October 31, 2024 • 31 mins
What if a single rally could redefine political engagement in America? Kamala Harris's recent massive gathering at the Ellipse, drawing an incredible 75,000 supporters, might just have done that. We're talking about a powerful display of unity and optimism that starkly contrasts with the turmoil of past events at the same venue. This episode unpacks the significance of such a turnout and Harris's vision for a united future, while also contemplating the role of media in shaping voter perceptions and their involvement in politics.
Next up, we're tackling the thorny issue of political statements in sports. When NFL player Nick Bosa sported a Trump 2024 hat during a post-game interview, reactions were nothing short of explosive. We're diving into the double standards that athletes face when expressing political views, comparing the fallout of Bosa’s move to Colin Kaepernick's iconic protest. We also question the unchecked influence of sports team owners' political leanings, and how these might subtly sway fans' loyalties and perceptions. Join us for a lively discussion on the awkward intersection where touchdowns meet political turfs.
Finally, we shift the spotlight to Stephen A. Smith, the charismatic ESPN personality whose political entanglements are as intriguing as his sports commentary. We're digging into Stephen's journey from journalist to a media figure, examining his engagements with Republican politics and appearances on Fox News. How do these moves impact his credibility and influence, particularly within the Black community? As we explore these themes, we also raise critical questions about media control in today's world and its implications for democracy. Tune in for insightful stories and reflections on navigating the complex web of media, politics, and sports.
Support the show:
https://www.buzzsprout.com/2003879/support
Follow our show's hosts on
Twitter:
twitter.com/@CoolTXchick
twitter.com/@Caroldedwine
twitter.com/taradublinrocks
twitter.com/blackknight10k
twitter.com/@pardonpod
Find Tara's book here:
Taradublinrocks.com
Find Ty's book here:
Consequence of Choice
Subscribe to Tara's substack:
taradublin.substack.com
Subscribe to Ty's substack:
https://theworldasiseeit.substack.com/
Support Our Sponsor: Sheets & Giggles
Eucalyptus Sheets (Recommended):
Sleep Mask (I use this every night)
Eucalyptus Comfortor
...
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
one, two, three, four kamala harris held a massive
rally at the ellipse today.
Outside of the capital, just,I've never seen anything like it
I think, it was something likeso they had planned for, I think
, 25 to 30 000, wasn't it like30 000 or more?
Speaker 3 (00:22):
yeah, so they.
They expected 25 to 30,000people.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Wasn't it like 30,000 or more?
Yeah, so they expected 25 to30,000.
They had to bump up the permitto allow more than 50,000.
And I think like 75,000 peopleshowed up.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Oh Jesus yeah.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Love it, I love it.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Absolutely bananas.
Just a massive amount of peoplethat showed up.
It just is out of control.
But here's a clip I love itFrom her speech at the Ellipse
Look, we know who Donald Trumpis.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
He is the person who stood at this very spot nearly
four years ago and sent an armedmob to the United States
Capitol to overturn the will ofthe people in a free and fair
election god, look at all thosepeople, god.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
It brings tears to my eyes the amount of people who
showed up for their things outof control.
Control, it's bananas.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Oh my god, fucking legendary Absolutely.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
And, most importantly , even with 75,000 plus hair
supporters showing up at theEllipse, not a single one of
them attacked the Capitol.
It's amazing.
Speaker 3 (01:41):
They didn't piss on the walls and swear shit on them
.
God, is she even ellipsingright?
Speaker 2 (01:48):
didn't even fight with a single capital police
officer didn't try to hang,didn't try and hang their own
vice president.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Wait, wait, wait there was no gallows.
What the fuck was she doing?
Speaker 5 (02:02):
those were just a joke.
You guys have no sense of humor.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
If there's not a gallows, if you're not trying to
hang.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Josh Hawley didn't have to run through a single
hallway.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Ted Cruz wasn't in a supply closet.
What the fuck is going on?
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Her speech at the.
Speaker 3 (02:19):
Okay, that's it.
I'm not voting for her.
Speaker 5 (02:22):
Yeah, I know, not even willing to overthrow the
government.
Speaker 2 (02:25):
Like, what kind of vice president is this?
But no, her speech at theEllipse was was pretty good
though I have not watched it inits entirety, I've only seen
some clips but she's reallyhighlighting the fact that she's
going to be a president forevery single American, whether
they vote for her or not, thatthe past decade, thanks to Trump
, has been extraordinarilydivisive, vote for her or not.
(02:47):
That the past decade, thanks totrump, has been extraordinarily
divisive, but it's time for usto pass it towards to a new
generation of political leaderswho are trying to bring the
country together and do goodthings for every american and
not create divisiveness andstrife and chaos.
I mean she, she was.
She crushed it, pat herself onthe back.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
It was so inspiring, she was so presidential, she is
so presidential and a reminderof what we can be, what we are
capable of in this country andwhat we have acquiesced to the
(03:27):
past fucking almost 10 years ofthis one man literally
single-handedly breaking downeverything that we have built in
this society as a country, as apeople, as a whole, and it's
(03:51):
she's going to fucking win, man,you know, and my boss, my
immediate supervisor, like hemessaged me and he was like hey,
I want to drive some people tothe polls, what can I do?
And so I sent him a link to uhin Charlotte, uh, the people
that are assisting with drivingpeople to the polls, etc.
(04:14):
Um and and everything.
And he's like thank you, youknow, but I was like we got this
.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
I was like we got this oh I, you know it's someone
who's like extraordinarilyplugged in and what's going on
in politics on a day to day.
Like I do worry about the factthat I'm not totally I'm not
totally disconnected from likethe average person or the
average voter.
But you know the way weexperience just media,
(04:43):
specifically through socialmedia, like you never really
know what it is.
People are getting every singleday, what bits and pieces and
chunks of things that they'regetting.
So it's always that hesitationin the back of your head because
you don't know how much peopleare actually consuming about
what's going on, because ifpeople were consuming everything
(05:05):
, it'd be a five alarm fire.
The country would be losing itsmind because they'd realize
that is true.
I'm sorry.
Yeah, we're on the precipice of, you know, Nazi Germany, the
fourth Reich being brought toAmerica.
Please stop wiggling your boobs,if you're listening to this, I
think he's talking to me ifyou're listening to this on the
(05:26):
audio podcast, there's yourincentive to sign up for the
youtube channels.
Pardon the insurrection, justput that into the search bar on
youtube and you can see tywiggle her boobs, uh, but yeah,
one of the things I worry aboutis like how much of this is
actually making its way out intothe public mind, into the
(05:47):
voters minds, because, again,just the way the media is
fractured and the way people'sconsumption of information is,
it just comes from such diverseand curated, sort or sometimes
limited curated sources that youjust don't know necessarily if
enough people are seeingeverything but fingers crossed,
(06:08):
hope for the best, I mean, and,of course, like what you do, see
what people who typicallyaren't focused on politics see,
like I have.
I have no real idea, but Iimagine if you were watching the
NFL this weekend, you probablysaw something, likely saw
something extraordinarily well,depending on what side of the
(06:31):
aisle you are politically, youcould say extraordinarily
rewarding or extraordinarilyfrustrating, as Nick Bosa, a
player for the San Francisco49ers, photobombed a post-game
interview.
Speaker 3 (06:47):
And what was the whole fucking point of that?
Speaker 2 (06:51):
Well, to show off his Trump hat.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
Points in the first half.
What was said during halftime?
Hey, all right, nick Bosa witha message there.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
I know that was likely hard to see, but that was
Nick Bosa pointing to the Trump2024 on his hat.
For some reason they'veswitched from, like the classic
red and white to the Proud Boys,you know, white and gold or
black and gold.
For whatever reason, I don'tknow what that was about.
Is that some kind of messagingout there to right wing people?
(07:22):
I don't know, but that was NickBosa.
It's a dog whistle.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
Absolutely Without a doubt.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
Yeah, Well, that was Nick Bosa, famously supporting
Trump, making his way onto thefield in the middle of an
interview at a photobomb thejournalist.
And then he was asked about itat a press conference afterwards
about why he chose to make somesort of yeah, I know right.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
Why he?
Speaker 2 (07:50):
was proposing to make some sort of political
statement, and here's hisresponse what appeared to be a
political statement.
Speaker 4 (08:04):
I'm not going to talk too much about it, but I think
it's an important time now theright wing.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
What the fuck does that even mean?
Speaker 5 (08:11):
it means he's too stupid to speak on the opinion
he thinks he has.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
I'm not going to speak on it, but I'm going to
photobomb, an interview with it,but yeah, I'm not going to
speak on it.
Get the fuck out of here.
Speaker 5 (08:25):
Maybe he lost a bet and he's not allowed to say.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Fuck him.
Speaker 5 (08:32):
That's part of the bet.
This is my middle finger.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
Nick Bosa is famously a Trump supporter.
It's not fake support, he'slike a real life Of everyone in
the NFL.
If I were to ask you, whichplayer would you expect to be at
the Capitol on January 6th?
The?
Speaker 3 (08:49):
answer would be Nick Bosa.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Yeah, so a couple of things there.
First of all, the fact thathe's unable to just even answer
the question when he was willing.
So, like again, let's zoom outeven further.
So typically, uh, when you knowplayers make political
statements of any fashion thatdoesn't kind of vibe with what
right wing uh talking heads likethe, the typical response is
(09:16):
shut up and dribble, or shut upand tackle, or shut up in
politics out of sports.
I don't want to, yeah this is myescape but then the second that
, uh, you know a player comesout and supports some right-wing
nonsense.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
They celebrate the shit and I again like the
hypocrisy aside yeah exactly thehypocrisy it's not even about
that, but it's the fuckinghypocrisy and you are absolutely
right d like it's that that isso frustrating and infuriating
(09:53):
so they're always stickingpolitics into sports.
Speaker 5 (09:55):
All the local republican candidates around
here like their signs are likeprotect women's sports and
protect girls sports.
Like okay, this is just theirwhole platform is being
anti-trans.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
Like yeah, well, apart from politics as a norm
well, carol, do not send yourkids to school, because your son
will become your daughter andyour daughter will become your
son that never happens so Iheard it, I saw it on TV so
(10:29):
Trump said.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
The hypocrisy aside, so I like, I know, so you would
think that, like me beingleft-leaning, liberal, whatever
you want to call it progressive,I don't know if I'd use that
word yeah, I'm libtard.
You would think that I would sayI would like to keep politics
out of sports when it applies toright-leaning sports figures,
(10:54):
whether they be players orwhatnot.
But actually I would like moreof this, and I'll tell you why.
So, typically speaking, I thinka lot of players have
extraordinarily distastefulpolitical beliefs, but because
they know that they're notwilling to come out on the
record and discuss these thingseven as we have, it's like one
(11:18):
of the complaints that was madeabout the way you know, I guess
liberal leaning people approachthis is they were saying like
well, when the NFL had thesepolitical slogans out on the
field, it was OK then.
And now you're going to beupset about Nick Bosa, just
point to a hat.
Well, in like.
The slogans in question werelike end racism.
(11:40):
So this circles back to theconversation me and Ty were
having about, like the socialissues that are actually not
political at all, becomingpolitically charged, because one
party in America typicallyleans into racism and the other
party typically, you know,combats that to the degree that
(12:00):
they can.
But that aside, like I wouldactually like more right wing
athletes and especially say,like you know, people who work
in the front offices of theseorganizations or who own these
sports franchises, to come outand tell us what their actual
politics are, because I wouldlikely imagine that if you knew
(12:23):
how many you know I don't knowif you enjoy sports, if you're
listening to this but if youknew how many you know, team
owners in the NBA or the NFL orespecially like baseball and
soccer, are actually these weird, crazy Elon Musk level Trump
supporters you'd probably startwatching the games a lot less
(12:46):
and that's likely why they don'tdo this.
Speaker 5 (12:49):
That's probably why you're not looking into it.
Yeah right.
Yeah, I mean what you can dothey always said that sports
were the opiates for the masses.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Well, what you can do is you can look at the way.
Wait hold on, you can look atthe.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Are you done?
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Yeah, all right.
Look at the way you can look atthe.
Are you done?
Yeah, all right.
What you can do is look at thepolitical donations of the
people who own these franchise,and you will not be shocked nor
surprised that most of them senda significant portion of their
money to republicans, andspecifically trump.
Now also uh, I'm sure at thispoint like this topic is being
beaten to death, but I wouldimagine you remember Colin
Kaepernick being blackballedfrom the NFL for taking, well,
(13:36):
the opposite of a stance duringthe national anthem.
He was taking a knee and whenhe was asked about why he was
doing so, the comments that hemade were, generally speaking,
saying that he was protesting.
You know police brutalityagainst minorities in America, a
(13:59):
whole tire fire in the NFL andthe media landscape about him
taking a knee, and it ended upwith him, once his contract
expired, no longer playing inthe NFL, not being signed to any
other teams.
Now, before he was taking aknee, he was actually sitting on
the bench.
He wasn't standing for thenational anthem, but he was just
(14:22):
sitting on the bench during thenational anthem and no one even
noticed.
But someone you know I think Iforget the guy's name is in the
military.
It did address him personallyand be like hey, man, you know,
not standing for the nationalanthem, like just sitting,
sitting on the in the stands onthe bench, like that?
That's actually disrespectful.
Here's a more respectful way tomake your point.
(14:45):
So Colin Kaepernick decidedokay, well, this is being
disrespectful, I'm going to berespectful to the flag and what
that stands for and kneel duringthe national anthem.
And until he was asked about itand spoke on the topic, no one
actually cared that he wasn'tstanding for the national anthem
.
What they did care about wasthat he was making a political
statement, but not just apolitical statement.
(15:07):
His political statement was inthe service of drawing attention
to racism against black people,and that's where it exploded
out of control.
Now you can say what you wantto about Colin Kaepernick, like
the level of courage that ittakes to like stand on your
principles to such a point whereit costs you your career in a
(15:28):
lucrative and a lucrative yes,exactly a lucrative career.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
It's not like he was working for 20 an hour.
Yeah you know, what I'm sayinglike and the endorsements that
come along with being in theposition that he had he was was
this far away from winning theSuper Bowl?
Speaker 2 (15:45):
Like it could all change for him Now.
Like I'm sure, if you'relistening to this podcast,
likely you're in agreement withColin Kaepernick's stance, but I
imagine, if you don't, youmight disagree with the manner
in which he took the stance,what he stood for or kneeled for
.
But what I would say is,regardless of how you feel about
it, even if you dislike him orhis message, you got to respect
(16:09):
the fact that he was braveenough to not only do the thing
but stand on business when askedabout it.
Now, on the flip side of that,we've got Nick Bosa coming out
here, basically taking theopposite stance of Colin
Kaepernick not just supporting aidea or a principle, but
supporting an actual politicalcandidate that stands for the
(16:31):
exact opposite of what ColinKaepernick was.
Well, he stands for what ColinKaepernick was protesting and
then, when asked about it at apress conference, he can't even
tell you exactly what it was hewas doing, what he was saying,
what the message is that he wastrying to get across.
But again, if you're watchingthis podcast and you've seen
everything we just previouslyshown you in this episode,
(16:52):
you're like well, we knowexactly what Nick Bosa stands
for, and I would just say likeit's extraordinary cowardice on
his part to not be able to evenattempt to articulate the
message that he was trying tosay why he, why he did what he
did, and to just yeah it was,yeah, it was a pussy ass move
(17:13):
because he's a pussy ass bitch.
Yeah, but one thing you willnotice, I would imagine, is that
, unlike Colin Kaepernick, heain't going to get blackballed
from the league, and that speaksvolumes.
True that so also in the realmof sports ball, I guess it's
longer than a sports ball minuteof the week.
Also, on Saturday we had aTexas Tech kicker who scored a
(17:38):
touchdown on a fake field goal.
And well he also decided totake a political stance, which
is it's quite something.
Oh, this is oh it's a fake.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
There he goes for the corner touchdown reese burkhart
.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
That's why they chose to take the three a little
something in case you missed itafter scoring that touchdown, he
pulled up, he pulled up hisjersey to show off his shirt
where he had written in markeron it trump 2024, go maga, or
something like that.
Uh, you know, basically comingout as nick bosa jr.
Um, now and again, like as Iwas saying, I don't want to be
(18:22):
hypocritical when it's likeleft-leaning athletes coming out
in support of calls that Istand for.
And you know I'm not saying youknow, shut up and kick your
field goals.
I just think it'sextraordinarily hilarious that
after he did that, he went on tomiss the final field goal of
the game and Texas Tech lost byone.
(18:46):
I love that for him so you know,he was so focused on making his
political statement that heforgot to do his job.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
He forgot to do his job.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
That's pretty good, because the internet the right
Did he miss a goal.
Speaker 5 (19:03):
That was the goal he missed.
No, then he sacrificed that oneno, to make a joke.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
That was a fake.
So a field goal will generallynet you three points if you make
it.
But that was a fake field goalwhere they pretended like they
were going to kick a field goaland then he took the ball and
ran it into the end zone for atouchdown, which was a really
cool, brilliant move.
Got him six points yes.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
But his arrogance.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
So later in the game, how many would the?
Speaker 5 (19:29):
field goal have been.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
Three points.
Speaker 5 (19:33):
So he got three extra points.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Yes, now, later in the game, when the game was on
the line and the team was down apoint, I think they might have
been down more.
Regardless, he had anopportunity to kick a field goal
later in.
The Would have been thedifference in the game, because
they eventually ended up losingby one point.
Speaker 5 (19:53):
But OK.
But it wasn't his directActions, it wasn't being a dick
that cost him the game.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
No, well, no, it was.
I believe, yes, karma knew hisjob, karma got him and I don't
understand football, ok, so no,no, no, no, guys.
Speaker 5 (20:12):
I don't understand football, okay, so no, no, no,
no.
You don't have to explain, no.
Speaker 4 (20:15):
Carol, but he had the opportunity to.
Speaker 5 (20:19):
I get it.
Yes, I get it.
He did that thing.
I totally get football.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
Hold on.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
I got to plug my computer up.
He did that thing and lost thegame, and then I think the big
takeaway from that is much likeMAGA they think they're ahead
and then they're likely going toend up losing by one.
So, speaking of the stick tostick to sports, people not
sticking to sports, you might befamiliar with the fact that
(20:46):
Stephen A Smith, notably fromESPN, has ventured into the
sport or the political landscape, and he's also been making
numerous appearances on Fox Newsthis year.
Well, one of these appearancesit went extraordinarily awry for
Sean Hannity.
Speaker 1 (21:04):
So, again, we might not like something on the left,
we might not like something onthe right.
These are the two candidatesthat we've got to work with, and
when you bring up issues interms of character or in terms
of being truthful or whatever,let me tell you something right
now you can bring a whole bunchof Republicans, and I'll be cool
with it.
You can't bring up Trump tomake a case against somebody
else using those arguments.
(21:25):
You can't do that.
Speaker 3 (21:26):
You know what?
Speaker 4 (21:28):
I'm predicting that, privately, you're going to vote
for Trump.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Oh then never, Never.
And I told you, I'm on therecord I'd have voted almost for
any Republican but him.
Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Nikki Haley, Chris Christie, I would have voted for
them All right.
So you know, first of all, likeStephen A Smith, like whatever
you think about him, he'sextraordinarily talented.
And again, like you ask if heever gets tired, I would imagine
the answer is probably yeah.
So like he's got to be doingcoke or something.
Speaker 3 (21:59):
No, fuck him.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
No, he's got to be on TV all the time.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
No.
So politically speaking, I donot align with Stephen A Smith
on nearly anything, as you heardhim even say there that other
than Trump he would have votedfor any other Republicans,
despite the fact that theRepublican Party is a dumpster
fire.
So, like you can like, ourpolitics clearly don't align and
this has been an issue, likewith black people specifically
(22:25):
and Stephen A Smith for quite awhile here, like he showed first
take when he had Well, we justdon't even.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
Well, I used to like on first take.
I used to like when him andSkip would spar.
Yeah, I wanted to be a sportswriter one time I would watch
Mike and Mike in the morning.
Then I'd watch first take, thenI'd switch over to fucking the
(22:53):
cow herd and then like literallyall day and I would like blog.
I had like three followers atthat time but I'm like, but when
he became like a permanentfixture it was too much sauce
for me.
It was too much sauce for me.
And, yeah, I don't agree withhim about anything.
(23:15):
I do appreciate what he said,like to Hannity or et cetera,
but I ain't seen this nigga saynothing motherfucking positive
about black folks, about blackfolk in politics, about Madam
Vice President.
Speaker 2 (23:31):
So here's the thing about Stephen A Smith in
politics, about madam vicepresident.
So here's the thing aboutstephen a smith.
So he he began his career as ajournalist, but he is much like
espn was wanted to do at thetime.
They started hiring all of thisthese prominent journalists
from these uh newspapers acrossthe country, the sports writers
and whatnot to give them likejournalistic credibility.
And then a lot of thosejournalists turned into tv
(23:52):
characters and that's whatspecifically happened to steven
a smith here cheeseburgers so alot of those journalists turned,
like uh, reporters for espn and, well, talking heads as well.
They ended up becoming theselike tv personalities, maybe not
to the degree of stehen a smith, um, but so when stephen a
(24:16):
smith basically went you knowI'm gonna try and be the face of
espn he took the formula fromthe show called part of the
interruption interruption.
That might sound familiar, giventhe fact that our name of our
podcast is part of theinsurrection.
He took the formula from TonyKornheiser and Michael Wilbon
and he flipped it and kind ofturned it into what basically
(24:39):
modern sports talk shows are nowlike debate TV.
It did so with his partner,skip Bayless you might be
familiar with him.
Speaker 5 (24:50):
I love Skip.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
Well, if you have problems with, you know, if you
have problems with stephen asmith's lack of pro blackness, I
can only imagine how you feelabout skip.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
So skip bayless skip bayless.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Is the sean hannity to steve stephen a smith, or was
, at the time that they weredoing this show, first take now,
after skip left, cold pizzabefore that?
Yeah, well, after skip left, umskip was was eventually
replaced by Max Kellerman.
I don't know if you know him,but he's not Just hold on.
So, your personal feelingsaside, so Max Kellerman was a
(25:25):
guy who grew up covering boxingand eventually started covering
other sports before working forESPN.
Eventually started coveringother sports before working for
ESPN.
Now, one of the things aboutthe course of that time span
with Stephen A Skip and MaxKellerman and likely probably
why Kellerman no longer has thejob is that a lot of people in
the Black community were lookingat this.
(25:46):
I love that for him and theirinteractions.
And when you go from Skip toMax Kellerman, let's just say
it's the wide it's like swingingbetween Kamala Harris is in
Trump it's.
It's that big of a divide and alot of black people were looking
at this like, hey, man, maxKellerman seems to be a lot more
(26:08):
pro black than Stephen A Smithand I'm sure that was one of the
things that was probablyirritating and frustrating to
Smith.
I don't know that to be thetruth personally, but I'm
telling you it was a thing, andI say that in regards to the
fact that the shut up anddribble people took a sports
(26:33):
talk show host and plopped themright down on Fox next to these
clowns and have no problem withthat.
But then every time there's asocial issue, they want to kind
of, you know, trash the left ortrash left, leaning athletes for
speaking up about it.
And just also to say this aboutStephen A Smith I don't
(26:54):
appreciate someone of hiscaliber and of his stature, who
does often tend to speak for theblack community or at least in
the sports arena, lending hiscredibility to a propaganda
network like Fox, even if he'son there to be an antagonist
from time to time.
So yeah, I just I don't approve, just I mean I know Stephen A
(27:17):
Smith don't give a shit aboutwhat I think, but just telling
you that, like in regards towatching Black people do things
to gain prominence, there is aline that you cross where you're
lending your credibility andyour Black face to something
that is just extraordinarilyanti-black.
It's disheartening andfrustrating.
Speaker 3 (27:38):
Absolutely, absolutely.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
All right, before we get out of here, I'll wrap us up
with my closing thoughts.
So I'm sure many of you areaware of the fact that the
Washington Post and LA Times,the editorial boards, they
penned an endorsement for KamalaHarris but those endorsements
were shelved because the ownersin that regard personally
(28:05):
intervened and made sure thatthe people, the editorial board,
didn't have the newspaper putout an endorsement and there's a
couple of issues I have withthat.
I don't know, actually, whatthe specific discourse is out
here on social media, but I cantell you how I feel about it.
A couple of things.
One, it was a stupid move forspecifically Jeff Bezos in the
(28:32):
Washington Post to have thisendorsement pulled, because the
paper would have just endorsedit.
In this political climate noone's really paying that much
attention to newspapers.
The endorsement wouldn't havebeen a story, it would have been
a thing on Twitter for an hour.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
I mean it would have been passed by like blip oh
Washington, it would have beenthey moved on.
And it would have been passedby like blip oh Washington Post,
it would have been blown over.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
Instead, what you have is a media firestorm
because once it was reportedthat Bezos personally intervened
and then apparently wasn'tgoing to get a meeting with the
Trump campaign until after hemade sure, they pulled their
endorsement into a frenzy aboutwhether you can even trust the
Washington Post to reportaccurately on any kind of issue,
(29:17):
political or otherwise, if it'snot in service of Jeff Bezos.
And as big of an issue as thatis, that's not even the biggest
issue for me.
The biggest issue for me isthat we already know what Trump
is about, what he plans to dowith the second term if he wins,
and the fact that you as ajournalistic entity are being
(29:37):
controlled by one person who hasinterests that could be
severely hampered by a secondTrump administration already
obeying a dictator in advance.
That screams to me the factthat if Trump does become
(30:02):
president and tries to instillsome form of autocracy in the
United States and end ourdemocracy and destroy our
freedoms, that the WashingtonPost not only won't report
accurately on these issues, butthey're likely going to comply.
Speaker 3 (30:10):
Will there be conjugal visits in the pogrom?
I'm just asking.
I'm just asking questions.
Speaker 5 (30:20):
Well, they're probably, but it's whether or
not they'll be consensual.
Speaker 3 (30:27):
Oh yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:27):
And then the bigger issue is not just Washington
Post, but this is a symptom of alarger problem is that numerous
media outlets, in the waythey've covered Trump over the
course of the past Well shit,nearly 10 years here, nine years
here is that they've alreadymade the decision that if Trump
does try to assert adictatorship, that they're not
(30:48):
going to be the barrier, the,the, the bulwark that speaks
truth to power.
They've already made it knownthat they're going to concede in
any way possible if itthreatens them, regardless of
the damage that it does they'regoing to be the fucking
disturbers of media they'vealready.
(31:10):
yeah, and much like theWashington Post, whose tagline
is literally democracy dies indarkness, they're turning off
that light Democracy dies ordemocracy is dead.
Speaker 3 (31:23):
That should be their tagline.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
Yep, the media has decided they're going to help
turn off the light.
And that concludes this episodeof Pardon.
The Insurrection.
one, two, three, four kamala harris held a massive
rally at the ellipse today.
Outside of the capital, just,I've never seen anything like it
I think, it was something likeso they had planned for, I think
, 25 to 30 000, wasn't it like30 000 or more?
Speaker 3 (00:22):
yeah, so they.
They expected 25 to 30,000people.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
Wasn't it like 30,000 or more?
Yeah, so they expected 25 to30,000.
They had to bump up the permitto allow more than 50,000.
And I think like 75,000 peopleshowed up.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Oh Jesus yeah.
Speaker 3 (00:36):
Love it, I love it.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Absolutely bananas.
Just a massive amount of peoplethat showed up.
It just is out of control.
But here's a clip I love itFrom her speech at the Ellipse
Look, we know who Donald Trumpis.
Speaker 4 (00:52):
He is the person who stood at this very spot nearly
four years ago and sent an armedmob to the United States
Capitol to overturn the will ofthe people in a free and fair
election god, look at all thosepeople, god.
Speaker 2 (01:16):
It brings tears to my eyes the amount of people who
showed up for their things outof control.
Control, it's bananas.
Speaker 3 (01:22):
Oh my god, fucking legendary Absolutely.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
And, most importantly , even with 75,000 plus hair
supporters showing up at theEllipse, not a single one of
them attacked the Capitol.
It's amazing.
Speaker 3 (01:41):
They didn't piss on the walls and swear shit on them
.
God, is she even ellipsingright?
Speaker 2 (01:48):
didn't even fight with a single capital police
officer didn't try to hang,didn't try and hang their own
vice president.
Speaker 3 (01:56):
Wait, wait, wait there was no gallows.
What the fuck was she doing?
Speaker 5 (02:02):
those were just a joke.
You guys have no sense of humor.
Speaker 3 (02:04):
If there's not a gallows, if you're not trying to
hang.
Speaker 2 (02:08):
Josh Hawley didn't have to run through a single
hallway.
Speaker 3 (02:13):
Ted Cruz wasn't in a supply closet.
What the fuck is going on?
Speaker 2 (02:18):
Her speech at the.
Speaker 3 (02:19):
Okay, that's it.
I'm not voting for her.
Speaker 5 (02:22):
Yeah, I know, not even willing to overthrow the
government.
Speaker 2 (02:25):
Like, what kind of vice president is this?
But no, her speech at theEllipse was was pretty good
though I have not watched it inits entirety, I've only seen
some clips but she's reallyhighlighting the fact that she's
going to be a president forevery single American, whether
they vote for her or not, thatthe past decade, thanks to Trump
, has been extraordinarilydivisive, vote for her or not.
(02:47):
That the past decade, thanks totrump, has been extraordinarily
divisive, but it's time for usto pass it towards to a new
generation of political leaderswho are trying to bring the
country together and do goodthings for every american and
not create divisiveness andstrife and chaos.
I mean she, she was.
She crushed it, pat herself onthe back.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
It was so inspiring, she was so presidential, she is
so presidential and a reminderof what we can be, what we are
capable of in this country andwhat we have acquiesced to the
(03:27):
past fucking almost 10 years ofthis one man literally
single-handedly breaking downeverything that we have built in
this society as a country, as apeople, as a whole, and it's
(03:51):
she's going to fucking win, man,you know, and my boss, my
immediate supervisor, like hemessaged me and he was like hey,
I want to drive some people tothe polls, what can I do?
And so I sent him a link to uhin Charlotte, uh, the people
that are assisting with drivingpeople to the polls, etc.
(04:14):
Um and and everything.
And he's like thank you, youknow, but I was like we got this
.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
I was like we got this oh I, you know it's someone
who's like extraordinarilyplugged in and what's going on
in politics on a day to day.
Like I do worry about the factthat I'm not totally I'm not
totally disconnected from likethe average person or the
average voter.
But you know the way weexperience just media,
(04:43):
specifically through socialmedia, like you never really
know what it is.
People are getting every singleday, what bits and pieces and
chunks of things that they'regetting.
So it's always that hesitationin the back of your head because
you don't know how much peopleare actually consuming about
what's going on, because ifpeople were consuming everything
(05:05):
, it'd be a five alarm fire.
The country would be losing itsmind because they'd realize
that is true.
I'm sorry.
Yeah, we're on the precipice of, you know, Nazi Germany, the
fourth Reich being brought toAmerica.
Please stop wiggling your boobs,if you're listening to this, I
think he's talking to me ifyou're listening to this on the
(05:26):
audio podcast, there's yourincentive to sign up for the
youtube channels.
Pardon the insurrection, justput that into the search bar on
youtube and you can see tywiggle her boobs, uh, but yeah,
one of the things I worry aboutis like how much of this is
actually making its way out intothe public mind, into the
(05:47):
voters minds, because, again,just the way the media is
fractured and the way people'sconsumption of information is,
it just comes from such diverseand curated, sort or sometimes
limited curated sources that youjust don't know necessarily if
enough people are seeingeverything but fingers crossed,
(06:08):
hope for the best, I mean, and,of course, like what you do, see
what people who typicallyaren't focused on politics see,
like I have.
I have no real idea, but Iimagine if you were watching the
NFL this weekend, you probablysaw something, likely saw
something extraordinarily well,depending on what side of the
(06:31):
aisle you are politically, youcould say extraordinarily
rewarding or extraordinarilyfrustrating, as Nick Bosa, a
player for the San Francisco49ers, photobombed a post-game
interview.
Speaker 3 (06:47):
And what was the whole fucking point of that?
Speaker 2 (06:51):
Well, to show off his Trump hat.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
Points in the first half.
What was said during halftime?
Hey, all right, nick Bosa witha message there.
Speaker 2 (07:00):
I know that was likely hard to see, but that was
Nick Bosa pointing to the Trump2024 on his hat.
For some reason they'veswitched from, like the classic
red and white to the Proud Boys,you know, white and gold or
black and gold.
For whatever reason, I don'tknow what that was about.
Is that some kind of messagingout there to right wing people?
(07:22):
I don't know, but that was NickBosa.
It's a dog whistle.
Speaker 3 (07:25):
Absolutely Without a doubt.
Speaker 2 (07:27):
Yeah, Well, that was Nick Bosa, famously supporting
Trump, making his way onto thefield in the middle of an
interview at a photobomb thejournalist.
And then he was asked about itat a press conference afterwards
about why he chose to make somesort of yeah, I know right.
Speaker 3 (07:50):
Why he?
Speaker 2 (07:50):
was proposing to make some sort of political
statement, and here's hisresponse what appeared to be a
political statement.
Speaker 4 (08:04):
I'm not going to talk too much about it, but I think
it's an important time now theright wing.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
What the fuck does that even mean?
Speaker 5 (08:11):
it means he's too stupid to speak on the opinion
he thinks he has.
Speaker 3 (08:16):
I'm not going to speak on it, but I'm going to
photobomb, an interview with it,but yeah, I'm not going to
speak on it.
Get the fuck out of here.
Speaker 5 (08:25):
Maybe he lost a bet and he's not allowed to say.
Speaker 3 (08:31):
Fuck him.
Speaker 5 (08:32):
That's part of the bet.
This is my middle finger.
Speaker 2 (08:35):
Nick Bosa is famously a Trump supporter.
It's not fake support, he'slike a real life Of everyone in
the NFL.
If I were to ask you, whichplayer would you expect to be at
the Capitol on January 6th?
The?
Speaker 3 (08:49):
answer would be Nick Bosa.
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Yeah, so a couple of things there.
First of all, the fact thathe's unable to just even answer
the question when he was willing.
So, like again, let's zoom outeven further.
So typically, uh, when you knowplayers make political
statements of any fashion thatdoesn't kind of vibe with what
right wing uh talking heads likethe, the typical response is
(09:16):
shut up and dribble, or shut upand tackle, or shut up in
politics out of sports.
I don't want to, yeah this is myescape but then the second that
, uh, you know a player comesout and supports some right-wing
nonsense.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
They celebrate the shit and I again like the
hypocrisy aside yeah exactly thehypocrisy it's not even about
that, but it's the fuckinghypocrisy and you are absolutely
right d like it's that that isso frustrating and infuriating
(09:53):
so they're always stickingpolitics into sports.
Speaker 5 (09:55):
All the local republican candidates around
here like their signs are likeprotect women's sports and
protect girls sports.
Like okay, this is just theirwhole platform is being
anti-trans.
Speaker 3 (10:07):
Like yeah, well, apart from politics as a norm
well, carol, do not send yourkids to school, because your son
will become your daughter andyour daughter will become your
son that never happens so Iheard it, I saw it on TV so
(10:29):
Trump said.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
The hypocrisy aside, so I like, I know, so you would
think that, like me beingleft-leaning, liberal, whatever
you want to call it progressive,I don't know if I'd use that
word yeah, I'm libtard.
You would think that I would sayI would like to keep politics
out of sports when it applies toright-leaning sports figures,
(10:54):
whether they be players orwhatnot.
But actually I would like moreof this, and I'll tell you why.
So, typically speaking, I thinka lot of players have
extraordinarily distastefulpolitical beliefs, but because
they know that they're notwilling to come out on the
record and discuss these thingseven as we have, it's like one
(11:18):
of the complaints that was madeabout the way you know, I guess
liberal leaning people approachthis is they were saying like
well, when the NFL had thesepolitical slogans out on the
field, it was OK then.
And now you're going to beupset about Nick Bosa, just
point to a hat.
Well, in like.
The slogans in question werelike end racism.
(11:40):
So this circles back to theconversation me and Ty were
having about, like the socialissues that are actually not
political at all, becomingpolitically charged, because one
party in America typicallyleans into racism and the other
party typically, you know,combats that to the degree that
(12:00):
they can.
But that aside, like I wouldactually like more right wing
athletes and especially say,like you know, people who work
in the front offices of theseorganizations or who own these
sports franchises, to come outand tell us what their actual
politics are, because I wouldlikely imagine that if you knew
(12:23):
how many you know I don't knowif you enjoy sports, if you're
listening to this but if youknew how many you know, team
owners in the NBA or the NFL orespecially like baseball and
soccer, are actually these weird, crazy Elon Musk level Trump
supporters you'd probably startwatching the games a lot less
(12:46):
and that's likely why they don'tdo this.
Speaker 5 (12:49):
That's probably why you're not looking into it.
Yeah right.
Yeah, I mean what you can dothey always said that sports
were the opiates for the masses.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
Well, what you can do is you can look at the way.
Wait hold on, you can look atthe.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
Are you done?
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Yeah, all right.
Look at the way you can look atthe.
Are you done?
Yeah, all right.
What you can do is look at thepolitical donations of the
people who own these franchise,and you will not be shocked nor
surprised that most of them senda significant portion of their
money to republicans, andspecifically trump.
Now also uh, I'm sure at thispoint like this topic is being
beaten to death, but I wouldimagine you remember Colin
Kaepernick being blackballedfrom the NFL for taking, well,
(13:36):
the opposite of a stance duringthe national anthem.
He was taking a knee and whenhe was asked about why he was
doing so, the comments that hemade were, generally speaking,
saying that he was protesting.
You know police brutalityagainst minorities in America, a
(13:59):
whole tire fire in the NFL andthe media landscape about him
taking a knee, and it ended upwith him, once his contract
expired, no longer playing inthe NFL, not being signed to any
other teams.
Now, before he was taking aknee, he was actually sitting on
the bench.
He wasn't standing for thenational anthem, but he was just
(14:22):
sitting on the bench during thenational anthem and no one even
noticed.
But someone you know I think Iforget the guy's name is in the
military.
It did address him personallyand be like hey, man, you know,
not standing for the nationalanthem, like just sitting,
sitting on the in the stands onthe bench, like that?
That's actually disrespectful.
Here's a more respectful way tomake your point.
(14:45):
So Colin Kaepernick decidedokay, well, this is being
disrespectful, I'm going to berespectful to the flag and what
that stands for and kneel duringthe national anthem.
And until he was asked about itand spoke on the topic, no one
actually cared that he wasn'tstanding for the national anthem
.
What they did care about wasthat he was making a political
statement, but not just apolitical statement.
(15:07):
His political statement was inthe service of drawing attention
to racism against black people,and that's where it exploded
out of control.
Now you can say what you wantto about Colin Kaepernick, like
the level of courage that ittakes to like stand on your
principles to such a point whereit costs you your career in a
(15:28):
lucrative and a lucrative yes,exactly a lucrative career.
Speaker 3 (15:32):
It's not like he was working for 20 an hour.
Yeah you know, what I'm sayinglike and the endorsements that
come along with being in theposition that he had he was was
this far away from winning theSuper Bowl?
Speaker 2 (15:45):
Like it could all change for him Now.
Like I'm sure, if you'relistening to this podcast,
likely you're in agreement withColin Kaepernick's stance, but I
imagine, if you don't, youmight disagree with the manner
in which he took the stance,what he stood for or kneeled for
.
But what I would say is,regardless of how you feel about
it, even if you dislike him orhis message, you got to respect
(16:09):
the fact that he was braveenough to not only do the thing
but stand on business when askedabout it.
Now, on the flip side of that,we've got Nick Bosa coming out
here, basically taking theopposite stance of Colin
Kaepernick not just supporting aidea or a principle, but
supporting an actual politicalcandidate that stands for the
(16:31):
exact opposite of what ColinKaepernick was.
Well, he stands for what ColinKaepernick was protesting and
then, when asked about it at apress conference, he can't even
tell you exactly what it was hewas doing, what he was saying,
what the message is that he wastrying to get across.
But again, if you're watchingthis podcast and you've seen
everything we just previouslyshown you in this episode,
(16:52):
you're like well, we knowexactly what Nick Bosa stands
for, and I would just say likeit's extraordinary cowardice on
his part to not be able to evenattempt to articulate the
message that he was trying tosay why he, why he did what he
did, and to just yeah it was,yeah, it was a pussy ass move
(17:13):
because he's a pussy ass bitch.
Yeah, but one thing you willnotice, I would imagine, is that
, unlike Colin Kaepernick, heain't going to get blackballed
from the league, and that speaksvolumes.
True that so also in the realmof sports ball, I guess it's
longer than a sports ball minuteof the week.
Also, on Saturday we had aTexas Tech kicker who scored a
(17:38):
touchdown on a fake field goal.
And well he also decided totake a political stance, which
is it's quite something.
Oh, this is oh it's a fake.
Speaker 1 (17:51):
There he goes for the corner touchdown reese burkhart
.
Speaker 2 (17:57):
That's why they chose to take the three a little
something in case you missed itafter scoring that touchdown, he
pulled up, he pulled up hisjersey to show off his shirt
where he had written in markeron it trump 2024, go maga, or
something like that.
Uh, you know, basically comingout as nick bosa jr.
Um, now and again, like as Iwas saying, I don't want to be
(18:22):
hypocritical when it's likeleft-leaning athletes coming out
in support of calls that Istand for.
And you know I'm not saying youknow, shut up and kick your
field goals.
I just think it'sextraordinarily hilarious that
after he did that, he went on tomiss the final field goal of
the game and Texas Tech lost byone.
(18:46):
I love that for him so you know,he was so focused on making his
political statement that heforgot to do his job.
Speaker 3 (18:58):
He forgot to do his job.
Speaker 2 (19:00):
That's pretty good, because the internet the right
Did he miss a goal.
Speaker 5 (19:03):
That was the goal he missed.
No, then he sacrificed that oneno, to make a joke.
Speaker 2 (19:08):
That was a fake.
So a field goal will generallynet you three points if you make
it.
But that was a fake field goalwhere they pretended like they
were going to kick a field goaland then he took the ball and
ran it into the end zone for atouchdown, which was a really
cool, brilliant move.
Got him six points yes.
Speaker 3 (19:26):
But his arrogance.
Speaker 2 (19:28):
So later in the game, how many would the?
Speaker 5 (19:29):
field goal have been.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
Three points.
Speaker 5 (19:33):
So he got three extra points.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
Yes, now, later in the game, when the game was on
the line and the team was down apoint, I think they might have
been down more.
Regardless, he had anopportunity to kick a field goal
later in.
The Would have been thedifference in the game, because
they eventually ended up losingby one point.
Speaker 5 (19:53):
But OK.
But it wasn't his directActions, it wasn't being a dick
that cost him the game.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
No, well, no, it was.
I believe, yes, karma knew hisjob, karma got him and I don't
understand football, ok, so no,no, no, no, guys.
Speaker 5 (20:12):
I don't understand football, okay, so no, no, no,
no.
You don't have to explain, no.
Speaker 4 (20:15):
Carol, but he had the opportunity to.
Speaker 5 (20:19):
I get it.
Yes, I get it.
He did that thing.
I totally get football.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
Hold on.
Speaker 2 (20:24):
I got to plug my computer up.
He did that thing and lost thegame, and then I think the big
takeaway from that is much likeMAGA they think they're ahead
and then they're likely going toend up losing by one.
So, speaking of the stick tostick to sports, people not
sticking to sports, you might befamiliar with the fact that
(20:46):
Stephen A Smith, notably fromESPN, has ventured into the
sport or the political landscape, and he's also been making
numerous appearances on Fox Newsthis year.
Well, one of these appearancesit went extraordinarily awry for
Sean Hannity.
Speaker 1 (21:04):
So, again, we might not like something on the left,
we might not like something onthe right.
These are the two candidatesthat we've got to work with, and
when you bring up issues interms of character or in terms
of being truthful or whatever,let me tell you something right
now you can bring a whole bunchof Republicans, and I'll be cool
with it.
You can't bring up Trump tomake a case against somebody
else using those arguments.
(21:25):
You can't do that.
Speaker 3 (21:26):
You know what?
Speaker 4 (21:28):
I'm predicting that, privately, you're going to vote
for Trump.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Oh then never, Never.
And I told you, I'm on therecord I'd have voted almost for
any Republican but him.
Okay.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Nikki Haley, Chris Christie, I would have voted for
them All right.
So you know, first of all, likeStephen A Smith, like whatever
you think about him, he'sextraordinarily talented.
And again, like you ask if heever gets tired, I would imagine
the answer is probably yeah.
So like he's got to be doingcoke or something.
Speaker 3 (21:59):
No, fuck him.
Speaker 1 (22:01):
No, he's got to be on TV all the time.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
No.
So politically speaking, I donot align with Stephen A Smith
on nearly anything, as you heardhim even say there that other
than Trump he would have votedfor any other Republicans,
despite the fact that theRepublican Party is a dumpster
fire.
So, like you can like, ourpolitics clearly don't align and
this has been an issue, likewith black people specifically
(22:25):
and Stephen A Smith for quite awhile here, like he showed first
take when he had Well, we justdon't even.
Speaker 3 (22:32):
Well, I used to like on first take.
I used to like when him andSkip would spar.
Yeah, I wanted to be a sportswriter one time I would watch
Mike and Mike in the morning.
Then I'd watch first take, thenI'd switch over to fucking the
(22:53):
cow herd and then like literallyall day and I would like blog.
I had like three followers atthat time but I'm like, but when
he became like a permanentfixture it was too much sauce
for me.
It was too much sauce for me.
And, yeah, I don't agree withhim about anything.
(23:15):
I do appreciate what he said,like to Hannity or et cetera,
but I ain't seen this nigga saynothing motherfucking positive
about black folks, about blackfolk in politics, about Madam
Vice President.
Speaker 2 (23:31):
So here's the thing about Stephen A Smith in
politics, about madam vicepresident.
So here's the thing aboutstephen a smith.
So he he began his career as ajournalist, but he is much like
espn was wanted to do at thetime.
They started hiring all of thisthese prominent journalists
from these uh newspapers acrossthe country, the sports writers
and whatnot to give them likejournalistic credibility.
And then a lot of thosejournalists turned into tv
(23:52):
characters and that's whatspecifically happened to steven
a smith here cheeseburgers so alot of those journalists turned,
like uh, reporters for espn and, well, talking heads as well.
They ended up becoming theselike tv personalities, maybe not
to the degree of stehen a smith, um, but so when stephen a
(24:16):
smith basically went you knowI'm gonna try and be the face of
espn he took the formula fromthe show called part of the
interruption interruption.
That might sound familiar, giventhe fact that our name of our
podcast is part of theinsurrection.
He took the formula from TonyKornheiser and Michael Wilbon
and he flipped it and kind ofturned it into what basically
(24:39):
modern sports talk shows are nowlike debate TV.
It did so with his partner,skip Bayless you might be
familiar with him.
Speaker 5 (24:50):
I love Skip.
Speaker 2 (24:53):
Well, if you have problems with, you know, if you
have problems with stephen asmith's lack of pro blackness, I
can only imagine how you feelabout skip.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
So skip bayless skip bayless.
Speaker 2 (25:03):
Is the sean hannity to steve stephen a smith, or was
, at the time that they weredoing this show, first take now,
after skip left, cold pizzabefore that?
Yeah, well, after skip left, umskip was was eventually
replaced by Max Kellerman.
I don't know if you know him,but he's not Just hold on.
So, your personal feelingsaside, so Max Kellerman was a
(25:25):
guy who grew up covering boxingand eventually started covering
other sports before working forESPN.
Eventually started coveringother sports before working for
ESPN.
Now, one of the things aboutthe course of that time span
with Stephen A Skip and MaxKellerman and likely probably
why Kellerman no longer has thejob is that a lot of people in
the Black community were lookingat this.
(25:46):
I love that for him and theirinteractions.
And when you go from Skip toMax Kellerman, let's just say
it's the wide it's like swingingbetween Kamala Harris is in
Trump it's.
It's that big of a divide and alot of black people were looking
at this like, hey, man, maxKellerman seems to be a lot more
(26:08):
pro black than Stephen A Smithand I'm sure that was one of the
things that was probablyirritating and frustrating to
Smith.
I don't know that to be thetruth personally, but I'm
telling you it was a thing, andI say that in regards to the
fact that the shut up anddribble people took a sports
(26:33):
talk show host and plopped themright down on Fox next to these
clowns and have no problem withthat.
But then every time there's asocial issue, they want to kind
of, you know, trash the left ortrash left, leaning athletes for
speaking up about it.
And just also to say this aboutStephen A Smith I don't
(26:54):
appreciate someone of hiscaliber and of his stature, who
does often tend to speak for theblack community or at least in
the sports arena, lending hiscredibility to a propaganda
network like Fox, even if he'son there to be an antagonist
from time to time.
So yeah, I just I don't approve, just I mean I know Stephen A
(27:17):
Smith don't give a shit aboutwhat I think, but just telling
you that, like in regards towatching Black people do things
to gain prominence, there is aline that you cross where you're
lending your credibility andyour Black face to something
that is just extraordinarilyanti-black.
It's disheartening andfrustrating.
Speaker 3 (27:38):
Absolutely, absolutely.
Speaker 2 (27:41):
All right, before we get out of here, I'll wrap us up
with my closing thoughts.
So I'm sure many of you areaware of the fact that the
Washington Post and LA Times,the editorial boards, they
penned an endorsement for KamalaHarris but those endorsements
were shelved because the ownersin that regard personally
(28:05):
intervened and made sure thatthe people, the editorial board,
didn't have the newspaper putout an endorsement and there's a
couple of issues I have withthat.
I don't know, actually, whatthe specific discourse is out
here on social media, but I cantell you how I feel about it.
A couple of things.
One, it was a stupid move forspecifically Jeff Bezos in the
(28:32):
Washington Post to have thisendorsement pulled, because the
paper would have just endorsedit.
In this political climate noone's really paying that much
attention to newspapers.
The endorsement wouldn't havebeen a story, it would have been
a thing on Twitter for an hour.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
I mean it would have been passed by like blip oh
Washington, it would have beenthey moved on.
And it would have been passedby like blip oh Washington Post,
it would have been blown over.
Speaker 2 (28:55):
Instead, what you have is a media firestorm
because once it was reportedthat Bezos personally intervened
and then apparently wasn'tgoing to get a meeting with the
Trump campaign until after hemade sure, they pulled their
endorsement into a frenzy aboutwhether you can even trust the
Washington Post to reportaccurately on any kind of issue,
(29:17):
political or otherwise, if it'snot in service of Jeff Bezos.
And as big of an issue as thatis, that's not even the biggest
issue for me.
The biggest issue for me isthat we already know what Trump
is about, what he plans to dowith the second term if he wins,
and the fact that you as ajournalistic entity are being
(29:37):
controlled by one person who hasinterests that could be
severely hampered by a secondTrump administration already
obeying a dictator in advance.
That screams to me the factthat if Trump does become
(30:02):
president and tries to instillsome form of autocracy in the
United States and end ourdemocracy and destroy our
freedoms, that the WashingtonPost not only won't report
accurately on these issues, butthey're likely going to comply.
Speaker 3 (30:10):
Will there be conjugal visits in the pogrom?
I'm just asking.
I'm just asking questions.
Speaker 5 (30:20):
Well, they're probably, but it's whether or
not they'll be consensual.
Speaker 3 (30:27):
Oh yeah.
Speaker 2 (30:27):
And then the bigger issue is not just Washington
Post, but this is a symptom of alarger problem is that numerous
media outlets, in the waythey've covered Trump over the
course of the past Well shit,nearly 10 years here, nine years
here is that they've alreadymade the decision that if Trump
does try to assert adictatorship, that they're not
(30:48):
going to be the barrier, the,the, the bulwark that speaks
truth to power.
They've already made it knownthat they're going to concede in
any way possible if itthreatens them, regardless of
the damage that it does they'regoing to be the fucking
disturbers of media they'vealready.
(31:10):
yeah, and much like theWashington Post, whose tagline
is literally democracy dies indarkness, they're turning off
that light Democracy dies ordemocracy is dead.
Speaker 3 (31:23):
That should be their tagline.
Speaker 2 (31:25):
Yep, the media has decided they're going to help
turn off the light.
And that concludes this episodeof Pardon.
The Insurrection.
Popular Podcasts
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.