The Matt Walsh Show - Ep. 1820 - AOC Is The Dumbest Politician In American History. And She Could Still Be President.

Episode Date: August 11, 2026

AOC claims Woke 1.0 was crazy, which of course means that she was crazy, and still is. Ep. 1820 - - - Today's Sponsors: Christian Healthcare Ministry - If you're looking for an affordable, biblical alternative to the way most people approach health care costs, it's worth taking a serious look. Get started today by visiting https://CH-Ministries.org/WALSH Dose Daily - New customers can save 35% on their first month subscription by going to https://DoseDaily.co/WALSH or entering promo code WALSH at checkout. - - - DailyWire+ Become a Daily Wire Member and watch all of our content ad-free: https://dwplus.watch/RealHistorySubscribe 📲 Download the free Daily Wire app today on iPhone, Android, Roku, Apple TV, Samsung, and more. 🍿 Run Hide Fight: Infidels will premiere on The Daily Wire, Wednesday September 16th. 📜 Real History with Matt Walsh is available ad-free, exclusively on DailyWire+ https://dwplus.watch/RealHistory 👕 Get your Matt Walsh flannel here: https://dwplus.shop/MattWalshMerch - - - Socials:  YouTube — https://youtube.com/@mattwalsh Facebook — https://www.facebook.com/mattwalshblog Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/mattwalshblog TikTok — https://www.tiktok.com/@mattwalsh_ X — https://twitter.com/mattwalshblog - - - Privacy Policy: https://www.dailywire.com/privacy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

For the vast majority of this country's history, intelligence was considered an asset in politics. Most Americans preferred to vote for politicians with a high IQ, not because these politicians represented the common man, but precisely because they didn't. They were extraordinary. This has been true since the nation's founding and before. Ben Franklin won a medal from the Royal Society for his research on electricity. John Adams was a gifted attorney who managed to get several British soldiers acquitted of charges related to the Boston Massacre, which was no small feat since the trial took place in Boston. Thomas Jefferson maintained a famous library, and he could translate passages in ancient Greek and Latin. These men were all-time geniuses.

And these attributes were valuable in politics because everyone understood that when you elect competent leaders at whatever level of government, you get favorable results for everybody. And that's all that people cared about at the time. Nobody elected George Washington because he was charming. There's actually a story from the Constitutional Convention where a guy put his arm on Washington's back as a greeting, and Washington removed the hand and just stared at the guy until he backed away slowly.

I personally find that story to be extremely relatable. It was the level of charisma and warmth that you could expect from Washington, and nobody cared. We elected Washington because he was a brilliant tactician who defeated the British. He was a great leader. But somewhere along the line, after a half century of importing tens of millions of foreigners into the country, our standards changed. Intelligence is no longer the qualification that it used to be, quite the opposite. Today, some of the dumbest and least impressive people in the country hold elected office.

One need only watch any random congressional hearing for five minutes to see that the general IQ of our politicians has clearly plummeted to depths never before seen or. explored. Indeed, it seems that the dumber and less impressive you are, the more likely you are to achieve political success. The more likely you are to become the Democrat Party's nominee for president. And that's not an accident. Now, yes, it's easy for conservatives to mock dumb candidates. We can laugh at the fact that Tim Wall said he was friends with school shooters or, you know, the fact that Kamala Harris speaks like an AI chatbot minus the computing power, or the fact that Joe Biden performed so poorly on the debate stage that his wife thought he was having a stroke. But dumb candidates are capable of doing two things that smart candidates simply cannot, at least

with any degree of effectiveness. First of all, dumb candidates are relatable and familiar to dumb voters, and there are, sadly, a lot of those. And we're importing more every day. When a Haitian arrives in Ohio, slack-jawed, prowling for cats to devour, he can find comfort in the ramblings of an alcoholic like Kamala Harris, who talks about coconut trees and, you know, giving away a bunch of free stuff. It's reassuring. It reminds him of home. And therefore, when some NGO comes along to collect 50 ballots from that Haitian, every single one of those ballots is guaranteed to be favorable to the Democrat Party. And the other benefit of fielding dumb candidates, and this is the really big one, is that they can easily wave their hand and disavow all of their previous

statements and their party's previous statements. They can snap their fingers and make all the bad press go away. After all, you can't hold dumb people accountable for things they've said in the past. They had no idea what they were doing back then or now. They can go on camera and say, oh, you know, I didn't really mean that. And millions of people will buy it. If you want to reset a disastrous era for your political party, or at least give the impression of doing so, a dumb candidate can get the job done. Now, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez may not understand much, but she definitely grasps this concept. She is now, with virtual certainty, going to be on the Democratic Party's ticket in 28, either as the presidential or vice presidential nominee. She is the party's ideal

candidate because she can simultaneously disavow what the communists are planning while also giving them everything they want. Unlike Gavin Newsom, AOC doesn't come across as overly calculating and manipulative because she seems like a moron because that's exactly what she is. And for Democrats, that's their secret weapon. On one of the Sunday shows this weekend at ABC News, AOC put this strategy into action. So watch her response to Jonathan Carl, who asks her, about the pesky fact that just a few years ago, Democrats, including AOC, were calling for the elimination of local law enforcement in the country. So here's her explanation after he asks about Francesca Hong, the communist in Wisconsin who wants to abolish the U.S. government. And here's

how she handles that. Watch. What do you make of those controversial statements? I'm sure you've seen. I mean, she's, you know, the Thanksgiving dust up. She says she doesn't, you know, still believe that. but, you know, the abolished prisons, abolished police, which is also positions that have been taken by a lot of the progressive candidates who have won. How do you get around that? Yeah. Those are not positions that are supported by most aware.

I mean, I think that a lot of these races, even right now, they'll have a tendency to be nationalized. Yeah. But these races ultimately are local and all politics are local. My understanding is that Francesca Hong has made clear her present stances to her electorate. Yeah, she's moved away from a lot of that. Right. She's moved away from it.

And I have a local city councilman that has this saying, woke one was crazy. Oak one was crazy. Okay, that's true. And I think that what's important is that we have to assess what a candidate is saying. Did the movement go too far with some of those positions? I mean, you briefly supported the idea of defunding the police. Well, you know, I think that during this time and during, especially during COVID, there was a huge opening of the Overton window. We were shut down.

There was some of the highest unemployment rates that we have seen because of those shutdowns. And I think that the doors were really open in trying to entertain any and every policy that was going to get us to a better place. Woke 1 was crazy, she says with a smile. And Jonathan Carle laughs along with her because the whole point of this interview is to create as much distance as possible between AOC and everything she's been saying

up until this point. They're acting like Woke 1 is a relic from a time when they were still building pyramids in Egypt. Woke 1 is ancient history. It was five years ago, but it may as well be 4,000 years ago. This is what we're meant to believe. Now, of course, they also want us to believe that slavery was so recent that it may as well have happened last week. Meanwhile, Jim Crow effectively happened this morning.

So things from decades and centuries ago are somehow fresher and more current than things from the year 2021. It's like we've entered some kind of time warp where the sequence of events has been jumbled and mixed up. We're unstuck in time, like we're living in a Kurt Vonnegut novel or something. But there's something else we need to notice about the clip that we just played. AOC goes out of her way to blame the COVID lockdowns for all of her party's bad ideas. She states that people were desperate because they were unemployed, and for that reason, they were willing to entertain every policy that might get them to a better place. You see, this makes perfect sense, because when people are unemployed and desperate,

the very first thing on their minds is defunding the police, that's priority number one. It's a tale as old as time. A person falls on hard time, starts to struggle, turns to the bottle, and soon decides that the concept of law enforcement shouldn't exist. We've all been there. Oh, and when you get the pink slip at your job, you're also going to become hell-bent on allowing men to compete in women's sports and castrating children and burning down random buildings on behalf of career, black felons.

You become totally psychotic, not responsible for your actions. And by extension, neither are Democrats like AOC. That's the message she's trying to send, at least superficially. But in reality, she's saying something a little different. She doesn't actually believe that woke one, so-called, was a good faith effort to fix anyone's problem. Which is really saying, or rather confessing, is that when you isolate Americans in their homes using the force of law, they become much easier to manipulate and control. The lockdowns were a godsend for these communists, and not simply because they upended the global economy and led to mass unemployment and disconnect content. The real benefit of the lockdowns from the perspective of politicians like AOC is that they demonstrated a proof of concept.

They prove that when the government demands total obedience in the face of a new, vaguely defined threat based on inadequate evidence, tens of millions of Americans will shut up and obey. They won't simply listen to Tony Fauci and his social distancing rules or whatever, wear the mask and all the rest of it. They'll listen to whatever you tell them about any topic. they'll become totally submissive. For the communists, that was the main takeaway from the lockdowns. That's why AOC mentioned the lockdowns in her answer. They can't wait to shut down the economy all over again so they can push the country more directly towards communism.

And make no mistake about it, woke one was trans hysteria, race riots. Woke 2, which of course is implied by the existence of Woke 1, is full-on communism. See, the left is getting more extreme, not less. Now they're just being slightly more strategic about it. So the second time around, they won't waste any time with race hustlers like Robin DeAngelo or Henry Rogers, aka Ibramax-Kendi. They won't try to launder their communism through respectable seeming academics or fake narratives of police brutality.

They won't have to. Instead, as explicitly as possible, they will pursue Marxism from the moment they regain power. race riots will still be a factor. Actually, they might even try to bring back the transist area. Who knows, it's hard to say. But what we can say for sure is that the second phase of wokeness, which we've already entered, as evidenced by the rise of the DSA and the election of communist foreigners like Mamdani, will be far worse in every way than the first phase.

Speaking of the DSA, take a look at this moment from AOC's interview when she's asked about the platform. the Democratic Socialists of America is clearly a deranged set of policy proposals, one that's incompatible with the continued existence of the United States. They want to eliminate privately owned corporations. They want to abolish the police, get rid of the court system,

the presidency, award citizenship to every illegal alien in the country, and so on. In response, AOC's first reaction is not to disavow anything in the platform. Instead, you know, she starts rambling about Donald Trump. Watch. I was looking through the DSA program, and this is the national program. I'm sure you've

seen the document. It was adopted just a few months ago. But some of the positions here, defund the Department of Defense, close-over-sea military bases, abolish the police and prison system, grant amnesty to all immigrants in the U.S., replace the Supreme Court and executive judiciary with chosen by lower and lower to Congress, abolish the Senate, public ownership of corporations and essential industries. I mean, those are some positions that you're going to be hearing a lot about this fall from Republicans. And I think we're also going to be hearing a lot about Donald Trump's commitment to getting us into a reckless war in Iran, his collaboration with big companies to make sure that everything from groceries to rent stay sky high.

And I think that people are less interested in these academic debates and they're more interested in how we're going to bring their bills down. Well, she doesn't want to get bogged down in academic debates like whether we should have a country or not. That's secondary to bringing the bills down and making sure people can afford to see a doctor, she says. But wait a minute, you might ask, how exactly will abolishing the Senate and the presidency and the Supreme Court help people afford to see a doctor? How exactly will life become affordable when we abolish our borders and start paying welfare to another 100 million foreigners? How is this going to work exactly? When we become a third world country, how is any of this stuff going to become more affordable? How is it working in actual third world countries today?

How's their health care system going? Hey, how is the health care system in Somalia? And what system of government is going to replace the one we have now? Well, Jonathan Carle, in a roundabout way, did attempt to address that question. It was one of the only moments in the interview where he pushed back a little bit. He wanted to know, in AOC's own words, how. she understood the distinction between socialism and communism. And here was AOC's response. By the way, just a quick definitional thing, what in your mind is the difference between socialism and

communism? I think to me the fundamental differences, I mean, there's many. One prevailing one is democracy. And I believe that democratic socialists are fundamentally pro-democracy. And we believe in the ballot box. We believe in respecting the outcomes of elections and governing democratically and ensuring that the ideas and policies that are implemented are one through popular vote and popular opinion. And so I think that's why so much of what we focus on is also making sure that we are providing for the majority of Americans, guaranteeing health care, raising wages, strengthening the right to a union. And I think that that's at its core what we're about. Are you still a member of Democratic Socialist of America?

Of the New York City chapter. The New York City chapter, not the national. Now, there's a lot to consider here, starting with the implication that communists are never elected democratically. That's simply not true. There have been plenty of communists who have won in Democratic elections from Nicaragua to India to Czechoslovakia. there are many, many communist regimes that have claimed to be democratic, claimed at least. So if your distinction between socialism and communism is that democratic socialists come to power because of democratic elections, you need to go back to the drawing board because you have no idea what you're talking about, par for the course with AOC.

Of course, the bigger problem with her response is that the DSA's entire platform is designed to destroy every aspect of American democracy. And I'm not even talking about the fact that they want to abolish every branch of government. The thing is when you open the borders and grant legal status to everybody who walks into the country, American democracy obviously becomes impossible. Americans cannot govern themselves when they're outvoted by foreigners. That's what's happened in California, a state that will never again elect another Republican. It's also happening in New York, where a quarter of the population can't speak English. This is why Democrats support amnesty in the first place.

It's a convenient way to rig elections. They'll tell you they favor democracy. but their plan is to dilute your vote until it's irrelevant. Now, if they can't ban you from voting, then at least they can just dump, they can bring in truckloads of foreigners and low IQ people and drown you out. That's the strategy.

The Obama and Biden administrations accelerated this plan, and the next Democrat administration, should one take power, will go even further. And you can expect no resistance whatsoever, from establishment Democrats during this takeover. As DSA candidates have won elections all over the country, prominent Democrats have openly admitted they don't care about their platform or how they'll destroy the U.S. They only care about putting more Democrats in office regardless of what they believe. Here's Adam Schiff of California when he was asked about the rise of the communist Abdul al-Said

in Michigan who believes that private health care should be abolished, also believes that football is quote unquote, toxicly masculine and other more outrageous opinions than that, although that one's pretty bad. Watch. Have you endorsed El Sayette? I'm supporting him now and I just spoke with him. I stayed out of the primary, but I'm supporting him and just spoke with him for the first time earlier this week. And that is the seat we must win. Now we've seen similar responses from every Democrat, except John Federman, I guess.

They're all lining up to support communists solely because they want to cling to power as long as possible. They'll happily watch the entire country burn to the ground as long as it advances their political careers for the time being. With Russiagate, Adam Schiff pretended to hide behind the narrative that he was rooting out Russian corruption in our elections or whatever. And when 20 different prosecutors were trying to throw Trump in prison during the 2024 election, and they pretended that they were concerned about the rule of law and democracy and all that. And now he's simply dropping the farce entirely. They all are. They're abandoning the phony, the phony principled messaging,

and they're just flat out embracing third world communism and other forms of stupidity. Christians often teach about helping one another, and they should. But eventually, that has to mean something practical. You're probably experienced getting hit with a medical bill that was much higher than you anticipated and didn't know where to turn. That's where Christian health care ministries comes in. CHM isn't health insurance. It's a health-cost-sharing ministry

where Christians voluntarily come together to share one another's eligible medical bills. The idea is remarkably simple. Actually, you can help carry someone else's burden, and when your family needs help, all the other members do the same for you. That's Christian community in a very practical form, and CHM has been doing it since 1981.

In 45 years, they've satisfied 100% of every eligible. medical bill they have received. Programs start as low as $150 per person per month with added protection for catastrophic medical events. So if you're looking at what you're currently spending on health care and wondering whether there's another option, take a look at CHM. It's affordable, it's biblical, and it's been working for Christians for 45 years. Get started today by visiting ch ministries.org slash walsh. That's chministries.org slash walsh. Your body actually makes most of its own which is worth knowing because cholesterol advice usually sounds something like this. Don't eat eggs, don't eat butter, don't eat anything you enjoy, problem solved. So it's obviously more complicated

than that. And that's why people are looking for practical ways to support their cholesterol health alongside things they're already doing. Eating better, exercising, monitoring your health, that's where a dose for cholesterol comes in. Dose for cholesterol is a clinically backed daily supplement designed to support triglycerides, LDL, HDL, and total cholesterol levels. And unlike most supplements, you're not adding another handful of capsules to your day. Dose is just a two-ounce liquid shot that tastes like mango. You just take the shot and you're done. No powder to mix, no capsules to swallow, no terrible supplement aftertaste.

It also gets delivered right to your door, so it's easy to stay consistent. That's really the point. A health routine only works if you actually stick with it. If you're looking for a practical way to support your cholesterol health, take a look at dose for cholesterol. New customers can save 35% on your first month of subscriptions by going to DOSE-D-A-I-L-Y.C-O-L-S-E-O-S-Walsh. Check out that's D-O-S-E-D-A-I-L-Y dot CO-S slash Walsh for 35% off your first month subscription. Now, if there's cause for some optimism here, it's the fact that with AOC in particular, they've clearly overcompensated. They're elevating a politician so dumb that she hardly qualifies as a useful idiot.

She's simply an idiot. Now, we shouldn't underestimate the possibility that she'll win the next presidential election. This is, after all, a very different country than it was 40 years ago. If AOC had run for president in, say, 1992, she would have been laughed off the stage and then out of the country and off of the planet. I mean, the American public would have gawked and stared in gaping astonishment. that a woman so ditsy and ridiculous, not to mention so clearly resentful of the country she wants to lead, would even consider running for any office, let alone the presidency. But this is not 1992 or even 2002.

This is a different country, and frankly, by every imaginable metric, a worse one. So AOC could absolutely win the presidency. And we shouldn't be so naive and optimistic in our thinking to assume otherwise. All that said, we do have to take stock of the fact that the headwerect that the headwerexed, wins for AOC are real. These are mental headwinds I'm talking about. I mean, her head is wind. That's all she has inside her head. But this is a woman who can barely form a coherent thought. On a debate stage with, say, J.D. Vance or Marco Rubio, she would turn in a performance that would make Biden look almost sentient by comparison. So you know where this is going? It's signed for a quick

recap of some of AOC's greatest hits, particularly from the woke one era, which which lasted from, you know, about 2015 to five seconds ago. We'll begin with a lesser-known gem, which is the fact that AOC sincerely believes that the term opening salvo is really pronounced opening silo. So instead of firing an opening salvo at the enemy, you're opening a silo at them. Makes perfect sense if you're illiterate,

which is why AOC doesn't miss a beat. Watch. Georgia is the crucible. Tennessee, Louisiana, Mississippi is the crucible. So if you are not from here, it is time to pull up. Because what they thought was the final blow is actually just the opening silo. What they thought was the final blow was actually just the opening silo. They never saw it coming.

They were expecting a salvo, probably because they passed the first grade, and they got a silo instead. She really showed them. But no one was more impressed with AOC's intellect than the all. audience of this CNN Town Hall debate, which learned the horrible truth about the people responsible for setting the rivers on fire and destroying the environment. Turns out that the villain of the story is not DuPont, as many on the left have alleged. Watch. Rivers in rural areas were on fire because of corporations poisoning the people who lived in

those areas, poor middle class communities, getting poisoned and dumped on by corporations like Deloitte and 3M pouring chemicals into these places, and they want to call it a democratic priority. Yes, you heard that correctly. The real enemy is Deloitte, which, by the way, is an accounting and consulting firm. So you thought that they were just sitting in their offices all day, dressed business casual, writing emails in their khakis,

and filling out Excel spreadsheets from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. But you were wrong. In their spare time, Deloitte consultants were dumping chemicals in the water. They were torching every river and farmland. they came across. They're like Mongol hordes rampaging around the United States. If we want to stop global warming, our best hope is for everyone to hire an accountant from Deloitte to do our taxes. That's the only way to keep them busy. Otherwise, they run rampant. But if the audience at the CNN Town Hall was impressed, they've got nothing on the unsuspecting foreign dignitaries at the Munich Security Conference

a few months back. This was AOC's big, prepared debut on the international stage for a moment to prove that she's qualified to serve as president or vice president. And here's how it went. Would and should the U.S. actually commit U.S. troops to defend Taiwan if China were to move? You know, I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is a, you know, I think that this is a, this is, of course, a very longstanding, policy of the United States. And I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point. And we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even

arise. You know, the best part of that clip is that right after AOC says, and this I think is the most profound quote from her, she says, you know, I think that this is a, this is a, such a, you know, I think this is, um, this is of course a very longstanding, um, policy. But right at that moment when she hears the word policy, the woman who asked the question nods her head up and down. She has no idea what AOC is saying because she isn't saying anything at all, but she's so happy to hear something approaching an English word that she can barely contain her excitement. She was just holding on, you know, for dear life, like waiting for AOC to say some kind of word and then AOC gets to it. And the woman's like, yes, a word.

And indeed, no one can argue with AOC's response. There is a long-standing policy not to answer that particular question. Any questions? Again, this is a moment that she prepped for. She spent months, yes, months, plural, studying foreign affairs with various experts in the field, gave her a crash course and how to handle questions like this, and that answer was the best she could do. We need to do something with our economic research and global position to prevent China from ever-threatening Taiwan. That's all she could say.

What this means is that she's simply too stupid to even dodge a defective. call it question, which is an extremely low bar, and she can't clear it. She could have just said, well, we shouldn't commit U.S. troops to any foreign conflict before it's even started, or she could have said, we'll commit U.S. troops to Taiwan or anywhere else, only if it's clearly in the best interests of American citizens. Could have said that. Instead, she just stutters like a buffoon, trying desperately to remember what her handlers told her to say, and she couldn't remember. But in fairness, I might be judging AOC too harshly here, because if you ask the ladies of the view, AOC's answer couldn't have gone better. Watch.

She made it clear while she was in Munich that she was there to point out the rise of authoritarianism. Did I say that correctly? Authoritarianism. Authoritarianism. So as you see it, happens to everyone. Everybody. Even women like Sunny cannot pronounce authoritarianism. So she was there to, you know, highlight sort of that and the rise of fascism.

This is the demographic that Democrats are courting for the next election. people who can't laugh at AOC because they're just as dumb as she is. For her part, AOC posted the following response to her critics who took issue with the fact that she embarrassed herself and the entire country on the international stage. And here's what she had to say. Do you think that I don't understand foreign policy? Because out of hours of discourse about international affairs, I pause to think about one of the most sensitive geopolitical issues that currently exist on earth.

I'm afraid the issue is not my understanding, but rather the problem is perhaps you've gotten adjusted to a president that never thinks before he speak. Now, what's funny about this response is that when Trump won the election in 2016, he took a phone call with Taiwan's president and instantaneously every media outlet in the country from the New York Times to Teen Vogue lost their minds. Overnight, everyone became an expert on Taiwan policy and a diplomatic precedent. they all told us that Trump was risking World War III, that he was reckless and irresponsible, but he wasn't qualified for the job and so on. And in the end, nothing happened. It was just a phone

call. Nobody cared. As it turns out, it's possible for politicians, even the president-elect of the United States, to contradict the foreign policy establishment when it comes to Taiwan or any other issue. You can say and do whatever you think is appropriate under the circumstances. But AOC is only capable of repeating lines she's rehearsed, which is why she melted down under pressure. It's hard to keep your pre-approved talking points straight when you're on a stage for any length of time. That's why AOC excels at producing shorter videos in the comfort of her own apartment. These are usually much more thoughtful takes on important issues like her assessment of gas stoves. You see AOC wants to ban gas stoves, but she also uses one.

and you can see right there the evidence in various videos she uploads. And you might think that's a contradiction, but you'd be wrong. Here's why. Watch. I do think it's funny that like absolute utter Republican meltdown where they're like, you can take my gas stove or my cold dead hands or how dare you talk about gas stoves. You have a gas stove. First of all, first of all, I rent, period. Second of all, though, it doesn't even matter because by that logic, these are the same people who would have said we should have never gotten rid of leaded gasoline.

Just because someone may have driven a gasoline car, science evolves and gives us new knowledge with time. You have to appreciate her complete lack of shame, if nothing else. As long as you don't own a gas stove outright, then you're not part of the problem. If you're only leasing, then you're good to go. You might think that this is just another run-of-the-mill example of hypocrisy, but it's actually much more tragic than that. Here's a post from AOC's X account dated January 2023. Quote, did you know that ongoing exposure to NO2 from gas stoves is linked to reduced cognitive performance? Well, there it is. Credit words do.

You won't find a stronger argument for banning gas stoves. It might make you as dumb as AOC. AOC has a gas stove, and look what happened to her. Terrifying prospect for most Americans. No steak or charred vegetable is worth that risk, I think. Visit BetMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive. The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMDM and Game Sense remind you to play responsibly, 19 plus to wager.

Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, Peace contact connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2600 to speak to an advisor, free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming, Ontario. And that's not even getting into the effects of gas stoves on climate change, which, as AOC has previously announced, we all remember, will kill us in 12 years. Now, she made that prediction all the way back in 2019, so we only have five years left. watch.

Millennials and people and, you know, Gen Z and all these folks that come after us are looking up and we're like, the world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change. And your biggest issue is your biggest issue is how are we going to pay for it? Now we can safely assume that this is one of those woke one moments that she's trying to laugh off as an example of COVID-hist. area, even though it's from a year before the COVID lockdowns happened. And that's because for someone who thinks that world was about to end, AOC has been acting very much like someone who thinks we have a lot more time. I mean, for one thing, as we established, she's clearly running for president or VP in the

next election. AOC apparently wants to be our last president ever, since the world would end about three years into her term, according to her predictions, which actually might turn out to be true, but it'll have nothing to do with climate change. Now for another thing, she just posted videos in which she talks about freezing her eggs and demonstrates the process, which is a very strange thing to do if you think that we're all going to die in a short period of time. It's also a rather gross thing to do on camera.

I mean, call me old-fashioned. Call me old-fashioned. But I really don't want to hear or think about any politician's eggs. Okay, we can talk about the price of eggs at the gross. grocery store, but the eggs in your body should not be a topic for public conversation, much less a subject for show and tell. And yet, watch. Don't be weird about this, even though I know all of you will be. All right, everyone, Deco and I, day one of freezing my eggs. I'm diving into the process, and now I've got...

Let's see, all of this medicine here. I'm going to inject this first, but I got a pro tip from a friend because this injection kind of stings. It kind of burns a little bit. So a friend of mine told me that if you make the first injection first and let it sit while you're doing everything else,

maybe it burns a little less, I don't know. Don't be weird about this. even though I know all of you will be. Okay. That wasn't so bad. Well, so much for climate change. Is AOC planning to have a child after the world ends? I mean, is this her plan to repopulate the Earth in the wake of the coming climate apocalypse?

Has that been the plan all along? AOC never wanted to stop climate change. I can see this clearly now. Here's what happened. She was actually hoping that her fantastic idiocy would discredit the environmentalist movement, which it did, by the way, she killed the environmentalist movement almost single-handedly. It's amazing. Thereby ensuring that the climate apocalypse is not avoided.

And in the meantime, she's been freezing all of her eggs, waiting for the human species to die off so that she can repopulate the planet with her progeny and rule over it as matriarch and empress. That was her dastardly plot. She almost got away with it. Or perhaps she's just a cliched feminist. millennial doing what cliched feminist millennials do. On second thought, you know, that's probably it, which makes this even dumber. She'll turn 37 in a couple of months. Now, if she got pregnant

now, it would technically be a geriatric pregnancy. And you could always say, oh, it's none of your business. I agree. She's the one who brought it up, first of all, okay? This is the other, speaking of being a cliched feminist millennial, this is the other thing they love to do. Share way too much information with the world, like announce things to the world that none of us asked, right? You could have just kept that private, but you share it. And then the second anybody has an opinion about it, you say, well, it's not your business. Why do you care so much? I don't know. If it's not my business, why did you tell me? Like, when you tell me something, I can't help but form an opinion about it. I'm a human. I have a brain. This is what happens. You have your

own perspective. When you force information onto me, I'm going to have my own perspective on it. If you don't want me to have a perspective on it, don't tell me. So, you know, she's freezing her eggs and putting the apocalypse aside, this desire to start having children late in life is completely baffling to me. You know, it's one thing if you become a parent later in life, because that's just how things worked out. For some people, that's the path. Life takes them. It's It's God's plan for them. And that can happen. I mean, there are some people that are just, that's just how it worked out.

They didn't plan it. It just worked out that way that they have kids later in life. Maybe they don't get married to later in life, whatever it might be. And that's one thing. But to deliberately choose to delay parenthood until your 40s to use egg freezing and other unnatural means to make it happen is an entirely different thing. You know, like the normal, the ideal trajectory is the one. I mean, like, okay, I'll have kids.

I will have kids who are in their 20s by the time I turn 50. There's a very good chance I'll be in my early 50s and I'll have grandkids. I mean, that could easily happen, right? AOC apparently wants to have a toddler at that age. No, like, the toddler in your life when you're in your 50s should be your grandkid, ideally. So it's totally backwards and ridiculous, but I'm probably giving her too much credit. I mean, the more you look into her social media egg freezing blitz, the more it seems like a stunt. So take this video, for example, watch.

My insurance does not cover one penny of this. It is 100% out of pocket. It doesn't go to my deductible. Nothing. It covers nothing. So there's two main sources of costs. So you don't just like pay one lump sum to the doctor. you pay for the medicine, and then you also pay your clinic and for the procedure.

So there's two costs of it. Some places are very expensive. I'm going to a place in New York City that specifically designs options for women who don't have insurance covering it. And so my grand total personally for me, all in, is going to be. probably between $8,000 to $9,000. The other piece of this is the actual clinic and procedure and your provider. And a lot of clinics actually don't require you to pay in a lump sum. I saved a long time for this. And so I'm just paying for it outright after years of saving. It's all carefully calculated to appeal to a specific and growing demographic, which is

women who hit their 30s without any clear prospects of having children. She wants to come across as a resource for these women as someone who's going through the same struggle they are. It makes her seem more authentic. But you've got to wonder if she's trying to be authentic, why she claims that she's spent years saving up $8,000 for this procedure. As a member of Congress, she makes $174,000 a year. And also, by the way, like, she also doesn't have to pay for, like, so many of her expenses

are calm. she doesn't actually have to pay for most things in her life. So her $174,000 a year is not like your $174,000 a year. So in six months, realistically, she could have been able to save a minimum of like $15,000 or so. The only reason she takes so long to save $8,000 with her income is if she didn't prioritize this procedure or if she's horrible with money. And that's not even getting into the fact that by freezing your eggs, you're not actually guaranteeing that you'll conceive a child one day if you choose to do so, not even close.

the longer you wait, the less likely conception becomes. Like, human biology is a thing. It does matter. You can't just completely subvert it. You know, human biology, what human biology tells you is that, like, once you get into your 40s, like I said, 35 medically is a geriatric pregnancy already. So human biology says that, like, no, you're not really supposed to start having kids in your 40s. that's not how this is supposed to work. And people today think that they could just, well, no, we could just magically pretend,

we can just magically erase that. We can magically make it so that biology doesn't count. That doesn't work that way. And you know, part of the process that AOC doesn't advertise is the ineffectiveness of it. It's a way for women to tell themselves that they'll be able to conceive a child if they want to. But most of the time, they're paying to delay the inevitable, which is that in reality, they will dial up. alone, which of course is exactly what Democrats want. If you have no family, you're likely to be more likely to be loyal to the state. You'll seek validation from politicians who will happily

provide it. And if they can't string a sentence together, who cares? At least they claim to be interested in solving your problems, all of which you created yourself. With AOC's soft launch of Woke 2.0, which is what we saw on Sunday, we can expect a lot more of this. In Woke 2.0, Democrats are done with indirect messaging. They'll go right on camera and tell you exactly what they want you to do. Instead of encouraging women to join the workforce, they'll demand that you freeze your eggs, complete with a video demonstration. Instead of pretending that they're prosecuting conservatives because no one's above the law, they'll just tell you straight up that we need to abolish the rule of law entirely. It's a testament to how much they've transformed the country and how much dumber we've

collectively become that their plan might work. You might even say that AOC's interview on ABC News on Sunday was the opening silo of Woke 2.0. And based on how Democrats are already rallying behind her, despite her manifest incompetence or maybe because of it, we can expect to see many more of these silos before the final silo is announced the nomination of AOC to be the next president of the United States. I'll do the show today. Thanks for watching.

Thanks for listening. Talk to you tomorrow. Have a great day. Godspeed. is beneath contempt. We who love and serve Allah fought back against the Americans and the Zionists from the scourge of secularism and the lands of unbelief.

We're gonna listen to Captain Saunders tomorrow. The retired Delta Force soldier with a new book out. He's the polar opposite of those brain-dead protest. Given the current climate, should place Saunders even be allowed on campus. Mr. Saunders is a close personal friend of Chancellor Friedman. This is a decision I cannot fly. I can't fly. There are three ways Islam will conquer the West.

Through immigration, through the wombs of our women, and by using our nation's freedoms against us. Are you paying attention? Hanenuktu. Allah abu. Listen carefully. The great Satan America will fall. You are infidels.

The bodies of women are not pure and the men's Souls are unclean. What makes them so dangerous? Their goals are not in this life, but the next. We got friends here, I can't just leave. They listen to me. In the law. We cannot run or hide from what is coming.

We have to fight. I will be rewarded 10,000 times in the next life. When you die, you're nothing. Only one way to find out. That's the American way. Hey y'all, it's Kelly Clarkson with Wayfair. Ever order furniture online and wonder, what if? Like, what if it doesn't hold up?

That sofa was four days old. You should have ordered from Wayfair. With Wayfair, there's no what if. Just style you love and quality you can trust. Visit Wayfair.ca. Wayfair, every style, every home.