Oct. 14, 2015 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:02:35
3101 Bernie Sanders vs. Hillary Clinton | Democratic Presidential Debate Analysis
In the Democrats’ version of the Hunger Games, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Martin O'Malley, Jim Webb and Lincoln Chafee squared off for their political survival in Las Vegas, Nevada live on CNN.What will Hillary Clinton say about the scandal about her email server? How does Bernie Sanders hope to shape the economy moving forward? Do All Live Matter or do Black Lives Matter? Should we have more or less Gun Control? Where is Joe Biden? Was Anderson Cooper an impartial moderator? Did Lincoln Chafee get permission to stay up past his bedtime?Freedomain Radio is 100% funded by viewers like you. Please support the show by signing up for a monthly subscription or making a one time donation at: http://www.fdrurl.com/donate
Hi everybody, it's Stefan Mullen, you from Freedom Maine Radio.
I hope you're doing well.
Well, we watched the Democrat debate last night from beginning to end and everything in between.
We have some thoughts to share about it, and I hope that you'll enjoy this review of what went down.
And I guess my first comment, and it's the same one that I had for the Republican debate, is...
Where was the deficit?
Where was the debt?
Does this not exist in these people's universe?
Is this something that needs to be dealt with?
Did I miss something?
Did I doze off?
Was it there at all?
There was lots of talks about adding to the debt and adding to spending.
That for sure.
And lots of talks about the 1%.
You know, the Democratic debate drinking game is anytime the top 1% is mentioned, take a shot and you were hammered 15 minutes in, thanks to Bernie Sanders primarily.
And the 1% thing just drives me nuts because, you know, the 1%, we have income inequality in the United States.
The top 1% has all the wealth.
Well, you know, if you look at any category, the top 1% of any category tends to have the most of that category.
Height, IQ, beauty, weight, singing ability, charisma, you know.
The people at the top tend to be really, really good at whatever that attribute is.
So the top 1% kind of differentiates itself from the rest, the other 99 in just about every other category, not just income and wealth.
So that being said, trying to redistribute it is going to be a bit of a challenge.
Yeah, I mean, it's the same in acting.
99% of the money goes to 1% of the people.
Same thing in sports.
And so Bernie Sanders, I did a quick tot-up.
American public.
And so we got Medicare for all.
This is just over a 10 year window.
So Medicare for all $15 trillion.
Sure.
$15 trillion.
And that's assuming that if you add to the benefits available to people in America, more people won't want to come to America.
So this is the same thing they do with college, right?
They say, well, we'll give free college tuition, and it's going to cost X.
But they basically say, well, how many people are in government run schools?
At the moment, government run colleges, state colleges, and we'll just cover that.
But they don't realize, of course, that it's public choice theory, that people will change their decisions based upon economic incentives.
And so how many people are going to transfer from private colleges to government colleges if government colleges become free?
Well, it's going to be huge.
But anyway, so he's got $15 trillion in Medicare for all.
Social Security, $1.2 trillion.
His infrastructure program, $1 trillion.
College affordability, $750 billion.
He wants to create a paid leave fund at $319 billion because, you know, $320 would be way too high.
Prop up private pension funds.
It's going to cost him $29 billion.
Youth Jobs Initiative at $5.5 billion.
He wants expanded childcare and pre-K programs, and he's not even said how much that's going to cost.
So over 10 years, that's at least, at a bare minimum, and it's probably going to be at least double this, $18 trillion.
So he's going to add a third to the federal outlays.
In other words, he wants to add $18 trillion, the entire debt, again, over 10.
Ten years.
And I don't think that's going to come from a speculation tax on Wall Street unless there's going to be, like, nothing left at the Wall Street area other than a few farms run by aging communal hippies.
Well, we talked about this in The Truth About Bernie Sanders' presentation, that even if you tax the rich at 100%, A hundred percent, which no one can say is not a fair share.
I mean, I guess someone could make the case that 99% is not a fair share, but a hundred percent, logically, you can't even make that argument.
If you tax them at a hundred percent, you barely cover the current budget deficit currently in the U.S. with the level of spending that we have without adding an additional $18 trillion to it.
Well, and it's the kind of, like we talked about in the R versus K presentations, which people can find on this channel under the title Gene Wars, That any hint of limitation is not great for our selected people.
And this is as true on the Republican side as it is on the Democrat side.
There's not one question.
I mean, it came with global warming and all the foreign policy and so on.
But you'd think that how can you actually pay for all of this stuff would be an important question in a sane universe.
But...
Couldn't buy it.
And I kind of get it.
If you don't understand economics, and it's not like they teach you this stuff in government schools.
They certainly didn't teach me this when I went to U.S. government schools and took some private reading on my own in quite a few years to get the lay of the land as to how this stuff works.
You know, the idea of Medicare for All.
I mean, you know, that sounds great.
Like, we can give everyone health care.
Like, wouldn't you want that?
I mean, yeah.
Wouldn't you want that if you could pay for it and all that stuff?
I can understand why that would be attractive.
Social Security, you know, you don't want grandma to have to eat cat food and die in the street.
I get it.
You don't want bridges to collapse for infrastructure.
That's important.
Bridges collapsing.
That's bad, right?
You want people to be able to afford college?
Yeah, you know, that sounds great.
You know, paid family leave.
Oh, moms can stay home with their babies?
Well, that sounds good.
Of course, they could just save up and do that anyway.
Or have a husband.
Well, come on, Steph.
Let's not get crazy there.
You know, bolster pensions, you know, youth initiatives, you know, create jobs, young people having jobs and working.
That sounds good.
You know, if I didn't understand economics, and it took me a while to understand economics, because again, this isn't taught in schools, you know, all this stuff sounds great on paper, but when it comes to practical reality, it's just not possible.
For the government to do this in a way that's not going to completely obliterate other aspects of the economy, which will then need more government programs.
There's no more permanent solution to a problem than a government program that just creates more problems, which then needs another government program and yada, yada, yada.
So, I mean, I understand the appeal of Bernie Sanders, and he's talking about, you know, he came out and defended Edward Snowden, which is in stark contrast to Republican candidate Donald Trump and some of the other people that call Snowden a traitor and, you know, call for – I think Trump actually said – I don't know that he said – I
certainly appreciate that, and I understand that perspective.
So there's a lot of things that Bernie Sanders says that sound very attractive, but when it comes to economics on paper, none of this stuff is going to work, and it's going to create a whole lot more problems, and all the stuff that you want, more people who have health care, old people who have social security, you're going to get the exact opposite of it, because, old people who have social security, you're going to get the exact opposite of it, because, well, have you found a government program that actually achieves anything close to its Not really.
Mike, I would like to correct you on one thing.
Sure.
You don't need any knowledge of economics to know that resources are finite.
I think that they teach you that in physics, I think.
I didn't have a physics course in high school.
No, come on.
They teach you that in called You Get an Allowance.
No, but you don't need any knowledge of economics to understand that someone is going to have to pay.
I'm really trying to empathize and understand the Bernie Sanders support.
Oh, I know that.
I'm trying.
I'm really trying.
It's a bit of a stretch for me.
That's just what I'm saying.
A bit of a stretch.
Everyone knows there's a debt, right?
I mean, if they can follow the arcane ramblings on foreign policy that these people went through, they must know that there's such a thing as a debt and that it was not addressed.
That's...
But that goes against the whole political narrative that will give you something for nothing, which is as true on the left as it is on the right.
Well, it's fascinating that most of the candidates, and Bernie Sanders specifically, he's the one that brought it up the most, are very, very concerned about climate change.
Some of the candidates, when asked, what's the most pressing issue, the most important issue facing the country from a national security standpoint moving forward, some talked about international stuff, but Bernie Sanders said climate change.
And You know, wanting children to grow up in a world and have it be habitable in the future.
Even if you accept the climate change narrative, which I don't, and there's a lot of evidence to suggest that it's nonsense.
You can look for other videos on this channel for more information on that.
But if you're concerned about creating a future world that's habitable for our children, how about not racking them with trillions and trillions of dollars of national debt?
We talked about debt in the form of college student loans being crippling to people.
Well, we're just throwing it on their back in the form of government debt as well.
That kind of counts.
You can't get a do-over when it comes to government debt.
You may be able to give people, you know, well, you can refinance your college student loans if I get an office.
Okay, well, that sounds great on paper, but you're not going to be able to continue to refinance all that government debt.
At some point, the bill is going to come due, and if it's not tied to, you know, Billy Bob who went to college, but it's tied to Billy Bob because he owes that share of national debt, his future is not going to look so great even if we solve a climate change issue.
He's not going to live in a prosperous future.
So all this concern about children and the future for climate change, No one cares about them in the standpoint of national debt, and it's just kind of maddening.
Oh, I mean, this is what it is the case for me, at least, watching any political spectacle, is it's a desert of crazy with the occasional oasis of sanity.
Like, against the Iraq War.
Good on you, Bernie!
You know, opposition to the war on drugs.
I can be down with that.
And some of the other stuff, the disgust against the influence of Wall Street in politics, fantastic.
But then, how on earth do you get to love Barack Obama, who took, as a presidential wannabe, the most money from Wall Street that anyone's ever taken in the history of politics, and that's saying something?
Well, and Hillary Clinton, whose foundation was taking money from foreign governments while she was still Secretary of State, you know, and you're saying this stuff next to her without immediately drawing the line from corporate interests and people in foreign governments to Hillary on the stage.
That's a bit much.
Well, and...
But Bernie Sanders, when he says...
And this, honestly, this is the part that stuck out for me most in the entire length of the debate.
when he said, "Without drastic action, the planet is going to be uninhabitable for our children and their children." of all, if it's uninhabitable for your children, you don't have to worry about their children.
So logically, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
But that is a first of all, even the worst estimates from the climate change experts do not have the planet uninhabitable in 30 years.
Like there's this, the whole planet, it's just turned into Venus in 30 years.
And And that level of extremism strikes me as, and saying something like that, and no one calling him on it, saying, let's not get crazy here.
That is incredibly dangerous and a very destructive thing to say because it takes the enthusiasm and the energy out of young people.
Like, why would I go to college to live on Venus?
You know, I mean, be responsible.
Don't smoke, kids.
Get your exercise and make sure you stay healthy because when you start snorting sulfuric acid when the wind blows from hell itself, you'll need to be fit as you die.
I mean, that is incredibly deflationary to people's ambitions and expectations.
I mean, what the hell is the point of going for college if, you know, I might as well sit here and smoke drugs if it's the literal end of the world in 20 or 30 years?
That is incredibly dangerous.
And the fact that he would say something like that I mean, he is, of course, you know, just this – he's the worst combination because he's a complete curmudgeon who looks almost exactly like one of the guys in the balcony in The Muppet Show.
But he says he's a well-armed curmudgeon because, you know, curmudgeons are just like, get off my lawn, right?
And he's like, get off your lawn.
I just gave it to some voters.
And that is really some dangerous stuff.
But the fact that he would go this crazy means that he is dangerously mental at a very fundamental level.
To be fair to Bernie, though, if he was not allowed to be crazy, his whole campaign goes out the window.
Well, they did actually ask him the question, can a self-professed socialist be elected president?
Is that possible?
Does that work?
And then somehow the phrase casino capitalist was invoked like 800 times.
And I'm like, who is he talking about?
Is he talking about the Fertitta brothers?
Is he talking about Trump?
Who are we talking about with casino capitalists?
But I guess that's the new buzzword term for people that make money.
I, you know, I gotta, I'll diverge with you a little bit on this one because, you know, we talk about crony capitalism, crapitalism.
Casino capitalism is another way of doing it, a way of saying it.
And I think, to be fair, there is, there are a lot of people who make a lot of money doing some very unproductive or negative stuff in the modern economy.
Lending to governments is one of them, right?
They lend a bunch of money to the government and it gets burned out of the general economy, right?
I think the latest estimates is they're making 78% more than private sector workers.
We gambled a whole bunch.
I mean, admittedly, they were forced to by the government in some ways, but the bank bailouts of 2007, 2008, 2009...
But ran into the trillions.
And so the too big to fail, the too big to jail kind of stuff, I think there is some legitimate resentment.
Of course, the answer that more government power is the wrong answer.
But I think that there is a sense of resentment towards people who are making money.
Not by lending money to businesses that can fail, but by lending money to governments and getting bailed out when lending money to private individuals fails.
Oh, of course.
But just saying the word casino capitalist or crony capitalism doesn't actually change anything.
And if the solution is just tax people more, well, we see what happens in that case.
They just move their business overseas to a place with a lower tax bracket.
I mean, Donald Trump frequently is talking about this in the campaign.
He's never going to eat another Oreo as long as he lives.
Because apparently Nabisco, which is I think the group that makes Oreos, is moving to Mexico or something of the sort.
So you're just going to get that type of thing.
And yes, on Wall Street, you do have a little more control because Wall Street is centralized in the U.S. You can't tax those profits.
But there is no firm plan in place or anything other than invoking this word of casino capitalist.
And there was a lot of talk around the banks and the banks being too big to fail and bank bailouts.
And, you know, that's an important conversation to have.
But in that conversation, nobody is talking about the biggest bank and it being too big to fail, which is the Federal Reserve and all this money printing that's going on and the control of interest rates and everything along those lines, which, given that Bernie Sanders wants to spend trillions and trillions of dollars on all types of programs, He's going to have to finance that, often through inflationary monetary supply measures.
And the Federal Reserve is not too big to fail, but Goldman Sachs or other banks are and were.
So that's a big thing that's being overlooked in this discussion when it comes to too big to fail and corporate issues.
Sandris was talking about we need fewer people put in jail and we need to spend more money on education.
Now, there's so much implicit admission of prior fault in all of this that only people lost in the bubble of now could fail to see the pattern.
Because he's basically saying, well, education is not doing a good enough job.
The government education is not doing a good enough job, so people are ending up in jails.
And that's kind of a pretty strong condemnation of public schools.
That they're so terrible that people are becoming criminals as a result of exposure to public schools.
And again, everyone cheers like, yeah, let's spend more in public schools because we want fewer people in jail.
But there is that implicit explication of that relationship that government schools are driving people into jail.
Whether that's true or not, but again, people just don't even seem to...
To really notice that relationship.
They keep saying, oh, well, there's this terrible stuff that's happening, and this government is doing this terrible stuff.
It's like, you all have been part of the government for decades, for the most part, so aren't you just the head of Pepsi, who's been the head of Pepsi for 30 years, saying Pepsi is a really horrible company that poisons people?
Where were you last yesterday?
Oh, I was the head of Pepsi 10 years ago.
Oh, yeah, I had a Pepsi.
This is not just shooting yourself in the head.
Of course, there's an implicit condemnation of public school teachers as well, because if immigrants from the third world are outperforming Americans, even though Americans are able to spend much more on education, what does that say about these lovely American teachers?
But of course, you cannot offend the teachers.
You see, Stoyan, the schools are terrible and we're not educating our children properly, but the teachers are awesome and great.
Nothing wrong with the teachers.
No problems at all.
They just need more money.
That's it.
It's the air conditioning, I think, that's the problem.
Oh, the windows!
It's the windows!
The vents!
The vents!
They need colored chalk.
That's the solution.
Get that colored chalk and test scores are going to go through the roof.
Now I did do, and I can't do too much fact checking on this stuff because it makes my brain want to go to Costa Rica.
So Sanders, almost all the new income and wealth is going to the top 1%.
So that's his contention.
He appears at the kindest and most charitable explanation to be relying on outdated data.
So in the first five years, Of what is euphemistically called the recovery, like 2009 to 2014.
The richest 1% of Americans got 58% of the income growth.
And that's according to a University of California economist.
And so that's not almost all.
It's more than half, but it's not almost all.
However, in the first three years of the recovery, the richest 1% got 91% of the growth in income.
Now, part of that, of course, is because there were massive bailouts.
So, funny if you give trillions of dollars to people how they end up with a lot of money.
I don't know how that works, but it's something to do with that.
Funny how when the tide comes in, the tide comes in.
But what happened was there was, in 2013, there were huge tax increases that went to the wealthiest Americans.
So, of course, Naturally, the companies paid out their big bonuses to their highest paid employees before 2013.
And then those bonuses fell back in size in 2013.
And so it was government intervention in terms of having huge tax increases.
And that's why they were trying to save their money from the huge tax increases.
2014, the bottom 99% finally saw their incomes rise 3.3%, which is the most it's increased in 15 years.
So, of course, his implication is that it's somehow the free market, that all the new income and wealth is going to the top 1%.
But that's a combination of impending tax increases, government action, and massive bailouts, government action.
So, again, but the implication is we need more government action to solve the problems caused by previous government action.
I think the phrase was actually save capitalism from itself at one point in the debate.
Yeah, rein in the excesses of capitalism, you see, because the government, American government in particular, It never goes through those kinds of excesses.
It never needs saving from itself.
And...
The fact that in the government, which signs terrible trade deals, pays $100 billion to Iran to get nuclear weapons, starts wars, bails out banks, requires a third of Americans to have a license to even have a job, and spends vastly out of proportion to its income, that it looks across at a couple of people trading freely and says, well, that's where the excess is in.
A lot of excess over there.
It's like, holy crap.
I mean, this is like...
One of the god-awfully fat French kings looking at a skinny guy farming saying, hey, that guy's got way too much food.
You know, we haven't talked much about...
We talked quite a bit about Bernie, not a ton about Hillary, and none about the other three that were on the stage.
I was curious if I could get your thoughts on the other three gentlemen.
First off, Michael O'Malley, who came on the stage, was a former Baltimore governor.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And still smells of cordite and gunpowder and black death.
And children's candy.
When you're trying to get elected presidents based on your experience as a Baltimore mayor and any success there, given that it's currently a steaming pile of wreckage, you're going to have some challenges.
But he, you know, he said his soundbites very well and he looked very polished, I will say.
Yeah.
I like to get things done.
Yeah.
I like to see both sides of the issue and work to the...
Oh, God.
Oh, just the empty phrases, you know.
I'm into what works, not what doesn't work.
Really?
Can you give me an example of someone else who's not?
I hate stuff that works.
I like to piss in the wind.
Well, you know, the biggest thing that he said that really does confuse me, in the same sentence, he said, our country is doing better.
We're creating jobs.
And then he talked about poor families are now poor, less money.
They're getting less money than they were 12 years ago.
And it's like, aren't those in direct competition with each other?
Our country's doing better.
We're creating jobs.
Okay, so if we're doing better, we're creating jobs.
Shouldn't the poor families then be doing better and have more money?
No, poor families are still poor, making less money than 12 years ago.
It's just like...
Okay, which is it?
Well, are they talking about poor employed families or are they talking about poor families on welfare?
That was not specified.
That's a pretty big question because, you know, the poor families on welfare, their income is dependent upon the government.
So if they're not doing well, that's the government.
I mean, once people find a poor family that's working hard, I guess we'll talk about that one.
Which is not a ding against poor families.
It's just that we did a presentation, The Truth About Welfare.
We talked about the welfare cliff.
You can check it out here.
Webb, he's the ex-Marine, right?
Yes, he's the ex-Marine.
Do they basically teach them how to narrow their eyes in that Clint Eastwood manner?
Because it's really impressive.
That's got to be like nine-tenths of basic training.
Look here, narrow your eyes, and speak with a slight growl.
I mean, I thought he was great.
I just don't know what he was doing there.
It's like he was on the wrong debate stage.
I have a theory, and the theory goes something like this.
They found a Republican.
They brainwashed him by playing Bernie Sanders speeches over and over again.
And then they set him loose.
And that's how they came up with Webb, because, frankly, he was more Republican, or at least seemed more Republican, than a lot of Republicans during the Republican debate.
So I'm not exactly sure what he was doing there, but hey, at least he had a foreign wife.
Actually, at one point, it got brought up that he called affirmative action state-sponsored racism.
It's like, wow!
Not expected to hear that on a Democrat debate stage.
Not enough Bernie Sanders speech.
And that was actually in reference to Ann Coulter's point, which is, you know, affirmative action is for black Americans because of slavery.
So even if you're pro-affirmative action and you think it's really important, it doesn't make sense to expand that to other groups because the reason affirmative action exists is because of slavery and what black Americans went through.
So, you know, giving it to, say, Asians or giving it to Hispanics doesn't make sense given what...
Or even blacks from Haiti.
Yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah.
So, you know, I wasn't expecting to hear that.
You know, he's the one person that talked about cyber warfare from China as like a thing, which, you know, if you've been following the news at all, and it's not like this is frequently talked about, so you might have missed it even if you were.
That seems to be a big issue moving forward is the amount of cyber warfare going on and the fact that all this information is continually being compromised by foreign governments, people that are embedded in secret missions and involved in the security departments.
Just all their information, medical stuff, social security numbers, all that.
Yeah, it may have been compromised.
An email or two.
Well, Hillary Clinton talking about Edward Snowden and getting very upset that Edward Snowden leaked this information because he could have just gone through the normal channels to be a whistleblower and he leaked this information.
You know, very concerned about him leaking information that might have a negative impact on the security of Americans moving forward.
And it's just like, your server was in a bathroom in New York City.
For God's sake, I cannot believe this woman is saying these words, even by the standards of politics, modern politics.
My head just exploded when she started going through that.
Server in a bathroom gives new meaning to the term data dump, but...
Did she wipe it or not?
Let's talk about Clinton for a sec.
Don't let me go there, guys.
I need you to shoot a grappling hook into my leg and pull me back from the Clinton darkness.
I was as transparent as I know how to be.
That is a terrifyingly true statement.
Yeah.
Because Clinton, of course, says, oh, it's partisan, it's not an issue.
Of course, Obama said, no, it's a legitimate issue.
They've since walked that back a little bit, by the way.
Of course they have, but not because of anything real.
And so she said, oh, I handed over all work-related emails to the State Department.
Nope.
And a committee later found emails between Clinton and Blumenthal and David Petraeus, not included.
She said, oh, I turned over my emails in response to a routine request.
State Department made a form of secretaries.
Nope.
And the request for all the emails was triggered by the revelation she had a private server.
She said, oh, I never received a subpoena for the emails.
False.
Someone has publicly produced one.
It's not true.
She said, oh, I only used one email device, and that's why I had to...
Nope.
And she had at least an iPad and a BlackBerry.
She said, oh, I emailed a lot with my husband, and that's why they're personal, right?
Nope.
Bill Clinton, a spokesman, said that Clinton only ever sent two emails in his life, both when he was president.
She said, oh, I never sent classified information on her email.
Nope.
Not true at all.
She said, oh, no, it was allowed.
I didn't break any rules.
Nope.
Nope.
It violated the record retention requirements of the Obama administration.
And the chief transparency officer at the State Department, whom I'm sure his name is Casper, said the arrangement was, quote, not acceptable.
She said Blumenthal's emails to her were unsolicited.
It's not true.
So it just goes on and on.
This is, and Sanders, of course, doing the White Night Mangina human shield.
Americans are sick of the emails.
They don't care.
They want to move on.
We want to talk about real issues.
Woo!
And everyone, everyone in the building stands up and claps.
Like, yes, you know, you have a grill on stage.
It is a real issue because it does speak to character.
It does speak to integrity.
It does speak to the sense that you're above the law.
It is something that is important.
And of course, Hillary Clinton, before she was fired, from the prosecution of Nixon was involved in prosecuting Nixon for something far less important than this and if you look at what happened with Petraeus with regards to his mishandling of classified information I mean the guy's life was ruined And so it is an important issue because it's something that's a little easier for people to understand than the machinations that go on between Secretary of State Clinton and Libya and Syria and all that.
When they got into that foreign policy stuff, it was just like word salad of I don't know what.
My intentions were and the outcome was and this happened and that happened.
But I think people can understand the email stuff and it is an important issue.
So the idea that it's just some partisan thing that is going on, I mean, it's partisan stuff generally doesn't get the FBI involved.
Yeah.
And, you know, even if you accept what she's saying at face value, which don't, but even if you do, it just suggests that she's grossly incompetent.
So she either partook in criminal behavior or she's grossly incompetent and opened up national security issues for America to just about everyone on the planet who is aware that there was a server in a bathroom.
Even accepting what she's saying is true, she disqualifies herself as being qualified for the office, just based on gross incompetence.
But we want to talk about the real issues.
I'm sure Nixon was saying that about Watergate, too.
Everyone keeps talking about this Watergate.
Can we talk about the real issues?
I'm sure if Hitler was alive, everyone brings up this Holocaust.
How about we talk about the real issues?
Like, no, that's kind of important.
Let's move on to race briefly.
Before we do, one comment I had.
I actually agreed with Bernie when he said that the American public doesn't care about emails.
They don't, because they don't care about the competence of their leaders.
That is all I had to add.
Well, her poll numbers suggest that some people care because they have been going down and down and down.
She actually lost 10 points over the course of, I believe it was a month recently, and Sanders is really starting to pose a legitimate threat in a lot of polls.
So I'm curious to see how this debate will impact that.
But yeah, there's a lot of people that don't care, but there's some that are starting to.
I find Democrats as a whole remarkably uncomfortable around issues of race.
Like, remarkably uncomfortable around issues of race.
There's more pandering from the Democrat Party to black constituents than anything, and pandering is discomfort, right?
And so when they say, let's talk about race, and let's give the conversation to Don Lemon, because hot potato, black man must catch it.
I just thought that was hilarious.
You know, it's like, let's talk about Scottish people.
Okay, we'll give it to a guy who's Scottish.
Brownskeeper Willie.
Oh man, it's like, it's crazy.
Oh, race, shit, let's cut to Don.
And now that was the only time that Don Lemon got a word in Edgewise, right?
Which he barely did.
I think he pitched to the black Facebook question about, do black lives matter?
No, but this was the only thing.
Race, dawn, ask one completely nonsensical question, and then we're going to discard you for the rest of the debate.
Talk about your human black shield.
Race has come up.
Quick, hold up the dawn.
Okay, lower the dawn.
Race has gone by.
And do black lives matter, or do all lives matter?
Oh, God.
And I think it was Webb was the only guy who said, well, of course, all lives matter.
And Bernie brings up Sandra Bland, who's an activist who committed suicide in prison, and somehow this is police brutality.
It's a complicated story, but it's not as simple as, you know, these activist killings or black killings and so on.
They're always complicated, but everyone presents them as simple as, you know, white racist cops and all that kind of stuff.
And, you know, I mean...
There were no blacks on the stage.
There was a black on the stage at the Republican debate.
Right, Dr.
Carson.
And there were no blacks on the stage and there were no blacks asking questions except for Don Lemon who only got one stupid question about blacks.
I mean, that's pure tokenism as far as that goes.
And I just thought that was ridiculous.
Let's get the black guy up here to answer a stupid question about blacks which has nothing to do with economics and has nothing to do with foreign policy and is only about black activism.
And, you know, it's just like, oh, God, how patronizing and condescending could you all be?
Well, and...
What is the state of the world and what is the state of the Democratic Party when the answer to that question that's going to get the best response is saying, do all lives matter or black lives matter?
Well, black lives matter.
So if you're Asian, fuck you.
If you're Hispanic, meh, it doesn't matter.
If you're white, eh, who cares about it?
I mean, that just...
That just says so much about the culture in which we live currently.
He wouldn't just immediately be laughed off the stage and discredited as an individual from public life moving forward at all.
That he's pandering in that way, shape, or form.
Never mind the fact that he was accosted by two Black Lives Matter supporters, two female Black Lives supporters that essentially pushed off the stage at one of his speeches not too long ago.
Like, yeah...
That's what we need, something that can just be pushed around by a couple activists.
Good job, Bernie.
But Hillary Clinton was able to dodge the question.
She wasn't explicitly asked, so she kind of slipped through.
But everyone else except for Webb was just like, oh, Black Lives Matter, Black Lives Matter.
It's like, oh my god, that's the level of pandering that we're going to.
No one else matters.
It's important that we send your children to college for free and we give them health care, but their lives don't matter because only black lives matter.
What?
There's a bit of interesting history there as well because apparently Hillary earlier this year got in trouble for saying that all lives matter.
That's a controversial statement in 2015.
That is a controversial statement.
That is a controversial statement.
And O'Malley also got in trouble earlier this year when he said all lives matter.
And now he reversed his position and said black lives matter.
And I've got to say my jaw just dropped when they said that because when I first heard the question, I thought to myself, all right, this is easy.
Of course, they'll say all lives matter.
I mean...
You're a foreigner.
You don't get it.
I get that whites in America are quickly becoming a minority, but at the same time, they're a huge voting book.
You can't just say that their lives don't matter.
But they did, which is quite remarkable.
And all the white people clapped.
Yes!
Here's the thing.
This is my imitation of the planning for this debate.
Okay?
I'll keep it very, very brief and it will involve no French accents.
But here's my...
Okay, see.
Well, with the white people, we're going to talk about like foreign policy.
We're going to talk about spending.
We're going to talk about education.
We're going to talk about banking.
We're going to talk about campaign finance reform.
And this is for the white people.
And, you know, some of the Asians as well.
Now, when it comes to black issues, we're just going to tell them that they matter.
And then we're going to move on very quickly.
How, like, oh God, how condescending could you be?
That's the only thing.
Can you tell us we matter?
Okay, you go back to talking about the complicated things we don't understand.
Is that the perspective that they have of black people?
Oh, God.
Oh!
How insulting!
To give him some semblance of credit, I think it was Bernie Sanders that did bring up the black illegitimacy rate at some point in this discussion.
Oh, did he?
But it was very brief and moved on immediately, but at least that caveat was brought up.
I assume it's white people's fault, though.
That was never specified, but...
All right.
One could assume.
By the way, we mentioned Webb, we mentioned Omali.
There's one other guy who didn't mention, and for good reasons, because he was the ghost.
Lincoln Chaffee!
Lincoln Chaffee!
I'm sure he's a nice man.
I'm sure, you know, if he was your neighbor or something, he'd be friendly.
He'd loan you a cup of sugar or something.
But why was this man on the stage?
He'd lend you a cup of sugar, but you would have to look at his stamp collection from the 1920s.
So I think you'll go without the sugar, frankly.
But he has very high ethical standards and has never had a scandal.
Never.
Never had a scandal.
He was very, very sure that he wanted to bring that up.
And why has he never had a scandal?
Because no one has cared enough to even look at his record or anything that he's ever done.
It's very true that very few ghosts have a criminal record.
I will certainly grant him that ectoplasmic truth.
And apparently he was a Republican, and then he was an Independent, and now he became a Democrat.
It's just like, okay.
Anyway the wind blows.
Yeah, no kidding.
So Sander said...
Sorry, go ahead, say.
Chaffee was the guy who ended his political career by saying, you know, when I just got in power, I kind of made a mistake.
You know, I voted for something I didn't agree with.
Yeah.
Yeah, we just questioned on his vote.
It's just like, my dad died and they brought me into office to take his seat.
And it was the first vote I ever did.
So it doesn't count, right?
It's just like, oh my god, you're actually on the stage trying to audition for the presidency of the United States.
You're going to have to make incredibly difficult decisions in tough situations.
And you're like, but my daddy died.
Therefore, I get a do-over, right?
That doesn't count.
Are you kidding me?
I mean, you might as well just pull out a gun and shot himself on stage from a political standpoint.
But that's exactly what Clinton did.
Clinton said, oh yeah, no, I voted for the Iraq War, then I found out it was actually about a war in Iraq, so that was terrible.
Yeah, I voted for the Patriot Act, and then I found out there was all this bad stuff in it, so that was...
Yeah, but she didn't go like, well, I was distracted that day because Bill was in the closet with an intern, so I get a do-over, right?
I mean, she was at least poetic in her sophistry.
There's a key difference between how Hillary and Chappie Henry is Hillary never admits vote.
She never said I was wrong.
She never said it.
No, he's too honest.
Yeah, he's too honest.
Which, that tells you something.
I mean, that Clinton, who never admits fault as a strategy, and Trump, who very rarely admits fault as a strategy, are two people doing very, very well in the polls.
You know, like, actually saying, oh, you know, I messed something up, or I made an error of judgment in a certain situation this way, is a negative to the voting populace.
You know, unless you just show commanding strength and say, like, no, I did it, it's fine.
People are going to be like, oh, well, this guy, he does things wrong!
He said so!
Like, yeah, show no vulnerability or weakness.
This is the voting populace.
No nuance.
We must just strong iron fist command.
We can't show any weakness.
That's pretty scary, frankly.
Oh, it seems to work pretty well for Putin.
Well, and having a giant terror network also, I think, is a bit of a backup for that, right?
Yeah.
But so Sanders, first of all, he says we've got to raise the minimum wage to $15.
Turns out, rut-ro, turns out that he pays his interns $12 an hour.
I need the government to save me from myself.
I want to force people to pay people $15 an hour.
I don't actually want to pay people $15.
I don't know.
That's natural.
But he was basically saying college is like high school 50 years ago.
So he's basically saying, well, there's a minimum amount of education you need to survive in society.
College is like high school 50 years ago.
And 50 years ago, high school was free.
Therefore, college should be free.
Okay, that's an interesting argument.
It does kind of obscure one basic fact, though, which is that high school is a lot worse now than it was 50 years ago.
That, I think, is sort of an important thing.
We need to put on more free government education because the existing government education that is free sucks.
After 12 years of being educated by the government, you're not worth $15 an hour after 12 years of education, so we need to artificially raise wages there.
Like, are you kidding me?
And it's such the party of the absent dad that I couldn't I couldn't help but see that repeated over and over and over again.
Because I sort of...
I would go back like 100 years or 50 years even and you'd say, okay, so what do they want to give people?
Well, they want to give people free healthcare.
Well, you know, when you had a mom staying home with the kids and you had a dad working, the dad would pay for healthcare and healthcare was way cheaper 100 years ago than it is now.
And...
They want kindergarten and pre-K and early childhood education.
Well, that used to be something that the nuclear family would provide.
The mom would stay home and, in general, the dad would go to work and pay for college.
Well, in the past, the dad who was working and maybe the mom, if she was working at that point, would pay for college.
This sort of goes on and on and on.
It seems to me that, as we've talked about in the show before, the government policies have shredded and disintegrated the nuclear family.
And so now the government has to rush in and provide to the children and to the wives in particular all that the nuclear family used to provide.
And this will be your husband kind of stuff is really, really powerful for a lot of people.
And it's almost beyond choice.
It's beyond, well, I can choose between the Republicans and the Democrats.
Their lives have been set up in such a disorganized way.
And in such an economically unproductive way, they have no choice, really, but to vote for these kinds of policies.
And the cheering is relief that their disastrous life decisions are going to be backstopped.
And this to me, it's the big bailout.
It's the bailout of the disintegrated nuclear family, far more important than the bailout of the banks, because at least you bail out the banks once and they kind of go on their way.
This is a continuing and escalating voter base of, I have no stability in my family structure, so I need the government to provide me stuff.
And I just couldn't help, every single time, most of the issues came up, I just saw, well, who used to provide that in the past, and why do we need so much more of it now?
I think it comes back to the nuclear family.
Well, and a complete stripping of responsibility for people for winding up in bad places as well.
I mean, that was talked about with the Family Medical Leave Act.
It's like these women are being forced to go back into the workforce to make ends meet.
And it's just like, you know, it's not an accident when you have a child.
We do have birth control these days.
So people make the decision to have a child when they can't financially afford a child.
And then do they have to go back into the workforce?
Hey, maybe they still have things that they could downsize.
Maybe they get a smaller house, go into an apartment.
Maybe there's other things they can do.
But no, they're forced, you see.
They're forced.
No choice.
In the matter here, when it comes to planning and having a family, you're forced to go back to work.
So we must, you know, pay or hold a gun to the head of employers, which it's going to be great for small business owners that are just scraping by to now have to pay for employees that are going to want to get knocked up and have a family.
I mean, again, it sounds great on paper.
Yes, moms staying home with their kids, that sounds great on paper.
But what you're just going to have is a whole lot of business owners deciding not to hire people because now this policy is put into place.
And, you know, the stuff with college and healthcare, it's like, yes, college?
Why is college so expensive?
Well, you have these things called licenses.
And in order to get a license, you must have a degree.
All these government-created barriers to entry in various fields to the point where if you want to do something, like even places, you know, it's a common meme and a joke on the internet, like some places you need a license to braid hair.
It's like, yes, and if you braid hair without a license, they will arrest you and put you in jail.
If you remove these artificial barriers, maybe college wouldn't be that expensive.
But you get all these people herded in there, and you're giving them government-subsidized loans, and now we want to forgive those loans or refinance them because people made decisions to get degrees that are completely economically unproductive.
Someone who went to school It's not a mystery that this is not going to offer lots of financial benefit in the market when you escape college.
This is not a mystery.
This is not a new development.
But these people that made these bad decisions went tens of thousands of dollars into debt to get something that's completely economically pointless.
Now, instead of holding them responsible for their bad decision and letting them serve as a warning to other people to make better decisions in the future, we're going to absolve them of all responsibility and say, oh, we're just going to let you refinance your loans on the taxpayer's dime so you don't have to – you get a do-over.
Well – Okay, you get a do-over.
That's not great.
And that's another bailout.
Because instead of them going bankrupt, well, of course, you can't discharge student loans even in bankruptcy.
Well, and it's a bailout of the colleges as well.
College debt, student loan debt is one of the few things you can't discharge in bankruptcy currently.
Man, wouldn't that be something if that law was changed?
And colleges had to take into consideration who they accepted into their college if they would be able to pay back their loan.
And if the degree that they were getting was something that was economically productive enough for them to have a job in the future to pay back that loan, that might change the setup and system a little bit.
But instead, we're just going to absolve and refinance this debt and the taxpayer's dime and continue to subsidize the colleges who continue to jack up fees because they can.
It's pretty simple.
They do it because they can.
So here's another government created problem that we're going to throw a government solution at it that doesn't address the original problem.
And you mentioned health care a second ago and absolving people responsibility for health care.
It's very difficult to bid for healthcare out of state.
Why is that?
We're in a global economy.
We're told this multiple times.
We're in a global economy, the United States.
There's lots of federal laws, but you can't bid to say, I'm in New York.
If I want to go to a health insurance company in Arkansas and try and get coverage, it's very, very difficult.
So why do we have these artificial barriers drawn up across state lines?
Well, because the insurance companies really love it.
And what is Obamacare?
It's one of the primary tenets of Obamacare is these state exchanges, which you have to have in state insurance companies.
So essentially, if you are one of the big insurance companies, and there's not many of them in each state, folks, they kind of have monopoly privilege in many cases, they can charge whatever they want.
And the insurance companies are making a lot of money.
They love Obamacare.
They love it because it reduces the competition they have to face.
So instead of addressing that, which is one thing Trump says, by the way, which he completely gets right, is these artificial barriers on state lines when it comes to bidding for insurance.
You know, instead of dealing with that, we're just going to give Medicare to everybody.
Well, how come insurance isn't working?
It's not working because of all these barriers and the fact that you have to cover pre-existing conditions so people don't bother getting insurance until...
They are sick.
I mean, this is just common sense along the way.
Not to mention that there's so many healthcare costs because of regulations and liability issues for absolutely absurd stuff, so insurance for doctors is completely through the roof.
There's just so many problems on top of problems on top of problems and trying to manage the effect of those problems without going to the root of those problems, which more often than not are government laws and regulations to begin with.
It's just madness at the highest level.
And it's absolving responsibility from the people involved.
Go ahead, Seth.
Well, they want to give, as far as I understand it, of course, if you're an illegal immigrant in America, you get free health care.
You get welfare.
You can often vote.
And even if you can't vote, your presence skews the demographics and causes some district rezoning.
You can't ask for proof of citizenship.
So, illegal aliens, all the illegal aliens coming in, estimates between 11 and 30 from some people, a million, are able to go to the polls.
And someone's saying they're going to give them free healthcare.
And free tuition!
Free tuition!
So, what on earth is the point of citizenship?
It's just this artificial barrier that you have to pay for when you can get all the stuff that you want without it.
When I first learned about that, I found this genuinely, and I'm pretty used to weird stuff around government, but I just found this genuinely that I think it was in New Jersey that they sued, illegal immigrants sued to get welfare.
It's like, what do you mean you sued?
You're no citizen.
You're there illegally.
And it's like...
People that broke laws are there illegally using the legal system to try and get free stuff.
America, everybody.
Slow golf clap.
And Republicans are demonizing hardworking immigrants.
Well, the reality is that immigrants are on welfare at significantly higher rates.
Illegal immigrants, in particular, are on welfare at significantly higher rates than the domestic population.
And that's natural.
Okay, so last thing I wanted to mention.
So Clinton says, I'm not running as a woman, fundamentally.
I'm certainly not running as a Clinton, despite the fact that it's Clinton, Clinton, Clinton, all over the place.
So the question was, why won't you be Obama 2.0?
How would you be different from an Obama administration?
And her first answer was, vagina!
Because I'm a woman.
You see, I'm going to take America from a sausage fest to a pastry shell.
I'm going to take America from having an Audi to an Innie.
And I find that fascinating because the whole point of a lot of the left stuff is to say that there is no difference between men and women, between the ethnicities and so on.
Women are perfectly equal to men.
But if she's going to run as a woman, then she's saying that she's going to bring something different to the mix because she's a woman.
Well, which is it?
A man and women fundamentally different and therefore having a woman president is going to be a big change?
Or a man and women the same, in which case, why would you even say that?
This is the back and forth that generally happens with this.
Women are better than men, but women and men are identical.
Okay.
Just clap, Stephan.
Don't think too hard about it.
And she was also asked with family medical leave right around this time, too, saying, like, you know, that's another big government program and stuff.
And her response, didn't address the original question, was, but Republicans, you know, they're all for big government when it comes to, you know, defunding Planned Parenthood and stuff like that.
And it's like, wait, and Actually, defunding Planned Parenthood would mean smaller government because you subsidize Planned Parenthood and give them money.
So in that situation, they're actually for smaller government, but it made a nice applause line.
And didn't she say when the moderator asked who are your political enemies that you're most proud to have gotten?
The Republicans.
She said basically a whole bunch of people, including the NRA and the Republicans.
So basically half the entire country is her enemy.
I guess, unlike most of Clinton's enemies, they're not going to end up packed in their own suitcase.
But half the country, and this is the same moderator who lectured Trump, oh, you've got to be a president for all the people.
It's like, so Hillary hates half the country.
They are her enemies.
And remember, Romney was secretly taped.
He said, well, 50% of Americans are never going to vote for me.
And that was a huge deal.
50% of, he just said, he didn't say they were enemies.
He just said, you know, a reasonable statement that 50% of the voters are not going to vote for him.
So we should really focus on those in the middle.
And that was a huge...
Oh my God!
He's excluding 50% of the country from having...
But he didn't say they were enemies.
Clinton has openly said here that half or more of the country are sworn enemies of her.
Oh my God!
I mean, how insane is that?
They should just...
I mean, most of the journalists didn't even stand up for Sheryl Crow's breathy, horrifying rendition of the National Anthem.
I mean, you hate America.
We got it.
You want to be Europe.
We got it.
But the fact that half of America are the enemies, and nobody called her on it, and none of the other candidates repudiated her and said, come on, Hillary.
What a great thing that would have been to say to Hillary, that is unconscionable, that you would view half of the country, not as people with different approaches to solutions, not as people with different ideologies, but you would view half the country as your sworn enemies?
And you think that you're going to do some sort of ruling or some sort of leadership while viewing half of the people in the country as enemies?
That is reprehensible.
They have different approaches, different perspectives, different arguments.
Sometimes their arguments are better than ours, right?
I mean, we're not always right and they're always wrong.
That's demonization, petty and immature.
But the idea that you would want to be leadership of the country while telling the country that half of the people in it are your sworn enemies should disqualify you from running a McDonald's, let alone the country as a whole.
And it was one of her biggest applause lines, which tells you what you need to know.
There's another Hillary Whopper in there, which should bring up as well, when she said, we lose 90 people a day to gun violence.
She left out the fact that two-thirds of those are suicides.
So, you know.
And two-thirds of those occurred while having to watch the debate.
By the way, just one question.
I'm not particularly clear on this.
Since when is suicide considered violence?
How do you violate your own desire to not get shot by shooting yourself?
Stop thinking.
Oh, yeah.
Look, if suicide is violence, I got allayed a lot in my early teens.
I'll let everyone dwell on that one.
Now, the interesting thing, too, is a lot more talk came up about Israel and all that in the Republican debate.
Now, of course, Bernie Sanders is Jewish and not like inconsequentially Jewish.
So how about asking Bernie Sanders if him being Jewish would affect his decisions regarding Israel?
I think that would have been an interesting question.
Are you saying there's a Jewish communist now?
A Jewish socialist?
Oh, my God.
Well, to be fair, a lot of Jewish capitalists, too.
But yeah, a Jewish guy on the left who is provoking class resentment.
I've never seen that before.
Except the entire 19th century of communist literature.
I just fundamentally want to know which rich kids taunted Bernie Sanders when he was a kid.
That's all I want to know.
Because when they said, well, 0.6% of Americans pay over 30% of the taxes, clearly that's not enough.
Do you even hear what you're saying?
Because I thought when they brought this up, again, naively, well, 0.6% of Americans pay 30% of the taxes.
Clearly, that's unbalanced.
It's like, that's not enough!
And again, when you look at the information that if you tax people at 100%, you're still barely paying for the current budget, let alone any of these future programs.
It just economically falls apart at every level.
Why does Bernie Sanders refer to himself in the third person?
He did that a few times, I saw.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Does he have a hand puppet in his pocket that's fellating him?
I mean, why are there two of him up there?
I don't know.
And also, no one goes to jail on Wall Street, Clinton.
You know, they're too big to jail, too big to fail.
Okay.
Well, how about prosecuting Bush for the Iraq War, for lying to the American public, for committing war crimes, for committing the international crime of aggression?
I mean, was that a little bit more important?
You know, there are, in fact, half a million or more dead from that.
Is that a little bit more important than who did what in the banks?
But, of course, that can't be.
You've got to focus all the hatred on Wall Street and avoid the complicity.
This was a war that she voted for that turns out to be, as far as I understand it, a war crime.
It was the initiation of aggression against a country which posed no imminent threat to the United States.
Of course, they said it did.
Everyone poses this as that, right?
But that, to me, was where the huge disconnect is.
And the idea that out of all of the incredible international crimes that the American government has been complicit in just over the last 10 or 15 years, the idea that the big problem is Edward Snowden, And again, this is where I like the Democrats.
This is the swing, right?
Which is, as one of them said, the courts have found that Snowden did nothing wrong.
And of course, only Hillary Clinton, as we talked about earlier, was concerned about secrets getting out.
The fact that she basically had open source invitation to Chinese hackers in her toilet.
But, yeah, I mean, the idea that the big problem is Edward Snowden.
And I love the fact, you know, again, Bernie Sanders, love the guy.
NSA, shut it down.
Absolutely.
No equivocation.
Of course it should be shut down.
It is a violation of the Fourth Amendment and it is wrong.
And, again, if you could just franken politician these people together, that would be fantastic, you You know, let's get some of the criticism of foreign policy that goes on on the left and the criticism of the war on drugs and the criticism of the expansion of the military-industrial complex and all that and merge it somehow together with the fiscal conservatism on the right.
You'd get, well, I guess you'd get the libertarians, right?
Which is the idea behind that.
Yeah, classical liberals is probably a better way of putting it, but man, you've really got to pick your poison with these guys.
Before we move on from Clinton, I just want to say, you know, Clinton talking about people escaping prosecution is rich right now.
I mean, like, the irony is thick as those words escape her mouth.
Not only because of her actions, but her husband.
I remember there was something there as well.
Yeah, I mean, she talks about basically having a vagina in the chair of the Oval Office.
I think under Bill Clinton's reign, that did happen fairly often.
and there just happened to be a penis on top of it.
So are we going to do another one, do you think?
These are a bit grueling to get through.
This one felt long.
The first Republican debate felt long too, but they wanted to stuff commercial time in there.
But it felt long to me.
And I know there's a bunch of stuff like gun control we didn't really touch on, but it felt long.
Folks, if you want us to do the next Republican, next Democratic ones, let us know, because, I mean, frankly, it's not too enjoyable to watch these things.
I wanted to do the first Democratic one because the spectacle of seeing Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton interact.
We actually got to see Hillary Clinton live in, She was actually there.
I don't think it was a hologram.
She wasn't in a bike store hidden away from the press.
Oh, that smug smile every time she speaks, that smug Cheshire cat, self-satisfied smile is truly, truly grating.
And some of the other candidates, Bernie and Michael Malley, have been pushing for more debates, more debates, more debates, and that's pretty much been shut down by the Democratic Committee, which I imagine is in the pocket of Clinton.
You know, so she doesn't get exposed to much sunlight when it comes to getting asked questions.
And from just a delivery standpoint, she did a lot better tonight than I was expecting her to do.
You know, she still has that old Clinton magic liar, liar, pants on fire charm.
She was able to trow it out there.
But, you know, watching these isn't exactly...
How I'd normally spend my time and my interest in it is wiggling.
Oh, I mean, because we don't believe in this particular religion, so it's like watching a video of Richard Dawkins watching a video of a Latin mass.
So for us, it's not that easy.
Sorry, so you were saying...
I was just going to say that if people are curious, because the one big talking point that we haven't addressed yet is gun control, and they talked quite a bit about it, we do actually have a series of videos on crime, and one of them is particularly focused on gun control.
So we'll be talking a lot more about it, but let's just say that blaming guns is not exactly the right way to approach it.
And let's just also say That one of the big voting blocs for the Democrats is actually responsible for a lot of the gun violence.
But that is a pretty comprehensive presentation on that coming out in the very near future.
And one last thing to mention is a lot of people say, oh, you know, you're very critical of things, but you're not offering any solutions.
So I'd actually like to address that and tell people to go to freedomainradio.com slash free, F-R-E-E, and pick up the free book, Practical Anarchy, The Freedom of the Future.
It's an interesting book, which if you're looking for solutions in our thoughts on things, that's a good place to start in addition to the podcast series.
So there's some potential solutions for you.
Yeah, everyone says we don't have solutions just because they don't like our solutions.
Doctor, I'm fat.
We'll eat less.
Well, come on.
Give me a real solution.
Okay, exercise more.
Oh, come on!
Give me a real solution.
Something involving space aliens beaming away my subcutaneous fat and depositing it on Mars for Matt Damon to eat.
But...
Yeah, we have solutions.
People don't like them, for the most part, because they're a great challenge, but they are the real solutions, of course, in my opinion.
Thanks, everyone, so much for listening and watching.
We look forward to your feedback and comments below.
Let us know if you want us to put our hearts through the cheese grater of highly focused, laser-like, brain-scalding statism again.
And we will for you, the listeners who rule us all.
And freedomainradio.com to help out the show, of course.
