Interview Show: Dan Crenshaw Talks Eyepatches/Mob Democracy/Unscientific Lockdowns
Kyle and Ethan talk to Representative Dan Crenshaw. He is the representative for Texas' second congressional district and the author of Fortitude: American Resilience in the Era of Outrage. They discuss the importance of knowing a good eyepatch guy, the difference between a democracy and a republic, and try to decide what was more chaotic: Afghanistan or CHAZ? Watch or listen to this episode on our podcast page, where subscribers can find full length episodes, or over on our YouTube channel. Subscribe using your favorite podcast platform here. Don't forget to pre-order the new Babylon Bee coffee table book! Topics Discussed Glass eyes bearing secret symbols Knowing a good eye patch guy Cancel culture Democracy Vs Republic Democrats, Republicans, and tribalistic partisanship CHAZ or Afghanistan The politicization of COVID-19 Federal Secret Police on American streets? The Ten Questions To watch or listen to the full podcast, become a subscriber at https://babylonbee.com/plans.
I just have to say that I object strenuously to your use of the word hilarious.
Hard-hitting questions.
What do you think about feminism?
Do you like it?
Taking you to the cutting edge of truth.
Yeah, well, Last Jedi is one of the worst movies ever made, and it was very clear that Brian Johnson doesn't like Star Wars.
Kyle pulls no punches.
I want to ask how you're able to sleep at night.
Ethan brings bone-shattering common sense from the top rope.
If I may, how double dare you?
This is the Babylon B interview show.
Hello, everybody.
Welcome to the Babylon B Interview Show.
I'm Kyle Mann.
I'm Ethan Nicole.
And today we're joined by Representative Dan Crenshaw, everyone's favorite eye-patched congressman.
Yeah, you just tell people, I'm talking to the Congressman Tan Crenshaw.
They're like, the guy with the eye patch.
Oh, that guy.
Whoa, that's awesome.
Yeah, exactly.
That's what leads me to.
I guess I want to know just up front, like, do you feel like, because there's obviously disadvantages to have missing an eye, but is there advantages to having an eye patch?
Yeah, there is.
I mean, so the eye patch is, first of all, thanks for being on.
Huge fan of Babylon B. You guys have coming on.
We're like, what?
I thought we were getting trolled or something.
Oh, no.
Oh, you've got a fan base.
Because underneath the eye patch, I wear all sorts of different glass eyes.
Really?
Now, and yeah, yeah.
I mean, like right now, I've got a, I think it's the seal tridon who's in there.
Wow.
So the, but the reason I don't walk around that way is because, and especially when I first started running for Congress, and basically, you know, it's the difference between my private life and my public life.
It's like my informal wear versus my formal wear.
It's kind of the best way to describe the aesthetics and reasoning behind the eye patch.
Because if I'm taking pictures all the time, the glass eyes don't look good.
Like they don't, they look weird in pictures because you can't really, you can't tell that it's some cool secret symbol.
It looks off.
There's all sorts of reasons.
And people are distracted by it too, especially if it just met you.
They're like, what's up with that?
The eye patch tells the story immediately because it's a very professional looking eye patch.
So people know, like, okay, this is, this isn't some temporary thing.
Like, we obviously know the story right away.
And that's important when you're in public and as a public figure.
You know, it just generally speaking also just looks better for video and camera.
So that's the reasoning why.
Well, it tells a story kind of more like says like mystery.
And then people are like, oh, mystery.
And then it's a person.
Then you have that.
But what I mean is by tell the story, it's like they know I don't have an eye.
Oh, yeah.
When I wear one.
It's like a weird contact lens or something.
Right.
I get that question all the time.
Yeah.
Yeah.
You get all sorts of weird questions.
And like, I just would prefer to avoid those.
All sorts of weird opinions.
Do you have an eye patch guy?
Is there like an eye patch store or boutique that you go to?
There's a guy.
There's a guy.
He's great.
There's really only one.
I mean, it's very hard to find quality eye patches.
I would say it's impossible except for this one guy.
Most eye patches are, I guess, ambidextrous.
Is that the right word to say it?
That means you're both left and right-handed, but they both go on your left and your right eye.
But if an eye patch can go on your left and right eye, that tells you it's not a good eye patch.
This one only works on my right eye.
It cannot fit on the left eye.
So it's much more comfortable as a result.
It's a lot better.
He makes ones that are sticky so you can put little stickers on them.
Makes them like, uh, so you don't have the strap around your head.
Yeah, as it gets hotter and yeah, it gets hotter in the summer I start to wear those more, so there's just no strap on there.
We don't want to talk about your eye patches the whole time.
I am curious, are you at the level now of fame and fortune that you have an eye patch, like Butler, that just puts it on you and like dusts it and has a selection for you?
I am not.
You'll get there.
It would probably.
I don't think i'll ever be there.
It would be more annoying than it would be useful.
Sorry.
Now, what do you really want to talk about?
Well, I wanted to say that Dan Grenshaw is the representative for Texas' second second congressional district and he's the author of Fortitude American Resilience in the Era Of Outrage.
Now Dan, every time we bring someone on, we get angry comments like especially yeah people high, high profile type people like you that, like a lot of people, especially conspiracy theorists, pay a lot of attention to yeah, you can tell they follow that person everywhere they go.
And then they leave these comments like what about?
Blah blah, blah?
And they post these links, you know, and like like, oh the crazy, these people are blood sucking blood.
Or like, so what do you predict?
I told you go ahead, but I did think of it, you did write this question.
Uh, what do you predict the crazy people that under this video will say, without even watching it, they'll just like.
They'll post, Dan Crenshaw is part of the I don't know Lizard family or something.
Um, the ones we get often.
That's a funny question.
So what are?
What are the conspiracy theorists gonna post after they see me on your show?
Just well they're, they're gonna see that we're.
Yeah, the haters.
The haters will post, um, there's one guy that's really.
It's like.
What is the title he like created?
He created this like headline and so it looks like a headline in an article, but it's like Dancing loses eye after kidney stone shoots out of his you know, it's like it's much more crude than that, like it's way worse.
Yeah yeah, you gotta you think of like much worse insults and that's what it is it's like.
But it's like kind of i'm just impressed by how quickly he's always on any twitter comments, um, you'll get, you'll get.
You'll get.
You know just uh, you'll get a bunch of pictures of like a my district, as if, as if, like I draw my own district.
You know, you'll get, you'll get stuff like that.
Um uh, who knows?
It depends on what type of conspiracist I think you're, you're referring to.
It's hard to say these days.
They're all over the place.
Yeah, i'm amazed at how quickly they can reply.
Like they just sit on twitter all day and search for your name or something.
It's wild obsessed with me.
But this is kind of the area we're in.
Is this outrage and cancel culture thing?
So I don't know, have you had any experience with cancel culture?
What do you think we should do about stuff like that?
What can be done?
Um, I mean, on a serious note, it's, it's a pretty deep cultural problem.
This this, like There's a couple needs that the American culture seems to have.
One is that the government takes care of everything for them, that all problems are solvable by a centralized power in Washington.
You're seeing this constantly with COVID-19, as if the president's actions can slow a spread of a virus that is fundamentally transmitted person to person and therefore interactions that people take on a personal level.
This is, you know, and so people are looking for him to tell them what they can and can't do.
That's actually a bit ridiculous, really.
You know, it's with the people calling for universal lockdowns of everything.
I asked people, look, why do you need me as a government to tell you where you can and can't go eat?
Why?
Can't you decide that?
You know, it's one thing to cancel big events, which I think is appropriate from a government level, but the extreme reaction of canceling all business and all work, I think, was it's a product of, again, of a cultural tendency to desire full safety at any cost over anything.
And that's not a healthy, nor is it a logical way to be.
And the other thing that we've seen obsessed with as a culture is telling other people what to do.
And this is probably the more dangerous one.
So the first problem, the cultural problem, it results in the shedding of any personal responsibility and it results in an increasingly totalitarian society.
And the second problem also results in an increasingly totalitarian society, but it also results in extreme divisiveness because gaining control of the reins of government becomes the end-all be-all.
It becomes life or death because our culture says that whoever is in control has to tell everybody what to do.
And so this outcome is 51% of the population with complete control over the rest of the 49%.
That's very divisive.
It will lead to really, really strong divisions in this country.
It already is.
Because we don't just let each other live the way they want to live.
You see this in the coronavirus pandemic.
You see it all over.
It's troubling.
It's hard for me to imagine a human being that thinks that highly of themselves, that if they just had all this power, they'd make everything, they'd fix everything.
To be able to make everybody do what they want, right?
I like people that want to give people the freedom to do what they want to do, but somebody that has that, I don't know, do you, do you, you don't have to name names, but do you like you ever bump into somebody in Washington?
You're like, oh, man, okay.
If that guy had too much power, I'd be scared.
Yeah, I do.
I mean, every single Democrat.
Democrats don't.
Yeah, it's fundamentally what they believe.
They're open about this.
This isn't controversial to say this.
This is long-held progressive ideology.
Ever since Woodrow Wilson, the father of progressivism, brought it into light, he said, you know, they think the Constitution is outdated.
They think that states' rights are racist.
They think that basically expert-driven, science-driven governorship from the top is the best way to run a society.
And they don't like all the checks and balances that get in the way of that.
This is why when they, you know, you look at their agenda, if they want everything in 2020, what would they do?
They would remove, they would get rid of the Electoral College.
They're already pushing for states to give their electoral votes to whoever wins the popular vote.
They want to add senators via Washington, D.C., to the Senate to get more blue senators there.
They want to pack the Supreme Court.
What are they doing?
What's really behind all this?
Fundamentally, it's a push towards mob rule.
51% of the population telling the other 49% what to do.
Democrats believe in pure democracy.
Republicans believe in a republic.
And that's a huge difference.
A republic allows people to live together peacefully.
It allows different preferences and different policies to take part across a vast country.
It's a healthy way to live.
Mob democracy is not a healthy way to live.
Again, we already went over this.
It's extremely divisive and it's highly unstable.
This is, but they don't care.
So it's the calling of the votes.
We got a lot of time.
Don't worry.
But I'm going to pause while it's stopped.
Making noise.
So are you voting on it?
This is just more amendments for the NDAA.
So some small things.
What was the original question?
I don't know.
I distracted you by asking you about the vote.
I'm sorry.
It's okay.
I was curious.
Yeah, I was talking about.
You're talking about Democrats and how they all want to take over the world and be totalitarians.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, I think I finished that thought.
I'm curious, before you joined, went into the Congress, do you think you were more partisan in your own heart and mind before or after you joined Congress?
Did it push you?
Which direction do you think it pushed you in?
Yeah.
I'm a little bit more cynical.
I don't know if more partisan.
Partisan, you need to define partisan.
Yeah, partisan can use that word.
Here's how I actually define it because I'm deeply principled, so I'm just not going to agree with Democrats on a number of things.
Does that make me a partisan?
I don't think so.
The way I tend to define partisanship, because it's such a bad word.
And so the definition should be bad.
Just because you refuse to agree with somebody, I don't think that makes you bad.
It just makes you maybe stubborn, maybe principled.
Maybe you just refuse to agree.
Is that partisanship?
I think partisanship is saying one thing in public and another thing in private.
And so I accuse Democrats of partisanship constantly because I see their actions as being wholly dishonest.
So if you're saying things that are lies for the sake of political opportunism and political one-upsmanship, that's pretty partisan.
And also, if I talk to you in private and you're like, honestly, totally agree with you, but in public, you're voting a different way.
That's partisanship.
That's pure party loyalty against which even you believe.
So that partisanship, I don't see very often on the Republican side.
If we were in the majority, maybe.
So there is dynamics that occur when somebody's in the majority in the minority.
But I see it very often on the Democrat side.
You know, all these supposedly moderate Democrats that got elected and now freshmen, they vote for an incredibly radical leftist agenda, 90-something percent with Pelosi's agenda on all the big bills.
They vote for them.
But then they come home and they talk this very moderate talk.
You know, you can't even tell which side of the aisle they're on.
They're just all about the nice things because they know that voters don't actually know what they're voting on.
And, you know, so people really got to look this stuff up and understand how radical these agendas are.
They're deep.
They're very bad for the economy.
They're mostly pro-illegal immigration and in every shape, land, and form.
You know, and uh, I mean, we could go down a whole list of eliminating freedoms and constricting economic growth is basically the summary of the agenda.
Um, but you wouldn't know that by how they talk to their constituents.
So, um, yeah, I'm definitely more cynical after I because I've seen that over and over and over again over the past couple years.
And so, it did, it's not great.
It doesn't mean there's not, you don't have friends on the other side that you can work with, um, but it's uh it's it's tough to work together on the bigger issues because we do we have totally different goals, yeah.
So, that's the first question.
Like, why can't you guys compromise is always the question we get?
And then I say, Well, you first have to ask if we even have the same goals.
You can't compromise when you don't have the same goals.
Um, so I think there are examples of maybe good potential compromises, even in healthcare and you know, maybe poverty measures or reduction.
I would assume we have the same goals, so you can imagine better compromises there, even though they don't really seem to be happening.
Um, but uh, like on immigration, for instance, we don't have the same goals at all.
The Democrats actually want more illegal immigration, and that's that's that there's a lot of evidence for that, it's in all of their policy proposals.
So, and we want the opposite, therefore, there is no compromise.
Like, somebody just has to win.
Um, I guess my main question was really that uh, you know, all of us are outside of Congress, and we kind of have a perception of those people and what they're like, and we think, and we probably have our position.
And then, did how did it shift once you became among them and you're more faced?
They're in your face now, you're smelling the breath, you know, they're alive.
Did it shift at all?
No, I don't think so.
Um, it's uh again, you make friends and you make enemies just like anywhere else.
Uh, I was just certainly disappointed by the behavior of some, and um, you know, but but again, became friends with others on the other side, so it like any other institution, it's a matter of functionalities oftentimes.
Well, you're talking about how the solution to everything isn't like the government just coming down and decreeing things.
So, when you talk about something like COVID-19, where you know a lot of people are recommending the social, the medical experts are recommending social distancing, masks, shutting some things down.
What is the solution?
Is it Americans having to take responsibility?
I mean, can we trust that?
What's the right answer there?
I know we've seen a lot of people like you see Democrats slamming the southern states and pulling out figures, and you see Republicans slamming New York and slamming New York and New Jersey's numbers.
What's the solution?
Is it more freedom?
Is it just people doing their part on a grassroots level?
Yeah, I mean, when you ask something in that question, which was, well, can we trust people?
My answer to that is you don't have a choice.
You don't have a choice.
The problem is, we ask that question as if it's a choice.
You don't get to, unless you're China or Russia, you don't get to ask that question.
You don't have a choice but to trust people to an extent because you can lock down their businesses.
But what's next?
You're going to weld their doors shut in their home so they don't go to their neighbor's house and hang out and drink wine.
Like China, the Chinese do that.
And so we don't have a choice but to trust people.
We have to have a much more sober conversation about what the role of government is and what we're capable of actually implementing.
We've not had a responsible conversation like that at all.
We say, well, the scientists say this, therefore we do it.
Listen to the science.
Okay.
First of all, a lot of scientists disagree.
First of all, the science is messy on this, especially in real time on a virus that we don't really understand that well.
The science is messy, always has been.
And scientists disagree.
Doctors disagree.
So that's the first thing.
The second thing is there is no scientific, even if they all agree, there is no scientific formula for public policy.
That's never how public policy works.
You take data and you take some of the, you take the science, and then it informs your decisions on a policy level where in which you're taking in other considerations as well, you know, healthcare aspects aside from COVID, domestic abuse, education, job loss, how that job loss affects public health, affects long-term growth, affects people's lives.
You can measure these things.
And you need to be able to, in a sober way, measure the costs and benefits.
And many of our leaders have utterly failed to do that, right?
So instead, because what do they want to, the thing they're most afraid of being accused of is not taking enough action.
Again, what did I say before?
One of the cultural tenets of our modern society is the demand for action no matter what.
It's very, no, it's the wrong, it's bad.
It's not good to always be demanding that.
It's thoughtless.
It doesn't, it's, it's an emotional reaction.
And many politicians are all are very willing to give in to that because, especially Democrat politicians, they will always give in to the emotional whims of the people.
They do not, because they do not govern with any sort of limiting principles in mind.
They don't care.
And so that's why you're seeing California immediately shut down again.
They never really opened up, but immediately shut down again.
You're seeing Texas say, no, we're going to stay the course.
Because if we actually listen to science, if we actually listen to the studies, all of the studies, not just the ones that are the scariest, you come away with a bit more of a balanced approach, a targeted approach.
You know, there's a lot in between doing nothing and just, you know, we and doing all of it, right?
Universal lockdowns.
There's a lot in between.
But we're still canceling big events.
You know, he did close, you know, governor did close down bars.
I think restrictions on bars would have been more appropriate as opposed to the mass shutdown of them.
Because again, what are you doing with universal lockdowns?
You're compiling a whole series of problems on top of the first problem.
And our policymakers just completely and utterly ignore that.
They ignore all those other problems, even though they're right in front of our faces.
They're really, they're severe.
The cost of shutting down schools is severe.
And the benefits are almost non-existent.
I mean, just given all the science that we know about how this transmits among children.
So our policymakers are showing a complete inability to think logically and with sound reasoning.
And I've just been blown away by it.
Again, targeted efforts in Texas are already flattening the hospitalization rate.
In Houston, the hospitalization rate is now negative, unless that changed today.
Change today?
I don't know.
Good check.
It's been negative for days now.
That's the trend.
In Texas, it's been flattening wildly.
And the reality is, is people take micro actions as they see the pandemic get worse.
And that will naturally, you know, they're less likely to do things as they see in the news.
There's more cases, there's more cases.
And that's going to be the most efficient way to deal with a pandemic.
It just is.
And it doesn't make people feel good because it's not their first emotional reaction, but it is the most realistic reaction.
And so if we're going to mobilize efforts, they need to be towards hospital capacity.
If our hospitals are close to being overrun, you can build out more bed space quite easily, actually.
In Texas, to be honest, we've just never been in a situation where we're close to running out of bed space.
We're fortunate.
If we were really truly at that situation, you could make a better argument for a periodic lockdown.
But we're just not even close to that.
And now it looks like we won't be.
So, you know, these are the kind of you rarely hear a widespread consideration of all factors when having this discussion.
And it's a real travesty for the human because the entire human race basically reacted this way.
Although I think we in America have made it far more politicized and far more vitriolic than it really needed to be.
I'm very disappointed in how we've done that.
Our governor has banned us from singing in churches.
Yeah.
So even go to church, really.
I mean, what, can you go to church now?
Is it locked in?
I think you can go to church outside.
Outside in the parking lot.
But you can't no singing.
No singing in churches.
See, this is the kind of stuff.
And, you know, they I remember in California, they were arresting a guy for surfing or paddleboarding or something or just running on the beach all day.
By himself out in the middle of the ocean.
This is nonsense.
This is anti-science nonsense.
And I think this is very frustrating for people because they know that that's not, that doesn't matter.
And then the mayor of LA is immediately marching with protesters with hundreds of thousands of people, or let's say tens of, I don't know how many people on the streets, but a lot, tens of thousands at the very least.
What's happening in Portland right now?
It's the same thing.
And so, you know, people sense some deep hypocrisy there.
And it makes them even more anxious and more upset about the entire thing.
What's the deal with Portland?
I saw people getting kidnapped and burned.
I mean, secret.
Well, there was that secret police thing people were saying.
I missed that.
Federal agents were showing up and throwing people into vans.
Throwing protesters out there.
I don't know what to think about it because I don't know.
I don't know.
Is that the right response?
Is that something that I get that?
Yeah, it's real.
They're not secret.
I mean, they clearly have markings, police.
They have badges on their, you know, they're in camouflage.
I didn't click on it.
I just saw it right before this podcast.
You know, so the question is, is like at what point after six weeks of rioting and tearing down and burning buildings to actually do something about it?
I mean, that's the question.
And the way they went about it, it was actually rather effective, which is why the left got so mad about it.
Because what they didn't do was show up with a bunch of riot police with shields and just like protests.
They didn't do that.
They went selectively after people creating the most problems.
And that's probably a more effective way to do it.
Didn't make it.
Yeah, they didn't.
But it also gave the left this ability to create this false narrative about secret police and unmarked, you know.
And it's like they're obviously, you look at them, you're like, this is obvious.
They're not very good at being secret.
Yeah, they're not hiding the ball.
It's not like people in plain clothes.
I mean, they're in full-on tactical uniforms.
So it's a bit ridiculous.
And, you know, America just has to have this conversation of do we value law and order?
Do we value safety in our communities or not?
And if, you know, and on the other hand, it's like, listen, if liberals truly want to live in these kind of cities and this is what they want, just chaz in Seattle and six weeks of straight mob violence in Portland, then I suppose they voted for that.
I suppose they voted for that.
I don't see them speaking out, you know?
And so that's, you know, that's the other, that's the other side of the argument.
But you cannot make the argument that these are peaceful protesters just trying to do the right thing.
That argument has no basis whatsoever.
Yeah, that's the weirdest thing is watching that on TV and going, why is nobody doing anything?
Where are the grown-ups?
Yes.
What is the motivation?
I just don't understand how, and do they think this appeal, like not doing any appeals to a large enough portion of the country that it looks better to not do anything?
I just did, and where I'm from, it's so it makes no sense.
It's like living in a bizarre dream.
It's hard to mind read.
So these are all very progressive Democrat mayors that are in charge of the responses here and very progressive Democrat governors with the exception of Georgia, right?
And that Republican governor said, no, we're not going to let this happen.
We will put the National Guard in there and quell this.
And I do believe there's a silent majority of the citizens of Atlanta that would, that are applauding that effort.
People naturally, the natural state of people is to desire a safe community.
And letting Antifa run around is the opposite of that.
Portland's an interesting question because Portland's been dealing with this forever.
And, you know, I don't know what the citizens, maybe the citizens like it.
I just, I honestly don't know.
Yeah.
I have no idea.
They keep voting in the same people.
So I have no idea what they're thinking or what their reasoning could possibly be.
It's utterly bewildering.
Yeah.
I lived there and every day I was like, I'm amazed it was still standing with the people I knew were running everything.
I was like, it's a city.
It's still a city.
It's not going to be long, though.
Because it takes a long time to completely destroy a society.
Yeah.
Now, they've been working at it for quite a while, but then they've unfortunately succeeding better than they might have thought.
But, you know, a lot of these far-left progressives, they govern over a society that was created by conservative ideals and principles.
And it takes some time to destroy those things, but they've been working on it for a while.
So we shouldn't be surprised if they start to make a lot more progress.
Which was more chaotic?
Afghanistan or Chaz?
Do you think?
Yeah, probably Chaz.
Afghanistan is far more predictable, you know.
But did they have an indigenous garden?
No, they certainly do.
I guess they're all indigenous there.
Yeah.
Lots of gardening.
Lots of gardening going on.
Do you regret giving Pete Davidson a spotlight and making him a celebrity?
No.
I mean, he was already kind of a, I mean.
He said he regretted it.
Yeah, it was a plane.
That's right.
But that's right.
For me, I had not heard of him until I heard about your story.
And then I still heard him.
His narrative.
Yeah.
I never heard of him either until he did what he did.
Most people probably hadn't.
I mean, yeah, he was more famous than I was at the time, but it doesn't mean he was super famous.
Obviously, just in some circles.
But his Netflix special was a little weird.
I didn't want to.
It was just his comments.
That's where he apologized.
That's where he apologized for the apology.
Okay.
Right, right.
But it wasn't funny.
Again, like, you know, I think comedy should always push the boundaries as far as possible, but as long as it's actually funny.
That should just be the only rule.
If the joke falls flat, then maybe you can slam somebody for being offensive.
But if the joke is good, obviously there's a lot of good comedians, talented comedians that manage to do this.
Joe Rogan and Dave Chappelle, they push the boundaries all right.
But it's funny.
And you can't help but laugh.
Pete Davidson.
Pete Davidson has had trouble with that.
You know, it's like, are you looking for laughter or are you looking for claptor?
And I would ask the same thing of our late night comedy hosts.
You know, they're mostly looking for claptor.
They just go up there and they say some mean thing about conservatives and then people clap and they're like, this is comedy.
It's not comedy.
We're just making political points.
And yeah.
So, yeah, I don't know why Pete did that.
It kind of ruined a good moment.
Nobody felt good about it.
So what was the point?
Yeah, I can just let it rest like it was.
It was great.
Do the congressmen all have like a group chat and you guys all text each other Babylon B articles sometimes What happens?
All right.
You ever see anybody's head explode on the other side?
No, they don't have the left isn't funny.
Yeah, they can kind of goes back to what I was saying.
Like they, they, they're not funny people.
They don't, they can't do comedy.
So, and they can't do satire.
I mean, name one, name one like funny left-wings.
I don't think.
And I could be wrong.
Maybe there's a, is there an opposite of the Babylon B?
The onion.
The onion, yeah.
But there's the onion.
But the onion kind of hits everything.
Isn't it onion?
Yeah, the onion doesn't say the left wing guys at all.
Like a lot of left-wing media, they don't say they are.
But I mean, you can only assume that most of the writers there are, but they generally have a left-leaning bias for sure.
They don't go completely.
Just like we make, we mock Trump sometimes.
We try to be completely, we're not, you know, we're not straight up wearing our red caps.
That's what I was wondering.
Would you ever wear a MAGA eye patch?
I don't have a MAGA eye patch.
Sad.
Just kidding.
No pressure on that.
I wouldn't wear it.
Send me a Babylon B eye patch.
I'll wear that.
All right, we'll do that.
We were talking like today.
Dan, write that down.
If you have to wear a face mask and an eye patch, it must feel like you might as well just like wrap a big cloth around your face and cut a hole out at that point.
It's just enough.
It's enough with all the straps.
Somebody said that today.
They're like, you're basically, you're almost done.
The other eye goes, it'll just be the best.
You could use a bra and just have one here and one here.
Thanks to Diagonal Bra.
That would look way better, of course, than my current look.
It'd be a more progressive look.
It'd be something.
Coming up next for Babylon B subscribers.
I'm not going to do that.
You can just be as quick as you want or say.
Hard to say pass.
Pass.
But then you will be judged for that.
Elon Musk.
I want to hang out with that guy.
Oh, yeah.
That would be what he thought about it.
I bet he'd make you a sweet cybernetic eye that glows red like Tim Raider.
Here on the Babylon Bee podcast right now, every head bowed.
Do you accept the Lord Jesus Christ in your heart?
And you become president.
What's the first thing you do?
Launch Pete Davidson into space.
I don't know, you know.
Enjoying this hard-hitting interview.
Become a Babylon Bee subscriber to hear the rest of this conversation.
Go to BabylonB.com/slash plans for full-length ad-free podcasts.
Kyle and Ethan would like to thank Seth Dylan for paying the bills, Adam Ford for creating their job, the other writers for tirelessly pitching headlines, the subscribers, and you, the listener.