Ep. 1735 - AOC Utterly Humiliates Herself On The World Stage
Matt Walsh mocks Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Munich Security Conference blunders—calling Venezuela south of the equator and falsely accusing Maduro of canceling elections—while contrasting her incoherent class-based cultural critiques with Marco Rubio’s sharp defense of Western civilization, including its Christian roots and resistance to demographic replacement. Walsh ties transgender ideology to violence, citing Robert Dorgan’s fatal shooting in Rhode Island, and dismisses outrage over Nicole Curtis’s accidental "N-word" use as performative "wokeness," arguing racial hierarchies now punish whites disproportionately. He also slams Hillary Clinton’s Ukraine support as hypocritical, given her push for progressive policies like gender ideology, and launches Real History to debunk what he calls "baseless lies" in public school narratives—from slavery’s origins to Indigenous pre-contact societies—framing it as a counter to leftist revisionism. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey guys, finding the perfect gift for the food lover in your life is easy.
Thanks to Goldbelly, Gold Belly ships America's most iconic foods straight from world-famous restaurants right to your door.
So if you want to treat someone to Joe's Stone Crab from Miami, Franklin BBQ from Texas, or desserts from famous foodies like Ina Garten or Martha Stewart, Gold Belly has you covered.
Just go to Goldbelly.com and for a limited time, get 20% off your first order with promo code GIFT.
That's promo code GIFT.
Today, Matt Walsh show, my new series, Real History, has provoked the ire of the libs over at The Atlantic, who accused me of trying to understate the brutality and evil of slavery, which is strange considering the fact that my series actually tells you much more about the brutality and evil of slavery than any of these people ever will.
Also, AOC makes her debut on the world stage and proceeds to totally humiliate herself as she attempts to issue her indictment of Western civilization and quote-unquote whiteness.
Plus, yet another trans mass shooting has occurred and an HGTV personality lets a racial slur slip out on camera.
She's been apologizing and prostrating herself in hopes of forgiveness, but we know how that turns out.
All of that and more today on the Matt Wall Show.
I've released enough documentaries over the years to recognize something of a pattern emerging in terms of how the left will respond.
There are really only two options.
Either they'll ignore my documentary entirely, which is how most of the media responded to am I racist, despite the fact that it was the top documentary of the decade, or in the alternative, they'll publish extremely low effort, highly dishonest articles where they review some imaginary version of the film, put words into my mouth and take every important scene out of context.
That was the case with What is a Woman when outlet after outlet accused me of being a transphobe who engaged in hate speech.
Even though 99% of the movie, of course, involved me asking basic, straightforward questions to self-described experts in gender ideology.
And the other 1% was me asking why those experts were running away from me instead of answering my simple and straightforward questions.
So based on these experiences, when I released the first episode of my newest series at The Daily Wire, which is called Real History, I was expecting either a total media blackout or a flood of desperate hit pieces.
After all, real history is a direct challenge to some of the most important tenets of modern leftism.
But interestingly enough, real history has not been met with a total media blackout, nor has it been bombarded with a series of incredibly dumb and lazy smears.
Instead, aside from a small number of YouTube videos from historians, which have mostly been positive and very thorough, the only mainstream response to real history has come from The Atlantic magazine, which considers itself to be the bastion of left-wing intellectual thought.
And right away, that got my attention.
It's not that The Atlantic is a trustworthy outlet.
It's obviously not.
In fact, they've created numerous high-level hoaxes in just the past couple of years, solely to influence elections.
But at the same time, if The Atlantic and only The Atlantic is coming after you, then it means you've done something unique.
It means that you've rattled the people who in elite circles of the Democrat Party are taken very seriously.
Now, why might real history have done that?
Well, to answer that question, let's see what The Atlantic says specifically.
Quote, Matt Walsh would like you to know you've been lied to.
Last month, the right-wing provocateur appeared on Megan Kelly's show to discuss his new video series, Real History with Matt Walsh.
In Walsh's account, the left believes that America was built on slavery and it has no right to exist.
And every white American carries somehow that legacy, that guilt in their blood.
Therefore, progressives feel they have the moral justification to do whatever they want to white people.
Walsh intends to stop this.
So in real history, he relentlessly downplays the brutality of slavery in the United States.
Sanitizing slavery has become a core objective of the reactionary right under Donald Trump, a malignant response to the progressive left's oversimplification of American history for their own present day ends.
But the truest understanding of slavery doesn't serve any political faction.
Rather, it acknowledges the horrors of racial oppression while still allowing us to see beyond them.
Walsh also notes that the descendants of Africans trafficked to what became the United States are now in better socioeconomic shape than those whose ancestors remained in the old world or transported to Latin America or the Caribbean.
He draws an odious conclusion from this.
American slavery wasn't that bad, yet the point is not entirely incorrect.
Other far more serious thinkers have made versions of it too.
Well, there's the sneering that you might expect from the Atlantic.
So they have to acknowledge that my point is actually correct, but it's coming from a person who's not a serious thinker.
And so, you know, it doesn't count.
But, you know, for all their preening and all their arrogance, it's clear that the author of this hit piece, Thomas Chatterdon Williams, has not even watched episode one of Real History.
He couldn't be bothered to spend, you know, the hour actually watching the show that we put out before he decided to write about it.
And I can make that claim with confidence because there's absolutely nothing in the episode or any episode of the series that relentlessly downplays the brutality of slavery in the United States.
That never happens.
Instead, the episode is roughly an hour long, and it's a look at what slavery entailed all over the world.
And yes, as a matter of historical fact, Africans and the Barbary pirates and the Ottomans generally treated their slaves far, far worse than Americans and American colonists.
That's just a fact.
Americans weren't known for floating canoes in the blood of their slaves, for example.
Nor were Americans known for sailing thousands of miles away in order to snatch men, women, and children from their homes, throw them onto boats, and sexually assault them.
That's not downplaying anything.
It's just the truth.
And serious thinkers, to use the Atlantic's terminology, care about the truth above all else, if they are serious thinkers.
But the Atlantic doesn't care about the truth.
And that's why in 2019, they published an article entitled, The Fight Over the 1619 Project is Not About the Facts.
Now, what's remarkable about this headline is that indeed the fight over the 1619 project was about the facts.
All of the history was completely wrong, including their claim that Americans fought the Revolutionary War to preserve slavery.
But the Atlantic ran cover for the 1619 project at the time because it served the narrative of the Democrat Party.
It advanced racial grievances, which they saw correctly for a time, as a pathway to power.
Now, the point of real history, on the other hand, is not to advance the interests of the MAGA movement or anyone else.
The point is to communicate historically accurate information that is deliberately hidden from us at every stage of our lives.
Schools don't talk about it.
The media doesn't talk about it.
Movies don't portray it.
Telling the truth is not downplaying anything.
By contrast, it's the fake intellectuals on the left, people like the writers at The Atlantic, who've been downplaying the reality of the African and Ottoman slave trade for generations.
And largely, they downplay it by just not acknowledging that it even happened.
But according to The Atlantic, so-called MAGA revisionists, along with the Trump administration, well, they're the real problem here.
So let's read on from their review of the show that they didn't watch.
Quote, back in March, Trump strong-armed a host of institutions by issuing an executive order called Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History, which directs federally funded museums, monuments, and parks to remove materials that promote corrosive ideology.
Last month, the Park Service obliged eliminating an outdoor exhibit at Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia, where George Washington's house once stood.
The exhibit honored nine slaves who toiled at the residence.
Trump and his allies seem unwilling to tolerate virtually any acknowledgement that America subjugated black people.
Rather than making a dispassionate case against the idea that our country was founded to enslave Africans, MAGA is taking down plaques commemorating basic facts such as Washington's slaveholding.
In real history, Walsh turns the clock back further still.
So you notice the sleight of hand trick that they're pulling here.
They're strongly implying that the Trump administration ordered the Park Service to remove an exhibit which references the fact that George Washington owned slaves.
But that's not actually true.
If you read the executive order, it orders the Park Service to remove anything promoting a corrosive ideology that demonizes Americans.
And as the Washington Post reported, the Park Service interpreted that executive order as broadly as they possibly could.
It is a form of malicious compliance.
Now, the Post reported that, quote, the removals were in line with President Donald Trump's March executive order directing the Interior Department to eliminate information that reflects a corrosive ideology that disparages historic Americans.
National Park Service officials are broadly interpreting that directive to imply information on racism, sexism, slavery, gay rights, or persecution of indigenous people.
So you see how that works.
The Trump administration issues an order telling agencies to stop advancing an anti-white, anti-American agenda.
Democrats then remove displays of slavery, which they were never told to do.
And then Democrats say, hey, you made us remove displays of slavery.
And because they chose to interpret it that way.
And by the way, it's especially ironic that they lump real history in with all this.
Again, if this guy had watched the show, which he clearly hasn't, he'd know that we talk at some length about Washington's slaves.
And in particular, we talk about his white indentured servants who ran away around the time of the start of the Revolutionary War.
Washington put out advertisements seeking the return of those white runaways.
And there were many more white runaways than black runaways at Washington's estate.
But no one at the Atlantic wants to talk about that because it complicates their narrative that only blacks were victimized by slavery in America, which isn't true.
So they hide the truth and then they accuse us of, you know, being the ones who are hiding the truth.
Now, what's funny about all this is that back in 2019, the Atlantic put out an article stating that reparations could mean telling the truth about uncomfortable historical facts.
So in that sense, if you took them at their word, you'd think that they'd be happy about real history.
You'd think they'd consider it a form of reparations, maybe.
But apparently not.
Because in reality, the Atlantic, like so many other bastions of left-wing intellectualism, quote unquote, is collapsing in on itself.
Their ideology is incoherent.
They have no idea what they stand for or how to construct even the most basic argument about anything or for anything they believe in.
This is a big, big problem for the left in general.
And in that vein, here's a little factoid that's going to be memory hold immediately.
This year's Munich Security Conference was supposed to mark the debut of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as the new leader of the intellectual vanguard of the Democrat Party.
This was intended to be her big moment, her global debut, her opportunity to prove to the world that she has transformed into a serious, thoughtful political leader.
No longer does Alexandria Oqueza-Cortez believe that climate change will kill everybody before the decade is over.
That's the old AOC.
The new AOC imagines a very different future, one with, well, herself sitting in the Oval Office in three years.
And that's why before the Munich Security Conference began, The Washington Post ran an article about AOC's upcoming appearance at the conference.
And in this article, the Post revealed that a heavy hitter named Matt Duss, who serves as the executive vice president of something called the Center for International Policy, had secured a role, quote, advising Oqueza-Cortez's debut in Munich.
So this preparation has been going on for months.
According to Duss, AOC, quote, brings an understanding of the way that oligarchy and corruption are part of the problem in our foreign policy and have been for a long time.
See, expectations were sky high.
Sandy Cortez was going to Munich where she would publicly respond to the keynote address by the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, in front of dozens of the most high-ranking, important diplomats in the world.
AOC was going to, she was going to set the record straight.
She was going to outline the worldview of the modern left and present a compelling case for why votes, voters should choose the Democrat Party and her.
And with that in mind, here's how her appearance got started.
It is not a remark on who Maduro was as a leader.
He canceled elections.
He was an anti-democratic leader.
That doesn't mean that we can kidnap a head of state and engage in acts of war just because the nation is below the equator.
So we only took out Maduro in Venezuela because of the location of its country, which is south of the equator.
That's how bigoted and idiotic we are.
And you know, that makes a lot of sense, as long as you never get anywhere close to a map, which apparently AOC has not.
Because if you make the mistake of looking at a map, here is what you will find, as you can see here.
You don't need to be a cartographer to understand the issue with what AOC has claimed.
You see, Venezuela is in fact above, it is north of the equator.
And somehow, for all of her extensive foreign policy prep, months in the making, no one ever informed AOC of this very problematic fact.
They also seem to have told her that Maduro canceled elections when the official complaint is that he rigged them, didn't cancel them.
But, you know, let's focus on one thing at a time here.
But it gets worse the more you listen.
So here's AOC responding to a point that Marco Rubio made during his speech at the Munich conference.
Watch.
Our horses, our ranches, our rodeos, the entire romance of the cowboy archetype that became synonymous with the American West.
Cultural Appropriation and Identity00:15:55
These were born in Spain.
Marco Rubio's speech was a pure appeal to Western culture.
My favorite part was when he said that American cowboys came from Spain.
I thought that I believe the Mexicans and descendants of African enslaved peoples would like to have a word on that.
So there are just so many, so many layers to the stupidity here.
It's like a stupid, it's an onion of idiocy that you peel back with AOC as always.
First of all, her name, and this will never stop being ironic and funny, her name is, as you know, Cortez.
So she shares a name with the Spanish conquisador who brought horses to Mexico in 1519, returning horses to the Americas for the first time in 10,000 years.
And yet she's apparently under the impression that cowboys who, you know, of course, ride on horses, that's part of the thing of being a cowboy, have nothing whatsoever to do with Spain.
Or she's implying that somehow there could have been cowboys here in the Americas before the Spanish showed up.
So there were cowboys here before there were horse.
Where were the cowboys?
Were the Aztecs?
Were they the cowboys?
AOC, did the Incas have cowboys?
Who were the cowboys?
I mean, you certainly can't go up to the Great Plains.
I mean, now we're getting into geography.
I know this is above her pay grade, but you can't go up into the Great Plains and find any cowboy Indians there.
Now, hundreds of years later, you would have Great Plains Indians who were expert, the Comanches, expert horsemen, but that was after the horses were introduced by the Spanish.
Anyway, and also, by the way, Rubio didn't say that American cowboys came from Spain.
He said the cowboy archetype was born in Spain, which is true.
This is such common knowledge and it's so uncontroversial, even among the far left, that there's even a Wikipedia article on it.
Quote, the Vaquero is a horse-mounted livestock herder of a tradition that has its roots in the Iberian Peninsula and extensively developed in what is today Mexico, then New Spain from a method brought to the Americas from Spain.
They became the foundation for the North American cowboy in northern Mexico, southwestern United States, Florida, and western Canada.
So presumably, you know, that's all true.
Presumably Wikipedia will remedy the fact that there's something true there.
They'll edit that article by tomorrow to help AOC save face.
But the really great part of that clip is that like the Atlantic, AOC remains utterly smug and confident as she makes a complete fool out of herself.
Just no self-awareness whatsoever.
Being as condescending as possible.
But that smug, well, maybe Marco doesn't realize that cowboys came from the Indians.
And of course, she's being as wrong as possible at the same time, which is why I truly believe AOC could benefit from, by the way, watching episode two of Real History, which comes out next week, which is a deep dive, a very deep dive, into the true story of the Indians in the United States.
And AOC, more than anyone else in the country, clearly could benefit from watching that.
But in any event, to the extent that she had an actual point to make, if she did at all, here it was.
But, you know, I think it's also important to note how thin that foundation is.
Culture is changing.
Culture always changed.
Culture for the entire history of human civilization has been a fluid, evolving thing that is a response to the conditions that we live in.
And so they want to take this mantle of culture.
At the end of the day, though, is, you know, it is very thin.
And so the response that we have to have is, again, it's material.
It's class-based.
It's common interest.
So this is textbook Marxism filtered through the brain of a very dumb cocktail waitress.
And if you think about it for 10 seconds, it makes no sense.
She's saying that culture doesn't really amount to anything more than class differences.
Culture is thin and meaningless.
This is also someone who would accuse you of cultural appropriation at the same time.
So, how can that make any sense?
Culture is nothing, but you can appropriate it.
What does that mean?
How can you appropriate something if it doesn't mean anything?
Or even if you could appropriate it, wouldn't it mean that cultural appropriation doesn't matter because that also is thin and meaningless?
But, you know, we can't look for consistency here.
But she says, all the traditions and laws and accomplishments and architecture and scientific breakthroughs dating back thousands of years are nothing compared to class.
All that matters is how many material possessions you have and how much money is in your bank account.
Now, putting aside how cynical and depressing that kind of thinking is, does that sound right to you?
Let's run a little thought experiment here, hypothetically.
Say you're a middle-class American making, you know, 70 grand a year.
Who do you think you have more in common with?
An American executive making a million dollars a year or a middle-class family in North Korea earning the equivalent of $70,000 a year.
If you got stuck in an elevator with the American executive, well, you could you have trouble communicating with this person, or would there be things you can relate to each other?
You could talk about politics or what's going on in social media, what's going on in the culture, talk about the NFL, talk about entertainment.
You could talk about your Christmas vacations or your plans for Mardi Gras.
You could share Instagram photos and so on.
I mean, if you're really chatting in the elevator, I'm not, but maybe if you maybe you are.
But if you got stuck in an elevator with a middle-class North Korean, you couldn't talk about any of those topics because they can't understand a word you're saying.
But even if they could understand the language, it would be awfully difficult to talk about Christmas and Mardi Gras with someone living in an atheist state.
It'd be hard to talk about politics or social media to someone who's been raised from childhood to trust dear leader who incidentally banned all social media in the country.
But this again is the new thought leader of the Democrat Party.
The person who wants you to believe that you have more in common with someone on the other side of the world in a foreign country who doesn't even speak your language if they make an equivalent amount of money to you, if your income is roughly the same.
This is the logic that's going to drive the party going forward.
So it's noteworthy that every time she opened her mouth, every time she tried to outline this ideology, AOC fell on her face.
Watch.
There's a very big difference between whiteness and national, like your actual culture, right?
Whiteness is an imaginary thing.
Being German is real.
Being Italian is real.
You know, being English.
These are rich cultural heritages that are based on values and they are so much a part of what make our cultures and our societies what they are.
Well, it's pretty incredible to watch because AOC will, she doesn't believe anything she just said, and none of these people do, because AOC will insist that brown people are real and black people are real, and even people of color, whatever the hell that means, even though we all have color, are real.
And yet, whiteness, white people, well, that's imaginary.
So I guess we're no longer talking about abolishing whiteness, I suppose.
So, you know, we can't abolish it if it's not real.
But let's give her the benefit of the doubt.
Even though she doesn't deserve it, let's do that.
Then, in the same breath, AOC says it's totally real to be German or Italian or English or Polish.
Why is that?
Because people in those countries, in her words, have certain values.
But wait a minute, what if a German and Italian have the same values or similar values?
Do they lose their unique identity in that case?
And for that matter, what if a German and an Italian get married and have a child?
And what if the child shares the values of his German father and his Italian mother?
Why exactly can't we describe people like this, and there are hundreds of millions of them as white?
Why is it imaginary to say that these are white people experiencing whiteness in the same way that a black person experiences blackness?
Why can't we say that?
Now, of course, the answer is that AOC has no idea what she's saying, nor does she mean any of it.
As Bo Weingard put it, quote, if progressives actually believe this, then they would consider a group of 10 whites descended from 10 different European countries diverse.
But of course, they don't because they believe very much in whiteness.
And it's the same reason why last week Democrats embarrassed themselves during their questioning of Jeremy Carl, who the Trump administration nominated for a post in the State Department.
Carl probably won't be confirmed.
Republicans are already caving on his nomination.
But to give you an idea of the questions he faced, here's one from Chris Murphy of Connecticut.
Watch.
Tell me how you define white identity and what you think is being erased about white identity.
Certain types of Anglo-derived culture that come from our history.
Let me think about this.
You know, Senator, I would say if you were to look at the book by one of your former Senate colleagues, Moran Fighting, about the sort of Scotch-Irish military culture and certain, you know, pride that went with that, that would be one example.
Obviously, you can have sub-elements of that culture.
You could have Italians, you could have Irish, and those are in many ways more.
So you're worried about white culture.
You're not worried about retreating to ethnic identity.
You don't speak about ethnic identity.
You speak about white identity.
So tell me the values that stitch together white identity and that make it different than black identity.
I would say that the white church is very different than the black church in terms of its tone and style on average.
Food ways could often be different.
And those are different.
Those are being erased.
Music could be different.
Well, if you look at the Super Bowl halftime show, which was not in English this time.
So our ability to access white churches or white food or white music is being erased.
I am concerned with the majority common American culture that we had for some time that through particularly mass immigration, I think has become much more balkanized.
And I think that weakens us.
And again, I'm not running away from that comment.
I'm not apologizing for it.
Well, I'm way over my time.
I think you're struggling to answer this question, right?
Because underlying your beliefs is a sentiment that white culture is just simply better.
Now, notice, I mean, not to keep, not to harp on the point, but the point has to continue to be made as long as this conversation is going on that you would never.
So Chris Murphy is very proud of himself because he's holding someone to account for daring to speak about white culture.
You will never see that.
You will never see this line of questioning ever of a black person who's sitting there and has been nominated for something and who has spoken about black culture in the past.
You will never see that.
You'll never see, oh, well, sir, you say that there's black culture.
What is?
What even is that?
Why does that exist?
Oh, do you think black culture is better than no?
A black person can say, number one, black culture exists, nobody will challenge it.
And number two, it's better.
I prefer it over every other culture.
They could say that in the hearing, and Chris Murphy would say, well, yes, sir, of course.
Of course it is.
So there's no reconciling that.
Because by the way, black people also, Africa is not a country.
It's a continent.
And there are a lot of different countries on the continent.
And they're very, very different in a lot of ways.
Big difference.
Even sub-Saharan Africa, very different also.
So there's a lot of differences you could point to.
And yet, black culture.
You can still talk about black culture.
You can talk about black people.
Nobody challenges it.
Now, if you're watching the video podcast, you saw the Democrat staffers in the background laughing at Jeremy Carl as he gave his answer.
And then the senator completely misrepresents what Carl said.
Actually, he didn't make any value judgments about any culture or race.
He simply stated a fact, which is that white people, by and large, do in fact have a shared culture.
And if you import zillions of non-white foreigners in the United States, then that shared culture will fragment.
And sooner or later, major cultural events will be conducted in a foreign language.
Our values will change, and that will weaken our culture.
It weakens every country where it happens.
And in any other country, you could make this point and nobody will have a problem with it.
But Senator Chris Murphy, like AOC, won't even admit that white people have any culture or that they exist.
Of course, though, if there is no white culture, then again, there is no black culture and for the exact same reasons.
But nobody says that there is no black culture, which means nobody really believes that there is no white culture.
Nobody believes that.
I would be fine if Jeremy Carl just shot back and said, you don't even, you yourself do not believe in the premise of your question, so I'm not going to entertain it.
How about that?
Or just shoot back, hey, what about black culture?
Does that exist?
Oh, it does?
Okay, well, then we're not talking about this.
Like, you don't, the premise of your question, you don't even believe in.
So this is, you know, this is just a game we're playing.
I'm not here to play games.
Now, at the same time, credit where it's due, Chris Murphy, despite being a complete moron, is about 100 IQ points more intelligent than AOC, which is to say his IQ is probably about 100.
And unlike Chris Murphy, AOC is being positioned as a possible presidential candidate for the Democrat Party.
So it's worth mentioning that the rest of AOC's debut on the international stage was a disaster as well.
At one point, she talked about the importance of raising taxes so that the government can waste even more money.
And then a politician in Argentina, which actually implemented a wealth tax a few years ago, informed AOC of the problem with her grand plan.
Watch.
So when you run for president, are you going to impose a wealth tax or a billionaires tax?
I don't think that anyone, and that we don't have to wait for any one president to impose a wealth tax.
I think that it needs to be done expeditiously.
Why We Need a Wealth Tax00:10:16
You have the recipe that many Latin American countries applied many, many times, that is some relief in the short term, but end up being a tragedy for the future.
It's like public expenditure, huge public expenditure, price controls, sometimes wealth tax, and you end up, wealth goes away and you have just the tax and you don't have wealth anymore.
That was something that Terranism did many, many times.
So all these recipes then creates a cycle.
Then you have this short-term relief, but then goes with inflation, shortage.
Then you have more poverty And the cycle goes and goes.
Yeah, sooner or later you run out of wealth and then you're left with a tax.
And somehow no one prepared AOC for this moment either in her extensive training sessions.
So this is what we're left with.
And by the way, it wasn't just AOC who collapsed during this conference.
Hillary Clinton did as well.
For some reason, she was in attendance, even though she's not a government official and shouldn't be representing the United States in any way, especially in a context like this.
So watch this exchange with the Czech deputy prime minister, just for example.
What I think, what I think Trump is doing in America, I think it is reaction, reaction, reaction for something that, for some policies that really went too far, too far from the regular people to far from reality.
So, you know, we saw the cancel culture.
We saw the Vogue revolution.
I don't agree with the gender revolution, the climate alarmism.
No, Peter, go on.
I think there are two genders, but enough of us can be.
Some of us think that there is more than one, or more than two, sorry, more than two gender.
I think there is male and female, and the rest probably is a social construct.
So this is something that went too far.
But does that justify selling out the people of Ukraine who are on the front lines dying to save their freedom and their two genders?
If that's what you're worried about.
Can I please finish my points?
I'm sorry that it makes you nervous.
I'm really sorry for that.
It doesn't make me nervous.
It makes me very unhappy.
No, no, no.
But can we let Peter finish, please?
Let me explain.
I have to— Can we let Peter finish, please?
I have to say one more thing.
You said that Ukraine fights for our future and for our freedom.
I think first Ukraine fights for Ukraine's future, Ukraine's freedom, and Ukraine's sovereignty and independence.
So what Hillary is saying here is that even if you disagree with the Democrats on some of the most fundamental questions a society can possibly face, questions like should doctors be able to mutilate people, including children, in order to affirm their delusions, then you still need to vote for Democrats because Ukraine needs more money.
Without exaggeration, that's what she just said.
And she became angry when she was challenged on it because at some level she must realize how incoherent and unpersuasive it is.
This is the best Democrats had to offer when it came to an international stage where they had the opportunity to outline their plans for the future if they ever returned to power.
Message was complete nonsense from top to bottom and it was condescending every step of the way, of course.
By contrast, as you've probably seen, Marco Rubio was thorough and coherent.
He made the point that armies don't fight for abstractions.
He outlined some of the many achievements of Western civilization, which changed the trajectory of the entire world.
He discussed our shared history with other Western countries.
He called out the insanity of the climate cult as well as the disastrous impact of mass migration.
He described the total impotence of the United Nations, which hasn't resolved a single international crisis in memory.
And he made it clear that while America is capable of going alone, we prefer to have the support of our Western allies.
Watch.
For the United States and Europe, we belong together.
America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before.
The men who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.
We are part of one civilization, Western civilization.
We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir.
We want allies who can defend themselves so that no adversary will ever be tempted to test our collective strength.
This is why we do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame.
We want allies who are proud of their culture and of their heritage, who understand that we are heirs to the same great and noble civilization and who together with us are willing and able to defend it.
And this is why we do not want allies to rationalize the broken status quo rather than reckon with what is necessary to fix it.
For we in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West's managed decline.
We do not seek to separate, but to revitalize an old friendship and renew the greatest civilization in human history.
And I'm here today to leave it clear that America is charting the path for a new century of prosperity and that once again, we want to do it together with you, our cherished allies, and our oldest friends.
Now the applause which took place throughout the speech, including at the end, is obviously a good sign.
It's an indication that diplomats in Europe understand the stakes of what's happening in their continent.
But the reality of the situation, frankly, is that the continent is probably too far gone.
I mean, there's a reason, I mean, there's a new Restore Britain Party that's running on a platform of mass deportations, which is unheard of in Europe.
But at the moment, it looks a bit like Canada's People's Party.
It probably won't get enough traction.
The people won't have the will to conduct mass deportations, and Europe's decline will probably continue.
That's just the reality.
And that's why outside of Munich, the reaction to Rubio's speech was the usual sneering from the left.
They've concluded that Europe is unsalvageable at this point, not worth salvaging anyway.
This was the New York Times response, for example.
Rubio's speech reiterated America's commitment to Europe, but wrapped it in historical and cultural ties that seemingly exclude large sections of the current European population.
About half the European Union now speaks English as a foreign language, a share that rises to 70% for young Europeans.
Christianity is declining across much of the continent.
In Europe's three largest economies, Britain, France, and Germany, less than half of residents now identify as Christian.
The ranks of the religiously unaffiliated are growing.
So Rubio's speech was dumb because he talked about our shared Western culture with Europe, even though the left has spent the last 30 years trying to make Europe completely unrecognizable.
This is what passes for a gotcha at the New York Times.
But they're missing the point entirely.
Marco Rubio did not deny that demographic replacement has been underway in Europe for a very long time.
What he's saying is that in order to preserve the future of Western civilization, which is to say to preserve the future of civilization in general, we need to reverse what the left has done to Europe.
And failing that, we need to prevent this incoherent and self-contradictory ideology from taking hold anywhere else.
No Secretary of State, at least since the Cold War, has articulated a vision as important as this, and no Secretary of State has drawn so sharp a contrast between the forces of civilization on the one hand and the communists who seek only to destroy it on the other.
That's what the Munich Security Conference was.
It was a study in contrast.
On the one hand, you have Marco Rubio reciting facts authoritatively.
On the other hand, you have Democrats ranting incoherently about cowboys and the equator and transgenderism and Ukraine.
They don't even know what they're saying.
They don't believe what they're saying.
And until now, they've gotten away with it because no one has ever articulated a clear, coherent, opposing platform, a platform that unequivocally recognizes the existence and success of white Western culture.
That's what Marco Rubio just did.
That's what real history does as well.
The truth is there's a reason why Western civilization produced the Enlightenment and democracy and the scientific method and the printing press.
And the list goes on and on and on.
There's a reason why out of the four populated continents bordering the Atlantic Ocean, none of them except Europe produced a single person who managed to navigate from one side of it to the other.
Europeans alone had the vision, the courage, the skill, the ingenuity to pull it off.
They not only traversed the unknown sea, but built empires that stretched across it.
They don't want you to learn much about the true history of Western civilization because if you do, you will learn how incredibly exceptional it actually is and has always been.
And once you do that, once you tell the truth about the exceptionalism of Western civilization, you reduce the left to hysterics.
Whether it's AOC or the Atlantic, they have no response.
They flounder and flail in front of the entire world.
This is the winning strategy.
And so with apologies to the intellectuals of the Democrat Party, or rather with no apologies at all, we're going to continue to pursue it until every single one of these liars and charlatans are so humiliated that they never show their faces on the international stage representing the United States of America ever again.
Now let's get to our five headlines.
Polar Exploration Dreams00:06:06
We've tried a lot of coffee over the years.
Our sponsor, Seven Weeks Coffee, is the one that my wife and I landed on.
I personally love their medium roast.
It's super smooth with a sweet, nutty taste.
Perfect for starting the day.
But it's not just great coffee.
It directly pushes back against the abortion culture.
Seven Weeks Coffee is America's pro-life coffee company that's founded on a mission to fund the pro-life movement one cup of coffee at a time.
Why are they called Seven Weeks Coffee?
Because at seven weeks, a baby is the size of a coffee bean.
And it's the same time that a heartbeat is clearly detected on an ultrasound.
They built their business around saving lives by donating 10% of every sale to pregnancy centers and pro-life organizations nationwide.
They have now raised over $1.5 million and saved thousands of lives.
Now let's talk about the coffee itself, which is important.
It's mold-free, pesticide-free, shade-grown, and low-acid.
And it's organically farmed.
It's coffee that tastes better and feels better because they did it right.
So go to sevenweekscoffee.com, save 15% forever when you subscribe.
Plus, get a free gift with your order.
And exclusively for my listeners, use code Walsh for an extra 10% off your first order.
That's a 25% total savings on your first order plus a free gift.
Just use code Walsh at checkout.
Speaking of all this, a cool thing over the weekend for me, this really has no relevance to anyone and no reason for you to care, but I'm a nerd, so I'll brag about it.
My wife found for me a first edition copy of a book called The North Pole by Robert Peary.
And this is his account, a contested account of being the first person to discover the North Pole.
He made it to the pole or thought he did.
It may have been 40 or 50 miles short in 1909 that he came back and published his account in like 1911.
So this is the first edition copy from 1911, signed by The Explorer, has an introduction by Theodore Roosevelt, which is just incredibly cool.
And also cool to have a wife who's supportive of your weird niche interests, which is a very important thing.
I think it's two important things as a man, especially as you get older.
And one is that you should develop some niche interests.
Like you should just become an expert in something for something weird for no reason, not because you're going to use it.
It has no utility, but you just you just learn it anyway.
And then it's, it's good to have a wife who's supportive of that, or at least if not supportive, then warmly bemused, affectionately confused, maybe.
And so for me, you know, the topic is polar exploration, which I find endlessly fascinating.
And but this topic actually, I think, relates to what we discussed in the opening monologue, because this is one of the things that makes Western civilization unique and why it should be celebrated.
And it's one of the commonalities that you find among among Westerners and Western civilization, that Europeans and eventually Americans explored the entire world, mapped and charted every ocean, every populated landmass.
They were the only ones to do this.
No one else did it anywhere close to this kind of scale.
And they did it for hundreds of years.
Like almost everything we know about the world, we know because of Western civilization.
And then when most everything had been discovered and they got sort of bored in the 19th and 20th centuries, they decided, well, we may as well go up to the North Pole.
And we might as well go down to the down to the South Pole in Antarctica.
And then they went up to the highest peak on Earth, Mount Everest.
And then they went down to the deepest depths of the ocean, the Mariana Trench.
And when all that was done, they went up to space.
And again, this is unique to Western civilization.
If not for Western civilization, most likely none of this stuff would have ever been done.
And it's the polar exploration part of that, which I find in some ways the most noble and impressive.
I mean, it's all extremely noble and impressive.
But you have to think about the fact that Westerners had already spent centuries exploring and discovering everything.
And then they decided right on the cusp of the modern age to go throw themselves at the most inhospitable, barren, hostile, dark, frozen wilderness on earth at both poles, north and south.
Men were dying by the dozens on every voyage, especially in the early days of polar exploration.
But they kept doing it and dying, you know, horrific deaths, like starving, freezing, scurvy.
But they kept doing it until it was done, until these poles of the earth had been conquered.
And the poles were there for anyone else, any other civilization to attempt to discover.
Anyone else could have stepped up to the plate and nobody did.
Just like so much else of what Western civilization achieved.
Like anyone else could have tried to do it, but they didn't.
Nobody even attempted.
I think the first non-Western, non-white attempt at polar exploration was by the Japanese in 1910.
And it was the only one many decades into the age of polar exploration.
They wanted to go to the South Pole.
They couldn't make it.
They abandoned it and they just kind of went home.
And they didn't make any discoveries.
And that was it.
That was the entirety of the non-Western contribution to the field until like India in the 1980s made an attempt.
And you could see why no one else wanted to do it, but this is why when you talk about Western civilization, this is one of the things that makes it great and why it makes sense to celebrate it and be proud of it because we're part of this tradition of the people who explored and discovered the entire world and beyond.
And again, this is almost entirely unique to Western civilization.
And so when we talk about Western civilization, what are we talking about?
Committed to Trans Ideology00:06:36
We're talking about that.
Okay, well, here we go again.
Daily Wire reports two people were killed and at least three others critically injured after a man who identifies as a woman opened fire at a high school hockey game in Rhode Island.
Pawtucket Police Chief Tina Goncalves confirmed in a Monday evening press conference that Robert Dorgan, who goes by the name Roberta Esposito, killed himself after what she said was likely a targeted shooting stemming from a family dispute.
And there's video circulating of this shooting, which we won't play, very disturbing.
Another trans shooting.
It's been only a week since the last one.
So we're talking about multiple times a month now.
And the thing about this one is that the detail that the left is using to try to mitigate the trans angle actually makes the trans angle worse.
Because apparently this monster was, along with being a fully committed, fully committed to the trans bit, apparently he was surgically committed to it.
Also, he had had the surgery.
And this is what, as the report goes on, this is part of what destroyed his marriage, that he decided to quote unquote transition, got the surgery.
His wife left him, understandably so.
And, you know, and then his whole life starts to unravel from there.
But along with being that committed to it, he also had quote unquote far-right political views, apparently.
So aside from believing in the most radical, most insane aspect of left-wing ideology, that would be trans ideology, he had quote unquote hard right far-right political views.
And so this is supposed to be some kind of like, well, now it's awash, right?
He was trans, but he was also quote unquote right-wing.
So it's a wash.
You know, it all cancels out.
But this only proves that a person who has fallen into the clutches of trans ideology is by definition, automatically a left-wing militant extremist.
It doesn't even matter.
I mean, that transcends politics.
It doesn't even matter what their other political views are.
It makes no difference.
Doesn't matter who they voted for.
None of that matters.
The trans stuff overrides everything.
There is no, another way of putting this, there's no such thing as a right-wing trans person.
There can't be.
They have given their lives to the most radically far-left idea ever conceived by humankind.
It's not possible to do that and also be right-wing.
I don't care who you voted for.
It makes no difference.
In fact, what's interesting is that this guy back in 2019 actually has a tweet where he's responding to me in 2019 and agreeing with me about keeping men out of women's sports.
Now, he since has blocked me and declared that I'm an asshole, and you know, which as you would expect, seven years ago, he was claiming to be one of the like reasonable trans people opposed to men and women sports, right?
So seven years ago, he was saying, yeah, I'm trans, but I'm not like them.
For me, I'm a reasonable one.
I'm, yeah, I don't, I don't agree with, I think we should keep men out of women's sports and all the rest of it.
That's what he was doing seven years ago.
And then what happens?
Seven years later, he puts on a dress and murders his family.
So what does that tell you?
It tells you that the thing that I've been saying for years, which is that trans ideology is a public safety hazard.
These are radical extremists by nature.
You know, by definition, they are radical extremists.
It's only going to get worse.
This is what I've been trying to say.
It's only going to get worse.
A lot of people have bought into a lie, committed themselves to it fully, enjoyed the attention and the affirmation they got from it.
And, you know, living out their fetish in public.
But once the attention drifts away, as it is now, and once the affirmation dries up, as it also is now, they can't go back.
They're pot committed.
They've given their lives and their souls to this thing.
They've already lost everything.
They have nothing else to lose.
Like this, take this guy, for example, for the sake of his trans fantasy, he gave up his wife.
He gave up his kids.
He gave up his dignity.
He gave up his self-respect.
He gave up everything.
He gave it all up.
He even gave up, apparently, his physical manhood.
He gave everything up.
Egged on by this, you know, this contagion, this social contagion.
And that's not even to say that he was confused.
Like, I don't even think a guy like this was ever confused.
Like, he didn't actually think he was a woman, but he enjoyed playing out the fantasy in public, which is all that this has ever been for a lot of these people.
But he went all in on it because that's where the culture was headed.
And for a brief moment in time, this was socially acceptable.
And he went all in.
There's no going back.
Can't go back now.
So in his mind, a mind full of rage and envy and very dark desires, in his mind, all that's left is to take as many people down with him as he can.
And in this case, it was, you know, his thought was to kill his family members who committed the sin of not affirming his delusional lifestyle.
And we're just going to see a lot more of this unless we start treating trans ideology as the public safety hazard that it is.
Whether you're a rancher, a cowboy, or buying your first pair, our sponsor, Tocovas, is where you'll find your perfect pair of boots.
Every boot is handcrafted for broken in comfort right out of the box, and they have an incredible selection of premium leathers from classic cowhide and goat to exotic options like ostrich and caiman.
Brian On Aliens00:07:01
I love mine.
They're great quality, hold up super well against dirt and mud and really comfortable as well.
If you've been thinking about getting a new pair of boots, now's the time.
Visit their stores for expert help, complimentary beverages, and free customizations.
Plus, browse their full lineup of Western apparel and elevated leather goods like wallets and belts, all crafted with the same timeless style and attention to detail.
Layer up this season with pieces that feel as good as they look.
You can shop online at tacovas.com or visit one of their 50-plus stores, Coast to Coast.
Right now, get 10% off at tacovas.com slash Matt.
When you sign up for email and text, that's 10% off at T-E-C-O-V-A-S.com slash Matt, Tacovas.com slash Matt.
Seaside for details.
Takovas, point your toes west.
All right.
Well, you know, I have to say something about this.
This is a this is a must.
So Brian Tyler Cohen is a liberal podcaster, and he had Barack Obama on his show last week.
And this is one moment that got a lot of attention.
You've probably seen it.
But in case you haven't, here is Cohen asking Obama what I think is a very important question.
Watch.
Are aliens real?
They're real, but I haven't seen them.
And they're not being kept in Area 51.
There's no underground facility unless there's this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States.
What was the first question you wanted answered when you became president?
Where are the aliens?
Where are the aliens?
So now Brian has gotten a lot of very deserved criticism for this moment.
This is this, and this is really saying something.
This is perhaps, perhaps the worst interview moment in the history of interviews.
Okay.
He asks a former president if aliens are real.
Obama says, yes, they are.
Not, they might be.
I think they are.
You know, oh, gee, wouldn't that be neat?
He says, they're real.
And the interviewer moves on.
No follow-up, doesn't press the point, doesn't circle back.
Like, this is akin to if you were interviewing a doctor and you asked him if, you know, if he knows how to cure cancer and the doctor says, oh, yeah, sure.
Sure, I do.
Cure cancer?
Oh, yeah, definitely.
And then you said, oh, cool.
Anyway, what's your favorite color?
Or it's like if you were interviewing a scientist and the scientist just sort of casually said, hey, by the way, you know, I actually invented time travel.
And you said, oh, you did, really.
Interesting.
Anyway, moving on.
What are your favorite Ryan Gosling films?
Just an absolute failure as an interviewer, which is what you get now, of course, when like everyone has a podcast, everybody wants to be an interviewer.
No appreciation for the fact that interviewing is an actual skill.
Like just because you consider yourself to be an outgoing, conversational person doesn't mean you know how to interview.
Interviewing is a particular skill set that involves an even a much less common skill, which is listening.
You have to listen to what the person says.
This is a classic bad interviewer, which is all over the place now with all these podcasts where you're interviewing, but you're not listening to what they say.
Listen to what he said.
He said, yes, they're real.
Listen to that, Brian.
Say something.
Respond to what he said.
And, you know, I guarantee Brian's the kind of guy, if you try to have a conversation with him, like there is no conversation.
He's the kind of guy that just talks about himself the whole time.
Anything you say just relates back to, doesn't matter what you say.
You could say like, oh, I just, you know, I just climbed Mount Everest.
And, oh, funny story.
Let me tell you what happened to me when I was in the parking lot at Walmart today.
So this is what we get.
But now I'm kind of doing the same thing because actually the more important point here is that Obama said that there are aliens.
Now, he has since put out a statement clarifying this and basically claiming that what he meant to say was that he assumes that aliens are real, but he never saw any evidence of it.
So he's backing away from the much more definitive and much more interesting claim that he made in the interview.
Now that he's had a chance to put out a statement, like, okay, you know, you had the chance, you had him on the spot and he made the statement.
You had a chance to have a real conversation about it.
But now he's able to put out a statement.
And so now he's backing away from it.
Is this like a cleanup job on his part or what?
I don't know.
And you know that I, you know, I'm a believer.
I think alien life is almost certainly out there.
The vastness of the universe does make that nearly inevitable.
And by the way, I say that not in spite of the fact that I believe in God, but largely because, you know, when you think of the universe as a created structure, to me, it makes the likelihood of other life all the more significant, not less.
And that brings it back to the analogy that I've used before, which is that, you know, if you walk into an enormous mansion with 20 bedrooms and you see people standing right there in the foyer, does it make sense to assume that those are the only people in the entire house?
Not even just like the only people in the house right now, but the only people that live there.
You see two people in the foyer, would it make sense to assume that that's it?
No one else.
There must not be anyone else in this entire, you know, 30,000 square foot house.
I mean, that could be the case.
It could be.
But if you had to put money on it, so people will say, well, the vastness of the universe doesn't indicate.
Yes, it does.
Again, for the same reason that a very large structure indicates a likelihood that there are lots of people who inhabit it.
It doesn't necessarily mean it, but it would indicate that.
And so if I walked into the 20-bedroom house and I saw two people in the foyer and you were to say, like, okay, I'll give you $1,000.
Take a guess.
Are there more people in this house?
Yes or no?
I'm going to probably, I'm going to say yes.
Probably there are.
Does that mean the government knows about them?
I don't know.
But, you know, also keep in mind that just because the government knows or some people in the government know, it doesn't mean the president would know, actually.
It wouldn't surprise me if there was some indication of, not that they're keeping aliens somewhere in a bunker, who knows?
But even if it's not that, it doesn't necessarily mean the president would be told.
So, you know, with Ash Wednesday right around the corner, it's time to start thinking about how you're going to approach this season in order to see real lasting spiritual change.
Canadians and Curling Cheating00:04:51
Our sponsor and friends at Ascension Press invite you to join them for the Crux Lenten Challenge, a daily program that teaches you how to surrender your life to God.
Each day, participants take on four challenges inspired by the cross of Christ, a daily scripture reading, a nightly examine, one physical exercise of your choice, and one dietary fast of your choice.
But don't worry, Crux isn't about extreme penance or white-knuckled self-improvement.
It's about encountering your weakness honestly and discovering the God who meets you there.
And you don't do this alone.
Each day, Father Columba Jordan shares short video reflections in the Ascension app to encourage you, guide you in your struggle, and help you recognize where God is inviting you to surrender.
For limited time, you can join Crux with 90 days of premium access to the Ascension app for just $4.99.
Visit AscensionPress.com/slash walsh to download the app and get the free Crux action plan to prepare for the challenge and track your progress through Lent.
Offer excludes current subscribers.
Quick thing to briefly mention as the New York Post reports, I just happened to see this as we were getting ready for the show that Canada, because we're in the final, I think it was the final week of the Olympics.
So it wraps up in a couple of days.
Canada is in a big controversy at the Olympics because they're accused of cheating and curling twice.
And NPR reports that I saw this headline that a curling scandal has rocked the Olympics, rocked the Olympics.
Everyone's talking about this is a huge deal.
And it's the Canadians.
Again, those filthy, cheating, lying bastards, the Canadians.
Exactly what you would expect, cheating again.
So here's, I think this is the clip of one of the cheating incidents.
I believe it's this.
Okay, go ahead and play it.
I think this is, and so you can see.
I don't even know if this is the cheating one or not, but I think it is.
So watch them cheat.
Yep.
Yep.
Yeah, so you see it right there.
These cheating, filthy, disgusting scumbags.
You can clearly see the cheat happen.
It's the way that he, it's the, it's the, the, the, the, it's the manner in which he, he did the thing.
It's the, when he pushed it.
Plain as day, plain as day.
We got him dead to rights.
And all I can say, and you guys know this, and so I don't even need to say it, but I will, that I care deeply about the sport of curling.
I take immense pride in curling as a sport.
I've always said that it is a sport.
So it's not like I'm just saying now that I care about it because the Canadians are cheating and it's just a chance to dump on the Canadians.
It's not like, it's not that at all, because I've always said, if I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times, that curling is a sport number one.
And number two, it belongs in the Olympics.
I wish it was, it should be in both.
I think it should be in the summer and the winter, frankly.
And I've said that since day one, since day one of the Olympics.
And I'm very protective, protective of the dignity and integrity of the sport, of this fine, noble, athletic pursuit that certainly you couldn't do unless you were in top, only the top physical specimens are capable of pushing the little puck down the thing.
And to think that Canadians are now sullying this great sport, making a mockery of it, just enrages me.
As a longtime curling enthusiast, it enrages me.
But this is what they do.
This is what the damn Canadians always do.
Data brokers are vultures snooping on everything you do online, tracking every click, selling your personal info to the highest bidder, including scammers.
These people don't care about your privacy or freedom.
That's why I use ExpressVPN to keep them out of my business.
It's been especially helpful to use whenever I'm traveling and doing research on public Wi-Fi.
I have peace of mind that all of my data is safe.
ExpressVPN works by running your activity through secure encrypted tunnels.
So no one, not big tech, not your internet provider, especially not data brokers, can spy on what you're doing.
It hides your IP address, which is how these parasites identify you and sell your information to whoever's paying.
Without it, they're blind.
And right now, ExpressVPN is at its lowest price ever, just $3.49 a month, barely 12 cents a day.
Using a VPN isn't about hiding something embarrassing.
It's about protecting your basic right to privacy in a world where every move you make online is being watched, tracked, and sold.
Take your privacy back with ExpressVPN.
And my subscribers can get an extra four months when you use my special link.
Go to expressvpn.com slash walsh.
Get four extra months of ExpressVPN.
That's exp-r-assvpn.com slash walsh.
Apologizing to the Offended00:08:20
Right now, more families are being forced to rely on high interest credit cards to cover expenses than ever before, even with a steady job.
If you're a homeowner caught in that cycle carrying balances with interest rates in the 20s or even 30s, now it's time to get some relief.
Mortgage rates are currently at a three-year low, and my friends at American Financing are helping homeowners pay off that high interest debt at rates in the low fives.
Their salary-based mortgage consultants don't just push loans.
They build exit strategies from debt.
On average, they're saving their customers $800 a month.
Plus, if you start today, you may even delay the next two mortgage payments.
There are no upfront fees or obligations to find out how much you can save.
America's home for home loans is American Financing 866-569-4711.
It's 866-569-4711 or visit AmericanFinancing.net slash Walsh.
Finally, people reported last week, I had this and we didn't get around to it, that the report reading now, HETV's rehab addict has been canceled after its star Nicole Curtis was caught using a racial slur while filming the series.
A video of Curtis using the N-word while filming the show was posted by radar online on Wednesday, the same day the series was set to return to television.
And I think she has since denied that this was during the filming.
Apparently, according to her, they were filming something else.
And this happened.
And the show was supposed to come out again.
And then this was dropped.
And here is the footage that's gone viral of her using the slur.
Why?
It's my last one.
Oh, farting.
What the f is that that I just said?
Fartinick, you gotta, you got it.
Can you kill that?
No, I know 35 minutes.
I thought I was killed.
So, I mean, you know, that's just funny.
Let's be honest.
She says fart N-word, which is a version of the slur I've never heard.
That's a new one.
And she doesn't say it to anyone, obviously.
She doesn't say it maliciously.
She doesn't say it as a slur.
It slips out because she's frustrated trying to fix something.
She asks for the flub to be deleted, but it wasn't.
Instead, they kept the tape.
This is from a couple of years ago, apparently.
Somebody kept the tape and then waited to release it until the moment when her show was supposed to come out again.
So somebody behind the scenes hates this woman.
I don't know what the drama is there, but now, and now the show has been canceled.
And this is another thing to keep in mind when someone tells you that wokeness is dead.
Well, if it were really dead, we wouldn't still be doing this.
Okay, if wokeness was dead, we wouldn't be doing this anymore.
We wouldn't be treating this thing where like we treat this word like it's some kind of magical spell, like it's some kind of incantation, some kind of mystical curse that you find in a dusty book in a creepy attic somewhere, where if you just say the word, you say the syllable, something bad's going to happen.
It's just a word.
It's a word that, and a word that the people who pretend to be most offended by it use the most often.
So the whole thing is a farce.
And if we were, and no one is actually offended by it.
This is all a game.
No one really cares.
This is just about enforcing the racial hierarchy, the hierarchy that says that, you know, black people are allowed to say whatever they want, use any words they want, whenever they want.
But white people can have their lives ruined if they accidentally say a certain word, even in the most benign context imaginable.
So wokeness is still alive.
We know that.
And lest you feel tempted to feel any sympathy for poor Nicole, she has, of course, groveled and apologized multiple times.
People reports again.
Initially, Curtis apologized for her use of the slur in a text sent to TMZ saying, I want to be clear.
The word in question is wrong and not part of my vocabulary and never has been.
And I apologize to everybody.
And then she put out another statement.
She said, there is anger.
There is hate.
There is pain.
I'm here to take it.
I haven't been hiding, ignoring, waiting for this to pass.
I've just been playing this all over and over again and watching the video and having this all out together to say the right thing.
She adds, I am sorry.
I am filled with remorse and regret, just as much as I was one second after the word was said four years ago in 2022.
So then she continues.
She says, she's been submerged in the African-American community her entire adult life, choosing to live and work in the inner cities of many major cities.
Submerged is a very interesting and descriptive word choice.
She's been submerged in, what'd you say?
I've been submerged in the African-American community, submerged.
I mean, arguably that's more offensive than using the N-word.
That brings to mind like sinking, drowning, being overwhelmed, you know, engulfed, devoured.
I've been devoured.
I've been devoured by the African-American community.
I'm sinking in it.
I'm drowning in it.
Which, you know, that's been her experience.
But mostly she says she's sorry.
She's deeply sorry to anyone who's feeling anger, feeling pain over the fact that she accidentally muttered a racial slur four years ago.
And of course, nobody on the planet is actually feeling anger, much less pain over it.
Nobody really cares.
People are pretending to care.
And and they're frauds, which is why the apology will never matter.
An apology to somebody who is even if a person is really offended and you apologize to them, that is rarely going to be accepted.
But if someone is not even actually offended and you apologize to them, then it's definitely not going to be accepted.
It's like if someone is pretending to have a headache and you give them Tylenol and you say, well, did the Tylenol make you feel better?
Well, no, because they already felt fine.
So it had no effect.
And of course, even if somebody actually did feel offended, it wouldn't matter.
They wouldn't be owed an apology.
But she's giving them one anyway.
She tried apologizing twice.
Maybe apologize a third time, Nicole.
Maybe apologize a fourth time.
Apologize a hundred times.
Apologize every day, Nicole, for 100 days in a row.
Maybe that'll work.
Maybe try self-immolation.
You know, try setting yourself on fire like that free Palestine guy, screaming that you're sorry, which is a joke.
Don't actually do that.
To be clear, I'm joking.
Because I wouldn't be surprised if somebody like this actually tried that.
That's the next step for liberal white women.
The next big trend on TikTok is they're going to start lighting themselves on fire in a desperate attempt to win the approval of minorities who hate them.
And it still won't work.
Here would happen.
Here's what happened.
Liberal white women start doing that.
They're going to be accused of stealing the spotlight from people of color who have also self-immolated.
They're going to be accused of appropriating self-immolation from marginalized communities.
That's the way it'll go.
And that's the way it always goes.
But that never stops them from groveling, even though it never works.
That's the lesson here.
And that will do it for the show today.
Thanks for watching.
Thanks for listening.
Talk to you tomorrow.
Have a great day.
Godspeed.
A Lesson on Misrepresented History00:00:58
They told you America invented slavery.
They told you the Indians were peaceful.
They told you colonialism was evil and that Joseph McCarthy was a bad guy.
And guess what?
They lied.
For half a century, generations of American school children have been taught to hate our history, hate our country, and hate themselves.
Time to set the record straight.
And since no one else is going to do it, I will.
Who sold us the slaves?
What were India and Africa like before Europeans arrived?
What caused white flight?
Some of the most well-known stories from American history are designed to demoralize you.
Trail of Tears, Smallpox, Blanket Smith, the Red Scare.
It's all baseless.
It's time for a lesson on what they're not teaching in public schools.
On the real history of slavery, of colonialism, of the Indians, of America, and the world.