Listen to Episode

Read Episode Transcript

Today on The Matt Wall Show, Canada continues to expand its medical assistance in dying programs so that more and more of the undesirables are eligible for execution, but the program is far worse and goes much further than you think. And worst of all, our country is now headed in the same direction. Also, Rod DeSantis prepares to officially announce his candidacy and is announcing it on Twitter. Target is starting to back away from its pride celebration ever so slightly, has Bud Light persuaded other corporations to think twice about shoving the rainbow on our face. And our daily cancellation in the media is very excited about a new wonder drug that can cure obesity and also alcoholism, shopping addictions and everything else apparently. But what is this drug and how does it work and why isn't anyone asking these questions? We'll talk about all that and more today on The Matt Wall Show. The CEO of Innovation Reefunds and GetReefunds.com has been on TV explaining how they've helped so many small businesses with their ERC tax refunds. They've completed thousands of returns for different kinds of businesses, including over $700 million for construction companies and over $200 million in restaurants, bars and hotels. Innovation Reefunds has hundreds of five-star trust pilot and Google reviews. It's certified with the Better Business Bureau in just eight minutes. You can easily start the process on GetReefunds.com. You can be up on your way to receiving up to $26,000 per employee. The ERC tax credit is not alone. It's a refund of your already paid taxes. It's designed to let the business owner direct the refund money into anything the business needs to grow. It's money that you can use to improve your business, however you see fit. So go to GetReefunds.com to start the process. There's no upfront charge. They don't get paid until you get paid. Innovation Reefunds has already helped clients claim over $5 billion in payroll tax refunds through the ERC and they may be able to help your business too. So go to GetReefunds.com or download the app from the app store today. That's GetReefunds.com today. Imagine that a doctor is sitting across the table from you. You're just meeting this doctor for the first time. You're not sure whether she's a good doctor or a bad doctor. You can't tell if she has any morals or not. You're assessing things. And then the doctor tells you about one of the highlights of her year. With a smile on her face, she starts talking about one time a few months ago when she killed a clown. We're talking about a man dressed in full-clown uniform, a red nose, who was giggling when he died. It was really important for him to be in his clown suit when he died. The doctor says to you, it was a wonderful thing. Now, at a basic human level, how would you react to that scenario? Would you run out of the doctor's office and call the police? Or would you congratulate the doctor because you're also a murderer who hates clowns? What would you do? At this point, you're probably thinking to yourself, well, what's with all the hypothetical questions? This is crazy. I mean, what are the odds I'm going to be sitting face-to-face with a clown killing doctor? As it happens if you live in Canada, it's not a hypothetical at all. Meet Dr. Stephanie Green. She's one of the country's leading physicians in the area of medical assistance in dying or made. And she recently sat down for an interview in which she talks about the one time that she deliberately killed a clown. I want you to watch the interviewer ask her about this and listen to her response. Notice the grins on these people's faces as they describe the death of this poor clown. Watch. One of these I absolutely loved was, I mean, I have to have met to welling up several times while reading the book, one of the things about Ed, who was an amateur clown. And I think, and he was having, you were going to be administering his assisted death. And I think you must have left the room or something, or he left the room and came back dressed in his full clown regalia, including a red nose. And you asked him what that was about? And he said that he wanted to go out laughing. And I just thought that was so charming, but it does lead into the fact that from talking to you and other practitioners, it's become sort of socially accepted now that people are having assisted deaths. Everyone is so individual. And what's important to one person may not be as important or differently, you know, important to someone else. For Ed, it was really important that he be in his clown suit and, you know, have this atmosphere, you know, with him at this final moment. And somebody else might find that ridiculous, but there's a real beauty in recognizing it for, for Ed, this was key. And it was such a wonderful thing to be able to facilitate this with Ed. You know, for someone else, it, like you say, might be an event with champagne. A wonderful thing to facilitate with a clown. So usually when you talk about facilitating something with a clown, you're talking about inviting a clown to a birthday party, let's say. But in this case, she's talking about facilitating his execution. And that's one of the creepiest videos you'll ever see, but it's the cutting edge of state run medicine in Canada. They are killing people and they are celebrating it. Before we really get into things, let's, let's review a few points. In Canada, doctors do not just execute the terminally ill as awful as that alone would be. Thanks to a recent court decision and a new law in Canada, doctors can kill pretty much anyone. Watch the creepy clown killing doctor explain the standard of care that determines who is actually eligible for execution now. Watch. Our law never required terminal illness. It never required a prognosis of six months. It always required originally that the patient be on a trajectory towards their natural death with no time limit around that, allowing more of a flexible clinical interpretation. But that, that, even, even that was challenged because that wasn't in our original constitutional decision by the Carter case. And so for four years after the law was passed, it was looked at in a provincial court and it was decided that also needed to be struck out of the law. And with the removal of that, it opened up access to assisted dying for those who weren't necessarily dying. A trajectory towards death is already an incredibly permissive standard for youth in Asia, given the fact that we as mortal creatures are all on a trajectory towards death. I hate to tell you. But even that vague limitation has been lifted. Now there's basically no limitation at all. And that's why last year a Canadian doctor named Joshua Tapar was able to authorize the killing of a 23 year old man named Keanu. And why was Keanu killed? Well, according to the sub-stack common sense, Keanu was depressed. He was diabetic and he had lost one vision, vision in one eye. On top of that, he quote, didn't have a girlfriend. On those grounds alone, the doctor authorized the state to kill Keanu. There are many more stories like this. There is Amir Farsoud who was approved for made because he was homeless. There is the Army veteran Christine Gothier who was told by the Canadian government to consider youth in Asia rather than endure the weight for a stair lift in her home. And so on. Many cases like this. Now this is eugenics. It's the kind of thing the medical community thought long and hard about after World War 2. Doctors wondered, you know, how do we make sure that medicine is never again used to kill the weakest and least desirable members of society? Well, doctors no longer ask that question. Eugenics is making a comeback. Why is that? If you look at this as a purely political issue, it makes sense. Several years ago, Canadian politicians realized that they had a big problem, the health care system which they run, wasn't able to keep up with the need for organ donors. It's a big, big political problem. Thousands of people were dying, waiting for transplant. So the government set out to find new ways to get more organs. And that's when they passed the first law legalizing youth in Asia. Now, if you think it sounds crazy to make this connection, well, the Canadian media drew this connection immediately. Here's a headline from the Ottawa citizen in 2020, a few years after MADE was legalized, quote, medically assisted deaths provide a proof of a growing boon to organ donation in Ontario. Very quickly, Canada became the world's leader in harvesting organs from made victims. According to the American Journal of Transplantation, doctors in Canada perform almost half of the world's organ transplants from MADE, and they've done that over the past half decade. It sets new records for organ donations every year. So that's one political problem solved. Just like China harvest organs from prisoners, Canada harvest them from homeless people and the elderly. Youth in Asia also solves financial problems. Back in 2017, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation ran an article, raving about all the money the country could save by simply killing sick people outright. To take care of sick people is expensive, but if you kill them, then you save a bunch of money it turns out. New research suggests medically assisted dying could result in substantial savings across Canada's healthcare system. Doctor assisted death could reduce annual healthcare spending across the country by between $34.7 million and $136.8 million. The savings exceedingly outweighed the estimated 1.5 to 14.8 million in direct costs associated with implementing medically assisted dying. The article goes on to explain that it's very expensive to provide medical care to sick people and elderly people, the more frugal option is to give them an lethal injection, problem solved. Who cares about human life anyway when there's money to be saved? Money to be saved and money to be made. The youth in Asia industry is booming in Canada with entrepreneurs finding new and creative ways to get in on the action. As the CBC excitedly reported funeral homes are expanding their brands to include medical assistance in dying, customers can now take the advantage of the luxury of the business area, sort of a full service option, which means that instead of going to a funeral home after you die, you can go there to die. Think of the convenience. Watch. Welcome, follow me. Funeral homes have been in Matio Baker's family for generations, but he recently expanded the kind of service he offers. So this is the room where you have the medicolead in dying? Yes, this is where it happens. People who are approved for medical assistance in dying can come here with their doctor and loved ones to end their lives at a cost of at least $700. It's a lot of organization on our part to really make it a respectful and meaningful event for that family. It's what Michelle Brunel recently opted for. His family says he had emphysema and his quality of life had deteriorated, but he didn't want to die at home or in the hospital. They're using a room that they have already decorated it very nicely. Allow us the time we needed to do what we had to do to say goodbye, let him get comfortable. It's just a beautiful option. Suicide rooms in funeral homes. This is real. This is actually happening right now. And if you really want to increase efficiency, maybe they can even allow you to commit suicide while laying in your casket. Saving time, saving money, making money. That's what eugenics has always been about. That's obviously not the entire explanation for what we're seeing. Every country has evil politicians who would kill innocent people for power, but Canada has much bigger problems. And its main problem is that it's a godless hellhole. One that's so far gone, the Prime Minister makes excuses for church burnings. Canadians they don't believe in God anymore, at least not in the traditional sense. They believe that they are gods. They think that they can change their sex just by wishing for it. God doesn't choose whether you're male or female, you get to choose it. And you could change your sex in literally an instant. That's what they seriously believe. It's whatever one on the left believes. So it's only natural that a society like that would gradually assume more god-like powers, including the power to decide who dies and when they die. And just like with gender ideology, maid is becoming a social media cult in Canada. Kids with obvious mental problems are posting TikToks with captions like, things my parents have had to come to terms with, they're child choosing medical assistance and dying. Now, if we put that picture up on the screen and you just take a look at this person, your first reaction is that, you know, if you're a sane human being, your first reaction, is that whoever that is, some sort of mental health intervention is obviously necessary for this person. But very quickly, that's becoming the minority position. Notice the 26,000 likes on that post. Okay, this is a young girl talking about how she's going to kill herself and 26,000 people liked it. By the way, that girl, who just yesterday set her TikTok account to private, has posted many times about her intention to take advantage of the maid program. She says that she says that she has a chronic medical condition. Note, not terminal, but chronic. And she also says that she has three quote, incurable personality disorders. So to be clear, doctors are going to kill. And she's going to kill this girl because in part, her personality is disordered. There's many more social media posts like that. Here's a video of a woman celebrating that a physician is about to kill her grandmother, watch. I came in quietly as I could hold up. Were you nervous? Are you excited? How do you feel? Looking for. Just putting it in to be dependent. No control. So as the day approaches, is it something you're thinking about every day? No. We're not going to happen when we're not. We're not going to happen. We're not going to be ready. I'll know. Are you excited, grandma, about your suicide? That was the question. And this is about as dark as it gets. And once again, these are not one-off videos. Millions of people support this and not just on social media. More than 25% of Canadians in a poll now believe that the homeless and the poor should be able to access maid. Nearly half of respondents think mental illness should be a justification for euthanasia. And that's about to be law in Canada. It's expected to be implemented in one year. NPR would like to see that happen. They just ran a segment on someone named John Scully who wants to die because of his mental illness. Listen. The expansion of medical assistance in dying to people with mental illness has been delayed by Canada's parliament for another year. The country already allows medically assisted death for some incurable illnesses. But as Emma Jacobs reports, mental health conditions are still up for debate. News Note, the story does include discussion of suicide. For John Scully, life has literally become a living nightmare. When I wake up, I go, oh God, I've got to stop it. I've got to stop it. I must find a way to stop it. Scully lives in Toronto. He was diagnosed with depression more than 30 years ago and suffers from work-related PTSD and anxiety. He says he has terrible, vivid nightmares. There is no way to stop it. He has been watching the progress of the expansion of medical assistance in dying, known by its acronym, MADE, very closely. I actually physically got the paperwork for MADE. I have it right here. Canada's medical assistance in dying program was made legally available to some adults with terminal illness in 2016. In 2021, it was expanded to include those suffering with serious and chronic physical conditions. But for many, the plan to extend this to those suffering with solely mental illness raised concerns. We don't have very good ways of defining incurability for mental health problems. Did you catch that? So they just need to figure out which mental illnesses are incurable. Once they figure that out, they'll know which one should be cured with suicide. This will be a reality soon enough. Suicide offered as a treatment for mental illness. It used to be that you would go to a therapist to help you not kill yourself in Canada very soon. It may work the other way. You consider that 20% of adults supposedly have a mental illness, according to the people who are in charge of determining these things anyway. You begin to see how bleak this picture really is. If mental illness is a legitimate reason to execute somebody, then pretty soon we're all going to be eligible. Now it's been easy for many people in this country to ignore made because for the most part, it's happening in Canada. But Euthanasia is growing in popularity here too. In fact, just this month, the US got its very first suicide tourism state. The Republican governor of Vermont signed a bill allowing Euthanasia customers to come from anywhere in the country to be killed. It'll start putting that in their tourism ads. Hey, you want to kill yourself? Come to Vermont and do it. As always, culturally, we're on the same track and on the same train as Canada, heading over the same cliff. We're just maybe a few train cars back. As I said on Twitter the other day, I should not have to explain, nobody should have to explain why it's bad for doctors to put human beings down like dogs. This is something that everybody should understand intuitively. If you don't understand it intuitively, there's something wrong with you when you need to think about that. Because whatever you think of suicide and if you have a soul, then what you should think of suicide is that it's bad and we should try to stop people from doing it, the point with Euthanasia is that doctors are prescribing death as a treatment. It is a total inversion of the medical field. It is medicine doing literally the exact opposite of what it is meant to do. But medicine has been inverted in this way in our society for a long time. Euthanasia is just the latest iteration. Some of us have noticed this trend. Some of us, the so-called social conservatives, have been screaming about it from the rooftops for a long time and we've been right all along. We have been right on every major cultural issue from abortion to gay marriage to gender ideology. And we're right about this too. Euthanasia is a dystopian abomination. It is a war on human life. It is a cancer. And like any cancer, it will never stay contained. It will never stop. It always spreads. It starts with Euthanasia for the terminally ill and very quickly it becomes Euthanasia for 19-year-old girls with personality disorders. This is inevitable. It will always be this way. If you accept medical assistance in dying in principle, you are accepting everything that comes with it and everywhere that it leads. How long until made is mandatory for certain undesirable populations in Canada? How long until it's mandatory here? Now, you can laugh at that slippery slope hypothetical if you want. But the thing about slippery slope hypotheticals is that these days they have a funny habit of coming true. Now, let's get to our five headlines. When you're just starting out, you're trying to build a career. One of the big things is you got to figure out how to stand out from the crowd. Standing out from the crowd can be tough, especially when you're looking for a job or when you're hiring too. Looking to find that application that really stands out is a challenge. That's why you need to check out Zippercouter. Zippercouter helps you find the most qualified people for your roles and find them fast. Right now, you can try Zippercouter for free at zippercouter.com slashwalls. Zippercouter's matching technology helps you find the most qualified candidates for a wide range of roles. See a candidate you like where you can easily send them a personal invite so they're more likely to apply. Their user-friendly dashboard makes it easy to filter, review and rate your candidates all from one place. Let's Zippercouter help you find the best people for all of your roles, four to five employers who post on Zippercouter and get a quality candidate within the first day. You can see for yourself how it works. Go to zippercouter.com slashwalls. The try Zippercouter for free. Again, it's zippercouter.com slashwalls. Zippercouter, the smartest way to hire. Deliwire reports the Florida Republican governor, Ron DeSantis, is officially entering the 2024 presidential race this week during a special event with Twitter owner Elon Musk. The conversation between DeSantis and Musk will take place on Twitter at 6 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday today. According to multiple reports, the conversation will be moderated by Republican donor David Sacks, who was a supporter of DeSantis and a close ally of Musk. Musk seemingly confirmed the report on the platform by retwiting a Fox News reporter who shared the news. A source closed the Musk, told NBC News that Musk believes that former president Donald Trump is not capable of winning the White House in 2024, that DeSantis is. The person said, quote, he's interested in the future and he's interested in winning again. So he's going to announce it officially on Twitter. And I think this is a brilliant idea. I mean, it's obviously a good idea. It accomplishes a few things. It's number one, it's newsworthy because it's different. It's interesting. Just giving a speech, typically for announcing a presidential campaign, we get what we got from Tim Scott. We played the clip yesterday. Give a speech at a rally and say, I'll really represent it and then give you a little stump speech. And that's fine, but it's not interesting. It's not different. It would still make the news because he's announcing that he's running for president. This is a bigger deal and this is what we need from Republican presidential candidates. We need them to and Republicans in general and conservatives in general. We need them to do new, different, interesting things. And second, the other reason this is a good idea is because it goes around the mainstream media and this is the major point. If you do a rally to announce your candidacy, then you're really doing an event for and with the mainstream media because you need them to cover it. Because obviously you're not just announcing your candidacy to the people that are in the room with you. You need to get the word out. And so you need the media to amplify your message. But here to Santis is going around the media completely. It's newsworthy so they will cover it, but he doesn't need them. It's an end run around the media. It's going around them and right to the people. And that is a very good idea and that's exactly what we should be doing. And Twitter, given that it is the most powerful and arguably the only free speech platform. It's certainly the only relevant free speech platform on the internet. And it's run by someone who has shown that he does believe in free speech. Given that fact, this is a really powerful tool that we all need to start thinking about how we can utilize it better. And it makes sense for political campaigns too. The Santis Camp also put out a short video leading up to the announcement. Let's watch that. They call it faith because in the face of darkness, you can see that brighter future, a faith that our best days lay ahead of us. But is it worth the fight? Do I have the courage? Is it worth the sacrifice? America has been worth it. It's a very free, single time. Solid, I like it. And the thing I like most is that, and it has a little bit of a kind of, it's a little different in that it has somewhat intentional vaguely kind of ominous tone, which I think is good because the left is terrified. They are, they are peeing their pants in fear because of Rhonda Santis. They've seen what he's done in Florida. They're absolutely petrified that he might accomplish the same thing nationwide. And they'll, they'll tell you that. They'll tell you that they're afraid. Their fear is the best sign of all. Lots of headlines, headlines like this one from the roots. This was their headline yesterday. Should black people be afraid now that Rhonda Santis plans to announce his presidential bid on Twitter? Should they be afraid? Yep. I, I, I guess so. Because if Rhonda Santis is on Twitter, then that, for what I understand, it means that people who are members of allegedly marginalized groups and, you know, black people, if they are on Twitter at the same time, they will actually, scientific, they will actually, they'll spontaneously combust is what will happen. So yeah, there's, there's a, there's a, much, many reasons to be afraid. But really, the fragility is just off the charts. These are the most fragile people in the world and they're used to getting their way because of it, wielding their hysterical emotions like a battering ram. But they're finally coming up against a faction of the right that won't be manipulated that easily. And we'll have more on that in a second. But there's more news on Twitter. Axios had the exclusive yesterday. Quote, the daily wire conservative media and entertainment company plans to put its entire slate of podcasts, which are almost all recorded as videos on Twitter beginning May 30th. A company executive told Axios last month, outspoken daily wire host Matt Walsh said YouTube removed his right to monetize his videos over his comments about transgender influence or Dylan Mulvaney. The daily wire then, then began putting the Matt Walsh show on Twitter. Walsh said he was making $100,000 monthly on YouTube. And so that's the lead up to it. And now the daily wire is, well, that's the news. Anyway, I guess I could have just told you that. I need to read the Axios report about it. But we're going to be putting all of our podcasts on Twitter. It started with my show and now all the shows are coming to Twitter. Tucker show will also be on Twitter. That was the news last week or two weeks ago. This is exactly what I was hoping for when we made the decision to bring my show to the platform a few weeks ago. And I remember suggesting it in a meeting right after we got demonetized by YouTube. And it was one of those kind of lightball moments in that it's a really obvious move. And you wonder why you didn't think of it earlier. Because clearly the right thing to do. A massive platform with hundreds of millions of daily users. And they're increasingly trying to ramp up the video element of the Twitter experience. And so why not take advantage of that? In a place where imagine that you can post your content and talk about things and express your points of view. And that's it. You don't have to worry about being censored or having it's they're not going to come around and say, well, that that point of view is a little offensive. So that's not going to be allowed. I have an opinion you have an opinion. We express those opinions. Nobody is harmed in the process. Maybe they get their feelings hurt, but that's as far as it goes. That's what's happening on Twitter. And I think it's obviously great news. Workpost has some news that's also, I think, pretty good target on Tuesday said the retail giant will pull some LGBTQ friendly kids clothing from its store after facing customer backlash just days after the company's top executive dismissed the social media upper war. The Minneapolis-based chain said one of the main factors of the nationwide adjustment ahead of Pride Month was because some customers had violent confrontations with workers. A target spokesperson said, quote, since introducing this year's collection, we've experienced threats impacting our team members sense of safety and well-being at work. Given these volatile circumstances, we're making adjustments to our plan, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior. Target declined to say whether or remove its tuk friendly women swimsuit that allows trans women, quote unquote, who have not had gender-ferming operations to conceal their private parts. Okay, so target is, of course, blaming this decision on violence and confrontation and they're making all that up. That's not happening. Okay, nobody's going to target and assaulting the employees. The real reason target is doing this, obviously, is that they're getting major pushback from their customers. Many of their customers, as it turns out, don't want to walk into target and be accosted by a gay rainbow explosion as soon as they walk through the door. They don't want their kids seeing that. They don't want satanic merchandise in the store or sold online. So target is trying to deemphasize the pride stuff by moving it to the back of the store to satiate the customers that they've upset. While at the same time, they're also defaming those customers and accusing them of endangering the safety of their employees. So they're trying to have it both ways and we absolutely should not let them, which is why the boycott is still on, target must be crushed for this. But the fact that they are moving the merchandise and making up these excuses, that's a good sign. It shows that our pushback is working. Again, just like I did with Bud Light. And target is obviously, there's another report quoting unnamed sources that target doesn't want to be the next Bud Light. Because they see what happened with Bud Light. And this is why, from the very beginning, those of us who are pushing the Bud Light boycott, this is one of the reasons why it was so important. This is the point we were trying to make. It's not just about Bud Light. Yes, there are many companies that have done things that are far more egregious than what Bud Light did, but we can make an example of them. That's what it's about. It's about mounting a trophy on the wall as a sign to others. So we want other corporations to go and look at that and say, wow, I don't want to have enough. You know, Pride Month stuff. This is all about just, this is supposed to be branding and this is about signaling our virtue. This is virtue signaling. This is about scoring some woke points. But I don't want to lose money. Those are the kind of calculations we want these corporations to start making. And I think that now they are. The ultimate goal, and I want to flesh this out a little bit more tomorrow as we really get into the weeds on this. But we have to look at, I know there are a lot of conservatives that are dreading Pride Month and complaining about it already. That's understandable. But I'm not dreading it. I'm looking at Pride Month as an opportunity. And we've got a few surprises in store for you. We'll come Pride Month. We've got a few things we're planning. We're going to make it a big month. But also it's an opportunity for us to fight back against this. And the ultimate goal is to make Pride toxic for these brands. We're going to make it toxic for them. Or I should say, we're not making it toxic. It already is. It is toxic. Okay, promoting this kind of stuff, promoting gender confusion, trying to sexualize kids, all this, this is already toxic. And we are bringing that to fruition. On the left they have this concept called problematize. And for them, when they say they want to problematize something, it means that they want to take something that is not a problem. They want to turn it into a problem. Well, we need to take a page from that book. And we're problematizing things too. But in our case, we are not taking something that isn't a problem and making a problem. We are taking something that is a problem and we are pointing out that it is a problem. And so yes, we can't, and I know this is the response from conservative skeptics who say, well, what are we going to do? Boycott every brand that does the pride? No, we can't boycott all of them. We can pick out certain ones. We can make examples of them. And for all the rest, we can't boycott all of them. That's correct. Correct. We can problematize pride. We can make sure that it's divisive and controversial. We can make the brand start thinking, is it really worth it? Okay? Yeah, if you're a brand and you go this direction, I'm not going to sit here and promise that every brand that does the pride thing is going to go bankrupt, obviously not. But what I can say is that the winds are changing and you're dealing with a faction of the right that plays a little tougher than what you're used to. And what that means is that you're not going to go bankrupt if you do the pride thing. But it's going to be an issue. Okay? You're waiting into choppy waters and you need to really think about whether or not you're whether it's going to be worth it. For so long, the reason that these companies have done this and it's gotten to the point that it has is because they could do it. They could shove this stuff in our face. They could express their hatred for their own customer base. Okay? They could do all of that and they would get woke points from the left and on the right it would be nothing. It would be a little annoyed about it, but we'd still continue chopping. We wouldn't say anything about it. We would just cooperate. And so it was a win-win for the press. Like why not do it? As far as they're concerned. For them, it's a win all around. Especially a lot of these companies are run by far left whacos and so they can use their company as an opportunity to promote this stuff, promote their ideology. They can win some points with their own side. The other side buys from them anyway. Everything's fine. But that's changing now. We aren't just going to sit quietly and go along with it. All right. Post-millennial has this report. A trans-identified male student athlete will be moving on to compete in California's track and field state tournament next week after placing second in the women's 1600-meter race, beating out female competitors that will no longer get the chance to compete for a state title. Athena Ryan, a biological male, will be advancing to the California Inter-Skallastic Federation State Track and Field Championships after replacing second in the girls' varsity 1600-meter race on Saturday, finishing behind Hany Thompson of Montgomery and ahead of Ellie Buckley, Fox News reports. Ryan have been competing on this Sonoma Academy's Boys Track and Field team until he transitioned into a female in 2021. And by transitioning into a female, we mean that he grew his hair out and put it in a ponytail. And that's what we mean. That's transition. Look, I'm a female now. My hair is longer. But there were some pushback, quote, security removed women from the field, seen holding signs in support of girls in the sectional meet. Many parents were completely unaware there was a boy competing in girls' races. Others were appreciative that they were there, the protesters were there, when they themselves felt silence, the group wrote on Twitter, sharing photos of women with a banner that reads, protect women's sports. The women holding the banner belong to a group called Women Are Real and said that they receive praise all evening with members of the crowd coming up to them and giving them fist bumps and high fives. Of course, when this first started happening with males competing in female sports, we were assured that the guys, you know, that it would never happen that we're just going to allow the boys who are experiencing real gender dysphoria, the ones who are, quote, unquote, actually trans, whatever that means. We're going to allow, it's only going to be them. They're going to be the only ones who we allow to compete. And it's not like you're going to add up with a bunch of guys who aren't even gender dysphoric in the first place and they're taking advantage of this because they can't hack it against the guys. And so they're taking advantage of an opportunity to win some trophies and medals they wouldn't otherwise win. We were sure that that would never happen, but of course, this is exactly what happened. It was always going to happen. Mediocre male athletes who can't win anything against the guys are switching over to the girls teams. That's what's happening. And I will say that I'm very happy about, to read in the article about women who showed up to protest this because that is what is needed. Now, you know that I've never been one of the people that claims that the fight to protect women's sports and women's privacy and womanhood generally that the fight is a woman's fight entirely. It's up to them to deal with. And as men, we don't have to worry about it. I never believe that. I've never said that, which is why I've been in this fight for years myself. But it is true that women need to step up. They need to step up and defend their own spaces. And it's also true that these spaces have all been compromised because women by and large have not stepped up. By and large. Now, there are exceptions to that. There are notable courageous exceptions. And they're all the more courageous because they are exceptions. But by and large women have allowed this to happen. And we need them now. You know, others have made this point. I think it's an important point that going back to Bud Light. Why is Bud Light being absolutely crushed right now? There are a bunch of reasons for it. But one of them is that Bud Light caters to a mostly male demographic. And so when this stuff was brought into a male space, okay, like the beer cooler at the liquor store, that's generally a male space. Now when it was brought there, many men said, no, we don't want this stuff here. Get this out of here. What are you doing? That has not been the response when it's brought into female spaces. Okay, that's why all these cosmetic companies and clothing companies, I mean, like every, the companies that are the worst with the pride stuff and pushing transgenderism, all the companies that are the worst with it for the most part, these are the companies that have primarily female, predominantly female customers. Because the women, again, are allowing it to happen. When it comes to target, you know, if a target boycott is really going to have an impact, if it's really going to work, that's going to come down to the women. Now when we talked about this a few days ago, I admitted that boycotting target is harder, than boycotting, but light, boycotting but light requires no sacrifice, no change in lifestyle or behavior at all, really. Just grab for a different beer, easy enough to do. Bud light is a terrible anyway. There are plenty of beers that are just as bad and that are just as cheap if that's what you want to go for. Target is different. It's not one product. It is a store that sells a bunch of products. And oftentimes it could be the most convenient option. It could be the cheapest option depending on what you're going for. And so to boycott it requires a little bit more sacrifice. Not much, not much, but a little bit more sacrifice and effort. But the other part of that is that in most cases, like if somebody needs to make a target run in my house, 99 times out of 100, it's going to be my wife making the target run. It's not me. And that's the way it goes in most homes. So it's going to be up to the women to actually make this work. And I think that this is, in many ways, target is a good test case. Have we gotten to the point where the women in America are now drawing a line and saying enough is enough? We don't want this anymore. And if that happens, if that happens, the woke cult is going to have a real problem on their hands. All right, let's get to the comment section. Rogue conservative says, I'm going to the university that fired people for the pronouns in the fall and I'm proud of them. You should be proud of them. And as you know, I'm highly skeptical of the university system. And I generally think that college proves to be a waste of time and money. But if you are going to go, then this is a good place to go. What's the name of university? I think it was Hogue's. Hogue's university, right? So Hogue's university, Hogue's university. And I know nothing else about this university except for the fact that they fired two of their employees for putting pronouns in their bio. And that honestly, that tells me everything I need to know. I already know that this is an extremely solid university, one of the only good ones in the entire country. And it kind of, because it works in the reverse too, that if somebody puts pronouns in their bio, we know everything we need to know about them. Just that one simple act tells you every last necessary detail about that person, but it goes the other way also. So River Perish says, I don't think this can be said enough. You can't run a conservative media organization with a headquarter in New York City period. Media staff rescue hard left. NYC scuse hard left. The mathematics just don't work. You get a bunch of employees sneering at their own product. And I agree and that's another reason why the excuses for Fox News don't wash. The excuses that I've heard even from. There's always some conservatives saying, well, yeah, they have all of these pro-trans policies written into their handbook. They have, in their handbook, they have LGBT terminology that they define and they encourage the use of. They give males the right to use women's restrooms and vice versa if it aligns with their quote unquote gender identity. Yeah, they do all of that. Yes, they have a perfect score. Fox News has a perfect score with the human rights campaign. But it's because they have to. They're just following the law. That excuse does not work because number one, just following orders never works as an excuse to engage in immoral behavior. And also, well, if being headquartered in a place like New York City requires you to be a woke corporation and you don't want to be, then move. Go somewhere else. We did it with the Delio Wires while we're here in Nashville. So that doesn't work. And then there's also the fact that as we reviewed yesterday, much of what Fox is doing, they are doing of their own volition. Okay, they're editorial guidelines that require reporters and commentators apparently to refer to people by their preferred pronouns, all the rest of it, putting out stories, promoting the trans of kids. That's not a legal requirement. Now, I think on the left, they'd like to make that a legal requirement, but at this point, it's not. So they're doing that completely on their own. Russ Bly says, being banished from Fox should be considered a badge of honor. What Fox and MSNBC have not yet figured out is they're going the way of the buggy whip. Google pictures of downtown New York in 1900, then look at New York in 1915. Today, the metamorphosis is even faster. In the next few years, cable news will just be a memory. So Matt, in essence, you've been booted from a horse and buggy, enjoy the high performance ride of the future. That is true. You know, it's, that's true with a caveat, which is that cable news is becoming irrelevant. And that's, it's just a numbers game. Like the only people that are sitting down and watching cable news are watching cable in general are people that are over the age of 65. In my generation, I don't know anybody who has cable. I'm not sure I've met anyone recently. In my generation, actually has cable. When you go to a hotel or something and they have like basic cable, if you go to a mid-range hotel that still has basic cable, and you're flipping through and you have to flip, I was just at a hotel like this recently. And I'm sitting there and I have to flip through the channels to see what's on. I want to know what's on TV. I have to actually pick up the remote and flip through the channels. And then if I want to watch something, I have to watch it from the beginning. I have to schedule my night so that I can watch it when it starts. And if I come in 15 minutes late, then I'm just late. I mean, this is, this is, this is like ancient stuff. It's like, it's, it's, even though I grew up with this kind of, this is the situation I grew up in. Now it feels very foreign and bizarre. So that's how it's headed. And in the next 10, 15, 20 years, certainly 20 years from now, cable news will not exist. In the meantime though, it is still relevant. And cable news and these, and the cable news and the media, the mainstream media in general, still has a lot of power. They have the ability to drive the narrative and they have the ability to influence and sway elections. So that is currently still the case. But it won't be for long. Michael says, you were not banned from Fox. You were just uninteresting. Now, I was definitely banned and I still am. But my other question is, why would you think that being uninteresting would mean that I wouldn't get on Fox? That's, like, if anything, that's, that's one of the things they're looking for. Have you, have you watched Fox recently? You think that if you're not interesting, they don't want you on? That's explained a lot of the content that you see on Fox if that's the case. You know, if you're looking for something interesting to watch, check out our series What We Saw, hosted by Storyteller Bill Whittle. Season one was focused on Apollo 11 and now season two of What We Saw is in full swing. And episode 11, we continue on as a fearless fighter pilot breeds new life into discouraged American aviators during the Vietnam War as they defy outdated tactics and execute a lightning fast surprise attack shaping one of history's most remarkable military operations. Bill makes you feel like you're there witnessing history. Here this amazing story in this week's episode of Cold War, new episodes of Cold War come out every week, but you have to remember to see it. So go to d'Ethewire.com slash Cold War to start watching. Now, now let's get to our daily cancellation. Speaking of the mainstream media, it's hard to imagine this today, but there used to be a time in this country when people took the Washington Post seriously. They probably shouldn't have. You know, they certainly shouldn't have. The country would have been better off if they hadn't, but they did. And yet to be fair, this was this was long before the post hired theater kids to make TikToks before rush a gay before Taylor Lorenz. So let's go back to the dark ages of the early 1990s when everyone got their news from papers like the Washington Post. Now, it's when the post ran a deep dive into a question that the whole country was asking at the time, here's the headline, quote, is pro-zac really the wonder drug for depression? The answer, according to the post rigorous reporting in that piece, seemed to be, yes, the science was settled. Depression happens when you don't have enough serotonin. So if you give people more serotonin, they're happy. Plus, there are other benefits too. The Washington Post reported at the time, quote, while other anti-depressants have been linked to weight gain, pro-zac has been associated with weight loss and advantage for some depressed people. What a breakthrough. If you're a pro-zac, you can stop wondering if you're sad and obese because of your life choices. You can get rid of both problems with just one pill. It took 30 years until we learned that from a medical perspective. None of that was true. Studies show that nearly half of patients gained significant weight on pro-zac. Then it turns out that pro-zac didn't do much about depression either, which was supposed to be the point of the drug. Compared to 30 years ago, when 45 million Americans weren't taking pro-zac, we had fewer suicides, fewer mass shootings, fewer overdoses back then. Why exactly didn't pro-zac work as advertised? Well, it took until last year, which was a long time since the early 1990s, until we got some kind of explanation. Turns out that scientists had no clue what pro-zac was doing in the first place. One of the leading journals in psychiatry determined that, quote, the main areas of serotonin research provide no consistent evidence of their being an association between serotonin and depression. That should have been a blockbuster story, but it was out of the news like less than a week. Who cares if we don't know what SSRIs do? They tell you, just shut up and take them and give some to your kids, too. That's their actual argument as of today. They lied about how it works, and there's no evidence that it does work. Take it anyway. And tens of millions of Americans are still doing just that. What explains that? Like, why are people still taking it? With opioids, there's a clear explanation. People became addicted based on lies from drug companies and doctors, but with pro-zac it's a lot less clear. Why are people of their own volition taking SSRIs to solve all their problems when even the pharma companies admit that the SSRIs don't work as advertised? These drugs have serious side effects, by the way. SSRIs can cause birth defects. They can kill your sex drive. They can make you agitated. And yet people are still taking them for no apparent benefit. Why? Whatever the answer to that question is, maybe people are desperate, maybe they're badly misinformed by the billions of pharma ad dollars. Maybe it's something else, maybe it's a combination. This is not an issue that's going away. Big pharma's grift is now expanding far beyond SSRIs like pro-zac. Consider the current wonder drug named Ozempic. You've probably heard the jingle if you haven't. I'm not going to sing it for you. Ozempic began as a diabetes drug when it came to market a few years ago. Recently though, Ozempic has transformed, in the words of MPR, into a blockbuster diet drug, because people taking it notice that they lost a lot of weight. This February nearly 400,000 Ozempic prescriptions were filled. That's an increase of more than 100% from the previous year. According to MPR, that means Ozempic has had a rise to superstardom. They say it's a hot commodity. Run out and get your prescription today if you want to lose weight. Now it's worth pausing for a moment to consider the irony of MPR, which runs a segment every day about how fat people are healthy and beautiful, now telling you to buy some Ozempic because in truth being fat is a disease that needs to be cured. The entire mainstream media toes this line. Being fat is good, and also being fat is a disorder that happens to you and you have no control over it. Of course both approaches are wrong. Fat positivity is a cult that kills hundreds of thousands of people, many of them probably MPR listeners, and being fat is obviously a choice, not an identity. You chose to be fat by eating too much. It's not something that happens to you like scoliosis or spina bifida. So what's really going on here? Anytime the media outlets spend two contradictory narratives at the same time, it's worth looking into a little bit further and figuring out why they're doing it. So what's the real reason they're promoting Ozempic? Keep in mind that Ozempic is not some anodine substance that anyone can try out for a few months without a problem, it can kill you. This is straight from the Ozempic website. So Ozempic may cause serious side effects, including possible thyroid tumors, including cancer. Spend five minutes on Reddit, you'll hear all kinds of stories from Ozempic patients about some of the other terrible side effects. One user wrote quote, it made my burps smell and taste so ungodly disgusting, think straight sulfur, plus an outhouse at a NASCAR race in summer at the end of a race weekend. I'm not exaggerating that it was complete projectile vomiting out of my nose and mouth. It was an absolutely ungodly horrible experience. One of two, because a podcaster told one news outlet that she had a similar story on Ozempic quote, I had no energy, constant nausea, and what I call power puking. Now you wouldn't think a drug that induces power puking would be promoted by every media outlet in the country, but this one is. Just like Prozac, every day we're hearing about the miraculous Ozempic. The Atlantic is out with a new piece explaining that the wonder drug doesn't just cure diabetes and obesity, it also cures credit card debt. And every other problem you can think of. The scientists accidentally invent an anti-addiction drug, the Atlantic asks. According to the piece, quote, people taking Ozempic for weight loss say that they have also stopped drinking, smoking, shopping, and even nail biting. Basically it solves everything, but maybe acne. Here's how the Atlantic article begins. All her life, Victoria Rutledge, thought of herself as somebody with an addictive personality. Her first addiction was alcohol. After she got sober in early 30s, she replaced drinking with food and shopping, which she thought about constantly. She would spend $500 on organic groceries, only to have them go bad in her fridge. I couldn't stop from going to that extreme she told me. When she ran errands at Target, she would impulsively throw extra things, candles, makeup, skin care products into her cart. Then this woman started taking a version of Ozempic, and suddenly, according to the Atlantic, all her problems went away. Quote, her food thoughts quieted down. She lost weight. But most surprisingly, she walked out of Target one day and realized her cart contained only the four things she came to buy. Another woman, Mary Mar, reported similar results. Mar said that she hopes to stay on Ozempic forever. It's incredibly validating, she told the Atlantic. It's incredibly validating. Medicine meant to affirm and validate. There's a lot of that going around these days. Now to be clear, there's no scientific basis that explains what, if anything is happening here. Ozempic releases a hormone that tricks the pancreas into releasing more insulin, which sends signals to the brain that we don't fully understand. The Atlantic admits that, quote, the exact mechanism of weight loss is still unclear. Most intriguing, it also seems to reach and act directly on the brain. Now the piece quotes a biologist saying that Ozempic's pseudo-hormones, quote, appear to actually bind to receptors on neurons in several parts of the brain. So just like Prozac, it's supposed to solve a bunch of problems all at once, but no one's really sure how. Before Ozempic, Mary Mar and Victoria Rutledge just couldn't resist putting unnecessary garbage in their shopping cart at Target. How they no longer have those inclinations, those thoughts, those thoughts. Their thought process has been changed by a drug, and nobody seems interested in asking any questions about that. How does that happen? What are the long-term effects of people flooding their bodies with Ozempic for 80 years? What other effects is this having on these users' personality or day-to-day interactions with other people? Now when has any idea? Do they have them in any long-term studies on this? Just like there were no long-term studies on Prozac or Cross-Exhormones for children? Ozempic might make people's lives worse in many ways as Prozac did, we don't know. All we know is that people who are desperate for validation, for assurances that they're not responsible for their own actions, which is what they want validated, are welcome to load up on Ozempic. Take the pill, it'll make you feel better, don't think about it. That's the pitch from Big Pharma. Now let's think about the implications of this for a moment. Given that Ozempic works just as the Atlantic is describing, if this drug stops people from shopping too much, then it has somehow mitigated the desire to shop. But that desire is a conscious thing in the mind, which means that the drug is in a literal sense manipulating people's thoughts. And of course this is nothing new. All psychiatric drugs do this. But the mind itself is still in many ways a mystery to science. But the doctors that are prescribing things that affect your mind, they can't even tell you what exactly the mind is or where it comes from or how it works. Which means the doctors who prescribe this stuff don't know exactly how the drugs work or what it means. And they can't grasp the full implications. We're treating people like machines incapable of changing their own behavior or engaging in self-control. And that's exactly how the system wants you to see yourself. You cannot fix this problem yourself. If you're a Victoria Rutledge, somehow it was a Victoria Rutledge incapable of going to Target and only buying a couple things. Like she couldn't physically impossible or did it just require a little bit of effort and self-control that she didn't feel like generating. Think about every drug and there are many of them that warn about suicidal thoughts as a side effect. Ironically, Prozac, which is supposed to cure depression, has been known to drive people to suicide instead. This means that a drug is what it means. That a drug is putting self-destructive thoughts into a person's mind. Suicidal people are not mere animals acting on instinct. They are again, our conscious agents responding to thought processes. These drugs are in some way causing these thought processes. How does that work? How can a pill make a person want to kill themselves? How can a pill put into person's mind the thought you should kill yourself? Nobody really knows. They have to turn out the pills and the prescriptions anyway. You know, in ancient times before medicine was more about marketing than health care, physicians knew to stay away from false panaceas like this. One expression was, leave your drugs in the chemist's pot if you can heal the patient with food. Well, that's ancient wisdom. It's gone now. Now we heal patients' food problems with drugs from the chemist's pot. And we heal their shopping problems and their drinking problems, too. Thirty years from now, we might learn what we're actually doing to these people. But for now, ozemic is canceled. Now, I'll do it for this part of the show. Those who move over to the members block, hope to see you there. If not, talk to you tomorrow. Godspeed.