August 7, 2025 • 28 mins
TikTok feminists are melting down over a story involving the WNBA and... adult objects. I break down the outrage in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, the Trump administration gets hit with a free speech lawsuit and NewsNation host Chris Cuomo admits to a huge mistake on live TV.
Send me a voice note: https://www.speakpipe.com/bradvseveryone
Check out the merch: https://bp-shop.fourthwall.com/
Support My Show: https://linktr.ee/bradpolumbo
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Three sex boys have been thrown on WNBA courts in
the past week during games in Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
The green dildo is being thrown on the court during
the game.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
Is rape culture.
Speaker 4 (00:11):
There's a horrific crime spree affecting women's sports in America
and it's definitely not at all even a little bit funny.
We're going to break down the big news coming out
of the w NBA and the online meltdown over it,
(00:32):
and so much more on today's episode of The Barad
Versus Everyone podcast, my daily show where we take on
the craziest ideas in our politics, media, and the Internet,
all from an independent perspective. Guys, welcome back to the show.
We've got a real doozy for our main topic today
and then some other more serious stuff to talk about
as well. But first, the WNBA. I'm not a big
(00:55):
fan of women's basketball. I can't even watch the NBA.
It's also become kind of a joke to me at
this point, even though I like basketball, but the WNBA.
I mostly hear about it when there's some sort of
political or social controversy, and there very much is right now,
because there is a trend of people throwing dildo's onto
the court in the middle of WNBA games, and people
(01:17):
are very upset about it. A lot of people are
laughing about it. I don't support it. I think it's bad,
but I can't help but chuckle a little at the
same time. So first, here's some news coverage about this.
I'm going to put in a clip of this happening
at a game, and then some coverage from the Associated Press.
Take a listen to this. And if you giggle or
laugh even once, you are a terrible evil person. Oh
(01:42):
look out, something just came until the floor. But an
object of just blew in as the free throw was being.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Made.
Speaker 4 (01:55):
You look like that hit a player too.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Three sex toys have been thrown on WNBA courts in
the past week during games in Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
LA Sparks coach Lynn Roberts said the disturbances are a
danger to player safety. After the most recent incident happened
during a game between the La Sparks and the Indiana
Fever Tuesday night. Fever regard Sophie Cunningham was nearly hit
by the object when it was thrown during that game.
According to social media, Green sex toys have also been
(02:22):
thrown at games in Phoenix and New York, but didn't
reach the court. In response to these incidents, the WNBA
has said that any fans throwing objects onto the court
during games will be immediately ejected. They will also face
a minimum one year suspension from league events and prosecution
from law enforcement. Local authorities have arrested the perpetrator of
the original incident in Atlanta last week, according to the league,
(02:42):
but it's unclear if further arrests have been made as
the disturbances continue now.
Speaker 4 (02:46):
The players and coaches, I think understandably, are not very
happy about this. Here's a coach of one affected team
and a player as well as.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Really actually think this is happening across the league.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
I'm going to steal that question. I think it's ridiculous.
It's down, it's sort.
Speaker 5 (03:04):
Of it's stupid, you know, we take it's also dangerous
and you know, player safety's umber one, respecting the game,
all those things.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
I think it's really stupid, yeah, so say, and it's
super disrespectful.
Speaker 5 (03:20):
I don't really get the point of it.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
It's really immature whoever's doing it.
Speaker 4 (03:27):
Seas you grow up, this is becoming a very big story,
to the point where the Post Millennial reports that more
money is now being bet on dildos at w NBA
games than on the games themselves, which is quite the headline.
Like this is twenty twenty five. This I every day,
(03:50):
I feel like we're in an upside down world and
crazier and weirder stuff that you never could have predicted.
Even the Simpsons couldn't have predicted this one. Crazy stuff
is constantly happening, and I guess what I should say
about it is this, Do I find this kind of funny? Yes,
At the same time, do I condone it or support it?
Absolutely not. These women are professionals, they're trying to do
(04:11):
their job, and throwing objects into the middle of any
sports field can be dangerous. Somebody can trip and fall
and get hurt. I think people are being a little
hyperbolic about how dangerous it is, but it's still it's
not really safe, and it is rude and crude and boorish,
And yeah, I don't support throwing adult objects at women
who are trying to do their jobs. It's not actually okay.
(04:34):
But at the same time, will I admit it's kind
of funny? Yes, I will. At first, I was like
very stiff upper lip about it on X and I
was like, this isn't okay, guys, don't laugh. And then
I the more it played out, I found myself laughing
to and you're not evil or diabolical for giggling at this,
because it is kind of funny, especially like watching them
all like react to it and they're like, oh boy,
(04:55):
here we go again. But the people doing it are
being arrested and charge with serious crimes. So I definitely
don't recommend anybody hop in on this bandwagon, and ultimately
I do not condone it, even if I will chuckle
at it. At the same time, I don't think that
this is the end of the world. I don't think
this is patriarchy or rape culture inaction. But that is
(05:18):
very much the take of TikTok feminists who are not
coping well with this story. Let's listen to one woman
who is a coach of some type give her take
on the situation.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Here's a video.
Speaker 6 (05:30):
I never thought i'd have to make the fact that
in three separate NBA games in a matter of days,
a green dildo has been thrown onto the court is
not hilarious. It's not like ha ha ha, it's harassment.
And due to the nature of the object, I would
say that it's sexual harassment. And we know that the
first one was thrown by a man, and like what's
(05:51):
happening is like I feel like we're all laughing in
order to take the power away from the thing, Like
we're just going to laugh along. But like that is
so common, It is so common in just general society
that men make a joke that is at women's expense,
which that's what this is. Throwing a dildo in the
middle of a WBA game is a joke at the
(06:12):
women's expense, the player's expense, the league's expense, and we're
supposed to, you know, make it our own thing by
making it funnier. But actually it's not funny. It's the
fact that's happened three times is not funny. It's harassment.
And it should not be on the players to have
to like make a joke about this thing when there
are flying objects when they're trying to play a basketball
(06:35):
game that is a danger to their safety. That is
not a joke, and it should be not on them
to laugh at the joke that the men started at
their expense.
Speaker 4 (06:44):
Stop it.
Speaker 6 (06:45):
I'm not laughing.
Speaker 4 (06:46):
I'm sorry, guys. The more mad and the more like
serious and uptight and angry that people like that get
about it, the more I can't help but laugh. I mean,
like I roll my eyes a little bit. A couple
things she's saying. To say it's sexual harassment is a
bit much. I mean, sexual harassment is a serious thing
(07:06):
that really affects and harms people. And to say that
because somebody threw an adult toy on a court a
couple of times and had to pause a WNBA game
for a couple minutes that sexual harassment seems to me
to be stretching the meaning of that term and watering
it down and diluting it in a kind of unfortunate way.
That again, is just really not fair to the actual
(07:28):
victims of sexual harassment, which is a serious thing and
not a laughing matter. But also I think they are
over genderifying this. I know that's not a word. I
don't even really know what I'm saying, but they're making
this like a look, men are being terrible to women
again thing, which I mean, obviously there is a gender
element to it, but people have also done this to men.
There was a whole thing in twenty nineteen, I believe,
(07:50):
where the Patriots people kept throwing adult objects onto the
field in the middle of Patriot games. So it's not
like only women are very subject to this kind of
trolling or prank Greek And again I don't condone it,
but you are feeding the trolls by engaging in this
kind of feminist hysterical meltdown over it, like this is
(08:11):
what they want. You realize that, right, this is exactly
what they want and what they find funny. So you're
doing great, keep it up, I guess. And now this
one actually frustrated me because I found it to be
totally absurd and ridiculous and frankly offensive. Let's take a
listen to this.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
I am home from.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Italy in the UK, and I immediately need to talk
about the WNBA again. The green dildo is being thrown
on the court during the game.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Is rape culture.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Throwing dildos on the court while women play basketball is
rape culture. Women being good at something that has nothing
to do with men. And even if we're women through it,
even though I'm hearing the streets are saying, it's not
anyone throwing a penis onto a women's sports game is
(09:05):
asserting and refirming that women cannot exist without a man
trying to reassert that dominance via a sexual act, via
a sexual object.
Speaker 3 (09:18):
There's nothing more like. That's rape culture.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
And I don't believe I ever found it really funny.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
Like, explain the joke real quick. What is the joke?
As someone who deals with penis, it's quite a bit.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
I don't I can't really find he he haha in
this one, So please explain it if you think it's funny.
So it was never really giving, you know, comedy Central,
but it happening repeatedly.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Now I'm like, is this a threat? What do we do?
Like what's really happening here? But it's it.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
I just I want us to use clear language. So
I'll say it again. Dildo is being thrown at women
while they play sports. It's rape culture.
Speaker 4 (09:59):
This is not bro Not everything is that deep, not
everything is that profound. And there's a level of hyperbole
and hysteria here that I think, actually again kind of
waters down the actual horrors of rape and its victims.
When you're saying that a prank involving adult objects being
thrown into the middle of a WNBA game is part
(10:21):
of that. I mean, was it rape culture when pranksters
did the same thing to the Patriots a few years
ago over and over again. No, it's an immature stunt
that I don't condone, but I can giggle at because
it is a little bit funny. And not everything requires
a master's thesis in grievance studies in identity, obsession in
(10:42):
oppression one oh one, Like, not everything is that deep.
Sometimes it's just a joke, it's just a prank. It
is very clearly not a threat. Of course it shouldn't
be allowed. Of course they are going to have to
crack down on the people doing it. But and I
do see that there is an issue with doing this
to women who are profreshen are trying to do their job.
But when you take the hysteria up to a tent
(11:04):
about it, you make it funnier. Thank you, You do
realize that you make You're giving the people who do
this exactly what they want, which is for woke people
like this to be incredibly triggered, and they are so.
At the end of the day, I do not think
this story is that deep. I think it's kind of funny,
but it really shouldn't continue and can't actually be condoned
(11:25):
or tolerated. But the hysterical meltdowns over it are also
I think actually much funnier than the brand itself, but
at the same time more disturbing as well. What do
you guys think? Let me know in the comments. Make
sure you're subscribed if you aren't yet, to this channel
and to the braad Versus Everyone podcast. Remember you can
also listen to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or
(11:47):
wherever you get your podcasts, So feel free to take
us with you on the go and join us over there.
And guys, remember to send in your voicemails for my
Voicemail Friday episodes where I listen to your wokhr stories,
your personal life situations, I give you my advice, and
I answer any questions you guys have for me. The
link to send in one of those is in the description. Okay, guys,
we've got to talk about big news that just came
(12:08):
down the pike about the Trump administration getting hit with
a massive free speech lawsuit for some of its immigration actions.
It's taken revoking people's visas over speech they've made or
ideas they've expressed or articles they've written about Israel. So
this lawsuit was just announced by the nonpartisan Foundation for
Individual Rights and Expression firewhere disclaimer I do a little
(12:31):
bit of freelance work for them. Here's their video announcing
this lawsuit.
Speaker 7 (12:36):
Can Marco Rubio deport legal non citizens for speech he
doesn't like? Federal statutes says he can, but the First
Amendment says otherwise. Over the last five months, Marco Rubio
has targeted lawfully present non citizens for deportation based on
constitutionally protected speech criticizing Israel. He's relied on two statutes
to do this. The first allows him to deport any
non citizen if they express an opinion that he thinks
(12:58):
threatens American Foreign Paul That's what they used against Mattmoud
Khalil when they didn't like what he had said. And
the second allows him to revoke any non citizen's visa
at any time for any reason, including based on constitutionally
protected speech. That's what happened to Remessia Oster after she
co authored an op ed critical of Israel that violates
the First men. No court has answered the question can
the Secretary of State to port a legally present non
(13:20):
citizen because of their protected speech, and that's where fire
comes in. Citizen or not, Criticizing American foreign policy is
not It is a constitutional right that we all share.
But since January, the Trump administration's message for non citizens
couldn't be clear. Watch what you say or else. This
is Americ. No one should fear a midnight knock on
their door because they voiced the wrong opinion. That's why
we're suing Marco Rubio in defense of our clients and
(13:42):
all legal non citizens who are afraid to speak their
mind right now. Because liberty does not come from the government.
The right to speak your mind is a right that
belongs to everyone that the government can never take away.
That is what makes America exception and no idea is
more foreign to what makes this country great than punishing
people because of their protected speech.
Speaker 4 (13:59):
So we're gonna get a more details here, but my
initial reaction is just that I support this lawsuit. I
would rather and set your opinions aside about the underlying
conflict between Israel and Palestine, the war with Amas, all
of that, because this is actually about the principle here,
not the specific speech in question. I would rather live
in a country where people are free to speak their minds,
(14:19):
people who are here legally. We're talking about immigrants in
this case, rather than one where the immigration enforcement might
kick down their doors and arrest them if they say
the wrong thing in a newspaper article, like what happened
to Romesau's Turk and others. And in this case, it's
being done to people. And no, it's not just people
who support hamas a designated terror group. It's people who
(14:40):
just criticize Israel, like Romeso O's Turk and others. And
I would rather live in a country where the government
does not have the power to do that, because a
future president that is progressive and hates Israel could just
as easily use these federal statutes that Marco Rubio is
invoking to deport anyone who supports Israel or supports the
idea for anything like that. It's a very dangerous game,
(15:02):
and I think it's just fundamentally inconsistent with the ethos
of free speech and the letter of the First Amendment,
which doesn't actually say only for citizens, it limits what
the government can do, and it says that the federal
government can make no law abridging the freedom of speech
or press doesn't say asterisk only for US citizens, and
(15:24):
multiple Supreme Court cases have found that First Amendment rights
do extend to legal immigrants. We're not talking about illegal
immigrants here, that's a separate debate, But for legal immigrants,
they do have some degree of protection, and even the
late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia acknowledged that they
enjoy some extent of First Amendment rights. So once you
(15:44):
accept that premise, it seems pretty clear to me that
these federal statutes, which are incredibly vague, dangerously vague and broad,
that the Trump administration is invoking, are unconstitutional and should
be struck down. Now. More details from Fire's lawsuit here.
America's founding principle is that liberty comes not from the government,
but is an inherent right of every individual. Every person,
(16:07):
whether they are a US citizen or visiting for the
week or here on a student visa, has free speech
rights in this country. Two lawful residents of the United
States holding the same sign at the same protest shouldn't
be treated differently just because one is here on a visa,
said FIRE legal director Will Creley. The First Amendment bars
the government from punishing protected speech period in our free country.
(16:28):
You shouldn't have to show your papers to speak your mind. Now,
the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, so the clients that Fire
is representing and suing the government on behalf of these
clients is an interesting collection of people here again from Fire.
Plaintiffs in Fire's lawsuit represent the wide range of groups
and individuals whose speech is threatened, but the continued assault
on non citizens protected speech. The Stanford Daily, the independent
(16:52):
student run newspaper at Stanford University, where writers with student
visas are declining assignments related to the conflict in the
Middle East, worried that even report according on the war
will endanger their immigration status. They're also suing on behalf
of Jane and John Doe to legal non citizens with
no criminal record who engaged in pro Palestinian speech and
now fear deportation and visa revocation because of their expression.
(17:15):
There's real fear on campus and it reaches into the newsroom,
said Greta Reich, editor in chief of the Stanford Daily.
I've had reporters turned down assignments, request the removal of
some of their articles, and even quit the paper because
they fear deportation for being associated with speaking on political topics,
even in a journalistic capacity, the Daily is losing the
voices of a significant portion of our student population. I
(17:37):
think the story here from the Stanford Daily kind of
gets at the reason kind of these sorts of policies
or cracking down on speech like this is so pernicious.
It creates this chilling atmosphere where people are afraid to
speak their minds, afraid to write the wrong thing or
the government will come get them. That to me just
seems totally Unamerican. And I don't believe that we need
(17:59):
a safe space from criticism of Israel or even anti semitism,
which is subjective and people disagree on what constitutes anti semitism.
I don't think we need safe spaces for these things
anymore than we do from racism, homophobia, sexism, transphobia, and
all the other things where conservatives rightly reject this safe
space mentality. I don't know why for some people on
(18:20):
the right, free speech becomes a nuanced question that they
make a lot of exceptions to the second that Israel
gets involved. To me, that makes no sense. You either
believe in these principles across the board, or you don't.
Having an exception for one specific issue does not make sense. Now,
one point I want to acknowledge is that Fire's lawsuit
(18:40):
does not argue and I certainly don't contend that the
Trump administration cannot revoke the divisas and deport people who
engage in criminal activity or who get suspended from their
university for bad behavior. So if you're one of these
students who came here and engaged in crimes, if you
in any way provided material support for hamas a designated
(19:02):
terror group, that is a crime. You can be charged
with that crime. You can have your visa revoke, and
you can be deported. Even if you get suspended from
school for engaging in encampment a disruptive protest, you could
have your visa reviewed and repealed taken away for that behavior.
That's all fine. I don't object to that, and I
don't think Fire does either. What we're saying is that
(19:22):
people who are legally in this country have the right
to speak their mind and express themselves, same as an American,
and that we do not need government speech police cracking
down on their ideas in speech and arresting and deporting
people because their ideas displease the state. I feel like
I'm taking crazy pills. That anyone on the Republican or
conservative side would disagree with that basic message more from
(19:45):
Fire here. Fire aims to stop the government's use of
the two provisions that stand counter to our deals as
a nation, provisions that in their expansive scope and unchecked authority,
are more at home in countries like China and Russia
than in a free America. By defeating these provisions, no
administration of any party will be able to weaponize them
against individuals for expression disfavored by the government. And that's
(20:06):
the key point here. Even if you support in theory
the crackdown of anti Israel radicals on college campuses, you
shouldn't support it in principle because the same principles and
powers and authorities used here could, and frankly will, if
allowed to stand, be used against you and the ideas
you agree with. Censorship is never ever a one way street.
(20:29):
It always ends up going both ways, So be careful
what you wish for and be careful what you support.
If you're somebody who believes in free speech and free expression.
That's why I'm rooting for FIRE. I hope they succeed
in this lawsuit and I will be following it with
great interest. What do you guys think? Do you disagree
with me on this one? I'm open to hearing you out.
I'm all about free expression after all. Let me know
(20:50):
in the comments. Hit that leg button while you're at it,
and make sure you're subscribed. Now, guys, one final story
that I have to cover because I just find it
so absurd and so hilarious. Chris Cuomo, the former CNN
host and now a News Nation host, is embroiled in
a bit of an embarrassing saga at the moment because
he shared a fake video of Alexandria Okazio Cortes, got
(21:14):
called out for it and then kinda sort of apologize.
So here's the tweet exchange that happened. Originally, Chris Cuomo
tweeted a clip of a link to a video of
AOC talking about the Sydney Sweeney Jeans campaign and claiming
that it was Nazi rhetoric. And then Chris Cuomo wrote
nothing about hamas or people burning Jews cars, but sweet
(21:36):
Sweeney Jeans ad deserved time on the floor of Congress.
What happened to this party? Fight for small business not
for culture wars? Now the problem was that this clip
of AOC, which I will show you in a moment,
was obviously obviously fake and AI generated and even was
labeled as much explicitly, yet he still fell for it.
(21:58):
So AOC responded, this is a deep fake, dude, Please
use your critical thinking skills. At this point, you're just
reposting Facebook memes and calling it journalism. Now I'm going
to show you the clip of Chris Cuomo sort of apologizing,
sort of admitting he was wrong on NewsNation, on his
show take a listen to that you're listening.
Speaker 3 (22:18):
I was wrong.
Speaker 8 (22:19):
I was tweeting today and saw a clip of AOC
saying that Sidney sweeneyad was racist, and so I replied
to it, and I said, why do you care about
this and ignore what matters most? Why in all the
times that you've called on Israel to stop, why have
you never told Hamas to stop, told Hamas to surrender?
(22:39):
Why would you ignore the Saint Louis attack on that
Jewish guy who had his car bomb. AOC tweeted back
and said, dude, that's a deep fake that Sidney sweeneyad.
You suck in so many words, and she was right,
They got me.
Speaker 4 (22:56):
AI.
Speaker 8 (22:57):
It was really good and it did seem like something
she would say what it was in her So I
thanked AOC for correcting me.
Speaker 4 (23:03):
So I mean I saw to give him credit for
admitting he made a mistake. But he makes some excuses
like it sounded like something she would say, or it
was really good AI that are actually laughable, like absurd.
If you watch the actual AI video clip that he
shared that we're gonna watch now.
Speaker 9 (23:25):
Sidney Sweeney looks like an Aryan goddess and the American
Eagle jeans campaign is blatant Nazi propaganda. I mean, fuck.
Watching that sultry little temptress squeeze into a Canadian tuxedo
three sizes too small, with her bouncy little fun bags
on the screen, staring at you, piercing through the core
(23:46):
of your soul, with those ocean blue eyes that could
resurrect a Furor from his grave in Argentina is something
that should alarm every American citizen because in America, beauty
is not defined by whiteness. Oh No, it is defined
by the number of victim groups of which you are
a member. Skinny, attractive, blonde haired, blue eyed cisgender women
(24:09):
descend from the slave daddy oppressors of this nation. And
any man who cranks one out while thinking about a
woman like this probably hates black people, probably hates gay people,
and they certainly hate the diversity of our great nation.
So I say, instead of simping for the Sydneys, we
should be celebrating the Shaniquas. Instead of worshiping the hot,
(24:32):
straight blonde, what about the obese alphabet people with blue hair.
Speaker 1 (24:36):
They need love too.
Speaker 9 (24:38):
And to all the haters who say companies that go
woke go broke, I'd rather be poor than a fucking Nazi.
Speaker 4 (24:45):
So that AI video was kind of funny. I mean
it's but it's so over the top. It's so absurd
that the idea that any journalist could see that. Also,
you guys, if you're listening on audio podcasts, you won't
see that. But if you're watching on YouTube, I'll zoom
in on this. It is labeled at the top parody
(25:06):
one hundred percent made with AI. So I just find
it diabolical and embarrassing that any major cable news host
and journalist could watch this and actually think AOC actually
said that, Like, I think AOC is crazy. I think
she says absolutely wild woke stuff, but not that like
that is way too over the top. It's obviously immediately fake.
(25:29):
And just the absolute dearth of critical thinking skills in
this country of media literacy, even from prime time cable
news hosts, is just galling, is just depressing, Like it
scares me because this AI video, to me and to
I think most people under the age of seventy, is
(25:51):
immediately obvious that it's AI. But this technology is going
to get much better, and it's going to get really convincing,
and then we're going to have a series problem because
we already have ancient journalists in the mainstream media like
this unable to detect obvious fakes. What about when they're
not so obvious like it's on journalists. Once we have
this brave new world of AI technology where videos that
(26:16):
are fake are almost indistinguishable from reality, we're gonna have
to rely on journalists and insiders to verify stuff and
to check stuff and help the public figure out what's
real and what's fake. And yet some of those journalists
can't even tell obvious AI slop. And look, I'm a
fan of AI slop. Okay, the Instagram videos with the
cat and the funny music, all of it. I am
(26:37):
pro ai. I think a lot of it's creative, a
lot of it's funny. But I'm really worried. Like the
fake news that people believe on either side of the spectrum,
all over Facebook, all over TikTok. We've debunked so many
fake stories, and they believe that without actual like video
evidence of things that aren't true. In most cases, when
that stuff gets really good, we're really going to be
(26:59):
in trouble if people don't develop some critical thinking and
media literacy skills, because right now they're just they're not
in the room with us. Even Chrisqualmo, host of a
prime time cable news show, decades and decades of experience
as a journalist, falling for aislop like a random boomer
(27:19):
on Facebook. I am concerned. I'm really not sure we're
going to be okay. Like the misinformation, the low information,
the civic and political literacy of the public is already
so so bad, and I think technology is about to
make it a whole lot worse. So far be it
from me to defend AOC, but just like basic fact
(27:41):
checking and journalism, it should be extended to anyone. And
this was so obviously parody and satire, but somehow people
felt for it. Still I can't believe it, But here
we are. Things are getting bleak, y'all, they're getting bleak.
But what do you guys think? What did you make
of this? Could you tell it's an obvious fake? Let
me know in the comments. Make sure subscribe if you
aren't yet, and hit that like button while you're at it.
(28:02):
All right, guys, that'll be it for this episode of
the Barad Versus Everyone Podcast. Thank you all so much
for tuning in. Remember to send in your voicemails for
our Voicemail Friday episodes. And with that, guys, we'll talk
again real so alright
Three sex boys have been thrown on WNBA courts in
the past week during games in Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
The green dildo is being thrown on the court during
the game.
Speaker 3 (00:10):
Is rape culture.
Speaker 4 (00:11):
There's a horrific crime spree affecting women's sports in America
and it's definitely not at all even a little bit funny.
We're going to break down the big news coming out
of the w NBA and the online meltdown over it,
(00:32):
and so much more on today's episode of The Barad
Versus Everyone podcast, my daily show where we take on
the craziest ideas in our politics, media, and the Internet,
all from an independent perspective. Guys, welcome back to the show.
We've got a real doozy for our main topic today
and then some other more serious stuff to talk about
as well. But first, the WNBA. I'm not a big
(00:55):
fan of women's basketball. I can't even watch the NBA.
It's also become kind of a joke to me at
this point, even though I like basketball, but the WNBA.
I mostly hear about it when there's some sort of
political or social controversy, and there very much is right now,
because there is a trend of people throwing dildo's onto
the court in the middle of WNBA games, and people
(01:17):
are very upset about it. A lot of people are
laughing about it. I don't support it. I think it's bad,
but I can't help but chuckle a little at the
same time. So first, here's some news coverage about this.
I'm going to put in a clip of this happening
at a game, and then some coverage from the Associated Press.
Take a listen to this. And if you giggle or
laugh even once, you are a terrible evil person. Oh
(01:42):
look out, something just came until the floor. But an
object of just blew in as the free throw was being.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Made.
Speaker 4 (01:55):
You look like that hit a player too.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Three sex toys have been thrown on WNBA courts in
the past week during games in Atlanta, Chicago, and Los Angeles.
LA Sparks coach Lynn Roberts said the disturbances are a
danger to player safety. After the most recent incident happened
during a game between the La Sparks and the Indiana
Fever Tuesday night. Fever regard Sophie Cunningham was nearly hit
by the object when it was thrown during that game.
According to social media, Green sex toys have also been
(02:22):
thrown at games in Phoenix and New York, but didn't
reach the court. In response to these incidents, the WNBA
has said that any fans throwing objects onto the court
during games will be immediately ejected. They will also face
a minimum one year suspension from league events and prosecution
from law enforcement. Local authorities have arrested the perpetrator of
the original incident in Atlanta last week, according to the league,
(02:42):
but it's unclear if further arrests have been made as
the disturbances continue now.
Speaker 4 (02:46):
The players and coaches, I think understandably, are not very
happy about this. Here's a coach of one affected team
and a player as well as.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
Really actually think this is happening across the league.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
I'm going to steal that question. I think it's ridiculous.
It's down, it's sort.
Speaker 5 (03:04):
Of it's stupid, you know, we take it's also dangerous
and you know, player safety's umber one, respecting the game,
all those things.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
I think it's really stupid, yeah, so say, and it's
super disrespectful.
Speaker 5 (03:20):
I don't really get the point of it.
Speaker 3 (03:23):
It's really immature whoever's doing it.
Speaker 4 (03:27):
Seas you grow up, this is becoming a very big story,
to the point where the Post Millennial reports that more
money is now being bet on dildos at w NBA
games than on the games themselves, which is quite the headline.
Like this is twenty twenty five. This I every day,
(03:50):
I feel like we're in an upside down world and
crazier and weirder stuff that you never could have predicted.
Even the Simpsons couldn't have predicted this one. Crazy stuff
is constantly happening, and I guess what I should say
about it is this, Do I find this kind of funny? Yes,
At the same time, do I condone it or support it?
Absolutely not. These women are professionals, they're trying to do
(04:11):
their job, and throwing objects into the middle of any
sports field can be dangerous. Somebody can trip and fall
and get hurt. I think people are being a little
hyperbolic about how dangerous it is, but it's still it's
not really safe, and it is rude and crude and boorish,
And yeah, I don't support throwing adult objects at women
who are trying to do their jobs. It's not actually okay.
(04:34):
But at the same time, will I admit it's kind
of funny? Yes, I will. At first, I was like
very stiff upper lip about it on X and I
was like, this isn't okay, guys, don't laugh. And then
I the more it played out, I found myself laughing
to and you're not evil or diabolical for giggling at this,
because it is kind of funny, especially like watching them
all like react to it and they're like, oh boy,
(04:55):
here we go again. But the people doing it are
being arrested and charge with serious crimes. So I definitely
don't recommend anybody hop in on this bandwagon, and ultimately
I do not condone it, even if I will chuckle
at it. At the same time, I don't think that
this is the end of the world. I don't think
this is patriarchy or rape culture inaction. But that is
(05:18):
very much the take of TikTok feminists who are not
coping well with this story. Let's listen to one woman
who is a coach of some type give her take
on the situation.
Speaker 1 (05:30):
Here's a video.
Speaker 6 (05:30):
I never thought i'd have to make the fact that
in three separate NBA games in a matter of days,
a green dildo has been thrown onto the court is
not hilarious. It's not like ha ha ha, it's harassment.
And due to the nature of the object, I would
say that it's sexual harassment. And we know that the
first one was thrown by a man, and like what's
(05:51):
happening is like I feel like we're all laughing in
order to take the power away from the thing, Like
we're just going to laugh along. But like that is
so common, It is so common in just general society
that men make a joke that is at women's expense,
which that's what this is. Throwing a dildo in the
middle of a WBA game is a joke at the
(06:12):
women's expense, the player's expense, the league's expense, and we're
supposed to, you know, make it our own thing by
making it funnier. But actually it's not funny. It's the
fact that's happened three times is not funny. It's harassment.
And it should not be on the players to have
to like make a joke about this thing when there
are flying objects when they're trying to play a basketball
(06:35):
game that is a danger to their safety. That is
not a joke, and it should be not on them
to laugh at the joke that the men started at
their expense.
Speaker 4 (06:44):
Stop it.
Speaker 6 (06:45):
I'm not laughing.
Speaker 4 (06:46):
I'm sorry, guys. The more mad and the more like
serious and uptight and angry that people like that get
about it, the more I can't help but laugh. I mean,
like I roll my eyes a little bit. A couple
things she's saying. To say it's sexual harassment is a
bit much. I mean, sexual harassment is a serious thing
(07:06):
that really affects and harms people. And to say that
because somebody threw an adult toy on a court a
couple of times and had to pause a WNBA game
for a couple minutes that sexual harassment seems to me
to be stretching the meaning of that term and watering
it down and diluting it in a kind of unfortunate way.
That again, is just really not fair to the actual
(07:28):
victims of sexual harassment, which is a serious thing and
not a laughing matter. But also I think they are
over genderifying this. I know that's not a word. I
don't even really know what I'm saying, but they're making
this like a look, men are being terrible to women
again thing, which I mean, obviously there is a gender
element to it, but people have also done this to men.
There was a whole thing in twenty nineteen, I believe,
(07:50):
where the Patriots people kept throwing adult objects onto the
field in the middle of Patriot games. So it's not
like only women are very subject to this kind of
trolling or prank Greek And again I don't condone it,
but you are feeding the trolls by engaging in this
kind of feminist hysterical meltdown over it, like this is
(08:11):
what they want. You realize that, right, this is exactly
what they want and what they find funny. So you're
doing great, keep it up, I guess. And now this
one actually frustrated me because I found it to be
totally absurd and ridiculous and frankly offensive. Let's take a
listen to this.
Speaker 3 (08:28):
I am home from.
Speaker 2 (08:29):
Italy in the UK, and I immediately need to talk
about the WNBA again. The green dildo is being thrown
on the court during the game.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Is rape culture.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Throwing dildos on the court while women play basketball is
rape culture. Women being good at something that has nothing
to do with men. And even if we're women through it,
even though I'm hearing the streets are saying, it's not
anyone throwing a penis onto a women's sports game is
(09:05):
asserting and refirming that women cannot exist without a man
trying to reassert that dominance via a sexual act, via
a sexual object.
Speaker 3 (09:18):
There's nothing more like. That's rape culture.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
And I don't believe I ever found it really funny.
Speaker 3 (09:26):
Like, explain the joke real quick. What is the joke?
As someone who deals with penis, it's quite a bit.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
I don't I can't really find he he haha in
this one, So please explain it if you think it's funny.
So it was never really giving, you know, comedy Central,
but it happening repeatedly.
Speaker 3 (09:45):
Now I'm like, is this a threat? What do we do?
Like what's really happening here? But it's it.
Speaker 2 (09:51):
I just I want us to use clear language. So
I'll say it again. Dildo is being thrown at women
while they play sports. It's rape culture.
Speaker 4 (09:59):
This is not bro Not everything is that deep, not
everything is that profound. And there's a level of hyperbole
and hysteria here that I think, actually again kind of
waters down the actual horrors of rape and its victims.
When you're saying that a prank involving adult objects being
thrown into the middle of a WNBA game is part
(10:21):
of that. I mean, was it rape culture when pranksters
did the same thing to the Patriots a few years
ago over and over again. No, it's an immature stunt
that I don't condone, but I can giggle at because
it is a little bit funny. And not everything requires
a master's thesis in grievance studies in identity, obsession in
(10:42):
oppression one oh one, Like, not everything is that deep.
Sometimes it's just a joke, it's just a prank. It
is very clearly not a threat. Of course it shouldn't
be allowed. Of course they are going to have to
crack down on the people doing it. But and I
do see that there is an issue with doing this
to women who are profreshen are trying to do their job.
But when you take the hysteria up to a tent
(11:04):
about it, you make it funnier. Thank you, You do
realize that you make You're giving the people who do
this exactly what they want, which is for woke people
like this to be incredibly triggered, and they are so.
At the end of the day, I do not think
this story is that deep. I think it's kind of funny,
but it really shouldn't continue and can't actually be condoned
(11:25):
or tolerated. But the hysterical meltdowns over it are also
I think actually much funnier than the brand itself, but
at the same time more disturbing as well. What do
you guys think? Let me know in the comments. Make
sure you're subscribed if you aren't yet, to this channel
and to the braad Versus Everyone podcast. Remember you can
also listen to the podcast on Apple, Spotify, iHeartRadio, or
(11:47):
wherever you get your podcasts, So feel free to take
us with you on the go and join us over there.
And guys, remember to send in your voicemails for my
Voicemail Friday episodes where I listen to your wokhr stories,
your personal life situations, I give you my advice, and
I answer any questions you guys have for me. The
link to send in one of those is in the description. Okay, guys,
we've got to talk about big news that just came
(12:08):
down the pike about the Trump administration getting hit with
a massive free speech lawsuit for some of its immigration actions.
It's taken revoking people's visas over speech they've made or
ideas they've expressed or articles they've written about Israel. So
this lawsuit was just announced by the nonpartisan Foundation for
Individual Rights and Expression firewhere disclaimer I do a little
(12:31):
bit of freelance work for them. Here's their video announcing
this lawsuit.
Speaker 7 (12:36):
Can Marco Rubio deport legal non citizens for speech he
doesn't like? Federal statutes says he can, but the First
Amendment says otherwise. Over the last five months, Marco Rubio
has targeted lawfully present non citizens for deportation based on
constitutionally protected speech criticizing Israel. He's relied on two statutes
to do this. The first allows him to deport any
non citizen if they express an opinion that he thinks
(12:58):
threatens American Foreign Paul That's what they used against Mattmoud
Khalil when they didn't like what he had said. And
the second allows him to revoke any non citizen's visa
at any time for any reason, including based on constitutionally
protected speech. That's what happened to Remessia Oster after she
co authored an op ed critical of Israel that violates
the First men. No court has answered the question can
the Secretary of State to port a legally present non
(13:20):
citizen because of their protected speech, and that's where fire
comes in. Citizen or not, Criticizing American foreign policy is
not It is a constitutional right that we all share.
But since January, the Trump administration's message for non citizens
couldn't be clear. Watch what you say or else. This
is Americ. No one should fear a midnight knock on
their door because they voiced the wrong opinion. That's why
we're suing Marco Rubio in defense of our clients and
(13:42):
all legal non citizens who are afraid to speak their
mind right now. Because liberty does not come from the government.
The right to speak your mind is a right that
belongs to everyone that the government can never take away.
That is what makes America exception and no idea is
more foreign to what makes this country great than punishing
people because of their protected speech.
Speaker 4 (13:59):
So we're gonna get a more details here, but my
initial reaction is just that I support this lawsuit. I
would rather and set your opinions aside about the underlying
conflict between Israel and Palestine, the war with Amas, all
of that, because this is actually about the principle here,
not the specific speech in question. I would rather live
in a country where people are free to speak their minds,
(14:19):
people who are here legally. We're talking about immigrants in
this case, rather than one where the immigration enforcement might
kick down their doors and arrest them if they say
the wrong thing in a newspaper article, like what happened
to Romesau's Turk and others. And in this case, it's
being done to people. And no, it's not just people
who support hamas a designated terror group. It's people who
(14:40):
just criticize Israel, like Romeso O's Turk and others. And
I would rather live in a country where the government
does not have the power to do that, because a
future president that is progressive and hates Israel could just
as easily use these federal statutes that Marco Rubio is
invoking to deport anyone who supports Israel or supports the
idea for anything like that. It's a very dangerous game,
(15:02):
and I think it's just fundamentally inconsistent with the ethos
of free speech and the letter of the First Amendment,
which doesn't actually say only for citizens, it limits what
the government can do, and it says that the federal
government can make no law abridging the freedom of speech
or press doesn't say asterisk only for US citizens, and
(15:24):
multiple Supreme Court cases have found that First Amendment rights
do extend to legal immigrants. We're not talking about illegal
immigrants here, that's a separate debate, But for legal immigrants,
they do have some degree of protection, and even the
late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia acknowledged that they
enjoy some extent of First Amendment rights. So once you
(15:44):
accept that premise, it seems pretty clear to me that
these federal statutes, which are incredibly vague, dangerously vague and broad,
that the Trump administration is invoking, are unconstitutional and should
be struck down. Now. More details from Fire's lawsuit here.
America's founding principle is that liberty comes not from the government,
but is an inherent right of every individual. Every person,
(16:07):
whether they are a US citizen or visiting for the
week or here on a student visa, has free speech
rights in this country. Two lawful residents of the United
States holding the same sign at the same protest shouldn't
be treated differently just because one is here on a visa,
said FIRE legal director Will Creley. The First Amendment bars
the government from punishing protected speech period in our free country.
(16:28):
You shouldn't have to show your papers to speak your mind. Now,
the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, so the clients that Fire
is representing and suing the government on behalf of these
clients is an interesting collection of people here again from Fire.
Plaintiffs in Fire's lawsuit represent the wide range of groups
and individuals whose speech is threatened, but the continued assault
on non citizens protected speech. The Stanford Daily, the independent
(16:52):
student run newspaper at Stanford University, where writers with student
visas are declining assignments related to the conflict in the
Middle East, worried that even report according on the war
will endanger their immigration status. They're also suing on behalf
of Jane and John Doe to legal non citizens with
no criminal record who engaged in pro Palestinian speech and
now fear deportation and visa revocation because of their expression.
(17:15):
There's real fear on campus and it reaches into the newsroom,
said Greta Reich, editor in chief of the Stanford Daily.
I've had reporters turned down assignments, request the removal of
some of their articles, and even quit the paper because
they fear deportation for being associated with speaking on political topics,
even in a journalistic capacity, the Daily is losing the
voices of a significant portion of our student population. I
(17:37):
think the story here from the Stanford Daily kind of
gets at the reason kind of these sorts of policies
or cracking down on speech like this is so pernicious.
It creates this chilling atmosphere where people are afraid to
speak their minds, afraid to write the wrong thing or
the government will come get them. That to me just
seems totally Unamerican. And I don't believe that we need
(17:59):
a safe space from criticism of Israel or even anti semitism,
which is subjective and people disagree on what constitutes anti semitism.
I don't think we need safe spaces for these things
anymore than we do from racism, homophobia, sexism, transphobia, and
all the other things where conservatives rightly reject this safe
space mentality. I don't know why for some people on
(18:20):
the right, free speech becomes a nuanced question that they
make a lot of exceptions to the second that Israel
gets involved. To me, that makes no sense. You either
believe in these principles across the board, or you don't.
Having an exception for one specific issue does not make sense. Now,
one point I want to acknowledge is that Fire's lawsuit
(18:40):
does not argue and I certainly don't contend that the
Trump administration cannot revoke the divisas and deport people who
engage in criminal activity or who get suspended from their
university for bad behavior. So if you're one of these
students who came here and engaged in crimes, if you
in any way provided material support for hamas a designated
(19:02):
terror group, that is a crime. You can be charged
with that crime. You can have your visa revoke, and
you can be deported. Even if you get suspended from
school for engaging in encampment a disruptive protest, you could
have your visa reviewed and repealed taken away for that behavior.
That's all fine. I don't object to that, and I
don't think Fire does either. What we're saying is that
(19:22):
people who are legally in this country have the right
to speak their mind and express themselves, same as an American,
and that we do not need government speech police cracking
down on their ideas in speech and arresting and deporting
people because their ideas displease the state. I feel like
I'm taking crazy pills. That anyone on the Republican or
conservative side would disagree with that basic message more from
(19:45):
Fire here. Fire aims to stop the government's use of
the two provisions that stand counter to our deals as
a nation, provisions that in their expansive scope and unchecked authority,
are more at home in countries like China and Russia
than in a free America. By defeating these provisions, no
administration of any party will be able to weaponize them
against individuals for expression disfavored by the government. And that's
(20:06):
the key point here. Even if you support in theory
the crackdown of anti Israel radicals on college campuses, you
shouldn't support it in principle because the same principles and
powers and authorities used here could, and frankly will, if
allowed to stand, be used against you and the ideas
you agree with. Censorship is never ever a one way street.
(20:29):
It always ends up going both ways, So be careful
what you wish for and be careful what you support.
If you're somebody who believes in free speech and free expression.
That's why I'm rooting for FIRE. I hope they succeed
in this lawsuit and I will be following it with
great interest. What do you guys think? Do you disagree
with me on this one? I'm open to hearing you out.
I'm all about free expression after all. Let me know
(20:50):
in the comments. Hit that leg button while you're at it,
and make sure you're subscribed. Now, guys, one final story
that I have to cover because I just find it
so absurd and so hilarious. Chris Cuomo, the former CNN
host and now a News Nation host, is embroiled in
a bit of an embarrassing saga at the moment because
he shared a fake video of Alexandria Okazio Cortes, got
(21:14):
called out for it and then kinda sort of apologize.
So here's the tweet exchange that happened. Originally, Chris Cuomo
tweeted a clip of a link to a video of
AOC talking about the Sydney Sweeney Jeans campaign and claiming
that it was Nazi rhetoric. And then Chris Cuomo wrote
nothing about hamas or people burning Jews cars, but sweet
(21:36):
Sweeney Jeans ad deserved time on the floor of Congress.
What happened to this party? Fight for small business not
for culture wars? Now the problem was that this clip
of AOC, which I will show you in a moment,
was obviously obviously fake and AI generated and even was
labeled as much explicitly, yet he still fell for it.
(21:58):
So AOC responded, this is a deep fake, dude, Please
use your critical thinking skills. At this point, you're just
reposting Facebook memes and calling it journalism. Now I'm going
to show you the clip of Chris Cuomo sort of apologizing,
sort of admitting he was wrong on NewsNation, on his
show take a listen to that you're listening.
Speaker 3 (22:18):
I was wrong.
Speaker 8 (22:19):
I was tweeting today and saw a clip of AOC
saying that Sidney sweeneyad was racist, and so I replied
to it, and I said, why do you care about
this and ignore what matters most? Why in all the
times that you've called on Israel to stop, why have
you never told Hamas to stop, told Hamas to surrender?
(22:39):
Why would you ignore the Saint Louis attack on that
Jewish guy who had his car bomb. AOC tweeted back
and said, dude, that's a deep fake that Sidney sweeneyad.
You suck in so many words, and she was right,
They got me.
Speaker 4 (22:56):
AI.
Speaker 8 (22:57):
It was really good and it did seem like something
she would say what it was in her So I
thanked AOC for correcting me.
Speaker 4 (23:03):
So I mean I saw to give him credit for
admitting he made a mistake. But he makes some excuses
like it sounded like something she would say, or it
was really good AI that are actually laughable, like absurd.
If you watch the actual AI video clip that he
shared that we're gonna watch now.
Speaker 9 (23:25):
Sidney Sweeney looks like an Aryan goddess and the American
Eagle jeans campaign is blatant Nazi propaganda. I mean, fuck.
Watching that sultry little temptress squeeze into a Canadian tuxedo
three sizes too small, with her bouncy little fun bags
on the screen, staring at you, piercing through the core
(23:46):
of your soul, with those ocean blue eyes that could
resurrect a Furor from his grave in Argentina is something
that should alarm every American citizen because in America, beauty
is not defined by whiteness. Oh No, it is defined
by the number of victim groups of which you are
a member. Skinny, attractive, blonde haired, blue eyed cisgender women
(24:09):
descend from the slave daddy oppressors of this nation. And
any man who cranks one out while thinking about a
woman like this probably hates black people, probably hates gay people,
and they certainly hate the diversity of our great nation.
So I say, instead of simping for the Sydneys, we
should be celebrating the Shaniquas. Instead of worshiping the hot,
(24:32):
straight blonde, what about the obese alphabet people with blue hair.
Speaker 1 (24:36):
They need love too.
Speaker 9 (24:38):
And to all the haters who say companies that go
woke go broke, I'd rather be poor than a fucking Nazi.
Speaker 4 (24:45):
So that AI video was kind of funny. I mean
it's but it's so over the top. It's so absurd
that the idea that any journalist could see that. Also,
you guys, if you're listening on audio podcasts, you won't
see that. But if you're watching on YouTube, I'll zoom
in on this. It is labeled at the top parody
(25:06):
one hundred percent made with AI. So I just find
it diabolical and embarrassing that any major cable news host
and journalist could watch this and actually think AOC actually
said that, Like, I think AOC is crazy. I think
she says absolutely wild woke stuff, but not that like
that is way too over the top. It's obviously immediately fake.
(25:29):
And just the absolute dearth of critical thinking skills in
this country of media literacy, even from prime time cable
news hosts, is just galling, is just depressing, Like it
scares me because this AI video, to me and to
I think most people under the age of seventy, is
(25:51):
immediately obvious that it's AI. But this technology is going
to get much better, and it's going to get really convincing,
and then we're going to have a series problem because
we already have ancient journalists in the mainstream media like
this unable to detect obvious fakes. What about when they're
not so obvious like it's on journalists. Once we have
this brave new world of AI technology where videos that
(26:16):
are fake are almost indistinguishable from reality, we're gonna have
to rely on journalists and insiders to verify stuff and
to check stuff and help the public figure out what's
real and what's fake. And yet some of those journalists
can't even tell obvious AI slop. And look, I'm a
fan of AI slop. Okay, the Instagram videos with the
cat and the funny music, all of it. I am
(26:37):
pro ai. I think a lot of it's creative, a
lot of it's funny. But I'm really worried. Like the
fake news that people believe on either side of the spectrum,
all over Facebook, all over TikTok. We've debunked so many
fake stories, and they believe that without actual like video
evidence of things that aren't true. In most cases, when
that stuff gets really good, we're really going to be
(26:59):
in trouble if people don't develop some critical thinking and
media literacy skills, because right now they're just they're not
in the room with us. Even Chrisqualmo, host of a
prime time cable news show, decades and decades of experience
as a journalist, falling for aislop like a random boomer
(27:19):
on Facebook. I am concerned. I'm really not sure we're
going to be okay. Like the misinformation, the low information,
the civic and political literacy of the public is already
so so bad, and I think technology is about to
make it a whole lot worse. So far be it
from me to defend AOC, but just like basic fact
(27:41):
checking and journalism, it should be extended to anyone. And
this was so obviously parody and satire, but somehow people
felt for it. Still I can't believe it, But here
we are. Things are getting bleak, y'all, they're getting bleak.
But what do you guys think? What did you make
of this? Could you tell it's an obvious fake? Let
me know in the comments. Make sure subscribe if you
aren't yet, and hit that like button while you're at it.
(28:02):
All right, guys, that'll be it for this episode of
the Barad Versus Everyone Podcast. Thank you all so much
for tuning in. Remember to send in your voicemails for
our Voicemail Friday episodes. And with that, guys, we'll talk
again real so alright
Popular Podcasts
Fudd Around And Find Out
UConn basketball star Azzi Fudd brings her championship swag to iHeart Women’s Sports with Fudd Around and Find Out, a weekly podcast that takes fans along for the ride as Azzi spends her final year of college trying to reclaim the National Championship and prepare to be a first round WNBA draft pick. Ever wonder what it’s like to be a world-class athlete in the public spotlight while still managing schoolwork, friendships and family time? It’s time to Fudd Around and Find Out!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!