Dave Smith and Robbie the Fire Bernstein critique government overreach, citing mass surveillance and bloated prisons as evidence of systemic failure. They analyze the disconnect between public will and political action, noting how Supreme Court rulings on Texas election challenges and DNC interference in Iowa caucuses erode trust in democratic legitimacy. The hosts condemn unprovoked violence by both Antifa and Proud Boys, arguing that law enforcement must prioritize mass arrests over ambiguous policies. Finally, they praise Tulsi Gabbard's controversial bills regarding transgender sports and late-term abortion survivors, asserting that logical sex-based segregation in shelters is essential for safety rather than discrimination. Ultimately, the episode suggests that true liberty requires consistent principles and decisive action against unchecked aggression. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Mises Institute Debates00:11:20
Fill her up.
You're listening to the Gash Digital Network.
We need to roll back to state.
We spy on all of our own citizens.
Our prisons are flooded with nonviolent drug offenders.
If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now.
Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.
You're listening to part of the problem on the Gas Digital Network.
Here's your host, Dave Smith.
What's up, everybody?
Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem.
Of course, I am Dave Smith.
Of course, he is Robbie the Fire Bernstein, the king of the caulks.
How you doing, my brother?
All right, man.
How are you?
Very good.
Very good.
Can't complain.
Why just all right?
Monday episode?
No, I gotta, man, weekends are boring when you ain't doing stand-up.
What do I like?
I gotta, we gotta get back out there, buddy.
Yeah, stand-up comedians have really been driven crazy this year.
You just fucking just picture every stand-up comedian you know in their fucking apartment with like stuffed animals lined up as an audience, just cracking jokes to them.
Like, fucking, where's it?
Where are you from, sir?
It's Kermit the Frog just sitting there.
Like, yeah, it's weird.
For a guy with no kids, I could do anything any weekend, and I just seem to do errands.
I cleaned this place this weekend.
I cleaned the place.
I cooked.
I did launch.
Like, I don't want to do that.
From the angle that you have us set up, your ceiling looks immaculate.
Oh, yeah.
Well, you know, I dusted it.
That's very good.
Very good.
Yeah.
It's a weird, I, uh, this is probably something that all parents have experienced at some point, but it becomes like it's hard for me to imagine life without having a kid.
It weirdly becomes this thing where you're like, I mean, I do remember, like, I know that two years ago, I didn't have a kid, you know?
And I know that there were, you know, 30 plus years before that of not having a kid, but it's all kind of like, wait, but what did I do?
Like, what did I do?
What did I do with all the time?
It's just your time is yours.
You can do whatever you want to.
If you're not working, you could just, I don't know, whatever.
Seems so strange.
But now I feel a little bit, you know, it's comforting to all parents because it's like, oh, yeah, no one has their time anymore.
You got, no one's got anything to do.
You can't do shit.
So there we go.
We brought you all down to our level, except without the purpose and meaning and joy.
All right.
Sorry, non-parents.
It's been a rough year for you, 2020.
Yeah, what's it like by you now?
Have things like locked down more?
Are there more restrictions?
I've noticed, and this just kind of depressed me, but I like doing pull-ups in the park, prison yard style.
And they, yeah, they gated the thing up.
So no more prison workouts.
What's the point of doing pull-ups if random parents can't see you doing them and be intimidated?
You got to go at night when people leave because otherwise you really seem like a creep.
It's not, you sure do.
You don't want to be in the background of people's TikTok videos or whatever.
You seem like, remember always sunny when D sets Dennis up to go look like a pedophile, but he thinks he's just teaching kids how to work out in the park.
Oh, that's great.
Yeah.
And I don't look friendly without hair.
I'm not like.
So, you know, I stay away from the park when the kids are there.
Yeah, that's probably, that's probably a good move.
Good move in general.
Speaking of parents versus non-parents, non-parents, just stay away from the park when the kids are there.
It can only lead to trouble.
Okay.
So as I mentioned on the last episode, I had a debate on the Lions of Liberty podcast.
It was a debate.
So, yeah, remember, Kamala?
So I debated Archie Flower, who is the state chair of the Vermont Libertarian Party.
That was just released just a few more moments before we started recording.
If you want to go check that out, it's up on the Lions of Liberty YouTube page and it's on their podcast feed, which I will mention one more time is a fantastic podcast.
It's actually, there's actually three different podcasts under the umbrella.
Mark Clare hosts the flagship show, which is what the debate was on.
But I love all of those guys.
I think they do great work and it's a really entertaining group and hardcore libertarians.
Love them.
Go support them if you don't already.
It's a really great show.
And yeah, I did another one of these debates with one of the critics of the Mises caucus.
And it's, I don't know, it's a weird experience.
Like every time, because now at this point, I debated Nick Sarwalk at the Soho Forum in an Oxford-style formal debate.
Then I had him on the podcast famously or infamously.
The You Should Vote for Cheney and even Hitler episode, which is what we probably should have just called it.
That's what it's known for now.
You know, and I've gone through and debated a bunch of these.
You know, the Twink from the Dork page, the, you know, I had Chris Spangle on the show, who is criticizing the Mises caucus and the Mises Institute.
And then I debated the Andy Craig guy on the lines of Liberty.
And now this was the most recent one.
And look, every time, every single time, just like, I'm not being a dick here when I say I won the debate, because there are debates sometimes where it's subjective who won.
Maybe more people feel one way than the other, which, you know, I mean, I don't know how else you determine who wins a debate.
I mean, you could just say the strength of the arguments, or you could say the, you know, how it was received, who, you know, who moved the needle more or something like that.
This isn't a situation where like 60% of the people thought I won and I clearly had better arguments.
This is like just every one of them, just 99% of the people are like, this was, and in terms of the arguments, it's just utter wreckage.
And this was maybe the most clear-cut of all of them, to the point that I felt a little bit bad about it during the like Archie.
He seems like a nice enough guy.
It wasn't like with Andy Craig, where he was like a dick.
And so that made me not feel bad about, you know, wrecking him.
But this Archie guy seemed nice enough, but he might have actually been the worst debater out of all of them.
I couldn't believe it.
I'm a little flabbergasted that he challenged me to a debate and came with what he came with.
Like, you are you not self-aware enough to just like go watch my other debates and look at what you're coming in with and realize this is probably not a good move.
Like, why would you want to do this?
And he look, go, go listen to it if you want to, but I thought his arguments were incoherent.
I thought Mark Clare really hats off to him.
He did his best to be a new neutral moderator.
And I think he was having a hard time keeping it together at certain points.
At one point, Archie actually argues that a meme that he didn't like was a violation of the non-aggression principle.
I'm not making that up.
This was actually his position.
It got goofy and weird, but my whole thing with doing these is that there are these people who fucking like launch these very serious accusations at me, at other members of the Mises caucus, at the Mises Institute, at affiliated members.
And they're, man, are they certain, you know, sure of themselves and loud and have a lot of conviction when they throw this shit out online?
And I just kind of wanted to go through, I'll go through all of them.
Like, who do you have?
Who's your leader?
Come argue this with me face to face.
Let's actually see how these ideas hold up when they're given some pushback.
And every time they just collapse.
They've got nothing.
And so I just don't, I see that there is some value in just kind of demonstrating this to everyone so that everybody in this space sees when you see these guys hurling these accusations at the Mises caucus.
Just know this is all bullshit and they can't defend it.
When pushed on it, even slightly, they can't defend these accusations.
So that's kind of what I, you know, that was the reason for it.
And I will say that I've noticed a tendency with almost all of these guys, not Chris Spangl, I'll say.
He didn't do this, but with everybody else who I mentioned, after the debate's over and the damn near unanimous response is that they got wrecked in the debate.
Then rather than doing the respectable thing and going like, okay, you know, I did not have a good performance here or my arguments didn't stand up or whatever, or maybe I could have done a better job or something.
Then they just dial it up to 11 and start going crazy.
Like I fucking break these people.
Like there's Nick Zarwalk went fucking nuts after the fucking debates that we had.
All these other guys just go crazy.
They just dial the accusations up to fucking 11.
And we'll see.
We'll see if that's the path Archie Flower ends up going by.
He seemed like a nicer guy than the others.
So maybe he'll be a decent guy about it.
But anyway, if you want to go check it out, go check it out at the Lions of Liberty podcast.
Excellent podcast.
And I appreciate Mark for having me back on.
And I'll say I will, I'm open to doing more of these.
I'd like to try going forward to have a little bit of a higher bar for who my opponent would be.
I'd like something competitive here.
I felt a little bit, you know, like sometimes in the UFC, I'm a big UFC fan.
Sometimes there'll be a fight that's like just a dominant performance.
And as you're watching it, sometimes you'll start to feel a little bit bad.
Like every now and then there'll be these fights where you're like, oh, they shouldn't have made this fight.
Like the matchmaker should not have made these.
And it's not always on them.
Like you don't really know until they fight, you know?
Sometimes you think, oh, this will be competitive.
But when someone's just like better everywhere, you know, like sometimes you'll have these fights in the UFC where one guy's like a ground specialist.
Like he doesn't really have striking, but he's really good at jiu-jitsu.
And then he'll go to try to take the guy down and he can't take him down.
And then he'll pull guard and they get down to the ground and you realize, oh, he's losing on the ground.
And you're like, oh, he's, this is his only out to win.
And this guy's better than him at that.
And then the fight, and then they're back standing up.
And now you're like, oh my God, this guy has like no chance.
Like this guy, he can't, he can't win on the ground, which was his only out to win.
And now he's just kickboxing a kickboxer and he has no kickboxing.
And it's like, you know, shit like that.
I felt a little bit of that.
Therapy With BetterHelp00:03:22
So I'm down to do more of these.
I will systematically, I mean, look, we're in the process of taking over a party.
If there's people who are resisting it and who are who are, you know, hurling accusations at us, I'll take them on.
I'll take on any of them.
But I'd like to try.
Like, let me try to get the best of them.
Who's the guy?
You tell me, who's the guy who's really prepared to come in and debate me and just demonstrate that his arguments really hold that when given some pushback?
You tell me and I'll be down to fucking set it up.
And I'm sure Mark Claire will be down to moderate as this gets a lot of buzz going for their channel.
Okay.
So anyway, go check out the debate dave tournament.
We could do it on the subscriber on the paywall.
Each week, two of these queeves, they compete.
At the end, we pick the best one.
We have them on for an episode.
Okay, maybe.
Maybe that's what we'll do.
Dave Smith, the Keef Slayer.
Kweef Slayer, Dave Smith.
Oh, did we just find a new nickname for me?
Libertarian Tupac, most consistent motherfucker you know, Kweef Slayer.
All right, guys, let's take a quick second.
I want to thank our awesome sponsor for today's show, which is BetterHelp.
BetterHelp offers professional counseling done securely online.
If you feel like there's something interfering with your happiness or preventing you from achieving your goals, definitely go check out BetterHelp.
I think this is really wonderful.
I've benefited from therapy in the past.
I know lots of people who have, and BetterHelp makes it a lot easier and more affordable to get therapy.
Whatever you're dealing with, BetterHelp has a wide range of counselors available for you.
Plus, BetterHelp is more affordable than traditional online counseling.
Their services are available worldwide.
It's quick and easy to get started.
Once you sign up, BetterHelp will match you with one of their own licensed professional therapists that you'll be able to communicate with in under 48 hours.
It's not a crisis line.
It's not self-help.
This is professional counseling done securely online.
And BetterHelp is committed to facilitating great therapeutic matches.
So it's easy and free to change counselors if needed.
You can log into your account and send messages to your counselor at any time, and you'll get timely and thoughtful responses.
Plus, you can schedule weekly video or phone sessions so you won't ever have to sit in an uncomfortable waiting room like with traditional therapy again.
Also, if money is tight, financial aid is available.
Basically, BetterHelp wants to help you start living a happier life today.
So go to betterhelp.com slash problem.
Join the over 1 million people who have taken charge of their mental health with the help of experienced professionals.
New testimonials from users are posted daily.
In fact, so many people have been using BetterHelp that they're recruiting additional counselors in all 50 states.
Go to betterhelp.com slash problem.
That's betterhelp.com/slash problem.
That'll get you 10% off your first month.
One more time, betterhelp.com slash problem for 10% off your first month.
All right, let's get back into the show.
All right, let's get into some news.
So there are a couple of things that were on our respective minds, or I should just say on our mind, because me and Rob, we really, we are one mind.
If you put us together, we have the intelligence of one normal man.
And so that's what we use our brains.
We meld them together.
Trump Political Will00:13:22
We think as one.
So we were both talking about before the show started, I guess, what was, you know, first and foremost, pretty big news of this week.
And I must say, a huge vindication of Robbie the Fire.
Texas legal challenge to the Supreme Court, tossed out.
Didn't even hear it.
Not interested.
Tossed it right out.
I do think that this goes to what you were saying, that even the people who are making these legal constitutional arguments, you still, and this is a problem that a lot of people get caught in.
There's always a human factor involved in these things.
The laws are not potions.
They are sentences written down on pieces of paper.
Men are governed by other men and women.
I mean, men, as in the species.
And I think you were right that you're like, I just can't see the Supreme Court actually doing this.
Even if there is some constitutional argument here, it just seems so unlikely.
And it also goes to show that Trump appointed judges don't just have some loyalty to Donald Trump.
They are, you know, still human beings who are at this point, you know, somewhat independent.
I mean, they have, you know, guaranteed jobs and there's no reason for them to just demonstrate loyalty to Trump.
But it seems to me that that was, I think, the last flicker of hope for Donald Trump.
To me, that was like the biggest one.
I mean, you had a state taking a case to the Supreme Court backed up by, what was it, 17 other states or something like that.
And so that was like, oh, okay.
I mean, if there's a path, this would be it.
After that, I really just don't see any, I don't see any path to victory for Donald Trump.
Looks like Joe Biden has got this thing made.
What do you think?
It's tough to follow because Trump's still saying, ah, that was just the preliminary court case.
That was the appetizer.
That was the soup of what we're doing.
Here's what's so troubling.
We watched testimony after testimony of shady shit going on that all got swept under the rug.
None of that got mainstream coverage.
The committees that heard on that just listened to it for three full days and said, yeah, we're certifying.
This whole thing's been swept away.
There was no public will to unwind it.
It's as simple as having a real investigation and spot checking the things that came in to see how many were valid.
No one cared.
This thing went away.
The Republicans are a bunch of dummies that they couldn't win the public court on the way that this thing was cheated.
And it's time, I don't know, it's time to move on.
Unless Trump actually has some things show up that put up, but you're at the wire here.
Yeah, it's interesting the way you put it.
I think it's a really important point when you say there's no will here.
And political will is a very important force.
And I've made this point like in years past where there'll be, you know, so even in the Obama years or something like that, you know, there'd be this narrative that the Congress is so divided and it's just like a do-nothing Congress and the Republicans are just being obstructionists and they just won't come to the table to get anything done.
And, you know, this was kind of like the popular narrative.
And then the like the sunset clauses in the Patriot Act, like the Patriot Act would expire.
And within one day, the Democrats, the Republicans, they come together, they sign reauthorizing the Patriot Act.
It's like done.
These people who hate each other when the cameras are on and they're such bitter rivals and all of this stuff, as soon as they needed to get the Patriot Act reauthorized, boom, they're right in there.
They might have given it a different name, but they, you know, reauthorized all of the provisions.
So that is an example of what political will looks like.
When there really is political will to get something done, they get it done.
They get it done, whether it's, you know, they could be in the middle of a shutdown and what do they come together to do to vote down BDS or whatever, you know, like done.
There's political will for this.
There's no question it's happening.
So political will is very important.
And this is something that you realize with all of this is that there's really no political will to actually get to the bottom of a lot of these claims to look into it.
That's just not the system is not interested in that.
They are interested in installing Joe Biden as president.
And so that's what's going to happen.
And you could see there's lots of examples of things where there is public will, or, you know, like amongst the people, but there's not political will.
A good example of that would be ending the war in Afghanistan.
There's something like over 70% of people want that war over.
The people want it.
You know, the politicians who campaign on it tend to win, but there's no political will to actually get it done.
And so you just see the war dragging on year after year after year.
And that's important.
It's also important to recognize that, as I was getting at before, that laws don't actually govern people.
Men govern people.
And it's not a question of what laws are written down on pieces of paper.
It's just a piece of paper.
In the same sense that, like, if I just write down a new law on a piece of paper right now, what does that mean?
It means nothing.
And you could say, like, well, that wasn't, that's not how a bill becomes a law.
It wasn't voted on by the Congress and signed by the president.
And you're like, okay, but what if I just make up my own rules right now?
I'm the dictator, Dave, and any law that I write goes through this process.
And here I have a little seal and I'll seal it.
And now it's officially a law because I declared that.
You're like, well, why isn't it a law?
Like, really, when you get down to it, why is that just words on a piece of paper?
And the answer is because it's not enforced.
That's what actually matters.
What's enforced?
You know, like I think Jeff Dice said once, which is a simple way to just put it, but if the speed limit is 55 miles per hour, but they don't pull anybody over unless you're going over 70 miles per hour, and the speed limit is 70 miles per hour.
That's what it actually is.
It doesn't matter what it says on the sign.
What matters is when will they pull you over?
And that's why everybody's comfortable going a few miles over the speed limit because they don't pull you over for that.
It's all that matters is what's enforced.
What's written down means nothing.
And so that's what we're realizing with all of this stuff.
It doesn't matter what the actual rules are.
It matters.
What matters is political will.
And what matters is what's enforced.
And that's something that a lot of people struggle with.
It's a lot because it's a mind fuck where you believe in the system to some degree, where you go, well, no, but the Second Amendment says this.
It's like, okay, yes, the Second Amendment does say that.
Go try having, you know, go try open carrying in New York City and see how far that piece of paper gets you.
You know, they've got men with guns who are enforcing a law, and you've got a piece of paper that you can cite.
Who do you think is going to win that battle?
It's not the paper.
It's not a magical potion.
It's just words on a piece of paper.
It is as meaningless as if I write down words on a piece of paper.
Oh, look, I just abolished all the gun laws in New York City.
Okay.
Go try.
Go try to live.
You might end up in a cage.
So that's really what matters.
And that's what we're seeing in this election: where the political will is and where the enforcement lies.
And none of it is good for Donald Trump.
Donald Trump, it looks like the Trump phenomenon is possibly alive and well, but the Trump presidency is on its final days.
Interesting to see what he'll do.
A lot of, you know, it does seem like Donald Trump, my guess would be he's going to try to do something.
Like on some level, I think Donald Trump has got to be accepting, even if he doesn't, you know, accept the results, he's accepting the fact that he's not going to be president come January 21st.
And so it seems like he's the type of guy who would want to leave on a bang, would want to do something.
And hopefully he does something good.
Yeah, pardon Snowden.
Pardon me.
That would be an awesome one.
Yeah, fucking throw, throw out some cool pardons.
I mean, that would be, that would be so fucking awesome if he did that.
Not holding my breath, but it would be really cool if he if he did that.
All right.
So a story that jumped out to me that I thought was really interesting because I should just say that one of the things that we've been talking about a lot since the election.
In fact, it was my big takeaway on election night was that even before it was clear who won, it was that it's pretty obvious here that whoever wins, the other side is not going to see them as the legitimate president of the United States.
And that's an interesting place to be in.
And as it became clear that, you know, what was happening, it was obvious that the vast majority of Trump voters are going to walk away from this believing that Joe Biden cheated, that there was massive voter fraud and that Donald Trump actually won this election.
Now, separate from whether or not you believe that's the case, because it's almost irrelevant.
In fact, it is irrelevant to the point that I'm making.
It's still a really interesting development that this group of people believes that.
Whether you believe they're wrong, you could say there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud or whatever, but it's still an interesting development that such a huge portion of the country believes there is.
Okay.
And so when this story came out, which got a little bit of attention, not the attention I think it deserved, but I thought to myself, ooh, this is an interesting development.
So let me read from Politico.
And here's the headline of the piece.
Iowa Autopsy Report.
DNC meddling led to caucus debacle.
Now, what they're talking about here was the Iowa primary for the Democratic candidate to run for president.
And if you remember, because a lot's happened since then, but there was this big shit show where their app fucked up and nobody knew who won the Iowa caucus.
And in effect, it was taken away from Bernie Sanders, who was the clear frontrunner and looked like he was going to win.
So I said when I was on Rogan, I think you got to explain how big of a deal that is because usually the Iowa caucus, like sometimes after the Iowa caucus, like most of the candidates just drop out.
That one's big.
And then if they don't drop out after that one, they drop out two later.
Like usually the Iowa caucus usually, from my memory, really sets a tone.
Like I remember.
Oh, absolutely.
Well, Barack Obama won the Iowa caucus, and this is what set him up to ultimately become the Democratic nominee.
And, you know, I mean, there were other wins.
That was a big thing with the Dean scream was that he was the first guy who blew it, that Howard Dean had won the Iowa caucus, was the frontrunner.
Then he went on this ridiculous tirade that didn't play well where he was screaming.
And that was the end of his campaign.
And it was insane that someone managed to win Iowa and blow it by screaming like an idiot.
Yeah, no, he sure did blow it.
But right.
So this is very important in terms of momentum, in terms of, and the value of Iowa isn't just winning the caucus.
The value is the narrative that this is the first contest and here's winner.
And every single newspaper is going to have this headline that says, this guy won the first caucus.
And then this starts having an effect on people because people like to vote for the winner, and it'll hold a lot of people back where they'll be like, yeah, maybe I like some of this guy's ideas, but I don't believe he can win.
And that certainly is how they tried to paint Bernie Sanders.
Well, he's got these ideas that resonate with a lot of Democratic voters, but he can't win, you know, so you have to pick someone who's electable.
But as soon as he wins one, then you go, oh shit.
You know, this is true in general for outsider candidates.
I mean, I remember really thinking when the first few primaries started or the caucuses and primaries in 2016 for Donald Trump.
Even though Donald Trump had been up in the polls for months at that point, you were still kind of like, I mean, we haven't actually seen this guy win a real contest.
You know, who knows?
Will these people who are picking Donald Trump in the polls?
You know, are they actually going to vote for him when push comes to shove?
Or are they going to go, okay, we got to go, you know, we have to come back to our senses and vote for a real politician.
And then when you started winning those, you were like, oh, no, this is over.
Quip Oral Hygiene00:02:55
This is real.
Like he's, he's really a phenomenon.
And so, anyway, so the value to Bernie Sanders here would have been that every newspaper in America has to print Bernie Sanders winner, you know, and that's the real value.
And then you get those like three, four days in the press where, or maybe even a week.
I forget how far after Iowa, New Hampshire is, but you get this four days to a week in the press where all everyone is talking about.
The story is that you won.
It's a very powerful narrative.
And your ideas get some press because you can't ignore the fact that the ideas, it depends on how much you win by, but if you really win by a landslide, you guys go, oh, I guess voters really do care about these ideas.
Then they get publicized and more people go, oh, yeah, I do really want that free healthcare, the universal healthcare, college, and everything to be free.
Sure.
No, it's a big, it's a big, big deal to win that first conference.
Which is why they cheated it.
Yes.
All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our awesome sponsor for today's show, which is Quip.
You know, Quip.
It's the electric toothbrush you've heard so much about, but it's their sleek, reusable floss pick you'll want to use next.
The durable handle is easy to guide, restrings with a click, and comes with a compact mirror dispensing case for on-the-go action.
Plus, a single refill pod replaces over 180 single-use plastic flossers.
So it's better for your teeth and for the environment.
Not a pick person, Quip also has refillable floss strings that expand to clean.
Honestly, I got to tell you guys, I love Quip.
I use their toothbrush.
It's the best toothbrush I've ever owned.
They've got all of the products.
They really promote good oral hygiene.
It's something you don't have to think about anymore because it just they take care of it for you.
Pair your floss with the perfect electric toothbrush for kids and adults.
Quip has the simple guiding features that you need.
Timed sonic vibrations with the guiding pulses.
They help you brush better, brush every quadrant of your mouth evenly.
You can get amazing rewards as well just for brushing better every day.
Quip's smart electric toothbrushes connect to the free Quip app.
So you can earn amazing rewards like free products and discounts as you track and coach better health habits two minutes twice a day.
Quip also delivers brush heads, floss, and toothpaste refills every three months.
Shipping is free so you can save money and skip the store.
It's perfect.
It makes life easy.
The things just come when you need them.
It's one less thing you have to worry about.
Bring delight to your everyday brushing and join the over 5 million mouths that brush with Quip starting at just $25.
This holiday season, check out Quip's exclusive deals.
And if you go to getquip.com/slash problem right now, you'll get your first refill for free.
That's your first refill for free at getquip.com/slash problem.
That's G-E-T-Q-U-I-P.com/slash problem quip.
Better oral health made simple.
Clinton DNC Sabotage00:12:41
All right, let's get back into the show.
So I said on Rogan's podcast where I was just like, you know, they screwed Bernie Sanders out of the nomination in 2016.
And we don't even know what they did in 2020.
And Rogan corrected me somewhat fairly and said, well, we do know what they did.
And we started talking about how they, you know, they clearly convinced everybody else to drop out right before Super Tuesday, except Elizabeth Warren, who was his competition.
And she stayed in much longer till she stayed in until the nomination was secure for Biden.
And so there was stuff that we knew.
But the point I was making was that in 2016, we had these big WikiLeaks dumps where Podesta's emails and some people at the DNC, these emails all got dumped.
And so we saw what happened.
And what happened, at least from what we know about, there still could be more that we don't know.
But from what we know is that the DNC, which claims to be a neutral organization that's just there running the primary season, they're not, you know, they don't have a candidate in the, they don't have a dog in the fight is what they claim.
And what we found out is that they very much had a dog in the fight and that they were actually actively working to sabotage Bernie Sanders.
They were brainstorming about different attacks.
They were talking about painting him as, you know, anti-Catholic, painting him in all these different lights.
Like what could they do?
And this was the DNC was openly colluding with Hillary Clinton's campaign to work on destroying Bernie Sanders together.
And then even, you know, as far as having Donna Brazil, who was working at CNN, leaking debate questions to Hillary Clinton or town hall questions to Hillary Clinton, so she would know what the questions were before they got it.
So there was a whole lot of just like shady shit going on where they were working to try to make sure that Hillary Clinton won.
They were trying to make sure Bernie Sanders could not win the Democratic nomination.
And this is now, okay, Politico, who is, you know, left-leaning for sure.
And this is them reporting, as I said, the headline was Iowa Autopsy Report, DNC meddling led to caucus debacle.
State party audit finds plenty of blame to go around.
So let me just read a little bit from this, from this piece.
Democratic National Committee meddling, combined with missteps by the state Democratic Party, were the primary drivers of the chaos that torpedoed the Iowa caucuses earlier this year, according to a new audit commissioned by the state party.
The report, which was distributed to Iowa Democratic Party State Central Committee at a meeting Saturday morning and obtained by Politico, identifies a series of errors made by the DNC, IDP, the Iowa Democratic Party, and the technology company contracted by the state party to build a reporting app to collect caucus results.
The February caucuses were overrun by foul-ups.
The state party was unable to report a winner on caucus night.
The mobile app to report results failed to work for many precinct chairs.
The backup telephone systems were jammed and some precincts had initial reporting errors.
The state party chair, Troy Prince, resigned in the wake of the debacle, which put Iowa's status as the first in the nation nominating contest in serious jeopardy.
But the report pins the blame squarely on the DNC for the heart of the problem on caucus night, the delay in the reporting of the results.
According to the report, the DMC, the DNC demanded the technology company, Shadow, build a conversation tool just weeks before the caucuses to allow the DNC to have real-time access to the raw numbers because the National Party feared the app would miscalculate results.
The DNC's data system used a different database format than Shadow's reporting app, which caused multiple problems.
So, what you have here is some interesting revelations, which is that this was the national DNC who was responsible for all of this.
And what happened in effect, so what we know, right, is that in 2016, they were openly, not openly, we know this because it was leaked, but that they were working to undermine Bernie Sanders.
And now, what we have is proof that they were working to do something that ended up undermining Bernie Sanders.
It seems like not that much of a leap to assume that once again, they were working intentionally to undermine Bernie Sanders.
And this is, you know, this is interesting information.
So, and also just to keep in mind with everybody, this whole thing where they were using an app, so they overhauled the way they do the caucus in Iowa, or at least the way they record the results of the caucus.
This is all pre-COVID.
This had nothing to do with COVID.
This is at a time when nobody, you know, if you had said COVID-19, 99% of people would have said, What are you talking about?
I don't even know what this is.
So, this was them overhauling the way we record election results well before the common excuse that's used for why we did that in the general election.
And this did, in effect, what it did basically was muddy the waters enough that Bernie Sanders couldn't get what we were talking about before.
He didn't get his four days where every single newspaper, the big story is Bernie Sanders winner, where what you were saying, people are now starting to take him seriously and listen to his ideas and see if, oh, maybe I like this idea.
Oh, yeah, abolishing college debt, oh, for you know, Medicare for all or whatever.
You know, he lost that.
And so, they were able to take that away from him, which I believe ended up being a huge factor in Joe Biden ultimately securing the nomination.
So, this is a very interesting story.
And here, let me read a little bit more from the article.
The audit states, the conversion tool had coding errors that spit out inaccurate numbers and caused confusion about the accuracy of the results, eventually leading to delays in reporting.
But the state parties app never malfunctioned nor was hacked.
Hold on, there was one other paragraph in here that I wanted to get to.
But anyway, whatever.
The point being here, that we've got some pretty serious evidence now that DNC meddling led to Bernie Sanders being denied his moment.
Okay.
Now, I'm sure you could come up with an explanation where this is not nefarious.
You could come up with an explanation where this was an honest mistake.
However, given that we know, you know, that they were doing this the last go-around, I think it's more reasonable to assume, and what really matters, a lot more people will assume that this was intentional and this was done to sabotage Bernie Sanders.
Now, what does this really mean for Bernie Sanders?
Nothing.
Bernie Sanders is a weak bitch, and he'll basically just take it and still support the Democrats and do their bidding.
And, you know, and he did.
He was out there campaigning hard for Joe Biden, just like he did for Hillary Clinton, because that's Bernie Sanders.
And that's why he'll never lead a revolution.
Thank God.
But what my thought was as this story comes out is more to the point of what I was saying before.
What I think the big story in America right now is that such a huge percentage of the population don't believe the results of this election.
And I got to say that this story, and particularly if more starts coming out, like if more evidence of what the DNC was up to in their own primary starts coming out, I got to think whether fairly or unfairly, this will really bolster the belief that these elections are not legitimate.
And understandably, what do you think?
What you're saying is 100% right.
And this is fascinating that this is coming out and showing that the problem is that it always seems to come out when no one cares anymore.
So if this came out two or you know, a month after it happened, when you and I, I, you know, it's funny, I'd forgotten about this until you sent me this article, but now I'm remembering that we were saying how this was total bullshit.
Oh, yeah, we called this.
You're right.
That point should be driven home that we were right.
We called this right at the time.
Like, no way.
This is just too coincidental.
There's no way that this just happened.
But now no one, Bernie Sanders isn't complaining.
No one cares.
So no one's like going that deep into, wow, you really did something terrible here and this thing is clearly rigged.
And then it's you and I, which we already have to connect dots to go, no, look, there's evidence from last election and this election and there's more.
The same thing's going to happen in this thing.
They're going to unwind it two or three years from now that there were errors and the statement's going to be, yes, errors were made, but it wasn't enough to actually affect the election.
And, you know, we're reprimanding the people that made those errors.
Sure.
It'd be like what they did with the FISA court for Trump.
Errors were made, but no one's in trouble.
And at the end of the day, the court still works in its proper fashion.
It was just errors in this one case.
I completely agree with you, but I think that the bigger, you know, like, like, so you're absolutely right that this isn't going to lead to, you know, an actual investigation or the truth being uncovered.
However, what it might lead to is really cementing the belief in a lot of Americans' minds that these elections are illegitimate.
And that's, that's more interesting.
I hope you're right.
But even this article is inside baseball.
It's politico not being widely reported.
And you and I have to connect the dots that no, this was a big deal, but it's because it's coming out, what, a year and a half after the incident took place.
That's true.
But it'll, it would be interesting if more information came out.
But you're right.
Fair enough.
Not everybody's going to pay attention to this.
It's not getting, you know, you know, widely reported loudly, if that makes sense.
Like there might be people who are doing articles on it, but it's not becoming the story of the day.
But it does, you know, it certainly should be enough for people to go like, hmm, if the DNC is willing to cheat in their elections, why is it that we should trust that they're not cheating in other areas?
And I think, you know, from my perspective, I don't think that's unreasonable in the same sense.
And you can say, and fair enough, like you could say, well, that isn't actual tangible evidence that they cheated in other cases.
But it's kind of like, you know, if you're in a relationship where somebody's cheated on you seven times and now you're suspicious and like they're not answering their phone or they're out with a friend or something like that, it's not completely unreasonable to be suspicious about that and say, you know, I mean, they do have a long track record of doing this.
So maybe they're doing it again.
That's that's kind of how I look at it.
And the Democrats are filthy whores.
Yes, that's what I'm trying to say.
They're whores.
They're cheating on you.
But then, you know, it's kind of like one of the things we were talking about just, what was it last month or something?
But it's funny to see, you know, it's one thing to see like these hardcore Biden supporters.
I don't even know if that exists, but you know, the people who like Biden and Hillary Clinton and them saying, oh, no, there's no way an election would be stolen.
But like Bernie supporters, are you guys actually taking that position that there's no way an election can be stolen?
Because, you know, you guys kind of seem like the proof that it certainly can be.
So anyway, it'll be, it'll be interesting to see if more information comes out about this stuff.
Man, I would love to see just like another round of fucking leaked emails from all of them, DNC, RNC, all of them.
Proud Boys Defense00:14:37
Get Snowden back out there.
Trump should get him that pardon and then hire him to do research analysis for the problem is the guy we really need for this isn't Snowden.
It's Assange.
And I think he's lost his mind.
And can I just say Flynn kind of sucks?
Cause he got out and you're like, oh man, he gets to talk and stuff.
And then he starts talking.
You're like, he's not that good at talking.
Yeah.
Yeah.
He's not.
Yeah.
He's not our great hope, as it turns out.
But who knows?
Maybe in the future, maybe Trump will be the guy.
You know, Trump will probably start saying all types of wild shit after he's out.
That'll be interesting to see.
All right, guys, let's take a quick moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is yokratom.com, home of the $60 kilo.
That is the world's best value in Kratom shipped right to your door.
No questions asked.
Now, if you've never heard of Kratom before, just ignore this ad.
We're not talking to you.
There's no need to hear this and go out and try Kratom.
But if you're currently a fan of Kratom, who's over 21 years old, then celebrate your freedom at yokratom.com, home of the $60 kilo, which is unheard of.
YoKratom.com is one of the biggest sellers of Kratom nationwide, and they made yokratom.com so you can buy directly at wholesale prices.
This is quality Kratom.
We've heard nothing but great feedback from the fans.
They confirm it's solid.
And like I said, it's the only place where you can get a kilo for $60.
So last time, if you're currently a fan of Kratom, go to yokratom.com and get yourself a $60 kilo.
All right, let's get back into the show.
Okay, so the other thing that I wanted to talk about, which I got to say, I'd almost preface it with saying, I don't know that I have such great information to really have a well-formed take on what happened here, but I'd feel bad not talking about it at all.
So that there were these violent clashes in DC between it seems like Proud Boys and on the other side, I don't know, Antifa BLM types.
I don't exactly know the details of it, but I saw a few videos online.
Evidently, I think there were like three stabbings that people were arrested for.
So, you know, there was a bunch of violence, a bunch of property damage, just awful shit show.
And it, it, you know, it was like Trump, you know, supporters marching, counter-protesting, Proud Boys going in to fight the, you know, the other groups.
And I saw some really awful videos of people just getting fucked up.
I don't know.
Did you, did you see some of the stuff?
Yeah.
So firstly, all the footage of just random people getting stomped out, which from what I'm seeing online, and granted, you can't find all these videos that easily.
And I'm not there.
So I'm just seeing what people are cherry picking.
But the Antifa videos where it seems like they're just picking and stomping out random dudes is just vile and reprehensible.
The videos of where Antifa is squaring off against the Proud Boys.
That's two people that want to get into a skirmish.
They both have it coming.
It's only escalating and headed towards more stupidity.
But that, you know, those two people want to square off.
God bless.
But what we got to stop is the random, you know, where 920 Antifa people just stomp out some random dude who's just single and alone.
Well, I agree with you.
It's very tough, like when you see some of these videos to really figure out what's going on here, you know, like, wait, wait, who is this group?
Who is this group?
What happened here in the conflict?
What's leading to it?
Now, I do think it's bad and it's horrible, you know, when even the two groups are going at it, you know, like it's all, but I agree with you that obviously if one group, whoever it is, whether it's Antifa or the Proud Boys or anyone, if you were just going and harassing, assaulting random people who are trying to like have lunch or go to a, you know, event or whatever, that that is substantially worse than two groups coming to rumble.
Like, I still think that's stupid.
But if two groups are coming to rumble and they're both kind of like in on this, then that's a, that's certainly better than just random innocent bystanders getting assaulted and things like that.
I think it's all really bad and really stupid.
And it's, you know, the cops looked like this go around that they're making more of an effort that they're yeah, I, that's, that's what it seemed like to me too, from the videos that the cops were at least not just sitting there watching it all happen, but kind of trying to intervene.
And, you know, okay, yeah, I suppose that is better.
But, you know, so I posted on Twitter because I saw a lot of the kind of woke libertarians types, you know, who were like, oh, look at how awful the Proud Boys are and they're assaulting people and they're, you know, they're like there's property damage and all this.
And I just kind of posted something along the lines of, oh, it's a little bit rich from the libertarians who supported Black Lives Matter through the summer to now be sitting here and being like, oh my God, property damage, violence.
This is so horrible, you know?
And I had a few of them come back at me and they're like, oh, well, I could say the same thing for you because you were condemning Black Lives Matter, but now you're not condemning the Proud Boys.
And well, first of all, I do condemn anybody who's fucking assaulting people or, you know, fucking up stores or anything like that.
But the difference is that I'm not like, I'm not out here supporting the Proud Boys and then complaining about it when Black Lives Matter, you know, fucks people up.
And so I just don't, it's not the same accusation.
It's not a fair analogy.
Like if the fucking, like, if the libertarian candidates who are running were out there tweeting out, you know, stand with Proud Boys and going to Proud Boys marches and like all of this shit, I'd have told them that this is fucking retarded because now, fairly, you're going to get, you know, to some degree held accountable for any violence that comes from that group.
So yeah, it wouldn't be good strategy.
It wouldn't be a good idea.
The other thing also is that it, again, this is unclear to me.
Like I don't know what the Proud Boys were doing down there exactly.
Are they going down there to rumble with Antifa?
Okay, I think that's a really bad idea and stupid if they're doing that.
But if they're going down there to just assault random people and break store windows, then that's fucking outrageous and evil.
And those people should be fucking held accountable for that.
So I, but I just can't determine it.
I don't, I don't know.
You're seeing these random choppy videos and it's like, I don't know what the fuck's going on here.
I don't know what, you know, what's being displayed here.
But like I said from the beginning, I have been critical of the Proud Boys before.
I think this thing turned into something that's not good and is going to, it's, I, I think that it's just going to escalate the violence of the situation.
Now, that being said, if you're at an event and it's a peaceful event and Antifa comes and starts bringing violence and you defend yourself, I'm not going to criticize anyone for that.
But that's uh, uh, it's hard for me to determine exactly what's going on here, but it's not good, it's not good all around.
And it, uh, there's still an easy way to put an end to it, which is that they need like a Giuliani cop-like character to say no mask at these events and start doing mass arrests of groups of people.
Like, like, we're doing an event.
If you show up as Antifa, you're being arrested, kind of thing.
Or if you show up with any signs that you're looking to partake in violence, which means you're wearing a mask, you got a canister of whatever, you've got anything that resembles a weapon shield.
You got to start, there needs to be a show of force towards those people.
Yeah, the Antifa problem is a real issue and it's got to be dealt with.
Well, the problem now is that they're actually the law enforcement is encouraging people to wear masks.
So they may, they're more likely to be arresting the people who don't wear masks at this event than the ones who do.
So you got a whole lot of problems in that.
No, the a year ago, you didn't see Proud Boys in the same, like, you didn't see as many of them or showing up to like look.
So it does seem like this is more of a defense tactic.
This is on the cops that when people are going to do these peaceful protests, they're unable to do so and they're being victimized.
So like, yeah, you could for sure see people are going to be like, well, fuck you.
You know that that's going to happen.
And as people show up with more and more weapons and it becomes more and more violent, it's only going to spiral.
So I don't know.
It's kind of on the cops to actually decide, hey, we're not, we're not going to allow this Antifa thing to be here because otherwise you're putting it into the field for vigilantes to act out against that.
So yeah.
Well, that is true.
I mean, this whole thing, it's the way everything's been handled this whole year is just, and this is one of the reasons why we've been so opposed to it, is that it's just, you can see the handwriting on the wall.
Like, if this isn't gotten under control, it's just going to lead to more and more violence, which, you know, I think normal, sane people should not want to see.
Fucking sorts of fights in the street, dude.
Yeah.
But look, I would say that I think if there were, and I know this is almost hard to imagine with the state of the Libertarian Party today, but if there were libertarian candidates running for office who were just out there saying, we support the cause of the proud boys, which whatever, you know, what is their cause, like something about Western chauvinism or something like that, like we love Western civilization, which, truthfully speaking, I mean, depending on how you interpret that,
could be something that a libertarian could support.
Like, I like Western civilization.
I like, I don't know, what are we talking about here?
The values of the Enlightenment?
Then, yeah, sure, those are really great.
You know, the achievements of Western civilization, there's a lot of great ones.
Now, there's also some really bad aspects to Western civilization.
So I don't know exactly what that means, but you could find a positive, you know, libertarian message in there, I suppose.
So, but if some libertarian candidate were out there saying, I support, you know, Proud Boys, I'm marching with Proud Boys, hashtag Proud Boys, you know, all this shit.
I would think that was really stupid because whatever the situation is with them, you'd go, Look, this is a group of people who are getting into fights.
Now, I don't know what percentage of the time they're initiating the fights, what percentage of the time they're justified in like defending themselves.
But if there's an organization of people that are getting into fights often and you're just out there supporting them, well, guess what's not that unlikely?
That either they're going to start a fight, they're going to assault some people, and you're going to be blamed for that, or it's going to be murky as to whether they started it or not, and you're going to be blamed for that.
And that's fair.
You know, like if you're supporting an organization that's out there committing acts of violence, yeah, of course, people are going to be like, Well, what the fuck?
You're supporting them.
So, I wouldn't think it was good to fucking just, you know, like be like, Yes, I'm with the Proud Boys.
I don't know.
I, I doesn't seem like a wise move.
But of course, they were doing that with Black Lives Matter.
And this is why they're getting all the shit for it.
So I don't think there's any hypocrisy on our end.
I'll, you know, I'll say right now, it's like anybody who's fucking getting in, anybody who's initiating violence against someone who, you know, they're fucking wrong.
And you don't want to be a part of a group with them.
But the other thing is that you can't, you know, it does seem to me to be pretty clear that the Proud Boys, which really did start as a joke.
Like I was around when Gavin was starting them.
It was all fucking silliness.
And it evolved into something else.
But a major part of what it evolved into was a response to Antifa, which was this organization that would come around and literally just come around in masks with weapons and just start assaulting random people at any right-wing event.
And they couldn't have, they couldn't even, you know, have their speakers speak at events that they organized legally themselves.
And this went largely, I mean, not unreported, but very minimally reported in the corporate press.
They were very minimally punished by law enforcement.
And obviously, if any right-wing group of people were doing this, they'd be like on the FBI's terror list, like number one.
They would have devoted all types of resources to shutting this thing down.
And they didn't do that.
And so this thing grew.
And now this grew out of it as like a response to it.
I think it's all in a bad place right now, but it's, I got to say, I do, at least how I'm seeing it.
I see a lot of it as a reaction to the Antifa problem that people were not willing to deal with.
So, you know, I don't know exactly what the solution is here.
I think these things are like my advice to anyone I care about, anyone I love, would be to stay the fuck away from these situations where, I mean, you don't want to be in these fucking crazy brawls in the streets.
And I would tell people to, even the ones who are just trying to have dinner or something like that, to stay the fuck away from the areas where these clashes are happening.
And at least don't wear a part of the problem shirt.
And if you could.
And if you could, I really appreciate you.
I know that guy, by the way.
Yeah, yeah, I messaged back and forth with him on Twitter.
Well, he wasn't like at one of these violent clashes.
He was like at a, you know, pro-Trump rally or something like that.
But, you know, I said, look, I appreciate you buying our shirt.
There's lots of other shirts.
Maybe you rock one of the other shirts that day.
But, you know, hey, it's up to you.
I believe in freedom.
I believe in freedom to do what you want.
Ooh, is that true?
Twitter, Brian just messaged us.
Twitter is saying Assange is getting a pardon.
Well, this must be late breaking because I was just looking at Twitter before we started recording.
Let me just check that.
Say what you're going to say, Ravi.
Did you see the Tulsi Gabbard?
I don't know if it passed or just law that she put forward basically keeping, I don't even know the words you're supposed to use for this, but let's go with transgendered male to fewer biologically born as men, who identify as women, not being allowed to play in women's sports.
I don't know if that's the proper way to say that.
Homeless Shelter Discrimination00:06:05
Okay, so she, there were actually two bills, I believe, that she put forward.
One was source yet.
It's not verified.
Let's just keep saying it anyway.
Okay, it seems like this is not verified.
It's just something a lot of people on Twitter are pushing, the Julian Assange thing.
So we'll see.
It's just people saying breaking President Trump will pardon Julian Assange.
But I think it's just like a viral campaign to try to get him to.
There doesn't seem to be any source attached to it.
Anyway, to what you were saying with Tulsi.
So she put forward one bill that was that, that was saying that, you know, sports should be kept to their biological participants.
There should be women's sports and men's sports.
And if you are biologically a woman or biologically a man, no matter what you identify as now, you have to play in the sports that your biology dictates.
There's a couple of issues that come up with that.
But the other bill she put forward was a bill about if you survive babies who survive late-term abortions, that you can't kill them, which I guess is controversial.
It's a little like common sense.
Holy shit.
It seemed just tough to argue against.
Oh my God.
But it is interesting.
And it's something that I think you got to admire about Tulsi Gabbard that she's willing to put both of these things forward, which you know will win her no favors amongst the radicals in her base.
I mean, she is a Democrat and of course will solidify their view that she's really a right-winger, which is so ridiculous.
But that's what the thing is, it's just more of those free thinkers like her who are willing to do things that are outside of the party line because they actually think that those policies make sense or are meaningful to them.
Yeah, there's, but one of the thing with the transgender stuff and with the transgender debate in general, and this is the stuff that like bothers me so much about it.
I don't mind, look, I'm a libertarian.
I believe everyone owns their own body.
You can do whatever you want with your body.
You can call yourself whatever you want to, you know, like that's fine.
And I believe as a principle in life in general, don't be a dick to people.
It's a good principle to live by.
I mean, maybe if someone's a dick to you, return the favor in kind, but in general, treat people with kindness and don't go out of your way to hurt people for no reason.
That just seems like a good, a good idea.
But then when it comes to like these things like transgenders competing in sports, children transitioning, these are topics that it's like, okay, this is getting a little bit crazy.
And then when you're not even allowed to discuss these things and they just call you names, basically, oh, you're some evil person.
If you're like, wait a minute, huh?
Seriously?
You're talking about a seven-year-old transitioning?
That seems pretty weird to me.
That's when things just get crazy.
And it's like, no, you can't.
I'm not going to be bullied into not having a conversation.
The stuff with sports is ridiculous.
Can I identify as special and compete in the Special Olympics?
Right.
Well, I don't know.
Maybe you can.
But, you know, it's like the idea that biological men are competing in female sports and dominating in them.
I mean, this is so obviously unfair.
This is the reason we have female sports to begin with.
And so this just seems very reasonable to me.
There was also, you know, there's these other examples where I've seen some of these like left libertarian types get into.
And, you know, Spike talked about this in his post, which he did apologize for and delete the post.
So I'm not bashing Spike Cohen for this, but it is something that I've heard other, you know, lefties and left libertarians say, where they'll talk about discrimination in homeless shelters and that trans people face discrimination in homeless shelters.
And what they mean by this is that biological men are not allowed in women's homeless shelters.
Now, of course, me and you, we're anarchists.
I don't think the government should be involved in this.
I think let private companies make homeless shelters and they can determine what their rules are and whatever.
That's fine.
But if it is a public homeless shelter and they're saying, well, no, a man who transitioned to a woman has to stay in the men's shelter, not the woman's shelter.
To just say that's discrimination against transgender people, it's like, well, if your position was that all men and women should stay together in homeless shelters and there shouldn't be women's homeless shelters and men's homeless shelters, then you could argue that you're against discrimination.
But if you're okay with having men's homeless shelters and women's homeless shelters, which seems quite reasonable to me, because I think it will lead to more fornicating.
Well, that's right.
There's a lot of people with mental illnesses and violent tendencies here.
I think it's going to lead to more violence against women, which is something that I think you might want to be concerned about if you have men staying in women's homeless shelters.
So as soon as you're okay with discriminating on that basis and saying, well, no, men have to stay in this homeless shelter, women have to stay in this homeless shelter, then you're kind of losing the argument.
The question becomes, well, why are we allowed to discriminate based on sex, but then we're not allowed to discriminate based on sex if someone of the opposite sex doesn't identify as that?
I mean, the whole thing just becomes goofy.
It's like, yes, obviously there's a reason why you might want to discriminate on that basis.
So anyway, a lot of this stuff just becomes insane.
But what's interesting about the Tulsi thing is that she is kind of like, she's putting herself in a position where she's going to get called all of these names and doesn't seem to care about it.
And there's something about that that I kind of tend to admire.
All right.
That's our show for today.
Thanks, everybody, for listening.
Go check out Rob's show, Run Your Mouth.
Go follow Robbie on Twitter at Robbie the Fire.
Go check out my debate with Archie Flower on the Lions of Liberty podcast.