5-7-25 - 7am - CMAS Numbers, Aurora and John Fetterman

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Why didn't the Republican Party start a messaging campaign ten
years ago? And all they had to say was if
California politics were so great, why did you leave?

Speaker 2 (00:15):
Or why doesn't the Republican Party figure out a way
to articulate what I just spent.

Speaker 3 (00:23):
An hour doing in.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
You know, you could you could be spending money on
local television all across the state on the western slope
here on the front range, with just little thirty second
spots about some of these numbers, and you know, ended
with a tagline.

Speaker 3 (00:44):
I mean, just.

Speaker 2 (00:47):
Somebody more clever than I can come up to something
but a tagline, you know, thank you Governor Polis and
Colorado Democrats, because this there's a direct line between the
policies of this governor and I might add also his
husband and the Democrats that run the polit bureau.

Speaker 3 (01:07):
But I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:10):
We've got not you know, I And I was gonna
say we have an incompetent Republican Party, which we do,
but I'm willing to give Bretta Horn and her her
team a chance to see what they can do. I'm
not going to I'm going to jump all over them
until until I see what they can do.

Speaker 3 (01:27):
As as long as we're doing this.

Speaker 2 (01:33):
I hate giving statistics on air, but I feel obligated
to give you this one. This comes from Rochelle and
it is the It's from the Colorado Department of Education.
It is the Colorado I mentioned our the learning gap,

(01:54):
then I mentioned how we're not meeting the test scores,
and how oh we didn't meet any experts. This is
the Colorado Measures of Academic Success twenty twenty four State
achievement results English Language, Arts and Mathematics based on the
Colorado Academic Standards. Well, oh, well, I didn't realize that.

(02:16):
So all we need to do is just lower our
standards and then it'll exceed our expectations. You see, I
too can think like a Marxist. I too can think
like a dumbass democrat. Well, these numbers are so bad
that what we need to do is just change the standards,
lower the standards, and then when they take the tests,

(02:38):
then they exceed the standards and we all clap and
see the hall oliya chorus. You see, I could run
this state. I could think like a democrat and figure
out how to do this. So this is kind of
hard for me to blow up and read it in
one let me see if I can't expand this window
so I can see this better. Because I do I

(03:00):
do want to share these numbers with you because they're
absolutely frightening. See click over here expand. Okay, now these
are mathematic results by gender. I don't really care about gender,
although it is interesting. I care more about the numbers

(03:24):
percent that met or exceeded expectations in twenty twenty four
mathematics grade three. All right, So in twenty twenty four,
males only forty four percent of males met or exceeded
expectations of math scores for third graders, for girls only

(03:49):
thirty nine percent. So we not only have a a
achievement result gap, we get a gap between sex male
and female. Let's go to the fourth grade. Oh, fourth
grade is wonderful. Third fourth grade males only thirty seven

(04:10):
percent met or exceeded expectations.

Speaker 3 (04:15):
So we touched.

Speaker 2 (04:16):
We just need to change our expectations. I got the
problem solved. We could be at the top of the heat.
Just change our expectations. In the fourth grade among females
only thirty percent. Now I'm giving you round numbers here,
I'm not giving you the decimal points. Oh, let's go
to the fifth grade, where it's well, no, it's really

(04:37):
not any better. In twenty four, fifth grade males only
forty percent met or exceeded expectations, and among females only
thirty four percent. I'd say, girls, I'm looking as I
scan through here. Girls, you're fully if you've got a daughter, daughters, girls.

(05:03):
Females are behind males every single grade level sixth grade.
Surely it gets bare in the sixth grade males thirty
one percent, not even a third, but females barely a
quarter of them twenty six percent. So by the time

(05:27):
you get to sixth grade, you got to know some
basic math. And yet among girls in twenty twenty four,
twenty six percent barely a quarter met expectations and among
boys less than a third thirty one percent. Okay, let's
get to seventh grade. Now we're getting into junior high

(05:49):
or middle school or whatever they call it now in
twenty twenty four, among boys only thirty percent and among
girls only twenty eight percent. So, girls, by the time
you got seventh grade, you increased your expectations. You got
over a quarter percent, you got over twenty five percent,
but you didn't make a third. So you're still not.

Speaker 3 (06:11):
You know that nobody's made it to fifty percent. Nobody.

Speaker 2 (06:15):
You get to the eighth grade, boys are at thirty
three percent and girls are at thirty one percent. Wow,
nobody even got to a fifty percent. Nobody. And somehow
we're supposed to think that Colorado education is whooh, Colorade education.
It's it's it's it's the best of the best. Now, no,

(06:35):
it's not. It sucks easily, though, Michael.

Speaker 4 (06:37):
If you're looking at the chart, you can see, yes,
it has gone up from twenty twenty three to twenty
twenty four. And they do have a little chart over
on the side. They very end says the change from
twenty four to twenty they're twenty three to twenty four.
But they've also got a twenty nineteen number. And every

(06:59):
single number from twenty nineteen to twenty twenty four is
lower in twenty twenty four than twenty nineteen.

Speaker 3 (07:08):
Oh what it is, Yeah, every single one is lower.

Speaker 4 (07:12):
They're touting the fact that, hey, look, from twenty twenty
three to twenty twenty four, things are up, not by
a lot, but they are up.

Speaker 2 (07:19):
Well except except there is an except there's well, there's
a couple of exceptions. Oh no, I'm sorry, I've pulled
down too far. I'm down at I'm at English Arts.

Speaker 5 (07:28):
Yeah at twenty Nineteenooo.

Speaker 2 (07:32):
But among ethnicities, Asians improved, So you can draw the
stereotype there that among English and math Asians are improving.

Speaker 3 (07:44):
So we just need more.

Speaker 2 (07:46):
We need more Chinese and Singaporeans and Taiwanese and Vietnamese
or something. That's what we need, you know, family oranges.
Oh God, just so depressing. Well, as as long as
we're doing some Colorado stories, let's talk about Aurora for
a moment, because Aurora City Council members on Monday night

(08:08):
passed a new resolution that tells me that the people
that voted for it, there were four no votes. There
were four no votes. I don't know how many. How
many people are on the city council in Aurora, maybe nine,
I don't know, but there were four no votes. So
I can't say this about those four no votes. But
every person that voted yes on these resolutions on Monday

(08:31):
night on the Aurora City Council, listen up. You're a
bunch of cowards. You're absolutely cowards, and you don't deserve. Well,
maybe you do deserve because a bunch of dumbasses, and
Aurora voted for you, So the very people that voted
for you, they're dumbasses too. And guess what, you dumb

(08:53):
asses that voted for the people that voted for these resolutions,
they're scared of you. They're scared of you because they're
changing the public comment rules to limit how people can
speak to elected officials during council meetings. Hmm. Now, it's

(09:14):
always bugged me when when when I was in a
city council in Edmund, Oklahoma, and maybe we were just idiots,
but we didn't have rules about how long somebody could speak. Now,
the mayor might occasionally intervene if someone's gone on, you know,
for an inordinate amount of time, and say you need
to wrap it up, but we wouldn't have like these

(09:37):
one minute or two minute little speeches. We would let
people speak their mind, and sometimes we were there till midnight.
But we felt like that was our obligation as elected officials,
that if the constituents wanted to come to a city
council meeting and talk to us, because they were and
generally it is about some you know, subdivision we had approved,

(09:58):
about some development we'd approved because at that time Edmund
was either the fastest or the second fastest growing city
in Oklahoma. So we had we see had what seemed
like dozens and hundreds of subdivisions or developments to approve,
and we would let people speak their minds about it,
because we generally wanted to hear what people had to say,

(10:19):
because when you're growing that fast, you want to make
sure you that you do your growth in a proper
way and in a way that the people want.

Speaker 3 (10:27):
So we would let them.

Speaker 2 (10:28):
Drone on and oftentimes it was droning, and sometimes people
would show up and they would have very specific and
able to articulate things, and we would listen to them.
But I guess today we don't want to do that.
We don't want to listen to the voters. So let's
see Francis or a council member, Francois Bergen, I don't

(10:53):
know whoever that is, propose the resolution which limits the
number of people who can stand at the podium them
to one and allows council members to attend meetings virtually
whenever they choose. So it's not like you had an appendectomy,
it's not like you've got pneumonia.

Speaker 3 (11:13):
It's just like, well, you.

Speaker 2 (11:15):
Know what, it's kind of chilly at it's kind of
drizzly and rainy.

Speaker 3 (11:19):
I don't want to go in today.

Speaker 5 (11:20):
Oh it's Tuesday. I don't feel like it.

Speaker 3 (11:22):
It's Tuesday, I don't feel like it.

Speaker 2 (11:24):
Or more likely, Dragon, oh we've got this ordinance coming up,
or we had this cop shoot somebody, or we had
a crime wave, or we've got ice arresting people.

Speaker 3 (11:40):
I don't want to show up and listen to people
bitch about it.

Speaker 2 (11:42):
So I think I'll just stay home and I'll just
I'll just appear on you know, just have a monitor
where they sit and just have them on the monitor
sitting at their chair. That way they can just you know,
maybe they could do a little tuban you know what
that is, Dragon, do.

Speaker 3 (11:59):
A little tuba in the MIDI.

Speaker 5 (12:01):
No, let's not.

Speaker 3 (12:02):
You don't want to go there.

Speaker 2 (12:03):
Oh you don't think they might be wanting to do
a little tuban mother in a council meeting, like.

Speaker 5 (12:08):
They're gonna get fired if they do.

Speaker 2 (12:10):
Well, exactly, no harm, no foul, right, just just don't
show it, all right, don't show it. So let's see now,
listen to this. This is this comes from Bergen, the
one that proposed the resolution. It's always one person at
the podium. That's just respectful. It's standard to have one

(12:31):
person at the podium. We've had a group of people
at the podium and that's just disrespectful. Oh so, let's
say a family wants to show up, or let's say
there's a victim. And I'm not talking about a minor victim,
because they're making an exception for a victim. I mean
for a minor. If there's a miner who wants to speak,

(12:54):
well they could have a parent or a guardian in
that special But let's say you're a grown ass adult
over the age of eighteen and you've been the victim,
or you want to speak about something and you want
somebody else there with You can't do it now, you
can't do it. You can't have your grand maybe or

(13:15):
maybe you're speaking on bath of your grandmother. Why you
can't do that either? Just one person.

Speaker 3 (13:20):
Now.

Speaker 2 (13:21):
I find that interesting because they say it's respectful to
have one and disrespectful to have more than one. Have
you ever watched a hearing at the Colorado polop Bureau.
Sometimes there's four or five people sending the podium sometimes
there's more. But in Aurora, no, let's see. Oh, there

(13:46):
was something in here about cops that, uh, somebody by
the name of Jackson. See, I don't know any think
about their horse, any council other than there are a
bunch of dumbasses. Quote this comes from somebody named Jackson.
There are armed officers throughout this room, referring to the
city council chambers. If this council was truly concerned about

(14:10):
public safety, you would be focused on reforming use of
force policies that disproportionately harm black, brown, immigrants and poor communities.
What about Asians? What about whites? Funny how you're worried
about disproportionately harming black, brown, immigrant and poor communities, you're
not concerned about whites or Asians. I don't get it.

(14:32):
But here's what bugs me about this point. If there
are cops in somewhere, it says the cops are busy. Oh,
although we have Bergen said, although we have police officers,
they're now having to watch ten to twenty people at

(14:53):
the podium instead of watching the audience. It is, in fact,
Bergen says, a safety issue. Okay, I've got a I
know this is complicated thinking. And I know this is
kind of advanced intellectual thinking. But if you're afraid that

(15:13):
the cops you have at the city council meetings are
too busy watching the people at the podium, then I
don't know, maybe I'm just a simpleton lawyer, but maybe
you should have more cops so some cops could watch
the podium and other cops can watch the audience, because oh,

(15:37):
it's so dangerous being a city councilman. Wow. You know,
if you're scared of being a city councilman and you're
scared of your constituents, and you really want one person
at the podium and you don't want, you know, a
group standing at the podium, and you know you're afraid
that the cops are too busy focusing on the people
at the podium and not watching you, watching out for

(15:59):
your then you know, maybe you shouldn't be a city councilman.
They're literally scared of their constituents. They are literally scared
to be a city councilman, and so they it's not
just if you're going to live with the number of
people the podium, but you're going to allow yourselves without
any notice to the city clerk. You just don't show up,
and so the clerk is calling the role and okay, well,

(16:22):
Billy Bob's not here tonight.

Speaker 3 (16:23):
Does he know where Billy Bob is? Oh, Billy Bob,
are you are? Are you on the line?

Speaker 2 (16:27):
Yeah, I'm here, I'm here. I'm on the line. I'm
staying home tonight because well I've had two me PBRs,
so I'm going to stay here at home tonight. Okay, well, Billy,
he'll be on the TV monitor. Now, Billy, does you
go tuban? Because we got some serious stuff to discuss here,
So don't be tuban while we're talking about you know,
crime or whatever's going on in Aurora. You know, Mayor Kaufman,

(16:51):
you got to have a comment about this. You ought
to say something about it. You ought to be a leader,
and you ought to talk about how if you're going
to be a city councilman, stand up and be a
city council and face your constituents. Wow, in Colorado, what a.

Speaker 3 (17:10):
What a shole place?

Speaker 2 (17:28):
Michael.

Speaker 1 (17:29):
I wish the FCC didn't have a stranglehold on your
profession because I feel that for you to truly get
your point across, you should be able to say uncensored
exactly what Colorado.

Speaker 2 (17:38):
Is these days, there are days when I have to think.

Speaker 3 (17:48):
Before I say it.

Speaker 5 (17:49):
Well, we can be uncensored once.

Speaker 2 (17:52):
Once, that's right, and actually we could probably be in Well,
you would never hear it anyway, because both me and
Dragon would immediately reach for the dunk button and you'd
never hear it because of the delay. And we probably
wouldn't get in trouble for it once because nobody would
know about it. Of course, let's Dragon went to squeal,

(18:13):
nobody would know what happened. But I don't want to
take those I don't want to take that chance. But
you know what I'm thinking. Yeah, now what I'm thinking
before I move on, because I want to talk about
John Fetterman. This text message drives me crazy twenty four
to sixty eight. Michael, have you seen the disruptions at

(18:36):
the Aurora City Council meetings the last few months? Watch
YouTube and you might see their reasoning. By the way,
there is spelled thh E I R not thh E
R E. So just say it. You know that that
kind of bugs me too. But here's what bugs me
about your about your text message. Uh, I've not seen
the YouTube channel.

Speaker 3 (18:58):
But I have seen.

Speaker 2 (18:58):
News reports about the ruptions. That's what the cops are for,
and that's what the mayor is for. If you're going
to show up en Moss at a city council meeting
and you're going to disrupt the meeting, you have forfeited
your First Amendment rights, and so then the aurora of

(19:19):
police department, at the order of the mayor. So Mayor Kaufman,
where are you. You ought to order the police department
to remove those people from the building. And if they
resist arrest, if they remove, if they resist being moved,
then you have probable call. You have right there, You
got probable costs to arrest them for resisting arrest. You

(19:42):
do that a couple of times, they'll shut up and
sit down, or maybe it'll become worse. Then you bring
in more cops. You escalate it. But what you don't
do is limit them from being there. I understand that,
I understand the disruptive. I understand why they're being disruptive.

(20:04):
I don't approve or condone it, and I think that
the responsibility for controlling that room belongs to the mayor.
And if the mayor's not going to control it, then
don't bitch it me and don't try to justify it.
Don't use these rules to justify limiting people showing up

(20:25):
for their city council meetings. Once again, you know, if
that's the equivalent of that's the equivalent of gun control.
That's the equivalent of saying that, oh, people are showing
up and disrupting, so we're going to just limit everybody
and kick everybody out of the room or allow them
to not show up. That's like saying, oh, I can't

(20:48):
openly or conceal carry a gun without a permit to
exercise my constitutional right.

Speaker 3 (20:55):
Well I have. I'm not even a citizen of.

Speaker 2 (20:57):
Aurora, but I have a right to show up at
that city council meeting. I have a right to show up,
stand there, and I have a right to speak. But
if I'm disruptive, I lose that right. So what they're
doing here is they're punishing the disruptors. And let me
put it in clearer terms, they're punishing everybody in order

(21:22):
to get to the criminals. All they've got to.

Speaker 3 (21:25):
Do is enforce the rules of decorum.

Speaker 2 (21:28):
All they've got to do is enforce the rules that
you can't come in there and disrupt the meeting, and
if you do so, you'll be removed, and if you
resist being removed, you'll be arrested for resisting arrest.

Speaker 5 (21:39):
That's just crazy talk. Michael, I know what am I
thinking about?

Speaker 2 (21:43):
You know, let me apologize for trying to be rational
only of course, twenty four to sixty right. Twenty four
to sixty eight rights right back and says Michael oops.

Speaker 3 (22:00):
Th h e I R.

Speaker 2 (22:04):
Not that I've ever done. That happens to everybody. But
when you're a grammar Nazi, you're a Grammar Nazon. You
can't help yourself. John Fetterman, I told Dragon I read
this story. I guess it must have been over the weekend.
The New Yorker had a story. It was a I
can't believe I got sucked into it, but it was
an in depth story in the New York not New Yorker,

(22:27):
in New York magazine about John Fetterman. Now here's my
take on John Fetterman. In the same world, he would
have stayed home and recovered from his massive, near fatal
stroke in twenty twenty two instead of running for the
United States Senate. But with the help of a bunch

(22:50):
of dishonest journalists, members of the Cabal, and their fellow Democrats.

Speaker 3 (22:56):
He actually won.

Speaker 2 (22:58):
Now, even though he's probably be worse at public speaking
than Joe Biden. And he kind of looks like young
Frankenstein's shiftless little brother or you know here, you can't
even reminds me of was it the Adams family that
had the big giant Lurch?

Speaker 3 (23:16):
Was that Lurch?

Speaker 2 (23:18):
I thought Lurch was the big tall guy, but I
thought there was the uncle that was kind of short
and side Fester faster. Yeah, he kind of reminds me
of Fester. A bit tall for Fester, but that's tall
for Fester. But he's got he's got the Fester shape.

Speaker 5 (23:31):
He's broad, he's broad.

Speaker 3 (23:33):
That's right.

Speaker 2 (23:35):
Now, as long as Federman is already in office, he's
already gotten elected. I won't pretend to disagree with him
when I think he's right. And I think, you know,
too many Republicans jumped on the Federman bandwagon when he
happened to be riding a couple of times, just like
a broken clock. But everything that he said about Israel

(23:57):
since October seventh, I happen.

Speaker 3 (24:00):
To agree with. He stands with the Jews against.

Speaker 2 (24:04):
The murderous terrorists who attacked them, and so do I. Now,
as much as I detest the way that Fetterman was elected,
my hat is off to him for speaking the truth
about Israel, no matter who doesn't like it inside the
Democrat Party, and boy, I'm telling you do a lot
of them not like it. They propagandized him into office,

(24:27):
and now that he's refusing to say the things they
want him to say, or that he's saying the things
that they don't want him to say, they're trying to
propagandize him back out of office. And it started with
that hip piece in New York magazine. Now here's the thesis.
Just bear with me, former and currents that this is
from the magazine. Former and current staffers paint a picture

(24:50):
of an erratic center senator who has become almost impossible
to work for and whose mental health situation is more
serious and compli cavid than previously reported. No, I'm not
talking about Joe Biden. No, no, no, no, no, this is
John Fetterman. No Joe Joe Biden. That that this is

(25:10):
not about Joe Biden. I know, I know what I
just said and what I just read. You could say woo,
who you talking about? No one is saying, the New
York magazine continues, No one is saying every controversial position parentheses.
For example, his respectful relationship with Trump closed parentheses. You

(25:31):
see that pisces them off. The fact that he went
to marl Lago to visit with Trump pisces them off.

Speaker 3 (25:40):
Let me back up, New York.

Speaker 2 (25:43):
No one is saying every controversial position parenthesis. For example,
his respectful relationship with Trump closed parend stems from his
mental health. But it's become harder for them to tell
which ones do. Many of the staffers I spoke with
are angry, They are troubled, and they are sad. These
were some of Fetterman's truest believers, and they now question

(26:06):
his fitness to be a senator. They worry he may
present a risk to the Democratic Party and maybe even
to himself. So into the reading. So do you see
how that works? Whenever Fetterman stumbled during the campaign, anybody
that noticed noticed was accused of ableism, or, as his

(26:30):
kind of weirdo wife put it, ableism. Hacks like kro
Swisher went from went after anybody, including other journalists, who
pointed out that Fetterman obviously had not recovered from a stroke.
But now he's become friendly to Israel, and even worse,

(26:52):
he's committed blasphemy among the Democrats because he's become friendly
with Donald Trump. So now he's the enemy. And then
we see crap like this, which is hard to hear,
but here's Fetterment on an airplane, sitting in first class.
He's in seat it would be two.

Speaker 3 (27:16):
Two A. So he's sitting in the aisle seat. No, no,
I'm say one A.

Speaker 2 (27:21):
He's sitting in the bullkit and he's having difficulty or
he's refusing to put on a seat belt.

Speaker 3 (27:27):
Captain comes out, is your seatbelt? Can you put your
seat belt on?

Speaker 1 (27:37):
Okay?

Speaker 3 (27:37):
He needs to be visible for me through at all times.

Speaker 4 (27:39):
That's not on that, that's not on, not thing.

Speaker 2 (27:41):
That's better. Now I think he's saying that I do
have it on, but he's got his typical hoodie on,
and of course his big belly and the hoodie are
covering up the seat belt and so they can't see it.
Those of us who are experienced flyers, like whenever I'm
flying overseas and I want to take a nap or
do anything else, always make sure if I get a

(28:01):
blanket or anything else, I put the seat belt over
it so I don't get, you know, punched by the
flight attendant. Hey, wake, come put your seat belt on. No,
it is on, and you can see it. And that's
what the captain's trying to convince him to do. Regulation.

Speaker 4 (28:14):
So it's okay, it's.

Speaker 1 (28:21):
Okay.

Speaker 5 (28:21):
So everybody just has to be visible to it through
at all times.

Speaker 3 (28:24):
I like that.

Speaker 2 (28:25):
I don't know if he knows who this guy is
or not. It's okay, buddy, I just need you tot
He calls the United States senator buddy. But I guess
if you're sitting there in shorts and tennis shoes and
your spiney little white legs and your bald head and
you got a hoodie on, uh, you might be called.

Speaker 3 (28:40):
Buddy by almost anybody.

Speaker 2 (28:42):
It's a federal regulation.

Speaker 5 (28:43):
So give your seatbelts on, mispastic right now. It's not visible.

Speaker 3 (28:51):
Anyway. That's betterment.

Speaker 2 (28:52):
Arguing with an airline pilot about his seat belt not
being visible over over his hoodie. Is he being arrogant?
Is he being entitled jerk?

Speaker 3 (29:00):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (29:01):
I think so, which separates him from the rest of
the Senate exactly how I mean. I thought that was
in the Constitution. You had to be an arrogant, entitled
jerk in order to be a United States senator.

Speaker 3 (29:16):
So if this happened.

Speaker 5 (29:18):
What hey, dragon, who's worse at hitting breaks?

Speaker 3 (29:22):
This dude or Martinez?

Speaker 4 (29:26):
Credit where credit is due. The Martinez Show is absolutely
terrible at breaks.

Speaker 3 (29:32):
Who tries to hit the brakes?

Speaker 4 (29:37):
I think everybody tries and I try, and you're better
at trying than they are better at trying.

Speaker 2 (29:45):
Okay, And in fact, I was going to break when
you interrupted me last time, and you have to admit
that's true.

Speaker 5 (29:53):
That's mostly true, yeah.

Speaker 2 (29:54):
Mostly okay, Well whatever you said. You know now you
sound like a Democrat. Now I want you to think
about that whole video of Fetterman being chewed out.

Speaker 5 (30:07):
Which you can see it, Michael says, go here dot
com bingo.

Speaker 2 (30:10):
Now, if that had happened during Fetterman's campaign, you know
that within twenty four hours or less, those same journalists
that are now trying to, you know, push him out,
would adocs the pilot. Fetterman would have been painted. He
would have been the victim. The Democrats made excuses him throughout.

Speaker 3 (30:29):
The entire campaign.

Speaker 2 (30:30):
But that stopped the minute he stood with Israel, and
it got even worse the minute he went to mar
A Lago. Now their hypocrisy, of course, is on purpose.

Speaker 3 (30:41):
They want you.

Speaker 2 (30:42):
To know they don't care about anything but their own power.
The message to Democrat lawmakers is a pretty simple message.
Will tell any lie necessary to get you elected, to
put you in office. But once you get there, you
owe us. The minute you screw up, the minute you
step out of line, we'll go after you, just like

(31:06):
we go after the enemy, which of course is us.

Speaker 3 (31:10):
Look look how.

Speaker 2 (31:11):
They turn on a dime to bash Biden after that
debate performance. As soon as the Democrat bosses made it
clear that Joe was a hindrance to their ambitions, that
they just abandoned everything, including him, George Clooney slipped the
first dagger between Joe's ribs, and then the rest of
the tribe turned on him like they turned him. They

(31:32):
turned him into a voodoo doll. Now they're trying to
do the same thing to John Fetterman, and the sad
thing is it'll probably work. The only thing that could
possibly hinder any of those vulturous Democrats is Shane. The
problem is that's an emotion they don't have. That's an
emotion they don't even recognize. It must really steam Fetterman's ego.

(31:54):
Knowing that none of those Democrats that all supported him
really dislike him to drag him out of office feet first
for the same reason they dragged him in feet first.
Nothing but just pure unadult rated power. By the way,
if you go read this story in New York magazine,
I think he's behind the paywall, but if you do
read it, you soon get the sense as you go

(32:16):
through it, Oh, disgruntled employee, first source, then a former staffer, Oh,
then another former staffer. Then it's friends that work with
they'm on a committee, or it's you know, some family
member or whatever. I honestly feel sorry for the guy.

(32:37):
I disagree with his politics, with the exception of Israel.
I feel sorry for him because of his physical condition,
and I don't think he should have run. I think
he is a disgrace. Speaking of decorum, I think he's
a disgrace to the decorum of the United States Senate.
You know, if you're going to get elected to the

(32:58):
world's most exclusive club other than former living presidents, then
you got to dress the part you really should dress
the part. But it does drive me batty that Democrats
are so blatant about just the raw use of power.
Holy crap. They they're truly despicable, but they're Democrat