Chad Prather’s upcoming book aims to help people cope in a "crazy world," though he jokes about its potential free giveaway, hinting at its perceived urgency. He criticizes Sports Illustrated for censoring obesity discussions while promoting unhealthy body images, like a 500-pound model labeled as "struggling with anorexia." Prather dismisses Project Veritas’ Twitter engineer leak as ideological, but warns Elon Musk’s acquisition could reveal 15–40% bot activity. Mocking White House press secretary Jin Psaki’s diversity credentials over competence, he calls media trauma claims absurd, citing figures like Brian Stelter and Don Lemon as proof. UFO disclosures? Just government distractions—he’d rather watch his live shows at watchchad.com. [Automatically generated summary]
Welcome back to another episode of Andrew Says This Week, my guest, returning again, as I call him, Chad Too Bad.
Chad Prader, how are you, good sir?
I'm good.
It's good to see you, man.
You as well.
Now, I do want to reference your book again.
It sits on my shelf here in the office.
It's still, to this day, one of the most cleverly written books.
Am I crazy?
It's called, has there been another book?
Did I miss one?
Is there talk about another book yet?
Yeah, actually working on something to help people get their life right that everybody's crazy.
Now I'm going to try to put one out there to get everybody on the right track in this crazy world we're living in.
When are we looking at that coming out?
We'll see.
It could be anytime.
I mean, literally within the next few weeks.
So we'll see.
We'll see.
But yeah, probably this book, actually, we're probably just going to give it away.
Honestly, that's how important I feel like it is.
Well, it's really cool.
The first thing I wanted to talk to you about is something that came up last night and this morning, the Sports Illustrated cover.
Now, I don't want to be too mean.
Have you seen this?
Yeah, I have.
The Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition.
Now, I noticed that on Instagram, if you try to comment anything, I told my friends, I was like, how much do you guys want to give me if I just comment the word fat?
And if you try to do that, it stops you.
It says this is flagged for comments similar to this.
And it says, are you sure you want to post it?
And we're at this point where just the most simple truth, and I know that's mean, and I know that nobody deserves that, but we're at this point where the simplest, blunt truth is now being censored.
And this isn't the first time Sports Illustrated has gone really weird.
Like, where do you think they're getting this idea from?
And where do you think it's going?
Like, are they sustaining business based off this?
Does it matter?
Does their magazine sell?
What do you think?
You know, I look at these things and honestly, to break it down, just be as completely clear and as commonsensical as we can be on this.
You know, in a situation like this, you are, this is what happens when you complete the pendulum sweep swings completely the other way from the bully culture, right?
So we have this idea that no one should ever be persecuted, be oppressed for anything.
They should never be bullied.
You know, everybody should live in a perpetual safe space, okay?
So that we fight against any form of victimization to the point where you can't even tell the truth anymore because that truth may offend somebody and therefore be perceived as bullying or victimizing.
Now, this is Sports Illustrated.
This is the same magazine that puts out the body issue every year that glorifies the athletic form.
Historically speaking, the swimsuit issue is another variation of that, which was started to sell swimsuits, right?
I mean, you know, every time you'd open up the swimsuit issue, they would talk about who the designer of the swimsuit was and where you could get the swimsuit and so on and so forth.
And obviously, you know, us young adolescent boys had other intentions in regards to that.
But when you look at this, you have to realize obesity is a health issue.
It's not glorifying the athletic form.
This is not an homage to sport.
This is something that is saying, we dare you to speak out against this.
We dare you to call this what it is because now we have a label and we can put you in that box.
You are a fat shamer.
But let's face it, if you took that girl's blood work on the front of that magazine, you took that girl's blood work three weeks ago.
I went and had blood panels done to find out all the things that are wrong with me.
We should all do these things.
I promise you, it's going to come back with a number of deficiencies.
It's going to come back with elevated levels.
This is not an image of health.
This is not a paragon or an example whereby we should emulate.
This is something that we should call out for the sheer hypocrisy of it.
Because let's face it, if you were to put out a magazine that put fat men on the front of it and said, you know, the farmer's diary or whatever, these guys, and you get my point, this thing would be the ultimate imparities.
But when Sports Illustrated does this, then you're not allowed to speak out.
You know, as a father of three daughters, you know, and five kids, I want those kids to be as healthy as possible.
I don't want them getting their body image or their self-image or their sense of self-worth from Sports Illustrated swimsuit issues.
But come on, culturally, we know that this becomes a problem when we can't even talk about health issues without being called persecutors.
Yeah, and I'm seeing this a lot.
You mentioned the health stuff.
I'm seeing this a lot across the board with many fitness-related things.
I'm seeing commercials from, I think it's Apple Watches or Fitbits, where they're showing not just, I mean, I'll call myself fat myself, but we're seeing morbidly obese people as an example of health in the media.
There's that one woman they had, I think it's a British model, and they say she's struggling with anorexia and she's like 500 pounds.
And it's this weird, this weird nexus of the universe we've come to, where you're right, where you can't even speak even on Instagram without it being flagged as a warning.
And you'll see all the comments are limited to, oh, this is amazing.
Oh, white men are going to have a problem with it.
Of course they are.
Problem with everything.
But I wonder if you're a child growing up in this and you're going to see no problem with 400 pounds, 500 pounds, and you're like, this is celebrated.
Nobody can tell you that I'm unhealthy.
Nobody can tell me that I'm going to be unattractive or die at 40.
It's really troubling stuff.
And I'm not going to be the one who's going to go out and say, you know, let's put anorexic models in there.
Let's put ultra unrealistic people in there.
But there is a line.
And I always thought that some part of it was to try to strive to be your best.
And especially in a sports magazine, it's like, are you going to have like a 250-pound cyclist on the cover of Cycling magazine or something?
Like, you're not going to do the sport that you want to do if you're taking this as an example.
And that's just my mean take of the day, I guess.
I guess it's mean now to point out the obvious.
Because again, people say you're criticizing somebody or shaming somebody for their appearance.
That's not the case.
That's not the situation.
This, the hypocrisy that we are calling out, I would say the exact same thing to your point.
If they had an 80-pound model who was suffering from anorexia, I would say this person needs to get some help.
We all are, you know, we all have physical flaws and we all need to work on those things.
I'm not going to parade my bad habits or parade my, you know, the things that I need to work on in my life, whether they're mental, psychological, physical, emotional, spiritual, whatever they be.
I'm not parading those out there and say this is the example that people need to emulate.
Yeah, it's really interesting, especially if you look at something like smoking, which has pretty much been eliminated from, you know, Hollywood.
And there's some things where they have period pieces where they allow it, but that has looked at something that's extremely unhealthy and was meant to be taken out of everything.
You can't advertise cigarettes in Canada.
I don't know if you knew that, but you can certainly advertise cheeseburgers and everything else.
I'm saying it should all be allowed because, you know, are we going to start, where's the smoking magazine on the cover?
Where's the sports illustrated with a guy just with a big cigar or somebody smoking 10 pages of them smoking each cigarette?
I don't know.
It all comes down to censorship with me.
And I think they want to control.
It doesn't even matter what it is.
It could be fat people.
It could be smoking.
As long as they're controlling what you can say, I think that's the point here.
And I want to kind of parlay that into asking you about this new Twitter leak.
Have you had a chance to see that yet with this Twitter engineer in Project Veritas?
I have, yeah.
Yeah.
And this is, and for those who don't know, we'll put it in after, but this is a senior engineer at Twitter.
And we've seen this stuff before from Project Veritas, but it always gets out of context.
But this guy's literally saying we're all communists there.
I came there, became communist.
We don't treat it like a capitalist company.
We do whatever we want.
And he even says he's worked four hours a week the last quarter.
Now, I don't know any job where you can work four hours a week and still be hired.
People could come in and out if they feel too stressed out.
They can take a few days off here and there.
Does that sort of paint the picture as to why Twitter is the way it is, do you think?
Well, I think they're saying the quiet things out loud.
We know that this is the reality.
You know, I work for Blaze TV, right?
I'm with a conservative leaning, pardon me, independent broadcaster.
There's no doubt that we have conversations behind closed doors, you know, amongst our friends about the way we want our individual programming to go and the way we want to handle our content and our shows.
And no question, we will talk about being conservative in the way that we lean in our opinions.
So I have no question that these folks have the same thing.
They're going to talk about their ideologies.
They're going to talk about their leanings, both politically and culturally.
And so when it comes out, we tend to be shocked, like, oh, my God, I can't believe they're saying these things.
Well, of course they're saying these things.
That's who they are.
It's how they are.
They fight for socialistic values.
They fight for censorship.
They're scared to death of an Elon Musk that might come in there and turn things in a different direction.
I mean, look, I saw 40,000 new followers in two days once the announcement was made.
It was almost like people were shredding paper because the new boss was coming in.
And so now we're seeing it.
We know it's happening.
I love that James O'Keefe and the folks over at Veritas continue to reveal these things.
Will anything happen because of it?
No, there's no consequences because we know that leftists don't suffer consequences.
They really don't.
So we'll see what happens with this, but I hope it's spread far and wide and people begin to understand the reality of it.
Well, what I've heard, and I don't know how much of this is true, is that there was an agreement when Elon agreed to purchase it that there was only around 5 to 10% bots.
And now they're saying that it's upwards.
I've heard everything from 15 to 20% to upwards of 40%.
And they're really worried that they're going to have to pay this huge penalty, I think, for a breach of contract or something like that.
Do you still hope that he takes it over or do you think it matters?
I hope he does.
I hope he does for the sheer entertainment value of it.
You know, when the announcement was made, those particular two days that weekend, that was the most fun I'd had on social media in three years.
So, you know, my good friend Sarah Gonzalez just trolled it.
I mean, it was amazing the things that she posted, just staccato machine gun fire tweets of things that historically would have gotten you banned.
It was a lot of fun to watch the reaction.
Right.
That was her.
Yeah.
You know what?
Listen, if it was only 5% bots, then all 5% are on my page.
I can tell you that because I get trolled all day, every day.
You know, I'm at a point now where it's like, you know, I don't have time to waste with this incessant nonsense.
So I just block it and move on.
They tend to show back up.
But, you know, yeah, I hope he takes it over.
Again, I have said this for years.
I've said that if you build something philosophically, ideologically, you build this house of cards, the slightest wind of common sense will eventually blow it down because it's on a faulty fault line.
The structure and foundation of it's built wrong.
And it's a weak structure to begin with.
So I think that a lot of things are being exposed.
You know, look, I sued Facebook back in late February and won.
I am the first and only person to sue Facebook and win in the state of Texas.
And so we've had numerous court battles with Facebook over various issues of things that they try to do.
And you basically sign your life away whenever you agree to their terms and conditions.
You're agreeing to let them dictate to your life on how you're going to operate on that platform.
And it's very difficult, slippery slope.
This is big tech tyranny.
We know it's there.
We've seen it in action.
It's only going to get worse as we move forward and continue to rely on social media platforms.
But it's going to be interesting to see how it all plays out.
But hopefully these exposures are going to continue to bring these things down.
What was this lawsuit with Facebook?
What was that over?
So they banned me for an old comment in response to someone from a long time ago.
Of course, I was running in the primary election here in the state of Texas.
They gave me a seven-day suspension just eight days before Election Day.
So we were able to take them to court on the basis of a bill that was signed by Governor Greg Abbott in February of 2021 in terms of censorship for conservatives in the state of Texas.
And we were actually able to get a ruling in our favor, get the restrictions and the ban lifted.
Sounds like a minor deal, but it was really pretty major.
And Facebook took a loss that they did not like.
So they've consistently been back in court with us trying to get that loss overturned.
So, you know, the thing is, and nobody wants to talk that in the media because, again, big media, big tech, they walk hand in hand with one another.
They don't want people knowing that you can fight people for things like common carriage laws and so on and so forth.
And, you know, on the basis of information and economic trade, be able to shut somebody's voice down is a bad policy to be in action here in America.
Yeah, I think that is a big deal.
And the reason they're probably trying to overturn it, in my opinion, is so that the precedent can't be set that says, hey, you can't, I'll say, probably purposely shut somebody down before an election happens to try to stifle their influence online.
We've seen it with other people.
And it's very interesting with the bots, I think, because you have, especially on Twitter, you have complicated bots and you have very non-complicated ones.
I think I'm pretty good at sniffing them out as I think a lot of people who are on it a lot are.
Shutting Down Opposing Voices00:06:13
But you have, you know, Bob 3356789 with no photo.
That's a pretty obvious one.
But then it goes as far as ones that have had accounts.
I don't know if they buy them or they just farm these bots for years.
But you can kind of tell that, you know, it's suspicious, but one of the first things you look at is how long they've been on the platform.
But then you get like message requests: hey, how are you?
Nobody says, hey, how are you?
That's the way they need to learn about the bots when you guys are making them.
Nobody says, hey, how are you?
I want to get to know you.
That's probably what happened to Eric Swalwell, I think.
A little bit more complicated there.
Something I saw you tweeting about, which I've been thinking about a lot lately, is the new press secretary.
And we're all going to miss Jen Saki.
We're going to all watch her on MSNBC.
That's going to be a great show for no one to watch because only people watch Rachel Maddow on MSNBC.
But now the first thing, Chad, that they talk about with this new press secretary, as she comes in, is she's the first, I don't know what the announcement she made.
I'm the first black immigrant lesbian woman, the first of all three.
And this is so important, not my accomplishments.
The first thing that we talk about is this person's, you know, ethnic or diversity-based accomplishment.
Why is that?
I don't care if you're a Jawa from Tatooine.
I want to know who art.
Are you able to put together a sentence?
Are you able to think with complexity of thought?
Are you able to articulate policy?
Are you able to talk about the things that the White House represents and is doing?
She has so far in the last 36 hours proven incapable of doing that.
We now know why Jen Saki was at least smart enough to corner the phrase, I'll circle back.
That was her way of saying, I don't know.
I'm not sure this lady has the wherewithal to know when she doesn't know something based on some of the stuff based on something that I've seen.
There we go.
There we go.
We back.
Yep.
I love technology.
But yeah, we'll see.
You know, this girl, I don't think she's overly intelligent.
Look, we've seen already with the Biden administration continually put people up because of their physical characteristics, whether it's, you know, the Levine person, you know, that, you know, all, I mean, these folks that are just, it's just crazy.
Like it's a clown car and you don't know who else is going to step out.
In regards to this, you don't realize any of their qualifications because that's not what they're talking about.
Even Jen Saki, upon introducing her, said, you know, these things matter.
These characteristics matter.
They don't.
They really, really don't.
I know.
It's really weird.
I was listening to a podcast this morning on the way in of a UFC fighter, and I won't name him because I think he's a good guy.
But he was talking about how, you know, diversity has a huge role to play in all of his decisions in the school he chose for his family, in his social gatherings.
He's talking about, you know, how great it is.
There's so many inter, I don't even know what the word he used, mixed families.
And I'm just like, why does this matter to you?
Shouldn't it matter if the people are good, if the schools are good, if the town is good?
And it's a town I think you'd be familiar with too.
I don't want to out this guy, though.
He's nice.
But it's just really weird to me when people focus on these things.
And when you trot somebody out, and the first thing is, look at her race and her gender, everybody.
I think that's a sign that this person probably isn't qualified, or else you'd be saying, look at their degree in this and look at their experience doing this.
If you put a person on the moon, you're not going to want to know about whether or not they're from Texas or Louisiana.
You're going to know if they're an astrophysicist or a scientist or an Air Force pilot.
I don't think that's going to be coming in handy if it's something other than that.
I want to ask you, what do you think about Peter Doocy from Fox News?
I think he was getting some heat.
I'm not sure how much legitimacy it had to it, but I saw some people saying like he's hugging Jen Saki after she leaves and they're good.
They got along.
I guess they didn't actually hate each other.
Do you think that's a good idea to still be able to talk to somebody who's they're probably so far opposite in their belief system?
Do you think it's a good idea for them to still show that they can get along?
Or do you think it sort of means that they don't actually disagree with one another?
Look, I've been saying for the last year they're probably hooking up behind the scenes, right?
Who knows?
Again, I say that tongue-in-cheek with all due respect to a guy like Deucey.
And I say respect because at least he is a guy who asks questions that are serious and not softball stuff to this administration.
Look, they should get along.
Of course, they should get along.
They don't have to agree with each other.
You know, look, two weeks ago, I had my friend Riaz Patel on my show on the blaze.
Look, Riaz is an executive producer, two-time Emmy Award nominee.
He was born in a Muslim family.
He is an immigrant.
He's in Hollywood.
He's gay.
He's a liberal.
I mean, he checks all those boxes of everything that a white heterosexual Christian conservative cowboy should disagree with, right?
But whenever we're together, we have the best conversations.
We don't agree on many, many things, but we still have the best conversations.
Of course, you should be able to get along.
That's what America's about, you know?
You know, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, go back and read the things they said to and about each other.
You know, our history is made with the disagreements and the debacles of discouragement that were created out of these disagreements that happened, but yet our founding fathers were able to come back together.
You know, and do I put Peter Doocy and Shinsaki on a level with our founding fathers?
No, but American civility does need to still exist.
Not even American cultural civility amongst free people definitely needs to exist.
I think anybody can look back and say, wow, Kaylee McEnany was really good at her job, even if you disagreed with her.
So I'll have to agree with you on that point.
Ultra MAGA Thing00:03:33
Your point, I was thinking that exact same thing.
You know, I don't think Jinsaki is dumb.
I think she's woke to an ideology that's dumb, which leads her down a wrong path.
I think this girl is going to prove, like, she might beat Scaramucci's record.
She might be out of there.
But it makes you realize just how sharp a Sarah Sanders or a Kayleigh McEnany really truly were and are in terms of their preparedness and their ability to communicate policy.
When she put her hand on the binder on the tab that she was about, that was the warning sign.
And again, even if you disagree with her, she was like the girl in school who always had her project done like three weeks before it was due.
It was amazing stuff.
Something I read about yesterday that I wrote down to ask you about was the ultra MAGA thing.
And my friend and I were talking about this, and he was reading me this article.
I think it was from Daily Mail, UK.
And they were saying that the Ultra MAGA slogan that Biden trotted out was six months in planning.
Did you read about this?
I did.
Yeah, six months in planning.
I wrote it down, Center for American Progress, which of course is one of those, you know, we're one step away from media matters there.
And six months to come up with ultra MAGA.
And now he's calling them the MAGA King and all these things.
It's like, do you really believe that this is what they came up with in six months to, you know, we're going to get them.
We're going to stick them with this.
That's unbelievable, isn't it?
You would think that they would learn from Hillary Clinton calling conservatives a basket of deplorables how far that will backfire on you.
Because people with common sense, people like you and me, we take that terminology and we run with it.
I mean, do you know how many t-shirts I've sold in the last week at watchchad.com or praythirtees.com that say ultra MAGA?
We even have a shirt that looks like the Michelob can that says MAGA Ultra with the little label on it.
We've got MAGA King shirts.
We've got MAGA King hats coming out.
These people are dumb.
I mean, you have to know better than to give us a moniker that we're going to run with.
I mean, look what we did with Let's Go Brandon.
I mean, that one little slip of the lip got her hung by the tongue culturally.
We're not going to let go of any of this stuff.
And so people want to call us a cult.
You know, my friend CJ and I, we do this.
We do these little songs together from time to time, post on social media.
We just did bow down to your MAGA King.
People lose their minds.
Like, they're like, you know, we do these songs and we sing them and people are like, you guys are such a cult.
I'm like, we're trolling you.
I mean, how do you not understand the self-defacing, self-efficating, you know, humor that we use just demonstrates that we're not dictated to by your labels.
It's not going to change anything.
So I love that they came out with it.
Yeah, and there's even more MAGA King songs too or Ultra Mega songs.
And I think you're right.
I think it's so things are so polarized.
It's so easy to troll these days.
Last week, I did a thing where I said, if Elon comes back on Twitter or Elon takes over Twitter, I'm moving to Canada.
In my bio, it says who I am and who I work for.
We don't want you here.
We don't want you woke leftists coming and ruining our country any more than it already is.
It's gotten easier to troll people because nobody does anything but react right away.
And I'm glad you're making sales with that shirt.
Journalists vs. Celebrities00:03:23
I'd be interested in getting one.
And I think that's what you have to do.
It's something I take from like barstool sports.
Once something's out there, pick it up, run with it, because the football is only going to be on the field for a little while in that sense.
And you got to capitalize on it.
And I'm glad you're doing that.
Olivia, he probably hasn't seen this.
Can we bring up this article?
It's from us, from us.
Our state broadcaster, CBC, has hired trauma therapists for their journalists, or they're trying to hire it for journalists out in the field.
And I want to read a couple sentences from this.
It's so funny.
They think that being this field journalist is so hard.
And we have tautism here, and I'm sure you know plenty down at the Blaze.
But they think that people saying mean things to them and not wanting to talk to them, this is equivalent, as I'm sure you've heard.
This is violence.
Words are now violence.
So I just want to read some of this.
Olivia, put it on screen.
And CBC hiring trauma therapists for journalists.
And now, if you scroll down, it shows the job posting.
Yeah, you can see the criteria right there, one and two.
Now, this comes after one of the CBC journalists said that they were getting text from somebody at the trucker convoy and then had to admit that it came from a different phone number than the thing they put their number into and they didn't actually know who it was.
Chad, is being a journalist in 2022 actually this devastating, do you think?
Listen, I still know it's not.
I mean, here's the issue.
Here's the issue.
You know, back in the 60s, whenever suddenly, you know, they were sending journalists into Vietnam to document the war, that was difficult.
You know, people who go into war-torn countries, that's difficult.
People who stick a microphone in someone's face in Main Street America, that's not hard to do.
You know, a lot of people make a career off of that.
The issue is journalists today want to be celebrities.
They don't want to be journalists.
They don't care about journalistic objectivity.
They want to be celebrities.
And today, that bar is set pretty low.
When you can have a Brian Stelter who brings literally nothing or a Don Lemon or, you know, numerous people that I could list out there.
You know, you alluded to Rachel Maddow earlier in the program.
Brings nothing to the table.
These people want to be celebrities, not journalists.
And so when the job of journalism actually happens, they're stressed because they're not prepared.
They never knew what that job was all about.
You know, you go back in history to, you know, the Edward Murrows, the Walter Conkreits, and even the Jennings and the Rathers.
It doesn't matter what you think of them politically, but when they were doing the job of news, you look at Woodward and Bernstein.
You know, Watergate, Watergate is the worst thing that ever happened to journalism.
It's the best and the worst because it made celebrities out of Woodward and Bernstein.
The difference is they did the work and they deserved the celebrity.
These days, folks are wanting the celebrity before they ever do the work.
And so when things like this happen, they need a safe space and a therapist.
What do you think the average Brian Stelter fan looks like?
I try to imagine sometimes who's sitting there watching, you know, Brian's great.
I tune into reliable sources every week.
He's just really on it.
Watching Area 5100:02:49
That's what I wonder sometimes.
Don Lemon, I think some older ladies and some older fellas will sit there and be like, you know, I like the cut of his jib.
He's witty.
But Brian Stelter is literally just sitting there wheezing, complaining about things.
I don't know.
Do you have an image in your head of what Brian Stelter's fans are like?
I think they look like people walking through an airport because I think that's the only thing even knows that Brian Stelter's on.
They're not paying attention to Brian Stelter.
The only time Brian Stelter gets any attention is one of his guests raises a little bit of a stink with something that they say, and the clips are shared.
Otherwise, no one's watching Brian Stelter.
He looks like a thumb.
And the guy's only 36 years old.
He looks like, I mean, this guy is aging terribly.
He looks like something out of a Batman movie.
He's a villain.
But you look, you know, CNN Plus, after spending $300 million, couldn't get more than 5,000, 6,000, 7,000 viewers.
You know, in less than a month, they crashed and burned because people don't want to watch CNN for free because of the Brian Stelters that are on there.
They're certainly not going to pay $6 a month for it as well.
I'd say your money's better spent with Rebel News.
Great promo.
I'm going to clip that.
And we're definitely going to use that.
Before you go, Chad, any thoughts on the UFO stuff that's happening?
Do you care?
You know, look, it's fun, right?
I get to tell jokes for a living.
I get to point out observational comedy and make a living doing it out on the road, which I do encourage people to come see us.
But, you know, again, the government's going to control the information.
They're going to give you exactly what they want you to see.
I think, again, it's another distraction.
It's always a distraction to get your eyes off of certain things that are going on.
There's real things going on on this planet on terra firma.
And so I'm not too extremely worried about the aliens at this point in time.
But, you know, keep talking about it.
They'll want to storm Area 51 again with their, you know, cups of cement or whatever they protest with these days.
That was a good time, the storming of Area 51.
Chad Prather, watchchad.com, was it?
Yep.
Yep, watchchad.com.
Buy one of these new shirts.
I'm interested in one of the beer shirts.
And of course, Blaze TV is all over the road there.
Go see him live.
Check out his dates.
I saw that on your Twitter feed.
And check out his songs, too.
They're pretty hilarious.
Thanks again, Chad.
We will see you again in another certain number of episodes.
Thanks, brother.
I'm holding on way too long, and I don't know why.