8-23-25 The Weekend Hour 3: Fat. Just Fat. Oops, Can’t Say That.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
To night. Michael Brown joins me here, the former FEMA
director of talk show host Michael Brown. Brownie, no, Brownie,
You're doing a heck of a job the Weekend with
Michael Brown broadcasting life from Denver, Colorado. You've tuned into
the Weekend with Michael Brown. Glad to have you joining
the program today as I am. If you join the
program any day Monday through Friday too. The UH text line,

(00:20):
of course is always open. The numbers three three, one
zero three. Key word is Micha or Michael, as I have.
I'm begging you to go follow me on X at
Michael Brown USA. You know why I want you to
follow me on X because it's it's an insight into
when you post something or you comment on something that

(00:44):
I post. It gives me a real insight into what
you're thinking. Because people are on X twenty four hours
a day, seven days a week, some people certain time.
You know, you can go on and see when you're
the most active. If you're a a premium sub subscriber,
you can see your most active times. And I know

(01:05):
when I'm most active. And it's kind of odd because
I don't eat by myself a lot, but when I do.
I've always got my iPad with me, and what I do,
I'm either reading the newspapers or I'm on X reading
through and posting things and commenting on things that I see.
And it's a great way to get input from all

(01:28):
of you out there in radio land what you're thinking,
which is why I like to follow and read what
you post. Anyway, it's at Michael Brown USA, at Michael
Brown USA and on the text line. Some of you
have pointed out that it won't be these policies, although
I would lump our physical policy in with policies, It'll

(01:50):
be the national debt that'll bring us down. Will it
certainly cause an upheaval. Whether it brings us collapses us
or not remains to be seen. But democracy and democrats
are not going to collapse the United States, while they
themselves are at risk of completely collapsing, and I think

(02:11):
they are at risk of completely collapsing if they continue
down this progressive elitism of trying to force their socialist
Marxist communist policies on us, while at the same time,
which is just a natural result of these policies, of
taking away individual freedom and individual liberty that is so

(02:31):
inherently important to us surviving as a republic. As they
shed these moderates, one of two things is going to happen.
Either the number of affiliates of unaffiliated people will continue
to grow independent voters or Republican voters will grow well.

(02:55):
There could even be a third party emerge. I think
that's highly unlikely, though historically we know that that happens,
the Whigs being the precursor to the Republican Party, for example.
There's always a third party bubbling up somewhere, but it's
never really taken hold, and I'm not sure that it

(03:15):
could today. But I want to go back for a
moment to the Founding fathers. When the Founding Documents were signed,
Those brilliant, very young men were well aware that mass
democracy would not work, and so we had to figure
They had to figure out a way to balance that

(03:37):
so that mob rule didn't trample over the court rights
and then lead to as it naturally does, from mob
rule to tyranny. Mob rule always leads to tyranny because
and I think this is bear with me for just
a moment. When Trump sends the National Guard into the

(04:05):
District of Columbia, he does so to make a point,
and that is, if you increase policing and police presence,
crime tends to disappear. Criminals are like cockroaches. They don't
like the site of cops. They don't like the site

(04:26):
of law enforcement. So when you have community policing, when
you have a patrol car that is naturally going through
neighborhoods or patrolling downtown areas, the crime tends to scatter elsewhere,
and fairly soon. If you do policing right, you can't
you'll never reduce crime to zero, but you can reduce

(04:46):
it and push it away. And when you push it away,
they tend to start looking for easier spots. People will
argue that what Trump is doing is he's creating a
police state. I watch what he's doing, and I wonder,

(05:08):
you're surely surely kidding yourselves, because temporarily putting National Guard
troops on the streets of DC is merely showing the
District of Columbia and primarily showing Congress that the way
DC has been doing it is an utter failure, leading
by example. It doesn't mean they will always have National Guard.

(05:29):
In fact, we won't always have National Guard. They're only
authorized under statute to be there for thirty days and
then Congress has to either extend it or Congress has
to wake up and get off their lazy asses and
realize that they really should take back control of the
District of Columbia, shrink its size, and then they themselves
should govern it. There should be, as there already is,

(05:50):
a District of Columbia committee, but that committee should enact
the policies. All of the ordinances that govern the District
of Columbia and the District of Columbia of d C
ought to be returned to Maryland. Now most of what
was the d C and the Virginia side has already
been returned to Virginia. We ought to do the same
thing for the Maryland side, so that you primarily have

(06:14):
the area that encompasses, say, everything from the Kennedy Center
around through the White House up to the US Capitol
down through part of southern d C, where you've got
a lot of federal buildings that appear to be just
office buildings, but they're federal buildings that house things like well,
FEMA for example, is in is in an office building

(06:34):
on d C Southwest, and then up through the Memorials
around to the Arlington Bridge and the Memorial Bridge, and
that tiny little portion ought to be the District of Columbia.
Not make it a state, give it to the control
of Congress, which it already has, but just narrow the
size of it, and then make Maryland responsible for those

(06:55):
parts of downteap of downtown d C, like along Kay
Street where all the lobbyists are. You think they would
put up with those kinds of policies. No, the I
mean they are now, but they're remotely working. Return it
to Maryland where Maryland can be held accountable for that crime,
and then let Congress be held accountable for a smaller DC.

(07:19):
But anyway, back to the founding fathers, it's a well
known path that mob rule leads to tyranny, and democracy
is mob rule. We know they thought about this in
Federalist number ten. Madison again, Madison, all of these Federalists ten,
fifty one, sixty three, and fifty five. In Federalist ten,

(07:41):
Madison argued that pure democracy is vulnerable to the mischief
of faction. So the solution was elected representative legislators who
will refine and enlarge the public views. Now they're not
always very good at that, but it's better than the alternative,
Madison said. He emphasized the need for checks and balances

(08:03):
because neither individuals nor majorities can be trusted to always
act justly. Madison wrote that if men were angels, we
wouldn't need government. In other words, both mass rule and
elite rule requires constraints. That's why we ultimately adopted the
Bill of Rights to constrain the government. It's also in,

(08:29):
for example, in Article one. It's why the federal government
has limited and enumerated powers. These men were brilliant. That's
why this republic has lasted so long. In Federal sixty three,
Madison defended the Senate as a stabilizing force against the House,
because the House of Representatives, elected every two years, can

(08:52):
have sudden and violent passions. He wrote, and the Senate
with the term of six years ostensibly more delay. But
I don't know how true that is today. But they're
elected on six year terms, so they're a little more stable.
If we don't like what the House does, we can
throw them out in two years. And in fifty five,
Madison directly confronted the idea the people's wisdom when he

(09:17):
wrote that had every Athenian citizen been a Socrates, then
every Athenian assembly would still have been a mob. The
people's wisdom sometimes needs to be filtered, and that's what
a representative republic does. So what is undeniable in all

(09:39):
of this, I'll tell you about next. It's the Weekend
with Michael Brown. Text Lines open three to three, one
zero three, keyword Michael, Michael. Go follow me on x
at Michael Brown USA. Be right back. Hey, you're listening
to the Weekend with Michael Brown, and I'm really glad
that you're doing that. I appreciate you tuning in. Text

(10:02):
Line always opened three three one zero three, keyword micro Michael,
follow me on x at Michael Brown USA. So go
back to Madison. In the Federalist papers, democracy is vulnerable
to factions, the need for checks and balances because we
can't trust individuals, and we actually can't even trust majorities
to always act justly. So you need checks and balances

(10:24):
because if men were angels, you don't need a government.
Clearly we're not angels, and mass rule and ruled by
elitists requires constraints. So they wrote the constraints into the
Constitution in sixty three the Senate, which I want to
focus on for a moment, was supposed to be the
stabilizing force against the craziness of the House of Representatives.

(10:51):
Have you ever thought about it's like to be a
member of four hundred and thirty five members of Congress
that every two years have to run back to their
districts and try to raise anough money and get elected
and try to stay in power long enough that you
get to become a chairman, which is why they have
so many subcommittees, because everybody wants to be called chairman.

(11:11):
Four hundred and thirty five yahoos led by a speaker
whipped into shape by a whip that's the name of
the office, the majority and the Minority whip that go
out and try to whip up the votes for a
particular piece of legislation. I mean, it's a bunch of cats,

(11:32):
all operating independently, not as a team. And I don't
even mean opposing teams like Democrats and Republicans. In the House,
they all operate independently. Same is true for the Senate.
But there's a reason for that. I'll get to that
in a minute. The House was designed that way, which
is why we elect them every two years. Unfortunately, and

(11:55):
This gets back to critical thinking. Most incumbents, something like
ninety percent incumbents get re elected, and they get re
elected because well, it takes so much money, organization, time,
and energy to overcome incumbency that very few incumbents get defeated.
They can hand out all sorts of perks and freebies
and everything else, and they're always in the news. Why

(12:16):
do you think they're always clamoring in a twenty four hour,
seven day a week news cycle. They're always clamoring to
be on cable TV because those voters who vote in
primaries preclude any primary opponent from generally, you know, gaining
traction because they're the incumbents are everywhere, and they're always

(12:39):
saying the right things. Maybe not always voting the right way,
but they're saying the right things. And of course in
Federalists fifty five, as I said, Madison confronted the idea
of the wisdom of the people. And this is a
great quote. Had every Athenian have had every citizen of

(13:02):
Athens min a Socrates, then every Athens assembly would still
have been a mob. You know how it is when
you get four hundred and thirty five yahoo's together. Have
you ever looked at some of them. That's not the
right verb. Have you ever listened to some of them?

(13:26):
Because they're really stupid? I'm sorry, but they really are stupid.
They can't put together a coherent sentence, they can't put
together a coherent thought. How did they get elected? They
get elected because to my point, I do believe that
we have a horrible lack of critical thinking skills. We
have a horrible act, we have a horrible attention span.

(13:50):
Do you ever find yourself just being distracted because there's
so much going on around you? Well, that's probably how
they get elected. But what's undeniable is that the checks
and balances that Madison wrote about that are in the
Constitution have been eroded. And that started with progressivism, with

(14:12):
the seventeenth Amendment and the elimination of senators representing the states.
What should be the most other than national defense? In immigration?
What should be the most powerful government in our system
of government? I think it's the states. I think that

(14:35):
the fifty States should be the most powerful other than
national defense and other than immigration. But we've eroded that.
We've allowed the federal government to become so powerful. Who
represents Let me ask you, I don't care what state
you're in. I'm sitting in Colorado. Who represents Colorado in

(14:58):
the United States Senate? I don't think either one of
our senators do, because both of our US senators are
more concerned about individual problems than they are protecting the

(15:18):
rights of the state of Colorado from being infringed by
the federal government. So when we have direct election of senators,
they no longer represent the state of Colorado. They represent
everybody in Colorado. And you may say, well, Michael, that's
what I want, that's what you believe you want, because

(15:39):
that's what you've been taught to believe. Since the adoption
of the seventeenth Amendment, one person, one vote No. They
were supposed to be appointed by the state legislatures to
represent the states to protect the erosion of states rights
by the federal government. Away completely gone away. The Senate

(16:03):
is no longer a body elected from the states. Let's
not fool ourselves. There is no senator from Colorado. There's
a Colorado Senator, but he doesn't represent there are two
Colorado senators, but they don't represent the state of Colorado.
They're out trolling right now. The one who wants to

(16:26):
be governor is out trolling for votes from individuals, the
one who wants to be the US Senator who's currently
an an No, I take that back. We don't have
anybody running yet that I know of, but those who
will want to run for a vacated or a senators
whose seats are going to be open are going to

(16:46):
be trolling for votes from individuals and not from the
state legislature. Now you might argue that practically speaking, right now,
that's good because our state legislature is controlled by Democrats.
But if we were, if we were electing senators at
the state level, at the state legislature, guess what that inherently,

(17:09):
inherently leads to us paying closer attention to who we
elect as state representatives and state senators. And so when
Colorado was represented by Republicans in the Senate or Republicans
in the House, or vice versa, it was divided, they
had to reach a compromise, would have had to reach

(17:31):
a compromise to elect a US senator. So nobody represents
us now, they just represent people. That's not checks and balances.
I'll be right back tonight. Michael Brown joins me here,
the former FEMA director of talk show host Michael Brown. Brownie, No, Brownie,

(17:53):
You're doing a heck of a job The Weekend with
Michael Brown. Hey, welcome back to the Weekend with Michael Brown.
Glad to have you with me. Text Line always opened
three three Wednesdayero three keyword Michael, Michael go follow me
on X at Michael Brown USA. You hear it again
and again that you know you go won't go broke? Yeah,
corporations kind of keep stepping on the same rake and
it keeps bam, slamming and right in the face. Cracker

(18:17):
Barrel lost upwards of ninety I'm sorry, two hundred million dollars.
I think it backed off a little bit, and it
may have been ninety four million dollars in a day
after their disastrous rebrand smarked outrage among the make America
a Great Again basse. Now, I saw I saw the
new logo and when I looked at it, in fact,

(18:42):
you'd see me comming about this on X. My response was, yeah,
who cares one. I'm not a big fan of Cracker Barrel.
I've been in a Cracker Barrel. I don't go out
of my way looking for Cracker Barrel. Got it? Even
though I am even though I am a cracker. I
didn't go looking for a cracker barrel, but I thought

(19:05):
name nobody cares. I don't care now no doubt on
the device of the marketing dumbass is that you know
the same type that thought that Dylan mulvaney was a
suitable spokesperson for bud Light. Can I call Dylan mlvaney
a spokesperson or spokes day? I mean, I'm not sure
I was supposed to say. Well, they sterilized both the

(19:26):
logo and the decor of the restaurants. They eradicated all
trace of the Americana that was once kind of the
whole point at Cracker Barrel. Well, the effect on Cracker
Barrel stock could should have been predictable. It finished on
Thursday at fifty four dollars. I haven't checked it today
to see what the clothes was yesterday. It finished on

(19:48):
Thursday at fifty four eighty a share, down about seven
point fifteen percent. CBS News's Money Watch reported in the
early afternoon the Cracker Barrel had lost the nearly two
hundred million dollars that I had mentioned earlier, but it
was able to make up some of the ground before
the closing bell. Then it went back to losing ground yesterday,
another cliche the corporations should familiarly familiarize themselves with, if

(20:13):
it's not broken, don't fix it. So this logo has
existed for forty seven years. I don't know that i'd
ever heard that Cracker Barrel was closing locations. Oh they
may have been. I mean, franchises close locations all the
time every single year because some you know, underperforming, so

(20:33):
you try to, you know, cut the bleeding. But then
I started digging into more and more about Cracker Barrel,
and I find out that, oh, they really are driven
by the EI. The CEO and their marketing director all
driven by diversity, equity and inclusion. So maybe the whole

(20:55):
go WoT go broke. Maybe that actually is true. So
I went from not caring to kind of chuckling. I
don't own stock in Cracker Barrel, so yeah, I'm not
even sure that any of the Maybe I should go check,
but I'm not even sure that any of the mutual
funds that I have have any interest in Cracker Barrel.

(21:18):
So I just I just rankly don't give a rat's ass,
except that it's a great lesson in trying to go broke,
You're trying to go woke. You are going to go broke. Now.
I don't know how long lasting this effect will be,
but from people that I know who like Cracker Barrel
say that, well, it's just not the same anymore. Well,

(21:39):
change happens and sucks to be you if you love
Cracker Barrel and you no longer do. But I think
it was more deeply rooted than what I originally thought
it was. You know, maybe maybe people who embrace obesity
as their identity, maybe they are oppressed. I don't have

(22:00):
anything I have to think that they're not, because those
of you who listen to me during the weekday know
that my producer, whose nickname is Dragon, has gone from
three three hundred and fifty plus pounds down to around
one seventy five or so, and he's done it all
by diet and exercise. I don't think dragons are pressed

(22:23):
at all. But when we dedicate an entire month to
black history or pride or anything else, why not have
an entire month to gluttony. After all, it too is
among the seven Deadly sins. But now we've got someone
who's trying to change that can even should I even

(22:46):
be referring to fatness. I know people. I have friends
who are fat. I have people who are. They like
to claim, well, they're just big bone. I'm just a
larger woman. I'm just you know, I'm a big man.
I'm a larger woman. Okay, whatever. Some people are fat.

(23:07):
I would say that at one time I used to
be fat, particularly for my height six foot, but you know,
it wasn't all muscle, it was kind of well, it
was all right there on my belly. Fat Church now exists,
are aware of that. Fat Church. It's trying to correct
this disparity by claiming that fatness is not a sin,

(23:28):
nor is it a failure of willpower or a moral evil.
Fatness is simply a much much maligned, naturally occurring body
type that scape go to in into society that values
than white enabled bodies over all others. Why, I'm beginning
to think that maybe oppression tends to be intersectional here
with fatness. It is inflicted by those who are not

(23:50):
only non obese, but happen to be white and non disabled.
You see, fat Church is a movement inviting Christians to
exist in their own biases against fatness and then hold
them to the light of the Gospel of God's freedom
and abundance, and imagine a society where all buddies are
liberated from any anti fat oppression. Wow. I try not

(24:18):
to judge fat people, but honestly, when I see someone
who is morbidly obese, I really do have sympathy for them.
I don't know whether it's genetic, I don't know whether
it's because they are gluttonous. I don't know what it is,
but I try not to judge them. I don't need
a fat church telling me that. But the intersectionality goes

(24:38):
even further. If you're a person of faith according to
the fat Church and wants to know how inner fatness
or anti fatness fits in with other oppressions in our society,
like racism, white supremacy, homophobia, patriarchy, well then come on in.
Because the list of vices and unsavory eccentricities presented as
Christian continues to expand, apparently drag queen exhibitionism, furry fandom.

(25:04):
Of course, you know, some Christians think that gay is
a sin and that you know that should be in
the list of Christian values or whatever. I'm totally agnostic
about that. Nudism, polyamory, recreational drug u sado masochism, sex toys,
swinger debauchery, transvestitism, veganism, which craft list is just beginning

(25:25):
to expand and expand and expand. How about we get
back to the basics of Christianity. Judge not unless you
be judged, or you know, you know you can hate
the sin but love the sinner. How about all of
those things. Why do we always have to bring religion

(25:47):
and then take religion and bastardize it over here into
some sort of cultism. Just stop that insanity, Please stop
the insanity. The the cultural Marxism calls for this arraying
of oppressed classes against the core population in order to

(26:09):
truly undermine society as a whole. Since nobody is really
oppressed in this country. Come up, let's be honest. Nobody
in this country is really oppressed. Classes of artificial victims.
You got to create those. And the newest one consists
of the obese, and I do mean fat, because when
you go to the Wall Street Journal they write this,

(26:35):
I don't know what. Of course, I've always said I
separate the Wall Street Journal into two parts, and that
is the news part and the editorial part. This comes
to us from the news part. In the world of
fat activism, they write, the old words overweight, overweight, and
obesity are expressly verboten. That's because advocates and fat study

(26:55):
scholars want to destigmatize and accommodate fatness their preferred term,
and push back against the view that overrate or or
or obese people are somehow abnormal or diseased. Hm hm
that's interesting because to be obese is by definition abnormal.
Why do I and how how could I possibly claim

(27:17):
that without somehow being horrendously awful person. Because obesity is
recognized as a disease by the American Medical Association, And
why would they recognize it as a disease, Because obesity
is associated with a lot of other diseases, including coronary

(27:37):
heart disease, hypertension, high cholesterol, heart attacks, heart failure, stroke, diabetes,
osteo arthritis, gallstones, liver problems, indometrial cancer, post mental puzzle,
breast cancer, prostate cancer, chlorectal cancer, kidney disease, apnea, asthma, psyriasis, reflux,
mood disorders, and incontinence. So if you add all those

(28:01):
things together, then you have to recognize that oh, obesity
is correlated with reduced life expectancy. But now we have
a third problematic word. Do you know what it is?
O zimpic. Those who are fat activists don't like oh

(28:23):
zimpic because it helps people lose weight, which means from
their perspective, that's actually counterproductive. You cannot keep up with
this insanity. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently
estimated that obesity is associated with approximately three hundred and
eighty five billion dollars in health spending last year the

(28:46):
Journal of the American Medical Association. According to a report
in jama, employees with obesity have seven times the medical
claims costs and eleven times the indignity claims cost of
those with a healthy weight They i'll they file twice
as many worker compensation claims in the journal Nature. According

(29:06):
to a twenty twenty three paper, roughly eight percent of
all medical expenditures in the US, almost ten percent are
associated with the treatment of obesity. But to acknowledge all
of that apparently is stigmatizing, which academia regards as a
thought crime. Fat studies, which is an interdisciplinary field that

(29:29):
arose in the nineteen nineties focuses on what it calls
weight based oppression. You can't make this stuff up. Can
I say fat or not fat? I'm so confused. I'll
be right back as usual. I want to thank everybody

(29:52):
who tunes in for the weekend with Michael Brown. I
know you have other things to do on the weekend. Heck,
I've got other things to do on the weekend. But
I come in here and do this. I love what
I do, So I appreciate you tuning in. Appreciate you,
you know, sending me text messages, following me a next
doing all the interaction that we do. And I appreciate
making sure that you let your local affiliate know how

(30:12):
much you appreciate the program. Or if you don't get me,
and there's a radio station in your community, call them,
tell them to carry the program. Yeah, help them carry
me in your town. So we've talked a lot, and
I a lot, But in this last couple of segments,
we've talked a little bit about intersectionality. Well, if you

(30:33):
failed to comply with the intersectionality agenda, well you may
face some law fare of your own. That's why I've
already sent Michael the title for the segments, and that
last segment I have titled as follows, fat just fat. Oops,
can't say that, but yeah, you can say that, because

(30:55):
I just refuse to go along with all of the
stuff that tells me what I can and cannot say.
And I know that sometimes I may offend somebody, call
somebody that cares, because I am who I am, and
I'm never going to go on radio or with my
friends try to be guarded in my language. Now. Obviously

(31:17):
I have to be guarded on air because the FCC
will get really upset, and then iHeart and Premier will
get really upset if I start dropping F bombs. But
I just don't normally drop F bombs anyway. I do
say the word bull, you know what a lot, because
I think because it's surrounded by it, as we all are,
I just think it's an appropriate word, but I can't

(31:37):
use it on the air. I think this next story
is a bunch of bull, you know what. As I said,
if you don't comply with the intersectionality agenda, you may
face some lawfare of your own. You can join the
Donald Trump in finding off lawfare. Emma Marhecho, a thirty
three year old man, ye're right, Emma. I don't know

(32:02):
of any man named Emma, but this is Emma Marhecho,
a thirty three year old man who identifies as a woman.
I identify as I don't know. I need to think
of something, because there's surely some money to be made
by identifying as something other than a white Anglo Saxon

(32:22):
Protestant a wasp. But anyway, this thirty three year old man,
Emma Sea why language is so confusing today, is suing
Westcliffe University in Irvine, California, along with two athletic associations
after losing a women's volleyball scholarship and being ruled ineligible

(32:45):
to compete. Now, remember this guy, Emma has not undergone
any sort of plumbing realignment, so Emma still has all
of his working parts, but he identifies as a woman.
He lost a women's volley scholarship and is now being

(33:06):
ruled ineligible to compete in women's volleyball, to which I
say to Westcliffe University, which I know nothing about in Irvine, California, congratulations,
welcome to the real world. Now here's why Westcliffe University
will probably have to comply with his outrageous demands. Merhecho

(33:28):
is represented by the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education
Fund and they claim that he was discriminated discriminated against
because he claims to be a transgender woman. According to
a news release that I read from the Mexican American
Legal Defense and Education Fund, Thomas SAMs, the President and

(33:49):
General Counsel at MALDAF the Mexican American Legal Defense and
Education Fund, says in this press release that the Latino
community is often first to be targeted under practices of
irrational discrimination, and this case falls within that pattern. I

(34:10):
love the term the use of the term irrational in
this press release because is it irrational to deny a
male who simply identifies as a female. Is it irrational
to not give them a women's volleyball scholarship or to

(34:32):
rule that they are ineligible to play in women's volleyball? Wow?
Intersectional oppression really is a mighty weapon to wield now.
According to the press release, the attorney's former hecho say
that he had experienced emotional distress and anxiety, and that

(34:55):
his educational goals had been subverted because of his inn
to pay tuition. When I read that in the press release,
I thought, wait, a minute. Are you really a transgender woman,
do you really identify as a female? Or were you
wanting to go to Westcliff University in Irvine and you

(35:18):
saw that there were some unused or open women's scholarships
for volleyball, so you thought, well, hell's bells. I played
volleyball out on the beach a lot, and so I
think I will just identify as a woman, change my
name to Emma, and just go apply for the women's scholarship. Now,
remember he's not paying for these lawyers. But because that's

(35:41):
not an issue at all, because when you're represented by
the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, that's an
NGO that's getting their money by going out and raising
money to fight oppression, you know, for Hispanics Latinos who
are being hmm, irrationally discriminated against. I think discrimination is irrational,

(36:04):
but here I don't think there's discrimination, so how can
it be irrational. I think this whole story is irrational.
I think that one of the things that we're beginning
to recognize in society is that irrationality is an excuse
for a lot of well, well, you know what, I
can't say, this is going on in our society. Ah,

(36:27):
everybody you know, thanks for tuning in. Be sure and
follow me on X that Michael Brown USA. Everybody, have
a great weekend and guess what, I'll talk to you
next weekend.