December 8, 2025 • 35 mins
Woke women on TikTok are losing their minds over... the color of the year? I break it down in this episode of the Brad vs Everyone podcast. Plus, a viral video featuring a racist Cinnabon employee and Somali customers divides the internet, and Tucker Carlson spreads some strange lies about... Uganda?
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):
Hey, panting, you're fired.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
That's what you're going with. Another day, another ridiculous woke
meltdown on TikTok from people who have way too much
free time. We're going to break this down and so
much more in today's episode of The Bread Versus Everyone podcast,
(00:32):
my daily show where we take on the craziest stories
from across the Internet and social media, all from an
independent political perspective. We've got a lot on deck today,
but first we've got to talk about what's going on
on TikTok right now, particularly the woke side of that
app and among the female inhabitants. I would say, not
(00:54):
exclusively female, but mostly females, and perhaps some gays are
getting in on it as well. But ay, a full
scale meltdown is underway after a color institute announced the
color of the year is a shade of white. Are
you not scandalized by that? Yeah? Me either. I didn't
(01:17):
even know this thing existed until five minutes ago, but
the internet is losing its mind over it. First, here's
some reporting from CNN on the announcement itself.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
What does it make you feel when you see that color?
Speaker 4 (01:29):
Um?
Speaker 2 (01:30):
I mean, the clouds are nice, maybe it's like more creativity,
like an abstract painting.
Speaker 5 (01:34):
It seems like a lovely, soothing tone.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
Pantone just announce the color of the Year for twenty
twenty six. The Pantone Color Institute describes it as a
calming influence in a frenetic society, a feeling of serenity,
a quote billowy and balanced shade. The color is cloud Dancer.
Every year since nineteen ninety nine, the Pantone Color Institute
picks a color that captures the cultural zeitgeist and trends
(01:59):
for the year. This year, the company explains, Cloud Dancer
represents new beginnings and a desire for a fresh start.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
I'm already bored because I'm just not that kind of
gay fashion colors. I'm yawning over here. But and that's
no shade to those of y'all who are into this
kind of thing. But I don't really care. I find
it hilarious that they picked this color with the hope
that because it was like a soothing white, it would
calm people or represent freshness or new beginnings. Instead, it
(02:29):
became the subject of a frenzy and race hysteria from
white left wing people mostly and people of color as
well on TikTok and started like this very popular. Millions
and millions and millions of views on these videos, outrage
and meltdown over this. Let's take a look at a
little compilation. I meant, I'm made for y'all. Keep in
(02:52):
mind that these videos you're about to see genuinely have
tens of millions of views and hundreds of thousands and
hundreds of thousands of likes on them. This is a
trending topic that people actually apparently care about.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Let's listen, Hey, Pantie, you're fired. You really chose white?
You chose white in these times. I know the danger
of that kind of messaging.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Oh my gosh, not her with the open flames. She
is lighting shit on fire. Extra points for drama, babe,
I will give you that. But she is lighting shit
on fire close to her face, and then talking about
how it's dangerous to have the color of the year
be white because of course it's like white people. I
guess my mind doesn't even go there, But we're you
(03:40):
then anti racist. Immediately think of a race and somebody
says the color white in terms of like a color palette.
What's funny is I think the color last year was
like Mocha brown or someone is something And funny how
no one cared and no one made it a race
issue because we're not as brain broken as y'all. But
I do just find this woman hysterical lighting stuff on
(04:01):
fire really really helping you beat the crazy Caaren allegations.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
There the messaging and I'm not having it. I'm not
having it.
Speaker 6 (04:11):
The color of the year is white?
Speaker 4 (04:15):
Is this?
Speaker 6 (04:16):
Am I being gatholic?
Speaker 2 (04:17):
This field like a dog whistle?
Speaker 6 (04:19):
Somebody, huh, low key, Panton's color of the year is
giving a white supremacy. I hate to say it, but
it's true.
Speaker 5 (04:28):
Good news, everybody. Pantone just announced it's twenty twenty six
color of the Year and they're going with white.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
Is she okay? Pantone? Hit that's what you're going with.
Speaker 5 (04:50):
Now did you forget to read the room or did
you read it? And this is just our hex code?
Speaker 4 (04:57):
Now ka kay?
Speaker 6 (04:59):
Was there a single person of color in the room
that was making this decision? And Tone just announced their
color of Year for twenty twenty six. It's called cloud
Damcer and the optics, man.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
It's not good.
Speaker 6 (05:13):
Oh.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
The optics of picking white as the color y'all. There's
so much here that the last woman seems so mentally unwell,
like the lexapro is not working. Whatever it is, she
needs a stronger dose from her doctor. Maybe she's been
mixing up too much red wine. I don't know, but
she seems so unstable and so deeply rattled by this,
(05:37):
which is just insane to me. I mean, it is
not that deep. This is just color. What is white
just banned from Color of the Year because some of
y'all might interpret it in this crazy extreme way that
it's absolutely not intended to be. I really, I don't know.
These people need to get outside. They don't. I don't
(05:58):
know this is I think a lot of it comes
back to a sense of helplessness and powerlessness that these
people are dealing with. They obviously are are distraught over
Trump's selection and kind of the rise of cultural conservatism
and Republican values, some of which I agree with, some
of which I don't, some of which I support, some
(06:20):
of which I push back on. But they're really distraught
over it. They feel helpless because they are, you know,
not in control or in charge, and they are desperately
I think, reaching for stuff that they actually could control,
and if they spend all their days worked up about
Pantone's color of the year, maybe they don't have to
grapple with like the things that actually matter, that are
(06:40):
happening that that cause them so much distress. I don't know,
that's my like, if I put on my psychologist hat
and try to figure out what the heck is happening
here with this meltdown, that's where I have to go.
Because there's something just deeply, deeply absurd about suggesting that
Pantones selecting a shade of white is like implicit KKK messaging.
(07:02):
And then there's something quite funny about the dude at
the end. I guess there is one guy involved in
this his comments because he said, we're no people of
color in the room. They always have this, They have
this very condescending idea that like, oh, all people of
color are woke, so of course if there had been
a POC in the room, they would have caught this
(07:24):
microaggression or whatever, which is actually itself kind of racist
because people of color are individuals. Crazy take I know,
they are individual human beings with their own agency and
opinions and values and perspectives, and not all of them
in fact, most of them are not are like TikTok,
brain broken, brain rotted like some of y'all. And so
let me play you this clip actually of the CEO
(07:46):
of Pantone discussing the selection for Color of the Year,
and tell me what, if anything you notice To address some.
Speaker 7 (07:53):
Of the online comments, let me state clearly that white
is indeed a color. We knew that people would have
emotions about this year as color. When I first learned
the color that, I thought, oh, this is going to
be pretty controversial.
Speaker 8 (08:14):
But the power of this program, the power of pant
Hol's Color of the Year, is that it sparks a conversation,
a conversation about color that everyone can participate in that
panton we don't dictate that conversation, We facilitated.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
Gosh, I just hate like corporate speak. That's on a side,
But the way that corporate people speak sometimes is so
maddening to me because it's like, get to your point,
what do you mean by anyway? For audio listeners, the
president of Pantone is a black woman, right, her name
is Sky Kelly, and she spoke about this. They also
released statements about this and making it quite clear this
(08:53):
was not in fact intended as a secret dog whistle
or some sort of implicit support of white supremacy. I mean.
The funny thing too, is like, imagine the people running
this company, like this paint company or color company or
I don't even know what it is. Again, I'm not
that kind of gay. Y'all are mostly women and gays
(09:17):
and people who lean liberal. Let's be honest, let's be
so one hundred, keep it a buck. And so these
are not like a secret bastion of hidden Trump extremists
trying to signal the rise of white supremacy or whatever.
These people are hallucinating and maybe they knew it would
be kind of controversial and they thought it might be
good marketing. That's possible. I could certainly believe that. But
(09:38):
if then then that doesn't somehow prove the crazy allegations
that people are making it, right, It just proves that
they knew they could exploit crazy people to amplify their
brand and talk about it a lot. That is not
the same thing as the allegations actually being true. And
that's a very important distinction to make here. But I
just come back to the privilege behind some of this,
(10:02):
Like you must have no real problems if you're getting
this worked up, if you're crashing out on camera over
the color of the year from some color institute nobody
outside of the interior design or design industry had ever
heard of. Because obviously this is like a big deal
to people in that world, but everyone out of there
had never heard of it, and mostly people are not
(10:23):
part of that who are talking about it now. You
must have no real problems or too much free time.
If you're actually so pressed about cloud Dancer being the
color of the year, not everything is in fact that deep.
That's my take at least, and I'm sticking to it,
But y'all can let me know what you think in
(10:44):
the comments below. Do hit the like button and make
sure you're subscribed while you are at it. Please, If
you are from the color community and you have thoughts
on this, and I'm talking about like design, I'm not
talking about people of color. Goodness, what a words out
that was. I do want to hear from you. If
you're in like the design or color space and you've
(11:05):
heard about all this drama and you have thoughts, do
let me know in the comments, guys, And at some point,
if you keep hearing dog whistles that no normal people
in real life ever notice. Consider that they may not
be dog whistles. You may in fact be schizophrenic. Sorry,
so sorry, not sorry, but anyway, guys, we'll leave it
(11:25):
there on that one for now, and up next we
got to talk about the latest Twitter drama and viral
video that is somehow dividing opinion. Kind of crazy to
me that this one even there's any room for disagreement,
but it concerns of course, because we keep doing this.
We keep finding like random videos of some minimum wage
(11:46):
worker having an interaction and they go megaviral and we
make that person famous or even just for a moment
like a flash and the pan kind of thing, because
it maps onto some culture war issue. Well, the latest
one of these involves a Cinnabon employee, and apparently those
do exist outside of shopping malls that closed down ten
years ago or fifteen years ago. So Cinnabon employee was
(12:09):
just fired after a clash that she had with apparently
Somali customers, so of immigrants of Somali origin, and this
happened in Wisconsin, and the video is absolutely insane to watch.
It is, of course, only a snippet of the interaction.
We're gonna play it, and I'll have to censor some
words because she does say the N word repeatedly in anger,
(12:31):
which is kind of wild. But so we don't really
know what happened before this video, So I will just
acknowledge that it's possible the customers were polite and reasonable
and this woman's just a racist jerk. It's also possible
they were really nasty or harassed her, or were rude
to her, or they're the instigators. We don't know. All
we know is what happened when the cameras started rolling,
(12:53):
And I think what happens then is bad enough to
call into question the fact that so many people are
somehow of defending this woman no matter what. But first
I'll just show you the video, the whole thing, and
we can we can talk about it after all. Right,
let's take a look at this.
Speaker 7 (13:08):
Sexualizing your body makes you a gettle person? Are you recording?
Speaker 2 (13:12):
I'm gonna record you. Yes?
Speaker 8 (13:14):
Do you want me to throw.
Speaker 7 (13:19):
I am racist? You are, and I'll.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
Say that to the whole entire world.
Speaker 7 (13:27):
Don't your life, by the way, talking about you're talking
about respect.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
You're talking about respect.
Speaker 3 (13:34):
You want a fire from this place of you're not
gonna be working here.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Suck it suck?
Speaker 1 (13:39):
What look?
Speaker 6 (13:40):
How you look?
Speaker 1 (13:41):
What? What's wrong with you?
Speaker 7 (13:43):
Is that ugliness?
Speaker 5 (13:48):
You're the ugliest person I've ever seen in my life,
knowing not knowing enough.
Speaker 7 (13:53):
No you're not, because you know damn well, you're.
Speaker 6 (13:58):
Keep keep squeezing that.
Speaker 7 (13:59):
Cat of it.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Be well, she seems lovely and stable. I mean I
should say, like maybe the customers did something before the
cameras started rolling to instigate or whatever. I mean, there's
that bit about how they they seem to be judging
her for the fact that she's not covered up in
(14:19):
a jab, which they have now after the fact, said well,
she had made a comment about the wife's jab that
was rude, and that's why they said that. It doesn't
really matter. It's like all of this building up to
the clip. I don't know who the true villain is
in that part, but what this woman does here is
psychotic and insane and racist. Doesn't matter if a customer
(14:41):
mistreats you or harasses you, if that's what happened, Like
I said, we don't know the appropriate response is to
kick them out of the store, call the police if
they won't leave even I can imagine a world where
you get really upset and maybe you cuss them out
and you behave in an unprofessional way, but you don't
go full like clansmen start calling them the N word
and proudly boasting you are racist at work? Are you crazy?
(15:08):
How could you possibly think that's acceptable behavior? Doesn't matter
what they do to instigate, that's still evil and immoral
on your part. If they did anything to instigate, you
still can't do that, and of course they're going to
fire you for that. You're at work. This woman is
dropping hard urs in anger on customer on customers at
(15:29):
work for a corporation, and then half of Twitter is
acting like she's the latest person unfairly canceled by the
woke mob girl. What are y'all okay? I mean? Of course,
Sinnabon fired her and put out a statement they said,
we've seen the disturbing video from the Cinnabon Bakery in Ashwabanan, Wisconsin,
and we do not condone this behavior. The former employee
(15:51):
was immediately terminated by the franchise owner. Their actions do
not reflect our values or the welcome experience every guest deserves.
So I don't know, because this involves Somalian people or
immigrants or something. It's become somehow a cultural flash point,
and a serious number of high profile people on right
(16:12):
wing Twitter in particular are defending the woman in the video.
Now again, I'm not defending the customers necessarily. Maybe they're
also like bad or I don't know, But no matter what,
her behavior is unacceptable and unhinged and evil, and she
has absolutely earned herself a firing. I just I find
(16:34):
it insane that people defend the indefensible like this because
of the culture war. But let me read you some
tweets from one from bad Ombre I stand with the
Cinnabon lady. For one from Derek Evans, white people are
sick and tired of the way we are treated in
our own country. Yeah, the country belongs to Americans, not
(16:56):
all of whom are white. And even if you are mistreated,
that is not an excuse to be evil and racist
to people anyway. The racist influencer Lily Gaddis says, I
absolutely support this. You've ruined your life, by the way,
in quotes referring to what the customer said, Remember that
this is how invaders are taking our country. If you
(17:16):
stand up against it. They'll ruin your life. Stand up
white people before it's too late, or just like, don't
call people the N word in a racist and angry
way on camera while you're at work, and you'll be fine.
Are they weaponizing that against you or are you just
acting a fool at work on camera, behaving yourself despicably
(17:40):
and then being held accountable for it. That's not a
problem most white people will experience because they're not going
to act like that anyway. This is my personal favorite.
Larry writes Crystal a hard working white mom, as if
you know anything about her or that she's hard working.
Was citing the fact that she's a mom, which is
(18:01):
hilarious because of some things people have unearthed about her
past that I can't verify, so I don't want to say.
But if those are true, then that's hilarious that he's
citing that. Anyway. Crystal, a hard working white mom, was
doing her job at cinnabon when a Somali couple decided
to make her shift horrible with intimidation. You actually have
no idea, you have you have no idea what happened
before the cameras were rolling that they went in there
(18:23):
and went to decided to harass her. You do not
know that, so that's you're assuming conclusions not based in
the evidence anyway. He concludes, instead of banning the offenders,
Cinnabon files fires Crystal to keep the Somali cap couple happy. Okay,
even if the Somali customers had done something wrong, then
(18:44):
they should also be banned. Yeah, you should still fire Crystal.
And it's not to keep the Somali community happy. It's
to protect the national brand of your corporation, which I'm
sure has millions of black customers, and say that it's
not in fact okay for employees to broadly proudly boast
that they're racist at work and call customers the N word.
(19:04):
What kind of crazy pills are y'all taking? Spinach bra
wrote in a tweet with seven hundred thousand views at Cinnabon,
I'm a daily customer. I'm sorry we need to pause
on that. I am a daily customer of Sinnabon. Sir,
I have questions about your health and your decision making,
(19:27):
and you should discuss that with a doctor because that
seems unwise to me. But you know what, it is
a free country. So Anyway, I am a daily customer.
I will never buy another Cinnabon after you fired that
lady who was harassed by Somalian illegal aliens trying to
do her job. Of course, he has no idea whether
these people are illegal aliens or not. And again it
(19:48):
wouldn't matter. You still can't call black people the N
word at work, oh Eve. Anyway, Jack Possebik, the far
right influencer, wrote, I'm going to take a wild guest
here that the left is lying about the Sinnabon employee
in Wisconsin because that is all they do. How many
times have we seen this cycle play out? Remember the
(20:11):
rule what happened right before this video? Now, I understand
his point that these things can be taken out of
context and sometimes we jump to conclusions too quickly, and okay,
I'm open to that. However, in this case, there's really
nothing that could come before the video starts that would
justify what she said, and I feel confident I literally
(20:33):
cannot imagine a scenario where therefore what she did is
okay and not a fireable offense. If you can, let
me know, I can't imagine one. And it's crazy that
she can behave in such an awful way on camera,
and they'll still find a way to defend her. In fact,
our culture is so screwed up now that there is
(20:53):
now a go fund me for this woman help Crystal
or I guess it's a give send go because gofund
me would probably ban this campaign. Oh and as of
time of this recording, they have raised one hundred and
two thousand dollars for this woman who proudly declared herself
a racist and was incredibly racist and abusive towards customers.
(21:17):
Oh gosh, this is just absolutely unhinged stuff. I think
I fear that polarization and partisanship are driving everyone insane
to the point where they just defend the most absolutely
indefensible and unhinged behavior because it's our side versus their side.
And I actually don't know if this is true. But
(21:37):
the funniest thing is some people on Twitter are saying
that this woman is actually a Kamala voter, which is
hilarious if true. I don't know if true, but again,
it shouldn't matter. Basic decency and respect for our fellow
citizens and just like common sense as an employee, all
require you to not behave like this at work or
really ever, and if all this woman had done, say
(22:00):
like say, because some people are saying, well, they were
sexually harassing her, which we don't know, and they're going
off of the first ten seconds of that clip that
I showed you where they're saying, oh, why are you
you're sexualizing your body by not wearing a his job.
That one comment in a loane does not constitute I mean,
it's inappropriate to say to an employee, and she'd be
just about to kick them out, but it doesn't mean that.
That's doesn't mean they were sexually harassing her. That's a
(22:23):
bit much. And so she could have asked them to leave.
If they refused, she could have called the police. She
could even have yelled at them, argued with them in
all sorts of ways, and then I and then said hey,
like they were, they just came in and started a
problem and all these things, and then there would be
a legitimate case to defend this woman. But when she
boldly states I am racist, you are an N word.
(22:44):
That is evil behavior, that is obviously unprofessional conduct that
any company with two sense of integrity and just basic
common sense as far as profit and keeping customers happy
is concerned, is going to kick that employee out there door.
This woman is not a victim. She is a villain,
and she does not deserve sympathy or a give send
(23:07):
go fundraiser sending her six figures. Seriously, y'all could be
buying malaria nets or feeding the poor with that money,
and you're deciding to give it to a woman who
broadly boasted that she is a racist and called customers
the end word? What the how do? How did we
get here? How did the train goes so far off
the tracks in this cultural war? Something here is really
(23:30):
sick and messed up, and there's really just no level
of what aboutism or attempting to explain how the customers
are also bad that possibly justifies this woman's behavior. And
it is to the eternal shame of these influencers that
their brains are so carroted by a combination of tribalism
(23:51):
and desperation for attention and clicks. They will defend the
absolute indefensible. But I mean, I never expect better from
an end influencer, I guess, or at least these days,
what do you guys think? They'll let me know in
the comments, make sure subscribed. Hit the like button and
all of that. Now, next, guys, we need to talk
(24:12):
about Tucker Carlson, the independent right wing podcast star and
now YouTuber and kind of internet figure, because he just
hosted the disgraced allegedly X gay Milo Yanopolis, who is
like this very fringe internet figure who used to be
a prominent gay conservative and now is an X gay
(24:35):
totally super duper for Shore doesn't do anything with men anymore,
for this really bizarre interview, and I discussed it with
Clarkson over on our Normal Gays YouTube channel in a
video we will release, and that focuses on Tucker and
Michel's conversation. But Tucker also delivered a monologue at the
start of the episode, and this episode is nearly a
million views and I'm sure millions more across podcast platforms,
(24:57):
So this is an influential piece of content. And this
monologue bothered me not just because I disagreed with it.
I disagree with stuff all the time, but because Tucker
is either grossly incompetent at basic research or fact checking,
and because I know that not to be true because
of his past work over the years. He just blatantly
lied and defamed not only Republican senators, but also religious
(25:22):
leaders in the process. We're gonna take a look at
this clip, but the context here is that Tucker is
discussing a twenty twenty three law in Uganda which criminalized homosexuality,
made it illegal and punishable by life in prison, and
then for certain content crimes that are considered aggravated homosexuality,
gave the death penalty. Tucker completely misrepresented the actual legal
(25:48):
text of this law to attack other Republicans and even
religious leaders as if they're like woke or something, and
sort of defend this barbarous, monstrous Uganda law without further ado.
Let's just look at his clip and I will as
we go along, I'll explain why it's wrong, and then
I'll show you the law itself so you can see
that how he's describing it is just totally detached from reality.
(26:09):
Let's watch.
Speaker 4 (26:10):
And we know this because about ten years later in Uganda,
the legislature passed almost unanimously with only I think one
dissenting vote, a law against something called aggravated homosexuality. Aggravated homosexuality,
as of twenty twenty three, is a death penalty offense
in Uganda. What aggravated homosexuality, but death penalty offense. That's medieval.
(26:35):
But how is it defined in Uganda? Well, if you
read it, and you can because it's online. The Ugandan
government defines aggregated homosexuality as gay rape of children, gay
rape of the elderly who can consent, people over seventy five,
gay rape of people who are mentally deficient, and the
(26:56):
intentional transmission of deadly diseases to another person.
Speaker 2 (27:00):
So it's particularly frustrating that Tucker says if you read it,
and you can because it's online, because he is so
woefully and totally misrepresenting this law to the point of
just complete dishonesty and deception, that if anyone actually reads it,
which I did, I went and found it. It's in
English in full, and I went and looked at it.
(27:22):
It is the Anti Homosexuality Act of twenty twenty three
in Uganda. And I looked at this and it is
very clear that what Tucker is saying about the law
is not true. First off, this law does not, and
he says it's over and over again, just apply to
gay rape and other kinds of specific horrific offenses. It
(27:44):
makes all homosexuality illegal. First of all, punishable by a
lifetime in prison. So I will read from the law
here for you. The Anti Homosexuality Act twenty twenty three,
an Act to prohibit any form of sexual relife between
persons of the same sex, to prohibit the promotion or
recognition of sexual relations between persons of the same sex,
(28:07):
and for related matters. So anything is banned here. It's
not just you know, abusing an elderly person or a
mentally infirmed person, which, of course nobody would would find
that to be particularly controversial. More from the law here,
the offense of homosexuality. A person commits the offense of
homosexuality if the person performs a sexual act or allows
(28:28):
a person of the same sex to perform a sexual
act on him or her. A person who commits the
offense of homosexuality is liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.
So this law is very clear. It punishes consensual same
sex relationships with life in prison. So Tucker is misrepresenting it. Now,
(28:49):
what about the part that involves the death penalty, the
aggravated homosexuality portion. Well, Talker's telling that only applies to
you know abuses, horrick instances and abuses. However, that is
also not true. Oh, by the way, to remove any
shadow of a doubt from the law here, consent to
(29:10):
sexual act is no defense. The consent of a person
to commit a sexual act shall not constitute a defense
to a charge under this Act. But the part about
aggravated homosexuality, which involves the death penalty, also applies not
just to gay rape, as he says over and over
again in an incredibly dishonest way, it also applies to
repeat offenders. And repeat offenders or serial offenders are defined
(29:35):
as a person who has previous convictions for the offense
of homosexuality or related offenses. So if you even are
convicted of consensual gay relationships between adults multiple times, death penalty.
That's what they're saying. And yet he is lying about that,
saying it only applies to horrific instances where kids are
heard or elderly people are taking advantage of It's not true.
(29:59):
He's either totally failed his research and or he's and
just as grossly incompetent, or he's blatantly lying and hoping
that the millions of people who watch him will never
catch on. Either way, it is just a totally reckless
and dishonest way to approach political commentary. But let's keep going,
because here's part that I actually think is really, really
(30:21):
shady is when he starts speaking about other other figures
who condemn this law because unlike him, they, you know,
believe in basic human freedom. Let's listen.
Speaker 4 (30:33):
So it's rape and murder effectively are against the law,
in fact, capital crimes in Uganda. Hmm, it's a little
different than advertised, but you would never know it.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
Yeah, if you lie about this what the law does
and is, then it's different from how everyone reported on
it and discussed.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
Great point, Tuck, because the entire American book class erupted
as one when this law passed in East Africa, thousands
of miles away with a non relevant trading partner with
no real military, in which there's no actual reason to
care about what Uganda does. But everyone here did care.
(31:14):
Bipartisan Lee, here's Senator Ted Cruz, the self described conservative
from Texas. Here's what he said. He tweeted this. He
put us in writing, as he so often does, and
we're quoting any law criminalizing homosexuality or imposing the death
penalty for quote, aggravated homosexuality is grotesque and an abomination
(31:34):
all civilized nations to join together in condemning this human
rights abuse. Yeah, so it's uncivilized to penalize gay rape
or the intentional.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Transmission of a deadly disease.
Speaker 4 (31:49):
That's uncivilized, seems kind of civilized.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
Well again, Tucker, you're just totally wrong about the substance
of the law. Yes, it is barbaric, inhumane and evil
to imprison people because they're gay and engage in consensual relationships,
and then to punish those people with the death penalty
if they are repeat offenders of that that is evil.
(32:15):
And the fact that the law also applies to some
cases where I think most people would agree or at
least it's like not outrageous, although maybe you could question
whether some of the things described are truly death penalty offenses.
But sure, yeah, obviously people, he's just totally misrepresenting, Tucker
Ted Kruz, who I'm no fan of, by the way,
But just like in the basic spirit of fairness, obviously
(32:38):
Tucker is not calling it uncivilized to punish rape and
the intentional transmission of disease. That's not what he's saying,
And you're just woefully misrepresenting him, and Ducker even did
this to religious leaders of the Anglican Church, who apparently
he's horrified that they would condemn this kind of evil thing,
like this evil law. Let's listen to Tucker.
Speaker 4 (33:01):
But at the time nobody agreed this was grotesque, the
kind of thing that only Africans would do. It's one
step up from cannibalism. Could you believe it? Patalizing gay
rape and the intentional, intentional transmission of AIDS. What do
I think of next?
Speaker 2 (33:13):
We'll throw you in a stop pot, savages.
Speaker 4 (33:17):
You'll notice that Uncle Ted called it an abomination, and
the Anglican Communion agreed. Here's justin whether it be the
Archbishop of Canterbury, the leader of the rapidly dying Anglican Communion,
which would include the Episcopal Church of the United States
the Angli State Church of England. He wrote to the
Archbishop of Uganda, Christian brother to Christian brother to express
(33:38):
his quote grief and dismay at the Church of Uganda
support for the Anti Homosexuality Act. The head of the
Church of England was filled with grief at the thought
that rape would be banned and the intentional transmission of AIDS.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Et cetera, et cetera, except for the part where that's
not at all what happened and you're just lying. I
don't I don't know what to tell you. I think
they should sue him the Anglican. You know, maybe defamation
laws are so stringent that he'll be able to plead
ignorance somehow, But he is just so woefully misrepresenting the
facts to tar people who expressed a good faith concern
(34:17):
about a repressive law against human freedom and act as
if they are supporters of rape. It is just one
of the most malicious and dishonest bits of political commentary
I've seen in a while, and these days, that is
saying something. And if Tucker can get a story like
this that he clearly spent a lot of time researching,
(34:39):
I don't know where he's researching it because he got
it so wrong. But if he can get this wrong,
either through incompetence or through dishonesty, then I really don't
understand how you can trust anything he says. And maybe,
you know, if he was to correct the record, apologize
for the mistake, apologized, maybe then you could. But he
hasn't done that. He won't do that. He's just spread,
(35:00):
adding wildly false information to millions of people, and attacking
and defaming public figures by a total misrepresentation of their views.
And it's just fine. I'll just keep it moving and
millions of people will still tune into him. Guys, At
some point, we have to stop rewarding people with attention
when they betray our trust over and over again. And
(35:20):
I really do believe that's what needs to happen to Tucker.
But until it does, as long as he is this
massive has this massive audience, and is as relevant as
he is, I will continue to criticize and call out
when his coverage goes astray. At least that's my take
on it all. But you guys can let me know
what you think in the comments below, make sure subscribe
to the like button and all of that, and that'll
(35:42):
be it, guys for today's episode of The Brad Versus
Everyone Podcast. Thanks so much for tuning in, and we'll
talk again real soon
Hey, panting, you're fired.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
That's what you're going with. Another day, another ridiculous woke
meltdown on TikTok from people who have way too much
free time. We're going to break this down and so
much more in today's episode of The Bread Versus Everyone podcast,
(00:32):
my daily show where we take on the craziest stories
from across the Internet and social media, all from an
independent political perspective. We've got a lot on deck today,
but first we've got to talk about what's going on
on TikTok right now, particularly the woke side of that
app and among the female inhabitants. I would say, not
(00:54):
exclusively female, but mostly females, and perhaps some gays are
getting in on it as well. But ay, a full
scale meltdown is underway after a color institute announced the
color of the year is a shade of white. Are
you not scandalized by that? Yeah? Me either. I didn't
(01:17):
even know this thing existed until five minutes ago, but
the internet is losing its mind over it. First, here's
some reporting from CNN on the announcement itself.
Speaker 3 (01:26):
What does it make you feel when you see that color?
Speaker 4 (01:29):
Um?
Speaker 2 (01:30):
I mean, the clouds are nice, maybe it's like more creativity,
like an abstract painting.
Speaker 5 (01:34):
It seems like a lovely, soothing tone.
Speaker 3 (01:37):
Pantone just announce the color of the Year for twenty
twenty six. The Pantone Color Institute describes it as a
calming influence in a frenetic society, a feeling of serenity,
a quote billowy and balanced shade. The color is cloud Dancer.
Every year since nineteen ninety nine, the Pantone Color Institute
picks a color that captures the cultural zeitgeist and trends
(01:59):
for the year. This year, the company explains, Cloud Dancer
represents new beginnings and a desire for a fresh start.
Speaker 2 (02:06):
I'm already bored because I'm just not that kind of
gay fashion colors. I'm yawning over here. But and that's
no shade to those of y'all who are into this
kind of thing. But I don't really care. I find
it hilarious that they picked this color with the hope
that because it was like a soothing white, it would
calm people or represent freshness or new beginnings. Instead, it
(02:29):
became the subject of a frenzy and race hysteria from
white left wing people mostly and people of color as
well on TikTok and started like this very popular. Millions
and millions and millions of views on these videos, outrage
and meltdown over this. Let's take a look at a
little compilation. I meant, I'm made for y'all. Keep in
(02:52):
mind that these videos you're about to see genuinely have
tens of millions of views and hundreds of thousands and
hundreds of thousands of likes on them. This is a
trending topic that people actually apparently care about.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
Let's listen, Hey, Pantie, you're fired. You really chose white?
You chose white in these times. I know the danger
of that kind of messaging.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Oh my gosh, not her with the open flames. She
is lighting shit on fire. Extra points for drama, babe,
I will give you that. But she is lighting shit
on fire close to her face, and then talking about
how it's dangerous to have the color of the year
be white because of course it's like white people. I
guess my mind doesn't even go there, But we're you
(03:40):
then anti racist. Immediately think of a race and somebody
says the color white in terms of like a color palette.
What's funny is I think the color last year was
like Mocha brown or someone is something And funny how
no one cared and no one made it a race
issue because we're not as brain broken as y'all. But
I do just find this woman hysterical lighting stuff on
(04:01):
fire really really helping you beat the crazy Caaren allegations.
Speaker 1 (04:05):
There the messaging and I'm not having it. I'm not
having it.
Speaker 6 (04:11):
The color of the year is white?
Speaker 4 (04:15):
Is this?
Speaker 6 (04:16):
Am I being gatholic?
Speaker 2 (04:17):
This field like a dog whistle?
Speaker 6 (04:19):
Somebody, huh, low key, Panton's color of the year is
giving a white supremacy. I hate to say it, but
it's true.
Speaker 5 (04:28):
Good news, everybody. Pantone just announced it's twenty twenty six
color of the Year and they're going with white.
Speaker 2 (04:40):
Is she okay? Pantone? Hit that's what you're going with.
Speaker 5 (04:50):
Now did you forget to read the room or did
you read it? And this is just our hex code?
Speaker 4 (04:57):
Now ka kay?
Speaker 6 (04:59):
Was there a single person of color in the room
that was making this decision? And Tone just announced their
color of Year for twenty twenty six. It's called cloud
Damcer and the optics, man.
Speaker 2 (05:12):
It's not good.
Speaker 6 (05:13):
Oh.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
The optics of picking white as the color y'all. There's
so much here that the last woman seems so mentally unwell,
like the lexapro is not working. Whatever it is, she
needs a stronger dose from her doctor. Maybe she's been
mixing up too much red wine. I don't know, but
she seems so unstable and so deeply rattled by this,
(05:37):
which is just insane to me. I mean, it is
not that deep. This is just color. What is white
just banned from Color of the Year because some of
y'all might interpret it in this crazy extreme way that
it's absolutely not intended to be. I really, I don't know.
These people need to get outside. They don't. I don't
(05:58):
know this is I think a lot of it comes
back to a sense of helplessness and powerlessness that these
people are dealing with. They obviously are are distraught over
Trump's selection and kind of the rise of cultural conservatism
and Republican values, some of which I agree with, some
of which I don't, some of which I support, some
(06:20):
of which I push back on. But they're really distraught
over it. They feel helpless because they are, you know,
not in control or in charge, and they are desperately
I think, reaching for stuff that they actually could control,
and if they spend all their days worked up about
Pantone's color of the year, maybe they don't have to
grapple with like the things that actually matter, that are
(06:40):
happening that that cause them so much distress. I don't know,
that's my like, if I put on my psychologist hat
and try to figure out what the heck is happening
here with this meltdown, that's where I have to go.
Because there's something just deeply, deeply absurd about suggesting that
Pantones selecting a shade of white is like implicit KKK messaging.
(07:02):
And then there's something quite funny about the dude at
the end. I guess there is one guy involved in
this his comments because he said, we're no people of
color in the room. They always have this, They have
this very condescending idea that like, oh, all people of
color are woke, so of course if there had been
a POC in the room, they would have caught this
(07:24):
microaggression or whatever, which is actually itself kind of racist
because people of color are individuals. Crazy take I know,
they are individual human beings with their own agency and
opinions and values and perspectives, and not all of them
in fact, most of them are not are like TikTok,
brain broken, brain rotted like some of y'all. And so
let me play you this clip actually of the CEO
(07:46):
of Pantone discussing the selection for Color of the Year,
and tell me what, if anything you notice To address some.
Speaker 7 (07:53):
Of the online comments, let me state clearly that white
is indeed a color. We knew that people would have
emotions about this year as color. When I first learned
the color that, I thought, oh, this is going to
be pretty controversial.
Speaker 8 (08:14):
But the power of this program, the power of pant
Hol's Color of the Year, is that it sparks a conversation,
a conversation about color that everyone can participate in that
panton we don't dictate that conversation, We facilitated.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
Gosh, I just hate like corporate speak. That's on a side,
But the way that corporate people speak sometimes is so
maddening to me because it's like, get to your point,
what do you mean by anyway? For audio listeners, the
president of Pantone is a black woman, right, her name
is Sky Kelly, and she spoke about this. They also
released statements about this and making it quite clear this
(08:53):
was not in fact intended as a secret dog whistle
or some sort of implicit support of white supremacy. I mean.
The funny thing too, is like, imagine the people running
this company, like this paint company or color company or
I don't even know what it is. Again, I'm not
that kind of gay. Y'all are mostly women and gays
(09:17):
and people who lean liberal. Let's be honest, let's be
so one hundred, keep it a buck. And so these
are not like a secret bastion of hidden Trump extremists
trying to signal the rise of white supremacy or whatever.
These people are hallucinating and maybe they knew it would
be kind of controversial and they thought it might be
good marketing. That's possible. I could certainly believe that. But
(09:38):
if then then that doesn't somehow prove the crazy allegations
that people are making it, right, It just proves that
they knew they could exploit crazy people to amplify their
brand and talk about it a lot. That is not
the same thing as the allegations actually being true. And
that's a very important distinction to make here. But I
just come back to the privilege behind some of this,
(10:02):
Like you must have no real problems if you're getting
this worked up, if you're crashing out on camera over
the color of the year from some color institute nobody
outside of the interior design or design industry had ever
heard of. Because obviously this is like a big deal
to people in that world, but everyone out of there
had never heard of it, and mostly people are not
(10:23):
part of that who are talking about it now. You
must have no real problems or too much free time.
If you're actually so pressed about cloud Dancer being the
color of the year, not everything is in fact that deep.
That's my take at least, and I'm sticking to it,
But y'all can let me know what you think in
(10:44):
the comments below. Do hit the like button and make
sure you're subscribed while you are at it. Please, If
you are from the color community and you have thoughts
on this, and I'm talking about like design, I'm not
talking about people of color. Goodness, what a words out
that was. I do want to hear from you. If
you're in like the design or color space and you've
(11:05):
heard about all this drama and you have thoughts, do
let me know in the comments, guys, And at some point,
if you keep hearing dog whistles that no normal people
in real life ever notice. Consider that they may not
be dog whistles. You may in fact be schizophrenic. Sorry,
so sorry, not sorry, but anyway, guys, we'll leave it
(11:25):
there on that one for now, and up next we
got to talk about the latest Twitter drama and viral
video that is somehow dividing opinion. Kind of crazy to
me that this one even there's any room for disagreement,
but it concerns of course, because we keep doing this.
We keep finding like random videos of some minimum wage
(11:46):
worker having an interaction and they go megaviral and we
make that person famous or even just for a moment
like a flash and the pan kind of thing, because
it maps onto some culture war issue. Well, the latest
one of these involves a Cinnabon employee, and apparently those
do exist outside of shopping malls that closed down ten
years ago or fifteen years ago. So Cinnabon employee was
(12:09):
just fired after a clash that she had with apparently
Somali customers, so of immigrants of Somali origin, and this
happened in Wisconsin, and the video is absolutely insane to watch.
It is, of course, only a snippet of the interaction.
We're gonna play it, and I'll have to censor some
words because she does say the N word repeatedly in anger,
(12:31):
which is kind of wild. But so we don't really
know what happened before this video, So I will just
acknowledge that it's possible the customers were polite and reasonable
and this woman's just a racist jerk. It's also possible
they were really nasty or harassed her, or were rude
to her, or they're the instigators. We don't know. All
we know is what happened when the cameras started rolling,
(12:53):
And I think what happens then is bad enough to
call into question the fact that so many people are
somehow of defending this woman no matter what. But first
I'll just show you the video, the whole thing, and
we can we can talk about it after all. Right,
let's take a look at this.
Speaker 7 (13:08):
Sexualizing your body makes you a gettle person? Are you recording?
Speaker 2 (13:12):
I'm gonna record you. Yes?
Speaker 8 (13:14):
Do you want me to throw.
Speaker 7 (13:19):
I am racist? You are, and I'll.
Speaker 1 (13:24):
Say that to the whole entire world.
Speaker 7 (13:27):
Don't your life, by the way, talking about you're talking
about respect.
Speaker 1 (13:32):
You're talking about respect.
Speaker 3 (13:34):
You want a fire from this place of you're not
gonna be working here.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Suck it suck?
Speaker 1 (13:39):
What look?
Speaker 6 (13:40):
How you look?
Speaker 1 (13:41):
What? What's wrong with you?
Speaker 7 (13:43):
Is that ugliness?
Speaker 5 (13:48):
You're the ugliest person I've ever seen in my life,
knowing not knowing enough.
Speaker 7 (13:53):
No you're not, because you know damn well, you're.
Speaker 6 (13:58):
Keep keep squeezing that.
Speaker 7 (13:59):
Cat of it.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Be well, she seems lovely and stable. I mean I
should say, like maybe the customers did something before the
cameras started rolling to instigate or whatever. I mean, there's
that bit about how they they seem to be judging
her for the fact that she's not covered up in
(14:19):
a jab, which they have now after the fact, said well,
she had made a comment about the wife's jab that
was rude, and that's why they said that. It doesn't
really matter. It's like all of this building up to
the clip. I don't know who the true villain is
in that part, but what this woman does here is
psychotic and insane and racist. Doesn't matter if a customer
(14:41):
mistreats you or harasses you, if that's what happened, Like
I said, we don't know the appropriate response is to
kick them out of the store, call the police if
they won't leave even I can imagine a world where
you get really upset and maybe you cuss them out
and you behave in an unprofessional way, but you don't
go full like clansmen start calling them the N word
and proudly boasting you are racist at work? Are you crazy?
(15:08):
How could you possibly think that's acceptable behavior? Doesn't matter
what they do to instigate, that's still evil and immoral
on your part. If they did anything to instigate, you
still can't do that, and of course they're going to
fire you for that. You're at work. This woman is
dropping hard urs in anger on customer on customers at
(15:29):
work for a corporation, and then half of Twitter is
acting like she's the latest person unfairly canceled by the
woke mob girl. What are y'all okay? I mean? Of course,
Sinnabon fired her and put out a statement they said,
we've seen the disturbing video from the Cinnabon Bakery in Ashwabanan, Wisconsin,
and we do not condone this behavior. The former employee
(15:51):
was immediately terminated by the franchise owner. Their actions do
not reflect our values or the welcome experience every guest deserves.
So I don't know, because this involves Somalian people or
immigrants or something. It's become somehow a cultural flash point,
and a serious number of high profile people on right
(16:12):
wing Twitter in particular are defending the woman in the video.
Now again, I'm not defending the customers necessarily. Maybe they're
also like bad or I don't know, But no matter what,
her behavior is unacceptable and unhinged and evil, and she
has absolutely earned herself a firing. I just I find
(16:34):
it insane that people defend the indefensible like this because
of the culture war. But let me read you some
tweets from one from bad Ombre I stand with the
Cinnabon lady. For one from Derek Evans, white people are
sick and tired of the way we are treated in
our own country. Yeah, the country belongs to Americans, not
(16:56):
all of whom are white. And even if you are mistreated,
that is not an excuse to be evil and racist
to people anyway. The racist influencer Lily Gaddis says, I
absolutely support this. You've ruined your life, by the way,
in quotes referring to what the customer said, Remember that
this is how invaders are taking our country. If you
(17:16):
stand up against it. They'll ruin your life. Stand up
white people before it's too late, or just like, don't
call people the N word in a racist and angry
way on camera while you're at work, and you'll be fine.
Are they weaponizing that against you or are you just
acting a fool at work on camera, behaving yourself despicably
(17:40):
and then being held accountable for it. That's not a
problem most white people will experience because they're not going
to act like that anyway. This is my personal favorite.
Larry writes Crystal a hard working white mom, as if
you know anything about her or that she's hard working.
Was citing the fact that she's a mom, which is
(18:01):
hilarious because of some things people have unearthed about her
past that I can't verify, so I don't want to say.
But if those are true, then that's hilarious that he's
citing that. Anyway. Crystal, a hard working white mom, was
doing her job at cinnabon when a Somali couple decided
to make her shift horrible with intimidation. You actually have
no idea, you have you have no idea what happened
before the cameras were rolling that they went in there
(18:23):
and went to decided to harass her. You do not
know that, so that's you're assuming conclusions not based in
the evidence anyway. He concludes, instead of banning the offenders,
Cinnabon files fires Crystal to keep the Somali cap couple happy. Okay,
even if the Somali customers had done something wrong, then
(18:44):
they should also be banned. Yeah, you should still fire Crystal.
And it's not to keep the Somali community happy. It's
to protect the national brand of your corporation, which I'm
sure has millions of black customers, and say that it's
not in fact okay for employees to broadly proudly boast
that they're racist at work and call customers the N word.
(19:04):
What kind of crazy pills are y'all taking? Spinach bra
wrote in a tweet with seven hundred thousand views at Cinnabon,
I'm a daily customer. I'm sorry we need to pause
on that. I am a daily customer of Sinnabon. Sir,
I have questions about your health and your decision making,
(19:27):
and you should discuss that with a doctor because that
seems unwise to me. But you know what, it is
a free country. So Anyway, I am a daily customer.
I will never buy another Cinnabon after you fired that
lady who was harassed by Somalian illegal aliens trying to
do her job. Of course, he has no idea whether
these people are illegal aliens or not. And again it
(19:48):
wouldn't matter. You still can't call black people the N
word at work, oh Eve. Anyway, Jack Possebik, the far
right influencer, wrote, I'm going to take a wild guest
here that the left is lying about the Sinnabon employee
in Wisconsin because that is all they do. How many
times have we seen this cycle play out? Remember the
(20:11):
rule what happened right before this video? Now, I understand
his point that these things can be taken out of
context and sometimes we jump to conclusions too quickly, and okay,
I'm open to that. However, in this case, there's really
nothing that could come before the video starts that would
justify what she said, and I feel confident I literally
(20:33):
cannot imagine a scenario where therefore what she did is
okay and not a fireable offense. If you can, let
me know, I can't imagine one. And it's crazy that
she can behave in such an awful way on camera,
and they'll still find a way to defend her. In fact,
our culture is so screwed up now that there is
(20:53):
now a go fund me for this woman help Crystal
or I guess it's a give send go because gofund
me would probably ban this campaign. Oh and as of
time of this recording, they have raised one hundred and
two thousand dollars for this woman who proudly declared herself
a racist and was incredibly racist and abusive towards customers.
(21:17):
Oh gosh, this is just absolutely unhinged stuff. I think
I fear that polarization and partisanship are driving everyone insane
to the point where they just defend the most absolutely
indefensible and unhinged behavior because it's our side versus their side.
And I actually don't know if this is true. But
(21:37):
the funniest thing is some people on Twitter are saying
that this woman is actually a Kamala voter, which is
hilarious if true. I don't know if true, but again,
it shouldn't matter. Basic decency and respect for our fellow
citizens and just like common sense as an employee, all
require you to not behave like this at work or
really ever, and if all this woman had done, say
(22:00):
like say, because some people are saying, well, they were
sexually harassing her, which we don't know, and they're going
off of the first ten seconds of that clip that
I showed you where they're saying, oh, why are you
you're sexualizing your body by not wearing a his job.
That one comment in a loane does not constitute I mean,
it's inappropriate to say to an employee, and she'd be
just about to kick them out, but it doesn't mean that.
That's doesn't mean they were sexually harassing her. That's a
(22:23):
bit much. And so she could have asked them to leave.
If they refused, she could have called the police. She
could even have yelled at them, argued with them in
all sorts of ways, and then I and then said hey,
like they were, they just came in and started a
problem and all these things, and then there would be
a legitimate case to defend this woman. But when she
boldly states I am racist, you are an N word.
(22:44):
That is evil behavior, that is obviously unprofessional conduct that
any company with two sense of integrity and just basic
common sense as far as profit and keeping customers happy
is concerned, is going to kick that employee out there door.
This woman is not a victim. She is a villain,
and she does not deserve sympathy or a give send
(23:07):
go fundraiser sending her six figures. Seriously, y'all could be
buying malaria nets or feeding the poor with that money,
and you're deciding to give it to a woman who
broadly boasted that she is a racist and called customers
the end word? What the how do? How did we
get here? How did the train goes so far off
the tracks in this cultural war? Something here is really
(23:30):
sick and messed up, and there's really just no level
of what aboutism or attempting to explain how the customers
are also bad that possibly justifies this woman's behavior. And
it is to the eternal shame of these influencers that
their brains are so carroted by a combination of tribalism
(23:51):
and desperation for attention and clicks. They will defend the
absolute indefensible. But I mean, I never expect better from
an end influencer, I guess, or at least these days,
what do you guys think? They'll let me know in
the comments, make sure subscribed. Hit the like button and
all of that. Now, next, guys, we need to talk
(24:12):
about Tucker Carlson, the independent right wing podcast star and
now YouTuber and kind of internet figure, because he just
hosted the disgraced allegedly X gay Milo Yanopolis, who is
like this very fringe internet figure who used to be
a prominent gay conservative and now is an X gay
(24:35):
totally super duper for Shore doesn't do anything with men anymore,
for this really bizarre interview, and I discussed it with
Clarkson over on our Normal Gays YouTube channel in a
video we will release, and that focuses on Tucker and
Michel's conversation. But Tucker also delivered a monologue at the
start of the episode, and this episode is nearly a
million views and I'm sure millions more across podcast platforms,
(24:57):
So this is an influential piece of content. And this
monologue bothered me not just because I disagreed with it.
I disagree with stuff all the time, but because Tucker
is either grossly incompetent at basic research or fact checking,
and because I know that not to be true because
of his past work over the years. He just blatantly
lied and defamed not only Republican senators, but also religious
(25:22):
leaders in the process. We're gonna take a look at
this clip, but the context here is that Tucker is
discussing a twenty twenty three law in Uganda which criminalized homosexuality,
made it illegal and punishable by life in prison, and
then for certain content crimes that are considered aggravated homosexuality,
gave the death penalty. Tucker completely misrepresented the actual legal
(25:48):
text of this law to attack other Republicans and even
religious leaders as if they're like woke or something, and
sort of defend this barbarous, monstrous Uganda law without further ado.
Let's just look at his clip and I will as
we go along, I'll explain why it's wrong, and then
I'll show you the law itself so you can see
that how he's describing it is just totally detached from reality.
(26:09):
Let's watch.
Speaker 4 (26:10):
And we know this because about ten years later in Uganda,
the legislature passed almost unanimously with only I think one
dissenting vote, a law against something called aggravated homosexuality. Aggravated homosexuality,
as of twenty twenty three, is a death penalty offense
in Uganda. What aggravated homosexuality, but death penalty offense. That's medieval.
(26:35):
But how is it defined in Uganda? Well, if you
read it, and you can because it's online. The Ugandan
government defines aggregated homosexuality as gay rape of children, gay
rape of the elderly who can consent, people over seventy five,
gay rape of people who are mentally deficient, and the
(26:56):
intentional transmission of deadly diseases to another person.
Speaker 2 (27:00):
So it's particularly frustrating that Tucker says if you read it,
and you can because it's online, because he is so
woefully and totally misrepresenting this law to the point of
just complete dishonesty and deception, that if anyone actually reads it,
which I did, I went and found it. It's in
English in full, and I went and looked at it.
(27:22):
It is the Anti Homosexuality Act of twenty twenty three
in Uganda. And I looked at this and it is
very clear that what Tucker is saying about the law
is not true. First off, this law does not, and
he says it's over and over again, just apply to
gay rape and other kinds of specific horrific offenses. It
(27:44):
makes all homosexuality illegal. First of all, punishable by a
lifetime in prison. So I will read from the law
here for you. The Anti Homosexuality Act twenty twenty three,
an Act to prohibit any form of sexual relife between
persons of the same sex, to prohibit the promotion or
recognition of sexual relations between persons of the same sex,
(28:07):
and for related matters. So anything is banned here. It's
not just you know, abusing an elderly person or a
mentally infirmed person, which, of course nobody would would find
that to be particularly controversial. More from the law here,
the offense of homosexuality. A person commits the offense of
homosexuality if the person performs a sexual act or allows
(28:28):
a person of the same sex to perform a sexual
act on him or her. A person who commits the
offense of homosexuality is liable on conviction to imprisonment for life.
So this law is very clear. It punishes consensual same
sex relationships with life in prison. So Tucker is misrepresenting it. Now,
(28:49):
what about the part that involves the death penalty, the
aggravated homosexuality portion. Well, Talker's telling that only applies to
you know abuses, horrick instances and abuses. However, that is
also not true. Oh, by the way, to remove any
shadow of a doubt from the law here, consent to
(29:10):
sexual act is no defense. The consent of a person
to commit a sexual act shall not constitute a defense
to a charge under this Act. But the part about
aggravated homosexuality, which involves the death penalty, also applies not
just to gay rape, as he says over and over
again in an incredibly dishonest way, it also applies to
repeat offenders. And repeat offenders or serial offenders are defined
(29:35):
as a person who has previous convictions for the offense
of homosexuality or related offenses. So if you even are
convicted of consensual gay relationships between adults multiple times, death penalty.
That's what they're saying. And yet he is lying about that,
saying it only applies to horrific instances where kids are
heard or elderly people are taking advantage of It's not true.
(29:59):
He's either totally failed his research and or he's and
just as grossly incompetent, or he's blatantly lying and hoping
that the millions of people who watch him will never
catch on. Either way, it is just a totally reckless
and dishonest way to approach political commentary. But let's keep going,
because here's part that I actually think is really, really
(30:21):
shady is when he starts speaking about other other figures
who condemn this law because unlike him, they, you know,
believe in basic human freedom. Let's listen.
Speaker 4 (30:33):
So it's rape and murder effectively are against the law,
in fact, capital crimes in Uganda. Hmm, it's a little
different than advertised, but you would never know it.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
Yeah, if you lie about this what the law does
and is, then it's different from how everyone reported on
it and discussed.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
Great point, Tuck, because the entire American book class erupted
as one when this law passed in East Africa, thousands
of miles away with a non relevant trading partner with
no real military, in which there's no actual reason to
care about what Uganda does. But everyone here did care.
(31:14):
Bipartisan Lee, here's Senator Ted Cruz, the self described conservative
from Texas. Here's what he said. He tweeted this. He
put us in writing, as he so often does, and
we're quoting any law criminalizing homosexuality or imposing the death
penalty for quote, aggravated homosexuality is grotesque and an abomination
(31:34):
all civilized nations to join together in condemning this human
rights abuse. Yeah, so it's uncivilized to penalize gay rape
or the intentional.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
Transmission of a deadly disease.
Speaker 4 (31:49):
That's uncivilized, seems kind of civilized.
Speaker 2 (31:54):
Well again, Tucker, you're just totally wrong about the substance
of the law. Yes, it is barbaric, inhumane and evil
to imprison people because they're gay and engage in consensual relationships,
and then to punish those people with the death penalty
if they are repeat offenders of that that is evil.
(32:15):
And the fact that the law also applies to some
cases where I think most people would agree or at
least it's like not outrageous, although maybe you could question
whether some of the things described are truly death penalty offenses.
But sure, yeah, obviously people, he's just totally misrepresenting, Tucker
Ted Kruz, who I'm no fan of, by the way,
But just like in the basic spirit of fairness, obviously
(32:38):
Tucker is not calling it uncivilized to punish rape and
the intentional transmission of disease. That's not what he's saying,
And you're just woefully misrepresenting him, and Ducker even did
this to religious leaders of the Anglican Church, who apparently
he's horrified that they would condemn this kind of evil thing,
like this evil law. Let's listen to Tucker.
Speaker 4 (33:01):
But at the time nobody agreed this was grotesque, the
kind of thing that only Africans would do. It's one
step up from cannibalism. Could you believe it? Patalizing gay
rape and the intentional, intentional transmission of AIDS. What do
I think of next?
Speaker 2 (33:13):
We'll throw you in a stop pot, savages.
Speaker 4 (33:17):
You'll notice that Uncle Ted called it an abomination, and
the Anglican Communion agreed. Here's justin whether it be the
Archbishop of Canterbury, the leader of the rapidly dying Anglican Communion,
which would include the Episcopal Church of the United States
the Angli State Church of England. He wrote to the
Archbishop of Uganda, Christian brother to Christian brother to express
(33:38):
his quote grief and dismay at the Church of Uganda
support for the Anti Homosexuality Act. The head of the
Church of England was filled with grief at the thought
that rape would be banned and the intentional transmission of AIDS.
Speaker 2 (33:54):
Et cetera, et cetera, except for the part where that's
not at all what happened and you're just lying. I
don't I don't know what to tell you. I think
they should sue him the Anglican. You know, maybe defamation
laws are so stringent that he'll be able to plead
ignorance somehow, But he is just so woefully misrepresenting the
facts to tar people who expressed a good faith concern
(34:17):
about a repressive law against human freedom and act as
if they are supporters of rape. It is just one
of the most malicious and dishonest bits of political commentary
I've seen in a while, and these days, that is
saying something. And if Tucker can get a story like
this that he clearly spent a lot of time researching,
(34:39):
I don't know where he's researching it because he got
it so wrong. But if he can get this wrong,
either through incompetence or through dishonesty, then I really don't
understand how you can trust anything he says. And maybe,
you know, if he was to correct the record, apologize
for the mistake, apologized, maybe then you could. But he
hasn't done that. He won't do that. He's just spread,
(35:00):
adding wildly false information to millions of people, and attacking
and defaming public figures by a total misrepresentation of their views.
And it's just fine. I'll just keep it moving and
millions of people will still tune into him. Guys, At
some point, we have to stop rewarding people with attention
when they betray our trust over and over again. And
(35:20):
I really do believe that's what needs to happen to Tucker.
But until it does, as long as he is this
massive has this massive audience, and is as relevant as
he is, I will continue to criticize and call out
when his coverage goes astray. At least that's my take
on it all. But you guys can let me know
what you think in the comments below, make sure subscribe
to the like button and all of that, and that'll
(35:42):
be it, guys for today's episode of The Brad Versus
Everyone Podcast. Thanks so much for tuning in, and we'll
talk again real soon
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com