Back to episode — Episode 2525 CWSA 07/03/24
Context —
d guess that that would make you feel better. And obesity, if you have the drug that makes you feel like you're connected and good and everything is fine, do you need to eat as much? Well, you might love to eat, but you're not going to do it for emotional reasons because your emotional reasons will be solved by a chemical. So I would say that's in the should have asked Scott category. Yes, if oxy…
← Previous segment →ng for it will be a pain. And then the attractive women have already left the industry. I think that's what it looks like. So I think the porn industry is dead actually.
There's something you never thought. Did you ever think the porn industry would just die? I think it's already dead. I think that literally it's just overweight ugly people in porn now. It's dead.
All right, so you've been hearing about this Project 2025. The Heritage Foundation puts out this real big document of things that they wish would happen if a conservative comes to power or conservatives come to power. And it involves every major agency and how they would be eliminated or changed. And there's a list of conservatives who are ready to go for different jobs. However, this is called by the Democrats a blueprint for fascism. It's a blueprint for fascism. So I think that's what Jane Fonda says. And it would do things like get rid of the EPA and the Department of Education. You dismantle the government.
Now here's my question. I don't know too much about what the word fascism means, but as Trump once famously said, I don't think you know what it means either. Well, sort of paraphrasing. But is reducing the size of your own government fascism? Is that what that's called when you reduce regulations? In other words, you have less control as a government over the people. So you're returning freedom to the people in the sense of getting rid of burdensome regulations, as they would see it, burdensome. How in the world do you call that fascism? I was pretty sure that was the opposite.
Now, have you seen any situation in which the news or people in it would tell you something that's clearly the opposite of what it is? Joe Biden's sharpest attack, just to pick one. President Trump is colluding with Russia. 51 intelligence people tell you the laptop is Russia disinformation or has all the earmarks of it. Yeah, we're pretty used to the news and the famous people in the news telling us the opposite of what is obvious. And I think that might be new. Would you agree that it used to be that people would say stuff like, well, I've got a secret source that said something, and you say to yourself, well, probably not true, but you know, I don't see anything that would counter it. It's just something that's true or not, and you can't tell, but there's nothing saying it's not true. It's just an unknown.
We've gone from unknowns to things you know for sure are true that the people who should be telling you the truth are telling you you're not seeing. You know, Jake Tapper was apparently saying the same thing, that we're being asked to deny what we see obviously right in front of us. Now he was talking about denying that Biden has a little cognitive difficulties. We all saw it. And yet part of the government and part of the media is trying to tell us that they couldn't see it. Really? Really? No, you could see it.
And now according to Red State, the Biden campaign, there's a Biden campaign official who's
Context —
accusing the media of election interference because the way they're covering Biden in the debate. Wow. So they're worried. Just hold this in your head. There's a Biden campaign official who is willing to say publicly that correct news, which is that Biden is infirm, correct news is election interference. Accurate news is election interference. Now I could see how it would be, but you would have to…
Next segment → →