Andrew Chapados and Chrissy Clark critique Twitter’s $43.6B privatization, questioning if Elon Musk’s "edit button" undermines transparency while advocating for reinstating banned figures like Trump and Alex Jones—though she doubts ideological motives. They expose Pearson’s algebra book pushing debunked CRT claims, Loudoun County’s NAACP-driven admission changes harming Asian students, and Disney’s misrepresented opposition to Florida’s "Don’t Say Gay" bill, calling out corporate politicization. Ultimately, the episode frames modern debates as battles over ideological control masquerading as free speech or equity. [Automatically generated summary]
I guess I should say your last name too, Chrissy Clark, reporter for the Daily Caller.
How are you doing today?
Great.
Thanks for having me.
I'm excited to be here.
Thanks.
I'm excited to have you.
First thing I want to know, what are you doing in Canada?
I was unfortunately here for a funeral, but I got to see some family and make the best out of it.
It was really more of a celebration.
I guess we're like really trending away from this whole wearing black to a funeral thing.
We were all asked to wear colors.
So we were like decked out in pink and purple, and it looked really fun.
It was actually a great time.
And my grandma was quite the fool.
We saw lots of videos of her drunk dancing.
So, you know, what's a funeral without some drunk videos of his grandma?
Exactly.
That's how I want mine to be.
And that's very like a New Orleans thing, is to have a celebration at a funeral.
I learned that from rap documentaries.
That's where a lot of music started in New Orleans.
Coming up next, my rap documentary, by the way.
News of the day, though, what we talked about, wanting to talk about today was Elon and Twitter.
He's buying it.
What do you think is the best case scenario that comes from this?
Well, I think Twitter being privatized is obviously like the best option because I think, you know, you go on social media platforms and a lot of them, when people talk about the 2020 election in the U.S. being rigged, I think a lot of the times what they mean by that is it feels like the top echelons of power and distribution of content is being rigged against a lot of conservatives.
That's just how they feel.
And regardless of whether the data bears out at that point, that's how they feel.
And so to have an outlet like Twitter that's no longer going to be pressing people or pressing an anti-conservative agenda, I think that's really awesome.
I definitely think that, you know, at this point, they have to do their fiduciary duty to their stakeholders.
So Twitter is probably going to have to take this.
Reuters, I think, came out with an exclusive a couple hours ago saying, you know, like, this is it.
They're taking the bid.
They're taking the 40,000, was it $43,000?
$54 a share?
Yes, $54 a share, but I think it's $43.6 billion for the company.
Yeah, it's chump change for Elon.
But anyway, that's the state of it.
And I'm excited to see what he does with it.
But I'm also very, very skeptical of this edit button.
Have you heard about this company?
I know he tweeted about that.
Yeah, so I guess the idea is to have an edit button and you can go back and edit things because if you write food wrong, you can.
So you're anti-edit is what I'm getting.
Well, I just feel like the trolls on Twitter will use this to capitalize.
Like you look at somebody from CNN that completely spews wrongful lies and they go back and they deceptively edit their articles.
Why wouldn't they deceptively edit their tweets?
Well, what if they have a previous version of it?
For sure.
Okay, then I'm cool with it.
But to just be able to edit things, the reason if you want to edit is for misspells or whatnot, that you wouldn't need to go back and see the original one, right?
But that's not what it's going to be used for.
I think in the grand schemes, what it's going to be used for is going back and deceptively editing things that journalists put out and being able to correct their misinformation that they've been spewing for so long.
It's like, just delete it and repost it.
There's really no need for this button.
It seems to be a lot of fun.
Well, do you think that they should do something in the lines of bringing people back, giving a second chance to people?
There's Alex Jones, there's Trump, there's Milo Yiannopoulos, tons of people, I'm sure, that maybe were maybe not wrongfully, but harshly kicked off the platform.
Do you think there should be one instance of repentance, if you will?
Or do you think we should keep them off?
What do you think?
Oh, I definitely would love to see President Trump back on there.
His posts are not as great as when they come on Twitter.
They're just a different brand of fire when he's on Twitter.
And you know what?
That's the whole point of the platform.
If you're really that offended by someone's thoughts and someone's tweets, go to TikTok.
They suppress everything on there.
You'll be perfectly happy on there.
You won't see anything.
You can be called out for hate speech if you misgender someone.
But, you know, you can assume my gender.
That's fine.
Very good plug.
Thank you.
But I look at that and no, absolutely, these people should be allowed back on.
I don't care if I don't agree with Trump on many things, but it doesn't mean I don't want him on Twitter.
I would hate for that to be the standard that we have on social media.
And I don't think it should be the standard.
And people like Elon Musk are not some radical right-wing conservative.
He just believes in free speech.
And free speech means giving the opportunity to even the most annoying people in the world like Trump.
But do you think he would do that given that he has his own social network now?
Yeah, I don't think Truth Social is even a real competitor.
As we've seen many times, we had parlor, getter, all these different right-wing spin-offs.
The problem with social media is they initially came in as nonpartisan.
These were just outlets where anybody could go and there wasn't a partisan direction to them.
When you're creating second-tier options like that, you're never going to get liberals on.
They can't even get Fox News on Truth Social.
How are they really going to grow that brand?
So I don't know.
I'd be interested to see if he wanted to come back.
But he just loves attention.
So let's be honest.
He'll come back if he's given the opportunity to.
It's more attention, more opportunity for his name to be in the headlines, which he loves.
I think they should do announcements, like on this day, Trump's coming back.
On this day, Alex Jones is coming back.
That way the media can profit off of it, which we know they want to do.
Yeah, CNN Plus might actually have a chance to come back if Donald Trump was on Twitter.
They'll just have their own Donald Trump-focused show.
Racist Curriculum in Schools00:15:14
Exactly.
Brian Stelter.
Oh, my God.
Mr. Potato Head.
I know.
He's truly a disturbing character.
Did you ever see the Project Veritas where he's caught in like his sandals and robe in like the basement of CNN?
It's pretty special.
I don't need to see that.
I don't need to see that.
That gives me Jeffrey Toobin vibes that I don't need.
Classic name.
I wanted to talk to you about the CRT stuff in Florida.
You'd written an article about the examples, and I was covering this the other day.
And it was basically, and we'll throw it up, it was basically some of it was in math books, and they were studying how different ages, age groups are more racist than others, and of course, different political affiliations.
I wonder who was the most racist in that shirt.
You want to tell people a bit more about that?
Yeah, so Florida has implemented new standards.
And in the U.S., during the Bush administration, excuse me, try not to gag, they implemented Common Core standards, which are just absolute crap standards.
And they really push for standardized testing in the U.S., which we know for most kids, and especially minority kids, doesn't work very well.
It's never been favorable towards the majority of kids.
It really has bolstered the Asian population's credentials because they have, it's part of their culture to just really be part of that and inculcate it into education and higher education.
But lots of kids don't have that.
So standardized testing in Common Core has become a big part of the American public education curriculum.
And when Ron DeSantis came in office, he was like, we're nixing this.
We're making different standards.
And so he implemented Florida's best standards, best, I don't know what it stands for, but something, be better in education, something like that.
But they're just different standards for Floridian students instead of these Common Core standards.
So he was initially going in and wiping out textbooks that were focused on this.
And when they were going through, they started noticing that they had information on social emotional learning, which we all know is just a code word for critical race theory.
And they also had different examples, like you were touching on, where there was a textbook.
And this is a textbook I've covered many times.
It's like a Pearson sixth grade algebra textbook.
And in it, it uses data from the race implicit bias test from Harvard.
Yeah, that's right.
Which is already debunked.
We already know that that's not even accurate data.
So you're giving inaccurate data to a bunch of sixth graders that tells them that conservatives are more racist than liberals.
Why?
Why is that necessary?
So those tests were the ones where they sort of flash things on screen, right?
And then the person mentions if they have an emotional reaction or something to it?
Yeah, yeah.
And then they had one like that, but there's also another one that's just like online that you could take.
Right.
It sounds very accurate.
Yeah, and it's definitely rigged from the get-go.
And it's trying to understand whether you have racial or implicit racial animosity towards certain things.
It's like, well, everyone's naturally predisposed to like things that are similar to them.
So like, yes, in some sort of way, everyone has an implicit bias.
I don't understand the need for a test like that.
But anyway, it's been debunked many times, even by far-left liberals and leftists in the U.S.
And it's not a real thing.
So not only are you feeding kids a really skewed version of the world, but you're using debunked data.
What's the point of that?
I don't get that.
But whatever.
They're trying to push that on kids.
And so DeSantis was like, no, we're not putting this crap in there.
The problem was that a lot of these textbooks have copyrighted materials.
So they're not exactly published yet.
So they couldn't go and screenshot pictures that were in the math textbooks and post them.
So they had parents do it instead.
And so it took a little while for them to release this information.
But, you know, we live in a time where transparency, we expect it instantaneously.
It's social media.
It's the world that we live in.
And that's exactly what was going on.
I was kind of pushing back against them.
And lots of people, even the New York Times, was pushing back against them.
Like, hey, show us one example, just one example so we can believe that you're telling the truth.
And they did release the example, but it took a long time.
And the governor's office went on.
They went to say, like, oh, we don't have any examples.
We've never seen the material before.
Well, then, how are you in favor of it if you've never seen the material before?
Or how are you against it if you've never seen it?
So we're just pushing back a little bit on that.
But it was really interesting to watch them kind of slow roll it, just expect everybody to take them at their word.
But then, you know, you see it, and it's definitely critical race theory-inspired ideology there.
And it shouldn't be in textbooks for sixth graders.
And I'm all for it.
What do you say to people who would say this shouldn't be happening because we shouldn't be banning material for students to read?
Right.
Yeah, I hear that argument.
And most often it's done with like pornographic novels.
We have some books.
What is it called?
Genderqueer, I think one of them is called.
My favorite.
Oh, of course.
Of course.
But it's, you know, there's graphic pornography in these books.
Not my favorite.
That's just in case anybody clips this.
Not his favorite.
Yeah, these are just books that are out there.
And parents have been pushing back against this.
These are, the problem is, is that I personally think these are public tax dollars.
You know, we fund our public schools via tax dollars.
You shouldn't be sending your kid to get ideologically skewed away from you with your own money.
If you decide to do that with a private school and you go to a private school, that's your money, your choice, whatever you want to do.
But if we're paying public tax dollars, I think it's the same argument you could actually make for the U.S. Hatch Act, which was, or the Hyde Amendment, sorry, the Hyde Amendment, which doesn't allow taxpayer dollars to support abortions.
It's the same thing.
Do we have to ban abortions in the U.S.?
Do we have to ban teachers from teaching crappy subjects to kids?
No.
But at the same time, I don't believe my public tax dollars should be used towards that.
And I think that's a pretty fair understanding, especially when so often this goes against one, it's politically driven in one way.
And you're never going to see it skewed to the right where you have kids being indoctrinated about, I don't know, like learning about the Bible.
Those don't even happen at Catholic schools anymore.
Even the Episcopal schools in Dallas are like very anti- they're very woke.
And they I just covered an assembly that they did where all these kids were forced to sit down and learn that like the Catholics and the Episcopal Church are now pro-LGBT.
I'm like, you're going to have to take that up with the Pope.
And isn't it always so interesting when mainstream news outlets cover different like there's been crime going on in the U.S.
And if it's ever pushed by like a radical jihad movement, it's always like local news outlet.
But then as soon as it's like a white person doing the exact same thing, it's somehow like the biggest national news story in the world.
It's so ridiculous.
Wow, this is an anti-bigotry show.
I have to end it there, everybody.
See you next week.
I was also reading one of your articles because I do so much research.
This Loudoun County school, and you claim that I've heard so much about Loudoun County from you.
Yes, I've been writing about them for a little while.
A little while.
How long?
Like about two years.
Okay, so maybe it's true.
But they changed their admission standards.
Is this the same sort of thing that's Harvard style?
Or how do you want to explain that?
Yeah, exactly.
Same thing as Harvard, where it's actually a little different.
So we have the NAACP, which is, they act like they're just pro-black people, but they're not.
I mean, they're a leftist organization.
They won't even, when they're asked to endorse a white candidate or a black candidate, the black candidate being a Republican and the white candidate being a Democrat, they opt to endorse the white person.
They're not in favor of actually promoting black people.
They're in favor of promoting a specific ideology.
It's very obvious.
So the NAACP has a branch in Loudoun County, and there's an elite magnet school in the district called Academies of Loudoun.
Really nice school.
It's hard to get into.
About 75% of the population is Asian at the school.
That makes white people, black people, Hispanic people, every race other than Asian students underrepresented, right?
Just by the numbers, that's how it works.
But they had a merit-based admission standards.
And the NAACP found that their admission standards were racist because they weren't allowing enough black people in.
Okay, well, they also weren't allowing enough Hispanic or white or mixed or disabled kids into the school either, but we only took issue with the black kids.
So then we go in and we have a Democratic Attorney General in Virginia that takes on this case and rules in favor of the NAACP only listing that it's underrepresenting black people and Hispanic people when in actuality every student besides Asians are underrepresented.
And this has been going on in Virginia for a long time where a lot of these Asian students sit there and go, I've worked my ass off to get into this school and I have to get punished for it because we're going through this like representative coalition time where everything is about race.
And these are kids that worked really, really hard for this.
So it's difficult.
It's difficult to kind of level that.
Anyway, we come out, we come to find, we FOIA some documents, whatnot, find out that the NAACP are the exact people that rewrote the admission standards for Academies of Loudoun, and Academies of Loudoun just copy and pasted it and took it.
So now it takes two standardized tests instead of four to get in.
You only need a C in math class to get into a school that's focused on science, engineering, technology, and mathematics.
So, I mean, good luck succeeding at this school when you have a C in geometry.
Oh, wait, you don't need geometry to get into the school anymore.
You need Algebra 1.
That's it.
It's ridiculous.
Like, you're lowering the standards.
And then they say, oh, well, we're not lowering their standards.
Explain me.
Explain me.
Someone, please.
I was talking to a BLM leader the other day on my show, and he, yeah, it's very controversial.
And he basically, of course, supported the idea of what's the not reparations, affirmative action.
Oh, yeah, yeah.
He said at one point it was required because we had to get people in the door who just were literally being kept out.
What would you say to somebody who said, well, we need the whole representation matters argument?
What would you say to somebody who said, well, if we're not having those people there, then how are we supposed to, you know, get our foot in the door, get a leg up, whatever term you want to use involving your legs.
How are we supposed to get into these wonderful schools if there isn't a way for us to get in from the get-go?
How would you respond to that?
Yeah, absolutely.
I think one of the lies about affirmative action is that it's really like ideological barriers, which in and of itself is quite racist.
To say that because of someone's skin color, they don't have the mental acuity to attend a Harvard is actually quite racist, which is what affirmative action essentially says, when actually much more of the issue stems from economic issues being, you know, in America, for instance, more often than not, you're looking at underprivileged areas that are full of minorities.
And it's not about their inability to have a public education.
We have right now kind of a crappy public education system, but you know, it gets you into college if you want to.
The problem is that we have inflated collegiate tuition hikes going on and on and on and on.
And it's impossible to get ahead when you're stuck with student loans up the wazoo.
So I think a lot of socialists will argue, okay, well, we should just get, you know, college should be free.
But at the same time, a lot of the services that are offered at these elite institutions, it's actually really sad because we put such an emphasis on going to Harvard when you can go to a public community college, get the exact same degree in advance based on your merits, based on how hard you try.
College should just be a stepping stone, but instead, in America, at least, it's got so much riding on what school you go to and what the institution says about you.
So part of it is a cultural-driven thing where we're so obsessed with getting credentialed properly.
And also, these colleges don't, like, these do not need to be warehouses for, you know, your multi-million dollar gyms or promoting some radical ideology using hundreds of thousands of dollars in tuition.
It's absolutely absurd.
If you can afford to go, I went to Michigan State.
If I can afford to go to Michigan State, great, but I'm not going to take out hundreds of thousands of loans when in actuality and get the exact same education down the street at Lansing Community College.
I just need to get the credentials to go to the job.
And I think that's two-tier.
First of all, you have affirmative action saying you must be able to go to these elite institutions.
Do you?
Do you really need that to succeed in life?
I don't think so.
But it's also just a push that we have in our culture.
So I don't think affirmative action is the answer.
I think putting less emphasis on a stupid college degree where you actually spend four years drinking yourself to death is just a waste of a credential and a waste of money that lands you in debt.
And then you can't buy a house and you can't seem to get ahead.
It's a broad swath of an issue and affirmative action is not the answer.
It's lowering these expectations for higher education.
All right, let's go Spartans.
Yeah, that's one whole answer for that.
I'm the question asker, not answer.
Another thing you were writing about, and this is a lot of schools, education seems to be your beat.
Yes.
not gonna lie um this all-girls school that i was reading about they had a uh an exercise about their preferred pronouns or they had to make so they had a cultural festival okay where they learned about lgbt ideology That culture.
Of course.
The ancient Asian culture of two-spiriting.
Of course.
I believe you have to be native to Eli Two-Spirit.
Is that correct?
Oh, I have no clue.
Wow.
So much for your expertise.
Yeah, no.
I've been learning about the Luna gender.
Something to do with the moon?
Something, yep, when the moon comes out, you're a different gender.
I don't know.
You know, lunatic means a person of the moon, like a person who worships the moon.
Okay, so they're lunatics.
There you go.
Perfect.
So what did these girls have to do?
Oh, I think they're, oh, they're not, I mean, they're not girls.
Come on, that's sexist.
You don't know what they are.
They only know their gender when the moon is out.
No, I meant the girls at the school, but I'm interested to learn about.
I'm learning about lunar gender.
The lunar gender.
So these girls, they went to a cultural festivity at this beautiful new facility that the school had just opened.
And they show up and they had, I guess they got like a passport where they had to go and get stamps from a certain amount of booths in order to say that they attended the event.
And one of the tables asked them to make pronoun buttons.
This is at an all-girls school, so it's not really tough to assume their genders.
And it was just very interesting to watch.
And so many of these girls capitulated to it because obviously they didn't want to get bullied.
But at the same time, it's like, is this really an appropriate thing to be doing with our kids' time?
Especially when we're looking at, obviously, a massive drop in learning loss post-pandemic or during the pandemic and now post-pandemic.
I mean, in America, we don't have proper, high enough reading proficiency.
Like kids in second grade can't read, yet we're focused all of our time on letting them know about the gender pronouns of their teacher.
The important stuff.
Right, of course.
The things that are going to help them succeed in life.
So that's ridiculous.
Why do you think, and this is just, might be a generalization by myself, but why do you think so many young women are willing to go along with a lot of these things?
You see it with masking.
Disney And The Woke Contagion00:07:30
You see it with gender ideology and transgenderism.
I mean, most of the girls on Leah Thomas' team won't say anything.
I think two, one anonymously and one publicly, have spoken out against him.
A few more anonymously to outkick, yeah.
I will say, have you ever read Abigail Schreier's book?
No.
Okay.
I can't read either.
Okay.
Oh, interesting.
Yeah.
So the Canadian public school system is also busted.
Hoping to get my grade eight soon.
No, it's a really great book, and it talks about how gender ideology and the whatnots is actually a social contagion, similar to young women in anorexia.
It's no different.
Girls that are in Reddit subthreads that are all anorexic, they really compete with each other to see who cannot eat the longest, and they're not allowed to be on psych wards together.
They cannot sit together.
They can't be together or else they'll compete to see who can be skinnier, who can eat less.
It's a social contagion that young women suffer through and it's tragic.
And to look at gender ideology as anything different is actually quite a sham.
You look at this.
These are young girls that want attention.
Puberty sucks, let's be honest.
And these young girls are seeking attention.
And when they get snaps and claps for being the thinnest or for coming out as trans, of course they're seeking that attention and the validation from their peers and that's exactly what they do.
They come out as trans.
They capitulate to all of this because A, they're looking to conform, but at the same time, they're looking for that uniqueness.
And that's, I mean, that's another cultural problem.
Everything has to be about your unique, I don't know, what is it?
Those Enneagram tests, like everything is about you, And so these young girls, they, you know, they just want to feel unique while at the same time conforming to the standards around them.
And that's being trans.
Being gay and being lesbian is not enough anymore.
Exactly.
It's never enough.
Like when is it, what, when is trans going to be out?
Is this like a pendulum swinging thing where we go back and it's like, oh, I'm gay and I'm lesbian.
It's cool now.
Or do we just keep pushing down the road?
That's what scares me.
Transracial ideology?
There you go.
Yeah.
Transhumanism.
I don't even know.
I guess maybe, I don't know.
I'm going to actually censor myself now because I don't know what else to say.
Say it.
We can censor it if you want us to.
Oh, that's okay.
I just, I find it all fascinating that this is hitting young girls particularly.
It's not just in the U.S. or Canada.
You see this in the UK the most, like 400% increase in young girls coming out or getting on hormone trans, what are those called?
The therapy, hormone therapy.
Sad.
It's really sad because it's a social contagion and it's not what I was expecting to come out of this push for what I initially thought, and I think most people initially thought was just about including people and making people feel welcome.
But now it's capitulating to everybody in order to make one person feel welcome while alienating the other 800.
Okay, the last thing I want to talk to you about is the whole Disney stuff going on.
It's crazy to me to see people just throwing in with giant corporations saying they should not be taxed harder.
And you saw the clip where everybody in the House, the legislature in Florida, was up in arms crying for poor Disney because they have to pay more taxes now.
Now, I'm not a person who's just going to say we need to tax the hell out of people, but when they make all these threats to the state and to the governor, basically saying do something about it, and he actually does something about it, it's funny to me.
So what do you think about Disney throwing in with this ideologically?
Because we've seen this before.
I mean, I mentioned the Major League Baseball pulling out of Atlanta when they disagree with voting laws.
Do you think that's just where we are with, at least it was out in the open, Disney made this huge push to be for some policies that they agree with?
Well, so Disney, their executives, most of them are actually in California.
So they're capitulating to their woke ideologues.
I get what they're doing.
They're trying to appease the far left because the far left are often much more aggressive about this than the far right is.
So they're like, okay, well, we're just going to capitulate to the far left, do our thing.
They come out against the bill.
They are pushing a false narrative of the bill.
Read the bill, please, read the bill.
There's nothing in it that says you can't say gay.
You can't talk about having a partner if you're a gay teacher.
All it simply says is, please don't indoctrinate our kids in any sexual learning, gay, straight, whatever the heck you want to talk about, until they're in third grade, until they're eight years old, which I would venture to say that's pretty, you know, it's in the mainstream.
I think the polling came out to like 64% of school-aged parents, regardless of party ideology, were in favor of that.
So it's very popular when people actually read the text of the bill and they don't hear it as a don't say gay bill.
So that was how it started.
And Disney went all in on, well, we don't agree with this.
This is awful, blah, blah, blah.
And that's their free speech at the end of the day.
Do I agree with it that corporations should be getting into political fights?
No, even when it benefits my political ideology.
But no, they shouldn't be getting into it.
What happened after that is Ron DeSantis went in and said, well, we're going to take away your special tax exemptions, which actually leads to like, I believe, a 15% price hike on taxes for people, for residents in those areas.
So that's going to fall on the burden of the Flirtian people.
And then you have, you know, they'd kind of, conservatives have kind of already won on that issue.
Like everyone was against Disney.
Lots of people went out to say they're canceling their subscriptions.
Disney took a hit in their subscriber base.
They took a hit in the polls with people that said they were going to visit or they would, you know, watch Disney movies unfiltered before handing it to their kid.
You know, this really opened the door to so many things and conservatives won.
And then Ron DeSantis decided to go after their tax exemption status.
And to me, I actually kind of found it to be like a really stupid move, if I'm going to be completely honest.
I was disappointed to see it because if the inverse were true and a corporation came out and said, I'm in favor of a bill like this in a very liberal state and the liberal state cracked down on the conservative company, I wouldn't be in favor of that.
So why would I want to give that power to the government?
I so often say if you wouldn't want the inverse happening on you, why do it?
But then I do hear the other argument that I hear is, well, conservatives finally have the levers in power.
Why would you not want to use your power when you have it when you know the left is going to wield their power against you?
And I think that's the problem is we're fighting amongst, you know, powerful people.
That's not where that power belongs, though.
It belongs in the hands of the people, not in the hands of Ron DeSantis fighting with Disney woke executives.
It's a little silly.
And I actually think that if Disney appeals this bill and sues the Florida government on this, they have a real shot of winning because the First Amendment in the U.S., which protects our free speech, it's large and encompassing and very well could be looked at as punishment for speaking out against the bill.
I could see the Florida government losing on something they had already won.
So it just seemed like a big waste of time, in my opinion.
Well, I applaud your ability to criticize both sides.
It seems you have a lot of feelings about Florida that they're going to come after you for.
It's fine.
Come on after me.
And where do you live?
I live in Tennessee.
I'm in Nashville.
My parents are Florida residents, though.
So I make my way down every once in a while, but far enough away from Tallahassee, where the governor's mansion is.
Our social media guy works in Florida, lives in Florida.
He's going to have issue with you.
Okay, that's fine.
We can talk.
You can fight it out.
Inter-Gender Boxing Debates00:01:33
You're not opposed to inter-gender boxing matches?
Oh, my goodness.
Actually, isn't that the only thing that people don't have issue with?
Is the wrestling matches?
What do you mean?
So I was listening to a podcast about, or no, I was listening to some teacher about it.
Sorry, they're interchangeable at this point.
That all these different sports, like Leah Thomas, like we were talking about, you know, with swimming, it's very difficult, but with wrestling, it's weight matchups.
So people were saying, oh, well, you know, wrestling could be actually the only thing that we're doing.
No, no, no, no.
Oh, I completely disagree, but I was just interesting that people were saying, oh, we could do it based on weight class.
Because there are 125-pound male fighters in sports and 125 female fighters.
Right.
So you want to put me up against 120.
I don't know how much he weighs.
How much do you guys think Yankee weighs?
They're not listening.
Don't worry.
He's probably around 150.
So we'll set that up.
Okay, sounds good.
I'll beef up a little bit.
$10,000 payout for everybody.
Thanks for joining me.
I appreciate it.
Yeah, thanks for having me.
This is so fun.
And we will catch you guys next week.
This was Chrissy Clark from the Daily Caller.
Go follow her on Twitter.
Go read her articles for a lot of wonderful, woke stuff like we've talked about today.
we'll see you guys next week.
I'm holding on way too long, and I don't know why.