The socialist darling of the Democrat Party, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, bumbled, mumbled, and stumbled her way through another embarrassing interview performance with ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel.
The New York congressional candidate appeared on Kimmel’s show Wednesday night and did her best ‘valley girl’ impression, peppering her responses with a multitude of ‘likes,’ ‘yeahs,’ and ‘for sures.’
This performance from Cortez, who graduated cum laude from Boston University, should be used as a public service announcement for what is wrong with our education system in America.
Like, um, for sure
Demonstrating the vocabulary of a small child and the speaking presence of someone auditioning for “Legally Blonde 3,” Cortez deftly maneuvered through Kimmel’s hard-hitting interview.
You guys, Ocasio-Cortez has, like, uh, like, something to say pic.twitter.com/7GNFpdKhFH
— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) October 18, 2018
Grabien has the stats – In three minutes of speaking she lobbed:
- 11 ‘likes’
- 20 ‘yeahs’
- And 3 ‘for sures’
We went through the video ourselves and also noted that despite those gaudy numbers, Cortez had an even more impressive stat. Zero, count ’em – 0 – coherent thoughts. Remarkable!
Here’s her take on health care and why it’s a right:
While telling a story of a couple she met at a Cracker Barrel that apparently supported her plan of making health care a “right,” Ocasio Cortez said of the wife, “She was like, yeah, no, my husband is a, is a, is a huge fan of yours. So I said, okay. We’re chatting. We’re in the Cracker Barrel, so there this motion-activated thing behind me that’s, like, singing ‘Jingle Bells’ and Christmas songs.”
The new face of the Democrat Party proceeded to explain what it’s like to meet voters campaigning door-to-door.
“Oh, yeah. Sometimes people just lose their — like, wait, you’re knocking on my door?” she sputtered. “Like, back in the day when you would knock on the door and carry a big check to someone’s door.”
Remember those commercials with the frying pan and the egg that said ‘this is drugs … this is your brain on drugs?’
This is your brain on socialism.
Jimmy loves Cortez
Lest you might be tempted to think Kimmel didn’t hammer her with provocative insights, we beg to differ.
Kimmel was his meek and mild, whimpering persona, fawning over her with such statements as “you came out of nowhere … it’s really one of the most remarkable stories I’ve ever heard.”
And yet Jimmy Kimmel manages to comes off even sillier commenting that her running for office is one of the most “remarkable” things ever. https://t.co/3bCrPQUXw3
— Karol Markowicz (@karol) October 18, 2018
Careful Jim, she might accuse you of catcalling her if you continue drooling like that.
Interviews are a gift to Republicans
Considering she’s widely viewed as the future of the Democrat Party, a party of socialism, you’d think party leaders would give her some lessons on how to handle a softball interview.
But every time she appears on television it is a gift to Republicans, who will gladly hold her up as an example of what the party is up against in 2018 and beyond. She has a rich history of failing miserably in her interview performances.
CNN’s Jake Tapper tried futilely to get Cortez to explain how she could possibly fund all of her radical Socialist fantasies and eventually gave up when the Economics major couldn’t provide an answer.
She couldn’t relay a coherent argument on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
When asked by Chris Cuomo to comment on House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, she flailed aimlessly with her answer.
“Of course, well, I think absolutely right now, you know she is … she is the leader of … no no, um, she is speaker — or rather leader Pelosi — hopefully we’ll see, she’s ah, she’s the current leader of the party…” Cortez said, practically replicating the Kimmel interview.
Conservative radio legend Rush Limbaugh had the best take on the confounding utterances that come out of Cortez’s mouth on a frequent basis.
“Ladies and gentlemen, this is wandering aimlessly through our vocabulary in dire search of coherence,” he said. “This is entirely incoherent — and to call it ignorant is to give it too much credit.”