05-15-25 FULL SHOW - A Lawsuit About Boys In Girl's Sports

Mandy talks about Colorado losing its business competitiveness and Uber and Lyft leaving the state, Colorado is facing a big loss when it comes to Medicaid, who really pays income taxes, a case that could limit federal judges' ability to issue national injunctions against the Trump administration, and a poker tournament to raise money for veteran's kids Christmas. 

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock
Accident and injury Lawyers.

Speaker 2 (00:05):
No, it's Mandy Connell and.

Speaker 3 (00:11):
KA ninety one FM, Got Way, the Nice three Bandy
Donald Keeping no sad thing.

Speaker 4 (00:26):
Welcome, Welcome, Welcome to a Thursday edition of the show.
I'm your host, Mandy Connell. I'm joined by Anthony Rodriguez
you can call him a rod. You look like winter
came back today, Anthony. You got a sweater on with
a nice neat.

Speaker 2 (00:41):
Shirt because it's chili. It is mid sixties and going
to the Nuggets game tonight.

Speaker 4 (00:45):
Oh there you go. So it's the full, full swoop
swoop of stuff today.

Speaker 5 (00:49):
Yes, little little, little, too chili for the suit jacket.

Speaker 4 (00:51):
I went to work yesterday in summer, and then I
went and worked on my side hustle after the show,
and I had to stop and get gas on the
way home. And imagine my surprise when I opened the
car door to winter.

Speaker 5 (01:04):
Yeah it was cold.

Speaker 4 (01:05):
Well, I had short sleeves on and it was forty
five degrees. It was too cold.

Speaker 3 (01:10):
Break.

Speaker 5 (01:11):
Yes, do not be thrown around the fact that it
felt like winter. That is not true.

Speaker 4 (01:16):
It did for me because we got these nice temperatures.
My body is already adjusted to it not being It
was chili, not winter, not true, Donald, No one asked you.
It was just a chilly, you know, middling spring cold.
It was brisk and the wind was piping. And I
didn't even get as much gas as I wanted to

(01:36):
because I was freezing.

Speaker 5 (01:37):
You know, you can get back in your car ring.
I know, that's what I did last night. I also
got gas only home, and I also felt that cold
that was not winter like.

Speaker 4 (01:44):
I felt cold and it felt winter like because I
was not dressed properly. Because there is no bad weather,
only bad clothing.

Speaker 2 (01:51):
Sure, right, yeah, yeah, I mean unless it's too hot,
and then you can't you know, you can only take option.

Speaker 4 (01:56):
You know that in the Nordic States, here's a fact
apropos of nothing. In the Nordic States, it is not
uncommon even now Sweden, Iceland, those places where it gets
really cold in the middle of winter. You will see
babies out outside, bundled up, taking a nap in the
freezing cold, their little faces or all that's showing. But
they believe that that helps develop a very strong immune

(02:17):
system for the babies. So even now, like outside a restaurant,
you'll see a couple strollers with babies in them, just
sitting there. It's true, I don't know about now because
crime has risen dramatically due to the mass migration in
Sweden and and those other Nordic countries. So I don't
know about now, but I mean within the last few
years you could still see that quite commonly. And as Americans,

(02:39):
you're like, wait, what should we is someone is anybody
who's baby? Is this if we feel like we should
do something? But no, they're fine.

Speaker 5 (02:49):
Let them sneeze and wipe it on their face too,
you know, build up the Do.

Speaker 4 (02:53):
You know what this means?

Speaker 6 (02:54):
A rod?

Speaker 4 (02:54):
I scrapped my windshield this morning? Oh scrape?

Speaker 7 (02:58):
Yes?

Speaker 5 (03:00):
Yeah, still don't care.

Speaker 2 (03:02):
Don't let the ex account denver Snow have any opportunity
to pop their ugly mean why vilm what they report on.
Don't hate the player, hate the game? Oh I can
hate the player in this instance, they are the outlier
of hatred. Denver Snow stay away. Give us five good
months more than I ask. Well, I'm you know, I'm

(03:24):
being realistic here.

Speaker 4 (03:25):
More than that.

Speaker 2 (03:26):
We're talking in October fifteenth. Stop, it's May fifteenth. By
the way, right now, stop talking October fifteenth and five
months if we don't have snow. We yeah, it's May fifteenth, already.

Speaker 4 (03:38):
Stop it, Anthony who brought in negative Nelly this morning?
I can stop it.

Speaker 5 (03:42):
I'm saying, it's May fifteenth, and it feels amazing, you
know what saying?

Speaker 4 (03:45):
Wait, yeah, left again today though winter's gone today it's chili.

Speaker 1 (03:51):
It was.

Speaker 5 (03:51):
It was never winter. I just it could have been.
I will bring donald again.

Speaker 2 (03:55):
It was the equivalent of Florida winter. You say it again,
you are fake. Stop saying word you're going to bring
on Denver snow earlier.

Speaker 4 (04:04):
They already planted all my plants and they look beautiful.

Speaker 5 (04:06):
I'm not saying now, I'm saying earlier than expected. In
twenty I have a.

Speaker 4 (04:09):
Question for our listeners. Does anybody else who has like
a you know, because I can't plant flowers in my
yard because the deer eat them. So I have them
all on my deck. My deck is the second story deck,
and I have them all and they make me so happy.
And every morning I get up, I feed Jinks, I
go outside to my deck and I talk to my
plants and tell them that they're doing a great job
that they look very pretty, do you does?

Speaker 1 (04:31):
No?

Speaker 4 (04:32):
Hydrangeas here are tough.

Speaker 7 (04:33):
Hard.

Speaker 4 (04:33):
Hiedrange is where there's a lot of rain, are beautiful
and easy and almost like a weed in Louisville. Oh,
forget about it.

Speaker 5 (04:40):
Yeah, how's stunning.

Speaker 4 (04:42):
Yeah, here's the thing, guys, know what's going to grow
here and know what's not because this is a frustrating
environment and it's hard on plants. Look around. What grows naturally?
Not a whole lot, you know, not a lot of variety.
So don't waste money on stuff that is.

Speaker 2 (04:56):
Not going to anyone here has magical tips for hydrangs
would be very much appreciated by my mother in law.

Speaker 4 (05:02):
Oh really, yeah, she struggling, really tries. Okay, here's my advice. Okay,
if you're gonna try hydrant, just get a spray bottle
full of water and every day when you water them,
because they have to stay pretty moist, and you spray
the flowers too, and the leaves, so you're basically mimicking humidity.

Speaker 2 (05:19):
Well, it sounds like they're also very particular with what
kind of sun and wind and what time and all
of that nonsense.

Speaker 4 (05:25):
Yeah, I'm not going to do that. They're stabborn. Let's
do this. Let's do the blog instead. You can find
the blog by going to mandy'sblog dot com. That's mandy'sblog
dot com. How much do I spend on plants each year?
Ask this texter. I don't know the answer to that question,
but it was less this year than it was last year.
Last year was the most expensive year ever, so expensive.

(05:46):
I didn't even buy plants last year because they were ridiculous.
But I think this year I'm probably in right now
for about three hundred total.

Speaker 5 (05:55):
Did they survive the apparently like monsoon yesterday.

Speaker 4 (05:59):
Oh, we didn't get very much rain in my house. Yeah,
we got nothing in my house. I mean very I
had lark, I had water last night before I went
to bed, so my plans, we didn't get any rain
at all. So anyway, find the blog, go to Mandy's
blog dot com. In the latest post section, look for
the headline that says five fifteen to twenty five blog
a lawsuit about boys in girls' sports. Click on that

(06:22):
and here are the headlines you will find within tic
Tech two A winner.

Speaker 8 (06:27):
I didn't go with the office half of American all
with ships and clipments, A team that's going to press plants.

Speaker 4 (06:32):
Today on the blog, there's a lawsuit about boys in
girls' sports. Get your poker face ready. Birthright citizenship heads
to the Supreme Court. Don't miss this history making season.
The Broncos schedule is out. Medicaid cuts could hit Colorado hard. Scrolling, scrolling, scrolling.
What happens when you set the bar high for students?

(06:53):
Mister pedophile was well known to students. Jeffco Schools has
the sex abuse problem. Colorado is nothing special to business anymore.
Colorado is fighting a losing battle over immigration. Want to
watch free movies this summer? Your cuteness break for the week.
This is a perfect example of why unions suck. Men
die of broken heart syndrome more often. Why social emotional

(07:16):
learning is just a ruse. What's the difference between Britain
and the UK? Rip Morris the Gator? The dark web
seems nice. You are not your job. Dion will be
prime time literally your representatives hard at work. Uber and
Lyft are pushing hard for a veto. Those are the
headlines on the blog at mandy'sblog dot com for this

(07:40):
Texters that I have a hydrangea plate that's only bloomed
twice in thirteen years, and I can't figure it out.
One thing I will tell you is that the soil
that hydranga loves the most is limey soil, like limestone
kind of soil. They love that. So maybe out a
little limestone. I don't know. Mandy heard from someone back

(08:01):
east coffee grounds for hydrangeas. Try that too, Sprinkle some
coffee grounds around there. You know, I used to love
one of my things. I promise I'm gonna have a
real show, you guys. I promise it has been this
week off the air for nothing bad. No, there's nothing
bad happening. But boy, this week has already been a
butt kicker, and it's only Thursday and it's not even

(08:23):
halfway done. So indulge me for a moment. When I
first started in radio, when I was a producer like
Anthony Is, I used to produce a gardening show on
Sunday Morning. I freaking loved that show so much. Now,
at the time, I was a renter, I lived in
a crappy house. I wasn't gardening. I had no idea
what they were talking about, but it was so interesting

(08:45):
and people were so passionate about gardening. I don't even know.
There might be a gardening show on in the market somewhere.
I have no idea, but man, isn't that weird? And
now I've decided. Remember we talked not too long ago
about people not having hobbies, me included. I've decided this
my hobby because I love my plants when they're nice
and full. I'll show you, guys pictures. They're they're getting

(09:05):
started right now, so you'll have to wait and see. Now.
I want to go right down to the bottom of
the blog first, because Gina Gondek posted this on her
x speed. She posted the first time I've opened my
Uber app in a while, and the first thing is
a notification urging users to ask Governor Polis to veto

(09:26):
the ride share safety bill. No word on what the
governor may do, but both Uber and Lyft are threatening
to leave the state if signed now this and I
responded to Gina and said, of course, they will. Just
ask Austin, Texas about what happened when they tried to
overregulate Uber and left. And I talked about this a
little the other day. But part of me wants this

(09:47):
bill to go into effect because you know, voters in
Colorado are going to continue voting the same way because
it's not about results for too many people, or they
are not drawing the straight line between policies and the
degradation of their quality of life, right, They just they're

(10:09):
not making the connection. And then they don't make the
connection that the policies are passed by someone. So it's
frustrating to me, and I really think that there's going
to have to be some pretty catastrophic things that happen
before Republicans can get a foothold in this state. And
if they drove uber and Lyft out of this state,

(10:29):
that would go a long way towards moving voters to
maybe pay attention to the people that they elect who
pass these policies that are clearly anti business. We've lost
our standing in the business world overall. We've dropped dramatically.
I have this story on the blog as well. Today.
There's a great editorial, I mean a great editorial about

(10:52):
how much our competitiveness has deteriorated in Colorado. You know,
it's like I feel anyway that the Democrats in the
legislature and some Republicans, they view business as almost a
necessary evil.

Speaker 1 (11:11):
Right.

Speaker 4 (11:12):
You have to tolerate it because without them, we can't
tax everybody and spend the money to create this progressive
utopia of Denver. But they view them as as this
evil force as and if you know anything about the
viewpoint that says progressives only see the world via an

(11:32):
oppressed and oppressor mentality. So you are either an oppressor
or the oppressed. And depending on what sort of class
you fall into or the boxes that you check in
the terms of whatever conversation you're having, you could fall
into either of those categories. You could be a black
lesbian with a disability and be oppressed, But if you

(11:53):
bought a business and your workers wanted to unionize, you
are now the oppressor, right, I mean, it really depends
on what it is. They shift the goalposts on this
stuff all the time. One cannot keep up. So it's
interesting that we now are potentially going to drive one
of I would say probably one of the most popular

(12:14):
conveniences of the modern era. When I travel, we use
Uber and Lyft all the time. I mean all the time,
unless I'm in New York City, where cabs are often cheaper.
I'm just letting you know, if you're in New York,
you need to download the taxi app and check the
estimated fairs before you go ahead and book that Uber
because in New York the taxis you're often way cheaper.

(12:37):
Thank you, you're traveling tip for the day. But if
we did this in our high tech, high energy young
people who love to go downtown but are super conscious
thankfully that they should not drink and drive, what are
they going to do? Austin, Texas regulated Uber and Lyft
out of business. I talked about this the other day
on the show, very very briefly, and Austin being a

(13:00):
tech hub, everybody was like, you know, they were being
very flippant about about the corporate monsters Uber and Lyft
leaving their area, and they were like, no, we'll just
make our own app. Man, it'll be awesome. So they
had like ride share apps that were co op where
everybody sort of shared the cost of whatever, and then
these other ride share apps popped up, but none of

(13:20):
them ever had enough drivers. You always had to wait
like an hour to get a ride. And then came
south by Southwest, an event that by definition appeals to
people on the leading edge, people that use Uber and
Lyft every day of their lives, and they all got

(13:40):
to south By Southwest, none of the apps worked, they
all crashed. Nobody could get a ride. And guess what happened.
The Texas legislature stepped in and told Austin that they
could not legislate ride share rules. And that's the only
thing that saved Austin from itself. I mean, for if
they hadn't they made ever, they may not have that.

(14:03):
So it's uh, I hate to say it, but I
know that looking at the bills that came out of
this last legislative session, they did not do anything to
improve the business environment. And I'm sure that there's more
laws in there. And by the way, I'm gonna get
Paul Lundin to come in. I heardhim on Ross's show
the other day. Just did such a great job of

(14:24):
giving the overview of the laws that flew under the radar.
And I think I said this on the air. I
know I said it off the air. The the big bills,
the bill about you know, stripping parents of rights if
they disagree that their kids are trans or this awful
gun bill, all of these big bills, they sucked up
a lot of attention. So I'm kind of wondering, like

(14:45):
what flew under the radar that we need to pay
attention to. So it remains to be seen whether or
not our fake libertarian governor is going to sign a
veto for these bills. I don't know. But if you
think that uber and Left will not pull out a Colorado,
think about it like this, and this is very very
very important. You're a national corporation. Work with me in

(15:07):
your head.

Speaker 7 (15:07):
Air.

Speaker 4 (15:08):
You are a national corporation. You operate in all fifty states,
and one state decides to create a whole framework of regulations,
some of which are extremely commersome and costly, and you
don't do anything, and that means forty nine other states
are going to go, hey, look look what they did
in that state, and then they're going to create their
own set of regulations and rules and costly things. So

(15:31):
they're not gonna let that happen. I think they cut
off Colorado with the knees. We're not that big a state.
We don't have that big of a population. You guys,
they're gonna just say no, we're gonna pull out. The
people of Colorado are gonna lose their minds. But will
they hold the people who did it accountable? I don't know,
but it might be the first thing to make them
go wait a minute, Just wait a minute, Mandy. Oh,

(15:57):
thank you to the person who told me about the guardsh.
I appreciate that. I half agree with Dems on corporations
but not businesses. CEO makes ten million, wall car center
makes eighteen dollars an hour, and the only way to
be CEO is to know someone got to fix that somehow.
In my humble opinion, you know, there's a lot I'm
just going to say it. I think that too many

(16:19):
corporations do have compensation packages for their upper echelon that
are so far out of whack with the going wage
in those companies. Now, I also believe that a guy
no offense who works in the car center doesn't go
home at night and wonder if he's going to be
able to get a return on the investment for the shareholders,

(16:40):
or figure out how to manage a healthcare crisis, or
deal with shortages of employees that you just can't seem
to fill. I mean, there's a lot more to being
a CEO than there is working in the car center,
so obviously they deserve a lot more compensation, But what
is enough? My issue is that they tend to stack
the board with people who are friendly to the CEO,

(17:02):
and they're supposed to be the ones who are supposed
to evaluate the CEO's performance. That's where things get dodgy.
But I don't know enough about corporate governance to even
offer suggestions on how to go about fixing this. I
really don't. And to the point that in order to
be CEO, you have to know someone. A lot of
life is knowing people, not just being CEO. This is

(17:26):
why I had the guy on about networking last week.
Always always, always network above your your going rate. Always
so anyway, Mandy, So if Uber and Lyft leave the state,
will the drivers be eligible for unemployment? Will the drivers
have standing to sue the state for losing their jobs?
I don't know the answer to either of those questions.

(17:50):
It would be epic if a bunch of Uber and
Lyft drivers got together and sued the state for taking
away their livelihood. That'd be fantastic, Mandy. Some things that
the stupid legislature needs to take care of is how
we do sales taxes when delivering.

Speaker 3 (18:05):
Me.

Speaker 4 (18:05):
Being an HVAC guy, I have to file with multiple
jurisdictions when I install parts at someone's house in the
Denver metro area. Now you're asking for government efficiency. Gosh,
it's like we should have an office for more. Wait,
never mind. The Supreme Court is hearing a case called
Trump Vicasa and it has something to do with birthright citizenship.

(18:27):
But I'm gonna be honest with you, guys. I read
a lot this morning, and I'm still not quite sure
exactly if this is procedural or if this will give
us any clarity on birthright citizenship. But of course, you know,
I'm gonna find a guest who can help us understand
all of this, and I'd like to welcome to the
show Joe Lepido Esposito. He is the legal policy Deputy
director at the Pacific Legal Foundation. Joe, welcome to the show.

Speaker 6 (18:50):
First of all, yeah, thanks for having me.

Speaker 4 (18:52):
So you just heard me. Admit, I'm not clear exactly
what is going to be decided, but it looks like
to me that this is a procedural question about the
ability of district courts to issue a national stay, not
so much about whether or not birthright citizenship exists for
real legal immigrants.

Speaker 6 (19:13):
That's absolutely right. That's really the core of what they're
deciding now. You know, the arguments this morning definitely got
into the case on the merits as well, because that's
part of the conversation is, well, you know, are there
certain situations where perhaps the government is just so wrong
on the law that of course the nationwide injunction would
make sense. So in some ways the discussion was there,

(19:33):
and you know, frankly on a lot of the president
under this area of the law that would be correct,
that this is sort of against what we've seen in
legal president prior. But the real core question is that
procedural one, and that's what they spent most of the
two and a half or so or so hours today
arguing about.

Speaker 4 (19:50):
So they're actually arguing about whether or not a district judge. Now,
a district judge important, but not in the grand scheme
of the federal system. I mean, it's kind of small potato.
So what we've seen since the beginning of the Trump
administration is Democrats using these district judges to issue stays
that they don't like for policies they don't like. So

(20:10):
will this settle all of those issues if they come back.
Let's just say the justices come back and say no,
a federal judge can only impact what's in their district.
Does that mean that all of these other sort of
district rulings will go out the window as well?

Speaker 6 (20:25):
You know, there's definitely a high probability of that. You know,
it's really going to depend on what kind of decision
they make, because you know, they've talked about a lot
of different ways this can be done. So for the
ones already on the books, you know, they've consolidated a
few cases here that had the same problem. I mean,
it was all around birthright citizenship. But essentially it's the
same exact problem in all these cases that there was
a nationwide injunction. So if they're able to actually reverse

(20:48):
that piece of the puzzle, that would probably make force
us other judges to issue new orders and do them
just either for their district or perhaps for the circuit
if they get appeeled up. So it's going to be
very limited if they can do it that way. On
the other hand, there's one proposal that sort of came
out within oral argument, and this may or may not
make it into a final decision, but one idea was that, well,

(21:09):
what if these are brought as class action suits? Then
that would make sense because then you could have a
class action suit based on people all across the country.
This is fairly common in that regard, and therefore this
would be how you would would stop the case from
moving forward in a nationwide injunction. You know, in the
same way that there were some nationwide injunctions during the
Biden administration when there was the student loan forgiveness plan,

(21:31):
right that the loan cancelation does happened as well. But
then it goes again back to the question of well,
should we be looking at the merits and what is
actually happening here? Is this something that can be reversed?
Is it something that needs this emergency procedure to actually
be stopped? And then you get back to the substance
of question. So again, you know, I hate to be
a lawyer on this, but it really does depend. It
looks like some of the underlying case and that's what

(21:54):
we may see in the final decision here.

Speaker 4 (21:56):
So let's talk about that. Does specific legal foundation have
an opinion about whether or not there is the possibility
that an illegal immigrant should be able to come here
or have a baby and have that child be a citizen.
And I know that there was a case a very
long time ago that involved two Chinese nationals, but it's
my understanding they had some kind of legal status. They

(22:17):
were either here I don't know what this is do
or you didn't have to have some kind of status
back in the day. But has it ever been decided
that if someone has come to the country in a
manner that is unofficial right and then they have a child,
has that question ever been answered by the courts? And
what is it going to take or what case should
we look at to possibly answer that question.

Speaker 6 (22:38):
If no, that's a very good question. So all the
legal president on this because we don't have anything specific
to this exact point, so it's hard to look to
one specific case. But in general, the president, like you said,
the one case regarding the Chinese nationals was one where
someone was given citizenship under the birthright. Means it's really

(23:00):
a big, interesting open question. You know, we don't take
a specific position on this, it's not exactly in our wheelhouse.
But what we do look at are these issues when
it comes to the separation of powers and what the
power of the president and the Congress and the judiciary
should be. So this is one where it really kind
of hits all of those points, because some of the
arguments we hear today was sort of this feeling of

(23:21):
from some of the justices of well, Congress should be
stepping up and doing their job of this is something
that they want obviously on behalf of the president. This
solictener General was arguing that now the president does have
this power, this is within his wheelhouse. And then other
folks that were opposing the president were saying, you know,
this is actually right the right place of the judiciary
to be taking a stand here and really saying, this

(23:43):
is where we put the brakes on things. It's our
duty and the Constitution to stop overreached by the executive
or by the Congress, if that may be the case,
but in this case the executive. So it's sort of
this perfect little capsule of a separation of powers problem.
So in that regard, we're very interested to see the
outcome because a lot of different ways can go and
we haven't quite figured out from their arguments today that

(24:04):
you know, we can see there's a split, but we're
not sure how they're going to split this baby.

Speaker 4 (24:08):
Well, and I like to remind my listeners, my listeners
are overwhelmingly they lean right, And I always like to
remind them before you say Trump should have the ability
to expand powers however he wants. Remember, our team is
not always going to be in charge, right, So you
have to think about it if you put the shoe
on the other foot. Some of the expansions that I've
seen I'm very comfortable with. I'm not going to lie.
I think that there has been too much sort of

(24:30):
corruption coming from Congress and the executive brand. It's all
been made into a little bit of a cess pool
because Congress keeps shoving their duties off onto the presidency.
So there's some stuff that I don't mind, some stuff
that I think is an overreach, but I want it
to be balanced the way it was intended by the
founding fathers. So I'm very interested to see how this

(24:50):
all plays out. And you just said, we really don't
know based on the questioning, like, where's the money going
right now? Is what I'm asking Joe.

Speaker 6 (24:58):
Yeah, so you know, I actually a good point. So
to answer your direct question there, I mean, I think
right now the money is on some sort of limitation
on nationwide injunction. I'm not sure what it looks like,
but I think the idea that disrect judges are doing
this sort of almost in a knee jerk way in
some of these cases in areas where it doesn't really
make sense. So I think they may sort of put

(25:19):
some sort of guidelines, if you will, out there, whether
it's a formal test or what it might be, so
it would be on things. So again, you know, perhaps
I'm showing my bias and the cases that we were showing.
But in something like the student loan case, if the
loans will be forgiven on Saturday and they final this
thing on Friday, well gee, we better get this thing
taking care of tonight if we think there's a chance
that they're going to lose the case, right, Otherwise, once

(25:40):
I gets paid out, it's gone. Now. In this case,
could they say, well, you know, if someone's born tomorrow
and we have to decide if they are a citizen
or not, is that an immediate need. I don't know
if it is right. I mean, somebody could be granted
citizenship if it's an open question, you know, if they've
just been born. I don't think that they're worried about
collecting Social Security quite yet. Yeah, but you know, there's

(26:00):
a few things that probably could be put on hold,
So that I think might be part of a test
that comes in here is how quickly do you need
to do it? And then also the standing of the
people who are coming before the court. So again they
broughtup this issue of a class action suit. If you
can actually get a class together on it, that maybe
makes sense to do a national wide injunction just to
sort of play it safe. So that might be a
guideline they give here. But you know, to your greater point,

(26:23):
I think that it's a very important one. It really
depends on who has the ball in their court. Like
I said, we've seen cases before where we were happy
to see Anasian wide injunction because that's what we wanted,
But in other cases we might not be as happy
about it.

Speaker 3 (26:39):
I think.

Speaker 6 (26:39):
Overall, I think for people on the right side of
the aisle, the one sort of positive thing through all
of this is we will find out, because of the
testing of the limits strengthly of the Trump administration of
what executive power should be. You'll find out exactly where
those lines are and those will have to hold for
the next administration, no matter who they are, whether it's JD.
Vance or if it's Pea Blue to Jets, it doesn't matter.

(27:00):
We're going to know where those lines are, and that's
going to be an important piece of really solving a
lot of the constitutional questions we have regarding separation of power.
So I think on the whole, you know, like you said,
somebody lesteners might be liking some of these things that
the court may say are an overreach. Well that's all
well and good, because I think for the most part,
if that's limiting government power and limiting the power of
the executive, it's probably overall a good thing. Anyway, Amen

(27:21):
to that.

Speaker 4 (27:21):
Joe Lupino Esposito from the Pacific Legal Foundation, Thanks so
much for your time and expertise today. Obviously, when does
this ruling comes out when?

Speaker 6 (27:30):
So we should probably expect it sometime at the end
of June. Okay, there's a chance they would do it
sooner because of sort of the pending issues and the
timeliness of it, but most likely we're looking at the
end of June.

Speaker 4 (27:39):
All right, Thanks so much. Maybe we'll talk again then.

Speaker 6 (27:41):
Joe, absolutely, all right, thank you.

Speaker 4 (27:44):
We'll be right back after this. At the end of
that conversation, when we're talking about the justices in this case,
that's been brought before. I got this text message that
said Congress should start defunding rogue justices or if they
are out of bounds, Congress should start impeaching those justices. Okay,
let me just say this, there are justices that rule

(28:08):
based on emotion, okay, because I think whenever you rule
based on political persuasion, you are now basing your judgment
on emotion. And there are some justices that I think
act in a political manner. I really do. But that's
why we have the system of justice that we have
all of the checks and balances throughout the court system.

(28:28):
It's like the Colorado Supreme Court, they've been overturned three
times by the US Supreme Court in the last three tries, right, So,
but we have that recourse when it comes to many,
many issues. So I understand the frustration at these justices
that act in a way that you don't like, but
that's just kind of the nature of the beast. It's

(28:50):
almost like, I'll use a baseball analogy, you know, until
they bring in automatic balls and strikes. The saying is,
you know, sometimes the strike zone is in your favor,
some times it's not. But in the grand scheme, of
the game. It all balances out most of the time,
and that's why it's been that way, And there's no
perfect system here. We're talking about human beings. We're talking
about people who have bias and prejudices and bigotry about things.

(29:14):
And I don't mean necessarily like their bigots, like they
hate black people. That's not what I'm talking about. But
we all have things that we feel strongly about and
that guide our viewpoints on stuff. And unfortunately, all justices
should be looking at the law, look at the intent
of the law, and interpret the law only in that way.
That's what I think. But again see my earlier comments.

(29:36):
They're human beings. So we've got these these justices that
are going to be making this decision, and we can't
always think that if they disagree with me, they are wrong, bad,
politically motive, any of that stuff. Sometimes they are, but
not all of them are. And it concerns me when

(29:57):
we start talking about using things like impeachment as just
tools to express our displeasure. Impeachment should be reserved for
people that have been clearly shown to have broken the
law or violated an oath so egregiously, like this woman
in Minnesota. Who's now been charged with not Minnesota, Wisconsin,
a federal judge has now been charged with harboring an

(30:20):
illegal immigrant. That woman should be impeached if that's how
they get her off the bench, right, I don't know
how the system is in Wisconsin. She needs to be impeached.
She needs to be taken off the bench because it
is demonstrable what she has done. She has violated her
oath to uphold the law. But you don't just impeach
a judge because you disagree with their logic and reasoning.

(30:42):
That really is It would be the beginning of the
collapse of our entire system. And I'm one of the
most skeptical people of our system right now. I feel
like there's too much in American government that has become
corrupted by political ideology, or self interest or double dealing.

Speaker 3 (30:58):
You know.

Speaker 4 (30:59):
I told you guys, yes when we talked about Qatar
or Cutter. However, there are so many people in government
that have made a fortune off of that country. So
who am I supposed to believe? So I'm really skeptical,
but I want to caution you, caution you about pushing
that too far. I'm worried about the future of the

(31:21):
country for a variety of reasons. But if we lose
all sense of confidence in our underpinnings, our foundational institutions,
then our civilization cannot continue. So be very specific and
very careful. You can say a judge was politically motivated.

(31:42):
You can say that because some judges are just like
people on the left say some judges are politically motivated
on the right. We're now hearing more of that as
the Trump appointees from his first term are really taking hold.
But just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they
are evil or have evil in And let's not run
around talking about using a tool that should be there

(32:04):
for the worst of the worst, not just someone we
disagree with. This is one of my frustrations about Republicans
in Colorado. I can't tell you how many Facebook posts
I see from people who are like, we should impeach
so and so, and I always respond with the same thing.
Stop wasting your energy, start finding really good candidates to
run against them, and start building an organization or an

(32:27):
infrastructure to get them elected. That is a much better
use of your time. Impeachment recall they should be used,
but only in circumstances where the worst of the worst
needs to go. That's just my viewpoint on that we
are going to come back, and when we get back, well,
of course we're going to come back, but you know
what I mean. At one ten, we're going to talk

(32:50):
to D forty nine's that's the school district in Colorado Springs.
D forty nine's superintendent, Paul Hilts, about a lawsuit they've
just filed against the state of call Colorado about boys
in girls sports. That's coming up next.

Speaker 1 (33:03):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock,
accident and injury lawyers.

Speaker 5 (33:08):
No, it's Mandy Connell and Don.

Speaker 4 (33:14):
On KLA.

Speaker 3 (33:16):
Ninety one.

Speaker 9 (33:17):
AM got.

Speaker 4 (33:21):
The nicety through three by Donald Keith.

Speaker 5 (33:27):
You're a really sad thing. Welcome, well, welcome.

Speaker 4 (33:30):
To the second hour of the show. In just a
few minutes, we're going to talk with the superintendent of
D forty nine, a school district down in the Springs
that is currently suing the state of Colorado over their
lack of protection for girls in girls sports. And we'll
talk to him at about ten after. In the meantime, though,
I want to do a couple of things very very quickly,

(33:52):
one of which is to remind you guys, and I'm
just going to say it like this, Okay, the Rockies
I have now made history. Yep, the first team to
start a season seven and thirty six in the modern era.
And ladies and germs, you do not want to miss

(34:13):
your chance to be a part of this. You may
remember my daughter and her Criminal Justice Club instructor coming
on the show to talk about taking the kids to
state competition, and we had this cool fundraiser going on
a raffle that you can actually buy a ticket and
you might win a night in a suite. So you
get ten tickets, you get the food in the suite,
you get SODA's wet because it's a school fundraiser, you

(34:34):
got to buy your own booze. But and Chuck and
I are going to host you in the suite, so
if you want to hang out, then this is a
perfect opportunity with you and nine of your friends to
go hang out on the suite for this night and
help these kids with their expenses for state competition. I've
got a link on the blog. You've got until two
thirty today to buy a ticket because we are closing

(34:55):
it and announcing a winner, hopefully by the end of
the show. So that is what's happening there. Go ahead
and look at that. And I want to make one
more comment on the judges thing that we were talking
about from the last hour, and I kind of went
on a warning tear. I guess about how just because
you don't like how a judge rules, we don't need
to run around talking about impeaching them or defunding or whatever.

(35:18):
Impeachment is a check and balance, but it really needs
to be reserved for the worst to the worst. It
shouldn't be a political tool, just like we want our
judges and justices to not look through a political lens.
And this texture said judges should be impeached for being political.
That is the point. Justice should be above politics. The
problem with that is if you are accusing a justice

(35:38):
of making a ruling based on politics, that is a
thought crime. You're ascribing motives and thoughts to their actual ruling. Now,
whenever a judge rules, there's a ruling you can turn
to to find out their reasoning, the logic behind their reasoning.
Now you may disagree with their logic or may understand
that that logic definitely has an ideological point that is
based in politics, but prove someone did something to benefit

(36:02):
a political party with actual evidence of them having an
exchange with someone in the party to say I got you.
It doesn't happen, So it's very difficult. So then you're
talking about intent, you know. And by the way, somebody
just said Rockies, bless their hearts. And one more thing,
don't you want to be able to in the future

(36:24):
when somebody is complaining about their baseball team having a
really tough pat don't you want to say you think
you've got it bad.

Speaker 9 (36:32):
I was at the Rockies in twenty twenty five. I went,
I want a suite. I went and hung out with
my friends. We were there for that season. I mean,
don't you want to be able to do that anyway?

Speaker 4 (36:44):
By a ticket? Make it happen. In just a few minutes,
we're going to talk to Superintendent Paul Hilts. He is
the superintendent of D forty nine down in the Springs
School District down there. I'm sorry, Peter Hilts. Did I
see Peter?

Speaker 2 (37:00):
Who?

Speaker 5 (37:00):
Did I say?

Speaker 4 (37:01):
Peter Hills is his name? So the long and the
short of it is they're suing the state of Colorado
because the rules in the state of Colorado, as overseen
by CHATSA, which is the organization that oversees high school sports,
has put them in conflict with both an executive order
and the rules of Title nine, and they're asking for clarification.

(37:22):
Not thrilled about this, absolutely thrilled about this, because it's
time for us to just you know, even this is
one of those things, This topic, this specific subject, is
one of those things where people completely ignore the fact
that the feelings of girls who play sports should matter.
All we're told is that the feelings of trans girls

(37:45):
who are girls, that were born boys who have decided
they are girls. Now, those are the only feelings that matter.
And in the sense of fairness, you have to just
ask yourself. I mean, on the face of it, why
do we have Title nine? If we just ask the question,
why do we have Title nine in the first place
that creates the framework for girls sports. The reason we

(38:07):
have that is because physically, after puberty, girls most of
the time cannot compete against boys. It's just a fact
of life. It's a biological fact of life. And you
can spin it anyway you want. That is a biological
fact of life. So the fact that we're even having

(38:28):
this conversation is kind of absurd to me because it's
yet another way to tell girls you don't matter as
much as people born male. I mean, I don't mean
to you know, that's what it says people who are
born male. Their feelings, their desires, their wants completely supersede
yours once again. And this is honestly what I want

(38:52):
to say to trans women who are upset that they're
having their rights curtailed. I'm like, well, now you know
what it's like to be a woman.

Speaker 1 (39:00):
There you go.

Speaker 4 (39:01):
You knew I had to take the feminist shot there,
even though. So we're going to talk to the superintendent
here in just a moment about that, find out where
this is and what this actually means. So Superintendent Peter
Hills is joining us.

Speaker 3 (39:15):
Now.

Speaker 4 (39:16):
Hey, first of all, welcome to the show.

Speaker 5 (39:18):
Thank you, Mandy.

Speaker 7 (39:19):
I listen to you, especially when I'm driving to Denver.
So it's fun to get a chance to sit down
and talk a little bit.

Speaker 4 (39:25):
Well, well, I appreciate that, and if I'm ever in
D forty nine, I will I will waive at the
D forty nine superintendent as well. So let's talk about
what you guys are doing and why you're doing it,
lay it out for me.

Speaker 7 (39:37):
You know what. The schools host sports because they're great
opportunities for leadership development and learning, perseverance and all of that.
And sports are physical contests. So if you're gonna host
physical contests, they should be classified and governed by a
physical standard. And the science of physical standards for human
for human people is biology. So we're using a bio

(40:00):
logical standard to cover a physical subject. To make sure
that girls have all of the access and opportunities that
they deserve, and to make sure that boys and girls
have all the privacy that they that they deserve, we
want to preserve opportunity and dignity. That's really the bottom line.

Speaker 4 (40:16):
So what has Colorado done in terms of what is
the legislature done that makes it more challenging to make
this happen.

Speaker 7 (40:24):
Well, I think the main thing that they have done
is they have absolutely conflated biological sex with gender identity
and expression, and they're not the same. So both the
Colorado Anti Discrimination Act and now the amendment that's in
the Constitution, but chass's bylaws as well, they all conflate

(40:45):
these two things that are very very distinct, and it
doesn't it doesn't create any unsafe condition or violation of
privacy for some adult somewhere to express a gender identity
that's different than their biology. But it does create unsafe
and non private conditions if you base your sports travel,

(41:06):
your sports practices, team composition competitions all night, if you
base that on gender expression, then you invite inequity exactly.

Speaker 4 (41:15):
First of all, I'm completely on your side and the
side of D forty nine. I think I think it's
absolutely insane. And I just said this that we're telling
these student female student athletes that once again, the feelings
of someone were male are more important than yours. That's
what it comes down to. And I don't mean to
be harsher or ugly or or any of those things,
but for me, the notion that girls should be made

(41:38):
to feel wildly uncomfortable. As we've I've now seen so
many college aged women finally come forward and talk about changing,
you know, for swimming it next to you a fully
intact male who's decided that he's female. I mean, that's
just fundamentally wrong. It's a violation.

Speaker 7 (41:59):
That's particular. I think that's the violation of privacy and
dignity because it sends a message that you're kind of
your personal integrity or your personal privacy is not as
important as taking this social political stance exactly.

Speaker 4 (42:15):
And so what do you expect to have happen in
the near term? Give me the sort of the arc
of this suit.

Speaker 7 (42:22):
So let me use CHATS as an example. That's our
State Activities Association, And they have a BYE law that
addresses this very directly. It says that if you let
males compete directly against girls, boys against girls, males against females.
When you do that, you limit female participation and you
undermine the intent, which is the intent title mind. You

(42:43):
undermine the intent to have more girls participation. Right, So
they have that already in their by law.

Speaker 6 (42:49):
But they also have this.

Speaker 7 (42:51):
Statement that we welcome students and in fact require districts
to permit students to compete based on their expressed identity.
And so CHASSA has a built in complete incoherence. I
think there's incoherence between even our Anti Discrimination Act, our Constitution,
the federal Constitution. And so I think these things that

(43:12):
are at odds, they are craving some degree of reconciliation.
Something needs to make them cohere again. And I think
that that something is going to be a legal declaration
that either states have the right to make this decision
if they want to, or the Constitution, via the supremacy clause,

(43:35):
gives the Supreme Court the authority to say gender and
biological identity are not exactly the same, and for these
kinds of classifications, biology is the correct standard.

Speaker 4 (43:47):
But don't you think that that that sort of squishness
is a feature, not a bug, right? I mean, it
just gives them plausible deniability no matter what sort of
situation arises. So I actually think that that's that's on purpose.

Speaker 6 (44:02):
Of course.

Speaker 7 (44:02):
I mean it's a feature if your purpose is to
be anti objective.

Speaker 5 (44:09):
It's kind of a.

Speaker 7 (44:10):
Post modern approach. There are there is no objective truth.
It's all subjective. But biology is not subjective. If we
want subjective, we're going to go to sociology and psychology.
We don't want subjective, we want objective. And so yes,
it's a feature if that's the system we're trying to design.
I would say, though, that our system of our constitutional republic,

(44:32):
which depends on a federal system with a supremacy clause
in the Constitution, there there is a mechanism to seek
clarity and to then promulgate that clarity. And so that's
why we filed this lawsuit, is because we believe that
we should have the right to escape this incoherence and
operate from a point of clarity.

Speaker 4 (44:54):
So in the meantime, though there's nothing, there's a Chastisse
as far as I know, has said they haven't seen
the suit, so they don't want to comment on it yet.
Maybe that's changed since I last checked. But what does
this mean in the near term, if anything, for girls
in Colorado playing in girls sports.

Speaker 7 (45:13):
Well, we absolutely hope that the leadership District forty nine
is modeling will be contagious. We hope that other districts
that maybe don't have our size or our resources will
will consider what we're doing, maybe even adopt similar policies.
We believe that there is a majority position, that a

(45:34):
majority of the districts, that a majority of the parents
and students agree with the position that we have taken.
We don't actually think this is a radical position at all.
We think it's a common sense position. And so if
more of the member districts around Colorado would stand up
for girls' rights the way we are standing up for
girls rights. That would put increasing pressure on CHASSA as

(45:56):
a membership organization to follow the part of their own
eyelaws that says we cannot limit female participation just to
serve a political end. So our hope is that CHASA,
under pressure from its members, will will adopt a common
sense approach to preserving the difference between boys and girls

(46:17):
and the privacy rights of boys and girls.

Speaker 4 (46:20):
You know, I'm right there with you in hoping. But
let's just say my confidence is not super high that
SHASA will do anything to clarify and sort thisself out.
I think that they are going to be very happy
to let the courts decide one way or the other,
to let them off the hook. So how long are
we looking? What is the process here in terms of time?

Speaker 7 (46:42):
So you're right, I think your observation in terms of CHASA,
they're going to be cautious and they are slow playing this.
They could actually have already waives service and accepted our
email and they can go see the complaint. I mean,
I know that they're saying they haven't seen it. That's
a little disingenuous. They haven't explicitly informally accepted legal service,

(47:03):
but they know what it says, and the reason they're
slow playing is that they're in a bind. They're in
a bind of their own making, but they're in a bind.
And so I expect that this is going to need
to proceed through the federal court system, through the Colorado District,
probably the tenth Circuit. We would hope to get a
Supreme Court ruling that clarifies for the nation whether or

(47:25):
not states may replace biology with sociology, or whether the
simple fact and the equal protection clause of the fourteenth
Amendment requires states to honor our human biology and our
rights that are distinct but co extensive between males and females,

(47:46):
boys and girls, men and women.

Speaker 4 (47:47):
I know the D forty nine already passed a policy
that said boys can't play in girls sports. Let's talk
about that for just a moment, because the big criticism
I've heard, and I think it's a fair criticism, is
how do you enforce this? What is the enforced the
mechanism to make this happen.

Speaker 6 (48:03):
Yeah, it's actually really really simple.

Speaker 7 (48:06):
When students register in our school district, they tell us
if they're a boy or a girl. When they register
to join a sport, they tell us if they're a
boy or a girl. When they compete, they're a boy
or a girl. When they get a sports.

Speaker 6 (48:18):
Physical, they're a boy or a girl.

Speaker 7 (48:20):
So we have all these data sources, and if they
all agree and we're able to say, oh, that boy's
a boy, then that boy can play boy sports or
co ed sports. So it's only a fair criticism if
they're if their classification is a mystery.

Speaker 6 (48:38):
But it's not a mystery.

Speaker 7 (48:39):
Ninety nine point nine one percent of our students declare
that they're a boy or a girl when they regishare
with the district, usually for kindergarten. So I mean the
majority of our students are telling us boy girl before
they come to kindergarten. So it's really not that hard
for bach or an athletic director to say, well, this
student wants to playing the boys team. This student is

(49:02):
a boy. Everything we have says they're a boy. They
want to play in the boys team. Green light, go ahead. Now,
there is an incredibly rare small portion of our population
who may have a genuine chromosotal or medical condition, and
if a parent and their child brought us a request
for accommodation based on some particular condition, we would evaluate

(49:26):
that on a case by case basis, but for the
vast majority of our students, that's not going to be necessary.

Speaker 4 (49:32):
I was going to ask, has D forty nine begun working,
or have you come up with a solution of any
sort for trans girls who want to participate in sports.

Speaker 7 (49:44):
So, you know, I was looking at the NCAA policy
just the other day and it says very clearly they've actually,
i would say, contracted back to common sense. And their
answer is that they base it on birth biology, and
that may sense, and then they actually have some rules
where girls, for example, who are taking testosterone therapy hormone therapy,

(50:10):
they then become disqualified, and that's the kind of a thing.
There are conditions where a parent with a medical professional
might make a decision to address gender dysphoria or to
address a chromosomal condition or some other medical condition. In
that case, then we would make a case by case evaluation.

Speaker 6 (50:33):
But what we really aim to stop is.

Speaker 7 (50:37):
A boy or young man who's been competing as a
boy who decides, you know, I think I'd like to
have even more success, so I'm going to decide I'm
a girl and compete with girls. And that has happened
all over our country. It has happened in Colorado, but
under our policy, that won't happen.

Speaker 4 (50:54):
What happens, and it's the last question my amosent a time.
What happens if the students from a decent nine team
are playing against another team that contains a trans girl.

Speaker 7 (51:06):
So one of the things I'm grateful for is I'm
only superintendent in District forty nine. But the reason we
sued CHASSA is because CHASSA is the statewide Activities Association,
and all of us who are members have to adhere
to chassa's bylaws or we're not allowed to compete in
any kind of interscholastic competition, contest, certainly not play off
some championships.

Speaker 1 (51:27):
And so.

Speaker 4 (51:29):
I can't.

Speaker 7 (51:30):
I can't decide what Denver Public Schools is going to
do or what Grand Junction might do. I can only
lead the way in District forty nine. But we believe
that by pursuing a statewide and even a federal declaration,
we believe that we will go upstream from the situation
you just described and not put our student athletes in

(51:52):
that position in the first place. So, Mandy, our hope
is really to change the narrative and get it back
to common sense.

Speaker 4 (52:00):
Wilts is the superintendent of D forty nine in the
Springs and they are the ones suing the federal government,
and super you know what, I'm sorry, Peter Hilts. I
keep calling you Paul. I'm making you the wrong apostle.
I apologize Peter over and over again. But this mom
just sent in as the Colorado Springs girl mom in

(52:20):
D twenty. I'm so grateful that forty nine is starting
this movement, praying hard that it catches on like he hopes.
Thank you, sir for standing up for our girls. And
I will leave it at that. Thank you so much
Peter for joining me today.

Speaker 7 (52:34):
We appreciate it.

Speaker 5 (52:34):
Have a good afternoon, all right.

Speaker 4 (52:36):
That is Superintendent Peter Hilts. You know, if I didn't
get a name wrong, it wouldn't be the Mandy Connell Show,
would it. Nope, sure wouldn't. Anyway, I've got a lot
of stuff that we're going to get to. Bronco's schedule
is out. If you follow us on Twitter, you can
weigh in on what you think the outcome of the
season is going to be. I will say a rod
much more optimistic numbers than last year.

Speaker 5 (52:57):
At the same time, twelve and five is realistic that.

Speaker 4 (53:02):
I mean, and it doesn't sound crazy, it doesn't sound
are like worst case scenario.

Speaker 2 (53:07):
Yeah, worst case is nine in eight. Worst case is
above five hundred. What alive to be a Broncos fan?
What a time to be a legendary case?

Speaker 4 (53:18):
All right? When we get back, we talked a little
bit about the medicaid cuts that Republicans are suggesting, and
they're asking people to actually work, to participate or volunteer,
and I want to talk for just a moment about
an article in the Denver Post about the medicaid cuts
that could be coming specifically to Colorado and especially because

(53:40):
of their choices of how they have expanded Medicaid in
the state. We'll get into it next. It could be
devastated to the Colorado budget and the Denver Post about
the impact that the Medicaid cuts that are being that
are going to be pushed through as part of the
big beautiful bill, which that whole thing's a nightmare. We'll
talk about that later, but there's magnificant and Colorado's choices

(54:03):
are going to make it hurt for Colorado and hurt badly.
According to the Denver Post. More than one hundred thousand
Colorado could lose their health insurance and the state would
face a budget to a fall in the billions if
Congress passes newly proposed cuts to Medicaid. Two points in
the House, Republicans planned to slash Medicaid spending would cause

(54:24):
most cause most of the losses. One of them work requirements,
which National nonprofit estimated would push anywhere from ninety five
thousand to one hundred and eight thousand people in Colorado
off the program and reducing state's ability to claim matching
federal funds when they pay when they tax healthcare providers. Now,

(54:44):
there's a couple of things at work here. Number one,
about the people who are going to lose their health
insurance because of the work requirements.

Speaker 7 (54:52):
Do you know what?

Speaker 4 (54:53):
A vast majority of those people will lose their health
require their healthcare for not doing won't file the required
paperwork that shows they have a job. So if that's guys,
sometimes you have to do things to get a benefit.

(55:14):
And apparently we've decided that people on Medicaid should never
have to do anything or take any responsibility for any
portion of their life and they should just get free
healthcare from the rest of us without taking any modicum
of responsibility for any part of it. There are no copays.
If they are drug copays, they're like two dollars. And

(55:35):
you know, yesterday I was talking about Medicaid patients being
likely to be more likely to no show. And part
of the reason is that, you know, there's transportation issues
and there's other factors when you're living in poverty. But
the reality is when you have no skin in the game,
you treat things differently. So people can't be bothered to

(55:56):
fill out a form and send it back and I'm
supposed to feel bad that they're going to get kicked on.
I don't. I don't feel bad at all. The other
part of it is that states have figured out a
way to gain the system in their favor. Medicaid works
like this. States submit Medicaid bills and then the government,

(56:17):
federal government reimburses each state a certain percentage of those bills.
I believe in Colorado right now it's about sixty percent.
So in order to make those bills higher, the state
governments do things like levy a hospital provider tax. All
that tax is designed to do is to jack up

(56:39):
the cost of delivering healthcare services because taxes and fees
are considered part of healthcare fees. They're all considered part
of the same thing. So they can get a higher
reimbursement from the federal government by gaming the system by
taxing hospitals and facilities and then recycling the money back

(57:00):
to the hospitals. I mean, it's basically money laundering. If
a private company did this, they would go to jail.
And I mean that if you tried to pull this
scam this way and inflate your numbers by just levying
more charges on there, you would go to jail. But
states have figured out how to gain the system. So
now Colorado's freaking out. And then there's this other part

(57:24):
of the whole thing. Colorado is one of I think
three or four states that gives medicaid. Two illegal immigrants,
illegal mothers and children can be on medicaid in Colorado. Now,
I don't understand how being on the public dole does
not prevent these people from ever being able to seek citizenship,
because that is something that you have to affirm that

(57:47):
you've never cost the state money to be here. And
I really don't think that. I mean, in my mind,
that's excluding but here we are, and this plan dings
those states a further ten percent in reimbursement. So Colorado
is set up to take a massive hit on Medicaid

(58:07):
because they've expanded it in certain areas. Are there are
medicaid programs that you can buy into if you have
an income I think that is maybe four times the
poverty rate you can buy in. And those premiums are
on a sliding scale, so the closer you are to

(58:27):
the poverty rate to like one hundred and thirty eight
percent of the poverty rate and up to four hundred
that those premiums slide up. That's one part of the program.
But why should someone on four hundred percent of the
poverty level be allowed to buy an a Medicaid That's
an expansion of Medicaid that has to be rolled back.
What I would love to see happen, both from the
federal government side and the state of Colorado side, is

(58:49):
for the federal government to go to a block grant
program which says, hey, Colorado, we're going to give you
four billion dollars this year for your Medicaid. That's what
you're getting, and you come up with some kind of
formula to index it to inflation, poverty levels, things of
that nature, because right now, our poverty level in Colorado
is about seven percent, but we have twenty percent of

(59:12):
the population on Medicaid. Roughly, these are rough numbers, so
that is way out of skew because Medicaid is designed
for people in poverty. I got the sweetest text message
yesterday and I forgot to read it, and I wanted
it to from the father of a young woman who
has a down syndrome and she's trying to live independently,

(59:33):
and when she turned eighteen, they automatically put her on
Medicaid because people with those sorts of disabilities do those
As a society, we need to take care of those people.

Speaker 7 (59:43):
Right.

Speaker 4 (59:43):
She was devastated. She never wanted to be a burden
for anyone, so she committed to volunteer hours every single
year to pay in her own way for her Medicaid.
She does one thousand dollars one thousand hours a year
of volunteer work. And I just thought, first of all,
what great job mom and dad did with that young woman,
and what a wonderful young woman she is for recognizing

(01:00:05):
that she had a responsibility and she's executing that responsibility
by volunteering her time. And by the way this Medicaid change,
you don't have to have a job. You can volunteer
eighty hours a week or excuse me, eight hours a
month and still meet the requirement. There's so many carve
outs in this that it's ridiculous to think that we

(01:00:29):
should not ask people to do anything, take any responsibility
for themselves, because frankly, that's infantalizing. You're treating grown adults
like incompetent fools. Why would anyone ever strive to be
better when the government believes they are an incompetent fool. Now,
don't get me wrong, I've met some people in poverty

(01:00:50):
that are in poverty because they continually make really dumb
and horrible choices, and perhaps they have to lose their
Medicaid and have to fight to get it back before
they start taking more responsibility. But Medicaid is out of control.
It is the spending is unsustainable, and I believe that
Democrats have been expanding Medicaid to get more people on

(01:01:11):
the dole as a means of using that during an
election cycle to look at the opponent and say that
guy's going to kick you off Medicaid if you elect him.
I mean, that's the oldest trick in the book. And
what ends up happening is that it gets more challenging.
If you are someone in poverty who the program was
designed for, and you need help and you need a specialist,

(01:01:33):
getting a highly specialized specialist on Medicaid is almost impossible,
especially in pediatrics, because they simply don't take Medicaid. The
reimbursements are so low they won't take it, and we're
now squeezing those people out of those few appointments to
make that happen. It's just ridiculous. And again, if we're

(01:01:55):
going to shrink the size of government, if we're going
to bring government spending under control, because we are on
an unsustainable path right now, we have to make hard choices.
We have to make sure that the poorest among us,
the people who are truly destitute need our help, that
they have it. But we need to move other people
that are on the other side of that towards more independence,

(01:02:17):
or at least towards moving them to the Obamacare exchange
where they can still get subsidies, but they have more
skin in the game. At that point, it's take a
quick time out, be right back. I got a lot
of you on the common spirital of text line. We'll
read some of those where we get back Diana to
get never afraid to be wrong about anything. Never let
it be said that Diana de get is not afraid

(01:02:39):
to spout off about things that she either obviously knows
nothing about or knows she's wrong, but continues to say
them anyway. Nothing more than this representative Diana to get.
A Democrat representing Denver said the republicans proposed cuts to
Medicaid are primarily aimed at paying for tax cuts for

(01:03:00):
the wealthy. This is a quote. House Republicans are so
laser focused on pleasing Trump they are willing to make
their constituents lives harder and healthcare more expensive. So I
thought I'd just do do you guys as solid and
I'd go find the tax rates before and after the
Trump tax cuts. Whenever a liberal tells you that the

(01:03:20):
Trump tax cuts benefited the rich, it is so easy
to show you show them otherwise. So and I'm going
to use filing single just because it's the easiest and
the numbers are the easiest to digest. But if you're
a single filer in the twenty five thousand dollars taxable
income range. Before the Trump tax cuts, your effective tax

(01:03:45):
rate was thirteen point one percent. After it was eleven
point two percent. That's so weird because someone making twenty
five thousand dollars a year does not feel like the
rich to me, and yet their tax rate went down
one point nine percent. How about if you make fifty
grand a year, well, your initial tax rate would be
sixteen point five percent. After the Trump tax cuts it

(01:04:09):
went down to thirteen point nine percent. That is a
decrease of two point six percent. And again, a person
making fifty thousand dollars a year, nobody's gonna call them rich,
and maybe the guy making twenty five grand a year,
but the rest of us know. So that was a
a two point six percent drop right there. Then we
go to one hundred grand a year. Initially your tax

(01:04:29):
rate would have been twenty one percent, now eighteen point
three percent, and that is a difference of two point
sixty nine percent. So the bottom half of tax payler,
tax filers below one hundred thousand dollars, that's not quite half.
That's not where the median is, but that's where the
tax breaks are. You got one point nine percent decrease
two point six percent decrease to two point sixty nine

(01:04:49):
percent decrease. And by the way, this table is on
the blog today at mandy'sblog dot com. So I got
it from Forbes dot com. You can go ahead and
check it yourself. Now, let's go to two hundred fifty
thousand dollars a year. Now to some people that is rich,
their initial tax rate was twenty six point four percent,
went down to twenty four point seven percent, a decrease
of one point six eight percent, not as high as

(01:05:12):
any of the last three. Script to five hundred thousand.
In some places, you are rich. If you're making five
hundred k a year, your tax breaks went from thirty
point eight percent an effective tax rate down to thirty
point one percent. That is a decrease of point sixty
three percent, also not as big as any of the
top three. Now, if you make a million dollars, a

(01:05:32):
lot of people would say, you know what, you're starting
to feel rich right there. Their tax rate used to
be thirty five point two percent, went down to thirty
three point six percent, for a decrease of one point
sixty one percent. None of the bottom three are as
high as the top three in terms of the percentage cut. Now,
when you look at the raw numbers of how much
tax was paid, they are going to save a larger

(01:05:55):
number because they have paid far, far, far more in
taxes than someone at the other end of the spectrum.
For someone that makes a million dollars a single filer,
they're paying, even after the Trump tax cuts, three hundred
and thirty five, six hundred and ninety dollars a year.

(01:06:16):
Someone with a twenty five thousand dollars taxbile income is
paying two eight hundred and ten dollars a year. I mean,
you start to see why it feels like tax cuts
for the rich one. In reality, the effective tax rate
was a far more modest decrease. And right now, one
of the things that Trump is trying to cut Medicate
for is to do this, you know, no taxes on

(01:06:39):
tips or overtime, which I really hate. I understand why
he's doing it. And don't get me wrong, I've been
a tipped employee. Okay, tipped employees are not going to
be millionaires. Even tipped employees at a really nice restaurant
not going to be millionaires. So he's trying to make
sure that a group of people who are you know,

(01:07:03):
some people make really good money, but they're not going
to be millionaires. I understand why he's doing it, but
I'd rather say, well, what else can we do in
terms of tax cuts, or let's just work on the deficit,
let's work on not spending two trillion dollars more a
year than we bring in. I'd be totally happy with that.
So the next time someone says, oh, tax cuts for

(01:07:23):
the rich, you need to say, you need to check up,
you need to look in, you need to just do
a little little tiny bit of research, because they were
tax cuts for everyone, and if they expire, everyone's taxes
are going to go up, especially especially people who make
one hundred thousand dollars a year and less. Their taxes

(01:07:43):
will go up more as a percentage than rich people.
But keep on, Diana to get keep on.

Speaker 1 (01:07:51):
The Mandy Connell Show is sponsored by Belle and Pollock,
accident and injury lawyers.

Speaker 5 (01:07:56):
No, it's Mandy Connell.

Speaker 3 (01:07:58):
And dont On Koa, ninetem Gott and the Nicety Cuts
Through Free and Connelly Sad Base.

Speaker 4 (01:08:17):
Welcome, Welcome, Welcome to the third hour of the show.
I'm Mandy Connell. That guy is Anthony Rodriguez. We're going
to take you right up until three pm when KOA
Sports takes over. A couple of things, just a little
bit of housekeeping. Someone sent this. We were talking about
tax rates and now with the cuts to Medicaid spending
that are coming if they pass this big beautiful bill,

(01:08:39):
which I'm not a fan of this. You guys and
I we're about to get fit a crap sandwich, another
crap sandwich. But we'll talk about that later. That being said,
Medicaid cuts are coming and Colorado is going to be hit,
and Diana Degett says, oh, Republicans hate people and are
cutting Medicaid to give text cuts to the rich. And

(01:09:01):
so we just went through the tax rates in the
last segment, and someone pointed this out, Mandy. Keep in
mind that the bottom forty nine to fifty one percent
of income earners pays zero in taxes. The top ten
percent pays something like ninety percent of all taxes. So
I zipped on over to the Tax Foundation dot org
and I looked at their latest data. The latest data
is from twenty twenty two. It takes an excessively long time.

(01:09:23):
I guess to analyze this data. But in twenty twenty two,
the top one percent of filers were responsible for twenty
two point four percent of the total adjusted gross income
and they paid a total a forty point four percent
of income taxes paid. So that's the top one percent.

(01:09:46):
They paid forty percent. Okay, the top ten percent. Then
we're looking, excuse me, top five percent. Now we're talking
about thirty eight point three percent of the adjusted gross
income and sixty one point sixty one percent of total
income taxes paid. By the time you get to the
top ten percent, they are paying seventy two percent of

(01:10:09):
all income taxes while they are forty nine point four
percent of total adjusted gross income. And the bottom, the
bottom fifty percent, they have eleven point five percent of
total adjusted gross income. They pay three percent of the
income taxes paid. So if you want to talk about

(01:10:30):
people paying their fair share, we're looking in the wrong direction.
I'm just saying swing that in there. So I just
saw something on Twitter and ohohoh, I hope this is true.
I really hope this is true. Democrats now say Alexandria
Acasio Cortes is the leader of the Democratic Party. Among

(01:10:53):
those who gave a name. You know it comes in
third Jasmine Crockett, the mouthy African Americans representative who says
openly racist and horrible things all the time. That because
she's cute and black and sassy, I guess we're supposed
to think she's awesome. Listen to this. Listen to this.

(01:11:17):
By the way, this is a survey of Democrats. Okay,
number one with a bullet as they used to say,
meaning rocketing to the top of the charts. Twenty six
percent of Democrats say AOC is the leader of their party.
The next closest competitor Bernie freaking Sanders twelve percent Saint

(01:11:42):
Bernie is the leader of their party eight percent sat
Chasmine Crockett six percent say Kamala Harris. It just keeps
getting better. Wow, Holy cow. Then the actual leader of
the minority in the House, Jakeem Jeffries comes in at
five percent. Pete Boudhage, Judge, have you guys noticed Pete's

(01:12:05):
growed a beard. It's it's a little bit patchy on
the sides, you know, doesn't It's not full and luscious
like jd Vance's beard. Earlier in the show, we had
a guest on from the Pacific Legal Foundation, and he
was using an example and he said, you know, if
it's JD Vance versus Pete Boodhage Judge, and I thought,
we're gonna have a beard off. I mean, if Pete

(01:12:27):
Booted Judge was married to a woman, that'd be a
different kind of beard. But I'm talking about the beard
he's trying to grow. If he's trying to help beard JD.
He's gotta you better get cracking. Maybe that's why he
started now to be ready for the election coming up.
If this is where the Democratic Party is, oh my, wow,
just oh my, and wow. This is great news for Republicans,

(01:12:51):
really great news for Republicans because what they're selling, as
they say in the South, that dog won't hunt. So
I'm perfectly fine with this, and I don't even care
if it's true or not. There'll be no follow up questions.
Just let me live in the happy illusion that that
is accurate. Then I don't think that it's wrong. By
the way, which is so fantastic. There's a great story

(01:13:12):
on the blog today that I absolutely love. Rocky Mountain
Prep is a charter school network in Denver, and for
the second year in a row. They celebrated their graduating
classes because every student was accepted to an institution of
higher learning of some sort, and they celebrated these kids.

(01:13:33):
But it didn't just happen, you know, out of nowhere.
Talk of college and post secondary opportunities begins early in
Rocky Mountain Prep classrooms. This from the article. Teachers discuss
goal setting with students and research together what step students
need to achieve different career paths. Students receive college counseling,

(01:13:53):
but their teachers all incorporate lessons about goals and the
future too. They fill out college applications together, they discuss
what careers match up with their talents and interests. Then
when college acceptance comes, Rocky Mountain Prep throws a big
bash in front of everyone to celebrate its commitment to
a higher education. This is a perfect example of what

(01:14:16):
happens when you set the bar high and you make
it a priority, and you center everything you're doing around
those goals and aspirations and kids, I really believe this, kids,
when given high expectations and the support to meet those expectations,

(01:14:36):
can achieve so much. I just thought was and there's
video on this story where I mean parents are celebrating.
You get the feeling that a lot of these parents
did not go on to post secondary education themselves, so
this is a really big deal. Maybe these kids are
the first kids to go to college in their families.

(01:14:56):
I think this is fantastic. And you know, one of
the other things I want to say about this is
they don't differentiate between boys and girls at Rocky Mountain Prep.
They tell the little boys, this is what you can
aspire to, this is what you can achieve, this is
what you can do. We have spent so much time

(01:15:17):
running around talking about girl power, and as the mother
of a fifteen year old daughter, I'm grateful that my
daughter doesn't seem to have the same self imposed limitations
that I and other women my age imposed on themselves
when we were younger. People ask me all the time,
They're like, oh, did you want to go into radio
when you were kid? I was like, why would I
have wanted to go into radio. There were no women

(01:15:37):
on the radio when I was a kid. It just
wasn't something that I aspired to because it just there
was no role models there. It really does matter, But
instead of singling out girls and saying you can do it,
girl power whatever. They're telling these kids, kid, power, you, boy, girl, whatever,
you can do this, and we're going to help you
get there. And lo and behold, look what happens. It works.

(01:16:01):
I love stories like this. I love adults who realize
that sometimes kids don't get that in their home life.
I grew up in a very rural part of Florida,
and a lot of rural people especially, are not highly educated.
And I grew up in an environment where kids were
actively discouraged from trying to attain post secondary education because

(01:16:27):
then they would have been educated beyond their people and
that was untenable to their family members. So I'm glad
this school system realizes maybe these kids have never had
anybody talk to them and say you can do this,
you can go to college, you can achieve these things.
So good for Rocky Mountain Prep, good for the students,
good for the families. I just loved the story and

(01:16:48):
I wanted to share with you. If you ever want
to know why I think unions are stupid a lot
of the time, let me direct your attention to the
strike at Starbucks. Oh yes, Starbucks, which is now dealing
with the unionized staff and some of its stores, is
now dealing with more than a thousand Starbucks baristas going
on strike. What is Starbucks done to them? Now, those

(01:17:10):
diabolical oppressors who make them work for slave wages serving
coffee to angry people, Starbucks have the nerve to issue
a new dress code for baristas. Wait until you hear
this bit of outrageousness. And this is the craziest thing
I've ever heard. People are gonna have to go out
my whole new wardrobe. The new dress code requires employees

(01:17:33):
a company operated and licensed stores in the US and
Canada to wear a solid black shirt and khaki, black,
or blue denim bottoms. My god, who has that in
their closet? Now, Anthony Shirley, you don't have any black, brown,
or denim pants that you would dip into were you
a Starbucks employee. Surely you don't own any of that,

(01:17:54):
of course not, No, who would, No way, Yeah, forgot
the other part. They're also giving staff two free shirts,
black shirts, just to like help them make the transition.
That's not good enough for the union. Starbucks Workers United,
the union that represents workers at five hundred and seventy
of starbucks ten thousand company owned stores, said the dress

(01:18:18):
code should be subject to collective bargaining. And this is
an actual statement. Starbucks has lost its way. Instead of
listening to baristas who make the Starbucks experience what it is,
they're focused on all the wrong things, like implementing a
restrictive new dress code. Yeah, that's hella restricted. Wow, I

(01:18:38):
don't know how you're going to get through it. Customers
don't care what color our clothes are when they're waiting
thirty minutes for a latte. But you know who does,
the company who owns the stores.

Speaker 5 (01:18:48):
Did I miss the mandating?

Speaker 7 (01:18:52):
No?

Speaker 5 (01:18:52):
Do they not mandate? I need that to be green.

Speaker 4 (01:18:56):
It's to make the green aprons stand out even Okay,
that's right.

Speaker 5 (01:18:59):
Yeah, they want the.

Speaker 4 (01:19:00):
Green apron to stand out even more. That's why they
want the black shirts. Yes, and so they have the
nerve to code.

Speaker 5 (01:19:08):
The green Apron's cool, but justice for more green. We
force them to have green.

Speaker 4 (01:19:13):
Well, then the apron wouldn't pop. They want the apron
to pop. So you're like, oh, hey, kind of like
if you've ever made the mistake of wearing a red
shirt and khakis to Target, only to have five hundred
people ask you where the detergent was that happened to
me one time. Yeah, but this is never again. Never again. Target.
But when you walk into Target, you know, when you

(01:19:36):
see a red shirt and khaki pants, you are looking
most of the time, unless it's me at a Target employee,
I hear you.

Speaker 5 (01:19:42):
Very valid rational thinking.

Speaker 2 (01:19:43):
But justice for more green if you have a primary green,
justice for green, justice for more green.

Speaker 5 (01:19:48):
Yeah, yeah always.

Speaker 4 (01:19:51):
By the way, the union said this week that it
filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board alleging
Starbucks failure to bargain over the new dress code. You guys,
when you go work at a place and they say, hey,
you gotta wear a uniform, what do you do you
wear the uniform? When I was a flight attendant for
Delta Airlines, and I don't know if it's still the
same way, I'm guessing it probably is. We had to

(01:20:12):
buy our uniforms, and we had to our uniform. Restrictions
were so tight that they would there were restrictions on
like the size of the earrings you could wear, how
long your nails could be, your makeup, And there would
be times when you would come to sign in for
a trip at the lounge and there would be a
supervisor standing there to spot check your entire outfit. It

(01:20:33):
was ridiculous.

Speaker 5 (01:20:33):
But yes, will they be striking in the nude on this,
you know what?

Speaker 4 (01:20:41):
That's an excellent question and made I hope the answer is.

Speaker 5 (01:20:44):
No, I as well. But it only makes sense if
you are striking uniforms.

Speaker 4 (01:20:49):
Now, if it was Starbucks saying, hey, guys from here
on out, we're gonna need you guys in dolphin shorts
and tights like they wear it Hooters, then maybe we
would have we'd be able to have a conversation. But
nothing about this is outrageous. I've worked in so many
restaurants where the dress code was really strict. If you
work in fine dining, the dress codes for servers are

(01:21:10):
always super strict.

Speaker 5 (01:21:11):
I mean, what was the dress code before?

Speaker 4 (01:21:14):
I guess the problem was is that people were wearing
like plaid shirts and then it kind of ate up
the apron in a way. It visually ate up the apron.
And they want everybody to know when they see the
green apron that they are looking at a Starbucks employee
and over a black shirt. That's what it looks like.
Dare they say, be more uniform exactly? We like our

(01:21:36):
coffee like we like our shirts black. So the green pops. Wait,
there's no green because I don't drink macha. Watch just
discussing someone made you try macha.

Speaker 5 (01:21:46):
No, it sounds terrible, Okay, I don't know what it is.
It just sounds bad. It's ground up green tea.

Speaker 4 (01:21:50):
That's what it is. And it's green powder, and it
looks like ground up green tea, and it tastes like
grass clippings.

Speaker 5 (01:21:55):
That's green. I can't get behind it.

Speaker 4 (01:21:56):
And I keep telling people I don't like macha, and
everybody's like, oh, you love the macha here, it's so good. No,
it all tastes like grass clippings. It's not good anywhere.
I'm an anti machi. I don't care. I'm not ever
doing it again. I've done it three times.

Speaker 7 (01:22:10):
That just.

Speaker 4 (01:22:13):
People try to make you like the things they like.
And sometimes you just have to tea.

Speaker 5 (01:22:18):
What any tea?

Speaker 4 (01:22:19):
You don't like tea at all? Any like even just
brewed iced tea, any kind of I've never met someone
who didn't like tea, Suke, But I'm from the South,
So what do you what about sweet tea?

Speaker 5 (01:22:28):
Any tea?

Speaker 4 (01:22:28):
Which is the proper way to have tea?

Speaker 5 (01:22:30):
Any tea.

Speaker 4 (01:22:31):
What if I bring some sweet tea that I make
the proper way I bring it in? You have a
little nip?

Speaker 5 (01:22:35):
Did you not just get done saying I.

Speaker 4 (01:22:41):
Was being sarcastic? Okay, I wasn't really going to make
you drink tea. You're the first person I've ever met
that doesn't like tea, no tea ever. You are a
unique individual, Anthony. We'll be right back. There is an
organization called the Veterans Association of Real Estate Professionals or
VP or REP. I'm not quite sure where you put
the emphasis on the salable, but Jeff Zorb is joining

(01:23:03):
me to talk about it as he is an integral
part of the leadership team over there. Jeff, how you
doing today?

Speaker 8 (01:23:09):
Hi Nnie, thanks for having us on again today.

Speaker 4 (01:23:11):
Well, you guys, what do you do? First of all,
obviously this is an organization based on your name of
veterans who are also real estate professionals. I'm guessing that
I got that correct. How did this all come about?
Where did the organization come from?

Speaker 8 (01:23:26):
So the organization has turned in twenty eleven in California
and they started forming chapters all over the country. There's
currently thirty four chapters across the country. We're really fortunate
in Colorado that we have three. We have an OUTCO
chapter Denver and at Carlo Springs as well.

Speaker 4 (01:23:43):
Oh, that's fantastic. In my mind, a lot of things
about the military would probably make you a very good
real estate professional. Do you find that that translates well.

Speaker 8 (01:23:54):
Most of the time? However, how do I say this?
There is the civilian factor.

Speaker 4 (01:24:02):
Okay, okay, the civilian factor. We'll leave it at that.
You guys have kind of events and specials so you
can provide services to the veterans community. Tell me about
that aspect of VARROP.

Speaker 8 (01:24:16):
So our focus is really sustainable housing and assisting veterans
through the process of the Veterans of VA loan.

Speaker 7 (01:24:23):
Right.

Speaker 8 (01:24:24):
Part of that is educating. We educate our real estate
community in the VA home loan. Veterans and active duty
military are now a protected class in the state of
Colorado as of twenty twenty two. There's a lot of
myths and misnombers out there about the VA home loan
and we're trying to do what we can through our

(01:24:45):
real estate community to educate them. As they're the feet
on the ground, right, they're the experts that are helping
our heroes. So the other aspect of that is philanthropic
and what we do as a chapter in Denver, we've
partnered with the Va hud Vash program that assists veterans
struggling with homelessness at different stages of that process. The

(01:25:10):
hud Vash will provide a seventy percent voucher to cover
the rents if you will for a veteran. We step
in and help with household essentials, beds, kitchen stuff, I mean,
whatever we go home and use on a daily basis.
These veterans don't have, so we try to supply that
through that program. We realized that many of these veterans

(01:25:34):
have families. Many of these veterans have kids, and because
of the struggles that they have financially, those kids weren't
you know, didn't really have a Christmas. So about four
years ago we started Kids for Christmas through the Sponsor
our Vet program. Last year we were able to fulfill
the Christmas wishes of one hundred and eleven kids of

(01:25:56):
veterans through their program, so we actually get the Christmas
wish lists of those kids. We partner with Walmart and
we go shopping literally fulfill those lists.

Speaker 4 (01:26:08):
I got to tell you, I've had the opportunity to
do stuff like this in the past. Let's just admit it, Jeff,
this is more for you than it is for them,
because being able to fulfill Christmas wifts, you know, Christmas
wishes for kids is one of the most gratifying experiences
I've ever had. It's the most fun. It's fantastic, and
I love that these are veterans' kids that are being

(01:26:29):
helped by this. And how are you raising money for it?
Let's talk about Saturday night.

Speaker 8 (01:26:35):
So Saturday, one of the things that we do is
a quarterly poker game. Saturday night, We're having one of
those games. We're at JJ's place in Aurora. It's a
total relaxed atmosphere. It's not highly competitive. First time poker
players can come join us. It's a lot of fun.
Registration starts at five point thirty. We are offerating a

(01:26:58):
cash first place. All the moneies that we raise as
a chapter, those stays locally. Well, yeah, everything since right
here on our own community, helping our own veteran community.

Speaker 4 (01:27:12):
Now, there is a forty dollars chip donation. Correct. If
you want to get in, you gotta you gotta purchase
those chips that that that will be a donation to
the cause. Is that correct?

Speaker 3 (01:27:23):
It is?

Speaker 8 (01:27:23):
It is a suggested donation. Since we're a nonprofit and
that that that gets you in the game. You can
do additional buy ins or add ons. There'll be opportunities
throughout the game to continue.

Speaker 4 (01:27:37):
We well go ahead.

Speaker 8 (01:27:39):
We also have received a authentic signed bow Nix football
jersey that we will be raffling off and it boat
listening Loo five thirty Saturday day days.

Speaker 4 (01:27:55):
So you just invite bo on. Yeah, you know we
both leave over here. That that's like really cool. I
like that a lot that you guys have that jersey.
How much space do you have? How many people can
you accommodate? I have not been to JJ's place. I
know it's Daniel Durinsky's joint, So that's that's cool that
you guys are going to be there. How many people
can you accommodate in this tournament?

Speaker 8 (01:28:13):
You know we're hoping to get between seven and ten tables,
so that would be you know, seventy to one hundred people.

Speaker 5 (01:28:19):
Okay.

Speaker 4 (01:28:19):
I was like, I have no idea how many? I
told you. Jeff was kind enough to say, hey, come
on by. But my daughter's sixteenth birthday party is the
same night, so obviously priorities. And I'm a terrible gambler. Jeff,
do you have a Do you have a prize? You know,
when you go to a golf tournament and the people
who come in last, they give them like a fishing
pole or something. What do you have for the people

(01:28:39):
who go out in the you know, the first round,
which is inevitably what I would do.

Speaker 8 (01:28:45):
You know, we don't have anything at this point. I'm
not opposed to finding something and call it the commemorative
Mandy Commel Prize.

Speaker 4 (01:28:53):
That's perfect, the Mandy Donald Cup of Losery. I mean,
that's I just I'm not a good gambler, and I'm
not good at card games, and I don't pay attention,
much to the chagrin of my card playing loving husband.
You know, I'm an awful partner that nobody wants to have.
All of this is happening tomorrow night at JJ's place,
and you can sign up ahead of time online, like

(01:29:15):
you can go ahead and make your donation ahead of time,
or you can show up at the door at five
thirty and get to be our So the tournament's kicking
off at six though, right, so you need to be
in the door by five thirty.

Speaker 8 (01:29:26):
Yeah you can, Yeah, five thirty, just start registering. Get
game kicks off at six. We will be done by
round ten. Okay, kind of keep a hard hard timeline.

Speaker 7 (01:29:36):
There.

Speaker 8 (01:29:37):
You can find out more about our tournament. We also
have an upcoming golf tournament at Top Golf coming up
in September. All of our educational opportunities if you're in
the real estate profession, check those out at Vaight Repdenver
dot org.

Speaker 4 (01:29:53):
I need to know how a golf tournament at Top
Golf works. I need to know because that sounds delightful.

Speaker 7 (01:30:00):
Hole.

Speaker 8 (01:30:01):
Yeah, they you know, it's all programmed. It's all computer iyed.

Speaker 4 (01:30:04):
Right.

Speaker 8 (01:30:06):
They actually have a hole in one. They designate one
of their holes and you shoot. You buy into it
and you shoot and you can get the hole in one.
It's a lot of fun.

Speaker 4 (01:30:16):
I I really appreciate everything you guys are doing.

Speaker 7 (01:30:18):
Jeff.

Speaker 4 (01:30:19):
Jeff's word from is it va Rep? Is that what
you say? I call it very rep rep va REP
wonderful organization. You can help support veterans kids at Christmas
by playing some poker, Jeff, I hope you guys have
a wonderful time at this poker tournament.

Speaker 8 (01:30:32):
Thank you, Mandy. Hope to see you soon.

Speaker 4 (01:30:34):
All right, yes, my friend will see you soon. You
know you won't see me in a poker tournament. I'm
not gonna lie, as I just said to Jeff off
the airs, like, can I just hand you the forty dollars?
Can we just cut out the middleman? Because yeah, zero
percent chance I'm gonna win a poker tournament. I'm okay
with it. Though I can't be good at everything, people,

(01:30:55):
I really can't. You think I could, but I can't.
By the way, on the blog today, it has get
your poker face ready, a link to sign up. It
has all the documentation, but it doesn't show up as
a PDF until you click on it. So sorry about that.
Didn't used to be that way. It says, check out
this document. It's not going to take you to some
weird porn site. You can go ahead and click on
that and get all of the information that you need. Don't, oh,

(01:31:18):
it's too late. Chuck hasn't texted me yet. I supposed
to have picked the winner at two thirty. I will
announce the winner. If you bought a ticket. It's too
late now to help my daughter's criminal Justice club go
compete at the national level. Anyway. I've got a bunch
of stuff on the blog today, including one of my
favorite videos that is making its way around the internet today.

(01:31:41):
A Rod, did you see the two Golden retrievers in
the pool strategizing to get the ball?

Speaker 7 (01:31:49):
No?

Speaker 4 (01:31:50):
Oh, and you know you have to turn the volume up.
It's so good and it's so entertaining, and you, guys,
this is why I have the Internet. It's just too
gold retrievers trying to get a tennis ball down on
the step in the water, and somebody did a dialogue
over it. You must turn up the volume. Makes me
want a Golden retriever. Golden Retrievers are such sweet dogs,

(01:32:13):
I mean really sweet dogs. Not as sweet as Saint Bernard's.
But whatever. It's fine. It's absolutely fine. And Rod's watching
it now so he'll be able to attest to how
adorable it is. It's on the blog today. I also
have a few more videos, including this one, which completely
freaked me out, even though intellectually I already knew this
was something that was true from sixty minutes. You mean

(01:32:36):
to tell me wait, you know what, Let me just
do this, Anthony, let me just turn that up, let
me refresh. Well, won't let me refresh now, I got
to refresh the whole thing in order to play that
sound bite that I was completely unnerved by today, completely unnerved.
I did not need to know this. Listen.

Speaker 5 (01:32:57):
Definitely wasn't that video because that was adorable.

Speaker 4 (01:32:59):
I know that telling you this is like the cutest
thing going now.

Speaker 2 (01:33:01):
Listen to.

Speaker 4 (01:33:02):
This is from sixty minutes about the dark web. Pretty
number of just about every single American is available for
sale on the dark web.

Speaker 5 (01:33:10):
That is a truth tape.

Speaker 7 (01:33:11):
All of our personal identifiable information named data, birth form
of addresses, social Security number is available in the dark
net and can.

Speaker 5 (01:33:19):
Likely be purchased.

Speaker 4 (01:33:20):
That's chilling.

Speaker 5 (01:33:21):
Yeah, it's very much a way of our lives though
right now.

Speaker 4 (01:33:24):
And purchase I hear for as little as two books apiece.

Speaker 5 (01:33:27):
Yep, very affordable.

Speaker 4 (01:33:30):
So that's not disconcerting at all. I'll tell you. For
a long time, when I was in radio, I've you know,
really been really careful about putting out too much public information.
But at this point I still don't know how to
get to the dark web, so I'm not going to
be buying anybody's social Security numbers or their addresses or anything.
The dark web is foreign to me. I don't know
how to get there, don't want to know. It seems

(01:33:51):
like bad people that have it the dark web, And
as a general rule, I try to surround myself with
not bad people. You know, it's just a policy that
I have, the not bad people policy. But I will
tell you this, if you don't listen to that and
do two things. Number one, we get some kind of
credit protections program LifeLock I have. There are different banks

(01:34:15):
that have that ability. You can do it through experience.
You can pay for their protection services. You need to
protect yourself, your name, your credit, your social Security number,
because undoing it after someone screws up all of that
is a nightmare, an absolute unmitigated nightmare.

Speaker 2 (01:34:38):
So do what you can.

Speaker 4 (01:34:39):
And when you have things like LifeLock or one of
those other services, part of that fee that you're paying
is a fee that says, if someone steals my stuff,
you're gonna help fix it. And that's invaluable. And the
second thing is if you don't arm yourself so you
can protect yourself if someone buys your address, someone who

(01:35:00):
hasn't out for you. Somebody you've had an issue with,
they decide, I mean, if they know how to get
to the dark wet, they decide they're going to come
to your house and try to do something. You better
be able to protect yourself because because all of the
traditional ways of you know, maintaining our privacy, they're they're gone,
they're over, they're done. So yeah, people can get your

(01:35:21):
stuff and your information and all of that stuff. You know,
we still shred old financial documents and every time we
do what, I laugh, it's like, what am I doing?
All of this information is probably available for someone to
steal on the internet right now. That's just a way
to you know, leave you with a happy thought. Just kidding.

(01:35:43):
One last story, and I'm only doing this because some
of us. I talked to Chuck yesterday. I was like, hey,
let's go to London for the Broncos game. Because my
daughter has decided she wants to go to school overseas.
So it's like, look, we could go. We could go
to the Broncos game. We could then take the week,
you know, fall break week, and we could go look
at these schools she wants to think, she wants to

(01:36:04):
go to so we're thinking about it, But then I
saw this article from Mental Flaws today. I love Mental Flaws.
I used to subscribe to their magazine a long time ago,
and then I don't even know if it's still a thing.
Mental Flaws is just a bunch of little snippets of
things that are interesting, like this one. What's the difference
between Great Britain and the UK? Here in the United States,
people use those interchangeable and they are not interchangeable. If

(01:36:25):
you live in the UK, you've probably had the irritating
experience of trying to find United Kingdom in a list
of countries, only to discover that some well meaning person
has listed the country under the name Great Britain instead.
It's an annoyance, but it's also an indicative of a
wider problem. People just don't know how to refer to
the UK. All over the world, people use the terms England,

(01:36:49):
Great Britain, and the United Kingdom interchangeably, even though they
all mean different things. In case you're wondering, you should
refer to the UK like this, often abbreviated to just UK.
The United Kingdom is a shortened form of the country's
full name, which is the United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland. The state itself consists of four component countries, England,

(01:37:11):
scott In, Wales and Northern Ireland, and if you're referring
to all four as a single body, you should always
use the phrase United Kingdom to describe them. Although England
is the largest of UK's four states and the one
which the UK government traditional meets, it is nonetheless only
a component of the UK and shouldn't be used to

(01:37:32):
describe the entire country. Visiting Edinburgh, for example, is not
visiting England, just as visiting Trenton is not visiting Massachusetts.
Great Britain is the name of the largest island in
the British Isles, and also a political entity consisting of
three countries, England, scot Scotland and Wales. Oh yeah, it's
not confusing at all. And then there's Ireland, which is

(01:37:54):
a totally different country. And then there's Northern Ireland, which
is part of the UK but not part of Ireland.
I just I'm glad I could clear this up.

Speaker 5 (01:38:03):
Yeah, no things.

Speaker 4 (01:38:04):
Don't you feel better about it all?

Speaker 7 (01:38:05):
Now?

Speaker 5 (01:38:06):
I feel more confused.

Speaker 4 (01:38:07):
Before we go to London, just say, if you're going
to London. Say you're going to London, You're going to England.
You're going to London, England in the UK, but you're
also going to the UK. You are, and you're going
to Great Britain. You well, yes, yeah, yes, you are America.
Grant Smith has entered the chat. Yeah, I'm glad I
could clarify all that. So when you're making your plans

(01:38:29):
to go to London, you want to embarrass yourself. Well, none,
none at all. They're all just swished together there, metrics
whatever whatever, like like some meters, yeah, some meters kilometers
or something inches, yeah, one of those things. No, no inches, no,
no way anyway, Grant Smith has joined me because now

(01:38:51):
it's time but the most exciting segments all the radio
of its kind.

Speaker 5 (01:38:56):
You forget.

Speaker 4 (01:38:58):
Everyone read this, okay, and now it's time for the
most exciting segment on the radio of its kind of
it's gone and.

Speaker 2 (01:39:10):
Of the day.

Speaker 4 (01:39:11):
All right, brain fart, Yeah that wasn't that wasn't my
best work right there.

Speaker 5 (01:39:15):
I was gonna try to Rob Dawson one that time.

Speaker 4 (01:39:17):
But yeah, it's almost like the computer from it hikers
goide to the galaxy? Does it?

Speaker 3 (01:39:27):
No?

Speaker 5 (01:39:27):
Just kiddings yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:39:29):
Anyway, by the way, to the Texter said Mandy, I'm
listening to via the iHeartRadio app. Why do you skip
every now and then when some phrases repeated? Guys, there's
a glitch in the matrix and our it department cannot
figure it out.

Speaker 5 (01:39:41):
Someone puts some two's and the zeros in one.

Speaker 4 (01:39:43):
Yep, they're working on it. They are working on it.
They know what's happening. Anyway, what's our dad joke of
the day. Please?

Speaker 2 (01:39:48):
If you're worried about your microwave collecting data and your
TV spying on you, just remember your vacuum has been
gathering dirts on you for years.

Speaker 4 (01:39:59):
Last time. That's fantastic. What is the word of the
day please? It is ameliorism.

Speaker 5 (01:40:07):
Yeah, I know, ameliorism.

Speaker 4 (01:40:15):
I know it's a part of speech obviously, and a
kind of speech, and I can't know what is.

Speaker 2 (01:40:21):
It refers to the belief that the world tends to
improve and that humans can aid its what that's.

Speaker 4 (01:40:28):
Supposed to happen, exactly what they haven't been paying attention obviously.
What is the archaic adjective fat fat eloquent mean fat
eloquent A T I L R Q U e n.

Speaker 2 (01:40:40):
T eloquently, overweight, honestly like to talk about food.

Speaker 4 (01:40:47):
No longer that if you foresaw this trivia question, you
might be fatal, fat, eloquent, fartulent, particular. Thanks, I appreciate you. Anyway,
Here we go. What is our jeopardy category?

Speaker 5 (01:41:04):
Please follow the money? Every answer has.

Speaker 4 (01:41:08):
Yeah, money, money, money, money, money.

Speaker 2 (01:41:11):
This Michael Lewis bestseller is subtitled art What is moneyball?

Speaker 4 (01:41:16):
That is correct?

Speaker 2 (01:41:17):
But it should have been the one I got yep.
In twenty ten a Paris Where's Paris, France? A Paris
court gave Manuel Noriega seven years in prison for this
crime of disguising the source of illegal proceeds.

Speaker 5 (01:41:32):
Grant grant, What is money laundering?

Speaker 4 (01:41:35):
Correct?

Speaker 2 (01:41:37):
In the title of their debut album, The Black Crows
advised listeners to shake this man.

Speaker 4 (01:41:44):
What is a money maker?

Speaker 5 (01:41:45):
That is correct?

Speaker 2 (01:41:47):
This larval word describes one preoccupied with wealth.

Speaker 4 (01:41:53):
Manny, what is a money grubber?

Speaker 5 (01:41:55):
That is correct?

Speaker 2 (01:41:56):
Gosh, many men have lightened their bill folds by carrying this.
JFK's was gold with an image of Saint.

Speaker 5 (01:42:06):
What is a money clip?

Speaker 4 (01:42:12):
Three day? Yeah, that's close. I am guessing you guys
in the afternoon, are gonna be talking about whether or
not Jamal Murray is going to have a flu game.

Speaker 5 (01:42:20):
Yes, that it is.

Speaker 4 (01:42:21):
The internet is demanding.

Speaker 5 (01:42:23):
That will be topic number one. We'll check in with
Bill Hanslick and then we'll also check with and with
a Rod court side at around he will stay away
from Jamal. I don't want to get sick.

Speaker 4 (01:42:31):
Yeah, well, I mean, did you just let him know
that the internet is demanding a flu game. They want
him to come out and blaze the trail, burn it up.

Speaker 6 (01:42:38):
This is it is.

Speaker 4 (01:42:39):
This is your moment to shine, Jamal, even if you
have to, you know the.

Speaker 5 (01:42:42):
I mean, if he can't shine, at least hopefully he
raises a normal doll.

Speaker 4 (01:42:46):
There's a really bad stomach flu going around right now,
Like really, I shu what the nuggets need been absolutely
put out, but only for one day, the one day
when he needs to know.

Speaker 2 (01:42:56):
If they win tonight, everyone goes into their separate quarters
ahead him.

Speaker 4 (01:43:00):
Quarantine, Quarantine, Friday, show tomorrow, keep it right here. KOA
Sports coming up next