November 4, 2024 • 49 mins
In this episode, Jeff Charles unpacks Donald Trump’s recent McDonald’s stunt in Pennsylvania, a calculated move that mixes fast food with political strategy aimed at winning over blue-collar voters. Jeff delves into why this act of relatability highlights Trump’s unique ability to connect with everyday Americans and contrasts it with Kamala Harris’s struggle to resonate with male voters, especially Black and Hispanic men, despite her campaign efforts. The episode also critiques the left’s narratives on crime rates, as Jeff discusses how rising violent crime—and the FBI’s recent “stealth edit” of crime data—are driving Americans to arm themselves amid growing distrust of the government’s ability to protect them. Finally, Jeff exposes the white savior complex within progressive circles, arguing that its patronizing approach to Black Americans often does more harm than good by reducing them to perpetual victims in need of rescue.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
FCB Faith is your rhythm and prey station. I listen,
my mom listens, pretty much the whole family. I cannot,
I cannot.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
I canna said, don't, don't and no, don't.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Listen to FCB Faith on iHeartRadio, Odyssey at faith dot com,
or tell your smart speaker to play FCB Faith on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
This is the FCB Podcast Network.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
This is a fresh perspective with Jeff Charles. Caught up,
up up, I'm loving it all right, Hey, what's good everybody?
Welcome back to a fresh perspective with Jeff Charles, where
we prefer truth over narrative and principles politics. And right
(01:51):
now we're gonna have a little bit of fun. We're
gonna we're gonna dive into the weird, wild and downright
genius world of political strategy. And yes, I am talking
about former President Donald Trump's recent visit to McDonald's. Now,
before you roll your eyes, this wasn't just some random
stock for a big mac. We all know that Donald
(02:11):
Trump loves his McDonald's, he loves his fast food. But
there's a lot more here than meets the eye. So
go ahead and grab some fries, grab a shake, grab
a double quarter pounder with cheese with no onions and
extra ketchup and mustard. I may have been exposing the
way I like my quarter pounders anyway, So yeah, go
ahead and grab that and we're going to get into
(02:32):
this all right. So picture this former president Donald Trump,
a billionaire businessman, former leader of the Free World and
quotation marks and the current GOP nominee for president. He
shows up Adam McDonald's in Pennsylvania. He throws on an apron.
He starts making fries like you know, you're in high
(02:53):
school working your first job. Now here's the thing. You
might be thinking, Okay, what's the big deal? Well, if
you ask him Democrats, this is basically the end of
the world. This is like the biggest scandal going on
right now. This is worse than water Kate because Trump
managed to pull off something that a lot of politicians can't,
(03:13):
especially Republican politicians. He made himself relatable while throwing some
serious shade at his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris or
how I affectionately refer to her as Black Hillary. So
here's the thing. Kamala Harris. She claimed that she used
to work at McDonald's during her college years. A lot
of people aren't buying that. Now. I'm not going to
say it one way or the other. I wasn't there.
(03:36):
A lot of people got there, start working out McDonald.
So it's plausible. So I mean, I haven't seen any
evidence that she's lying. So maybe she did. But anyway,
this visit was Trump's way of kind of calling her
out and casting doubt on her claim that she worked
at Mickey D's. So he shows up, he strolls in
and you can see the footage on this all over
(03:58):
x and other social media platforms. Sure, he shows up
in his full suit and tie. He takes off his jacket,
he puts on the apron and he's still wearing his
shirt and tie and he's got the apron on and
he's ready to get to work. And he's over there
making these fries and they're like telling him how to
do it, YadA, YadA, YadA, and he's just having a
great time. He's serving people through the drive through. A
(04:19):
lot of them loved to meet him, and you know,
they were gushing over how they got to meet former
President Trump. And you know, he was just living it up,
living his best life. And it was hilarious. It was
absolutely hilarious. Now here's the thing. There was a strategy
behind this, right. This wasn't just about trolling Kamala Harris,
although that was funny enough on its own because of
(04:41):
just how how insincere she tends to come off. But
here's the first thing. He did this in Pennsylvania. This
is a state that's going to be absolutely critical in
the upcoming elections. So both Trump and Harris know this,
and they've been pulling out all the stops to win
over voters. Harris has been sending high profile Democratic operatives
to gin up support. Trump has been campaigning and doing
(05:04):
rallies and events like crazy. Both the candidates know that
this date is crucial. Here's the thing. The latest real
clear polling average shows Trump leading Harris in Pennsylvania by
wait for it, zero point eight percent. So they're basically
neck and neck. This is a toss up right now
as far as I'm concerned. So what better way to
(05:25):
appeal to blue collar folks in Pennsylvania than to show
up at McDonald's and kind of, you know, be relatable
like one of them. Right, here's a kicker here. You like,
when you watch the videos, you can tell that he
was having the time of his life, which is yet
another reason why this whole stunt works for him. He
was flipping the fries, he was joking around with his staff.
(05:47):
He's saying, I could do this all day. I wouldn't
mind this job. I like this job. Now, you compare
that to Kamala Harris, who you know, if she were
doing this, it wouldn't work for her because she'd be
cackling through the whole thing. She'd be talking about how
she came from a middle class family. She struggled, whether
you love or hater, she is not as good as
at relating to regular everyday folks, especially those who are
(06:09):
from the blue collar persuasion. It just wouldn't work for her. Now,
she may have some other strengths whatever, she can stick
to a teleprompter, but when it comes to engaging like that,
this is playing to Trump's strength. And here's the thing.
The Left is still losing their minds over this whole thing.
All you have to do is go on X right now. Well,
after you watch this video and after you listen to this,
(06:32):
go on X and check it out and you will
see there in full meltdown work, a full meltdown mode.
But here's the thing. That's how you know it worked
when the Left is screaming about how this is just
some meaningless stunt and it was staged and the Secret
Service bitted everybody who came through the drive through, like
(06:52):
anybody cares about that, Like we didn't already know that
this was stage and that the Secret Service after two
assassination attempts, would be vetting people who go through the
drive through. They're trying to make this they're trying to
make this big. How do you do about it? And
nobody cares. The thing is, they're freaking out because deep
down they know that this stunt worked. They know that
(07:14):
his visit to McDonald's is going to stick with voters
because again, it plays to one of his strengths. He
knows how to connect with people, especially people who aren't
in the world of academia. He knows how to connect
to the regular salt of the earth, assault of the
Earth person in ways that commonly hero and a lot
of other Republicans and Democrats can't. I mean, there was
(07:34):
even an article on Newsweek, and I'm not not a
Newsweek i write for Newsweek Opinion, but there was a
report saying that they found some health code violations at
the McDonald's location that Trump was act like employees like
supposedly not washing their hands before putting on gloves. Oh
that's so horrible. I mean, the thing is that this
(07:55):
is what people are resorting to. Then you know they're reaching, like,
don't try to cancel with Donald's over this. Come on.
McDonald's actually offered to have Kamala Harris come and resume
her role as a fry cook, because that's what she
says she did. She said that she did the prize.
Everybody knows that whatever they're pointing out, it happens at
every fast food joined. You probably if you're watching this,
if you're listening to this, you probably worked out a
(08:17):
fast food place. My first job at fifteen years old
was at Carl's Junior. It was great. My second job
was at Togo's Togo's eaterie. Remember that. See my California
brothers and sisters will know exactly what I'm talking about.
I miss so sandwiches. But I digress. So basically, they
want to cancel an entire McDonald's because Trump showed up.
So here's the thing again, Like I said, this shows
(08:42):
just how effective this visit was. It was endearing. When
you watch it, he comes off very well. He looks
funny in that apron It makes you laugh and it's
kind of a heartwarming type of thing, whether you hate
him or love him. And the thing is, if you're
looking at this through partisan lenses, and you're not really
going to see the significance because if you're a Democrat,
(09:03):
I mean, Trump could sneeze Trump. Trump could go and
need starving children in Detroit, Michigan, and Democrats would hate it.
They would say, I want those children to starve rather
than have Trump feed them. It's it's weird if you're
looking at this through a political lens. If you're looking
at this in a strategic fashion, then you know this
(09:24):
was a good move on his part. Now, I'm not
saying that this is going to win him the election.
It probably won't. If you're already voting for Kamala Harris,
this isn't going to change your mind. If you're already
voting for Trump, this is just like a little icing
on the cake. It's cool, But if you're undecided, it
might help you get a few people over into his camp.
(09:47):
And realistically, that's all he needs. Again, this is going
to be a close race overall, but in Pennsylvania it's
going to be very close. So he only needs to
move a few people over to beat come up in Pennsylvania,
and this stunt could help him do that, but again,
nothing is guaranteed. And it kind of also reminds me
(10:10):
of back in the day in twenty sixteen, where Trump
can basically sneeze or cut a wet fart and the
left would freak out about it, and in so doing
they actually promote him. See, all they had to do, guys,
was just let this ride. They saw what happened, they
saw how effective it was. All they had to do
was just say, okay, let's not really say much about it.
(10:32):
We know how America's attention span is. Give it two
or three days. People have completely forgotten about it. No,
but no, they had to freak out. They had to
be like, oh my gosh, this is the end of
the world. We're all going to die because President Trump
served up fries at a McDonald's. Yeah, you guys are
helping him. You're helping him. Democrats, you're helping him by
freaking out. All you have to do is shut up
(10:54):
or just say, Okay, that was funny or whatever. Move
on to the next thing. Talk about policy, because that's
what people really care about, and this whole thing would
have been over. But it is what it is. Right,
it's too late. The cats out of the bag, and
the Democrats and their close friends and allies and the
activist media are already freaking out. Now, y'all know, I
don't really have a dogmas fight. I'm not supporting either candidate,
(11:16):
the Repuvement or the Democrat because neither of them really
want to shrink the size of government. None of them
want to get rid of federal agencies. If anything, the
government is going to grow over both of them. So
to me, it's just it's not that big of a deal.
But as a political commentator, this was an interesting moment,
This was a significant moment. Now Kamala Harris might be
(11:36):
able to come up with something that's equivalent equivalent to that,
something that maybe placed her strengths. I wouldn't recommend that
she tries going to McDonald's and working, because that's again,
like I said before, that's not going to work for her.
But this is one of those things. This is one
of those ways that Trump can use his showmanship to
get support. So it is. It was very interesting seeing
(11:57):
this happen because I had heard that it was going,
but I wasn't quite sure that it was. And then
when I saw it, I was like, that was a
brilliant maneuver. That was a very brilliant maneuver. So I'll
leave it there. You guys, let me know what you
think about this. But before you go, you already know
what to do. You gotta like this and share this,
and if you haven't subscribed already, you got to fix
(12:18):
that subscribe hit that subscribe button or else I will
show up to your house wearing a McDonald's apron and
I will go in and make you some fries and
you won't like them because I don't know how to
make fries. Also, check out my substat called Chasing Liberty.
You can get to that at libertychasers dot com. Become
a subscriber support my work. I very much appreciate it.
But until next time, stay free, stay principled, and most importantly,
(12:42):
stay ungovernable. Welcome on back, and today we're going to
go into a topic that Democrats might not want to
talk about. And what I'm going to talk about is
why men across all races seem to be steering clear
(13:04):
of Kamala Harris in the voting booth. So my friend,
who also happens to be the editor of Newsweek Opinion
and an author, Batya Ungar Saragon, she did a video
where she hit the nail on the head as for
the reasons why Kamala Harris is having trouble getting mails
to vote for her. So go ahead and grab your
(13:26):
popcorn and let's get on into it. So before we
get into it, I mean just to remind you, I
need you to like this, share it with your friends,
and also subscribe if you haven't already. Think of it
as the easiest vote you'll ever cast. There's no long lines,
there's no ID required, So Black people, you can subscribe.
You don't need your ID because apparently we can't get IDs,
(13:48):
and you won't have to listen to someone trying to
convince you that you're a horrible person for not doing it.
If you don't subscribe, you're not a horrible person, but
you are missing out on some major stuff in your life.
So hit me up up subscribe. So anyway, let's go
ahead and get into it. Let's talk about Vice President
Kamala Harris and her problem with male voters. Now, to
(14:09):
be fair, she also has an issue with women voters too,
but she is doing better among women, and in a
second you're going to see why. So Batya. She did
a video for the Free Press recently, and I'm going
to play a clip of it in a little bit,
but she talked about how Harris is underperforming with men
by as much as sixteen percentage points compared to her opponent,
(14:30):
former President Donald Trump. And that's not just with white
working class dudes, you know, the usual suspects for the
Democrats losses, but it's also among black and Hispanic men,
especially younger Black and Hispanic men. Now, if you're a
Democrat strategist, this is where you should be hitting the
panic button. But instead the left is doing what they
(14:51):
always do with numbers like this, They cry sexism. Right
so you can so, I read an article from the Guardian,
and there's also other left wing outlets who are out
here blaming Harris's dismal polling numbers among men on you
guessed it misogyny, because when men don't like your candidate,
what better way to win when them over than by
(15:12):
calling them sexist, right. So you guys might also remember
about a week ago, week ago, a former president, Barack
Obama also chimed in and he was lecturing specifically black
men about not wanting to support Harris, saying, oh, well,
you don't want a woman in position of leadership. And
here's the thing. That's not what's it. That's not what
(15:35):
the problem is. And that's what Batia points out. It
isn't about misogyny as much as Democrats want it to be.
It's about messaging. Batia made it an excellent point that
Harris's campaign isn't necessarily designed to appeal to men much
at all. It's really designed in tailored to women, specifically
college educated women. There was even a video, yes, in
(15:59):
actual Campaig video where there were a bunch of men
talked about talking about supporting a woman for president and
how that makes them super masculine and tough because they're
secure enough to vote for a woman. It was like
the Democrats version of that ridiculous Gillette ad a while ago.
The thing is, again, it's not about winning over men.
It was about reassuring women that men voting for Harris
(16:23):
is okay somehow, like basically it was appealed to men,
but not like masculine men. It was more for like
I hate to use this term, but more feminine, soy
boy type of men, like, oh yeah, I can support
women because I'm woke and I'm feminist and I believe
in women in y YadA, YadA, YadA. But here's the thing. Men,
(16:46):
whether they're black, white, Hispanic, purple, or otherwise, they're not
buying what Harris is selling because she's not really selling
to them. Now, I will be fair. In Over the
past month or a couple months or so, she has tried,
Like I mentioned that cringe that was supposed to be
an overture to male voters. She also rolled out a
plan specifically for black men because she is struggling among
(17:09):
black men. Just to give you an idea, she's hovering
about seventy percent support among black males. Now, to give
you a point of comparison, Biden was pulling out about
ninety percent among black males. So that's a huge, huge,
huge job. She has alienated black men, white men, and
men of all races. So the campaign understands this obviously,
(17:31):
so they're trying to fix this. But I'm not sure
this is going to work. So I'm just going to
play this clip from Batya and you can kind of
see where she's going with this.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
The real reason men of all races are so reluctant
to bag Harris is because her campaign is not for them.
It's for women, specifically college educated women. And this includes
the messaging that's ostensibly about featuring men. It turns out
(18:03):
liberal women want their men LARPing in Camo while voting
for the party that ship their jobs overseas to China.
They want their men to be able to fix a car,
or at least dressed like they know how to, while
voting for the party that defunded vocational training. They want
their men to dress like ranchers but vote like podcasters.
They want men to vote against their own economic interests
(18:26):
in support of the future. Is female culture wars. I'm
not saying that real men can't support women, or abortion
or Kamala Harris. I'm saying that the Harris campaign's failure
to appeal to men has exposed an inherent contradiction in
the heart of the Democrats base of college educated women
between what women want and expect from men aesthetically or sexually, namely, masculinity, competence,
(18:51):
self reliance, and assertiveness, and what they demand politically submission.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
Right, So Batia nailed it in that clip. Right, Let's
be real, like, scolding men into supporting Harris is not
going to work. And you would think that Democrats would
have figured this out by now. I wrote about this
when Barack Obama came out with his nonsense, like when
he was running for president, people would just call everybody
who disagreed with him racist, and that kind of worked
(19:17):
for him. It kind of wrote for him. He didn't
say it himself, but his allies in the media and
in the Democratic Party basically try to make it sound
like anybody who disagreed with him or didn't plan to
vote for him were doing so because of his skin color.
They're using the same playbook with Kamala Harris, except this
time they're using her skin color, her supposed blackness, and
her status as a woman. They're basically just changing the
(19:40):
labels from racist to sexist to misogynists. This is twenty
twenty four, y'all. That doesn't work anymore. The fact that
Trump one in twenty sixteen should show that these strategies
don't work anymore. But It's like they don't have any
other playbook to use. They haven't written a new one yet. Right.
What's even worse is how insulting this is to men
(20:04):
of all races. Batia says that telling black men that
they owe their votes to Harris because she's a woman
is pretty damn offensive. It's like they're basically saying, vothe
for her, or you're a bad person, you're a bigot,
you hate women. That's not how you win elections. At
the end of the day, the numbers don't lie. Harris
is lagging behind with male voters because she's not making
(20:27):
the case for why she's the better option. It's really
that simple. Instead of addressing men's concerns like jobs, the economy,
public safety, crime, education, she's just recycling the same tired
lines about identity politics, and honestly, it's not fooling anyone.
Immigration is another issue that men are concerned about it
and I know that women are concerned about the things
(20:48):
that I just listed as well, But for men, these
are at the top of the list among voter priorities,
especially when it comes to the economy. Men want to
provide for their families, They want to be in a
position to where they can feed their wives and their kids,
or if they're single, they want to be in a
position to where they can have a family that they
can support. And right now it's way harder to do
(21:11):
that with inflation, with other economic issues, with the lack
of jobs, it's way harder to do that right now
than it was before. Democrats don't really want to speak
to that. Kamala has kind of said a few things
in that direction, but you can't really nail her down
on a lot of policy because she hasn't given a
whole lot. What she's been trying to do is trying
(21:33):
to separate herself from her prior stances on the issues
that were way more radical, like wanting to revamp the
entire health care system so that the government can take
it over, get rid of private insurance. She wants to
know ban as many guns as she can. I mean,
she won't say this, but she is calling for more
restrictions on firearms, something that she has tried to mitigate
(21:54):
by saying, oh, I'm a gun owner, so vote for me.
I'm not going to take your guns. It's not working.
It's not working for her. So here's the thing she's
not really fooling anybody, Right, If the Democrats want to
have a chance to win in November, they got to
stop lecturing people and start offering something of substance. But
(22:16):
given how things are going, I don't think that's going
to happen anytime soon. Part of the problem is that
Kamala Harris doesn't really have a lot of substance. She's
an empty suit. She does best when she's given her
talking points and she can recite those talking points without
being challenged. You see how she's done in these interviews.
Most of them she's done horrible that there was a
few where she kind of did okay, but again she
(22:40):
doesn't really there's not much there there when it comes
to Kamala Harris, Right, you guys understand what I'm saying here.
It's kind of hard to explain, but there's just not
much there. So the thing is, she does appeal more
to women. As a matter of fact, when she was
chosen as Biden's running mate, I even said back then,
she's not being chosen to appeal to black voters. She
(23:03):
was chosen to appeal to white women ones that want
to be able to say, yeah, I voted for the
first woman president. I voted for a black woman to
be the president of the United States. A lot of
a lot of white left leaning women eat that stuff up, right,
So it's no wonder that she's struggling with men. And
(23:25):
I think Republicans in general tend to win over men
more than Democrats in general. But her numbers are looking bad.
I mean, there's a sixteen percent difference between her and
Donald Trump right now, and he's dominating her among men. Trump,
for his part, has tried to reach out to women
as well because he's not pulling as well there. That's
probably why he moderated it moderated his abortion stance. I
(23:48):
think that that's one of the main reasons why he
did that. Now. I don't have the numbers as far
as how he's doing with women, but I would bet
that the gap isn't nearly as big as when it
comes to men, and he's leading Kamala Harris with men.
So to me, I mean, Kamala Harris has a lot
of work to do. I mean, again, this still isn't guaranteed.
(24:09):
There's still neck and neck in a lot of swing states,
and overall, there's still neck and neck. But if Kamala
Harris can't figure this part out, it's not going to
look good for her, especially with black voters. She should
be having way more black support than she does right now,
and that's going to figure into into these swing states.
If those numbers hold in swing states, she's going to
(24:32):
lose and Trump is going to win, and it'll be
interesting to see how Democrats react to that. What's going
to happen is they're going to say it was foreign influence, racism, misogyny,
and it will be everything except for the fact that
Democrats have horrible messaging, they have horrible policy, and that's
(24:52):
really it. So that's where it stands right now. Now
things might change. I might be wrong, but I don't think.
I again, I'm not necessarily predicting who's going to win.
But if Kamala Harris loses, this is going to be
one of several reasons why. So I'll leave it there
for right now, and I guess we'll see what happens.
(25:13):
Let me know what you think. Thanks for coming and
taking a listen and watching this. Make sure you subscribe,
Make sure you like this, make sure you share. Also
check out my substack at Chasing Liberty. You can get
that at liberty Chases dot com. Become a subscribe to
my substack, support my work. I highly appreciate it, and
until next time, stay free, stay principled, and most importantly,
(25:36):
stay ungovernable. Hello everybody, and welcome back to a fresh
perspective with Jeff Charles, where we prefer truth over narrative
and principles over politics. And right now we're going to
get into a topic that might not surprise you if
you've been paying some attention. We're going to be talking
(25:57):
about leftist lies about crime rates. But here's the cool
thing about this. Like they've been the Democrats have been
lying about crime rates going down over the over recent years,
and it was recently exposed as a lie according to
the FBI. But here's the cool thing about it. Americans
were never buying the lies in the first place. Let's
(26:19):
go ahead and get into this so again. For years,
the left has been selling the narrative that violent crime
is down and everything is just fine, go back to sleep,
you know, don't don't believe your lying eyes. But let's
be real. Anyone who has lived in a major city
or a progressive utopia like San Francisco or New York
(26:41):
City y'all could smell the bs from a mile away, right.
The stats that they were showing may have they may
have looked good at first, but then it turned out
that there's a bit of a problem. So the numbers
that they've been using, a lot of them come from
the year twenty two. I don't think that we have
the stats in for twenty twenty three yet. But recently
a report showed that the FBI stealth edited their crime
(27:05):
numbers from twenty twenty two. They quietly revised these statistics
that originally showed a slight decrease in violent crime and
who actually it hasn't gone down. They found that it's
actually up by four point five percent violent crime. And
these are just the official numbers. The real world experience
(27:26):
of the average American is probably way worse because they're
actually feeling it in their neighborhoods and they've been investing
in their own protection as a result. So here's the
thing who trusts the government to keep them safe at
this point, And it's not just me saying this. Real
clear investigations they uncovered the stealth edits. They first claimed
(27:48):
again of decline in violent crime, but then they revised
their numbers to show a significant increase of four point
five percent. This was not just a clerical error. This
was either incompetence or just straight up deception. The FBI
estimates crime data, and around forty percent of police departments
weren't even reporting their numbers to the FBI. This means
(28:11):
the rest of the numbers were a bit of a
guessing game. I mean, could this really get any sketchyer,
I mean, I don't think so. But again, there are
at least two indications showing that people weren't buying what
the Democrats were selling on this. I mean they were
saying it all over the place, all of their media,
their politicians. Kamala Harris is like, oh, crime has gone down.
(28:34):
But here's the thing. Gallup conducted a poll ear earlier
this year, I believe, in March, and it found that
seventy nine percent of Americans are worried about violent crime.
Fifty three percent say they are worried a great deal
about crime, about twenty six percent say they're worried a
fair amount about violent crime. So that adds up to
(28:55):
seventy nine percent. But let's just take a look at
that other number. Over half of the country is concerned
about crime a great deal. Now, this poll was conducted
when Democrats were lying about these crime rates. If they
actually believed what Democrats were saying, those numbers would look
way different. Right, So polling already shows that Americans know
(29:18):
that crime is up. They're experiencing it in their neighborhoods.
So how could they not, right. But here's another factor,
gun ownership. Now, while Democrats were trying to convince us
that everything was fine, that violent crime isn't as much
of an issue, people were out there stocking up on
firearms like they were preparing for the apocalypse. Another study
(29:40):
found that seventy nine percent of gun owners said that
they bought their guns over the past year for personal protection.
Even liberals, even among Democratic voters who are usually not
too keen on gun ownership, their rates of gun ownership
are way up. So so much for being anti gun right,
I mean, since twenty twenty, more than half of new
(30:02):
Democratic gun buyers were first time gun buyers. Now that's
a plot twist. That is another inconvenient fact that the
anti gunners and the people lying about crime rates wouldn't
want you to know. Now, this isn't just about crime statistics.
It's not just about gun ownership, it's not just about
concerns over crime. It's about trust. I mean, if Democrats
(30:26):
want to keep gas lighting the American public, they can
keep trying, but they're going to find it harder and
harder to convince people that they've got this whole crime
thing under control. People were already singing through the lies
and taking matters into their own hands, literally by arming themselves.
That same study that dealt with gun ownership, it also
(30:46):
showed that most Americans are investing in more security systems,
more security measures for their homes. That tells you something, Right,
if people believe that crime wasn't on the rise, they
wouldn't be doing this, especially people who are traditional more
averse to gun ownership Democrats. So people weren't buying this
(31:06):
whole thing. I mean, I know that this is something
that they kept saying on the TV, on the airwaves
and the interwebs. Oh crime is down, crime is down,
crime is down. Every time you go to one of
those networks and they talk about crime, they're saying, oh,
violent crime has gone down. And for the regular person,
they know it's not true. But here's the thing. It
was never going to work. I mean, if you have
(31:28):
a neighbor whose house got got broken into, or if
you're hearing sirens outside of your window every other night,
no politician or bureaucrat is going to be able to
gaslight you into thinking that somehow violent crime is just
magically going down. And with the elections coming up, you
can bet that crime is going to be a top
(31:48):
priority for voters and the Democrats are going to have
to come up with a new strategy and fast. Honestly,
I think it's too late at this point. I mean,
the election is just a few weeks away, and this
whole thing was expo is a lie. Now here's the
other kicker. What media outlets are reporting on this. No
establishment ones, no left wing ones. There are sources on
(32:10):
the right who are reporting on these revised numbers, but
chances are people are never going to see them. But again,
it doesn't matter because they already know that crime has
been going up. They can see it in their cities,
they can see it with their family and friends, people
are talking about it, and so On one level, I
(32:32):
hate to say this, On one level, it is a
good thing because it shows that Democrats are lying about
crime rates. It also shows them that they can't trust
what they're being told in the media and by their politicians.
That's a good thing. Their government is lying to them,
and people are seeing that their government is lying to
their faces. The increasing gun ownership also is a good
(32:55):
sign too, because it shows that more people are understanding
that their own protection is their own responsibility. They can't
count on the police to show up if somebody is
trying to break into their house or if somebody is
trying to mug them. More people are understanding that if
they want to keep themselves safe, it's up to them.
This could cause more support for the Second Amendment because
(33:16):
Democrats want to crack down on that right. Democrats want
to make it harder for people to keep and bear arms,
so maybe this will create more of a backlash. It should.
If you realize that crime is on the rise, police
aren't going to help you, then yeah, you need to
protect yourself. And I do like where this is going.
(33:38):
I don't like the reason why it's going this way,
but it is what it is, right. I mean, if
you want to keep yourself safe, you have to keep
yourself safe. I mean, there's even reports over the past
few years I've seen multiple ones in places like San
Francisco in other cities where the neighborhood are pulling their
resources together, pulling their money together there to hire private
(34:01):
security because the local governments aren't doing it. The police
aren't doing their jobs, or they're not being allowed to
do their jobs. It could be one or the other,
it could be both. So people are hiring private security
to prevent people breaking into their cars, breaking into their homes.
This is also a good thing because it shows that
you can't rely on the government, and if it's pushing
(34:23):
people more in a direction where they want to be
more self sufficient. Folks like myself who love liberty, I
love seeing that because the reality is that you can't
depend on the government. The government is not always going
to be there for you, even when their intentions are good.
I mean, I'm sure a lot of officers will love
(34:44):
to be able to actually protect people from violent people
who are going to hurt them or to steal their property,
but a lot of them are caught up doing other
stuff that doesn't really relate to what their actual role
is supposed to be, which is protecting our rights. As
a whole other conversation, but suffice it to say that
these are signs that more Americans are understanding that self
(35:08):
sufficiency is the only way to go at this point.
And there are other indications, but I'm not going to
get into those right now because I don't want to
digress too much. I'm already kind of babbling. But the
thing is is that crime rates are up and people
are taking notice and they are doing something about it,
and that is a great thing. So let me know
(35:30):
what you think, let me know, let me know what
you think. Are you seeing this in your neighborhood. What's
going on here? What's going on here? Hello everybody, and
welcome back to a fresh perspective with Jeff Charles, where
we prefer truth over narrative and principles over politics. Today
or right now. Right now, we're going to dive deep
(35:53):
into an uncomfortable truth that a lot of the folks
on the left would rather we just ignore, except for
the ones who are honest. There are folks on the
left who have talked about this as well, so I'll
be fair to them, but I'm going to talk about
white progressives particularly and their belief that black people are inferior.
(36:14):
Now that sounds pretty strong, doesn't it, But yeah, they do.
They do. Now, I'm not talking about all white progressives,
not talking about every single solitary white progressive in the
United States of America. But as far as politics goes,
and as far as members of the chattering class and
the overall discussion on race, culture, politics, all that stuff,
(36:37):
these talking heads and these leaders, they think that we
are inferior as black people. This isn't some wild conspiracy theory.
If you know, you have to look that close at it,
you can easily see it in how they talk to us.
So I'm going to set the stage a bit. You
might remember there was an interview on CBS News that
involved author Twan Nahisi Coates, a black man, and he's
(37:01):
you know, he's seems to be on the He's definitely
on the left, and he is very much in this
whole anti races camp, this whole progressive ideology on race.
Like that that's his lane, that's what he does. And
he recently wrote a book and he did an interview
that was kind of controversial. He said some controversial things
(37:22):
about the conflict in Gaza, about Hamas and Israel, all
that stuff anti Israel, of course. And here's the thing.
He was being interviewed by a reporter named Tony ducoppol.
I hope I'm pronouncing his name right. I'm probably not.
But Tony is a white guy. He's a reporter, and
he was interviewing Tony Heasy Coats, and he made the
(37:45):
unforgivable mistake of actually challenging some of Tony Heasy coats
ideas during the interview, pushing back, asking tough questions, you know,
what an interviewer is supposed to do. And uh, the
backlash from his white progressive colleagues was about as fierce
as you might expect. I mean they basically lit him
(38:07):
on fire. I mean verbally, of course, you know, one
to even during a conference call after the interview, they
told him to shut the you know what up? Because
how dare a white man ask a black man tough questions? Right?
That's what's going on here. Here's the thing. If a
white author had been in the hot seat, nobody would
(38:27):
have bet in an eye. You're allowed to ask tough
questions and challenge, challenge the ideas of a white person.
I'm left leaning media I'm talking about specifically here. But
since Coats happens to have more melanin CBS's Race and
Culture department. Yeah, that's a thing. CBS has a Race
and Culture department that vetted the questions beforehand, and they
(38:50):
basically wanted to spoon feed Coats a bunch of softball
questions as if he can't handle a tough conversation because
he's black. But see, here's the thing. Is this anti
racist or is this just white saviorism? This guy is
as virtue, which, by the way, white saviorism is racist.
It is very much racist. This brings us to the
(39:12):
heart of the issue. White progressives in particular have this
really bad habit of assuming that black people are inherently
weaker or incapable of handling the same level of scrutiny
as white folks. You know, I read a piece responding
to this from John mccorter. I believe it was for
the New York Times. He's a linguist, he's an author,
(39:34):
he's a black man as well, and he called this out.
He called it a grotesque version of anti racism. These
progressives act like, as black people, we have to be
coddled and shielded from difficult conversations and being challenged, as
of we're just mentally fragile porcelain dolls that are incapable
of sane, intelligent discussions. It's really condescending. And it's it's
(40:00):
basically like it's you know, who else agrees with this
that black people are inferior and can't handle conversations. People
like David Duke, actual open races are in agreement with this.
Now they may not agree that, you know, we should
we should be able to be on TV and have
you know, books and all that good stuff, good stuff,
(40:22):
but the idea is the same. So it is it's like,
you know, oh no, don't ask Jeff any tough questions.
His fragile, little negro blame brain might explode. I mean,
come on, if I can survive Thanksgiving with a relative
who thinks the earth is flat, I can handle a
few tough questions. I don't really have a relative who
things the earth is flat. But but here's the thing.
(40:44):
It's it's this type of mindset runs deep on the
hard left, it really does. It kind of hearkens back
to what Malcolm X was saying about white conservatives and
white progressives that the white conservative who have happends to
be racist is going to be more open about it. Nowadays,
they do try to hide it. The ones who act
(41:04):
I'm talking about the ones who are actually racist. I'm
not talking about all white conservatives. Most white conservatives and
most white progressives are not racist, but the ones who
are on the right, when they do, try to hide it,
and they don't do a very good job. So I
appreciate that because I like knowing who I'm dealing with.
I want to know if somebody thinks I'm inferior because
my skin color is darker. On the left, it's more
(41:26):
dangerous because they come to you with a smile on
your face and a pat on the back, acting like
they're your friend. And that's what Malcolm X discussed when
he was still alive. He referred to the white conservative
as the fox or I'm sorry, as the wolf, and
the white progressive as the fox, because the fox is
more sly. This whole thing goes way back. White progressives
(41:48):
love to paint Black Americans as perpetual victims in pretty
much all of their narratives. They will talk endlessly about
slavery and Jim Crow, which is fine, we should be talking,
we should talk about those things, but they also conveniently
skip over the parts of history, where black folks fought back,
where we showed agency, where we showed dignity. They don't
(42:11):
want you to hear about the slaves who escaped and
who escaped from captivity and killed the people who were
trying to catch them using guns. Yeah, that happened quite
a bit. Is a book called Negroes in the Gun.
I'm almost done reading it. He's got tons and tons
of these stories with black people fighting back, not just
under slavery, but even after slavery, when the KKK would
(42:32):
show up. They make it sound like we were just
helpless victims being victimized and terrorized by the KKK. No,
a lot of black people killed KKK trying to terrorize
them or use their guns to scare the KKK off.
It happened all the time. Yet you don't hear about this.
And I don't even want to single out white progressives
for this, because a lot of the black progressives in
(42:54):
the media they don't talk about this either because they
would rather us be seen as victims and they make
great black faces putting up this front for white progressives
to spread this narrative. So what's the reason for this, why,
I mean, what's the point why portray black people as
little weaklings who have to be coddled because we're not
(43:17):
intellectually on par with everyone else. Here's the thing. If
black people show strength, intelligence, and agency, then we don't
need them to be our saviors anymore. And what happens
to a white progressive when they lose the chance to
save someone, Well, that's kind of when they start sweating
a bit. Maybe they lose a sense of purpose. They
lose an opportunity to virtue signal and to tell all
(43:40):
their friends how anti racists they are and how wonderful
and virtuous they are for standing up for us, because
we can't stand up for ourselves. Right, that's what a
white progressive loses. See, here's the thing. Every group in
this country has a victim poot complex. There are black
people who have a victim pood complex. There are white
conservatives who have avictimood complex. I don't care what race
(44:02):
they are, what political affiliation, they all have a victimhood complex,
except the white progressive. Because the white progressive doesn't have
a victimhood complex. They have a white savior complex. They
think it's their job to save people who have a
little bit more melanin or maybe if they're a member
of the LGBTQ community, or if there are another quote
(44:24):
unquote marginalized group, their job is to put on the cape,
to put on the tights and fly to the rescue. Right,
this coddling, this approach is not just insulting, it is
racist and it is dangerous. See, white progressives will push
policies that they think are going to help us, but
(44:44):
in reality they're holding us back. And that's giving them
the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure a lot
of white progressives actually think that they're helping us when
they donated to the Black Lives Matter Global Foundation, which
was exposed as a huge gript And again i'm talking
about the Global Foundation, I'm not talking about the local
chapters that turned out to be a gripped But when
they gave money to that organization, they actually thought that
(45:06):
they were helping black people. But there are other white
progressives and positions of power who know that they're not
helping us, who don't care. It's like Sonny Johnson always says,
if they want to be the party that champions black
people and poor people, then they got to keep you poor.
They got to keep you in that same position, and
that's where I put on my tinfoil hat. And I
think that a lot of this is on purpose, so,
(45:28):
you know, like they do things like they lobby against
school choice, even though the vast majority of Black Americans
support the idea that they should be able to choose
where and how their kids are educated. They want to
keep black children trapped in failing government run schools, claiming
it's for our own good. But the idea is that no,
you are not capable of deciding where and how your
(45:50):
children should be educated. We have to do that for
you through the government. That's where this racist line of
thinking comes into play. Gun control is another racist policy
that white progressives push. And you know, it's it's amazing
because a lot of these people don't even realize how
(46:11):
racist they are. They don't. I truly believe that a
lot of these people don't understand that they're being racist.
If we want to fight real racism, then this is
something that we need to be calling out too. Sure,
we should call out those who are openly racist or
the people who don't hide that. Well, yeah, let's call
that out too. And I do. I mean, if you
(46:32):
follow me for any length of time, you know that
I will call it out wherever I see it. But
this white savior complex, white progressive racism is far more
dangerous to us than the people who will admit that
they just don't rock with black people. I'm not worried
about some guy down the street who says I don't
really like black people. He's not affecting my life. White
(46:53):
progressives will use the government to under the guise of
trying to save us, to really harm us. And that's
what they've been doing, and it's all part of this
mindset that a lot of them have. So to me,
I think that that CBS interview showed a lot. I
would imagine that Tanny Heasey Coats would agree with me
(47:14):
on this. I don't know him personally, but I'm pretty
sure he would be insulted by the notion that he
can't handle tough questions, that he can't defend his ideas,
that he lacks the wherewithal to explain his point of
view and have it stand up to scrutiny. I don't
think that he'd be very happy about that. I don't know. Again,
I don't know him personally, but most black people feel
(47:37):
that way. And again, there are some people on the
left who are honest about this. I mean, I've had
conversations with black people on the left who have said
that this is a problem. So again, these white progressives,
the ones who screamed the loudest about being anti racist,
a lot of them are some of the most racist
people you'll ever meet, except their racism has a smile
(48:00):
with it and a suit and tie. So maybe we
should start calling this out a bit more because this
is what's really harming the black community, one of several things.
I'm not singling that out as the only thing, but
this is something that needs to be discussed way more often.
So let's have some more of these conversations, all right. Anyway,
(48:22):
thanks for listening, Thanks for watching. I'm gonna remind you
that you already know what I'm gonna say. You gotta
like this, you gotta share this. Please subscribe. If you
don't subscribe, I'm going to file a report with CBS's
Race and Culture Department and they're gonna come at you. Also,
check out my substack. It's called Chasing Liberty. You can
access that at libertychasers dot com. Become a subscriber there
(48:44):
and support my work. I really appreciate it, and until
next time, stay free, stay principled, and most importantly, stay ungovernable.
Speaker 2 (49:03):
This has been a presentation of the FCB podcast Network,
where real talk lives. Visit us online at fcbpodcasts dot com.
FCB Faith is your rhythm and prey station. I listen,
my mom listens, pretty much the whole family. I cannot,
I cannot.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
I canna said, don't, don't and no, don't.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
Listen to FCB Faith on iHeartRadio, Odyssey at faith dot com,
or tell your smart speaker to play FCB Faith on iHeartRadio.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
This is the FCB Podcast Network.
Speaker 1 (01:30):
This is a fresh perspective with Jeff Charles. Caught up,
up up, I'm loving it all right, Hey, what's good everybody?
Welcome back to a fresh perspective with Jeff Charles, where
we prefer truth over narrative and principles politics. And right
(01:51):
now we're gonna have a little bit of fun. We're
gonna we're gonna dive into the weird, wild and downright
genius world of political strategy. And yes, I am talking
about former President Donald Trump's recent visit to McDonald's. Now,
before you roll your eyes, this wasn't just some random
stock for a big mac. We all know that Donald
(02:11):
Trump loves his McDonald's, he loves his fast food. But
there's a lot more here than meets the eye. So
go ahead and grab some fries, grab a shake, grab
a double quarter pounder with cheese with no onions and
extra ketchup and mustard. I may have been exposing the
way I like my quarter pounders anyway, So yeah, go
ahead and grab that and we're going to get into
(02:32):
this all right. So picture this former president Donald Trump,
a billionaire businessman, former leader of the Free World and
quotation marks and the current GOP nominee for president. He
shows up Adam McDonald's in Pennsylvania. He throws on an apron.
He starts making fries like you know, you're in high
(02:53):
school working your first job. Now here's the thing. You
might be thinking, Okay, what's the big deal? Well, if
you ask him Democrats, this is basically the end of
the world. This is like the biggest scandal going on
right now. This is worse than water Kate because Trump
managed to pull off something that a lot of politicians can't,
(03:13):
especially Republican politicians. He made himself relatable while throwing some
serious shade at his opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris or
how I affectionately refer to her as Black Hillary. So
here's the thing. Kamala Harris. She claimed that she used
to work at McDonald's during her college years. A lot
of people aren't buying that. Now. I'm not going to
say it one way or the other. I wasn't there.
(03:36):
A lot of people got there, start working out McDonald.
So it's plausible. So I mean, I haven't seen any
evidence that she's lying. So maybe she did. But anyway,
this visit was Trump's way of kind of calling her
out and casting doubt on her claim that she worked
at Mickey D's. So he shows up, he strolls in
and you can see the footage on this all over
(03:58):
x and other social media platforms. Sure, he shows up
in his full suit and tie. He takes off his jacket,
he puts on the apron and he's still wearing his
shirt and tie and he's got the apron on and
he's ready to get to work. And he's over there
making these fries and they're like telling him how to
do it, YadA, YadA, YadA, and he's just having a
great time. He's serving people through the drive through. A
(04:19):
lot of them loved to meet him, and you know,
they were gushing over how they got to meet former
President Trump. And you know, he was just living it up,
living his best life. And it was hilarious. It was
absolutely hilarious. Now here's the thing. There was a strategy
behind this, right. This wasn't just about trolling Kamala Harris,
although that was funny enough on its own because of
(04:41):
just how how insincere she tends to come off. But
here's the first thing. He did this in Pennsylvania. This
is a state that's going to be absolutely critical in
the upcoming elections. So both Trump and Harris know this,
and they've been pulling out all the stops to win
over voters. Harris has been sending high profile Democratic operatives
to gin up support. Trump has been campaigning and doing
(05:04):
rallies and events like crazy. Both the candidates know that
this date is crucial. Here's the thing. The latest real
clear polling average shows Trump leading Harris in Pennsylvania by
wait for it, zero point eight percent. So they're basically
neck and neck. This is a toss up right now
as far as I'm concerned. So what better way to
(05:25):
appeal to blue collar folks in Pennsylvania than to show
up at McDonald's and kind of, you know, be relatable
like one of them. Right, here's a kicker here. You like,
when you watch the videos, you can tell that he
was having the time of his life, which is yet
another reason why this whole stunt works for him. He
was flipping the fries, he was joking around with his staff.
(05:47):
He's saying, I could do this all day. I wouldn't
mind this job. I like this job. Now, you compare
that to Kamala Harris, who you know, if she were
doing this, it wouldn't work for her because she'd be
cackling through the whole thing. She'd be talking about how
she came from a middle class family. She struggled, whether
you love or hater, she is not as good as
at relating to regular everyday folks, especially those who are
(06:09):
from the blue collar persuasion. It just wouldn't work for her. Now,
she may have some other strengths whatever, she can stick
to a teleprompter, but when it comes to engaging like that,
this is playing to Trump's strength. And here's the thing.
The Left is still losing their minds over this whole thing.
All you have to do is go on X right now. Well,
after you watch this video and after you listen to this,
(06:32):
go on X and check it out and you will
see there in full meltdown work, a full meltdown mode.
But here's the thing. That's how you know it worked
when the Left is screaming about how this is just
some meaningless stunt and it was staged and the Secret
Service bitted everybody who came through the drive through, like
(06:52):
anybody cares about that, Like we didn't already know that
this was stage and that the Secret Service after two
assassination attempts, would be vetting people who go through the
drive through. They're trying to make this they're trying to
make this big. How do you do about it? And
nobody cares. The thing is, they're freaking out because deep
down they know that this stunt worked. They know that
(07:14):
his visit to McDonald's is going to stick with voters
because again, it plays to one of his strengths. He
knows how to connect with people, especially people who aren't
in the world of academia. He knows how to connect
to the regular salt of the earth, assault of the
Earth person in ways that commonly hero and a lot
of other Republicans and Democrats can't. I mean, there was
(07:34):
even an article on Newsweek, and I'm not not a
Newsweek i write for Newsweek Opinion, but there was a
report saying that they found some health code violations at
the McDonald's location that Trump was act like employees like
supposedly not washing their hands before putting on gloves. Oh
that's so horrible. I mean, the thing is that this
(07:55):
is what people are resorting to. Then you know they're reaching, like,
don't try to cancel with Donald's over this. Come on.
McDonald's actually offered to have Kamala Harris come and resume
her role as a fry cook, because that's what she
says she did. She said that she did the prize.
Everybody knows that whatever they're pointing out, it happens at
every fast food joined. You probably if you're watching this,
if you're listening to this, you probably worked out a
(08:17):
fast food place. My first job at fifteen years old
was at Carl's Junior. It was great. My second job
was at Togo's Togo's eaterie. Remember that. See my California
brothers and sisters will know exactly what I'm talking about.
I miss so sandwiches. But I digress. So basically, they
want to cancel an entire McDonald's because Trump showed up.
So here's the thing again, Like I said, this shows
(08:42):
just how effective this visit was. It was endearing. When
you watch it, he comes off very well. He looks
funny in that apron It makes you laugh and it's
kind of a heartwarming type of thing, whether you hate
him or love him. And the thing is, if you're
looking at this through partisan lenses, and you're not really
going to see the significance because if you're a Democrat,
(09:03):
I mean, Trump could sneeze Trump. Trump could go and
need starving children in Detroit, Michigan, and Democrats would hate it.
They would say, I want those children to starve rather
than have Trump feed them. It's it's weird if you're
looking at this through a political lens. If you're looking
at this in a strategic fashion, then you know this
(09:24):
was a good move on his part. Now, I'm not
saying that this is going to win him the election.
It probably won't. If you're already voting for Kamala Harris,
this isn't going to change your mind. If you're already
voting for Trump, this is just like a little icing
on the cake. It's cool, But if you're undecided, it
might help you get a few people over into his camp.
(09:47):
And realistically, that's all he needs. Again, this is going
to be a close race overall, but in Pennsylvania it's
going to be very close. So he only needs to
move a few people over to beat come up in Pennsylvania,
and this stunt could help him do that, but again,
nothing is guaranteed. And it kind of also reminds me
(10:10):
of back in the day in twenty sixteen, where Trump
can basically sneeze or cut a wet fart and the
left would freak out about it, and in so doing
they actually promote him. See, all they had to do, guys,
was just let this ride. They saw what happened, they
saw how effective it was. All they had to do
was just say, okay, let's not really say much about it.
(10:32):
We know how America's attention span is. Give it two
or three days. People have completely forgotten about it. No,
but no, they had to freak out. They had to
be like, oh my gosh, this is the end of
the world. We're all going to die because President Trump
served up fries at a McDonald's. Yeah, you guys are
helping him. You're helping him. Democrats, you're helping him by
freaking out. All you have to do is shut up
(10:54):
or just say, Okay, that was funny or whatever. Move
on to the next thing. Talk about policy, because that's
what people really care about, and this whole thing would
have been over. But it is what it is. Right,
it's too late. The cats out of the bag, and
the Democrats and their close friends and allies and the
activist media are already freaking out. Now, y'all know, I
don't really have a dogmas fight. I'm not supporting either candidate,
(11:16):
the Repuvement or the Democrat because neither of them really
want to shrink the size of government. None of them
want to get rid of federal agencies. If anything, the
government is going to grow over both of them. So
to me, it's just it's not that big of a deal.
But as a political commentator, this was an interesting moment,
This was a significant moment. Now Kamala Harris might be
(11:36):
able to come up with something that's equivalent equivalent to that,
something that maybe placed her strengths. I wouldn't recommend that
she tries going to McDonald's and working, because that's again,
like I said before, that's not going to work for her.
But this is one of those things. This is one
of those ways that Trump can use his showmanship to
get support. So it is. It was very interesting seeing
(11:57):
this happen because I had heard that it was going,
but I wasn't quite sure that it was. And then
when I saw it, I was like, that was a
brilliant maneuver. That was a very brilliant maneuver. So I'll
leave it there. You guys, let me know what you
think about this. But before you go, you already know
what to do. You gotta like this and share this,
and if you haven't subscribed already, you got to fix
(12:18):
that subscribe hit that subscribe button or else I will
show up to your house wearing a McDonald's apron and
I will go in and make you some fries and
you won't like them because I don't know how to
make fries. Also, check out my substat called Chasing Liberty.
You can get to that at libertychasers dot com. Become
a subscriber support my work. I very much appreciate it.
But until next time, stay free, stay principled, and most importantly,
(12:42):
stay ungovernable. Welcome on back, and today we're going to
go into a topic that Democrats might not want to
talk about. And what I'm going to talk about is
why men across all races seem to be steering clear
(13:04):
of Kamala Harris in the voting booth. So my friend,
who also happens to be the editor of Newsweek Opinion
and an author, Batya Ungar Saragon, she did a video
where she hit the nail on the head as for
the reasons why Kamala Harris is having trouble getting mails
to vote for her. So go ahead and grab your
(13:26):
popcorn and let's get on into it. So before we
get into it, I mean just to remind you, I
need you to like this, share it with your friends,
and also subscribe if you haven't already. Think of it
as the easiest vote you'll ever cast. There's no long lines,
there's no ID required, So Black people, you can subscribe.
You don't need your ID because apparently we can't get IDs,
(13:48):
and you won't have to listen to someone trying to
convince you that you're a horrible person for not doing it.
If you don't subscribe, you're not a horrible person, but
you are missing out on some major stuff in your life.
So hit me up up subscribe. So anyway, let's go
ahead and get into it. Let's talk about Vice President
Kamala Harris and her problem with male voters. Now, to
(14:09):
be fair, she also has an issue with women voters too,
but she is doing better among women, and in a
second you're going to see why. So Batya. She did
a video for the Free Press recently, and I'm going
to play a clip of it in a little bit,
but she talked about how Harris is underperforming with men
by as much as sixteen percentage points compared to her opponent,
(14:30):
former President Donald Trump. And that's not just with white
working class dudes, you know, the usual suspects for the
Democrats losses, but it's also among black and Hispanic men,
especially younger Black and Hispanic men. Now, if you're a
Democrat strategist, this is where you should be hitting the
panic button. But instead the left is doing what they
(14:51):
always do with numbers like this, They cry sexism. Right
so you can so, I read an article from the Guardian,
and there's also other left wing outlets who are out
here blaming Harris's dismal polling numbers among men on you
guessed it misogyny, because when men don't like your candidate,
what better way to win when them over than by
(15:12):
calling them sexist, right. So you guys might also remember
about a week ago, week ago, a former president, Barack
Obama also chimed in and he was lecturing specifically black
men about not wanting to support Harris, saying, oh, well,
you don't want a woman in position of leadership. And
here's the thing. That's not what's it. That's not what
(15:35):
the problem is. And that's what Batia points out. It
isn't about misogyny as much as Democrats want it to be.
It's about messaging. Batia made it an excellent point that
Harris's campaign isn't necessarily designed to appeal to men much
at all. It's really designed in tailored to women, specifically
college educated women. There was even a video, yes, in
(15:59):
actual Campaig video where there were a bunch of men
talked about talking about supporting a woman for president and
how that makes them super masculine and tough because they're
secure enough to vote for a woman. It was like
the Democrats version of that ridiculous Gillette ad a while ago.
The thing is, again, it's not about winning over men.
It was about reassuring women that men voting for Harris
(16:23):
is okay somehow, like basically it was appealed to men,
but not like masculine men. It was more for like
I hate to use this term, but more feminine, soy
boy type of men, like, oh yeah, I can support
women because I'm woke and I'm feminist and I believe
in women in y YadA, YadA, YadA. But here's the thing. Men,
(16:46):
whether they're black, white, Hispanic, purple, or otherwise, they're not
buying what Harris is selling because she's not really selling
to them. Now, I will be fair. In Over the
past month or a couple months or so, she has tried,
Like I mentioned that cringe that was supposed to be
an overture to male voters. She also rolled out a
plan specifically for black men because she is struggling among
(17:09):
black men. Just to give you an idea, she's hovering
about seventy percent support among black males. Now, to give
you a point of comparison, Biden was pulling out about
ninety percent among black males. So that's a huge, huge,
huge job. She has alienated black men, white men, and
men of all races. So the campaign understands this obviously,
(17:31):
so they're trying to fix this. But I'm not sure
this is going to work. So I'm just going to
play this clip from Batya and you can kind of
see where she's going with this.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
The real reason men of all races are so reluctant
to bag Harris is because her campaign is not for them.
It's for women, specifically college educated women. And this includes
the messaging that's ostensibly about featuring men. It turns out
(18:03):
liberal women want their men LARPing in Camo while voting
for the party that ship their jobs overseas to China.
They want their men to be able to fix a car,
or at least dressed like they know how to, while
voting for the party that defunded vocational training. They want
their men to dress like ranchers but vote like podcasters.
They want men to vote against their own economic interests
(18:26):
in support of the future. Is female culture wars. I'm
not saying that real men can't support women, or abortion
or Kamala Harris. I'm saying that the Harris campaign's failure
to appeal to men has exposed an inherent contradiction in
the heart of the Democrats base of college educated women
between what women want and expect from men aesthetically or sexually, namely, masculinity, competence,
(18:51):
self reliance, and assertiveness, and what they demand politically submission.
Speaker 1 (18:57):
Right, So Batia nailed it in that clip. Right, Let's
be real, like, scolding men into supporting Harris is not
going to work. And you would think that Democrats would
have figured this out by now. I wrote about this
when Barack Obama came out with his nonsense, like when
he was running for president, people would just call everybody
who disagreed with him racist, and that kind of worked
(19:17):
for him. It kind of wrote for him. He didn't
say it himself, but his allies in the media and
in the Democratic Party basically try to make it sound
like anybody who disagreed with him or didn't plan to
vote for him were doing so because of his skin color.
They're using the same playbook with Kamala Harris, except this
time they're using her skin color, her supposed blackness, and
her status as a woman. They're basically just changing the
(19:40):
labels from racist to sexist to misogynists. This is twenty
twenty four, y'all. That doesn't work anymore. The fact that
Trump one in twenty sixteen should show that these strategies
don't work anymore. But It's like they don't have any
other playbook to use. They haven't written a new one yet. Right.
What's even worse is how insulting this is to men
(20:04):
of all races. Batia says that telling black men that
they owe their votes to Harris because she's a woman
is pretty damn offensive. It's like they're basically saying, vothe
for her, or you're a bad person, you're a bigot,
you hate women. That's not how you win elections. At
the end of the day, the numbers don't lie. Harris
is lagging behind with male voters because she's not making
(20:27):
the case for why she's the better option. It's really
that simple. Instead of addressing men's concerns like jobs, the economy,
public safety, crime, education, she's just recycling the same tired
lines about identity politics, and honestly, it's not fooling anyone.
Immigration is another issue that men are concerned about it
and I know that women are concerned about the things
(20:48):
that I just listed as well, But for men, these
are at the top of the list among voter priorities,
especially when it comes to the economy. Men want to
provide for their families, They want to be in a
position to where they can feed their wives and their kids,
or if they're single, they want to be in a
position to where they can have a family that they
can support. And right now it's way harder to do
(21:11):
that with inflation, with other economic issues, with the lack
of jobs, it's way harder to do that right now
than it was before. Democrats don't really want to speak
to that. Kamala has kind of said a few things
in that direction, but you can't really nail her down
on a lot of policy because she hasn't given a
whole lot. What she's been trying to do is trying
(21:33):
to separate herself from her prior stances on the issues
that were way more radical, like wanting to revamp the
entire health care system so that the government can take
it over, get rid of private insurance. She wants to
know ban as many guns as she can. I mean,
she won't say this, but she is calling for more
restrictions on firearms, something that she has tried to mitigate
(21:54):
by saying, oh, I'm a gun owner, so vote for me.
I'm not going to take your guns. It's not working.
It's not working for her. So here's the thing she's
not really fooling anybody, Right, If the Democrats want to
have a chance to win in November, they got to
stop lecturing people and start offering something of substance. But
(22:16):
given how things are going, I don't think that's going
to happen anytime soon. Part of the problem is that
Kamala Harris doesn't really have a lot of substance. She's
an empty suit. She does best when she's given her
talking points and she can recite those talking points without
being challenged. You see how she's done in these interviews.
Most of them she's done horrible that there was a
few where she kind of did okay, but again she
(22:40):
doesn't really there's not much there there when it comes
to Kamala Harris, Right, you guys understand what I'm saying here.
It's kind of hard to explain, but there's just not
much there. So the thing is, she does appeal more
to women. As a matter of fact, when she was
chosen as Biden's running mate, I even said back then,
she's not being chosen to appeal to black voters. She
(23:03):
was chosen to appeal to white women ones that want
to be able to say, yeah, I voted for the
first woman president. I voted for a black woman to
be the president of the United States. A lot of
a lot of white left leaning women eat that stuff up, right,
So it's no wonder that she's struggling with men. And
(23:25):
I think Republicans in general tend to win over men
more than Democrats in general. But her numbers are looking bad.
I mean, there's a sixteen percent difference between her and
Donald Trump right now, and he's dominating her among men. Trump,
for his part, has tried to reach out to women
as well because he's not pulling as well there. That's
probably why he moderated it moderated his abortion stance. I
(23:48):
think that that's one of the main reasons why he
did that. Now. I don't have the numbers as far
as how he's doing with women, but I would bet
that the gap isn't nearly as big as when it
comes to men, and he's leading Kamala Harris with men.
So to me, I mean, Kamala Harris has a lot
of work to do. I mean, again, this still isn't guaranteed.
(24:09):
There's still neck and neck in a lot of swing states,
and overall, there's still neck and neck. But if Kamala
Harris can't figure this part out, it's not going to
look good for her, especially with black voters. She should
be having way more black support than she does right now,
and that's going to figure into into these swing states.
If those numbers hold in swing states, she's going to
(24:32):
lose and Trump is going to win, and it'll be
interesting to see how Democrats react to that. What's going
to happen is they're going to say it was foreign influence, racism, misogyny,
and it will be everything except for the fact that
Democrats have horrible messaging, they have horrible policy, and that's
(24:52):
really it. So that's where it stands right now. Now
things might change. I might be wrong, but I don't think.
I again, I'm not necessarily predicting who's going to win.
But if Kamala Harris loses, this is going to be
one of several reasons why. So I'll leave it there
for right now, and I guess we'll see what happens.
(25:13):
Let me know what you think. Thanks for coming and
taking a listen and watching this. Make sure you subscribe,
Make sure you like this, make sure you share. Also
check out my substack at Chasing Liberty. You can get
that at liberty Chases dot com. Become a subscribe to
my substack, support my work. I highly appreciate it, and
until next time, stay free, stay principled, and most importantly,
(25:36):
stay ungovernable. Hello everybody, and welcome back to a fresh
perspective with Jeff Charles, where we prefer truth over narrative
and principles over politics. And right now we're going to
get into a topic that might not surprise you if
you've been paying some attention. We're going to be talking
(25:57):
about leftist lies about crime rates. But here's the cool
thing about this. Like they've been the Democrats have been
lying about crime rates going down over the over recent years,
and it was recently exposed as a lie according to
the FBI. But here's the cool thing about it. Americans
were never buying the lies in the first place. Let's
(26:19):
go ahead and get into this so again. For years,
the left has been selling the narrative that violent crime
is down and everything is just fine, go back to sleep,
you know, don't don't believe your lying eyes. But let's
be real. Anyone who has lived in a major city
or a progressive utopia like San Francisco or New York
(26:41):
City y'all could smell the bs from a mile away, right.
The stats that they were showing may have they may
have looked good at first, but then it turned out
that there's a bit of a problem. So the numbers
that they've been using, a lot of them come from
the year twenty two. I don't think that we have
the stats in for twenty twenty three yet. But recently
a report showed that the FBI stealth edited their crime
(27:05):
numbers from twenty twenty two. They quietly revised these statistics
that originally showed a slight decrease in violent crime and
who actually it hasn't gone down. They found that it's
actually up by four point five percent violent crime. And
these are just the official numbers. The real world experience
(27:26):
of the average American is probably way worse because they're
actually feeling it in their neighborhoods and they've been investing
in their own protection as a result. So here's the
thing who trusts the government to keep them safe at
this point, And it's not just me saying this. Real
clear investigations they uncovered the stealth edits. They first claimed
(27:48):
again of decline in violent crime, but then they revised
their numbers to show a significant increase of four point
five percent. This was not just a clerical error. This
was either incompetence or just straight up deception. The FBI
estimates crime data, and around forty percent of police departments
weren't even reporting their numbers to the FBI. This means
(28:11):
the rest of the numbers were a bit of a
guessing game. I mean, could this really get any sketchyer,
I mean, I don't think so. But again, there are
at least two indications showing that people weren't buying what
the Democrats were selling on this. I mean they were
saying it all over the place, all of their media,
their politicians. Kamala Harris is like, oh, crime has gone down.
(28:34):
But here's the thing. Gallup conducted a poll ear earlier
this year, I believe, in March, and it found that
seventy nine percent of Americans are worried about violent crime.
Fifty three percent say they are worried a great deal
about crime, about twenty six percent say they're worried a
fair amount about violent crime. So that adds up to
(28:55):
seventy nine percent. But let's just take a look at
that other number. Over half of the country is concerned
about crime a great deal. Now, this poll was conducted
when Democrats were lying about these crime rates. If they
actually believed what Democrats were saying, those numbers would look
way different. Right, So polling already shows that Americans know
(29:18):
that crime is up. They're experiencing it in their neighborhoods.
So how could they not, right. But here's another factor,
gun ownership. Now, while Democrats were trying to convince us
that everything was fine, that violent crime isn't as much
of an issue, people were out there stocking up on
firearms like they were preparing for the apocalypse. Another study
(29:40):
found that seventy nine percent of gun owners said that
they bought their guns over the past year for personal protection.
Even liberals, even among Democratic voters who are usually not
too keen on gun ownership, their rates of gun ownership
are way up. So so much for being anti gun right,
I mean, since twenty twenty, more than half of new
(30:02):
Democratic gun buyers were first time gun buyers. Now that's
a plot twist. That is another inconvenient fact that the
anti gunners and the people lying about crime rates wouldn't
want you to know. Now, this isn't just about crime statistics.
It's not just about gun ownership, it's not just about
concerns over crime. It's about trust. I mean, if Democrats
(30:26):
want to keep gas lighting the American public, they can
keep trying, but they're going to find it harder and
harder to convince people that they've got this whole crime
thing under control. People were already singing through the lies
and taking matters into their own hands, literally by arming themselves.
That same study that dealt with gun ownership, it also
(30:46):
showed that most Americans are investing in more security systems,
more security measures for their homes. That tells you something, Right,
if people believe that crime wasn't on the rise, they
wouldn't be doing this, especially people who are traditional more
averse to gun ownership Democrats. So people weren't buying this
(31:06):
whole thing. I mean, I know that this is something
that they kept saying on the TV, on the airwaves
and the interwebs. Oh crime is down, crime is down,
crime is down. Every time you go to one of
those networks and they talk about crime, they're saying, oh,
violent crime has gone down. And for the regular person,
they know it's not true. But here's the thing. It
was never going to work. I mean, if you have
(31:28):
a neighbor whose house got got broken into, or if
you're hearing sirens outside of your window every other night,
no politician or bureaucrat is going to be able to
gaslight you into thinking that somehow violent crime is just
magically going down. And with the elections coming up, you
can bet that crime is going to be a top
(31:48):
priority for voters and the Democrats are going to have
to come up with a new strategy and fast. Honestly,
I think it's too late at this point. I mean,
the election is just a few weeks away, and this
whole thing was expo is a lie. Now here's the
other kicker. What media outlets are reporting on this. No
establishment ones, no left wing ones. There are sources on
(32:10):
the right who are reporting on these revised numbers, but
chances are people are never going to see them. But again,
it doesn't matter because they already know that crime has
been going up. They can see it in their cities,
they can see it with their family and friends, people
are talking about it, and so On one level, I
(32:32):
hate to say this, On one level, it is a
good thing because it shows that Democrats are lying about
crime rates. It also shows them that they can't trust
what they're being told in the media and by their politicians.
That's a good thing. Their government is lying to them,
and people are seeing that their government is lying to
their faces. The increasing gun ownership also is a good
(32:55):
sign too, because it shows that more people are understanding
that their own protection is their own responsibility. They can't
count on the police to show up if somebody is
trying to break into their house or if somebody is
trying to mug them. More people are understanding that if
they want to keep themselves safe, it's up to them.
This could cause more support for the Second Amendment because
(33:16):
Democrats want to crack down on that right. Democrats want
to make it harder for people to keep and bear arms,
so maybe this will create more of a backlash. It should.
If you realize that crime is on the rise, police
aren't going to help you, then yeah, you need to
protect yourself. And I do like where this is going.
(33:38):
I don't like the reason why it's going this way,
but it is what it is, right. I mean, if
you want to keep yourself safe, you have to keep
yourself safe. I mean, there's even reports over the past
few years I've seen multiple ones in places like San
Francisco in other cities where the neighborhood are pulling their
resources together, pulling their money together there to hire private
(34:01):
security because the local governments aren't doing it. The police
aren't doing their jobs, or they're not being allowed to
do their jobs. It could be one or the other,
it could be both. So people are hiring private security
to prevent people breaking into their cars, breaking into their homes.
This is also a good thing because it shows that
you can't rely on the government, and if it's pushing
(34:23):
people more in a direction where they want to be
more self sufficient. Folks like myself who love liberty, I
love seeing that because the reality is that you can't
depend on the government. The government is not always going
to be there for you, even when their intentions are good.
I mean, I'm sure a lot of officers will love
(34:44):
to be able to actually protect people from violent people
who are going to hurt them or to steal their property,
but a lot of them are caught up doing other
stuff that doesn't really relate to what their actual role
is supposed to be, which is protecting our rights. As
a whole other conversation, but suffice it to say that
these are signs that more Americans are understanding that self
(35:08):
sufficiency is the only way to go at this point.
And there are other indications, but I'm not going to
get into those right now because I don't want to
digress too much. I'm already kind of babbling. But the
thing is is that crime rates are up and people
are taking notice and they are doing something about it,
and that is a great thing. So let me know
(35:30):
what you think, let me know, let me know what
you think. Are you seeing this in your neighborhood. What's
going on here? What's going on here? Hello everybody, and
welcome back to a fresh perspective with Jeff Charles, where
we prefer truth over narrative and principles over politics. Today
or right now. Right now, we're going to dive deep
(35:53):
into an uncomfortable truth that a lot of the folks
on the left would rather we just ignore, except for
the ones who are honest. There are folks on the
left who have talked about this as well, so I'll
be fair to them, but I'm going to talk about
white progressives particularly and their belief that black people are inferior.
(36:14):
Now that sounds pretty strong, doesn't it, But yeah, they do.
They do. Now, I'm not talking about all white progressives,
not talking about every single solitary white progressive in the
United States of America. But as far as politics goes,
and as far as members of the chattering class and
the overall discussion on race, culture, politics, all that stuff,
(36:37):
these talking heads and these leaders, they think that we
are inferior as black people. This isn't some wild conspiracy theory.
If you know, you have to look that close at it,
you can easily see it in how they talk to us.
So I'm going to set the stage a bit. You
might remember there was an interview on CBS News that
involved author Twan Nahisi Coates, a black man, and he's
(37:01):
you know, he's seems to be on the He's definitely
on the left, and he is very much in this
whole anti races camp, this whole progressive ideology on race.
Like that that's his lane, that's what he does. And
he recently wrote a book and he did an interview
that was kind of controversial. He said some controversial things
(37:22):
about the conflict in Gaza, about Hamas and Israel, all
that stuff anti Israel, of course. And here's the thing.
He was being interviewed by a reporter named Tony ducoppol.
I hope I'm pronouncing his name right. I'm probably not.
But Tony is a white guy. He's a reporter, and
he was interviewing Tony Heasy Coats, and he made the
(37:45):
unforgivable mistake of actually challenging some of Tony Heasy coats
ideas during the interview, pushing back, asking tough questions, you know,
what an interviewer is supposed to do. And uh, the
backlash from his white progressive colleagues was about as fierce
as you might expect. I mean they basically lit him
(38:07):
on fire. I mean verbally, of course, you know, one
to even during a conference call after the interview, they
told him to shut the you know what up? Because
how dare a white man ask a black man tough questions? Right?
That's what's going on here. Here's the thing. If a
white author had been in the hot seat, nobody would
(38:27):
have bet in an eye. You're allowed to ask tough
questions and challenge, challenge the ideas of a white person.
I'm left leaning media I'm talking about specifically here. But
since Coats happens to have more melanin CBS's Race and
Culture department. Yeah, that's a thing. CBS has a Race
and Culture department that vetted the questions beforehand, and they
(38:50):
basically wanted to spoon feed Coats a bunch of softball
questions as if he can't handle a tough conversation because
he's black. But see, here's the thing. Is this anti
racist or is this just white saviorism? This guy is
as virtue, which, by the way, white saviorism is racist.
It is very much racist. This brings us to the
(39:12):
heart of the issue. White progressives in particular have this
really bad habit of assuming that black people are inherently
weaker or incapable of handling the same level of scrutiny
as white folks. You know, I read a piece responding
to this from John mccorter. I believe it was for
the New York Times. He's a linguist, he's an author,
(39:34):
he's a black man as well, and he called this out.
He called it a grotesque version of anti racism. These
progressives act like, as black people, we have to be
coddled and shielded from difficult conversations and being challenged, as
of we're just mentally fragile porcelain dolls that are incapable
of sane, intelligent discussions. It's really condescending. And it's it's
(40:00):
basically like it's you know, who else agrees with this
that black people are inferior and can't handle conversations. People
like David Duke, actual open races are in agreement with this.
Now they may not agree that, you know, we should
we should be able to be on TV and have
you know, books and all that good stuff, good stuff,
(40:22):
but the idea is the same. So it is it's like,
you know, oh no, don't ask Jeff any tough questions.
His fragile, little negro blame brain might explode. I mean,
come on, if I can survive Thanksgiving with a relative
who thinks the earth is flat, I can handle a
few tough questions. I don't really have a relative who
things the earth is flat. But but here's the thing.
(40:44):
It's it's this type of mindset runs deep on the
hard left, it really does. It kind of hearkens back
to what Malcolm X was saying about white conservatives and
white progressives that the white conservative who have happends to
be racist is going to be more open about it. Nowadays,
they do try to hide it. The ones who act
(41:04):
I'm talking about the ones who are actually racist. I'm
not talking about all white conservatives. Most white conservatives and
most white progressives are not racist, but the ones who
are on the right, when they do, try to hide it,
and they don't do a very good job. So I
appreciate that because I like knowing who I'm dealing with.
I want to know if somebody thinks I'm inferior because
my skin color is darker. On the left, it's more
(41:26):
dangerous because they come to you with a smile on
your face and a pat on the back, acting like
they're your friend. And that's what Malcolm X discussed when
he was still alive. He referred to the white conservative
as the fox or I'm sorry, as the wolf, and
the white progressive as the fox, because the fox is
more sly. This whole thing goes way back. White progressives
(41:48):
love to paint Black Americans as perpetual victims in pretty
much all of their narratives. They will talk endlessly about
slavery and Jim Crow, which is fine, we should be talking,
we should talk about those things, but they also conveniently
skip over the parts of history, where black folks fought back,
where we showed agency, where we showed dignity. They don't
(42:11):
want you to hear about the slaves who escaped and
who escaped from captivity and killed the people who were
trying to catch them using guns. Yeah, that happened quite
a bit. Is a book called Negroes in the Gun.
I'm almost done reading it. He's got tons and tons
of these stories with black people fighting back, not just
under slavery, but even after slavery, when the KKK would
(42:32):
show up. They make it sound like we were just
helpless victims being victimized and terrorized by the KKK. No,
a lot of black people killed KKK trying to terrorize
them or use their guns to scare the KKK off.
It happened all the time. Yet you don't hear about this.
And I don't even want to single out white progressives
for this, because a lot of the black progressives in
(42:54):
the media they don't talk about this either because they
would rather us be seen as victims and they make
great black faces putting up this front for white progressives
to spread this narrative. So what's the reason for this, why,
I mean, what's the point why portray black people as
little weaklings who have to be coddled because we're not
(43:17):
intellectually on par with everyone else. Here's the thing. If
black people show strength, intelligence, and agency, then we don't
need them to be our saviors anymore. And what happens
to a white progressive when they lose the chance to
save someone, Well, that's kind of when they start sweating
a bit. Maybe they lose a sense of purpose. They
lose an opportunity to virtue signal and to tell all
(43:40):
their friends how anti racists they are and how wonderful
and virtuous they are for standing up for us, because
we can't stand up for ourselves. Right, that's what a
white progressive loses. See, here's the thing. Every group in
this country has a victim poot complex. There are black
people who have a victim pood complex. There are white
conservatives who have avictimood complex. I don't care what race
(44:02):
they are, what political affiliation, they all have a victimhood complex,
except the white progressive. Because the white progressive doesn't have
a victimhood complex. They have a white savior complex. They
think it's their job to save people who have a
little bit more melanin or maybe if they're a member
of the LGBTQ community, or if there are another quote
(44:24):
unquote marginalized group, their job is to put on the cape,
to put on the tights and fly to the rescue. Right,
this coddling, this approach is not just insulting, it is
racist and it is dangerous. See, white progressives will push
policies that they think are going to help us, but
(44:44):
in reality they're holding us back. And that's giving them
the benefit of the doubt because I'm sure a lot
of white progressives actually think that they're helping us when
they donated to the Black Lives Matter Global Foundation, which
was exposed as a huge gript And again i'm talking
about the Global Foundation, I'm not talking about the local
chapters that turned out to be a gripped But when
they gave money to that organization, they actually thought that
(45:06):
they were helping black people. But there are other white
progressives and positions of power who know that they're not
helping us, who don't care. It's like Sonny Johnson always says,
if they want to be the party that champions black
people and poor people, then they got to keep you poor.
They got to keep you in that same position, and
that's where I put on my tinfoil hat. And I
think that a lot of this is on purpose, so,
(45:28):
you know, like they do things like they lobby against
school choice, even though the vast majority of Black Americans
support the idea that they should be able to choose
where and how their kids are educated. They want to
keep black children trapped in failing government run schools, claiming
it's for our own good. But the idea is that no,
you are not capable of deciding where and how your
(45:50):
children should be educated. We have to do that for
you through the government. That's where this racist line of
thinking comes into play. Gun control is another racist policy
that white progressives push. And you know, it's it's amazing
because a lot of these people don't even realize how
(46:11):
racist they are. They don't. I truly believe that a
lot of these people don't understand that they're being racist.
If we want to fight real racism, then this is
something that we need to be calling out too. Sure,
we should call out those who are openly racist or
the people who don't hide that. Well, yeah, let's call
that out too. And I do. I mean, if you
(46:32):
follow me for any length of time, you know that
I will call it out wherever I see it. But
this white savior complex, white progressive racism is far more
dangerous to us than the people who will admit that
they just don't rock with black people. I'm not worried
about some guy down the street who says I don't
really like black people. He's not affecting my life. White
(46:53):
progressives will use the government to under the guise of
trying to save us, to really harm us. And that's
what they've been doing, and it's all part of this
mindset that a lot of them have. So to me,
I think that that CBS interview showed a lot. I
would imagine that Tanny Heasey Coats would agree with me
(47:14):
on this. I don't know him personally, but I'm pretty
sure he would be insulted by the notion that he
can't handle tough questions, that he can't defend his ideas,
that he lacks the wherewithal to explain his point of
view and have it stand up to scrutiny. I don't
think that he'd be very happy about that. I don't know. Again,
I don't know him personally, but most black people feel
(47:37):
that way. And again, there are some people on the
left who are honest about this. I mean, I've had
conversations with black people on the left who have said
that this is a problem. So again, these white progressives,
the ones who screamed the loudest about being anti racist,
a lot of them are some of the most racist
people you'll ever meet, except their racism has a smile
(48:00):
with it and a suit and tie. So maybe we
should start calling this out a bit more because this
is what's really harming the black community, one of several things.
I'm not singling that out as the only thing, but
this is something that needs to be discussed way more often.
So let's have some more of these conversations, all right. Anyway,
(48:22):
thanks for listening, Thanks for watching. I'm gonna remind you
that you already know what I'm gonna say. You gotta
like this, you gotta share this. Please subscribe. If you
don't subscribe, I'm going to file a report with CBS's
Race and Culture Department and they're gonna come at you. Also,
check out my substack. It's called Chasing Liberty. You can
access that at libertychasers dot com. Become a subscriber there
(48:44):
and support my work. I really appreciate it, and until
next time, stay free, stay principled, and most importantly, stay ungovernable.
Speaker 2 (49:03):
This has been a presentation of the FCB podcast Network,
where real talk lives. Visit us online at fcbpodcasts dot com.
Popular Podcasts
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.
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.
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.