Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Chris Powell been writing about Connecticut government and politics for many,
many years. Encourage you to get the Chris Powell column,
and I welcome you back to the show, sir. The
one I was looking at is from actually April, your
column elections can't be secure without proof of citizenship.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Yeah, I don't think the people running Connecticut want elections
to be secure. I mean they're do. I they're big
advocates of, you know, illegal immigration and open borders. You know,
some of the far leftist Democrats have advocated letting legal
(00:37):
immigrants vote at least in municipal elections. I think the
whole rationale for open borders under the Democrats and the
Biden administration was really to skew congressional district and for
the House of Representatives. They didn't have to get all
(00:58):
the illegal immigrants to to vote. They merely needed to
get them into democratic areas in time for the next
congressional district because the constitution requires that in allocating districts
for the House, all people have to be counted, not
all citizens. All people have to be counted. So if
(01:21):
you you know, if you've got a lot five or
ten million people into the country, illegally, and if you
concentrate them in urban areas, as naturally happened because that's
where the housing is, that would cause the creation of
more solid democratic districts. And I think that was really
(01:43):
what was behind the open borders policy of the Biden administration,
really behind the open borders advocacy of Democrats in Connecticut
and throughout the country.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
You know, And I love what you said at the
outset there too, like you start to get skeppt, like
does Connecticut even want elections to be secure? A quick sidebar,
you know, when I look at Bridgeport and this is
probably the silliest of questions you'll ever get. But like
we proved it was fraud. It took us forever to
(02:16):
do it. The same woman in two different elections. There
was a special election redo simply because of the footage
we saw of her stuffing ballot boxes. And yet Chris
have got to ask you, in the end, it's determined, Yes,
you broke the law, you tampered with this election. You're
(02:36):
in trouble. You're going to get time. Whatever the punishment
is is meager. I'm sure I don't recall it off
the top of my head, but at the same time,
we're going to let the results of that election stand.
Speaker 3 (02:47):
I find that odd, don't you.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
It's like we're saying here, oh, yeah, there was rampant fraud,
but we're not going to do anything about.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
The hearth they did have. They did have a second
to election or by the court, and Bridgeford had the
the same result. You know, bridge Bridgeford is maybe the
center I know, yeah, Bridgewort is this, you know, maybe
the center of election high jinks. But there was a
less publicized scandal and uh in Stanford just a little
(03:20):
earlier than that, where the the Democratic city chairman uh
was convicted of election fraud involving the absentee ballots. And
you know, we we we we just don't know how
much of this is going on elsewhere. We we we
do know it's it's it's possible. And uh, I think
(03:42):
uh uh, it is only reasonable to ask that people
when they are registering to vote, uh, and when they
are voting in person, UH, provide proof of of identification.
And you know, here in Connecticut, I guess we're going
to have a referendum soon on no excuse absent to voting,
(04:04):
letting everybody vote by mail. I think that's pretty scary
because the more you separate the voter from the actual
casting of his vote, the more you're increasing the possibility
for fraud. The only way really to get a secure
election is to require everybody to vote in person and
(04:27):
to produce identification, and that's you know, that's more inconvenient
than a lot of people today want to go through.
But when you separate the voter from the casting of
his vote, you're asking for trouble.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
That's been one of my rants all the way back
to my top Top forty days, which you probably aren't
even aware.
Speaker 3 (04:45):
Back in the nineties, used to do Top forty radio
more often than not. Wish I stayed there.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
It was much less stressful, it was lighthearted, it was fun.
But when people would complain that they couldn't make it
to the polls, I'd be like, is it that inconvenient?
You're right to vote, this precious right to do it
in person. It's five minutes out of my day. Admittedly
I work a few hours in the morning and then
the rest of the day is mine. But I've always
(05:13):
been able to make it down there. You see people
from your community. You know, it's kind of a fun day.
I don't get the people who kick and scream about it.
But I wanted to ask. I've got one gentleman hitting
me this morning, and if he's listening right now, I
hear from him a lot. You know, I appreciate his emails,
But he said, he says, you know, I hear you
complaining about real ID. Nineteen states, including Connecticut plus Puerto
(05:37):
Rico and DC, they all issue driver's licenses to undocumented residents.
This will ensure, you know, voter integrity. I don't see
real ID ensuring voter or rectifying any issues. I see
in it being another thing that I have to do.
But I don't see any of the people who are
(05:57):
here illegally. I don't see you doing affecting our elections
in any way. How do you feel about real ID
as it pertains to secure elections.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
I don't know that it's got much much bearing on
election security at all. Any I understand why the government
wants it for travel security. But if if you're registered
to vote in Connecticut, if you do register to vote
in Connecticut, you have to affirm that you're a citizen,
(06:30):
but you don't have to show any any proof, and
nobody ever checks and our Secretary of State Stephanie Thomas
thinks this is this is not a problem. Well, I
think it is a problem. If look, I got to
show my license sometimes when I'm buying beer in the
in the supermarket, you got to show your your identification
(06:54):
if you're you know, getting on a plane or even
on a train. Sometimes where asked for identification when we
you know, take out at a loan providing Providing identification
is routine in the country. Now, I mean, why shouldn't
(07:15):
it be required for voting, which is really you know,
certainly it's more important than you know, my buying a beer.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Yeah, I was going to say, does Chris Powell actually
get carded for a case of beer?
Speaker 2 (07:27):
I mean, good for you about it. Absurd, But I
think the younger cashiers in the supermarkets, you know, do it,
you know, even to the elderly like myself.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
Yeah, no, No, I still get asked, and I often
thinks they're just playing by the rules, and which is
basically what we're talking about here. It's not an inconvenience.
Here's my identification. And I saw in your column too
that you said, look, as a matter of policy in
regard to this, order's most important component Trump is right,
Thomas is wrong, and your columns you call it like
(07:58):
you see it. As far as Trump, they're not letters
to Trump. You call him out more. A recent one
you called megalomaniac, which I can't possibly disagree with.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
I don't I don't know.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
I don't even think Trump would disagree with that. So
you saying Trump is right here and Thomas is wrong.
I thought it carried a lot of weight.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Well, Trump reminds me of Little Whiker. He's not only
not not always wrong, just insufferable.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
Yeah, that's a great way to put it.
Speaker 3 (08:26):
One day, Chris, but we've got some time.
Speaker 1 (08:27):
I'll tell you about the time I was on live
television with Little Whiker and we went at it a
little bit, which actually was an edifying exchange. I enjoyed it.
But we did go at it a little. He got
snarly and then dismissive. But he probably would say I
was the insufferable one.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
It was him.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
In any event, what are you tackling next your next column?
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Oh, I wrote something yesterday about the hearing on homeschooling. Yeah,
I think it's it's so terribly ironic that the solution
being advocated for really taking care of the safety of
(09:12):
the homeschool kids, which is absolutely right. You've got to
hit the parents to produce evidence that the kids are
actually learning from homeschooling, and get the parents every year
to produce evidence that their kids are safe. Yeah, we
ought to do that for the homeschool kids. Problem is,
we don't do it for the public school kids. I mean,
we have no proficiency testing as a mandatory basis for
(09:37):
the public school kids. We have only social promotion in
Connecticut public schools. We don't require the public school kids
to show that they've learned everything every year. We passed
them on every year, you know, without any proof of learning,
to even graduate them without any proof of learning. So
I just have to wonder, why are we going to
(09:58):
make a standard for the homeschool kids that's you know,
far tougher than the standard for the public school kids. Yeah,
there ought to be proficiency testing, proof of learning for
the public school kids before we do it for the
homeschool kids. There's not many homeschool kids, but you know,
most kids in Connecticut or public school then we require
absolutely nothing of them.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
Yeah, and I'm all for welfare checks too. I think
those should take place. I think DCF has faltered in
that manner A lot in Connecticut have done a lot
of horrible stories. It's something to look at. I don't
think you'll necessarily one hundred percent agree with me on this.
You've defended the governor before. I think he got asked
(10:40):
a question about that Waterbury case, and I think the
best he can come up with. I don't even know
how rehearsed it was. He's like, I think we got
to look at home I think it was a flip moment.
I think we got to look at homeschooling regulation because
that was lame. This guy was a prisoner and since
he was what eleven years old, twenty one years in
your bedroom, and that was the best the governor could
(11:02):
come up with.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Well, look, there's there is a problem with false claims
of homeschool Absolutely, that's you know, undeniable. And I think
the Democrats would you know, love to blacken the reputation
of homeschooling to you know, get everybody under the control
of the teachers, you know, unions. Again. But there is
(11:25):
a problem with false claims of homeschooling. But let's let's
address that. But there's far greater problems with public education.
I mean, look, the kids being homeschooled, nobody's paying attention
to them. Well, you know what, we have a huge
problem with chronic absenteeism in public schools. The average public
chronic absenteism rate in public schools in Kanaga is about
(11:47):
nineteen percent. It goes as high as fifty percent with
high school kids in New Haven. If they're not in school,
they're you know, God knows where they are. And a
lot of public school kids and in high school, you know,
get in trouble when when they're not in school, some
get even murdered. They get in trouble with drugs and
(12:08):
crime and vandalism and their misbehavior. Well, you know this
is this is more of a problem than the trouble
that the homeschool kids get into. But we do nothing
about it.
Chris Powell been writing about Connecticut government and politics for many,
many years. Encourage you to get the Chris Powell column,
and I welcome you back to the show, sir. The
one I was looking at is from actually April, your
column elections can't be secure without proof of citizenship.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
Yeah, I don't think the people running Connecticut want elections
to be secure. I mean they're do. I they're big
advocates of, you know, illegal immigration and open borders. You know,
some of the far leftist Democrats have advocated letting legal
(00:37):
immigrants vote at least in municipal elections. I think the
whole rationale for open borders under the Democrats and the
Biden administration was really to skew congressional district and for
the House of Representatives. They didn't have to get all
(00:58):
the illegal immigrants to to vote. They merely needed to
get them into democratic areas in time for the next
congressional district because the constitution requires that in allocating districts
for the House, all people have to be counted, not
all citizens. All people have to be counted. So if
(01:21):
you you know, if you've got a lot five or
ten million people into the country, illegally, and if you
concentrate them in urban areas, as naturally happened because that's
where the housing is, that would cause the creation of
more solid democratic districts. And I think that was really
(01:43):
what was behind the open borders policy of the Biden administration,
really behind the open borders advocacy of Democrats in Connecticut
and throughout the country.
Speaker 1 (01:55):
You know, And I love what you said at the
outset there too, like you start to get skeppt, like
does Connecticut even want elections to be secure? A quick sidebar,
you know, when I look at Bridgeport and this is
probably the silliest of questions you'll ever get. But like
we proved it was fraud. It took us forever to
(02:16):
do it. The same woman in two different elections. There
was a special election redo simply because of the footage
we saw of her stuffing ballot boxes. And yet Chris
have got to ask you, in the end, it's determined, Yes,
you broke the law, you tampered with this election. You're
(02:36):
in trouble. You're going to get time. Whatever the punishment
is is meager. I'm sure I don't recall it off
the top of my head, but at the same time,
we're going to let the results of that election stand.
Speaker 3 (02:47):
I find that odd, don't you.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
It's like we're saying here, oh, yeah, there was rampant fraud,
but we're not going to do anything about.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
The hearth they did have. They did have a second
to election or by the court, and Bridgeford had the
the same result. You know, bridge Bridgeford is maybe the
center I know, yeah, Bridgewort is this, you know, maybe
the center of election high jinks. But there was a
less publicized scandal and uh in Stanford just a little
(03:20):
earlier than that, where the the Democratic city chairman uh
was convicted of election fraud involving the absentee ballots. And
you know, we we we we just don't know how
much of this is going on elsewhere. We we we
do know it's it's it's possible. And uh, I think
(03:42):
uh uh, it is only reasonable to ask that people
when they are registering to vote, uh, and when they
are voting in person, UH, provide proof of of identification.
And you know, here in Connecticut, I guess we're going
to have a referendum soon on no excuse absent to voting,
(04:04):
letting everybody vote by mail. I think that's pretty scary
because the more you separate the voter from the actual
casting of his vote, the more you're increasing the possibility
for fraud. The only way really to get a secure
election is to require everybody to vote in person and
(04:27):
to produce identification, and that's you know, that's more inconvenient
than a lot of people today want to go through.
But when you separate the voter from the casting of
his vote, you're asking for trouble.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
That's been one of my rants all the way back
to my top Top forty days, which you probably aren't
even aware.
Speaker 3 (04:45):
Back in the nineties, used to do Top forty radio
more often than not. Wish I stayed there.
Speaker 1 (04:51):
It was much less stressful, it was lighthearted, it was fun.
But when people would complain that they couldn't make it
to the polls, I'd be like, is it that inconvenient?
You're right to vote, this precious right to do it
in person. It's five minutes out of my day. Admittedly
I work a few hours in the morning and then
the rest of the day is mine. But I've always
(05:13):
been able to make it down there. You see people
from your community. You know, it's kind of a fun day.
I don't get the people who kick and scream about it.
But I wanted to ask. I've got one gentleman hitting
me this morning, and if he's listening right now, I
hear from him a lot. You know, I appreciate his emails,
But he said, he says, you know, I hear you
complaining about real ID. Nineteen states, including Connecticut plus Puerto
(05:37):
Rico and DC, they all issue driver's licenses to undocumented residents.
This will ensure, you know, voter integrity. I don't see
real ID ensuring voter or rectifying any issues. I see
in it being another thing that I have to do.
But I don't see any of the people who are
(05:57):
here illegally. I don't see you doing affecting our elections
in any way. How do you feel about real ID
as it pertains to secure elections.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
I don't know that it's got much much bearing on
election security at all. Any I understand why the government
wants it for travel security. But if if you're registered
to vote in Connecticut, if you do register to vote
in Connecticut, you have to affirm that you're a citizen,
(06:30):
but you don't have to show any any proof, and
nobody ever checks and our Secretary of State Stephanie Thomas
thinks this is this is not a problem. Well, I
think it is a problem. If look, I got to
show my license sometimes when I'm buying beer in the
in the supermarket, you got to show your your identification
(06:54):
if you're you know, getting on a plane or even
on a train. Sometimes where asked for identification when we
you know, take out at a loan providing Providing identification
is routine in the country. Now, I mean, why shouldn't
(07:15):
it be required for voting, which is really you know,
certainly it's more important than you know, my buying a beer.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Yeah, I was going to say, does Chris Powell actually
get carded for a case of beer?
Speaker 2 (07:27):
I mean, good for you about it. Absurd, But I
think the younger cashiers in the supermarkets, you know, do it,
you know, even to the elderly like myself.
Speaker 1 (07:36):
Yeah, no, No, I still get asked, and I often
thinks they're just playing by the rules, and which is
basically what we're talking about here. It's not an inconvenience.
Here's my identification. And I saw in your column too
that you said, look, as a matter of policy in
regard to this, order's most important component Trump is right,
Thomas is wrong, and your columns you call it like
(07:58):
you see it. As far as Trump, they're not letters
to Trump. You call him out more. A recent one
you called megalomaniac, which I can't possibly disagree with.
Speaker 3 (08:08):
I don't I don't know.
Speaker 1 (08:09):
I don't even think Trump would disagree with that. So
you saying Trump is right here and Thomas is wrong.
I thought it carried a lot of weight.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
Well, Trump reminds me of Little Whiker. He's not only
not not always wrong, just insufferable.
Speaker 1 (08:23):
Yeah, that's a great way to put it.
Speaker 3 (08:26):
One day, Chris, but we've got some time.
Speaker 1 (08:27):
I'll tell you about the time I was on live
television with Little Whiker and we went at it a
little bit, which actually was an edifying exchange. I enjoyed it.
But we did go at it a little. He got
snarly and then dismissive. But he probably would say I
was the insufferable one.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
It was him.
Speaker 3 (08:47):
In any event, what are you tackling next your next column?
Speaker 2 (08:51):
Oh, I wrote something yesterday about the hearing on homeschooling. Yeah,
I think it's it's so terribly ironic that the solution
being advocated for really taking care of the safety of
(09:12):
the homeschool kids, which is absolutely right. You've got to
hit the parents to produce evidence that the kids are
actually learning from homeschooling, and get the parents every year
to produce evidence that their kids are safe. Yeah, we
ought to do that for the homeschool kids. Problem is,
we don't do it for the public school kids. I mean,
we have no proficiency testing as a mandatory basis for
(09:37):
the public school kids. We have only social promotion in
Connecticut public schools. We don't require the public school kids
to show that they've learned everything every year. We passed
them on every year, you know, without any proof of learning,
to even graduate them without any proof of learning. So
I just have to wonder, why are we going to
(09:58):
make a standard for the homeschool kids that's you know,
far tougher than the standard for the public school kids. Yeah,
there ought to be proficiency testing, proof of learning for
the public school kids before we do it for the
homeschool kids. There's not many homeschool kids, but you know,
most kids in Connecticut or public school then we require
absolutely nothing of them.
Speaker 1 (10:19):
Yeah, and I'm all for welfare checks too. I think
those should take place. I think DCF has faltered in
that manner A lot in Connecticut have done a lot
of horrible stories. It's something to look at. I don't
think you'll necessarily one hundred percent agree with me on this.
You've defended the governor before. I think he got asked
(10:40):
a question about that Waterbury case, and I think the
best he can come up with. I don't even know
how rehearsed it was. He's like, I think we got
to look at home I think it was a flip moment.
I think we got to look at homeschooling regulation because
that was lame. This guy was a prisoner and since
he was what eleven years old, twenty one years in
your bedroom, and that was the best the governor could
(11:02):
come up with.
Speaker 2 (11:03):
Well, look, there's there is a problem with false claims
of homeschool Absolutely, that's you know, undeniable. And I think
the Democrats would you know, love to blacken the reputation
of homeschooling to you know, get everybody under the control
of the teachers, you know, unions. Again. But there is
(11:25):
a problem with false claims of homeschooling. But let's let's
address that. But there's far greater problems with public education.
I mean, look, the kids being homeschooled, nobody's paying attention
to them. Well, you know what, we have a huge
problem with chronic absenteeism in public schools. The average public
chronic absenteism rate in public schools in Kanaga is about
(11:47):
nineteen percent. It goes as high as fifty percent with
high school kids in New Haven. If they're not in school,
they're you know, God knows where they are. And a
lot of public school kids and in high school, you know,
get in trouble when when they're not in school, some
get even murdered. They get in trouble with drugs and
(12:08):
crime and vandalism and their misbehavior. Well, you know this
is this is more of a problem than the trouble
that the homeschool kids get into. But we do nothing
about it.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.