm not doing it, sorry. So you could call him a bit of a party pooper at times, but you need guys like that.
You need guys like that. Those guys are not the problem.
The Republican Party has plenty of problems. Thomas Massey is not one of them.
And you know what? I'll tell you, you know why you need guys like that? I'll tell you why. Because when something like COVID happens, you need your Thomas Masseys because they are going to be the only people who stand against the madness.
Massey was one of the very, very few Republicans to stand up against the COVID madness from the beginning. He was against the vaccine, the vaccine mandates, the lockdowns, the masking mandates, the stimulus checks that were handed out, which proved to be a quite disastrous decision.
He was against all of that, and he was right. And that's why you need Massey there.
You need him because you know that a guy like Massey is going to get those issues right. And when Republicans are banding together to do something dumb, you can guarantee that Massey will not be in that group.
He's one of those guys. And again, we need those guys.
To be clear, you can feel however you want about the continuing resolution. That to me doesn't even matter that much.
We go through this periodically. Every few months, it's another big panic.
Oh, the government's going to shut down. The government's going to shut down.
I don't know how many, just in the time I've been doing this podcast for six or seven years, how many times have we had this news cycle where there's a big panic because the government's going to shut down? 50 times? I mean, it's constant. It's a constant thing.
And so I'm not even interested in talking about that. It bores me to death.
Because it doesn't matter if you think Massey is right or wrong about this. The point is that trying to kick the guy out of Congress is foolish.
Here's a fun challenge. Here's an activity.
You should try this. If you think that Massey should be primaried, you clearly believe that he's one of the worst

Republicans in Congress if you want him to be primaried. Because I assume that you don't support primarying the best Republicans in Congress.
I would hope you wouldn't support that. So here's the challenge.
Try to come up with a list of 10 elected Republicans with a better voting record over the last 10 years than Thomas Massey? Go ahead. Give me 10.
If you want the guy ousted, you must have at least 10 guys in Congress who you think are better than Thomas Massey. You must be able to prove that he's not a top 10 Republican.
I'll make it easier.

Give me five.

Give me five.

Give me five elected Republicans with a better voting record than Thomas Massey.

I'll wait.

I mean, actually, I won't wait because I'll be waiting forever because he can't do it.

So this is a mistake by Trump.

It's a mistake on the merits.

It's also a political mistake.

This is a political miscalculation by Trump.

Trump is usually very good at picking battles that he can win. He's very good at that.
He's got a political mistake. This is a political miscalculation by Trump.
Trump is usually very

good at picking battles that he can win. He's very good at that.
He's got a great instinct for it.

But as I said, nobody bats 1,000. Nobody's right all the time.
And in this case, his instincts

fail them because this is not the politics of it. Put aside the merits, the politics of it

are not good. Thomas Massey, a primary challenge against Thomas Massey in Kentucky will fail.
He is very popular. He's very popular with the grassroots across the country.
He's popular on social media with people on the right. But most importantly, and all that stuff matters politically too.
Like you just go on, and I'm not saying this is the be all and end all, but it does matter that if you go on X right now and you look at the conversation about Thomas Massey and Trump's attempts to sort of demonize him and turn him into public enemy number one, it is at best very divided on the right about this. And there's a lot of grassroots conservative support for Massey against Trump on this.
And that doesn't happen often. So that alone shows you that this is probably not the fight that he wanted to pick.
But all of that is, that's secondary to the fact that what's most important is that Thomas Massey is very popular with his constituents. We know that.
We don't have to speculate because they keep re-electing him. They keep re-electing him easily.
His constituents love him, and of course they love him because he does what he promises to do for his constituents. His constituents in Kentucky, in his district, vote him in there because they want him to vote against stuff like this.
That's why they vote. You might not, if you live somewhere else and you're not a Thomas Massey constituent, you might feel differently.
You might wish that Thomas Massey did something else, but he's not actually there to represent you. Thomas Massey doesn't represent me.
I live in Tennessee. He represents his constituents and he's doing what his constituents want him to do.
That's his job. So a primary challenge is going to fail.
And Trump is kind of throwing down the gauntlet. He's calling the shot, but it's not going to work.
Who's going to primary Thomas Massey? Who's going to step up to that? Who wants to be the guy? You're not going to get a real conservative. You're not going to get a real conservative with any kind of political future who wants to step up to the plate to be the guy to primary Thomas Massey and then lose.
So you're not going to get that. What you're going to get, here's what's going to happen.
I guarantee it. I guarantee it.
You can come back and tell me I'm wrong later. Clip this out.
If I prove to be wrong, I won't be. If he gets primaried, if a primary challenge even gets off the ground, which is a big if, but if it does, it's going to be a challenge from the left.
It's going to be someone who's more liberal than Thomas Massey and more establishment. So this is going to be an establishment liberal challenge from the left against Thomas Massey.
And Trump has already signed up to support whoever that person is. Right? Against a grassroots conservative, very popular congressman.
It's just not the right approach. It's bad politics.
Bad politics. All right.
So there was a rally in D.C., I assume, as always, for International Women's Day over the weekend. A man got up there to lecture the crowd of women about what it means to be a woman.
And he's kind of trying to flip these, doing the uno reverse and trying to flip the what is a woman question around on conservatives. And let's see, let's see how that worked out.
For cis women, BIPOC women have to do it for white women. All women have to do it for men, and we are sick of it.
It was women teaching me that there is no definition that anyone can find to define what is a woman that excludes me that does not also exclude millions of cisgender women. Women born without a uterus, women born with chromosomal incongruities, women with hormone imbalances, women with facial hair.
According to the Boston Children's Hospital, one in every 5,000 women is born without a vagina. There is no way to say that trans women do not belong without also saying to that all of them are not women either.
And I dare you to say to their faces, they are not. So there's the challenge.
He says that we cannot come up with a definition of woman

that does not exclude millions of quote unquote cis women. And by cis women, of course, we mean biological women.
And by biological women, we just mean women, you know, actual women. So, but to use his language, he's saying that we cannot come up with a definition of woman that would exclude him as a trans-identified male, but not also exclude millions of quote-unquote cis women.
So that's the challenge. And I'd be a real hypocrite if somebody tried to flip the what is woman challenge around on me and I failed to answer it.
So I'll take that on, sir. I will take that on.
Can I come up with an answer to what is woman that does not exclude millions of actual women? I can. Here it is.
Adult human female. Okay, there you go.
Done. Next question.
So that's the answer. That is the answer to the riddle.
Adult human female covers all women. That's what's beautiful about the definition.
That's what's beautiful about any definition of anything, is that it covers all the things that it's defining and none of the things that it's not. That's what is necessary.
That's what makes it a definition. So women without uteruses and women who are infertile and women with physical deformities, women with facial hair, women with hormone imbalances, all of them are female.
Okay? A woman could have a full-on beard and she could be completely infertile and she could have no uterus and she would still be a female. I mean, she could have no uterus, a beard, no arms, no legs, no eyes, no ears.
I mean, she could lose every part of her body that would not kill her to lose. And she would still be a woman.
She would still be entirely a woman. She would be as much a woman as any other woman walking around with all of their body parts intact.
Okay. That's because her species has not changed.
So you take a woman and you start removing parts like a Mrs. Potato Head doll.
It doesn't matter how many parts are gone, okay, because the species, like there's no amount of parts of a person that you can take away that would change their species, you see, or their sex. You know, it's like you can't take away any part of a human and change their species to some other species.
You can't take away parts of a man and change his sex, take away parts of a woman and change her sex. Species, sex, these things are immutable characteristics They're inherent traits

They cannot be changed. There's nothing you can add that will change a person, the species of a human being or the sex of a human being.
There's nothing you can take away that will change that. There are a lot of other traits that can be changed.
There are descriptive traits.

There are adjectives that can be changed by adding and taking away from a person. But adult human female, species and sex included in the definition, those two things cannot change.
and you know it's amazing that we've been having this argument for years, and we've responded to all of these inane counter-arguments a million times, and yet they still come at us with stuff like this. They still think that infertility and female facial hair is some kind of decisive fact in their favor.
They still think apparently that if you add facial hair to a woman, you've changed her sex. They think it's some sort of trump card, which of course it's not.
All right. One other a clip from a protest, which, you know, these daily occurrence, this latest protest is against Doge in the Capitol.
And, you know, we didn't get what we all expected, at least what I expected, I'll say, which was one big mass protest after Trump's win. I thought that that would happen.
I mean, it's what happened the first time he won. We got the big women's march in DC that they claimed a million people showed up to.
I don't think it was actually a million, but it was hundreds of thousands of people. We didn't get that.
Instead, we're getting something distinctly more annoying, which is a never-ending series of small, pitiful, little protests, one after another, after another, after another, unendingly. And at this one, a masked federal worker, or hopefully former federal worker, showed up to talk about how frightened she was to receive an email asking her what she did last week.
Watch this. When you wake up or when you're on your weekend and you get the fork in the road message, or you get the subsequent five bullets, hey, what the hell did you do, you lazy federal worker, this week? How frightening is it that someone on X, the owner of X, speaks to you directly to say, what did you do last week at work? And if you don't answer, I am going to fire you.
But even more egregious, the president comes out, the most powerful person in the land, and endorses that message. How do you think that makes federal workers feel? You know, yesterday I talked about the lack of self-awareness of these people and how much I envy it, frankly.
And here we have yet another example, no self-awareness. And as an extension of having no self-awareness, they also have no awareness of how other people think, right? This is the thing that's really hampering the left right now.
It's not so much their lack of self-awareness. It's their lack of other awareness.
It's their lack of understanding of how other people think and feel. They can't get in our heads at all.
They just don't understand it, which means they can't persuade us. In order to persuade someone, you have to be able to understand how they think.
If you don't understand how they think and they're a total mystery to you, you're not going to be able to persuade them. In fact, you can't even effectively demean or attack somebody in an effective way if you don't understand how they think.
You can't even hurt their feelings. Forget about persuading them.
You can't hurt someone's feelings if you don't understand how they think. It requires some basic understanding of how your opposition thinks, which they don't have.
So if I'm a federal worker and I really want to mobilize people against Doge and against all the cuts to government, and I want to gain sympathy and support from the public, which if you're one of these federal workers or ex-federal workers showing up at a protest, you would think that that's what you want to do. That's why you're having a protest.
So if I'm in that spot, here's what I would do. And it's not that I want to give these people any hints, but they're not paying attention to what I'm saying anyway, so it's fine.
So here's what I would do. I would get up there and I would say, you know, I got that email from Elon and I was happy he sent it.
I sent back 15 things that I did last week. My only complaint is that he didn't ask us to give more things.
I wanted to give a longer list. I want him to send more emails and ask for longer lists because government is a thankless job.
I'm slaving away at all hours, working hard at my desk job from 8.30 a.m. to 2 p.m.
every day. These are unbelievably hard hours.
No one works like me in the federal government, and no one ever thanks me. It's a thankless job.
I relish the opportunity. I relish the opportunity to tell someone what I've done.
It's about time they ask. You know what? I got that email and I thought, thank God, it's about time someone asks me what I'm doing all the time.
Sit down for a minute. I hope you have two hours.
I'll tell you all the things I did last week. I would say something like that because I would recognize that even if it's not actually true of federal workers, if you're trying to persuade someone, that's how you would frame it because I would recognize that first of all, if I want people to be against cuts to federal jobs, I need to persuade people that federal workers are doing a lot every day.
And for another, I would also recognize that the public is not gonna sympathize with me if I cry about having to answer a simple email. So I would not cry about it.
If I wanted to cry about it, I would go home and I would cry in the privacy of my own home. I would cry into my pillow at night about the mean, scary email that I received.
I would not do it in public because the whole point is to mobilize and persuade the public. And I'm not going to do that by shouting, oh no, the email frightened me.
That's scary email.

These protesters don't realize any of this

because they have no understanding

of how other people's minds work.

They don't understand their own minds or anyone else's.

They're like automatons.

They're like essentially AI, but not nearly as smart.

They're AI with a fraction of the computing power is basically what we're dealing with. Let's get to the comment section.
My all new limited time sense, spring rain is here. You can light it up as a perfectly acceptable substitute for spring cleaning.
I know your wife will definitely agree. Why clean the house when you just light a candle and make it smell nice? Get yours now at thecandleclub.com slash Walsh.
I went on a date with a girl once who was trying to defend Colin Kaepernick. I strongly disagree.
The date was over in about 10 minutes. That's a good call.
And look, it's possible that the girl could just be very, could be ignorant, not very thoughtful, sort of just adopting the approved point of view on a topic like Colin Kaepernick. And in that case, maybe you could convince her otherwise.
Maybe you could convert her to be a full-on conservative. Maybe, but it's not, probably not worth the effort.
It's not worth the gamble. So cut your losses and move on,

especially if this is someone you don't even know.

You've been on a date for 10 minutes.

You have no emotional attachment to them.

You don't really lose anything by just cutting it off.

And so I think that was a smart move.

I watched Love is Blind.

Virginia also dumped Devin at the altar.

She was outraged at him for being a black conservative.

The crazy thing is both Sarah and Virginia

likely found them attractive because of their conservative values, but felt pressured to reject them because it's not hip. So two men were dumped at the altar for being conservative in the same season, or is this two different seasons? I don't know.
Either way, the real point here is why are you watching Love is Blind? You know it's not good for you. You know that.
I mean, come on. I don't need to tell you that.
These reality shows, they're basically porn for women. And I don't mean because they're sexual.
Well, they are sexual often, but that's not even what I mean. I just mean that they're trashy, lowest common denominator stuff, and they appeal to the lowest, basest parts of you.
Now, I don't understand the appeal. I could not sit and watch one of these shows for an hour, much less a season, much less multiple seasons.
I find them terribly, terribly dull and boring, but they're not for me, right? They are basically for women, but they're not appealing to the better parts of your nature, right? They're appealing to kind of the worst parts of you, which is what porn does. So for men, that's porn.
For women, it's stuff like this. And so I recommend finding other things to do with your time.
We need a special episode where Matt does an interview with his wife. I feel like that'd be hilarious.
You know, I've actually thought about doing a 60-minute style hard-hitting interview with my wife where I interrogate her about all the many controversies we've had over the years. I've thought about doing that.
For example, just as an example of one of the things that I would take her task for, this is a recent thing. As you know, if you've listened to my show, my wife for years has been trying to coerce me into agreeing to buy goats for some reason.
And I have remained steadfast against it. I have not relented.
Her pressure campaign has failed. But then the other day, out of the blue, we're just in the kitchen.
I think It's like, it's first, oh no, it's first thing in the morning. Okay, first thing in the morning.
All right, I'm stumbling out, half awake. My wife's like a morning person.
She'll wake up, it's 6.05 a.m. and she's already singing.
She's like Mary Poppins singing through the house. That's not me.
So it's

first thing in the morning, haven't even had a cup of coffee yet. And she says, she asks me if

she can get two chickens. So I just want to get two, only two, just two chickens.
Of course, I say,

well, what do we need chickens for? Why do you want chickens? Well, because eggs are expensive.

I know eggs are expensive, because eggs are expensive.

I know eggs are expensive, but chickens are expensive.

You got to feed them.

You got to do the whole thing.

It's a whole thing.

You got to get the whatever, the chicken coop.

And you got to, it's a whole thing.

It's a whole thing is what it is.

There's expense that goes into it.

And also it's a whole thing.

Which for me, you understand, that's my main argument against everything.

Thank you. and also it's a whole thing, which for me, you understand, that's my main argument against everything in the family context.
My main argument against most things is just, yeah, it's a whole thing if we do that. I don't need to describe what the thing is.
It's a whole thing. I don't want to do a whole thing, but I agreed because that's the thing.
She said two chickens, okay, whatever. It was early.
I wasn't thinking straight, and so I agreed, fine's the thing She said two chickens Okay, whatever It was early

I wasn't thinking straight

And so I agreed

Fine, get the two chickens

Whatever

And then

Shortly after that

She starts talking about how

This is great

Because the chickens

Are a stepping stone to the goats

So it was all

It was all about the goats all along

She's using these poor chickens

These poor chickens

That we don't even have yet

Thank you. chickens are a stepping stone to the goats.
So it was all about the goats all along. She's using these poor chickens, these poor chickens that we don't even have yet.
They're just, she's not even, it's dehumanizing to the chickens who aren't human. It's de-chickenizing to the chickens or something.
She's just using them as a gateway drug to goats. So this is the kind of thing I have to deal with.
And maybe I should interrogate my wife on camera about it. It'd be like a Frost Nixon, except mainly focused on goats.
I still can't stop laughing about Matt's reaction to his boots picture at the presidential address with the Speaker of the House in Bend. Go back and watch it for a good laugh.
I'm glad you think it's funny. The whole thing was a debacle for me.
Actually, the boots thing was only one of the wardrobe-related crises to come out of my attendance at that speech. I think that's the only one we talked about just because I thought that was enough.
That was enough to talk about that.

I didn't think we need to go into all the details.

But I didn't even mention how people were also accusing me of having tied my tie too short.

So that was also something.

I've actually gotten multiple text messages from people,

friends of mine, or so I thought,

criticized, yeah, I saw you on camera. Your tie was too short.
Okay, thanks. Nothing I can do about that now.
And I don't even think I mentioned this either, but speaking of controversies with my wife, I don't think I mentioned this, that she actually texted me immediately after the speech was over and told me that my fly was down, that I was on camera four times and my fly was

down. And I had a brief moment of pure panic because that's kind of like the end of your

career. I think there's something, you can't survive certain things.
There's certain images

that are, if they're out there, you can't survive them. And you know, that's how precarious this whole thing is.
You have your fly down to the State of the Union one time. It only takes one.
You don't get a redo. You don't get two times.
Only one. And your career's over.
So I had a moment of pure panic, but then I went back and looked at the clips and I discovered that, no, that's not the case. My fly was not down.
This is my wife trolling me, I guess. And so this is a big joke.
It's a big practical, it's a big prank, a big practical joke that instead of, you know, I was just, I was at the State of the Union with a joint session speech, kind of a big deal. So you'd think she would text and say, hey, what was it like meeting all the cabinet officials and congressmen? What was that? No, instead it was, hey, your fly was down, LOL.
But I can't be mad because it's exactly what I would do in her position. That is precisely what I would do.
This is the one thing about being a devoted troll as I am, is that you're going to get it dished back to you constantly. And you have to respect the game.
You just have to. And I do.

But these are the things that I deal with.

Mainstream media thinks you're too dumb to see through their lies.

They twist the narrative, manipulate the headlines, and bury the truth.

We know better at The Daily Wire.

That's why we bring you the facts, no filter, no spin, no corporate leash.

And then you can get in on the conversation.

Join the live chat during our daily shows, 100% uncensored, ad-free,

and packed with fans who actually think for themselves. Get the news the way it should be, honest, fearless, and without an agenda.
Your voice matters. Be a part of it.
Join now at dailywire.com slash subscribe. Now let's get to our daily cancel.
Have you checked lately to see if your home's title is still in your name? With one forged document, scammers can steal your home's title and its equity. But now you can protect yourself from this crime.
Home Title Lock's million-dollar triple lock protection gives

24-7 title monitoring, urgent alerts to any changes, and if fraud does happen, they'll spend

up to a million dollars to fix fraud and restore your title. Get a free title history report and

access your personal title expert, a $250 value, when you sign up at hometitlelock.com and use

promo code DailyWire. That's hometitlelock.com and use promo code dailywire.
That's hometitlelock.com, promo code dailywire. Pleasure.
For our daily cancellation today, we have Sam Seder. You probably recognize the name because this is sadly the second time I've mentioned it in a week.
Last week, it was because his co-host was laughing hysterically at a female athlete who sustained a traumatic brain injury at the hands of a trans male. Now we have a story involving Sam himself.
And as I mentioned last week, Sam has done literally dozens and dozens of segments about me on his show. He's been begging for my attention for years.
He is one of my biggest fans. And now that I've mentioned his name twice in a week, Sam is no doubt on cloud nine.
And that's fine. I'm glad that I can make the little guy feel good about himself.
But in any event, Sam Seder recently did that thing where he sits in the middle of a crowd and faces off against more than a dozen people who disagree with him in rapid succession. It's a series you've probably seen called Surrounded.
It's a kind of speed debate organized by Jubilee Media. And one after another in this debate, Sam's amateur opponents completely demolished him.
And there's one moment in particular that I want to focus on, and it's getting a lot of attention online. Here it is.
It's rooted in European identity

and Christian values. That's what it has been.
Would you really disagree with that?

What is it then, if that's not the identity of America? Well, I think the identity of America...

For the majority of time, America's been a country. You don't think that's been the identity?

Well, actually, no. I think actually the identity of America has been, you know, for better or for worse, a melting pot.
Before I play the rest of the conversation, notice what's already happened here. The woman, who by the way is named Sarah Stock, presents a clearly defined view of American identity.
She handles herself very well during the whole exchange and deserves a lot of credit for it. Sarah says that America is rooted in Christianity and European values, which is obviously true.
But even if you disagree with that for some reason, you'd be wrong. But even if you do, at least she's presenting some sort of definition of what it means to be American.
She's offering an affirmative explanation of American culture. On the other hand, Sam cannot provide a definition at all.
Instead, he offers a cliche. He says America is a melting pot without explaining what that means exactly.
He simply implies that we've always been a melting pot. And then for good measure, he says that the woman is advocating for a dominant white culture, which is how Sam presumably wins all of his arguments with his leftist friends, because anything white is automatically bad and bigoted and evil.
So he could just say, oh, well, so you're advocating for something white? And with his friends in his world, that's enough. That's the end of the conversation.
But he's in a world here with people where that's not the end of the conversation. Because in this context, where the word white doesn't inspire terror in everybody in the room, the tactic does not work.
And so we're left with the substance of what he's saying, which falls completely flat. The main problem with Sam's argument, of course, is that America has not always been a melting pot, as that term is generally understood.
This country was composed of white Western European Christians, almost exclusively in its first years. This is the core of America.
Those are the people who formed this country. And then afterwards, white Western European Christians were still the dominant demographic for much of our history.
To the extent that there was a melting pot in the United States, it was among different kinds of European Christians, like continental Protestants versus Irish or Italian Catholics. That was the melting pot.
Now, as the conversation goes on, the woman presses Sam on this point, and again, he has no response to it. Watch.
Yeah, maybe since like the 1960s, even then, like even we had this idea of a melting pot literally means assimilation too. It means melting.
It means you're assimilating to the dominant culture. Is is that not what melting means and now instead we're saying there's something wrong with xenophobia no i mean look i gotta be honest with you like i you and i have a fundamental disagreement we will never see eye to eye on this it's a choice and people i think what you're expressing though is really what the the the Trump uh uh movement at its heart is about and I think that's I mean I disagree I don't think Trump's like anywhere close to being a Christian nationalist that's ridiculous like Trump's basically a Democrat from like 15 years ago when it comes to social you don't think that he's conservative enough for you oh definitely nowhere close no he's not xenophobic enough for you no he's trying to pour a bunch of H1Bs.
Are you kidding? Right. Oh, so you want to get them out too.
Yeah. No, I mean, I think you're making my argument for me.
You know, we hear about this idea of a melting pot, and there's some disagreement over the precise meaning of the term melting pot.

In the clip we just played, the woman, Sarah, debating Sam, says that the term melting pot implies assimilation. Sam apparently has a different idea in mind.
He's probably thinking of a melting pot as a reduction to the lowest common denominator. Whichever definition you use in this part of the debate, the woman who's debating Cedar is correct that America certainly didn't become a melting pot by any definition of the term until relatively late in the country's history.
We first saw major immigration surges in the late 19th century coming predominantly from southern and eastern Europe. And these surges, of course, have intensified in recent years.
According to census data, the foreign-born population of the United States doubled from 1970 to 1990 from around 10 million to 20 million. And that's just the people we're tracking with census data, which of course excludes illegal aliens.
But this melting pot stuff is almost beside the point anyway. Even if America is a melting pot, however you define melting pot, that does not answer the question of identity.
Melting pot is not an identity. Let's just agree with Sam Seder for a moment, just for the sake of argument.
It's a melting pot. Fine.
Melting into what? And for what purpose? That's the question, Sam. What are we melting into? Why? Imagine that I told you, let's say I told you about an exciting new organization that I just founded.
I said, I just found an organization. You're going to love it.
And you ask me, well, what is the organization? And I say, oh, it's an organization with a bunch of different kinds of people. It's a melting pot of people.
Do you see how you would still have absolutely no clue what the hell sort of organization it is? I would not have explained anything about what the organization actually is or why it exists or what its purpose is. Yes, it has lots of different kinds of people.
Great. Why? What are they doing? What is the context? That's the question that Sam cannot answer.
He's debating national identity, but he has no, absolutely no, conception of what our identity actually is. That's why when Sarah asks him, well, what do you, do you really not think it's that? What do you think it is? He can't answer.
According to leftists like Sam Seder, our country's identity has nothing to do with religion, ethnicity, race, tradition, or borders or laws, right? Because he would say that illegal aliens who come here are also just as much Americans as anybody else. So that means that borders and laws also don't define the country.
If that's the case, what is our country exactly, Sam? What is it? What does it mean to be an American? What is our identity? Leftists like Sam Cedar can't answer that question. It's the what is a woman problem all over again.
So they would rather launch ad hominem attacks or filibuster than give you a coherent answer because they can't and they know they can't. Guys like Sam, they can spit and sputter and tantrum all they want, but it won't change the facts here.
And the fact is that, again, America was founded by Christians of Western European descent. That is the culture that our country is rooted in.
That's a fact. If the Chinese or the Arabs had colonized North America and founded a nation here, it would be a fundamentally different nation.
This country, the USA, the country that we live in right now, could not have been formed by any group other than Christians of Western European descent. Now, other groups can form countries.
Many groups have formed many countries, obviously, but they could not have formed this country. This country is distinctly Christian and European at its core.
That is a fact. And guys like Sam have no response to that fact other than to cry about it.
And that's why in response to my posts on this subject, in which I simply asked him to define American identity, Cedar posted this inane message on X. He said, quote, I'm impressed how aggressively these guys from Daily Wire are owning white nationalism and theocracy.
So that's about, oh, he called, oh, white nationalism. That's scary.
Don't you get it, Sam? We don't care. You can label it all you want.
Oh, that's white nationalism. That's theocracy.
That's Nazism. Whatever.
It doesn't matter to us. Don't you see that? Your labels don't mean anything to us.
They mean nothing, not a single thing. See, the emotional blackmail only works if we give a damn what you think of us and we don't at all, not at all.
So you're left with the questions still that you can't answer. Once again, he refuses to articulate an actual response.
It said he resorts to these dumb labels that win debates in his circle, but he's left flailing and flabbergasted when he finds himself surrounded by people who aren't afraid of the labels. We don't care what you call us.
The word white is not a pejorative to us. So now what, Sam? What do you have to say now? That tactic's off the table.
We don't care. What about the issue? You have anything to say about that? And this was a theme of the whole episode of Surrounded, for what it's worth.
It happened again and again. In a separate conversation, for instance, Cedar was pressed about the foundations of his morality.
And once again, he deflected. Watch.
I don't base my understanding of civil society on religion. And so we have a civil society.
We have laws that we have decided as a society in a democratic way. And for some people, it's OK for it to be informed by their religion.
That's OK. OK tomorrow society comes together and we say hey trans folks don't deserve rights you would be okay with that no i i would i would i would be against it but i mean it would be it would be morally right under your not morally right no no no i'm not talking about morals okay so here's where i'm getting to right um religious uhigious foundations provide an ethical framework for one to live their life off of.

I believe you can have an ethical framework without religion.

And if we take the leftist view to its logical tail end, to its extreme view, you have low reproductive birth rates, you have a reproductive dead end, so two men together can't reproduce unless they have to take from a healthy straight couple.

Religion provides this foundation where you do prioritize the nuclear family.

So do you have a problem with gay people being married?

So all he has is deflection.

That's his only available tactic.

He's being pressed on the foundations for his belief system.

If it's not religion, then what is it?

If it's the will of the people,

then how can you object to a popular law

that offends trans folks, quote unquote?

How can you say that slavery or Jim Crow were ever wrong? They were the will of the people at one point. And then when he realizes he doesn't have any grounds for rational objections, Sam asks the guy whether he has a problem with gay people.
So he resorts again to trying to shame the person asking the question. He's hoping that you won't notice that his own belief system is completely contingent on these precarious expedient factors.
There's no deeper foundation whatsoever. They can't articulate why trans rights are supposedly important any more than they can tell you what it means to be American.
Now, if you really press some leftists on this question of what does it mean to be American, what they will probably respond is that they think that America is an idea. But the problem with that is twofold.
First of all, nations are tangible, physical things. They are not abstractions.
Ideas don't have laws. They don't have precedents.
They don't have passports. Ideas don't have militaries.
And secondly, when you ask leftists about this, they won't go into any detail about what this idea actually is. Okay, so they say America's an idea.
You say, okay, fine. Again, sake of argument, let's say America's an idea.
What is the idea? Can you at least tell me that? They say America's an idea, but they seem to have no idea about what this idea is. And that's because the men who came up with the ideas that lie at the foundation of our government were all Christians.
They were Christian ideas. Human rights is a Christian idea.
It makes no sense, actually. Human rights make no sense outside of a Christian worldview.
No sense at all. You can't make sense of them.
Because human rights, that's why it's endowed by the creator. That is the philosophical framework of human rights.
It's something that supersedes, that goes beyond, that is rooted in something that transcends, you know, governments and people and voting and everything else. They're not just these subjective social constructs.
Because if human rights are social constructs, they don't mean anything. They're not real.
And that would mean that if everybody agrees that black people should be enslaved, well, then that's it. That's the end of the discussion.
If you want to appeal beyond that to something outside of the government, something greater, something bigger than the government, well, what is that? So in other words, it turns out that the left also rejects the very ideas that they claim define our country. So America is not defined by ethnicity, not defined by race, not defined by religion, not defined by borders, not defined by law, not defined by culture, not even defined, as it turns out, by ideas.
So I ask again, and Sam, I know you're watching, I'm asking you, what is America? What defines it? What is our identity, if it's not any of those things? Now, I'm not expecting that I'll get an answer, because these are the contradictions and inconsistencies that emerge when you spend five minutes talking to any leftist about their beliefs, whether it's a random person off the street or a supposed intellectual like Sam Seder. No matter where you look, the foundations of leftist understanding collapse

the moment you apply any scrutiny to them whatsoever. And that is why Sam Seder, who

was just humiliated by random people who asked him the most basic questions imaginable, is today

canceled. That'll do it for the show today.
Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening.