04 24 25 We talk with SC Superintendent of Education Ellen Weaver

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Jonathan and Kelly Show.

Speaker 2 (00:04):
Jonathan Rush El Salvador is the destination for Democrats seeking
the thrill of bringing violent, criminal, illegal aliens back to America.

Speaker 1 (00:15):
Kelly Nash, come.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
Witness Trump derangement syndrome in its purest form.

Speaker 3 (00:20):
Step into the rhythm of rescue today.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
The Jonathan and Kelly Show. WOC.

Speaker 2 (00:27):
I've forgotten exactly where that prison is, and I think
it's like off the beaten path. Okay, once you get
de El Salvador, you get a land, then you gotta
go to SALESI then you gotta go you got to
go check into the hotel. Okay. I would imagine the
closest hotels to that prison have just doubled their rates
in the past ten days.

Speaker 3 (00:45):
Or if they see a gringo, are you coming on
down here from America?

Speaker 2 (00:51):
Oh, the Democrats are flocking, but they're also spreading out
across the US. We're talking a little bit about them
visiting Louisiana and there's several other places. Now with the
true administration is having to relegate the deportees soon to
be deportees to hold them in the US while we
get through this little snap foo with a couple of
judges here. I want to throw a little sand in
the gears.

Speaker 3 (01:12):
You know, look, I don't want to make it ugly,
but I mean, what if we just gave you a
shoot to kill order. You're in this country illegally. You
have an hour to leave.

Speaker 2 (01:27):
Hold that awkward thought, and oh look it's the hotline,
Kelly Nash. Welcome on the phone, our Superintendent of Education,
Missalem Weaver.

Speaker 1 (01:36):
High.

Speaker 4 (01:36):
How a y'all doing today?

Speaker 2 (01:37):
We're doing good, but I know not nearly as busy
as you are with all the things going on talking
about the budget and teacher salaries and you know the
talk from Washington, d C. Let's talk there first, because
a lot of people are very anxious about what's going
on with the new decree and possibly the elimination of
the Federal Office.

Speaker 4 (01:52):
Yeah, no, you're right. I've heard from a lot of
people who are just very uncertain about what is happening
and what we can expect the Pact to be here
in South Carolina. And so I actually just wrote an
op ed several weeks ago that ran in the Post
and Courier, and the title of it is keep Calm
and Educate on South Carolina's opportunity to lead. And in

(02:12):
that op ed I outline, you know, the primary concerns
that I hear from people are around what is going
to happen to the federal money that helps support our
students who have special needs and our students who come
from low income families. And the great news in all
of this is that those programs which are called the
Title programs for low income students. You might have heard

(02:35):
the phrase Title one funding, That's what that's all about.
And then IDEA, which is the protections and funding that
we have for students with special needs. Those programs both
actually pre date the US Department of Education. They are
written into law, they are appropriated funds by Congress, and
they are not going anywhere. So the Department of Education

(02:59):
could go away tomorrow and those guarantees and funds would
still be here for the students of South Carolina. And
so in that outbed, I just wanted to, you know,
mythbust a little bit. I know, it's probably shocking to
you that the mainstream media, national media is you know,
in a panic attack over every single thing that this

(03:19):
administration does, whether their panic is based in fact or not.
So I wanted to just be very responsible in laying
out the facts of the situation for our teachers and
parents here in South Carolina so that we can have
a real conversation that's based in real facts and allows
us to keep doing our most important job, which is
to focus on the needs of our students.

Speaker 3 (03:40):
We're talking with Ellen Weaver, and one of the pushes
because a lot of people can't push back on the
fact that obviously if you eliminate the federal Department of Education,
it would save money. They kind of serve as like
a middleman. So we take our tax dollars, we send
it to the government. The government then gives it to
the Department of Education, then they decide what they think

(04:00):
is best, they pay all their bureaucrats, and then they
send it back to the states. This would eliminate a
lot of those bureaucrats, and like you said, it would
empower the state to do more. But one of the
pushbacks that Democrats have been throwing around is the fact
that quite honestly, they don't trust the states to do
the right thing. That especially Republicans, and so you know,

(04:24):
I find that highly insulting, but also not very likely
because you're in a position that can be voted on,
So if you're not doing a good job, the people
will remove you.

Speaker 1 (04:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (04:34):
No, it's incredibly insulting and it flies in the face
of over two hundred years of American history. I mean,
somehow we made it two hundred years in this country
without the federal government interfering outside of its constitutionally assigned
authority into education. I mean, we, you know, turned two
hundred years old as a country in seventeen seventy six,

(04:56):
and the department was created in seventeen I'm sorry, not
seventeen six, nineteen seventy six, and the department was created
in nineteen seventy nine to pay off basically teachers unions
who supported Jimmy Carter for president that year. And so
you know, it's it's really it's really just a complete,
a complete insult to those of us at the state

(05:19):
level who work hard every day, to the folks in
our local schools who are giving it they are all
to support students, to say that we don't have the
best interest of South Carolina students at heart, and that
we aren't going to continue to do everything we can
to ensure that they have a great education. If the
federal government isn't looking over our shoulders. I think that's

(05:42):
just silly.

Speaker 2 (05:43):
Well, I know, as we record this on Thursday morning,
we're still in the throes of the conversation between the
House and the Senate having to do with the finalization
of the budget, and there seems to be a little
bit not enough of a differentation between the budget numbers
between the House and the Senate. They create a problem.
Som' sure they'll iron that out to make sure we
hit our budgets projected number of forty eighty five hundred
minimum for our teachers in our state, so and not

(06:06):
speaking specifically to that, which will help us retain and
also attract teachers. But you have another program you've started
as well.

Speaker 4 (06:13):
Yeah, we sure knew. We have a strategic compensation plan
that we have rolled out in thirty seven different schools
across the state. These are all schools who raised their
hand and volunteered to be part of this pilot. They
had to put together a plan for how they would
allocate the five million dollars in funding that was provided

(06:33):
by the General Assembly. And the whole idea behind this
is that, you know, like you said, as a state,
we are seeking to provide a high opening bid for
teacher pay, if you will. We want to have a
competitive starting salary, and that's really what we've been working
on over the last five or six years here in
South Carolina. I mean, we've increased teacher pay forty seven

(06:55):
percent for starting teachers since twenty eighteen twenty nineteen, which
is which is just incredible, and we're continuing that push
to fifty thousand. I don't think we're gonna get there
in this year's budget, but we're very very close.

Speaker 3 (07:07):
That increase almost kept up with Biden inflation, all.

Speaker 4 (07:10):
Most kept up with by inflation. That's exactly That's exactly right.
So that's the idea behind the strategic compensation is that,
you know, we start with that strong foundation, that strong floor,
but then when you have teachers who are just doing
an exceptional job when it comes to moving the needle
in terms of academic performance and outcomes for their students,

(07:33):
they should be rewarded for that. And so that's what
that strategic compensation pilot does, is that it rewards teachers
who are who are really having incredible success moving the needles,
specifically in our rural communities and in you know, high
poverty schools where sometimes it's it's harder, it's more of
a challenge because these students are maybe starting at a

(07:55):
place of disadvantage. And those teachers, they teach their heart
out every single day, and we think that ought to
be rewarded.

Speaker 2 (08:01):
Well, I know, as we look for ways to incentivize
teachers to want to work in our schools and certainly
show up every day. Can you tell me were you
aware of or do you know of now? Since we're
five weeks into what they say is a nine week
pilot program in Charleston County where they're actually paying twenty
five dollars to the families of students to attend, and

(08:22):
this is supposed to help ward allf our absenteeism problem.

Speaker 4 (08:25):
Absenteeism is a real problem, but I'm not sure that
the answer is paying students or families to combat it.
I think we've got to do a better job engaging
parents and educating them about the real challenges that their
students are going to face if they don't support their
students attendance in school. And then we also have to

(08:48):
do what we've called for, what I've called for since
I've been in this office, which is really engage in
the teaching of foundational skills that equip students to fully
engage in their learning. I think you have a lot
of students who are disengaged because maybe they're just not
as prepared as they need to be. And so that's
the whole idea behind our reading initiative, And you know,

(09:12):
so much else that we're doing with the cell phone
policy that we've talked about before, ensuring that students are
fully engaged in their learning, and helping parents understand why
it's so important that their child is there at school
every day.

Speaker 3 (09:24):
Superintendent of Education on theen Weaver, We've got to go quickly.
But lastly, what are you doing for the summer to
try to help kids not regress?

Speaker 4 (09:32):
Well, you know, we have summer reading camps which are
part of South Carolina law. That's actually a huge part
of the budget that the General Assembly is passing now
to help us increase access to those reading camps not
just for struggling third graders, but for first and second
graders before they get to that important third grade gateway
and are still struggling. So I'm very very excited about that,

(09:53):
and I also wanted to share that today is actually
the day that we are going to be naming our
South Carolina Teacher of the Year, which is a huge
celebration at the Governor's mansion. Governor McMaster and Miss Peggy
are always there and of course Max the Bulldog to
help us celebrate just the incredible gift that our teachers
are here in South Carolina to our students. So I'm

(10:16):
really excited for the future of education in South Carolina.
Here in South Carolina, we're going to keep calm and
educate on.

Speaker 2 (10:22):
Thank you so much for your time today. This is
a big week for our kids. Thank you for heading
all those programs up and helping us keep it on track.

Speaker 4 (10:30):
It is truly a joy to be able to do
this work, and I appreciate you all allowing me the
opportunity to let your listeners know what's going on.

Speaker 2 (10:37):
And this is a big week, not just for the
education portion of the budget, for the budget in general.
Today on the rash thought, we're talking about the senators
voting themselves a in district stipend, but it's not it's expenses,
not the stipend. It's an in district expenses increase, so
their salary is going to stay at and then they

(11:02):
have expenses for in district as for visiting constituents, and
then they have a stipend that it covers some of
their expensive traveling back and forth. Yeah, Columbia.

Speaker 3 (11:12):
So right now, if you're a South Carolina state senator,
you get one thousand dollars a month to do whatever
it is that you're doing in your district. If you
want to have a town hall, you want to do
you want to go to lunch with somebody, it's a
business thing, whatever. You you just get one thousand dollars
to do whatever it is that you're doing in your district.

(11:34):
You also get a thousand dollars a month to come
to Columbia because obviously it works out great for people
who are living in the Midlands, but for the people
who live further away oftentimes they have to pay for
hotel rooms, whatever. So that's actually probably a little bit
under what it should be for some of them.

Speaker 2 (11:50):
Oh, if you're traveling down for like Salem, yeah, and
you get a traveling and.

Speaker 3 (11:53):
All the three nights or whatever, right so, and then
you get the ten thousand, four hundred dollars of your salary.
But what they're doing is the in district compensation is
a thousand that what they voted on is to bring
it up to twenty five hundred. So it's basically it's
going to go from twelve thousand dollars a year to
thirty thousand dollars a year for your in district compensation.

(12:14):
Your salary of ten thousand, four hundred a year doesn't change,
and the thousand dollars a month stipend doesn't change. So again,
all in you're at like fifty grand something like that.
Not to me again, somebody, I am a fiscal hawk.
I hate government expenses. However, I recognize that when people work,

(12:38):
they should be compensated. That's actually a biblical principle.

Speaker 2 (12:42):
Yes it is.

Speaker 3 (12:43):
And so I don't think that they're they're not fleecing
us right now. We're not getting run over there. Now.
What are they doing in the back door deals, that's
where the fleecing takes place. But yeah, otherwise, I mean
they're almost doing it for free right now, pretty much.
So I don't have a problem with this vote. And
again it was twenty five or twenty four to fifteen.

Speaker 2 (13:06):
And there are a couple of big issues. We'll see
how it shakes out as the House and the Senate
going to conference to come out with a final budget,
finalized budget plan. So and then there was one other
thing going on I wanted to talk about today in
the state is an article off now it's escaping me. Nonetheless,
this is a big push now to get things done

(13:27):
before the session is over.

Speaker 3 (13:30):
I think that one of the big things inside that.
But and I don't why is it in the budget?
It doesn't make sense to me, is the h I'll
just read it from the paper. Another clause insert it
into the budget Wednesday threatens to revoke three and a
half million dollars from South Carolina's capital city if it
doesn't repeal its ban on conversion therapy.

Speaker 2 (13:50):
Since June of.

Speaker 3 (13:51):
Twenty twenty one, a Columbia City ordinance has threatened a
five hundred dollars fine for anyone attempting to alter a
juvenile's gender, idea, entity, or sexual orientation through counseling. Now,
just so we understand what we're saying by that, the
fine is if in a youngster comes to a therapist

(14:12):
or a pastor or somebody and says I feel gay
or I feel transgendered, and you say anything other than
that's awesome. If even if the child says, and I
don't want to be gay or transgendered, if you offer
to help them not be gay or transgender, to help

(14:33):
them change their thinking on that, you would be fined
five hundred dollars. So that's what they're talking about with
the attempting to alter a juvenile's gender identity or sexual
orientation through counseling, because when you read it that way,
it sounds as if, well, there should be a bigger
fine if I'm attempting to make somebody change their gender

(14:54):
or sexual identity. But that's no. It's if the kid
says they don't want to be gay, or even if
their parents bring them and says, my son or daughter
struggling with homosexual thoughts, Is there anything you can do
to help? If you say yes, I think we can
help them. That's been labeled as conversion therapy, which is

(15:14):
actually not We're not converting you. We're actually helping you
see who the real you is, right, But conversion therapy
is bad and dangerous according to the gay, transgendered community,
and so that's why they pushed so hard. And former
Mayor Steve was a or we used to call Mayor

(15:35):
Ben was a big fan of putting a ban on that,
and so I agree with the Attorney General Alan Wilson,
who had that inserted into this.

Speaker 2 (15:44):
Now the other thing that and I remembered it while
you were talking that you said the word moment. There
was a moment there were and I guess this is
like they're hoping it doesn't go the way of medical marijuana,
because we were in pushing for that and then the
ultimate go obviously to have a recreational marijuana is that
the old we've been pushing. But that has been and

(16:05):
that process has been going on. I've forgotten which Senator
it is. When the Myrtle Beach has been pushing for
this for like a day, it's a Tom Davis, So
Tom Davis, and that just hasn't been expedited throughout the process.
Now this one they're hoping is going to gain a
little contraction quicker, and it could because there's a big
dollar markettaches to it. There was a conversation about our

(16:25):
state constitution and legislation or statutory whatever it may be
that would prohibit the building of this billion dollar casino
in the midst of the corridor of shame and the
economic impact that could have in our state. And we
did have a couple of senator House subcommittees. I don't
know who hosted it, but we had a couple of
family organization type Christian organizations come out make their position

(16:51):
very clear that this is not something that the state
of South Carolina would even come close to considering. Oh,
we're considering it because it rings to cash register. So
now they're going to be drawing their line in the
sand and making their positions clear so they can push
back as quickly as possible, because you know how these
things typically go. You start having the conversation. Before you

(17:11):
know it, what once revices are now habits is the
Doobie brother's name one of their albums. That's an obscure
reference from nineteen seventy two that I didn't know I
was going to have in the podcast today. But we
are now entertaining in the midst of all this money talk,
a little money money, money from casino building and the
prospect of actually turning the car door of shame into

(17:33):
something other than the carridor of shame.

Speaker 3 (17:38):
Well, the point is, do you want to go down
this path because it is immoral?

Speaker 2 (17:48):
Right?

Speaker 3 (17:49):
Will it make money? Probably not guaranteed, not guaranteed. As
we've talked about in the past. Atlantic City is a
absolute desolate wasteland right now, but in all likelihood would
increase some money for specifically that area, and it would
help the state as well. I like the pushback though.

(18:12):
I'm trying to find the where the senator was making
the pushback, and he was talking about the fact that
this is here. It is supporters of the effort. Let's
see a representative Palme Metal Family counsel told House lawmakers
the bills are a moment of moral reckoning. Scripture is clear,
you're not only to avoid evil, you are to expose it.

(18:35):
Gambling is one of those things that's listed as evil.
This state has always wrestled with this. We are in
a Bible Belt state. We live in the Bible Belt,
so any type of gambling legislation has always faced this
type of challenge. Supporters say, if it's going to bring
in money, and they did have some expert testifying to

(18:56):
the fact that it does not. They have never seen
any correlation between increased crime, which is something that people
who are against gambling they always say, well, look at it,
you bring down the neighborhoods, you bring into kinds of people,
they're gonna rob people and whatnot. They said that that
does not happen, and they do expect it would make

(19:17):
a lot of money.

Speaker 2 (19:18):
So I don't know. It's like what.

Speaker 3 (19:22):
You sold out for the lottery, and so you're is
it the slippery slope or is it just the next
logical step.

Speaker 2 (19:30):
Well, I'm just waiting for someone to put together the
purpose that will overcome the moral objection. Like with the lottery,
it's all for the children. Yes, So is this gonna be?
Are we going to go with a poker for potholes
so we can raise money so we can actually get
you some smooth How it's gonna be. It's gonna be

(19:51):
a blackjack for black top. I mean, we got to
come up with a marketing campaign here.

Speaker 3 (19:56):
Well, earlier in the week, we were talking with the
Lieutenant governor and she said she got to app out
there for you, now right, have you tried it?

Speaker 2 (20:02):
I did download the app because I had seen and
we went through this before, so if you heard it,
I'll do it. Briefly, I had seen a app advertised
on television where you could play lotteries on your smartphone,
and I'm like, how do you do that, like in
the state of South Carolina. So I looked it up

(20:23):
to see what the app was. I forgot it's called
jack Pocket, So I looked it up and it was
not available for usage in the state of South Carolina.
So I don't know if we would have the opportunity
to become part of that. I still can't believe that
even existed, because I thought the convenience store operators would
have had a strong enough lobbyist to make sure you
want to get the foot traffic in the door to

(20:43):
buy the lottery ticket with cash, but if they are
able to pass it so that you can use your
debit card or credit card to make the purchases online,
you could do that with your app.

Speaker 3 (20:53):
I was talking about the app that the she was
talking about that says you can get all the potholes fixed.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
Oh sorry, sorry, sorry, Yes I did not, And I
thought about it the other day because I wanted to
do it on Monday Thursday, because I remember I was
going to make that as the day. I would remember
the day that I put it in because she said,
you tell me how many days it takes. Yeah, And
I'm glad you brought it up today because Sally just
hit a pothole last night and I'm like, damn it,
I meant to download that scdot app for potholes.

Speaker 3 (21:22):
According to the Department of Transportation, we're fully funded, we
got enough money. It's not a money issue. It's apparently
we don't know where the potholes are issue. So they
can't use that angle for the casino. I would imagine
that the heart strings would be pulled when they showed
the Barack Obama speech with the young girl and she's

(21:44):
in the Corridor of shame and the building barely stands.

Speaker 2 (21:48):
So I remember the train would come past and they
were surprised the building could withstand the vibration from the train.

Speaker 3 (21:54):
Yeah, and so you'll get a parade of young children
who are not being educated properly in this state. They
don't have the means for it. And James Clyburn will
be out here probably screaming about it. And you know,
how does he do how does he talk about.

Speaker 2 (22:09):
You get the Democrats to offer up something here in
an exchange program. Maybe James Clyburn can negotiate this, we
will give if they would give up their there and
it May with the advent of the Federal Department of Education. Possibly,
I'm sure it will collapse. It'll be shuddered. So if

(22:29):
we give up their arguments against school choice, could we
get a casino? They would use that to get the
casino so that you fund school choice because they've had
that problem with funding it with state dollars.

Speaker 3 (22:43):
Well, what's in it for the Democrats.

Speaker 2 (22:46):
The schem off the casino instead of and then buy
the votes the old fashioned way as opposed just waiting
on the teachers to support them. I don't know. I
could see where.

Speaker 3 (22:56):
Perhaps James Clyburn and the Democrats would go with that plan.
If you said, we will fund the Corridor of Shame
at a two to one rate over every school in
the state, and then if you want to have school choice,
everybody's going to want to come to what was formerly
known as the Corridor of Shame because we have taz
Ma Halls.

Speaker 2 (23:16):
The James Clyburn School of Arts.

Speaker 3 (23:19):
Yes, something like that. I could see him going for that.

Speaker 2 (23:27):
If you get the James Cliverer's School of Arts right there,
so yes, this could be the plan. Then you could
get your casina.

Speaker 3 (23:35):
So that's what your soul cost that's it. You know
you want God's blessings or do you want quick cash?

Speaker 2 (23:42):
You realize the only use this example of the girl.
The girl was actually invited to DC, if I remember,
cooking for an official State of the Union, addressed by
Barack Hussein Obama, and he pointed around the crowd. She
was a very lovely young lady. We didn't have a
chance to hear her speak, but she was loveless. She
had I think I remember correctly. She had on a

(24:03):
very nice outfit, and her parents were there, maybe just
her mom, I can't remember. Trying to see if I
can find her. That girl probably graduated from that school
ten years ago. Now. She probably drives past it and
wonders how it still Standing't glad she's not going to
be in it when it finally falls. But nothing has
been done to my knowledge.

Speaker 3 (24:22):
Let's see this, Uh, Well, in January of eight, was
he the president? In January of eight? Was this the
first speech that he ever gave?

Speaker 2 (24:38):
Yes? That would have been the State of the Union, It.

Speaker 3 (24:40):
Says, January twenty fourth eight. Well, now this is according
to this It says, polls show the Democrat presidential hopeful
because he.

Speaker 2 (24:49):
Wouldn't have gone until nine.

Speaker 3 (24:51):
He was making an issue out of the Corridor of
Shame on his campaign, and there he is a very
young baraco. By point that he's wagging the finger at
South Carolinians who refuse to fund their schools. Now, I'm trying.
I just don't know where the girl is. I can't
find her. The PBS has a story whatever happened to

(25:14):
that rural corridor of shame that Barack Obama mentioned? And
the building still has a furnace fueled by cole. Students
in Dylan have little access. Blah blah blah. I don't
want to subscribe to PBS. Once he became the president,
he made education his top priority. Blah blah blah. The

(25:37):
president was late addressing what experts and locals say is
needed in towns like Dylan. Two thirds of the students
are black, one third or white ninety percent or low income.
Blah blah blah. It's a legacy of racial segregation and
distance from jobs and resources that it's just a hell hole.
And so how Obama? How did Obama even fine Dylan?

(26:01):
Bud Farrillo, preppy, genteel, sort of hell raiser, activist and
former legislative aid from Colombia, produced and directed at a documentary
film called The Corridor of Shame? Is he the one
who named it? In April of two thousand and five,
that was shown on public television, Obama announced he was
going to run for president in Springfield, Illinois, and six

(26:22):
days later got a phone call from Barack Obama. I'd
like to see that.

Speaker 2 (26:29):
So there.

Speaker 3 (26:31):
And then in March, Obama gathered with forty five educators
to tour Dylan Blah blah blah. It looks like absolute hell.
Obama won the Democrat primary in South Carolina. YadA, YadA, YadA. Well,
whatever happened? This story just drags on and on and on.

Speaker 2 (26:47):
Yen't believe. We don't have a follow up that begged
to be in.

Speaker 3 (26:50):
And this story was in twenty sixteen. Whatever happened to that.

Speaker 2 (26:53):
District, It was never going to be a follow up.
There was never any intention to follow up. It was
just used as a political grand standing. He was ever
going to do a damn thing, we said, nobody ever
did a damn thing.

Speaker 3 (27:05):
Media specialists at this when so they opened a new
building in twenty fifteen, But how embarrassing is this?

Speaker 4 (27:13):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (27:15):
At twenty fifteen, they opened up a new building. However,
the district did not have any money to buy books.
God at the high school, the students have the new
dual enrollment courses from the local community.

Speaker 2 (27:29):
College, and they don't have broadband because James Cliburne was
supposed to deliver that with the eighty million dollars that
he got by COVID money. But you ain't seen not
one frigging computer soocked up to the James Clyburn broadband.
Who's going to bring state wide? Not one.

Speaker 3 (27:41):
Jermaine McDaniel, who apparently is a very good football player, says,
everyone's goal is to get the hell out of here.
I'm hoping that a college will pick me up and
I can move. Yeah, that's in twenty seventeen. So apparently,
I guess it didn't. Really, it didn't pan out the
way Obama had promise.

Speaker 2 (28:00):
Look, it's a very poor community. If you live there,
you don't have the access to education, you don't have
access to a lot of things that most of it.

Speaker 3 (28:06):
Dylan Middle School looks really nice.

Speaker 2 (28:08):
Yeah, it does good.

Speaker 3 (28:10):
My gosh, it looks fresh. Now there's no books or
internet or maybe even electricity.

Speaker 2 (28:15):
Going on the road for ninety five.

Speaker 3 (28:17):
Oh, it's no longer an ice worm.

Speaker 2 (28:19):
You know the whole thing about the it's a racial
hell hole, you know when ninety percent of the community
is living in poverty. Yeah, you ain't got time for racism.
We're all in this boat. We're all in the same
friggin sinking boat. Yeah. On top of that, we've already
run ashore. We can't. We don't even have water.

Speaker 3 (28:38):
Yeah, I mean, here's a here's a photo of a young.

Speaker 2 (28:41):
Kid number now the name of that movie.

Speaker 3 (28:43):
Alan Richardson is sitting next to Tamari Latson. They both
are one is white, one is black. Both look miserable.

Speaker 2 (28:50):
I'm trying to remember the name of the movie. There
was a movie out.

Speaker 3 (28:52):
Racism is a is a privileged sport. In order to
be racist.

Speaker 2 (28:58):
You have might got to have something to be proud.

Speaker 3 (29:00):
You've got to be above the poverty line.

Speaker 2 (29:02):
Were in the same boat.