Relatable with Allie Beth Stuckey - Ep 76 | Unwilling to Work

Episode Date: February 12, 2019

 Analyzing AOC's Green New Dream and the immorality of laziness. Copyright Blaze Media All Rights Reserved.

What up, guys. Welcome to Relatable. I hope that everyone had a great and wonderful weekend. I did. I don't really know what I did this weekend. I can't ever remember. By the time Monday comes around, it feels like so much time has passed since Friday that I can never remember what I did. We built a bookshelf, a new bookshelf. Well, actually, my husband built a new bookshelf because gender. roles. And I'm very thankful for that. I'm not a decorating person. I'm a trash person, as you guys know, but my living room is kind of looking cute now. So goal reached for me. A little bump date. I am 20 weeks pregnant, almost 20 weeks and half pregnant. And so I'm halfway there, which is exciting. Thank you guys so much for praying and for thinking of me and for your kind messages. Pregnancy is great so far. Definitely in a high point where I'm not quite huge yet, but I'm not sick and I'm only moderately tired.

Like can't really fall asleep at night. And then I'm really tired the next day and feel like I need to take a nap. But other than that, I'm feeling good. feeling good we're going on a baby moon next week i will still be working and you will still get podcast but we are going on a little trip and i'm really excited about that last trip probably as you know as not parents you know don't actually have like a little one outside the womb so i'm excited about that okay pass that for those of you who hate when i open without actually talking about what we're going to talk about i'm really sorry maybe you'll fast forwarded just a little bit

uh today we're going to talk about the green new deal we're going to talk specifically about this one line in the FAQ from the Green New Deal, and that is providing economic security for those who are unwilling to work. You heard me right, ladies and gentlemen, unwilling, unwilling, unwilling to work. So let me just briefly tell you what the Green New Deal is. Now, this happened last week, and you've probably watched the news and you already know what is actually in the bill, so I won't spend too long talking about that. I will just give you kind of an overview of the high point of what's in the bill,

because just in case you don't know what's been going on or what's in the bill, I don't want you to miss that. So Green New Deal resolution passed by our favorite Congress from the Bronx, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. And it was published. I saw it first in NPR, the resolution itself and the FAQ. The FAQ is what has caused the most controversy over the past few days and we'll get into that. The goal of this resolution is to cut carbon emissions by moving towards a hundred 100% clean, renewable energy, stopping fossil fuels entirely. So it is going to do this by, quote, upgrading all existing buildings in the country for energy efficiency. Yes, you heard that right.

Upgrading all existing buildings. All buildings. Every building, not just in New York City, but throughout the entire country, upgrading them, whatever that means, for energy efficiency, every single building. Okay. Working with. farmers to, quote, eliminate pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. All right. Also, quote, overhauling transportation systems to reduce emissions, including expanding electric car manufacturing, building charging stations everywhere, and expanding high speed rail to a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary. Sorry, Hawaii won't see it anymore. A guaranteed job with, quote, a family sustaining wage, adequate family and medical leave, paid vacations, and

retirement security for every American. Also, high quality care for all Americans. Now, this is not just a deal that is targeting the environment trying to supposedly make the environment better. This is also fighting what Alexandria and Acacio-Cortez and a lot of Democrats see as racial, gender, socio inequality, by calling for massive public investments in what this resolution calls front. line and vulnerable communities. So people who are in poverty. There's a quote from CNN. It is providing

universal health care and affordable housing, ensuring that all jobs have union protections and family sustaining wages and keeping the business environment free of monopolistic competition. Basically, this is a big government dream. It is a radical progressive wish list. It is mobilizing big government programs and trillions. They don't even know how much it's going to cost, but estimates are just trillions and trillions of dollars. That's literally the most specific number I've seen. Trillions and trillions of dollars of taxpayer money to, quote, fight climate change by revolutionizing the way we work, the way we live, the way we travel over the next 10 years. I radically grow the size of the government in order to do that using your money and limiting

your freedom because one thing we know about the government is that it cannot help you without also limiting your freedom. The bigger the government is, the less freedom that we have. Democrats tend to see that, especially far left Democrats tend to see that as a good tradeoff for whatever benefits we're getting from the government expanding. Environmental experts. We're talking environmental experts, even those that are on the left that probably agree with Acacio-Cortez on climate change. Even they are saying that this is an unrealistic plan, that it's actually impossible to cut carbon emissions to zero by 2030. That's only 11 years from now. Many of them are saying, okay, we might be able to do that by 2050, but 2030,

No, probably can't do that. We actually don't even know how big of in effect carbon emissions are having on the environment. That's something that's being debated among scientists. It's not even just a right-left issue. That's a genuine thing that's being debated. We have no idea, no idea, no evidence whatsoever to show that the resolution that Alexandria Accio-Cortez and other Democrats are signing on to that it's going to help

anything. We have no idea if it's actually going to be effective. We have no basis on which we should place the belief that this is actually going to work. The good thing is this is a non-binding resolution. It wouldn't actually create any new programs. It's more of a set of goals for what far left Democrats like AOC believe will help the environment and even the economy. That's what they're saying, which is just absolutely, absolutely crazy to me. So this is, isn't talking about how it's going to happen. That's actually a very, a very frustrating question for AOC whenever she's asked,

well, how are you going to pay for this? She just kind of gets all frazzled. We're just, we just are going to pay for it. Well, she also says that this is a very urgent need that we are meeting climate change, social and racial, inequality and all of this stuff that the Green New Deal apparently is going to magically heal over the next 10 years. She says it's very urgent, but she doesn't know how to pay for it.

like if you have to make a car payment or if you have to fix your car and it's truly urgent, you figure out how you are going to pay for that repair on your car. If it's not really that urgent and you don't have to think about it right then, you can save a little bit over time and say, okay, I'm going to get that part of my car fixed. But like if you got to get something fixed on your car in order for it to work, if it's really that urgent, you're going to find a way to pay for that right then. So it doesn't make that much sense to me that she's saying,

this is a very urgent thing that we have to figure out right this second and we have to cut carbon emissions over the next 10 years, but I have no idea how I'm going to pay for it. So I'm just going to push forward this resolution and hope that it works. That just doesn't make any sense. Either it's urgent and you're going to figure out a way to pay for it. You're at least going to make some kind of plan to pay for it or it's not that urgent. And this is just a pipe dream and you know that. And it makes you look good to millennials who care about this kind of stuff. The presidential candidates on the left on the Democratic side have all signed on to this. know it's not going to pass. We still have a Republican-controlled Senate. So there's no way that this legislation is going to pass, but it is popular among AOC's base, which is ignorant, socialist,

millennials. And so in order for those presidential candidates to get the support of the millennials that they know they have to get the support of in the election, they are going to sign on to this, knowing that they're not actually going to have to be held responsible for the utter failure that it would be if it was actually ever put into place because it's not going to be probably at least not anytime soon. Nancy Pelosi, which who is now basically a conservative Democrat, if you can even believe that from San Francisco. She's not conservative, by the way, but just compared to someone like AOC. She is even scoffing at this. She was asked about it in an interview and she was like, what is it called a green new dream? Yeah, we have no idea what's in it.

but everyone, everyone is for it, right? Everyone supports it. So she's kind of even patronizing this and looking down on this. She even won't go so far as to say that they're embracing socialism. Because remember, just five years ago, socialism was seen as a dirty word on in the Democratic Party. No one on the right or the left would have said, yeah, I'm, I'm a socialist. I mean, maybe Bernie Sanders, but he was really the only one. it wasn't until Bernie Sanders really made this mainstream made possible by the far left

progressivism of Barack Obama over the past eight years, that this kind of became a word that all of a sudden has positive connotations in the United States of America. So just remember that when people tell you that you are out there, you are crazy, you are a bigot, you are extreme for believing in capitalism, you can rest assured that you simply believe in not only the most effective system, but the system that has been held in the highest esteem. far longer and far more consistently than socialism ever has, especially in the United States of America. And so you don't need to listen to any of that. All of this stuff that they're saying is so common sense and that we absolutely need and that this is just the practical solution that we need to all that ails us in the United States of America.

They are the radicals, not you. So if you are stepping back for a second and saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, maybe I don't want the governments to overhaul all of these industries. in effect almost every area of my life. Maybe I don't want to pay trillions of tax dollars towards a deal and a resolution that we have no idea is going to be effective based on no evidence whatsoever. It's okay. Like you're not crazy. You're totally logical, totally on par with reality when you're asking yourselves those

questions. I said, and I was, let me just say, like I know it's a little bit, um, A little bit, is arrogant the right word? Well, it's just a fact. It's not even meant to be arrogant. It's just a fact. I was the first person to say that this is the fire festival of legislation. I just want you to know that.

Like, I was sitting here in this little chair that I do my podcast in, that I do my Instagram stories in. And I actually wrote a tweet that said something comparing AOC to Billy McFarland, you know, the guy who ran the fire festival. And then I was like, oh, I haven't even, I haven't even better tweet than that. And I said something, I'm not reading it. I said something along the lines of the Green New Deal is the fire festival of legislation. You pay all of this money to go to what seems like this awesome destination only to find

yourself sleeping in a tent and selling your soul for a bottle of Evian. I was the first one to say that. And then I saw all of these people after that, after that, telling the. the joke and owning it as theirs and even an article written with that title. Maybe, maybe we all came up with the same idea at the same time. I'm not really sure. My tweet was retweeted a lot because it was a fire tweet. But yeah, people definitely took credits for that because it's a great analogy. So it's fine. You can take it. Just know that you heard it here first and you saw it on my Twitter feed first. it is a great analogy. It is the fire festival of the green, of, of, of legislation, of the Green New Deal, of

legislation. Because you're promised all of these great things, you see celebrities endorsing it. You're like, oh, wow, socialism, Green New Deal, big government, no airplanes. Awesome. That sounds great. Oh, I just have to pay my life savings for it. Oh, but it's no big deal. It'll totally be worth it. You'll get there and it'll be the best experience of your life. will all live in this wonderful green zero carbon emissions, utopia, and we'll all hold hands and sing kum by yaw, and it'll be wonderful in the government. We'll be taking care of us. Great.

Now just hand over your entire paycheck and we'll get you there. That's exactly what happened with Fire Festival. That's exactly what's happening with the Green New Deal. And just like the Fire Festival, this is going to end up being a disaster as all government overhaul is. Okay, so let's get into this FAQ that has caused so much controversy. The FAQ really makes clear what the goal of the Green New Deal is, which is to swells capitalism, rather than allowing the market, aka you and me, decide what kind of transportation that we want to use,

for example, what buildings we want to build, what medical insurance we'd like to have, the government is going to decide all of those things for us. AOC is having a really, she's having a really hard time with that part about it. and she's having a really hard time with the PR about the FAQ that I'll get into in just a second. But she's having a really hard time defending, defending the Green New Deal against accusations that this is going to take a massive government overhaul, massive intervention into each of our lives. She's not really sure what she wants to say about that. So sorry, I just had to catch my breath for a second because I'm so excited.

So in an interview with NPR, AOC was asked, are you prepared to put on the table that yes, actually they're right? What this requires is massive government intervention. Someone asked her that on the radio on NPR. AOC says, yeah, it does. It does. Yeah, I have no problem saying that.

Okay. So she's admitting what we all know to be true. This is going to take massive government intervention. Obviously, she's not advocating for market solutions to help the environment or to help the economy. she's talking about legislation. Like she's talking about programs. She's obviously talking about government intervention.

Anyone with a brain sees that, whether you're left or the right. And yet later that day on MSNBC, later that day, she tells Chuck Todd, I think one way that the right does try to mischaracterize what we're doing is though it's like some kind of massive government takeover.

I'm sorry? That's because you said that. That's because that's what you said. You said that. You said that. You said that this morning. So what? I'm very confused.

I think baby girl is a little confused, too. AOC. Yes. Speaking of dishonesty, though, girlfriend, what got the most flack was not even just that utter hypocrisy and dishonesty, but was this one line that was rolled out in the FAQ that was provided by AOC's team to NPR and other outlets that talks more specifically what's, the goals are. And that line is this resolution will provide economic security for all who are

unable or unwilling to work. Also talks about providing healthy food, high quality care, safe, affordable, adequate housing, economic and, sorry, wow, just forgot how to talk for a second. Economic environment, free of monopolies, high quality education. Last thing here, economic security for all who are unable or unwilling to work. In case you don't understand what unwilling means. That means unwilling. That means like you don't want to do something. Like that's like, okay, so you're making a meal for your kids and you say, okay, I've got, I've got vegetables over here for people who are willing to eat vegetables. And then I've got, I've got Sour Patch kids over here for people who want to eat Sour Patch.

Now, maybe your kids are awesome and just want to eat broccoli anyway, but you're going to have a lot of three-year-olds, four-year-olds, five-year-old, six-year-olds that are going to take the sour patch instead, right? That's the same thing here. So if you are unwilling to eat vegetables, aka work, it's totally fine. You can just have sour patch kids instead. How many people do you think that are stupid and don't understand the importance of eating vegetables are going to take a sour patch kids, aka are not going to work? There's going to be a lot of people. And what happens if people just eat sour patch kids instead of broccoli for dinner every night, you end up being really unhealthy and lazy and you can't do anything with your life and you have to have people take care of you,

which is exactly what happens when the government takes care of people who are unwilling to work. Unwilling means you are lazy. Bottom line, that's it. We're not talking about unable. We're not talking about you fell on hard times. We're not talking about that you're sick, that something happened to you physically or the circumstances have just worked out in a very unfortunate way in which you were unable to get a job, which happened. We're talking about unwilling. You are fully able to physically, mentally, emotionally, whatever it is, circumstances,

you are able to work, but you say, no, I'm good. I got my sour patch kids. No, I'm just going to watch Netflix for a little bit. You know, I got a lot of options. No, I'm good. I got my health insurance. I got my affordable housing. I got my healthy food. I got everything that I need. There's no need for me to work. And AOC and the Green New Deal is saying that is perfectly fine. That's perfectly fine. And the reason why this is catching so much black, while people are, why people are so, uh,

just, uh, amazed by this in a very bad way, me included is because of how utterly, how utterly un-American it is. Now, all of this is very un-American. The idea of the government taking care of you,

rather than you working hard for yourself, is something that, uh, the Democrats have been pushing for it for a long time. But they have also tried to market it in a cunning way to say, oh, no, I believe in hard work.

They've said, no, I believe in the American dream. I believe in resolve and pulling yourself up by your, by your bootstraps. They've kind of tried to like say that and then give this caveat. But I just believe that we need to create a level playing field so that those who are oppressed, those who are marginalized, those who are on are having a hard time, are able to chase that American dream with free health care, free college, whatever. That's how they've kind of tried to market this thing. but very rarely do you hear a politician, even on the left, come out and say, no, work is not necessary. It's not part of the American character. It is not part of who we are as a people.

And quite frankly, it's not necessary. And the reason for that is because socialists truly believe that work is not inherently moral, that there's nothing actually good about work, that it's just kind of like, okay, you have the option to work. That's fine. You also have the option not to work. That's fine. So tell me, though, even from a just a totally secular perspective, does this sound right to you? You are babysitting.

Okay? You're babysitting. You're making $20 an hour. You babysit for five hours. You get $100. I was offered that babysitting job, but I decided not to take it because I don't feel like it. I really would rather paint my nails without any pants on. so I decided not to take the babysitting job.

Now, when you get home, I would like, I would like 50% of what you made. I would like $50. You say, well, why? You didn't go. You could have gone. You could have had a babysitting job, but you chose not to.

I say, I don't know. I didn't feel like it. Give me your money. And you have to give it to me. That's exactly what is happening here. I mean, that's pretty much what already happens. But Democrats are just now. coming out and saying it's not just if you've fallen on hard times.

It's not just if you're in a bad situation and you can't work. It's saying if you don't want to work, which like I said, already exists, already happens in our current welfare system. But Democrats up until now have said, oh, no, no, that doesn't happen. We want everyone to work. Employment is good. We don't want people to, we don't want people to just be lazy. But now they're just coming out and saying, well, actually, it's totally fun.

Actually, you can be lazy, and that's just as good as wanting to work. No, no. And let's look at this from a biblical perspective. Not only does the Bible have a lot to say about laziness, I mean, if you look at Proverbs, specifically Proverbs 1915, slothfulness cast into a deep sleep and an idle person will suffer hunger. Proverbs 31, 27, you know, the Proverbs 31 woman says she looks well to the weight of her household and does not eat the bread of idleness. Obviously, from a biblical perspective in that way, laziness in idleness is wrong.

Stealing from other people, what you did not earn is wrong. But also from the perspective that work is moral. Work is inherently good. How do I know that? Because in Genesis, we see that work existed before the fall. work is not a result of sin. Work is not a result of mankind falling. The result of mankind falling is that you will work, you will toil, you might not get anything in return. You might work the field and not actually reap anything. That is the result of sin. But work, productivity, being fruitful,

actually existed before the fall. So human beings, man and woman, were made to work. We're made to do something we're made to nourish and to beautify and to cultivate and to create things. Without that, we know from a Christian perspective, but also just from a historical perspective, we can look throughout history and see this. The human soul is denigrated without work, without a purpose, without something that we're striving towards, without something that we're building, without something that we are creating, we rot, we atrophy, we become not only really stupid, but we become immoral and corrupt. You've probably heard the phrase that an idle mind is the devil's workshop or idle hands are devil's tools.

That's absolutely true. We are made to be in a balanced way busy. Now, that doesn't mean that you have to have a nine to five job in order to be productive. You might be a stay-at-home mom. You might be a volunteer. You might run a nonprofit organization. There are various work looks different for various people. But, of course, within the realm of work that is not.

sinful. What is important is that we are making better the small plot of the universe that God has placed as him. We are beautifying. We are improving. We are making better the lives of other people, whether that is through nonprofit efforts, whether that is through volunteering, whether that is through being a financial consultant, whether that is through PR, you are moving the ball forward for your clients, for the people around you, for your customers, for the lives of those who work with you, me even delivering this podcast, you are doing something to contribute to the world, to the economy. That is what we are supposed to do as human beings, simply taking and not giving anything. It's not what we are called to do as Christians. It's not what we're called

to do as people, period. There is no moral, no biblical foundation whatsoever for being taken care of, for being unwilling to work, particularly by the government, by the way, which is just a corrupt institution in general. That's why conservatives believe in small government, not because we believe that we shouldn't help people when they need help, but because we think that private citizens do a much better job of helping people than the government does. Why? Because we can help people while still allowing them to be free. The government can't do that. That's just the nature of the government. As Ronald Reagan said, the most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.

That has always been true. It is still true. Ronald Reagan had a lot to say about welfare and how the idea behind welfare has changed so much from the time of FDR to the time to now. It started out as relief. Help from the government was just to make sure that people could survive after the Great Depression.

They could feed their families. They had fallen on a hard time. So you need relief from the government to supplement what you're already doing that move to welfare. And now it moves to entitlements. and our mentality has shifted with it. We have this idea that people are entitled to what the government gives them,

which is exactly why it is so hard to shrink the government once you've grown it, and Democrats know that. You probably saw that when Republicans tried to repeal Obamacare for being unconstitutional, and it really did shift so much of how American politics works and what Americans really expected from the government, when the government said, yeah, we're going to start taking care of your health care coverage, Republicans tried to repeal that. And what was the pushback?

The pushback was, well, you were evil and heartless and mean. And what are all of these people going to do? 24 million people are going to be kicked off of health care coverage and they're going to die. Well, Obamacare is new. And it didn't really solve anything. So, and we could get into all of that. But that's just an example of what happens when Democrats try to grow the government, they implement a program that gives people something without them having to work for it.

And then when you try to shrink the government by over, returning those programs that aren't actually helping and aren't actually good in the long run for the American people, you are told you are cold and heartless because all of these people are going to be left without. I personally think that it's very patronizing because it's basically telling people you can't go it alone. The odds are so stacked against you that you can't pull yourself up by your bootstraps and work hard. And so you really need us to take care of you. AOC is having is having the darnest time trying to figure all of this out. and defends her position on her Green New Deal.

And so she's getting extremely defensive of all of this. Now, she has a formula. So the formula is this. She says or does something not very smart. People criticize her for that. That's the second thing. She claps back, as she likes to say. She likes to think, oh, I'm a tough girl from the Bronx.

She claps back. And she says that, oh, these people are just bullies. me because I'm a woman and I'm a woman of color and because my ideas are so awesome because they're scared of me. She dismisses any legitimate criticism, which there always is. There's always thoughtful criticism of AOC that exists on the right and the left. She dismisses all of that. And she calls out a couple of trolls that said something untrue about her, untrue about something that she said, gives her an unfair criticism. She uses those obscure trolls to characterize the entirety of the right and say, oh, no one has any legitimate criticism of me. Look how awesome I am.

They're just attacking me because I'm, I'm so great. I mean, it's a brilliant strategy, but it's morally corrupt and completely dishonest. So here are some of the things that she has said over the past few days in light of all of the criticism that she's gotten. And like I said, even skepticism from the left with the basic question of how are you going to pay for this? How are we going to implement this? Okay. So she said, when you're hashtag green, New Deal legislation is so strong that the GOP has to resort to circulating false versions, but the real one, that's 70 House co-sponsors on day one, and all damn presidential candidates sign on anyway.

This was in response to a parody, by the way. Now, I could actually see how this parody was confusing a little bit because her Green New Deal is so ridiculous that it's kind of hard to tell the difference between the actual Green New Deal and a parody. But it was a joke and people were circulating it, talking about like making guys urinate and buckets and things like that. Like it was obviously ridiculous, but she points out these two examples of people using this parody as saying,

well, this is the entire GOP. They're circulating false versions because they know that my Green New Deal is so strong. Okay. Next week, The right has gotten increasingly desperate with spreading targeted rumors about me lately. Someone made up a mean that led to Snopes disproving this. Then she shows a link. And then in parentheses, she says,

also I had to live alone in my family's apartment after my dad died. the eviction lie is especially bad. And look, that's totally sad. And no one should be making fun of that. But the tweet talks about her having like a bad credit score and being evicted. I'm not sure that this, again, a random person. I'm not sure that this random person that she decided to cite knows anything about that part of her life.

And that is really sad. And it definitely shouldn't be made fun of. But again, this is just a random person that she's picking out. like I didn't see one mainstream person, not one person that I followed, not one person that I know run with this. I mean, this was a random guy without even a verified badge that had like a few thousand followers. And she decided to point this out and say, this is the GOP. Okay. What about all the members of the GOP and even conservative media and conservative influencers,

commentators, whatever you want to call them that have had very thoughtful and legitimate and fair criticism of your legislation? and actually have been very generous and gracious towards you as a person. What about them? They just don't exist. No, of course they don't exist because she knows her strength lies in her sass, not her smarts. She knows that if she actually went up against Ben Shapiro or, gosh, I would love for her to go up against Neil Cavuto on Fox News and Fox Business, I think that would be perfect. She knows that if she goes up against a Republican congressperson that actually knows anything,

she would totally crumble. I mean, she's really not. Like if you watch her on TV or in interviews that are unedited, she hard to, ever does unedited videos or she hardly ever does live. But when she does do live and even in the edited ones, she's not articulate. She really stumbles over her words. She has a hard time matching like the verb with the noun. She just gets really nervous. And so there's just, she wouldn't be able to do it. She knows that too. She knows that her strength is being sassy, not in being smart. She's got a lot of people behind her that are saying, look, this is the legislation that we need to push. These are

the proposals that we have. But she knows that if she went up against someone that actually knows their stuff, like she just wouldn't be able to do it. So it's actually pretty smart of her. It's smart of her to not take those opportunities. But for her to pretend, like no one has offered, no one has offered to have a legitimate conversation with her or an honest debate with her is just morally bankrupt and extremely hypocritical since she's always pointing

fingers at the right for being morally bankrupt. But here's her next tweet basically saying that this stuff, is really sad. The GOP is so intellectually bankrupt that they no longer engaged to debate issues in good faith, but instead seeks to lie, destroy a name called target

and destroy people slash communities with any means possible. It's a virus and a race to the bottom. I mean, if that is not, if that is not the craziest case of a lack of self-awareness that you have ever heard of in your entire life,

no longer engaged to debate issues in good faith, but instead seek to lie, distort, name called target, and destroy people's lives? Like, have you met the American left? Like, welcome, welcome to America in which liberal's number one goal, it seems like, is to destroy people's lives.

Please tell me. Tell me the last time that a liberal got harassed at their home or in a restaurant. Like, please tell me the last time a liberal got fired for saying something too extreme. You and all your anti-Semitic friends seem to be doing fine in Congress. Tell me the last time.

time a liberal's life was ruined by a conservative by false allegations. Can you tell me that? I don't think you can't. And plus, plus, you have had so many requests, as I said, for honest debates. You've had people offered to pay thousands of dollars towards whatever charity you wanted to, you wanted them to pay towards to just have an honest conversation with you. And you refuse to do it. You called it a cat call when Ben Shapiro asks you to have a debate. but now you say we are so intellectually bankrupt that we no longer engage to debate issues in good faith. We are the only ones engaging issues in good faith.

We are the, and I'm not saying everyone on the right. I'm not saying that. I'm not saying everyone on the right is good and everyone on the left is bad. I'm not saying that. But the number of conservatives who are willing to have an intellectual policy-driven conversation versus those on the left that are willing to, I guarantee the number is thousands and thousands higher on the right than it is on the left. Why? Because in order for us to even stay afloat, in order for us to even push back against the mainstream narrative, which is coming

from the mainstream media, which is coming from Hollywood, which is coming from academia, which is coming from people like you who have taken off with the help of Hollywood and all of those other megaphones, in order for us to push back against any of those narratives, we have to know our stuff. Like, we have to read books. Like, we have to actually know the facts. And so, yes, we are willing to engage you in debate. Now, I, I am totally fine having a conversation with her. I don't want it to be me. I don't think I'm the best person for that job.

Like the only, the one thing that I have over Ocasio-Cortez is not political experience. It's not degrees. It's probably not a lot. I probably don't have that much over her besides just understanding how terrible socialism is. But one thing I do have for her is self-awareness. Like, I do. understand the things I know about and the things that I don't know about and I don't purport to know the things that I don't unlike her. So I don't think that I'm the best person to debate

her. I think someone who is smarter than me, who knows more than me, who has more experience than me, would be in a better position to have a conversation with her than me. Now, I'm not really sure that it would be a great thing for Bench Pierre to debate her. I think it would be really, really painful to watch. Like I think it would almost just be like you just want to like, you just couldn't watch, you know? Like we'd all like our blankets would be over our head and I would be sweating. And then you would just, she would actually win because you'd feel bad for her

because she just got destroyed on national television. Like I just, I'm not really, I'm not really sure if I could just, if I could watch that happen. So, but for her to say that she's never been asked or for, Oh, we don't want to debate things in good faith. What she means by in good faith is that people agree with her. That's what she is saying. She thinks that in good faith means that we're just going to be like, yeah, you know what?

I'm totally fine with the government taking over my life. I'm totally fine with people who are working, taking all my money to live comfortably. That sounds good. That's what she sees is in good faith. If we have other ideas, then that's not in good faith, which means that she's the one that's not in good faith. I mean, this is the biggest lie. And so, guys, I know, like, it is tempting for me. It's tempting.

It might even be tempting for you, especially if you're a girl. It's tempting for your liberal friends, for your moderate friends, for your friends who just don't know anything about politics. I know for her to be attractive for you to just latch on to be like, okay, well, she does just at least seem like a nice person. I'm not so sure about that. I just don't know. Like, how, how either she's just so ignorant and so latch.

keen self-awareness that she could say something like this, or she's purposely manipulating you in line by saying that the GOP is so intellectually bankrupt that we no longer engaged to debate issues in good faith, but we lie to store a name called target and destroy people in communities by any means possible when she has had multiple invitations to have honest conversations, respectful dialogue. Have you seen her? Have you seen her have a respectful dialogue with someone on the right one time?

You're saying there's no one in Congress that you, that would talk to you in a respectful way about your positions. There's no one. There's not a single person in Congress that would like to talk to you. I would love, I would love for you to talk to a Republican congressperson. I think that that would be great. I think that you could have a very understanding dialogue and that would be really good for the American people. I don't want to see her get destroyed.

I just want to see her to be able to defend these things. And I just don't think she's able to. And I think she knows that. Okay, last week, it's pretty wild that the GOP can't decide whether they're going to run with a conspiracy theory that I'm secretly richer, the exaggeration and mockery of my family's struggle after my dad died during the financial crisis. Instead, they decide to defy logic and run with both. Sorry, it sounded like I laughed. I didn't laugh. I was like breathing. I just don't know who she's talking about. I don't know who she's talking about. I don't know. Like, again, there could be a couple,

there could be a few trolls that are saying something like this and they're wrong for saying that. Like you should definitely not say that someone's secretly rich if they're not. You should also not make fun of someone's family struggle. You totally shouldn't do that. But I'm just not sure that that's like a mainstream narrative. So here is AOC's formula. She picks out some random people on Twitter who made stuff up about her. She uses their trolling to characterize the entire Republican Party to claim that she's a victim of unfair bullying because of how great she and her ideas are.

She uses dishonesty and emotional manipulation to make herself look like a hero. It really shows a lack of character and maturity that should be expected from a 29-year-old that doesn't have any political or professional experience whatsoever. But you would hope that it doesn't apply to someone that has the power to create legislation that would affect the entire country. And yet, we are as millennials in general, a generation of idiots. So here we are. This is something I was thinking about.

Speaking of generation of idiots. And because I look at someone like AOC and she is so popular and I don't think, and I could be alone on the right and saying this. I don't think that she is this terrible person. I think she's dishonest. I think she's manipulative. I think she's so wrong. And I think she's so ignorant. I think she's really bad for the country. But I don't like condemn her soul. I'm sure that she probably has a good heart. And if it wasn't for her terrible values, we probably could be friends. Like we probably have stuff in common. But the reason why she is so popular simply because she's attractive and she's young and she's got like, I'm from the Bronx story and she does clapbacks on Twitter.

Those really the only reasons why she's popular. It's not because she has good ideas or she's articulate or smart. The reason why that is working for her is because we as a generation about to be the largest voting block ever. We're really dumb. And I don't mean that in a mean way. And I don't mean every single millennial. But just in general, like we're dumb. Like if you look at historical knowledge, if you look at even things like our knowledge about the Holocaust,

our knowledge about American. in history and our founding, we are the most ignorant generation, even though we have the most degrees of any generation. And I do have a theory. And this is a total theory just based on my own subjective experience. But just walk with me for a second. So I was reading one of my blog posts from 2012. And so seven years ago. And I just had like this little blog where I talked about like Jesus stuff and life stuff. And I was reading it. And you know, when you read something from almost a decade ago, you're typically like, wow, I was so dumb. I was so dumb. And I hate the things I said. I'm so embarrassed. And I thought that was a good idea and it's really not.

Well, I didn't have that feeling. I read it and I was like, wow, I was a lot smarter than I feel like I had more profound thoughts. I think I had more poignant analogies. And I was a really good writer. And wow, I feel like things came so much more easily to me than than they do now. But when I think back to college and to high school. What did I do at night? What did I do in my free time? I read. Even if it wasn't a nonfiction book, like something that actually taught me something, it was a fiction book. Sometimes it was trash fiction books, like teen fiction books. I always, I read those, my friends and I always read those in high school. I was always reading. I've always loved to read. I started to read really early. I've always loved words. Reading, writing has always come super easily to me. And I just did that

really naturally and enjoyed doing that in high school and college. But since college, and really my last couple of years of college, the number of books that I read every year has dramatically dipped. And part of that is because of busyness, but a lot of it is because of social media. Because at night, when I get in bed, the last thing I want to do is exercise my brain. And so I want to do something mindless. And I also notice that I am not able to concentrate for as long as I used to be able to when I'm writing or when I'm reading. I pause and I look at Instagram. How awful is that? It's like my brain is addicted to instant gratification, to convenience, to the personalized world that has been created on all of my social media platforms.

And I said something about this on Instagram. On my Instagram story the other day, I said, I feel like my brain has atrophied. And I'm not able to say all of the things that I used to say seven years ago because of social media. And I got a ton of messages from you guys, a ton of being like, oh my gosh, I thought this was only me. I feel the same way. So it does just make you wonder about our generation. If all of us have kind of latched on to the habit of scrolling mindlessly for hours a day, I mean, I think sometimes it's hours a day for me, which is so sad. It's such a waste of mental energy. If we've all done that. And just like when you stop exercising for a long period of time and you're just not as strong and you're kind of out of shape and your body's not

able to do this in things that it used to be able to. The same thing happens to your mind. And I just wonder if over the past decade of us being addicted to looking at pictures and reading, you know, three-worded captions and not exercising our minds in our spare time, but rather killing brain cells by looking at the Kardashians on our Instagram Discover page, if our minds have atrophied and if we have a lower tolerance for actually researching things and for actually learning things. And so we take whatever the headlines tell us, and we take whatever we see on social media, we take whatever is emotionally compelling, the most emotionally compelling, and we latch on to that. The Democrats in the left have done a really good job on capitalizing on that. They have made it

all about emotions. They have made it all easy, all about attention grabbing headlines. I mean, they've got the megaphones, like I said, of Hollywood, of the mainstream media, of academia. and so all of these things in social media, all the things that are surrounding us have this liberal bent. And if we're not thinking, if we're not willing to make the effort to actually dig in to the facts,

then yeah, we are automatically going to lean liberal. That's why I always say it's much harder to be a conservative than it is to be a liberal because you don't have to think to be a liberal. You're automatically, you drift towards liberalism. Laziness drifts towards liberalism.

You never drift towards conservatism because it's too hard. and your life is going to be a lot harder because you're going to be basically persecuted for it. You have to think and you have to try and you have to research and you have to do the things that are millennial atrophied minds no longer want to do. So I know that sounds just like really sad, especially if you're a mom that's listening to this or not just a mom, but if you're like an older mom, if you're not a millennial, you're a generation X, you're a baby boomer and you're like looking at this huge generation

of millennials and you're like, what the heck, what are we going to do? how are we going to fix any of this? I get it. I know that it sounds really dark and it sounds really hopeless. But the light in this, if you are a millennial, if you are Generation Z, if you're a young person listening to this, is the bar is set really low for you. Okay? And that's a good thing. The bar is set really, really low for you to impress your boss, for you to impress the generation ahead of us that is still in charge of the country.

The baby boomers and soon to be Gen X, there's a lot of gender. in Exters in the White House, for example, they still care about good communication. They still care about you working hard. They still care about you being able to prove how much you know. And so all you have to do, all you have to do to be an impressive millennial to get further than your peers and your coworkers is to read and to be able to write and communicate well. read, write, and communicate well, and you will be light years, light years ahead of where most millennials are. Most millennials can't even write a sentence without a comma splice. They don't even know

good grammar. They can't, they can hardly read. They can't write a good argument. If you can write well, if you can read, like if you are exercising your mind every day, and I'm preaching to the choir, by the way, preaching to the choir, preaching to myself, if you are reading and exercising your mind even just for an hour a day. If you are writing, if you are practicing the art of argumentation, well, one, you're going to become a conservative. Like, you just are. The path from logic to conservatism is like the snap of finger blink of an eye. It's just right there. Whereas the path from logic to progressivism winds a bunch of different directions and it goes all around and it has a bunch of dead ends and actually you just end up turning around and going to conservatism. Anyway,

if you just do those things, if you just do those things, you will be so far ahead of your friends, you will be so far ahead of them. If you just think, if you just think, that's all you have to do. It used to be that everyone was,

everyone had a base level of intellect. Like everyone had to read the classics. Everyone read in their spare time. Everyone could write a decent letter. That's just what you did in your spare time. But now none of us have to do that. We don't know how to do that. And yet that's always going to be valid.

I truly believe maybe I'm maybe it's unrealistic. I truly believe that that's always going to be valuable. That's always going to set you ahead. I'm so thankful that I had a grandmother and a mother who, uh, taught me how to read and taught me how to write at a very early age. I've literally since I have been two and a half or probably two years old. No, less than that. I think the video that I'm thinking of of myself is like 18 months.

my grandmother and mother just like just taught me things. I was just always learning things when I was little. And I think that I have gotten dumber in the past 10 years because instead of exercising my brain, I've just been intellectually lazy in a lot of ways. So get ahead by reading, by knowing things, by researching, by taking that extra effort to actually know the facts of something and to read in your spare time. I don't care if it's a theology book, which I think is great. I think fiction is awesome.

Like, I think read fiction books. I think it really helps with your creativity. It really helps with your ability to write my friends in high school and college who didn't write well. It's because they never read. My friends now who can't write very well, it's because you don't read. That's why you want to become a good writer, read. And writing is really important.

You want to be a conservative commentator. You want to do a podcast. You want to be able to get ahead and conservative media. Rights. That is how you are. going to prove that you actually have intellect, that you actually have substance, that you're not just a talking head, you're not just repeating, you're not just repeating talking points of someone else, but you're actually thinking for yourself. So that's my advice to you guys. It'll also

save you from the clutches of socialism, which is predicated on the ignorance of the masses. Okay, love you guys. I'll see you on Tuesday. Tuesday? I don't know what I'm going to talk about. Yeah. I think that we're going to talk, or Tuesday, did I say Tuesday? Thursday. I thought about if gathering, thought about the scandal and the SBC with the sexual harassment, sexual, every sexual misconduct, everything that's going on there. Also, though, it's Valentine's Day. So maybe I'll do something loving, love. Maybe I'll talk about how Timothy and I met, my husband. I don't know. Okay. Love y'all. Bye.