The Three Whisky Happy Hour: Here's Lookin' at 'Lookism'

The 3WHH is a man down this week as John was unavailable, so Steve and Lucretia soldiered on without his ritual abuse of their superior taste in political philosophy, prudence, and natural law. And in the best fashion of Helen Andrews, Steve ran the episode even though it was Lucretia's turn on the host rotation calendar. We could have called this episode "Revenge of the Manosphere."

Steve and Lucretia consider a few news headlines, and some major stories conspicuously not making headlines* (such as the Houise investigation of the White House conspiracy to cover up Joe Biden's senility), who Bill Kristol supports in the NY City mayor's race (you'll never guess), whether the climate cult is over, and alarm bells about rising anti-Israel sentiment among young conservatives. (We recorded before the Kevin Roberts video went live, however.)

And then we arrive at the main topic of the day: Lucretia defending herself against charges of "lookism." Steve enlists an expert witness: the great Taki Theodoracopulos, who wrote way back in 1981 that American women were the ugliest in the world. Seems like the perfect topic for the week when the world discovered the Jennifer Welch, the Democrats' newest It-Girl. (And naturally, the exit music this week is "Ugly Women," by country musician Grant Langston.)

* Yes, that sentence is a sly reference to a light bulb joke: How many Straussians does it take to change a light bulb? None: the light is made conspicuous by its absence. (IYKYK, otherwise you don't get Plato.)

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Well whiskey, come and take my pain, the honeys, my ry,
oh whiskey. Why think alone when you can drink it
all in with Ricochet's three Whiskey Happy Hour. Join your bartenders,
Steve Hayward, John You, and the International Woman of Mystery,
Lucretia where they lap it up and David hain't you

(00:27):
baby on the show. He's has got to give it
and let that whiskey flow.

Speaker 2 (00:33):
Welcome everyone to the three Whiskey Happy Hour, which is
onlyly like a two whiskey Happy Hour tonight because we
are missing John U. He's got way more important things
to do than hang out on a podcast with us,
I guess, and actually we do miss him. He should
be back next week, maybe without me, because Steve and

(00:54):
John are going to be hob nubbing at the fed
Sock next week and I'll be in Hawaii, so they'll
do it without me. Maybe they'll find a really exciting
guest to join. But anyway, John, we miss you. I
just want everyone to know that I am the host.
I am the host of the three Whiskey Happy Hour,
but as usual, Steve's in charge. We're gonna confirm everything.

(01:18):
Helen Andrews had to say about how things are really
so much better if you leave the feminist out of it.
So Steve's take it away.

Speaker 1 (01:26):
Well, first of all, yes, I mean, I'm not sure
you being in Hawaiian, John and I stuck in Washington.
I'm not sure who's getting the worst end of that deal,
although I'm pretty sure I do know who is. Anyway,
all I think about the Helen Andrews story is were
we ahead of the curve a week ago or what?

Speaker 2 (01:41):
I mean?

Speaker 1 (01:41):
That thing is still generating tons of comment all across
the political spectrum, and it's sort of fun to watch.
I don't think Helen and I sent her an email.
I think I still have it somewhere. I don't think
she expected it was going to be quite the sensation,
and that's kind of fun. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:57):
Well, it sort of is the twenty twenty five equivalent
of Larry Summer's comment. But as you kept trying to
point out to John this week, the environments changed a
little bit. The fact that she could even write it.
I mean, it helps that she's a woman writing it,
of course, but the fact that she could even write
it and anyone would take it seriously and admit to it,

(02:17):
I think is probably evidence of at least some progress.

Speaker 1 (02:21):
Well, yeah, so I'm not sure I mentioned I think
I mentioned it to you guys after we finished our
show last week. But I started listening to another podcast
by some of those abundance liberals, Megan mccardal and the
Ben Dreyfus is Richard Dreyfuss's son, and Josh Barrow. I
was just mentioned the three names, and so they're progressives

(02:42):
and they spent like a half an hour talking about
Helen's article, and it was hilarious because theylle said, well,
we don't agree with her, except we think she's right.
It was completely incoherent. That's not incoherent. They clearly can't
associate themselves with her open antief feminism. But they said,
you know, argument, but her arguments and are analysis are

(03:04):
very well founded. And then it went on essentially make
her arguments and sort of progressive up talk.

Speaker 2 (03:10):
They do a Sorry, Steve. That leads me to something
I didn't tell you I was going to say. But
at driving home today, I was listening to The Five
and Greg Guttfeld had this great line. I really wanted
to steal it, but I'm going to do the right
thing and attribute to it to Greg because it's his.
He said that the abundance is just a new smarmie

(03:31):
word for equity. And when somebody tells you they're an
abundance liberal, what they really are, isn't. It's just another
name for equity, Because the question is who's abundance and
for whom? From whom? And of course the answer for
whom is those who want to live in an area
beyond their means, and from whom it's got to be

(03:53):
the taxpayers who will subsidize so these others beyond their
means equity. Well, that was really interesting.

Speaker 1 (03:59):
People want to live beyond their means. What that means
is it's all the places liberals would like to live
young liberals especially, but can't afford because liberals have been
running those places. I mean, I'll be slightly more charitable
and put it like this, but also give me give
my complaint. Well, I know, let me finish with my
complaint which I put in my review of the Abundance
Book a few months ago for Cimitas, which is, these

(04:22):
guys have figured out that, let's assume equity is their
primary motivation. I'm sure it's true for a lot of them.
But what people like Ezra Klein have figured out is,
you know what, if we actually want the benefits of
economic prosperity to be more broadly distributed to the working
class in the middle class, we have to get rid
of the regulations that are stopping it. And that's the
point I said, excuse me, h, how many decades have

(04:45):
conservatives been saying this, and these guys act like they've
discovered us for the first time. Oh my god, regulation
is making housing too expensive? They have They give absolutely
no credit and no recognition to the decades of serious
scholarship on the subject from our friends. Right. That's what
really annoys me about these guys. I'll just add finally
that you know, I was at this little meeting three

(05:07):
four weeks back with Tom Massey and Ran Paul, who
I found very impressive in person. Someone asked the question,
what about the abundance Democrats? And they both said, there
are no abundance Democrats. So there may be in their
thinking classes, but there are no abundance democrats in Congress.
Will stop so anyway, we'll stop right. But by the way,
since John isn't here, does there anything we want to
abuse him? About in absentia or there is.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
But I want to say one thing to follow on
what you said about your complaint that I think ties
into one more current event. And now have you noticed
that the latest criticism of Trump's big, beautiful ballroom is
that he has managed to do so in a way
that he has what's the different word steamrolled over, etc. Etc.

(05:53):
All of these historical preservation groups, including a very official
one that he just renamed, all the people are fired,
all the people. But even then, he's not stopping for
permits or you know this or that, all of that nonsense.
It's been created over the years just to style me
any kind of development or even really salutary kind of

(06:17):
historical creating, historical monuments, that sort of thing. All of
it has been simply put to a standstill by these
different do good historical preservation society people. And never mind
the regular regulations too. Sorry, I just thought you might worry.

Speaker 1 (06:36):
Well, I'm going to come from.

Speaker 2 (06:38):
Kudos, of course, said the same thing to build that
beautiful place of yours.

Speaker 1 (06:43):
Well not well, no I didn't, I'd never mind. I'll
just observe that this is a new one for Democrats
who didn't spare any thought of historic preservation when they
were joining the mobs and toppling statues of Civil War
generals and well and not right, I mean, okay, we
know that stories, right, Frederick Douglas and Boston, right, yeah, yeah,

(07:06):
renaming things. Taking down the Theodore Roosevelt statue in front
of the New York Public Library, I think it was
our museum.

Speaker 2 (07:13):
Was it in front or in something?

Speaker 1 (07:15):
I think in front? But it's it's awful. Okay, Well,
there is some good news this week though. That's kind
of fun, and we can we can always abuse John
at you know, at random moment.

Speaker 2 (07:24):
Well, I just wanted to be very you know, razor sharp.

Speaker 1 (07:28):
And so here's a few news items which we can
comment on or not. I don't think they need much comment.
But first of all, I'm sure you've seen the news
that Bill Gates has decided to give up on climate hysteria,
and boy is he taking a beating for it. My
take on it is he's giving up on climate hysteria
because his work is done. Now that we all have

(07:49):
the nanobots from the vaccines and our bloodstreams, he doesn't
need to worry about climate anymore. You're laughing. I thought
that was fun.

Speaker 2 (07:56):
Actually, I would see I wish it were. Actually I
wish it was, but I think the opposite is actually
the case, and that and the opposite being that while
he has realized that climate change is going nowhere, we
had that conversation a few podcasts back that that you know,
there's not a single poll, and not a single public

(08:19):
opinion poll that lists climate change is any kind of
concern for you know, the vast majority of Americans. And
so rather than try to keep beating that one to death,
he's going to keep moving on to his ridiculous population control,
but not for the sake of you know, He's just
going to do all the oftenings he was doing minus

(08:40):
climate change.

Speaker 1 (08:41):
Yeah, but I will say this about I mean, but
still surprising that he would say it so directly as
he has. Look, I mean, say what you will about
the guy. I say lots of bad things about him,
but on some of these matters involving physical science, he's
actually over the years been willing to depart from orthodoxy,
in particular Ironer now the left. He's always ignored this,

(09:02):
but I've used to look at clips and post them
occasionally of him saying, no, you know what, you can't
power Tokyo. I'm wind and solar power. I think go
through the numbers of why it would never work and
why batteries wouldn't work, and so, in other words, he's
always been an energy realist, which is why he's invested
some of his own money in small nuclear reactor development. Okay,
whether that will work or not, who knows. But the

(09:23):
point is he has known better for a while and
now he's finally saying it so.

Speaker 2 (09:28):
And here's the funny thing. This usually happens to the
poor leftists until they give it up altogether, and that
is that he is being excoriated by the left, but
the right is not embracing him, most of them, the most.
The nicest thing I've heard the right say about him well,
dogs about time, those kinds of comments. So really, I

(09:51):
don't know where it's really gotten him.

Speaker 1 (09:53):
But if you care, if you want a clear sign
that the climate change cults or the climate moment is ending,
it's not over, it won't ever be quite over for
a very long time, but it's ending or coming to
an end. Sorry, I can't help myself, Lucretia, is you
know the world is getting back to normal when people

(10:13):
are now stealing artworks from famous museums instead of pouring
tomato soup on them, which we in France last week.

Speaker 2 (10:21):
Okay, what's the fascination with that? Just because it's the Louver.

Speaker 1 (10:27):
Well that and there are some people who are saying
this is a metaphor for Europe giving up on defending
its own civilization.

Speaker 2 (10:33):
I mean, I mean, there was the whole dei element
to it, that they are mad a bunch of incompetent women.
Helen Andrews, I don't know.

Speaker 1 (10:42):
I mean, I think you don't need to bring this
into it to make the point about European decadence and
Europe giving up on a civilization. But it does, from
the sound of things, seem like they had pretty slap
dash security for such a place.

Speaker 2 (10:54):
Well, but I would might my counter with the reaction
to I mean, it's a major news story constantly all
day long by people who really shouldn't care, but they
talk about I mean all day long, they talk about
it on Fox and CNN, and I guess my point
is is that they haven't completely given up on European

(11:16):
decadence and culture to the point where they don't care
if the Crown Jewels or whatever they were got stolen.
They don't care, they care.

Speaker 1 (11:26):
I bet a lot of people didn't know that there's
still were crown jewels anywhere in French. You would have
thought they would have been buried along with Marie Antoinette
in seventeen eighty nine whenever it was right.

Speaker 2 (11:36):
I don't know, or traded.

Speaker 1 (11:39):
Yeah, right right. Oh, here's another bit of good news
I think are interesting news. Rolling Stone is reporting just
today that there is no rap song on the top
forty hits right now for the first time in thirty
five years. Now. You know, Stan Evans used to say
among his favorite oxymorons along Jumbo Shrimp Senate Ethics Committee

(12:02):
was rap music. Yeah, so there we go, right, the
NFL signs to get some I think it's this bad
Bunny guy, a rapper. I'm not sure I'm going to
tune into good Bunny on Super Bowl Sunday.

Speaker 2 (12:15):
I'm not I'm gonna watch Creed with I'm not a refuse.
I actually have not watched the halftime show for I
don't know how long, but I don't think I'm gonna
watch the I haven't watched a single football game, so
it's hard to imagine around the Lucretia Household starting Thursday night,

(12:35):
then all through Sunday into Monday night, all right, twenty
four to seven. But we gave it up and I
haven't gone back.

Speaker 1 (12:44):
Right.

Speaker 2 (12:45):
Well, now you wait before you go on, I have
to tell you about I'm not going I had today.
So I go to return my shopping cart at Costco
and there's a fairly well dressed black guy with this
massive I don't know anything about motorcycles, but massive motorcycle contraption.

(13:07):
And he walks up to it and you can see
if he sort of clicks a key and it starts
blasting this like throw you back blasting music, right, except
that it's James Ingram, you know, the soul singer. I
don't remember what song it was, but it was one
of those late eighties Jeans Ingraham. Isn't that his name?

Speaker 1 (13:31):
I don't know, James Brown, maybe I don't know. I
don't knows.

Speaker 2 (13:35):
Not smooth, oh yeah, jazzy, which is normally, but it
was so loud and I was so annoyed. But I
didn't say anything to him because at least it wasn't rap.

Speaker 1 (13:47):
All right, let's take a quick ad break and then
I'm gonna give you a couple more news items that
are less cheery but maybe more fun to dish on.
So we'll be back, all right, Lucretia, sit down for this.
Bill Crystal has announced his candidate for the mayor the
mayoral race in New York, and you'll never guess who
it is. I guess I shouldn't laugh. This is really pathetic,

(14:10):
but he says, yeah, I think I'm from Mondami winning
because going back to Cuomo is just impossible. And I
mean I'm no fantom Andrew Cuomo or any Cuomos, but
I mean, come on, this is absurd. Cuomo would be
leagues better than Deblasio and the current and income poop
they have in there, so I think this is pretty
amazing current.

Speaker 2 (14:31):
They have and there would be leagues better than Mandanni.

Speaker 1 (14:33):
Correct, that's right, yeah, right, you know right, he would
do less harm, certainly right. I don't know what to
make of this. I mean, you know, I've I've made
this rant before about It's one thing to say you
don't like Trump and think he's taking the Republican Party
in the wrong direction. I disagree, but I can I
can understand someone thinking that, But why do you move
the left in this ridiculous way. And while I'm aut he.

Speaker 2 (14:55):
Should know better. I mean, he's not some seventeen year
old or nineteen year old I'll say it like that
in a class with you know, some attractive socialist professor,
you know, feeding him a bunch of crap. He's he's
a grown man. He's studied with some of the best
minds in the United States. He studied with the right people.

(15:18):
I mean, okay, you could talk about East Coastralcians versus
West Coast Trailsians, which were not gonna do, but none
of them became that unsound.

Speaker 1 (15:27):
What the heck you know?

Speaker 2 (15:30):
Is it really that he's excuse the expression, sorry, family
show pussy whipped by Susan and she's become this far
lefty and she's just dragging him with her.

Speaker 1 (15:40):
Uh oh, I have a worse export. Well, maybe maybe
that is the worst. I've always resisted this, but I
wonder if he has always had some daddy issues of
some kind. Because I'm convinced I won't, maybe I will
write the article. Now I can cherry pick irving Crystal
quotes that would sound very pro Trump his approval of
popular very directly, and remember that you know, one of

(16:03):
his closest friends who's still alive. He's very old now.
But Norman put Hartz has been pro Trump from the beginning,
and you know, I think that led us some friction
with John h except that if you if you dip
into the commentary podcast, which I do now, and then boy,
it's hard to flog a critical statement about Trump out
of John these days. I mean, he's ever since Trump

(16:24):
bombed Iran, he's pretty trumpy these days. So when he's
come around, right, yeah, a lot of.

Speaker 2 (16:31):
People, a lot of people who are very very anti
Trump have come around. They always, you know, they've got
to have the disclaimer every single time. But and then
they'll go on and praise what Trump has done, as
if somehow Trump and the things Trump have done are
completely separable. You know, I get that. I get that

(16:53):
that's an East Coast ratan kind of attitude about our
politicians should be more statesman like than Trump is. But
that is no reason to go over to Mendonni. I mean,
he knows what's going to happen to New York. I
guess that's the one sort of interesting commentary thread I've

(17:15):
noticed lately, which is that there's all these rich people
who are coming out in favor of Mendonnie, even though
you know, he threatens the high taxes and all those
other things, but they know he can't really touch them,
they'll be fine. Well yeah, I mean, well, I think
they're they're donating to them in the hopes that he'll

(17:37):
eat them.

Speaker 1 (17:37):
Last, eat them last. That's what I was just about
to say. That's the Churchill's old line about crocodiling, and
you feed the crocodile thinking they will eat you last. Yeah,
that's right.

Speaker 3 (17:46):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (17:47):
Well, or the other possibility, which I think is I've
always thought was absurd, but I'm starting to wonder, is
the people who were said twenty thirty years ago that,
especially the crystals, they're not really conservatives or your conservatives,
they're really Trotskyites. And so it is.

Speaker 2 (18:04):
You know.

Speaker 1 (18:04):
You know, George Will has said that he wants Madami
to win to punish people in New York. Says every
few decades we need to be reminded of how bad
the left can be. Now, I think it's an incorrect argument,
but I understand it. Right, the worse the better, right,
But that's Leninism of the right. Okay, One last I
don't like it.

Speaker 2 (18:24):
Yeah, I know that, right, we go one I just mentioned,
you know me the actually the New York Post refused
to publish my comment because they had, you know, some
anti Mendami thing about his mention of his aunt. I'll
come back to that. But they said, of course Islamophobia

(18:44):
is a terrible thing, and of course, you know, data
dota patriotic Muslims. They went on and on and on.
So my comment was that that sure, there are really
whole aspects of Islam, but that's what Islam is, and
any supposed peaceful Muslim who won't denounce it is complicit

(19:08):
in their evil because Islam is the greatest source of Well,
they wouldn't publish they wouldn't publish that. But my point is,
this greatest commentary ever this week. Islamophobia is so scarce.
It's like what used to say about racism that they
have to make it up.

Speaker 1 (19:29):
We said, well, what do I need to repeat this?
We've been over backwards so far that we've made pretzels
look straight after nine to eleven, Right, you know George W.
Bush going to a mosque saying it's a religion to peace,
and you know, there was no there was no call
for rounding up Muslims and putting them in a urnment
camps like the Democrats did in the nineteen forties. Let

(19:49):
us remember, okay, not Muslims. As a Japanese, I think
people understand the parallel. More. One more footnote about the
sort of crystal world and that the dispatch is you
Jonathan Last used to write these great pieces. He's going
on and on a dispatch about how every Democrat in
twenty twenty eight should say that they are going to
tear down the ballroom if they're elected. And this is demented.

(20:13):
I mean, is this really the parallel. I'm never going
to move on to the back to winning whatever that
report it's called. We're really going to go from tear
down this wall from Ronald Reagan to tear down this
ballroom in twenty twenty eight among Democrats.

Speaker 2 (20:27):
You've been waiting a long time to tell that joke,
haven't you, Steve.

Speaker 1 (20:30):
I've been waiting a few couple hours. Yeah, at least.
But why But there is something well, because that's just
you know, he's it really.

Speaker 2 (20:39):
I mean, we laugh about Trump arrangement syndrome, but does
I'm guessing that it actually affects people's brains in way
that ways that cause him not to be able to
think rationally anymore. Right, Yeah, yeah, Jonathan last I used
to read everything he wrote, just like Bill Crystal.

Speaker 1 (20:57):
Right.

Speaker 2 (20:58):
You know, it's so disappointing to me to watch what
I used to consider my when I was a young
conservative trying to figure things out. The Weekly Standard was
I lived in the mountains and I didn't have television.
The Weekly Standard was my access to civilization for that
shake and anyway, sorry, it is so disappointing. It's so

(21:25):
I watched John Fetterman, who is obviously the more he
heals from his stroke, the smarter he becomes, the better
his rational, critical thinking skills become. But he doesn't give
up on the left entirely. You know, he still is

(21:46):
a Democrat. He still understands what it is that is
that is causing the left all of these problems and
tries to point them out, but out of a kind
of concern for his party, for you know, for for
his political movement. I excuse me, Bill Crystal's just turned

(22:07):
into the sleeve bag. I don't know how else to
say it.

Speaker 1 (22:10):
Yeah, it's uh, yeah, I don't either.

Speaker 2 (22:13):
That's all right, but that gets us on process with you, Steve. Yeah,
I know what he used to say. Some of my
friends are pro Trump, some of my friends are anti Trump,
and I'm sticking with my friends. They've met the anti
that very hard.

Speaker 1 (22:27):
That's right, absolutely, they certainly have. Yeah. So, but that
brings us to uh something that is well, it's making
news and sort of the commentariat class or you know,
the chattering classes, which is a report by a progressive
group called what's it called, Deciding to Win, That's what
it's called. And the thing is this is this is

(22:49):
not analogy, but this is the history repeating itself. They're
trying to do now what the well, I should describe
it a little bit. It's report saying essentially, one says is, look,
leading democratic positions are really unpopular, and why are we
leading with those positions? You know, trans this and defund
the police and all these other crazy things. And they're saying,

(23:11):
we got to dump all that and get back to basics,
which is, you know, jobs, inflation, the economy, better schools,
lower crime, the kind of things the Democratic Leadership Council
promoted in the late eighties early nineties. That was embraced
by Oh Bill Clinton, right, and that's a lot of
the reason why he won welfare reform. Right. I think

(23:32):
the planets are coming to alignment for another ground swallow
support for welfare reform. I'll leave aside why for now, But.

Speaker 2 (23:39):
When people, sorry, people hear about the fact that what
forty million.

Speaker 1 (23:42):
Forty two million people on food stamps as we used
to call them, right, Yeah, it's ridiculous. One of the
findings of the study that jumps out to me is
that the Democratic party brand is so bad that if
you just put the D for Democrat next to some idea,
public support for it goes down. That used to be
the Republican problem back in the eighties and the nineties

(24:03):
and the Gingridge years. You describe some plan in the abstract,
Oh that sounds pretty good, they say it's a Republican plan. Oh,
that's not so good. You losed fifteen points right now.
That's happening to Democrats and that's a really bad sign.
And you know it's getting blowback already from the left,
just as the Democratic Leadership Council did. There's one little
tidbit and then it'll stop. One of the things that

(24:26):
the Democrat Leadership Council tried to promote back in the
late eighties, was a plank on their social agenda that
would say or declaration that the work ethic is a
core value of society. And one of the left leaning
members of the Black Caucus, who was Augustus Hawkins from
LA of the famous Humphrey Hawkins Full Employment Bill, he said, oh, no, no,

(24:50):
that we can't have that, that that would be seen
by welfare recipients as a slap in the face. And
so they dropped it, right, And so now a lot
of people say, why are we still doing three paragraph
land acknowledgements at the beginning of the Democratic platform and
things like that. Let's drop all that nonsense. So anyway,
I'm think back popping my popcorn. I know you cut
winded this.

Speaker 2 (25:10):
I think I think you should definitely put that chart up.
And it takes me a little bit of a brain
power to understand. But what the chart does is it
takes the positions of Democrats and takes the positions of voters,
and it has a scale whereby and this is how

(25:33):
it goes how much voters think Democrats currently prioritize each
issue minus how much voters think Democrats should prioritize each
issue and at the ones that they think they should,
and they're not. It's securing the border and lowering the
rate of crime and so on. And then the opposite
end of the scale is what they're doing that voters
don't want them to do, which is protecting the rights

(25:55):
of undocumented immigrants, protecting the rights of LGBTQ Americans, raising taxes,
promoting diversity and education, and protecting abortion rights, all of those.
The Democratic Party is way to the left on promoting
those issues when the American people don't want them to,

(26:15):
are uninterested, say they're unimportant. And I don't know how
you get around that with the Mindanis and the aocs
and so forth of the world pushing and pushing and
pushing all of those farther and farther. Gavin Newsom, the
poor kid, grew up in a poor black neighborhood, so

(26:36):
sad he made so much of himself, considering his origins
as they're called.

Speaker 1 (26:43):
So you knew that that Erbie Steve mart movie The
Jerk was really a documentary about.

Speaker 2 (26:48):
Gavinue Gavin Newsome in the phone book.

Speaker 1 (26:54):
Now we have a I've got a piece about Newsom
coming out in the New York Post. You're maybe not
by his favorite newspaper as it was before on I
think Saturday or Sunday about Newsom, so I will lag
that at the time. Yeah, well, you know, so here's
a wild thought. Oh this goes back to something you
said earlier, but we moved along too fast. It's about

(27:17):
one of the reasons he so. Yeah, well, one of
the reasons her article caught is that things have changed.
There's right now I'm picking us up and I'll give
you one specific example. A whole lot of supposedly centrist
or center left people at universities are now saying, you
know what, we were always against wakeness. Well they were not.
And the latest is that really I think mediocre historian
Joe Lapour and she said in an interview here in

(27:38):
the last couple of days, oh yeah, wokeness on campus.
It really got way out of hand. It was very
destructive and like she was egging those people on. Some
people have got the receipts of things she was writing
five years ago about DEI is grade and all the
rest of that, and so they're all lying, of course,
and so the irony is and here I'm just going
to do a proposition. You know, who might save the

(27:59):
Democratic Party? Barry Weiss? Now, I mean that somewhat figuratively,
not literally.

Speaker 2 (28:06):
But you might say the media, Steve Well.

Speaker 1 (28:08):
See that's my point. It's a derivative point, which if
the if the major media start coming around and reporting
more fairly, it might put pressure. It might bolster some
modern Democrats. See, that's my point. That's why I say
Barry Weiss might say the Democratic Party. I mean the
Washington Post editorialized a few days ago, you know what,
the ball runs a perfectly sensible idea. I can't believe

(28:29):
people are going crazy about that. And that's senatorial page right.

Speaker 2 (28:32):
Well, and CNN and and and so you see have
been challenging some of these Democratic senators about their their
talking points, their lying shut down, shut down. It has
been interesting. And I saw an article that they didn't
get to do the whole thing, but about how Barry
Weiss may turn around the I mean, the media will

(28:53):
always be biased. The media has been biased since the
beginning of time, but it hasn't been monolithically biased. Yeah, right,
and it's not so much. But what we saw I
think in the New King's rally. Is that the what
do they call it the broadcast media? Is that the
right word for it? Yeah, that the CBS, ABC, NBC.
I mean, I have a friend who's just a few

(29:15):
years older than me who never misses CBS evening news
is a good Morning America.

Speaker 1 (29:23):
Well, I mean, I just look, I think it is
significant that the last couple of days Barry Wise fired
the entire what's it called Culture and Diversity division kept
ahead of it. But I thin you're going to move
that person out, and then their longtime very left wing
anchor of the one of the shows, John Dickerson, is
leaving after eighteen years, and I think he's leaving before
he gets fired. And so, I mean, so we'll see

(29:46):
if this. I think it's going to catch on because
the other networks are going to feel the pressure keep
up with CBS, I think, and the newspapers are going
to also get a little a little better, right sure
to Wise at the Times. Oh that's just I'd love
to see what those group chats look like. All right,
let's take another quick ad break and then we'll come
back and move on to a couple of stories and

(30:08):
I think are pretty big that are not getting reported
or not being thought about. So we'll be back here.
Don't go away, listeners, All right, we are back. Here's
the story I think you know about, and another one
that I think is actually kind of breaking in the
last twenty four hours on the right. So the first

(30:28):
one is, you know, the James Comer's House Oversight Committee
whatever it's called Government oversighte committee has been doing these hearings, sorry,
depositions with Senior Biden White House people, and the report
they put out a few days ago has gotten no
coverage in the mainstream press. And what it shows is,

(30:49):
you know, the cover up is worse than we thought
of Biden's condition, his inability to operate the office. But
they've released on Twitter maybe elsewhere, but they've at least
some video excerpts of their depositions. The one that is
most astonishing to me is with Tom Donalin, I think
that's his name, Tom Donalan, who was a deputy chief

(31:09):
of staff and the head of the campaign re election effort.
And they started asking him, so, you know, what were
you paid for the campaign? He finally coughs up that
he was getting paid four million dollars to run the campaign,
and then they say, and did you have a well,
there are any bonus arrangements in the campaign, and he
Hampden had for almost sixty seconds a lot of its

(31:31):
just dead silent, and they finally and they kept asking
a question, and he finally admitted that if Biden had
been re elected, Donalin would have received a four million
dollar bonus. So the obvious conclusion comes is that there
was a direct interest in a lot of these people
propping up Biden their own pockets, right.

Speaker 2 (31:53):
Steve that the reason that's significant in some ways is
because I think we knew that, but we didn't. We
actually didn't a sign of pecuniary interest to it. We
assigned an ideological interest that they were able to manipulate
Biden to do what they wanted, and therefore they were
wanted Biden to stay no matter what. But that you're right,

(32:13):
that's that's new, and that's for leftists. That's a little embarrassing, now, huh.

Speaker 1 (32:18):
Well, and by the way, those two things are not
mutually exclusive, of course. Well, they had another younger guy
on and they really put this guy in the hot seat.
I forget his name. I had never heard of him before,
but they showed clips of him on TV saying, no,
Biden is sharp, he's prepared. He asked great questions. I mean,
that's what all of us see of him every day.
And then they asked him how many times did you

(32:40):
actually see the president one on one? Turned out to
be twice in two years, which was pretty embarrassed both
times probably, But this is getting the free Bacon's been
writing about this, of course, but you'll see no news
stories of this in the New York Times, Washington Post,
the usual place.

Speaker 2 (33:00):
Right.

Speaker 1 (33:00):
It's just being met with utter silence. This ought to
be a gigantic Well I've said this for a year
and a half now that all these people should not
only be never allowed close to power ever again, I
now double down and say, I don't. I don't know
what the legal basis might be, but I think they
ought to be a serious look at prosecuting them for something.

(33:21):
There's got to be something legally wrong here.

Speaker 2 (33:23):
I'm going to plage on you here for a moment
and say, what would that something be.

Speaker 1 (33:27):
Well, that's why I said I don't. I don't know,
but I've got to think that the Justice Department could
at least put them through the ringer, and maybe I
spend a lot of money on lawyers. There should be
some punishment for this. This is this is like, this
is much worse than the Watergate in a lot of ways, right, way,
way worse.

Speaker 2 (33:45):
And then if you go one step further and watch
the things that some of these people did, not just
that they did it without the full knowledge and authorization
of the President, who was obviously seen, but some of
you know, the Arctic frost and some of the January sixth,
all of that, when those people were running wild, that

(34:12):
needs to be looked at too. And I'm not entirely
convinced that if Biden had been the person that he
was pretended to be when he was, you know, when
he was in his basement campaigning, that Biden would have
necessarily authorized all of those really really bad things. Maybe
you would have, because he's just a corrupt.

Speaker 1 (34:29):
Old you know what.

Speaker 2 (34:30):
But say, but you're right, but I just don't know.
I don't know under what statutes they can actually be prosecuted.
I think the best you might be able to do again,
I feel like I'm channeling John You is embarrassed the
hell out of them for their role in all of this.
I hope there's more, but let's at least do that, right.

Speaker 1 (34:54):
Yeah, I think so, yeah, you're you're breaking up on
me just a little. I don't know if it's you're
under Miam, but I think we're okay. No, it's mine,
it's it's it's on my end. But I think we're okay.
We didn't we didn't drop out completely, So we'll keep
going here. Look, I say, I don't know what the
legal basis might be. Uh, I mean, uh, well, we'll
ask John when he comes back to use his imagination.

(35:15):
There was that very vague statute about honest services that
the Supreme Court is essentially said it was too vague
vague for avoidance, right. That was why they threw out
the conviction of Governor MacDonald of Virginia and a couple
letters of these. So maybe that doesn't apply. But I
don't know.

Speaker 2 (35:32):
I guess you have a conspiracy, you have to have
an actual crime.

Speaker 1 (35:36):
Crime, right, Well, I mean, I don't know that. Could
it could be you cover up, covering up on instructing
justice with the Hunter Biden. I don't know.

Speaker 2 (35:43):
I mean, we have a bunch of brilliant lawyers who
listen live or are recorded to this podcast. So I'm
hoping all of you will send in your suggestions and
we can pass them on along to him BONDI or something.

Speaker 1 (35:57):
Yeah, now the other the other story. Let me give
you a little preface for this and then I'll explain
to you and listeners what was is on my mind.
So I think I mentioned that I was spent all
last week at the University of Mississippi. Fabulous trip, and
the students I met at the program of the Declaration
of Independence Center were absolutely fabulous kids. They're smart, they

(36:18):
reach stuff, they're going places, They're really sensible. I couldn't
believe that most of them were just nineteen twenty years old,
because seems so much more mature. But I was a
little bit concerned when several of them told me that, yeah,
we kind of like this Nick Fuentes guy. They acknowledged
his defects and things about him, but the point is
they thought he might be a successor, or one of

(36:40):
the possible successors to Charlie Kirk. And that sounds like
a lot of bad news to me from what I
know about Nick Fuentes, who has now raised a controversy
because Tucker Carlson had him on for a whole hour Okay,
why is this important? Is oh? A couple of students
also said to me and asked me about this, and
just their casual conversation. You know, we don't quite understand

(37:02):
our Israel policy. I mean, you know, why do we
give them so much money? And I went through patiently
explained why it made sense for us to give the
military support. And by the way, I don't think these
kids were anti Semitic in the least. Most of them
were faith. I don't think that's that. I think what
they are do. I think they are, however, buying into
some of the relentless propaganda funded by Cutter. I don't

(37:25):
They're not. They're not like the lefties who really are
hate Jews that. I don't think that's that at all. However,
so last night, the Wednesday night, Chardie Kirk was supposed
to come to Mississippi this week. Obviously that didn't happen,
but instead Erica Kirk came along with Vice President Vance
and they had a huge packed house. And by the way,

(37:49):
pulling us together on short notice, when you're having the
vice president come in this atmosphere quite a lot for
the university to do. Good for them for pulling it off,
and Vance did the Charlie Kirk routine, which was take
question for like an hour, and a lot of them were,
you know, hostile, but one of them from a kid
in the Maga hat who I don't think was an impostor.
It's just my sense looking and listening to him on

(38:10):
the YouTube. He asked the same question, says, I don't
understand our Israel policy. But then he did repeat some
lefty talking points. He said they're engaged in ethnic cleansing
in Gaza, which is wrong, of course, and then he
also added, and they have a religion that disagrees with
our religion, which I also think is mistaken. Right, you're right, yeah, now, well, right, whatever,

(38:35):
it's I just think that's bad theology. Protestant, Catholic, Zoroastrian.
I don't care. That's just bad theology too. And Vance's
answer disappointed me. Instead of challenging the premises of the question,
he gave an America First answer, which on its own
terms was pretty sensible. He said, look, you know, our

(38:56):
America first part foreign policy operates like this, Uh, you know,
we support nations that support us and are alied with
our interests, and when they don't, we go our separate ways,
and that's fine, and I can understand perhaps that he
wasn't prepared for the question, or for a variety of reasons,
did not want to try and take on the premises

(39:17):
of the question. Charlie Kirk would have, though, I'm quite
sure of that. But so I can kind of understand
a politician being on the spot. But it still bothers
me that this is spreading around among young people on
the right and that some of our and some of
our leaders I think are not fully aware of this
and are not doing a very good job of answering it.

Speaker 2 (39:34):
So right now, let me give jd Vance for a
moment an out on this and the difference between Charlie
Kirk going into all of the reasons why we you know,
the religious reasons, why why it's a Judeo Christian Western civilization.

Speaker 1 (39:51):
He could have.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
Right, yes, But at the same time Trump does not
emphasize those things. Trump's I mean seriously, he from a
philosophical or theoretical point of view, doesn't emphasize those things.
He emphasizes America first. And you know, this is more

(40:14):
successful than I thought would have ever given credit for.
And that is this idea that America first is perfectly
congruent with Argentina first, and Japan first, and even Saudi
Arabia first and so on. And maybe as the representative
of the Trump administration officially, he just couldn't stray too

(40:39):
far from that. Maybe I'm wrong, Maybe I'm making giving
him too much of leeway there.

Speaker 1 (40:45):
I don't know. I mean, maybe they have thought about this,
decided to punt for this reason. There has been this
is what the commentary people say, there has been no
more pro Israel administration than this one, for all the
reasons I fully agree with. And by the way, this
is something that commentary people pointed out last summer that
I had to think about say, oh, yeah, you're right
about that. But you know, the Republican Convention last summer

(41:07):
was very say pro zionist, I'll put it that way,
in the right sense of that term. And I thought, yeah,
that's right, it really was. And so this is a
very worrying sign. And you know, we know and in fact, somebody,
oh gosh, I've forgot the exact details, but some major
university like Syracuse somewhere has put out a little report

(41:27):
I think that was it, saying, you know, an awful
lot of these campus demonstrations around the country. Columbia UCLA.
It wasn't that many of our own students, It wasn't
generated by student groups. It was funded by foreign sources
trying to cause this trouble. And I think they're also
working the social media and whatnot to try.

Speaker 2 (41:44):
And but I will tell you that on the Charlie
Kirk assassination that every time I turn around one of
the young kids that I know who's right wing maga
but I hate to say it. They call it anti Zionists,
but there actually anti Semitic. They are convinced that, you know,
the entire American media is right by rich Jews. They

(42:08):
are convinced that Charlie Kirk was killed by Massad. They
are convinced, and those things on on social media reaching
this this sort of call it a soft cohort of
young men on the right who have you know, sort
of been kicked around for so long. I hate to

(42:28):
say it like this, but there their belief systems are
are unformed and vulnerable, and they are in many ways
open to some of this nonsense. And and because they
probably haven't gotten themselves the greatest critical thinking skills training

(42:49):
they're not always able to see through it. Yeah, and
and of course it appeals to certain aspects of that
young men Hubris and know all of that. That's all
a good thing. But it worries me a great deal, Steve,
it really does. It worries me a lot. And I
agree with you that somehow, somehow we need to address it.

(43:15):
We do need to police our own. Yeah, it doesn't
mean that we stop debate about things, but we have
to engage with those, especially young men. I mean, leave
Candace Owens aside. God, what happened to that woman.

Speaker 1 (43:30):
Yeah, but.

Speaker 2 (43:33):
But that's sort of the extreme example of that whole
movement on the right. And it bothers me almost as
much as Bill Crystal that Tucker is embracing it a
little bit too closely, I'll put.

Speaker 1 (43:45):
It that way. Well, yeah, I mean I don't. I mean,
I the only time I see Tucker now is by accident,
if I you know, scrolling through social media, which you
know I do to waste time now and then. But apparently,
by all accounts, he had ted Kruz on recently and
they got in a big shouting match about this. And yeah,
well I think about Israel and and but yeah, I
mean Tucker came back to it in his conversation with

(44:07):
Nick Fuentes and attacked Cruiz for being one of these
Christian Zionists.

Speaker 2 (44:12):
And.

Speaker 1 (44:14):
So I mean, Tucker really can't conceal what direction he's
headed into, and I think any any longer. But it's
just a shame, I know, Yeah, it certainly is. All right,
let's take our last break and then we're going to
revisit an old, fun topic on the mind of some
of our newer listeners. So don't go away, and we're back,

(44:41):
and Apprecia, you had no idea what you were doing
when you said you were gonna You're gonna be a
good Helen Andrews and let me take over the show
even though it's your turn this week to host. I
want to revisit the subject that we talked about at
some length with you a couple of years ago now,
and we've seen in the comments. I think there are
more recent listeners of the show who said, you know, Lucretia,

(45:04):
she sure sometimes says mean things about other women, you know,
calling him muggly or fat or whatever, and you know,
accusing you of lookism. And you gave a really eloquent
defensive lookism or what you meant and not not never
mind look as I'm not trying to actually validate that term.
But the point is is you gave a very eloquent explanation,

(45:25):
not defense. I'll put it that way. That's better. Sorry,
start over, not literally start over, but you are. I'm going,
so you can do that, and I will fill in
with some fun stuff I dug up trying to do
some background on all of this.

Speaker 2 (45:37):
First of all, Steve is much better on the theoretical
aspects of this topic than I am, because of his
closeness with Roger Scrutin. But I agree with Roger Scrutin
and Steve about beauty, esthetics and so on, and I
believe that there's an aspect of tyranny that wants to

(45:58):
destroy beauty, wants to destroy I mean, brutalist architecture. We
could go on and on, but let's let's let's bring
it back to what Steve wanted to me to discuss,
and that's this idea of fat, ugly women who are
just mean and horrible and nasty. And the comment I
made a few weeks ago which had poor Steve wondering
if we were going to get kicked off the air

(46:19):
or something. I said, why is Katie Porter? If she's
so fat and ugly, why can't she at least be nice?
Why does she have to be so damn mean? Which
seems to be the Jennifer Welch chick right everywhere. And
you know, people are rightly making fun of her overly
plasticized face and so on. But here's the point I'm

(46:43):
gonna do to Steve. I'll do it quickly. When I
was a little girl, I read a book called The
Plain Princess by Phyllis McGinley, and to understand that they
did some modern play about it. Never mind that, but
here's the very quickly. The Sonata princesses Marelda's parents. She's

(47:03):
the only child. They adore her. They spoil her, they
have parties for her. They they do everything possible. They
buy her the finest gowns. But she's plain. That's a
lovely old archaic word, that word playing. She's you know her.
They brush her hair hundreds of times a night to
try to get it shiny, but nothing works. And she's sallow,

(47:26):
and she's just she's not you know, deformed, she's just
not pretty. She's playing and so this, this woman, older woman, says,
let me take her for three months and I will
make her beautiful. But what the woman does is she
she teaches as Marelda, how to be a good person

(47:49):
and care about others and not just be self centered
and care only about herself, and you know, everything she
can have. And it's like the typical fairy tale, it
goes in threes. So the first thing is their skins
just becomes glowing, and then her hair, you know, and
she becomes at the end of it, this kind and
humble princess and absolutely beautiful. And so my point I've

(48:14):
always believed this since day one, and that is that
my making fun of somebody's looks, like say Pritzker, why
because he's such a horrible person. He's a truly horrible person.
And so I turn it the other way for just
a moment. The trend of especially transsexuals, but the left

(48:39):
in general, to do everything possible to make themselves less attractive.
I mean, I'm not crazy thinking that, am I ugly hair,
the you know, the big, big, ugly, ugly, purposefully ugly glasses.
I can't believe all of those young people need to
wear glasses. But anyway, and the piercing and the tattoos,

(49:01):
and the on and on and on, and just not
caring about your looks in any way, shape or form.
That has to be a kind of Richard the Third
tyranny in my opinion. You know, Richard the Third was
the deformed King of England, and he uses his ugliness
and his deformity to advance his own tyrannical impulses. He

(49:23):
gets the queen queen princess if forget the daughter of
the king who he murders her husband, gets her to
marry him even though she knows he murdered her husband.
And he's ugly because he's a tyrant. And I just
think that it's the tyrannical impulses of the left. So
when I when I speak out against people and call
them ugly, I only do so because their soul is ugly.

Speaker 1 (49:46):
Yeah. So my gloss on this is to go back
to an old article. It turns out it was from
nineteen eighty one. I'll tell you in a minute a
funny story about how I found it again. And it
was by that that very wild writer, Talkie THEODOREA Kopple
of So who used to just go by Talkie because
it would take too long to type out Theodora cooppolos
in a byline. I met him once twenty some years ago,

(50:08):
and he's a real character. But he wrote an article
in the American Spectator in nineteen eighty one about why
Americans are the ugliest women on the planet. Not all Americans,
but he had in mind. And I'll give you a
couple of names, but his argument parallels yours. So I
tracked down the article and I'll just give you three
quick samples from it. A clip. One. It is an

(50:29):
accepted fact that true beauty is a combination of body
and spirit. Just as true is the fact that a
woman lacking femininity cannot possibly be considered beautiful in the
true and classical sense of the word. And then the
second quote reminds me of what Rush Limbaugh used to say.
Remember you used to say that feminism was invented by

(50:50):
I think he said ugly women who couldn't get a
date or something like that. It was, you know, pretty
crude and direct and riled up a lot of people.
But here's taki. It says a few ugly women who
could not get men to like the decided to change
something that is as unchangeable as well. For lack of
a better example, man and woman bowl this over for

(51:12):
a while, and I believe you will agree that despite
outwards appearances, a woman can be truly ugly. Take Jane
Fonda and Shirley McLain. That harshness, those granite stairs, the
shrillness of their rhetoric. It makes one want to shriek
at their ugliness. I think that's parallel to your point,
is that it is right, there's this and you have

(51:33):
you haven't changed fond of workout tape in the eighties,
didn't you? It did?

Speaker 2 (51:37):
Okay, right, I'm sorry, but somebody gave it to me anyway. Now,
there was a there was a comedy sitcom called Gosh,
I'm gonna forget the name of it. It was two
lawyers and they were always in these escapades and it
was it was funny. The one of the lawyers was
the guy from Saved by the Bell. The other was
the one from the the stupid movie Clueless. Anyway, it

(52:03):
didn't matter. They there's this. There's an episode where a
it's not an exactly modeling agency, but something like that,
and there's a guy who is handsome and he's surrounded
by all of these gorgeous, beautiful women. And his daughter,
who's beautiful, is also part of the corporation. And there's

(52:23):
this kind of chubby, kind of dumpy woman.

Speaker 1 (52:28):
Who was his.

Speaker 2 (52:30):
Aide, it's chief of staff something like that. The daughter's
jealous of her and fires her. Well, the daughter fires
her and says she's incompetent, and she goes to these
two lawyers and you know they're they're masculine pigs. Of course,
you know they've always got women running around half naked
around him. And anyway, she insists that the daughter did

(52:51):
this because she's jealous of her looks, she's dumpy, and
all these other things. I know, I've got to make
this quick, Steve, but I'm sorry, but here's the point.
She believes she's beautiful, and she's kind and she's funny,
and she helps everybody, and she's always laughing, and first
of all, the two lawyers tend to fall in love
with her, and you realize that it really doesn't have

(53:13):
anything to do with the fact that she's dumpy and
a little bit overweighted and not terribly beautiful and doesn't
dress well. She's just the nicest, kindest person. And that's
the entire thing of the story. And the daughter realizes
it and they hire her back, and did you know,
of course that's it's a comedy. But my point, really,

(53:35):
there's really something to that. Steve and feminism did everything
possible to make sure that women didn't weren't feminine, weren't kind,
weren't loving. My favorite feminist line of all time, Catherine
somebody other, some famous feminists said when the separatist movement

(53:55):
was coming along, remember the feminist separatists stay away from men.
She said, Well, I suppose, if you know, if I
have to in an official setting, I will sit in
the same room with a man. But I certainly I
wouldn't touch a man with a ten foot poll I'll

(54:16):
just let that one out, okay.

Speaker 1 (54:18):
Right right, Well, I took a quick footnote to this story.
You know, I couldn't remember I knew the articles. The
old talking article was ralling on my head, and so
I used Google to try and find it, and I
stumbled across, by accident, an article from the Harvard Crimson,
you know, the Harvard student paper from nineteen eighty one,
and it was this right well before John's time. But

(54:41):
the article was a student columnist with a long attack
on the American Spectator. Can you believe how outrageous this
right wing magazine is? And it gives examples of they
make fun of Andrew Young, the great black unm bass
Throunder Carter and this and all the rest. And then
it has this crazy article by this talkie guy on
ugly women and femine and you know so. But then

(55:03):
I looked at who the author was. I sculled up
to the top, and it's Bill McKibben. And I don't
know if you were familiar with that name, as I am,
but he's one of the chief climate hysterics of our time.
So it's perfect, right, absolutely perfect that it would have
been Bill McKibben the article of the stupid article who
that was one of those great climate change fanatics that
I love watching meltdown in a puddle of goo.

Speaker 2 (55:25):
Before all right, I love it, Steve. Before we go
to the Babylon b I do want to mention to
you because you sent me a nice note about it.
I sent Steve a little substack the other day, which
a little piece to put on our political question sub substack.
Even I have been amazed by the response to it.

(55:46):
All it really was was the next stage feminism, which is,
you know, Helen Andrews, next stage feminism taking over the university.
The University of Irvine is hiring a petic gogic wellness
no pedagogic well being specialist, because faculty at universities are

(56:12):
suffering from compassion fatigue. Now you have to go read
the article. It's on political questions subject easy to find,
ze doesn't even need a link to it. But what
I found was that how do I say this, People
who actually got an education earlier in life, like you
and me, are just appalled by the idea of what's

(56:33):
actually happening in the universities today. And it is all,
in fact, this over the top feminism. Really, it's all
about safe, nurturing learning communities. And when you have that,
you have the number of a's and b's go way up,

(56:53):
and the number of d's and f's go way down
because students have a sense of belonging and they you know,
of course, we all know what that's all about. That
you can't give a D, N and F anymore, You
simply cannot. And so anyway, anyway, I was really I
thought it was a nice model on to the Helen
Andrews thing, and I was surprised at I was surprised

(57:16):
at the enthusiasm our little political things generated on that one.

Speaker 1 (57:22):
Yeah, I was see, you've got to write more often
in between, you know, all your other battles.

Speaker 2 (57:26):
I have to tell you, when I saw the article,
I was so incensed by it.

Speaker 1 (57:32):
I figured that's what happened before or after you'd had
a shot of whiskey.

Speaker 2 (57:37):
That was before in the morning. I read the Chronicle
of Higher Education in the morning so well a.

Speaker 1 (57:42):
Related story that I won't go into, but Harvard put
out of reports saying, you know, we've really made a
mistake with great inflation. We've got to get back to
be harsher grades. And the same Harvard, afore mentioned Harvard
Crimson has a story about all the students were upset,
this one girl saying, I skipped class all day Monday
and cried because you know, I work hard for my
a's right, because I give you three quarters of the grades,

(58:03):
or as our six.

Speaker 2 (58:04):
Percent of undergraduate grades actually the Dean of whatever.

Speaker 1 (58:11):
But I think if you go to a minus it
gets up to like eighty percent. But in any case,
our rascally friend Richard Samuelson says, we now have the
right title for the biography of Harvey Mansfield, The Old
Man and the C Minus.

Speaker 2 (58:23):
Yes, that's great. Those who knew Harvey knew his nickname
was Harvey C minus Mansfield, right right, yeah, yeah, it's
it's it's bad. And I suppose you know, the argument is,
if you're going to pay all that money to go
to Harvard, I guess you should just get a's. Right.

Speaker 1 (58:39):
Well, look, this has been known for a while now.
The hardest thing about Harvard is getting admitted, and once
you're there, it's okay. But they're starting to be Okay,
I'm off with that for today. We can we got
we'll do lots more of that. Give us a couple
of b's, and then.

Speaker 2 (58:52):
We're taking it out because we're running out. Cromo kind
of starting to regret killing off those all those old
voters during the pandemic, right, yes, yeah, yeah, sorry, some
of them just aren't funny these days. Okay. Trump asks
Elon if he can come up with a way to

(59:12):
supply one point two to one gigapods of power to
a Dolorean. Yeah, Americans, obesity crisis solved as EBT benefits
run out.

Speaker 1 (59:27):
Yes, we'll save that one for another day too.

Speaker 2 (59:30):
I won't do any Dodgers one. Sorry, are you rooting
for the Dodgers?

Speaker 1 (59:35):
I guess you.

Speaker 2 (59:37):
Actually probably went to more Dodger games than you did,
because in high school had season tickets.

Speaker 1 (59:45):
Parents a few seasons.

Speaker 2 (59:46):
Anyway, Yeah, Newsoon continues to endanger public by issuing driver's
licenses to women. I know, bad luck, Just do more
bad luck. Trump says, the missing Epstein files we're in
the East Wing have now been destroyed. Actually, I have

(01:00:08):
to tell you that there was this whole I don't
know if you happen to be on X when this
whole thing was happening, where somebody Molly came. It was
Molly Hemingway who answered. But somebody came up and put
a picture of themselves and their husband in gowns and said,
memories of the East Wing. We can't believe it's gone.
And Molly says, I I'm so sorry to have to

(01:00:30):
inform you that that's not the East Wing. But the
good news is it's it's still there. And so then
it was all of these great pictures of this is
us in the East Wing. They're like in front of
the taj Mahal and yeah, we can't believe it's torn down.
That was so great. But anyway, one more, one more
about that? Where did it go? Arc of the Covenant

(01:00:52):
unearthed under White House East Wing?

Speaker 1 (01:00:57):
There people who would believe that you know what the okay, okay,
well and.

Speaker 2 (01:01:01):
You didn't see I am I started the by drinking
because they hadn't had my afternoon tea in my little
Halloween cup. Right, yeah, do you have my whiskey? Is
it too early for you, Steve?

Speaker 1 (01:01:13):
No, it won't be now. But by the way, how
how could be Halloween when I still have my government shutdown?
Decorations still up?

Speaker 2 (01:01:20):
Sorry, they when is it going to shut down? Let's
have a prediction, Steve before Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:01:28):
It'll be wrong next week. I think, well they could
be after the election. They they want to be able
to use election wins Democrats that they're anticipating in New
Jersey and Virginia as a talking point that see the
public's on our side. I think it's nonsense, but I
think they will try that.

Speaker 2 (01:01:42):
I know that those are really really uh high hills
to mount here, whatever, but there is a chance that
both of those could the Republicans could pull them out.

Speaker 1 (01:01:53):
Right right, and it's tightening in New York City too.
I think uh mondommie's been stumbling lately. But again we'll
leave that for next week, when we know when the
dust settles. But for now, yeh, next week, but for now,
Happy Halloween. I'm not doing I'm not doing the uh
the AI generated limericks this week. I'm gonna wait till

(01:02:13):
John gets back, and because he's the critic of all these,
and so we'll just end abruptly with always drink your
whiskey meat, Buy more books. Thanks for watching, for our
live viewers, and thanks for our listeners who are using
on tape delay.

Speaker 3 (01:02:26):
By everybody dream morning, I'm not a morning man, She
asked if I was done with the sports page. Vintituke
it from my hand. She was friend.

Speaker 1 (01:02:46):
And way only scenes she was nice to be.

Speaker 3 (01:03:02):
So she was going to the batting cages, hit some hardballs.

Speaker 1 (01:03:12):
Now I could come and by one's a ball to
be alcohol.

Speaker 3 (01:03:19):
She was friend.

Speaker 1 (01:03:22):
In the way and only you haven't seemed to be.

Speaker 3 (01:03:30):
She was nice to me.

Speaker 1 (01:03:36):
Ricochet joined the conversation