Ep. 1599 - Joe Biden Has Terminal Cancer. The Cover Up Was Way Worse Than We Thought.
01:10:24 Share

This is Dr. Jordan B. Peterson. Watch parenting.

Available exclusively on Daily Wire Plus. We're dealing with misbehaviors with our son. Our 13-year-old throws tantrums. Our son turned to some substance abuse. Go to dailywireplus.com today. Today on the Matt Walsh Show, Joe Biden has terminal cancer. They expect us to believe that he was just diagnosed right after leaving office, but it's clear that he's been sick for a while and they covered it up. This is one of the greatest scandals in the history of American politics. Also, the Supreme Court demands that Trump stop depositioning

reporting illegal aliens. The media are shocked to learn that despite reports to the contrary, the Pope is in fact Catholic. And a story goes viral of a young man who supposedly swiped right on Tinder two million times and landed only one date. Have things really gotten that bad on the dating scene for men? All of that and more today on The Matt Wall Show.

Being a husband, father, and host of my own show means life never slows down. Imagine trying to eat 31 different fruits and vegetables every day. Sounds miserable and pretty time-consuming. But with balance of nature, fruits and veggies, there's never been a more convenient dietary supplement to ensure you get a wide variety of fruits and vegetables every day.

with 31 different whole fruit and vegetable ingredients. Balance of Nature takes fruits and vegetables, freeze dries them, turns them into a powder, and then puts them into a capsule. You take your fruit and veggie capsule every day, and then your body knows what to do with them. Go to balanceofnature.com. Use promo code Walsh for 35% off your first order as a preferred customer. Plus, get a free bottle of fiber and spice. That's balanceofnature.com, promo code Walsh.

The hallmark of the late Soviet period was that no one actually knew who was running the country. Leonid Brezhnev, who supposedly ordered the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, could barely speak in public. There was a concerted effort by the Politburo to hide his decline to the extent they could. By the final few years, it was clear that Brezhnev wasn't actually making any decisions at all. Then when Brezhnev finally died in 1982, he was replaced by with a guy named Yuri Andropov, who from the moment he took office,

was suffering from severe kidney failure that often led to his complete incapacitation. And of course, that fact wasn't disclosed to anybody at the time either. But after Andropov died a little over a year into his term, the Soviets released medical files revealing that he had been on dialysis practically the whole time he was in office.

And at that point, Andropov was replaced by someone named Konstantin Chernenko. And you can probably guess how that went. For his part, Chernenko was also suffering from debilitating health problems, including heart failure and emphysema, from the moment he took over. And once again, these problems were hidden, at least until he died while in office after 13 months on the job. And once again, in those 13 months, he spent a lot of his time in the hospital unable to perform his duties.

Yes, the Soviet Union cycled through three mostly unaccountable, incapacitated, sickly leaders in rapid succession, all while hiding their respective conditions from the public. And you don't need to be a student of history to know how that worked out or what happened to the Soviet Union a few years later. Everything collapsed. Now, for many years...

It's gone without saying that in this country, we don't want to emulate the Soviet model of governance. Instead of being governed by a shadowy Politburo or an unelected bureaucracy of some kind, we've always understood that it's critically important to have a competent, healthy president at the head of the federal government.

That's why members of the cabinet as well as members of Congress have a constitutional duty to remove the president if during his term he becomes incapable of serving. It's also why White House doctors release regular reports about the health of the president. Any effort to subvert this model of transparency, to revert to a Soviet style of governance where nobody knows who's in charge, can only be interpreted in one way. It is an attempt to undermine and ultimately destroy the foundations of this country just as the Soviet Union was destroyed.

And the people responsible for any kind of effort like that should be imprisoned as traitors to this country because that's exactly what they are. During Joe Biden's presidency, we've known for some time that his handlers were hiding some of the most dramatic evidence of his mental decline. As egregious as this cover-up was, it wasn't entirely effective because people could still observe many signs of Joe Biden's decline in public. But what we didn't know until yesterday was

As you've heard by now, is that Biden's handlers were also almost certainly hiding another very important piece of information, which is that Joe Biden was suffering from terminal stage four prostate cancer that has spread to his bones, an aggressive cancer that will almost definitely kill him in a matter of years, if not likely sooner than that.

In other words, it's the kind of disease that if Joe Biden had been elected in November would lead to Kamala Harris being installed as the president of the United States. And there's very good reason to believe that they hid Joe Biden's diagnosis from the public in an attempt to secure exactly that outcome. It is just impossible to believe. I mean, impossible to believe that Joe Biden went from a perfectly clean bill of health, which his doctors provided in 2024,

to having stage four prostate cancer in a matter of six months. That's just not how it works. I mean, pretty much every expert in the field is unanimous on this point. For example, News Nation just spoke to a urologist named David Shusterman. Shusterman pointed out that prostate cancer is typically a slow-growing cancer that's easily detectable by using a PSA blood test long before it spreads. And as president, Biden would presumably be receiving these tests on a regular basis. Watch.

It's very unlikely that someone could get annual checkups and not notice a PSA elevation over the past-- this is what I typically would see in a VA hospital, where a patient hasn't had medical attention in 10 years, presents to an emergency room with bone pain, and then they find that it's metastatic prostate cancer. But in the modern age of medicine, especially

the fact that he was a former president, he had intensive state-of-the-art care where we can see prostate cancer 10 years in the past. So this is, I mean, it's very unusual to hear that someone has prostate cancer where they're annually being followed up. And the fact that

We just find it at a Gleason 9 is just pretty much unheard of in this day and age of medicine, even in the

Even in inner city populations, we wouldn't see. I see. Well, most likely he had prostate cancer for a long time. And aggressive prostate cancers such as this at age 80 grows over a long period of time. I mean, usually it takes from the first diagnosis of prostate cancer to spread would take five to 10 years, even in the most aggressive form.

It's just, to me, it seems very surprising that the first diagnosis would be a metastatic diagnosis, especially Gleason 9 cancer. Okay, so according to this urologist and pretty much every other doctor we've heard speak about this in the last 12 to 24 hours, it's pretty much unheard of to get a diagnosis of stage 4 prostate cancer out of the blue in a situation like this.

I mean, even in poor areas without good health care, he says it's the kind of thing that happens when patients don't get regular screenings for many, many years. And then he states that Biden may have had this cancer for a period of five to 10 years before he was in office. And that appears to be the consensus.

As Stephen Quay, a prominent doctor and scientist, put it, quote,

It's highly likely that he was carrying a diagnosis of prostate cancer throughout his White House tenure and the American people were uninformed. And this is so bad, by the way, that even doctors on MSNBC and CNN are saying the same thing. And in an interview with Reuters, Dr. Chris George, who serves as the medical director of Northwestern Health Network's cancer program, offered this assessment, quote, I would assume that the former president gets a very thorough physical every year. I would be interested to know what his PSA was the last time it was checked.

It's sort of hard for me to believe that he's had a PSA within the past year that was normal. It's possible, it's possible, but that would surprise me. Usually prostate cancer doesn't go full throttle like this too often. When it does, that's usually a bad, bad sign. That's an aggressive cancer for sure, but it does seem odd to me. Now, this is as close as you'll get to a doctor who is willing to entertain the official narrative or at least say that it's plausible.

But even he thinks that it's highly unlikely because they would have been checking Biden's PSA levels. And he's wondering what they were. Here's the problem. If you go back and pull up Biden's medical reports, you won't see anything about his PSA levels. And at the moment, we have no indication of whether they were checking his PSA levels at all. In 2019, Biden's doctors reported that he had an enlarged prostate, but he had no cancer. So you'd think that that would trigger some extra urgency for regular PSA screenings.

But apparently not. We're supposed to believe that they didn't do any screenings at all for a guy in his late 70s, 80s, who has a large prostate. They're doing regular screenings and they're doing the physicals for the president's precisely because they want to find out if he has anything like a fatal disease. And so we're supposed to believe that a PSA blood test was not part of that at any point.

Then in 2024, Biden's physician reported that he was, quote, a healthy, active, robust 81-year-old male who remains fit to successfully execute the duties of the presidency. But again, nothing about his PSA levels. There's also nothing in the reports to indicate that he was being treated in any way for cancer. At the same time, CNN just interviewed a doctor who stated that when prostate cancer is being treated, symptoms can include cognitive impairment and fatigue, which are both symptoms that Joe Biden obviously displayed during the campaign. Watch.

He's 82. How would that dictate how he and his medical team make a decision about the treatment options?

I think he's not my patient, but if I had a patient like him with all the medical stuff that he has, including whether it's the physical or the mental, you really have to take that into account because all these treatments do have potential side effects. One of the biggest side effects that I see in my patients that get these hormone treatments could be cognitive changes. So you have to kind of balance that. People can also get issues with fatigue and weight loss.

Now, the urologist we showed earlier, Dr. Schusterman, said the same thing in his interview with News Nation. These treatments can cause cognitive impairments. So that raises some more questions. Do we know that Joe Biden was receiving any of these cancer treatments that fried his brain and made him so tired that, according to his own aides, he wasn't able to function after dark? At the moment, we don't. But we also don't have any reason to believe Biden's handlers when they say he wasn't taking these treatments, especially given all their other lies and given his behavior while in office. In fact,

We cannot believe anything that anyone close to Biden says about anything at all, particularly anything related to his health. You just can't believe a word they say because we already know that they lied. And if they lied about this, which they almost certainly did, that really would be the scandal of the century. I mean, imagine if it turned out that Joe Biden was senile in part because they were treating him for terminal cancer that they didn't disclose. I mean, at this point, you can't put it past any of these people.

Now, it's impossible to ignore the fact that they're floating this possibility on CNN just a couple of days before the release of Jake Tapper's new book, which goes in depth about Joe Biden's cognitive decline. And that presents yet another reason to doubt the official narrative, which is that Biden's cancer was suddenly discovered this week. I mean, it looks a lot like they're releasing this diagnosis in order to change the subject and garner sympathy for Biden. In fact, David Axelrod has just come out and basically said that. Watch.

His medical condition now, his announced medical condition now, do you believe that silences or delays a lot of conversations about his, you know, last year and a half of his presidency for now?

Yeah, well, I mean, I think those conversations are going to happen, but they should be more muted and set aside for now as he's struggling through this. So that is the very thinly veiled command. He's essentially saying, now that we've told you that Joe Biden is dying, please stop talking about how he covered up his mental decline as well as his cancer. And of course, CNN and other networks will follow David Axelrod's command.

So to be clear, you know, saving the news of Joe Biden's cancer diagnosis for two days before the book release in order to change the subject and garner sympathy is just diabolical. I mean, I've never seen anything so cynical in my life, but that is clearly what they're doing. They waited for right now so they could say, oh, you would say all this about a dying man. He's dying after all.

In order to believe the official narrative, we have to believe not just one coincidence, but we have to believe in a whole succession of the wildest coincidences we've ever seen. And there's no reason to believe that. You know, they'd rather you don't pay any attention to all the evidence that they lied and deceived the public for several years in one of the greatest scandals of American history. Watch.

I can testify because I've been working very closely with this president for the past two years. I've been knowing him for 30 years. And I'm telling you, this guy's tough. He's smart. He's on his game. Joe Biden has vision. He has knowledge. He has a strategic thinker. The president is focused. He's detail oriented. He's always thinking about the big picture. He is engaging. He is capable. He has an incredible record as president. Start your tape right now because I'm about to tell you the truth.

And F you if you can't handle the truth. This version of Biden, intellectually, analytically, is the best Biden ever. Not a close second. And I've known him for years. The Brzezinski's have known him for 50 years. If it weren't the truth, I wouldn't say it. You did such a great job. You answered every question. Let me ask the crowd. What did Trump do?

Yes. Undisputed winner of the worst wife in America contest, by the way, is Jill Biden. We saw at the end of the clip there. Undisputed winner. I mean, Meghan Markle is a distant, distant second at this point. And Michelle Obama was, you know, left out of the competition for eligibility issues. Anyway, they don't want you asking any questions about any of this. They genuinely believe that now that they've told us Joe Biden has cancer, that all this will go away and we'll stop asking questions.

We'll stop asking how Joe Scarborough could have claimed that the best version of Biden, the best version of Biden was when he had terminal cancer and dementia. That was his best version, according to Joe Scarborough. But it won't go away. Instead, it's just become a much more serious crisis. In fact, I mean, at this point, there are several questions that need to be answered immediately. First, when was Joe Biden actually diagnosed with cancer?

Was he treated in any way for prostate cancer at any time while he was in office? If so, who knew about these treatments and participated in the cover-up? And, you know, did they secretly treat him or did they not treat him because the only way to keep it hidden was to do nothing about it? Or did they want the disease to kill him quickly after his reelection so that Kamala could take over? Did Joe Biden even know that he had cancer? Was it hidden from him? I mean, all of these options are on the table now.

And we are well past the point where we can take any Democrat's word for any of this. I mean, cable news hits on CNN are not sufficient. At this point, we need Congress to step up and actually do something for a change. We need full congressional investigations into this cover up, put everybody under oath, every staffer, every official, Jill Biden, his doctors, everyone. Whatever the case, it's now clear that

Their plan to engineer the first female president was to push through a cancer-riddled dementia patient, get him reelected by any means necessary, let him die, and then have her take over. I mean, that is undeniable at this point. That was the plan. It's the most ruthless, cold-blooded plot we've ever seen in American politics. These people are demons. They really are.

And like their counterparts in the final days of the Soviet Union, they obscured vital information that every American is entitled to. In fact, the Free Press reports that, quote, administration staffers referred to Biden's close-knit team of top advisors as the Politburo. So they knew what they were doing. They knew they were acting like Soviet puppet masters. And they're still doing it. They're refusing to answer the ultimate question, the ultimate question that we simply must have an answer to after all the other ones, which is this.

Who was actually running the country for the past four years? Because whoever it was, it wasn't Joe Biden. And whoever it was, those people are still out there. Some of them may be in government right now. And if not, they're certainly planning to return to power soon. And before that happens, every single one of them must be identified and prosecuted and imprisoned like the traitors to this country that they are. Now let's get to our five headlines.

What started as an idea is now the podcast and business blasting through your earbuds. Launching your own business is pretty much on everyone's bucket list, but most people let it collect dust right next to learn a language and get abs. Stop hiding behind lame excuses like, "I don't have the skills. I can't do it alone."

Turn those what-ifs into bold why-nots with Shopify backing your ideas. They've got the tools you need to take the chance. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S.,

We even use it for our own DailyWire shop to make sure things are running smoothly and efficiently so you can all get what you need from the shop. You might be asking, "What if I can't design a website?" Or, "I'm worried people haven't heard of my brand." Well, not a problem. Shopify has got you covered from the start with beautiful, ready-to-go templates

that match your brand style and help you find your customers through easy-to-run email and social media campaigns. And if you need a hand with everyday tasks, their AI tools created specifically for commerce can help enhance product images, write descriptions, and more. Plus, their award-winning customer support is available 24-7 to share advice if you ever get stuck. Turn those dreams into...

and give them the best shot at success with Shopify. Sign up for your $1 per month trial and start selling today at shopify.com slash Walsh. Go to shopify.com slash Walsh, shopify.com slash Walsh. Okay, this was going to be the lead story today, the monologue, but there's just too much going on, so it ends up here. Daily Wire reports the Supreme Court on Friday ruled 7-2 against the Trump administration's attempt to swiftly deport Venezuelan gang members

under the Alien Enemies Act, requiring officials to provide more than 24 hours for detainees to challenge their removal. Under these circumstances, notice roughly 24 hours before removal, devoid of information about how to exercise due process rights to contest that removal, surely does not pass muster, the majority wrote. The unsigned decision clarified that the court was only ruling on the notice requirement and not whether the Trump administration can use the Alien Enemies Act itself.

The court stated to be clear, we decided we decide today only that detainees are entitled to more notice than was given on April 18th. So this is supposed to put a stop to Trump's deportation efforts. That's the idea anyway. And and it's this is completely bogus. It's illegitimate. It's ridiculous. Trump should ignore it. That's the only answer. The Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to tell the president that he can't deport illegal aliens.

They don't have the authority to set policy on how that is carried out. They don't have any authority to do that. I mean, it's nice that they've given their opinion. So the Supreme Court has given their personal opinion that they think, you know, if you're going to deport an illegal alien, they should get more than 24 hours notice. That's their personal opinion. Thanks for letting us know, guys. Really interesting. I'm glad you chimed in.

Really interesting opinion. Thanks for that. Anyway, let's get back to deporting the illegal aliens. Like that, that has to be the answer, um, because they don't have the authority. So Trump should just ignore them. And what are they going to do about it? What are they going to do about it? There's no enforcement mechanism. They can't compel him to do anything. So ignore them. Um, and, uh,

Where does that lead? What happens? I don't know, but this comes to a head. It's time for this to come to a head. The judicial branch thinks that it can usurp the authority of the executive branch. And the only way to put a check on this madness, the only way to shut down this power grab by the judicial branch is to disregard them and dare them to try and do anything about it. It's the only way. And

Also, just on this due process thing for a moment, you know, the Supreme Court is concerned about the due process rights of illegal aliens. And this is what we hear all the time now from the left about the due process. First of all, illegal aliens have no legal rights in this country at all. They're not citizens. The Constitution does not cover them. The Constitution of the United States of America is for the United States of America. It's not for the entire world.

The Constitution doesn't apply to every far-flung corner of the planet. It's for Americans. And also, this concept of due process, the way that we talk about it, you would think that rather than due process, that it's the process, right?

We talk about it as if there's the process. There's a process, and there's only one process. It's inscribed in stone, and that process is universally applied to everybody, regardless of whether they're citizens or not. But that's not the case. Even for American citizens, that's not the case. Due process means, not to be redundant, but due process means the process that is due.

So the opposite of due process would be an undue process. If somebody is not getting due process, it means they're getting an undue process. Illegal aliens have for decades in this country been getting an undue process. And the process has been that essentially they get to sneak across the border and stay here. You know, that's been the process. That is an undue process. So I do believe in due process for illegal aliens.

I don't believe in an undue process. I think, yes, I believe in due process. And the process is this. We capture you. That's step one. Step two in the process is we confirm that you're here illegally. And then step three is we expel you from the country. That's it. That's the whole process. There is no other process that is due to these people. So...

giving them a chance to appeal and explain why they really want to stay in the country and how terrible things are back home and how whatever. That's not part of the process. That should not be part of the process. The only process is you came here illegally. We're going to confirm that that's the case, that you're here illegally. You're not actually a citizen. And then you're gone. That's it. And by the way, confirming that you're here illegally is not a complicated step. If you're here legally,

If you're a legal citizen, there is tons of documentation to prove it. And even if you don't have that documentation somehow, then if you don't have it on you, if somehow you can't, I mean, almost any of us as legal citizens, if we were asked to provide some physical documentation to show that we're legal citizens, we have ample, we have plenty that we could provide.

But if you're a legal citizen and even if somehow your house was burned down and all of your documents, everything in your life was burned and you lost all of it, you could still easily prove that you're a legal citizen. I mean, you're going to be in like 20 different government databases proving that you're a legal citizen. It's not hard to do.

So if you're if you don't have documentation, if there's no documentation either physically on you or in any database proving that you're a legal citizen, then you're here illegally. Now, of course, I tweeted this over the weekend and all these idiot leftists, including Keith Olbermann, responded like they had this great dunk. And they said, yeah, well, you know, confirming confirming that they're here illegally is what this is all about. You moron.

Under Trump's system, even you could be deported. How would you like that if they don't have to confirm? So next thing you know, you're going to be deported. That's what Keith Olbermann said, paraphrasing slightly. Because right, Keith, if we deport illegal aliens, the next thing you know, they'll be deporting legal citizens who've been here for generations. Like, okay, you know what? I'll take my chances. Where would they even deport me to? Where are they going to send me? Ireland? Ireland?

So the idea is if we deport an illegal alien who arrived here from Honduras last week, then there's nothing stopping them from also deporting me to my ancestral homeland where my distant relatives lived generations ago. Is that the idea? Really? I mean, that's like saying...

It's like saying that the laws against bank robbery would mean that if we enforce the law against bank robbery, it would also mean that if you go to the bank with a withdrawal slip to legally withdraw money from your checking account, that you might also go to jail for bank robbery. It's like claiming that there's no way to distinguish easily between those two scenarios because they're both scenarios where someone's taking money from a bank

If we have a law against bank robbery, it means that we're just going to put everybody in jail. There's no way to know. How can we possibly know? How could you possibly distinguish? It's absurd. I mean, it's obviously clear that confirming someone's illegal status isn't difficult. It takes two seconds. They're either here legally or not. And if you're not, you got to go. There's not any legal citizen. I got news for you. There's not any legal citizen in this country that the government is unaware of.

I mean, maybe if it's illegal, it's like a baby that was just born three days ago. That might be one the government isn't quite aware of. But even then, they probably know. But if you're a legal citizen, especially an adult, the government knows you. They want to get their tax money. You got a social security number. I mean, they know who you are, and they know where you are, and they know a lot about you. So this idea that it's complicated...

It's so hard. How can you distinguish between a 65-year-old retiree in Cincinnati whose family has lived in Ohio for 95 years? How can you distinguish between that and a guy from Guatemala who just came here

Just ran across the desert three days ago and doesn't speak English. Like, there's no way. How do we know? How do we know between those two who's the legal citizen and who isn't? It's so hard. It's difficult. It takes it'll take it. There's no way you need years of court cases to figure out the difference between those two. It's just absurd. The whole thing.

And it's all about, as we know, you know, they're not they don't care about due process or putting a process in place. What they want is they're trying to throw roadblocks into the middle of the process. They want to prevent the process. They want to sabotage a process, not, you know, in state one. NBC News reports on a on a breaking news story. Apparently, the pope is, it turns out, Catholic.

This is the news. Here's the headline. Pope Leo XIV affirms family is based on union between a man and a woman. Unborn have inherent dignity. That's the headline from NBC News. Actually, it is shocking. The shocking thing about the headline is that this is an NBC News headline, and it uses the term unborn instead of fetus. And it's generally respectful to Catholic teaching. I don't know how this headline made it past the editors. I don't know what's going on over there. Somebody's getting fired for this. I can tell you that.

I mean, listen, this is NBC News. Pope Leo XIV affirms family is based on union between a man and a woman. Unborn have inherent dignity. Like the NBC News version of that headline is supposed to be something like, you know, Pope Leo XIV confirms bigotry against LGBT community while launching attack against reproductive rights. That's how NBC is supposed to report on that. So I don't know what's going on there. But, you know, baffling, but in a good way.

Now, on to the articles. As Pope Leo XIV affirmed Friday that the family is founded on the stable union between a man and a woman, and that the unborn and elderly enjoy dignity as God's creatures, articulating clear Catholic teaching on marriage and abortion at the start of his pontificate. Leo, the first American pope, has also called for reviving multilateral diplomacy and promoting dialogue between religions and the search for peace in his first meeting.

with the Vatican diplomatic corps. It was up to governments to build peaceful societies, above all by investing in the family founded upon the stable union between a man and a woman. In addition, no one is exempted from striving to ensure respect for the dignity of every person, especially the most frail and vulnerable, from the unborn to the elderly, from the sick to the unemployed, citizens, immigrants alike. So there you go. Turns out the Pope is Catholic. And this is why I said to be really wary of anybody claiming, as you know, when the Pope was elected by the cardinals,

A couple of weeks ago, you had all these, a lot of people on the right claiming the Pope is some kind of woke leftist. And that's why I said at the time to be very wary of that because, yeah, he may be kind of liberal on immigration, but he's also going to be staunchly opposed to gay marriage and abortion at every stage. And it's just not possible for somebody to be, to hold those views and still be a leftist.

That doesn't exist. There's no such thing as a leftist who is pro-life and anti-gay marriage. Doesn't exist. By definition, if you hold those views, you're not a leftist. Even if you're kind of liberal on other issues, even if you're liberal on other important issues, you cannot be a leftist and hold those views. Now, on the other hand, it's possible. I mean, it's unlikely, but you don't encounter this very often, but it would be possible for a leftist to also be anti-illegal immigration. Unlikely, it's rare, but

It would not be like incoherent necessarily for someone to say, yeah, I think we should shut down the border. But also, I think that, you know, marriage is whatever I want it to be. And we should be able to kill babies up until, you know, up until the moment of birth. And if you hold that view, even though you have a conservative view on immigration and on the border, you are still fundamentally a leftist.

If you want to dismantle the nuclear family, if you reject the inherent dignity of human life, that is wokeness. That's what wokeness is. So it is incoherent to call somebody woke if they uphold the dignity of human life and they uphold the sanctity of marriage and the family, which is why, as I said, when Pope Leo was first elected, many of the right-wingers attacking him and calling him woke are far woker than he is. I mean, he is far, far to the right of many of them.

Because many of them support abortion up to a point and they support gay marriage. Those are now common positions for so-called conservatives. And, you know, so you are far to the left of Pope Leo and also Pope Francis, by the way. For all the talk of how he was a liberal pope, and he was, he's actually much more conservative than the majority of conservatives that were complaining about the fact that he's liberal.

Because a large number of those conservatives support gay marriage, support abortion, and those are the leftist sacraments. So if you're on board with the left on those issues, you're on the left. Hate to tell you, you just are. And I'm not saying that we can't find common ground with so-called conservatives who have these liberal social views. We can work together to advocate for stronger borders and all that kind of stuff. We're on the same page on issues like crime and all that is good. But

you are fundamentally on their side. And you're certainly in no position to run around questioning anyone else's conservative bona fides because you've accepted the left's two central and most extreme and most damaging tenets. And if you've done that, then the wokeness is coming from inside the house, let's just say. Okay, here's another, let's play this a little bit, something a little bit lighter.

Another fun so-called Karen video. Now, you know this genre. We've talked about it many times before. Somebody records a video of themselves being reprimanded by a so-called Karen, and everybody laughs and mocks the Karen, and we all agree that Karens are horrible monsters, even though the quote-unquote Karen is actually entirely in the right most of the time.

So I'm going to play this latest video. I won't go into my whole speech about how Karen is a racial slur. It is, you know my take on that. It is a slur invented by non-white people to demean white women. So that's the genesis of the term. It is a racial slur. You know, if we say N-word, we should be saying K-word because they're both slurs. They're both slurs. They're both racial slurs. That's what they are. But anyway, in this video, so there's just the setup. There's a guy on an e-bike, on like a motorized bike.

And he's being followed by a woman on a normal bike who scolds him for using his motorized bike on the bike trails, which is not allowed. And then this video ended up on the Internet. And of course, almost everybody is all agreeing that this woman, what a horrible Karen and blah, blah, blah. But let's watch the video.

Is that a full e-bike? Yeah. You know they're not allowed on the bike trails on full motorized vehicles. These can't be on the bike paths. You have to bike on the street because they go like 35 miles an hour. I just didn't go 25 max. You're not allowed on the bike trails on a full electric bike. There's signs all over. And you people pissed me off because a guy came up this far from me and almost took me out. I would have either been in the hospital or dead. Alright.

So there's a few things here. It's funny. I'll never understand these people who have some interaction in public where they cower like little pathetic wimps and then they post it for the whole world to see so everyone can see what a pansy they are. Like this woman, she came right up to you. She confronted you directly.

She had an issue with something you were doing. She told you about it. Okay. She was an adult about it. She wasn't screaming. She wasn't being belligerent. She didn't film you. She didn't try to publicly shame you. She didn't call the cops. She just came up to you man to man or man to woman in this case and told you what she wanted to tell you. And if you really thought she was being unreasonable, you could have told her that to her face.

Instead, you back down and then put your little snide comeback in the caption of the video and then post it. If you listen to the audio podcast, you couldn't see it, but she confronts him. He says, oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry about that. And then he rides away and then up on the screen in a caption that he put on later when he was editing the video, it says, shut the F up, Karen. He didn't say that to her face, did he?

Right. He said it later in the video. I'll get her back. I'll show her. And he puts a little caption on his video. So even if I thought that she was wrong, which I don't, I'd still take her side because you're a weak little punk. You are a weak little punk running to the Internet for backup because you're too much of a to speak up for yourself in person. I'm so tired of people that do this.

You know, if that happened to me, like if somebody started scolding me in public and I cowered and stammered and said, oh, yeah, OK, I'm sorry. Oh, sorry about that. I would simply not ever post that video on the Internet. I would never I would never say, hey, guys, look at me being a little over here. Get a load of this. Get a load of this. This woman talked to me and I just and I and I and I was terrified and I stammered and stuttered and ran away. Look, everybody, check it out. I would never do that.

Um, I would, we would never speak of that encounter ever. It would never be, I wouldn't tell a single person. I wouldn't tell a single soul. I wouldn't tell my wife. I wouldn't tell anybody. Um, it would die. It would go with me to the grave. And yet, and yet these guys, they put it on the internet and, and that, that's why the, you know, the, the, the quote unquote Karen's, uh, this is why I defend them because they have the gumption. They have the guts to actually just come up to you face to face and tell you what they think.

They aren't filming you. They aren't, you know, running to Twitter to make fun of you. After you're long gone, they're just coming up to you in person as a human being, like people used to do, and just telling you like, look, here's what you did. I think it was the wrong thing to do. I just want you to know that.

I respect that. I respect people who will just speak up and say what they need to say. I just don't, I don't understand how twisted your mind has to be when you see a video like this and you side with the, with the weak, weak ass little punk who was number one, breaking the rules. And number two is running to the internet to, to get backup rather than manning up and speaking up for himself. If he really thinks he was in the right.

Also, in this case, as usual, the so-called Karen is right. Motorized bikes aren't allowed on the bike trail. It's not like an unreasonable rule. There's a reason for that, right? And I'm not one to speak up for cyclists very often. Okay, you know how I feel about cyclists. But in this case, she's right. That's the rule.

And this guy ignored the rule because he's an entitled jerk who thinks he should be able to do whatever he wants. And yet somehow this detail is always overlooked and ignored in these so-called Karen videos, right? It's always somebody whining saying, oh, this Karen yelled at me and said I was doing the wrong thing. Come on, internet. Let's come on, right? Let's have my back on this. And somehow nobody ever asks the obvious follow-up question, which is,

Okay, she yelled at you and said you're doing the wrong thing. Were you? Were you doing the wrong thing? How is that not the most relevant question to ask here? Instead, all these morons are like, she should just mind her own business. You idiots. Was he breaking the rule or not? He was. Because if you were breaking the rule, then how are you not in the wrong here? I mean, what exactly is your claim? Are you saying that

You were doing the wrong thing, but this woman somehow has, what, a moral obligation to just let you do it without comment? Is that what you think? All these people that say, oh, people just need to mind their own business. So what you're saying is that everybody else has a moral obligation to just let you do whatever the hell you want. That's what you're saying. Sure, motorized bikes aren't allowed on the trail, and here you are with a motorized bike on the trail, and we're all supposed to just accept that because...

Why? Why are we supposed to accept that? Why are you allowed to magically break this rule that everyone else is following? What makes you so special? You're such a precious little angel that everybody is just, yeah, yeah, I know this is the rule. There's a million signs. I'm going to ride right past those signs doing the opposite of what the sign says because I feel like it. No, that's not how it works. That's not how it works. And

And if there are a million signs saying no, no motorized bikes on the trail. And this guy says, well, I'm just going to do it anyway. Well, that makes him wrong. That makes him wrong. And Karen wins again. This is why we need these so-called Karens who, who, who, you know what they actually are. You know what the quote unquote Karen, you know what they are? They're moms. Like this is, they're actually, this is what, this is how moms are supposed to be.

Like that's, that's what a mom does. That's that, that's the role is one of the roles that moms fill in society, right? It's, it's always, of course it's going to be, it's like, it's not, it's probably not going to be a dad with a rule. Like it's an, it is, it's a rule. Okay. First of all, it's a rule. The rule is there. It's a legitimate rule. Uh, no motorized bikes on the trail. It's a legit, it's a rule. It's legitimate. There is a reason for it. There's a safety reason for it in that these bikes go too fast for, you know, for, for a trail that was not made for those kinds of bikes. Um,

But men like dads, right? The dad thing is you're probably not going to, you're just like, ah, whatever, you know, they're fine. This is the eternal argument between moms and dads. It's like the mom is like, look, he's on the trail. He's not supposed to be, ah, he's fine. He's probably fine. It's whatever, who cares? You know, that's the dad approach. But the mom says, no, this isn't right. The rule is right there. You can't break the rule. And there's always a little bit of tension there.

But you need that. You need that. And you need that in society. And you need these women, these moms who are just going to, you know, they're not OK with you breaking the rules. The rules there for a reason. They're not going to let you break it. And why are they enforcing the rule? Just because it's the rule. That's the only reason. And you need people in society who care about the rules simply because it is a rule.

Let me tell you something. We, we, we, we, you shout down all these people, you shame them and you, you, you make them go away. Um, then what do you, what would you rather have? Would you rather have a society that's run by the weak little on the bike, breaking the rules, doesn't even have the guts to speak up for himself. Like, who do you want? Who do you want? Who do you want to have a greater influence on society? That guy or, you know, the, the, the woman, the mom who cares about the rules.

Well, if you want a civilized, well-ordered society, then it should be the latter is what I'm going to tell you. All right, let's get to the comment section. You're a man, it's required that you grow. We're the sweet baby gang.

Tax day may have passed, but for millions of Americans, the real trouble is just beginning. If you missed the April 15th deadline or still owe back taxes, the IRS is ramping up enforcement. Every day you wait only makes things worse. With over 5,000 new tax liens filed daily and tools like property seizures, bank levies, and wage garnishments, the IRS is applying pressure at levels we haven't seen in years. Increased administrative scrutiny means collections are moving fast.

The good news, there's still time for Tax Network USA to help. Self-employed or a business owner, even if your books are a mess, they've got it covered. Tax Network USA specializes in cleaning up financial chaos and getting you back on track fast. Even after the deadline, it's not too late to regain control. Your consultation is completely free. Acting now.

could stop penalties, threatening letters, and surprise levies before they escalate. Call 1-800-958-1000 or visit TNUSA.com slash Walsh. You may have missed April 15th, but you haven't run out of options. Let Tax Network USA help before the IRS makes the next move. So on Friday, we talked about the horrifying story of the cockroaches found on a Spirit Airlines flight. So of course, our comment section today will focus only on that because that's the only important thing.

Spirit doesn't have first class. They have big seats in the front row, but they don't even call it first class themselves. Because this story was that there was cockroaches in first class on Spirit Airlines, which as I remarked, I'm fascinated less by the cockroaches and more by the fact that Spirit has first class seats. But a few people corrected me on this and said that it's... So you're telling me that first class on Spirit Airlines is literally just called the big seats, right?

That's what they, that's the most spirit airlines thing I've ever heard of. That's, that's so much better than I thought it was funny thinking about spirit airlines having first class, but now that I know that they actually just call it. And I think, is that what they call it? Like if you go to the website and you could pay the upcharge for the big seats, um,

That is that's great. Their version of first class is just to give you a human sized feet seat. Their version of first class is to give you a seat that you can fit in if you're an adult with legs, which I think is just great. You know, that's I would expect nothing less or nothing more. Flying first class on Spirit Airlines is like being the valedictorian of summer school. That's good.

That's the joke I was searching for. I was searching for a joke like that when we talked about this, and I couldn't quite, I didn't quite land on it. I couldn't quite get there, but well done. Well done. I knew Spirit was bad when I flew with them while my friends flew in another airline. Our flights going the same route, just being five minutes apart.

My flight had such bad turbulence and shook the whole time. And when I landed and saw my friends, I was like, wow, that was terrifying. And they were like, what are you talking about? Our flight was smooth as can be. But yeah, that's because the turbulence on Spirit is not from the weather conditions. It's because of the mechanics of the plane, I assume. It's because the engines are operated by an army of hamsters on a wheel running really fast, I assume.

I'm going to stand up for Spirit. I've flown Spirit about 30 times to visit family back home. Spirit has never had cancellations, and the one day I had was only 20 minutes. They're reliable, and I'm able to get to my destination safely and for a good price. Delta, on the other hand, they have stranded me in multiple airports with cancellations. Delta has also been on the news a lot recently for their safety. This has to be an alt account for the Spirit CEO. There's no other explanation.

There's no way that anyone is passionately defending Spirit Airlines. Yes, they are. I mean, I'll give you that. They're reliable. They're a reliably horrific experience. But you do know exactly what you're going to get. So in a way, I guess I'll agree. Dollar Tree, Aldi's and Walmart are lower than TJ Maxx on the rankings. IMO. No, I'm not. I won't tolerate that. I'm not going to. I won't tolerate that kind of Walmart slander.

I just want Walmart. Is it Walmart's better than TJ Maxx? Walmart is at least I think Walmart gets a bad rap, you know, and I think I've I've I've have sung the praises of Walmart in the past. As you know, I'm a I am a loyal Walmart shopper myself, even even now, even still.

And it's a professional operation. You know, it is a professional. TJ Maxx is a is a like a giant flea market. It's like TJ Maxx is a it's a flea market tier operation. So the ranking is actually garage sale, flea market, then like a street market in Tanzania and then TJ Maxx.

And the thing is that the flea market and the garage sales and third world street markets are better organized and have better customer service. Have you ever walked in, like, have you walked into a TJ Maxx and had to ask an employee a question? They look at you like they're offended that you would ask. I've had this, like, it's like when you ask, if you go to a store and you accidentally stop a customer because you think that they're an employee and you ask them where something is. And a lot of times they get offended.

but really it's their fault because it's like, why did you wear a blue polo to Best Buy? I mean, what am I supposed to assume? But the employees at TJ Maxx, they get offended the same way, even though they're actually employees. So the last time I went to TJ Maxx was, it was like over a year ago and I was out running errands and my wife did what all wives do all the time and what my wife loves to do, which is that after I'd already completed the errands,

I was getting in the car with a feeling of satisfaction, like, well, all the errands are done. Heading home, you know? And then she texts me, as you always get that text in that moment, say, oh, actually, can you get this one other thing? And the one other thing is always something oddly specific. And I forget what it was. It was like, it was like, it was a shower curtain thing.

rings or something, not the shower curtain and not the shower curtain rod, but the rings, you know, the rings he put on so that the shower curtain slides, something really specific like that. And, uh, and of course I text her back and I say, well, do we really not have those? How do we have a shower curtain? We don't have the rings. What, what happened that we lost that part, but we don't, we still have the curtain. And she said, we needed it. She said, Oh, go to TJ Maxx. They have a great, they have a, they have nice ones that are on sale. And I'm like,

What constitutes a nice shower curtain ring? And how do you know that off the top of your head? But I just... It's the kind of thing, you walk in there, I know I'm not going to be able to find this. I just will not... There's no way I'm going to be able to find it. Stop an employee to ask them about it. They have no clue. It's... They have... They are more clueless about how the store is set up than you are as a customer. So...

Anyway, what was the point? Yeah, TJ Maxx is worse than Walmart. Finally, I think Matt's memory failed him a little here. Ames wasn't that low end. It was basically Kmart. It definitely wasn't sub dollar tree. You owe your parents an apology, Matt. I don't know. I was also surprised in the comments that so many people knew what Ames was. It was a bargain retailer that went out of business 25 years ago.

Apparently a lot of, a lot of former Ames customers out there. Ours was pretty rough. I don't know. Ours was, ours was bad. It was really bad. And like I said, we did our back to school shopping there. Um, and the, the clothes were, they were such, they were such obvious knockoffs that even the, even the kids wearing Payless shoes and Walmart brand t-shirts would make fun of me.

You'd have a kid wearing shoes with like a slightly different looking swoosh and the brand was, you know, Fikey or something. And they would be laughing at me in my Ames gear. So, but it's good. It builds character. I'm glad I didn't wear designer clothes when I was a kid. I really am. Because when you don't have expensive clothes, it forces you to develop a charming personality, which in theory, I mean, obviously that didn't work out in my case, but it's a good theory anyway.

If you're not a Daily Wire Plus member, here's what you're missing. Ad-free, full-length shows from the most trusted voices of conservative media. Access to our award-winning investigative journalism, breaking news, and top headlines. Unlimited access to our entire entertainment library, including the number one documentary of the decade, Am I Racist? And Dr. Jordan P. Peterson's new series, Parenting, premiering this Sunday exclusively on Daily Wire Plus. Live chats with the show and fans across the country and much more. Join now at dailywire.com slash subscribe. Now let's get to our daily cancellation.

There's a story circulating on social media that sounds like a modern urban legend, and maybe it is. The Daily Dot reports on a Tinder user who allegedly managed to score exactly one date in the course of five years, despite, as the story goes, swiping right on more than two million women.

Now, this claim was posted initially on Reddit, complete with the guy's Tinder stats and some images of his profile. It then made its way to X in a post that's now been viewed over 20 million times. And I'll show you some of the images that have been posted, but I'm going to blur out the guy's face and his name just in case these images have somehow been posted without his permission. I have no reason to think that they have been, and they've already been viewed like tens of millions of times anyway, so it's probably a moot point, but we'll blur it regardless. So there you can see his alleged Tinder stats, and then you can see some of the pictures on his profile.

And even with his face obscured, you kind of get the gist. You see him out on the lake in pretty much every picture, multiple photos of him showing off the fish that he caught. We can also see that he works as an equipment operator at Don't Worry About It. And he notes that if you don't like fishing, he's not interested in you. And we also see him in a hoodie with a vulgar sexual reference. His interests, along with fishing and camping, include memes.

So it is, in other words, and I don't say this to be mean, it is a dating profile specifically constructed to be as unappealing to women as possible. I mean, it is those scientists who worked in a lab to concoct the most perfect kind of woman repellent. And again, I don't say that to be rude to this guy. I have empathy for him, but I'm just being honest about it. I mean, this is one of the problems here is a really awful dating profile.

Now, let's assume that this story is real for the sake of discussion. And it's worth talking about because regardless of the specifics of this alleged case, it does in many ways represent the problem that a huge number of young men are facing. Now, most men may not strike out two million times, but they are striking out a lot. And so much that it has convinced millions of young men to essentially give up on the dating scene entirely. By now, you're familiar with the very bleak statistics, which all prove that our friend here is not alone in his reported plight.

Over 60% of men between the ages of 18 and 29 are single, which doubles the rate for women in the same age bracket, because obviously that means that a lot of these women are dating older guys. And by the age of 35, about 40% of men will not be married. The average age of marriage for men is now over 30 for the first time in American history. In fact, 20% of single men have never even been on a date in their entire lives.

So all of these numbers are historic highs and they are all also much higher for men than for women. Now, before we talk about what guys like Tinder Dude could do differently in light of these facts, we should acknowledge that, first of all,

This really sucks. I mean, it is a tragedy on a societal scale. I have immense compassion for any young man struggling in this way. One of the first things we learn about men in the Bible is that men are not meant to be alone. A man is meant to find a wife and become one flesh with her and from their flesh to create their own family, which will carry on his name and lineage. So it's incredibly devastating for a man to feel like he may never be able to fulfill that great vocation.

We should also acknowledge that although women may also struggle in their own way to find a good match, they do have it significantly easier than men. I mean, just taking Tinder as an example, women swipe right on an average of about 4% to 14% of profiles. Men swipe right on up to 70% of profiles. And yet, women get far more matches, up to 10 times more matches, if not more than that. And this pattern repeats on pretty much every dating app, every dating site. It is not

oversimplifying to say that a woman, a woman in order to find interested men only needs to be not morbidly obese. If a woman can simply keep herself in decent shape, she is virtually guaranteed to garner interest on the dating market. I mean, it really is that simple. And the reason to point this disparity out isn't just to complain that it's unfair. The point is that the disparity feeds the problem. The easier it is for women on the dating market, the harder it gets for men.

because the problem has a compounding effect. It compounds exponentially. This is because men not only have lots of competition, but also a woman's standards are raised higher and higher, often to an unreasonable degree.

A moderately attractive woman on a dating app might rule out all moderately attractive men. And then she might start adding other unreasonable demands. She gets pickier as the men get more desperate. Now a moderately attractive woman, or even a moderately unattractive one, might narrow her field to only men above six feet in height who earn an income three or four times above the national average or whatever it is. The effect is that decent looking guys with decent jobs

find themselves very often cut out. A man has to be exceptional to attract interest. A woman has to be just not fat. And this is the dynamic that millions of young men are dealing with, especially if their access to the dating world is facilitated primarily or solely through dating apps. So what can a young man do about all of this? Well, let's go back to Tinder dude and use him as a case study. What can he do about all of this?

Well, the first thing he could do about all this is accept that he can't do anything about any of it. The dynamics that I've just outlined cannot be changed or fixed by any one guy. It's extremely unfortunate that the dating scene works this way, but that is how it works.

As a young single guy, you have only two choices. Flipping a magic switch and making it better is not one of them. So the choices are these. You can give up and resign yourself to being alone and lonely and sad forever, or you can try your best to succeed in spite of these enormous challenges. You can try or you can not try. Those are the options. I mean, those are the options everywhere in life. Try or not try. And the thing that separates successful people from failures is that successful people, when given that choice, always try.

I know it sounds like a cliche, and it is, but it's also true. But you can only try to change the things that you can actually change. And on the dating scene, that means working on yourself. I mean, you are the only person that you have complete control over. All you can do is make yourself as desirable as possible and put yourself in situations where your chances are as high as possible. For Tinder dude, he can start with some basic fixes. And, you know, he's in the same situation a lot of guys are in, which is that

He's not, you know, he's not some like hideous guy. He's not, he's just like a normal guy. He's fine. He's fine. He's a normal guy. And, and so there are, there are like little things that can be fixed that would greatly increase his chances. First, first of all, get rid of all the fish pictures. I'm impressed by the fish that he caught. Like those are nice fish, but

He's not trying to attract me, I hope. Presumably, he's trying to attract women. And a woman's attitude towards fishing will almost always range somewhere between indifference and outright disgust. My wife is about as pro-fishing as a wife can possibly be. And yet, if she were to rate her top 50 favorite photos of me, none of them would be the ones where I'm holding a fish, even though those are basically the only times I take pictures anymore is when I'm holding a fish.

Also, he could project a classier, more sophisticated appearance. Now, I don't mean that he needs like a photo of himself smoking a pipe and reading a leather bound book in his study. I just mean get rid of the picture with the vulgar hoodie. Grown, mature, sophisticated guys don't shop at Spencer's, which I assume is where he got that sweater. He should generally get rid of anything that makes it seem like he's the kind of guy who spends hours a day on Reddit.

Listing memes as an interest along with the vulgar hoodie give off Reddit vibes. And it makes it seem like when you're not fishing, you spend all of your time online. There's no woman in existence who is looking for a man who spends all of his time online. Even the women who also spend all of their time online are not looking for that. And yes, that's unfair, but that's just how it is. These are all easy fixes that would take about three minutes to implement. And then we move on to the harder things. This guy needs to get in really good shape.

If he shaves off even a third of his Tinder time and dedicates that to the gym, he could get into relatively respectable shape pretty quickly. If you are a single, able-bodied man, you have no excuse to be out of shape. You definitely have time to go to the gym or work out at your house. You have all the incentive in the world to do so.

When you're older and you have a wife and kids, that's when you might lose a little bit of the incentive and the time. Although even then, there's no excuse to be a fat slob. I have a wife and six kids. I still try to work out four or five times a week. If I have time for it, you definitely do. I cannot tell you how often I talk to young men who say that they've done everything they can to find a woman. And yet I can look at them and tell that everything apparently didn't include what is arguably the most important thing. Go to the gym and get in shape.

I mean, if you haven't gone to the gym and gotten into shape, you have not done everything. You haven't even done most of the things that you could be doing. You can't help your height. And if you aren't rich, that's not something you can necessarily fix quickly or ever. But you can drop down to the floor right now and rip off some push-ups. Even if you tell me that you can't afford a gym membership, which is a claim that I would find pretty dubious because gym memberships can be cheap if you're not picky about the gym.

But even then you could still get in shape. I mean, I could list like 20 muscle building exercises you could do in your living room without weights right now. And if you could save up and spring for some used dumbbells and a pull-up bar, all the better. The point is you need to be in good shape and you simply have no excuse not to be. Women these days may be too picky in certain ways.

But you can't blame them for not wanting a doughy, flabby guy. That is biological hardwiring. Women are attracted to strength. The only way to reliably attract women if you're not in good shape is to either be rich or extremely funny.

Those are the two things that can get over the hurdle of you being a bit of a slob. But, you know, you aren't rich and you probably aren't that funny. So if you're also adding out of shape to the list, then you've put yourself in a hole that you might not be able to climb out of. Also, even if you are like stand up comedian level funny,

That's not going to come across in a dating profile. Dating apps are a visual medium. You need to be able to show something visually that will separate you from the pack. And that really leaves either physical fitness or money. And those are the two things I can come across quickly in a picture. And that brings us to the last point. Dating apps operate in one dimension. You are reduced to a picture and a few details on a screen.

You know, we like to think of this as kind of a modern, cutting-edge approach to dating, but it's actually extremely primitive. It's even animalistic. Because on a dating app, as a man, the mating ritual reduces you to the level of a bird in the rainforest trying to attract the female's attention by showing off your colorful feathers and bright, elaborate plumage. Only in your case, you're competing against thousands of other birds occupying the same tree branch.

Only about 5% to 10% of the male birds have feathers impressive enough to even be in the running. The other 90% to 95% are dancing around and making fools of themselves basically for no reason. Prior to dating apps taking over the world, we as humans had developed a far more sophisticated and meaningful process for finding a mate. And it involved...

Well, a long time ago in traditional societies, the process was often arranged marriage, which, as I've said before, is way better than this Tinder stuff. We'd be way better with that situation. But we don't have that. So without that, then it involves meeting a woman in person out somewhere in the world where she would assess your desirability based on more than just a cursory glance of your physical features and your employment history.

And this is where a man of average looks and average income could set himself apart with his intelligence, with his personality, sense of humor, integrity, competence, skill, artistic talent, you know, any number of other things.

The dating apps make almost all of those things irrelevant, or at least they push those factors further downstream. Now, you don't even get a chance to impress a woman with your intellect or charming personality or sense of humor until you've already attracted her attention and won the initial mating contest based entirely on your looks. And so for men, this is pretty much the worst possible system. And that means the real answer or the best one

is to start to move away from these dating apps. I mean, even if you do meet a woman on Tinder, most of them aren't looking for a serious relationship. They're not open to marriage anyway, which makes the whole thing a waste of time. And that means your best bet is to go out into the wild, in the real physical world, and start talking to women.

Talk to women at church, at school if you're still in college, at work, at the gym that you're supposed to be joining, at the dog park. I mean, anywhere. Now, sure, this increases your chances of an embarrassing rejection pretty significantly. And yes, yes, in the post-MeToo world, trying to strike up a relationship with a woman at work could be fraught with peril if you're not careful about it. But I'm not saying you just charge in cold to a woman you've never spoken to before and ask her on a date. Just start by saying hi. Say anything.

develop some kind of rapport. And this is how it was done for a long time before swiping was a thing. The idea that I think a lot of young guys have that this just can't be done anymore is ridiculous. I mean, men still meet and start dating women in the real world every day. It can be done. It still happens every day, like thousands of times a day, every day, everywhere in the country. So if you're not one of these guys that's doing this, um,

then it means you're not trying. And like I said, you can either try or not try. Those are the only options. So you might as well try or else you will be, not by me, but because of the harsh realities of life, canceled. That'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to you tomorrow. Have a great day. Godspeed.