00:00:00
Speaker 1: Democrats double down on radical transactivism, some Maga voices christ sexism over Christy Nome criticism, and the far right YouTube star calls me out in an unhinged rand. All this and so much Morris coming up on today's episode of The Bread Versus Everyone Podcast, our daily show where we take on the craziest stories from across the Internet and social media, all from an independent political perspective. Guys, up, first, we've got to check in with the Democrats in Congress, both in the Senate and the House, and with so much of the Trump administration's basically public relations being in turmoil between the Ebstein files and overreach on different issues, the Democrats have come together and decided to be normal and present a sane alternative to the American people that shows like we're not crazy, We're not out of touch with reality. You can trust it. Just getting, just getting. I almost had your fooled there for a second, didn't I know. Many prominent elected Democrats in both the House and the Senate have instead to decide it that now is the perfect time to rally behind and promote a so called transgender Bill of Rights which also includes non binary people. Don't you dare for a second think that the they them's are left out of this. That goes far beyond what any you know, reasonable freedom minded American would be cool with, which is adults who identify as trans living however, will make them happiest, and instead would enshrine basically, if actually carried out, it's just a resolution, but if actually carried out, would enshrine every nonsensical, far left extreme gender activist idea into our laws and is almost beyond parity in its scope and some of the things that it quite openly states. Where to take a look at it in some detail today, First, though, I'll just show you a clip from one of the main sponsors of the legislation or the legislative resolution, technically speaking, Congresswoman Prima Jaya Paul here. She is speaking about it too often when.
00:02:13
Speaker 2: We discuss transwrits, we're on the defensive, discussing how to protect trans people from horrific Republican attacks and how to ensure that trans people can live authentically in our community.
00:02:27
Speaker 1: Okay, just to pause for a second of context, There are definitely some genuinely hateful people just attacking and mocking all trans people, but some of these attacks they're talking about are literally just laws that say no biological males and female sports, or laws that say you have to be eighteen to medically transition. And that's not a hate crime, like, that's not a vicious attack on trans people. That's common sense compromise legislation. And the failure to parse those two things out and to draw those distinctions is one of the reasons the Democrats have lost so totally on this issue in this question lately, and these lawmakers don't seem to be changing course at all. Let's keep listening.
00:03:07
Speaker 2: Our communities today, though we are not on the defensive, we are looking forward with the transmel of Rights. We are laying out a comprehensive vision to provide protections for transgender and non binary.
00:03:21
Speaker 1: People, a vision that pause transgender and non binary people. That's how you now know this is a joke, and that's how you know this is so deeply unserious. Non Binary is not a real thing. It is not even a quantifiable or coherent idea. Adults or just people who have severe gender dysphoria is one thing that has existed. We can certainly talk about the spread of it and the new forms of it, and people who claim to have it without actually having any diagnosis, but it's at least there's a real underlying phenomenon there that's been studied for many years. Is non binary doesn't mean anything? Oh I just don't feel male or female in my gender presentation. Explain that without doing sexism right, because there are only two human sexes, male and female, and then there are very rare gen intic conditions where people can be intersex, but even most of them can technically be qualified as male or female based on the structure of their reproductive system. But that's like, according to almost a red herring when they bring that up, because that's not most non binary or trans people. And so to say, oh, well, I don't feel male, What because you don't like stereotypically masculine things, or I don't feel female I want to be they I'm not a female? Why because you don't want to wear a dress or make like that's fine, you don't have to do that. And if your identity suggests otherwise, then it's actually perpetrating gender stereotypes and sexism. So it's not a real or coherent concept. It's a pure fad, just a made up identity that people adopt as kind of a social trend and to cash in on the victimhood currency of social media. But yet they're lumping that in with something that's apparently worthy of federal civil rights protection. So sorry, black people, right your civil rights protection. Sorry gay people, your civil rights protections are the same thing as a she slash of day in bio. What a joke. And honestly, guys, there's a decent chance that my little rant against non binary there is going to get this YouTube video demonetized, as I've had when I tell the truth about non binary sometimes I get demonetized for hate speech. But I'm okay with that. But do consider becoming a channel member to support my content. Hit the join button or the link of the description and sign up to support me. You'll unlock early access to add free full length episodes with no annoying YouTube mid rolls, and you'll help support me dropping truth bombs on the thems when YouTube seems not to like it. But regardless, make sure she subscribe to the like button and let's keep going here. We'll listen to the rest of what the Congress will has to say.
00:06:01
Speaker 2: That ensures that every single person has a chance to thrive a vision that says you are us, you belong and you are worthy of the same rights as everyone.
00:06:15
Speaker 1: And of course, like I agree with that part. I do believe all Americans trends are not confused about being non binary or not, are entitled to the same rights and freedoms one hundred percent. But this is the kind of rhetoric that they'll use, and then what they're actually proposing is something very different. So we're going to go through the actual substance. I went and read this congressional resolution, the so called Transgender Bill of Rights, and I expected it to be kind of crazy, but it's actually like way worse and way more explicit than I thought it would be. I do want to show you one video of the Senate sponsor, Democrat Ed Markey from Massachusetts. I believe he decided to team up with a influencer, a trans influencer, to make content promoting this legislation. Let me know if you recognize this person, and then after I'll tell you why you might you might.
00:07:08
Speaker 3: Today is a very exciting day because you're introducing to the Senate the Transgender Bill of Rights, which will mandate federal protections of transgender people what do you hope that this legislation will accomplish for transgender people across the nation.
00:07:23
Speaker 4: Well, we want to put transgender issues right on the front burner of American politics in or to make sure that they have equal protections in their schools, in their places of employment, in healthcare, in all of the of the protections which they are entitled to trans rights, to our human rights, and that the day will come when we'll look to the history books to find that we have had such a debate. Well, not the trans community was entitled to all of the protections that are built into ways.
00:07:54
Speaker 1: There's so much to unpack there. I mean, for one, the idea that you're like his so I he's a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, so he's got a safe seat. His swing state colleagues must despise him, must hate him, because to say something like we should be putting trans issues at the forefront for the Democratic Party is such absurdly foolish like political strategy for anybody not in a deep deep blue district or state that they represent, because on a lot of these issues, Democrats are very out of touch with common sense in the public. And he's like, yeah, let's do it, and I find it laughable to suggest that, like, oh, we'll look back at the different debates over trans issues and the people who were against it will be well, look back and we'll marvel there ever was a debate kind of how we view like segregation now is the implication that I pick up on there we look back and we're like kind of astonished that large swaths of people could ever really think that it made sense to have blacks only in whites only schools and water fountains and all of this. I almost think he's drawing that parallel or that kind of parallel, and I'm sorry, but that is certainly not going to be the case. In fact, I think it's more likely that history will remember the people that stood ten toes down on unproven experimental medical transition of minors will be viewed how we more similar to how we view the lobotomy now. And maybe the idea that we actually allowed biologically male people to compete in women's sports and biologically male sex offenders to be placed in women's prisons in blue states like California and Massachusetts. Yeah, I think that will actually age like milk and be viewed as on the wrong side of history, not the people who had questions and concerns about it. And sorry I got a little bit off track there, but I want to talk about the person that you've seen in this video, the transgender influencer. Well, this is an influencer named Rose Montoya. And this is a curious choice of person for the Democratic lawmaker, the senator here to team up with, because Rose Montoya is the transgender influencer that President Biden to the White House and then the influencer flashed I guess her if we're being polite and using this person's pronouns, but her prosthetic breasts at the White House for a photo and it was this whole controversy. It embarrassed the Biden administration. But to their credit, they banned Rose from the White House. And Ed Markey and his team are like, you know who we should team up with it for this, that trans influencer who flashed people at the White House. Like it's almost beyond parody that they would do this, that they would pick these people of all the messengers to team up with to make content about it. It's just bizarre. Maybe they didn't do their due diligence, but wow. And then when you get into the substance of this resolution, it is really astonishing stuff. And over fifty or more, dozens and dozens of Democratic lawmakers cosign this, including Alexandria Okazio Cortes, who's kind of a rising star in the Democratic Party and possibly a twenty twenty eight nominee, maybe for the presidency or maybe for the the peace slot. And let's just look at the text without further ado. So here's the first part that stood out to me, where they suggest that transgender and non binary people face significant barriers to legal recognition of their truest selves on government issued documentation and identification that reflects their gender. So this just struck out. This stood out to me because it's like, I wasn't aware this was a thing that existed, the idea that you were entitled to legal recognition of your truest self. And I would love to know if there is a limiting principle on that, because I've always found it bizarre this idea that a non binary person who claims to be non binary is entitled to have government documents reflect their denial of reality because it's their truest self, even though it's actually like literally false. So that's an interesting dichotomy there, But is there a limit to that, like not to stretch to the point of absurdity, But sometimes that can be useful for testing an argument, like if I identify as a dog, should I be able to have my species listed as dog? But that's aren't I entitled to my truest self being just It's kind of a microcosm of this affirmation without limit principle that I think is embedded into a lot of progressive thinking about these issues. Okay, next part that stood out to me. President Trump has issued several executive orders that attempt to unlawfully discriminate against transgender people. Anti trans individuals strive to deprive transgender and non binary people of access to gender affirming care, despite the overwhelming consensus of the medical community that gender affirming care is essential and life saving healthcare. So this was an interesting statement to me because I find it insanely gas lightly and bizarre. How the same many of the same Democrats who told us for years trust the science and trust the experts, when frankly we probably should not have nearly been so deferential to the science and the experts are now actively like just refuting what actual evidence and medical consensus and literature suggests. There is not evidence proving that gender affirming care is life saving for non binary people, which it doesn't even make sense why a non binary person would want or need gender affirming care, by which they mean different chemical or hormone therapies as well as surgeries and the like. But there's not evidence proving that that is life saving. Even with transgender care, more traditional transgender care, the evidence is very low quality, even for adults. Now, I'm a believer that you own your body and should be able to do almost anything with it until the point when you start hurting someone else. So I have absolutely no issue with transadult to getting surgeries or taking hormones if that's what they want to do. But when they're making claims definitively that this is life saving care, those are not evidence based claims, especially but actually all around, as applied as applied to minors, it is not an evidenced based claim to claim there is that this treatment is life saving for trans miners. Yet they repeat this ad nauseum. There is no actual evidence to support that claim, and even the ACLU admitted before the Supreme Court that they had no proof of that claim, so I just thought that stood out. Next year, they say the federal government has a duty to protect the rights of transgender and non binary people by implementing a transgender Bill of Rights that includes ensuring that transgender and non binary people have equal access to services and public accommodations that align with their gender identity, by amending the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, including gender identity and sex characteristics in public accommodations and federally funded programs and activities, and expanding the definition of public accommodation to address the full range of places and services that members of the general public utilize. That might sound like not particularly controversial, because I would agree in general that like, it's wrong to have your restaurant say, like, we don't serve trans people or anything like that. I certainly would not ever be okay with that form of discrimination. But that's actually a breath takingly radical stance. They just suggested that essentially all public accommodations and services, by which they mean public businesses and like, have to be open to everyone according to their gender identity. The practical consequence of that, as we have seen in Blue states, is that locker rooms are for women, spas like Korean spas that are nuwe only for women. Any man or male who simply says they feel like a woman at that moment, no diagnosis, no treatment, no anything, or they don't even have to say they feel like a woman. They could say they feel like a non binary in California at least, and they are entitled to walk into whatever women's changing room or locker room or nude spa or space. They feel like that is insane and that actually puts the whims of random people, some of whom are not many of whom have no ill intent, but many people of ill intent will take advantage of such a system, puts that over the basic comfort and safety and dignity of women. And so it's the kind of thing that it's astonishing these people support and justlies under the radar. How actually radical that it is. Furthermore, another piece from this resolution amending federal law to ensure it protects students from discrimination based on sex, including gender identity and sex characteristics. Now I'll pause on that just to say it seems kind of contradictory to me. How can how can laws protect on the basis of discrimination of sex and gender identity when those two things are in direct conflict or they're the opposite of each other in the cases that we're talking about here, but anyway, thus guaranteeing the right of students to participate free from discrimination, including harassment and sexual violence in all areas of school life, including in classes, extracurriculars, including athletics, access to facilities, and other school activities. Of course, and this is the problem that they like lump in utterly uncontroversial things with extremely controversial things. Nobody trans or not should ever be harassed or subjected to sexual violence, of course. However, this resolution also says that no one should ever be denied access to athletics because of their gender identity, which means women's sports are no longer for females and biologically male athletes are able to compete at the high school or collegiate level. And that's crazy, that's unfair. In some cases, that's unsafe, and it's an eighty twenty issue that these democrats are once again doubling down on. So if you thought they were learning, if you thought they were waken up, that at least does not apply to the dozens and dozens of Democratic politicians who have co signed this statement. Up next, they write that they want to clarify and reaffirm the rights to bodily autonomy and healthcare for transgender and non binary people. And then the second part of this says, by eliminating unnecessary governmental restrictions on the provision of an access to gender affirming medical care and counseling for transgender and non binary adults and adolescents. Emphasis on that last part because I do agree with the first part. Like I said, adults freedom, do what you want with your own body. But adolescens, So thirteen fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seven, ten year olds should not be chemically castrating themselves, should not be getting double misectomies. All of this is barbaric. It is not supported by evidence. They cannot understand the lifelong decisions and their ramifications that they are making. And yet Democrats who sign this document and are standing on this, they think that should be legal. That is what that statement very clearly means. And I think that's astonishingly ignorant and extreme, but hey, I love this. They also wrote as part of their Transgender Bill of Rights, codifying the right to abortion for everyone. I'm not even trying to give my hot take on abortion here, I'm just saying I find this thing that Democrats do annoying, where they make everything about everything. Abortion is a totally separate issue from trans Could you just not conflate every It's like so annoying. Another piece here that I just love. They require then an X marker be available on federal government identification and records that require gender. Yeah, I'm sorry that. I'm gonna crash out if I think about that for more than a second. No human being sex is X, even intersex people. That doesn't apply to But the people getting this on their passports were basically never intersex, So that's kind of, once again a red herring. So what we're doing is we're saying that you have a right to list inaccurate information on government documents. I'll never get that. That will always strike me as absurd. Now, the final piece here cracked me up, because, like, you're never woke enough. They say the federal government must make an ongoing commitment to the rights of transgender and non binary people. Policies concerning transgender rights must be led and informed by transgender communities in particular, black and indigenous women due to their intersect identities. I hate it here. So imagine being a Democrat and having to flagellate yourself like this, listen to indigenous trans women of color, oh my god, or just listen to people who make sense what a crazy thought, regardless of their identity. And I'm sorry, but if they just they're so clearly pandering, and they so clearly do not mean a word of this, because if they did, then this white dude wouldn't be on stage giving all these remarks about it and everything. This straight white dude from Massachusetts. How about you shut up and let a queer, non binary, trans indigenous woman of color take the stage call in Blossom. Okay, they actually don't mean it. It's just obvious pandering, and it is really, really breathtaking stuff. Part of me had kind of hoped, though I never really believed this, that Democrats were were going to chill out and be a more moderate and normal and I think some of them are, but many are not, and many seem deeply captured by some of this radicalism. And that is really concerning for the future of the country because we need a sane alternative to the Republicans, but at least among these folks from this resolution, that is not what we have. That's my take at least, but you guys will have to let me know what you think in the comments below. Make sure subscribe if you aren't yet, to hit the like button, and please consider becoming a Channel member if you haven't yet. Up next, we got to talk about a controversy that is a brewing in Congress and on the Internet concerning the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Christy Nome, who is very controversial for her handling, and many would say botched handling of Trump's increased immigration enforcement, like when she falsely called people domestic terrorists who had just been killed with no real evidence and then never really apologized for that. But more importantly, people are upset that she is getting mocked and people are calling her ice barbie because she often dresses up in costumes like border patrol costumes, even though she is not actually a law enforcement agent for television hits, and she's all glammed out while holding guns and all this stuff. So progressives and just critics. I've even said it myself, so shoot me. I guess people are saying this is a sexist attack on her. And the most recent recent person to say this, who's going viral for having made this comment is actually a moderate Democrat, Senator John Fetterman, and he made these comments and then mega accounts across the internet are uplifting them and agreeing with him. So let's listen to what he had to say.
00:23:51
Speaker 5: Now, I met with Secretary Nome and I've always treated her with respect. I met with her in my office, and I refuse and I never will engage on the kinds of sexist kinds of terms like ice Barbie from a lot of the left media will use those.
00:24:08
Speaker 1: Kind of things.
00:24:10
Speaker 5: And now I said, hey, I'm a Democrat. Then I say secure our border, yeah, and deport all of the criminals.
00:24:19
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know.
00:24:20
Speaker 5: We also, I think we can signed up on that. And then my friend Katie Britt came to me and said, we want to bring the Lincoln Riley Bill there, and I'm like, yeah, I was going to be the Democrat to bring that there, and now we the co sponsor as a Democrat. So I believe that we should have those kinds of appropriate things.
00:24:41
Speaker 1: So there's parts of that that I certainly agree with. I agree with his position on securing the border and deporting criminal illegal immigrants who are here in committing crimes are abusing welfare. I think mass deportation is a different question when you're trying to round up millions of people, including people who have been here for decades and haven't done anything wrong, and being here illegally, including people who are brought here as kids and have lived their whole lives in America. I have a different view on that than the Trump administration. But the piece of this that's getting picked up on is when John Fetterman sticks his neck out for Christy Nome and says that the mockery of her as Ice Barbie is sexist. So some mega accounts praised him for these comments. I'll show you these here. The account Nick Sorder wrote, Wow, John Fetterman just called out the left for their unfair attacks on DHS Secretary Christie Nome. Maga Voice, a huge X account wrote, holy shit, Democratic Senator John Fetterman exposed the Democratic Party for being sexist. Another mega account wrote, watch John Fetterman just called out the left for their unfair sexist attacks on DHS Secretary Christie Nome. I think you get the idea. They love what Fetterman had to say here, ate it up and shared it and agreed the left is sexist and people who criticized Christy nomean co ice Barbie are hypocritical sexists. And I roll my eyes so hard. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm not gonna. I cannot engage with this. I generally believe in civility and decency and substantive debate, So I mean, calling people names or nicknames is not something I, in an ideal world would support. I will say I have done it once or twice with Christinome, just because I find her antics so ridiculous. And I'm going to get into that why it's not sexist. She literally acts like she's a barbie playing dress up, and she has probably at this point a higher silicone percentage of her body composition than your typical barbie does a higher plastic percentage, rather with how much work she's obviously had done. But I find it like hilarious that people who love Trump and don't care about how he speaks to women quiet piggy and all this stuff and all the controversies involving him and women and sexist things he said and done, and him being a pig towards women. You're gonna start policing people who come up with a nickname for Christinome. That's not nice. I agree, we should all want to be in a more civil time in our politics, and maybe that means not using nicknames. But like Trump is the king of nicknames, this administration insults people, and Christinome just defamed a dead person as a domestic terrorist. I just don't really have it in me to clutch my pearls over Ice Barbie, and I find it kind of ridiculous that they're even unironically suggesting this given all of the contexts that I just mentioned. And also, I'm sorry, I'm not sorry. She literally treats her job as if she is a Barbie and has for a long time. And I'm going to walk through this for y'all because I don't want you to think I'm just being petty, right, But glam dot Com went through and cataloged her different costume changes she has done over the years for political stunts, and it goes back to her as a governor of South Dakota. So she for example, in twenty twenty three, she played dress up as a nurse and as an electrician for different ads for the South Dakota Governor's office, and in all of these she's wearing uniforms for no discernible reason, like costumes, and has a full face of glam like ridiculous amounts of makeup on. So I'm sorry, but to call somebody who dresses up in outfits and wears makeup and is very concerned about all of that a barbie? Is that a sexist attack? No, it's not. Now maybe you think, oh, we should all be polite and civil, and I would in theory, I do agree, and I want us to get back to that, But don't cry. I hate the snowflake bullshit weaponization of the identity and victim stuff. It suxes, is it?
00:28:50
Speaker 2: Or?
00:28:51
Speaker 1: Does she literally adopt costumes? I mean she also look she also did a highway patrol officer costume in another ad as the governor, and she did a I guess that's supposed to be a construction worker outfit, and I think in both of these you can see how much work she has had done. So I'm sorry. Is it really like such a horrific thing to make fun of somebody who dresses up in costumes and has tons of plastic surgery as a barbie. Is that really a microaggression? Am I supposed to clutch my pro I'm just not gonna sorry. And the thing that makes me crash out is that this woman is the head of the Department of Homeland Security in America, and yet she dresses up in costumes for TV appearances. Here she is on Fox News doing a sit down interview wearing a Border Patrol outfit live on air. So she's got a Border Patrol uniform and hat on as she is sitting on television being interviewed by Laura Ingram, I mean, what are you going for a ride along after this? No, you are not. But she's dressing up like an agent to cost play like I'm a tough girl, I'm leading the Border Patrol. No, you are an administrative official. A cabinet secretary is literally like a political appointee who runs an organization, but they don't become like a rank and file trained law enforcement officer. And you're almost mocking those people by putting on their costumes for TV hits. No, but we're supposed to be more offended by people calling her a barbie than by her doing that. This is my favorite one. This is a photo shoot she did or for a video I believe with some DHS officers where not only does she have full glam on while holding some sort of heavy duty firearm and being dressed in costume because maybe for a ride along it is appropriate. I don't know for her if she's riding along with officers to be wearing that, But I love this. I am not a firearms person, but somebody who is. If you're supposed to hold your gun like that so it's pointing at someone's head next to you while you do a photo op, I'm call me crazy, but I don't think that that is how firearms trainers typically recommend that you hold firearms even when they are just not being actively fired or aims. Call me crazy, I don't know. I just listen. I have to say that. And I've talked about this with the bad Bunny thing and other stuff. The MAGA snowflakery is getting a bit much for me. It's it is what it is at this point. But Republicans have decided to make Trump like the head of their party, and he constantly mocks and insults people and calls people nicknames and all this, and I don't like it. I've never liked it. But what you can't do, but it is what it is at this point, right What you can't do is elect a person like that, elevate them to the forefront of national politics. But then tis tics even the most minor and frankly justified similar insults or nicknames from the other side. It's just hypocritical, so hypocritical. I don't know what do you guys think. Let me know in the comments, make sure you subscribed. Am I an evil sexist pig for calling her ice Barbie once or twice? I will admit I have said it. Let me know in the comments, and we'll leave it there for that one okay, guys, one final thing we're gonna cover on today's show. I have been catching a lot of heat, a lot of anger from right wing commentators for my apparently controversial hot take that someone singing in Spanish on stage for fifteen minutes is not an attack on America and is actually just not that big a deal with bad Bunny, didn't love his performance, didn't hate it. I'm fine with people not tuning in, flipping change in the channel, tune into turning points, alternative, but I don't view it as an attack on America for somebody to sing in a different language. Music transcends languages. Puerto Rican culture is a part of America. Got no issue with it being represented at the halftime show. Obviously, if every halftime show ever was in Spanish, that would be weird. But just doing it once yea with one of the biggest artists in the world, does not bother me at all. And you could quibble with some of the lyrics that he used. A lot of people are being fed misinformation about that, and I've talked about that because the actual lyrics that he used during the actual performance were edited for TV. They're not the super vulgar ones you see floating around on Twitter. Anyway, I've said all this, and I've said that magazinems some people in Mega, not everybody. Of course, a lot of people have actually disagreed with the snowflakery, but high profile commentators crashing out over it are acting like snowflakes. And I've said so, and I've gotten a lot of heat, first from Matt Walsh, we talked about that on the show, but now from a far right YouTuber named Mark Deese who has a lot of subscribers, a lot more than me. I think, over a million, and he really did not like what I had to say in a tweet that got a lot of attention about this. And when I'm quite the rant about me that we're going to react to, I guess, without further ado, let's listen, and I'll pause into my thoughts on some of his commentary on the underlying situation as well, because it was strange. Let's listen.
00:34:14
Speaker 6: By now, most people have either witnessed the cultural insurrection at the Super Bowl halftime show or heard that the entire show was performed in a foreign language.
00:34:25
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm sorry to pause. I'm so quick, but there's already so much wrong with this, first off, cultural insurrection. And it's somebody singing in Spanish for ten minutes. It's an American citizens sing in Spanish. It's like show Me on the Doll, my friend, where the dude spinging and speaking in Spanish touched you. It's not the end of the world. It is not an insurrection. Millions of people in America speak Spanish and singing Spanish, and Spanish songs play on the radio here all the time. Little did I know that desp Sito from a few years ago was part of a cultural insurrection. Actually, just America is a melting pot and has lots of people with different cultures and languages and they all blend together and that's part of our big, vast pluralistic society. And it's not a cultural insurrection. You sound ridiculous. Oh my gosh. Also, you're just you're also just like, maybe this is a little pedantic, but you're also incorrect. Objectively, the entire halftime performance was not in Spanish. It was mostly in Spanish, but Lady Gaga did sing in English. So I do think it's significant that these people don't even speak factually about these things.
00:35:39
Speaker 6: Language by a foreigner, a bisexual, of course, entertainer who goes by the name of bad Bunny.
00:35:46
Speaker 1: Did he just call an American citizen a foreigner, No.
00:35:55
Speaker 6: A bad Bunny who usually wears dresses during his performance. First of all, for those who claim that Bad Money is an American because Puerto Rico is part of America.
00:36:08
Speaker 1: Uh, yes, well, he's like setting this up as if this is this ridiculous straw man argument. For those who claim that a person who is born in America and literally is a US citizen with a US passport? Is an American? You mean anyone in touch with reality? I mean maybe, like it's kind of a weird take, but maybe you think Puerto Rico should not be part of America. Puerto rican should all be stripped of their American citizenship. But right now they are citizens, and they are Americans. This is just a fact. How are we debating a fact? What are we doing here? Guys? I have more to say about this man, and we're about to get to the part where he rants about me being gay for some reason, But first to make sure they'll subscribe to do it the like button while you're at it, and please consider becoming a channel member. I push back on the far left and the far right, and frankly, the biggest way to blow up on YouTube is just a pandera to one side. But that's not what I do. So call me PBS if you like, but I need support from viewers like you. Hit the joint button or the link in the description to become a channel member. Now you will unlock early access to full length at free episodes with no annoying mid rolls interrupting me mid sentence, and more importantly, you will help me support my content and expand, and you will make people like Mark here cry every time you sign up. So hit the joint button now if you can. Now, let's listen to more of this super normal rant Erica.
00:37:34
Speaker 6: Well, it's a territory, it's not a state. And that's like saying Caitlin Jenner is a woman. Okay, you can say that, but we all know the truth. There's a big difference between an American territory.
00:37:48
Speaker 1: And a state.
00:37:49
Speaker 6: They have their own history, their own culture, their own holidays, their own language. In America, Americans can vote for the president of the United States. Puerto Ricans cannot because they're pseudo Americans there.
00:38:08
Speaker 1: This is like just really really strange. So he's saying that because Puerto Rico is a territory and not a state and doesn't get electoral votes for the presidential election as a result in the Electoral College, that it's therefore they're not Americans. And the funniest thing about that is that it's also wrong. He's saying Puerto Ricans aren't really Americans because they can't vote. That's only true to the extent that they live in Puerto Rico. So I don't know where bad Bundy lives, but say that, like I was born in Rhode Island, if I moved to Puerto Rico, I will now live in a territory and not a state, and therefore I will not be able to vote in a presidential election and cast a meaningful ballot. Does that make me no longer an American? I was before and now I'm not and I'm on the contrary. For example, one of our friends in Michigan was born in Puerto Rico, and now she lives in Michigan. She can and presumably will vote in the twenty twenty eight presidental central election as Michigan as a Michigan voter, even though she's Puerto Rican, because she is an American, whether you like it or not, like you're just it's just I really don't I'm the last person to jump to just like racism. But I'm really not sure what else could be motivating motivating this bizarre mental gymnastics here to try to figure out a way in which Americans are not Americans, and some Americans are more American than other Americans.
00:39:32
Speaker 6: I don't know, guys, due to Americans, they're Americans on paper, they're I knows, they're American in name only. Most of them don't celebrate or care about Independence Day, the fourth of July or Thanksgiving or anything about American culture or the Founding Fathers or anything about US real America.
00:39:54
Speaker 1: Obviously, that's an interesting statement with no evidence or basis whatsoever. I don't think he has any idea what percentage of Puerto Rican celebrate the fourth of July or Americans Founding or anything. You just say things. I guess also like, yeah, non Puerto Rican Americans spend a lot of time thinking about the Founding Fathers. Uh huh. Anyway, here's the part where he comes to my tweet, and.
00:40:18
Speaker 6: You see the only people other than the libtards who think that this was great are the rhinos, the fake Republicans who are always welcomed by the liberal media.
00:40:31
Speaker 1: Pause on that. I no longer consider myself a Republican. I consider myself an independent, So go off.
00:40:37
Speaker 6: I guess the industrial complex like this clown Brad Palumbo who says that a Spanish language Super Bowl halftime performance by a top American artists, see, they try to reinforce that fake news that he's he's an American.
00:40:51
Speaker 1: No, no, well, because he literally is, factually speaking, an American citizen with a US passport in facts, don't care about your racist feelings. He's an American.
00:41:00
Speaker 6: No, he's an I know, he's an American in name only. And artist is not an attack on American culture. It's a reflection of it more than true. FA million Americans speak Spanish, Yeah, which is a major problem. It's called assimilation. You're supposed to assimilate here.
00:41:17
Speaker 1: Yeah, they speak English too, buddy, They also assimilate and they speak both. And we live in a multicultural society with a common culture that people should assimilate to. But it's still okay to have your own traditions and cultural heritage as well as part of that. Like you're gonna, you're gonna, Oh no, I have to live in the same country as some people who also speak Spanish. I am much more sympathetic to the critique of people who come here as immigrants, for example, and don't learn English. I think that's crazy, Like that's wild. But still having both is not a problem.
00:41:52
Speaker 6: Sorry, not sorry, You're you're supposed to come and start speaking our language, engage in our customs, engage and so our holidays in thriving American cities like Miami, where I live. It's commonplace, of course that it's part of the reason why America is becoming a hellhole. A third world hellhole.
00:42:13
Speaker 1: Is the third world hellhole in the room of us. That is certainly not the uh impression that I have of Miami. I actually think it's a thriving and flourishing and very well run, very safe city, very clean, very well policed, too much construction, lots of traffic. But uh, third world hellhole it is not. I would suggest that our our friend here needs to touch some grass and probably get some some sunlight as well out of the basement hellhole.
00:42:43
Speaker 6: If you feel attacked simply by people speaking in or singing Spanish, you're the Probut well, we're the problem, yeah, because we don't want foreign ours speaking of foreign land on our soil. In a case you can't tell O gate.
00:42:57
Speaker 1: Clown is oh so I I'm a gay CNN contributor. Clown, I guess one out of three am bad calling someone a CNN contributor. For people who are not in the political commentary industry, you might not understand this. I am not a CNN contributor. I have appeared on CNN the network three times. I've actually probably appeared on Fox News over one hundred times. I'm also not a contributor there and never have have been. A contributor refers to somebody who has a contract and is paid to be a regular talent for the network. So like Scott Jennings, for example, is a CNN contributor, I am not. So it's just actually wrong. And then you got me there. I guess, oh, gay, it doesn't really have anything to do with our debate about the Spanish language and bad Bunny. But I guess if you're really into identity politics, you can bring up unrelated stuff for no reason. All right, it's post.
00:43:56
Speaker 6: Well, here's five seconds of him speaking.
00:43:58
Speaker 1: We got to talk about controversial to say the very least social media point that Trump? Why am I kind of eating good night? That is? Uh? I think most people would just say it's pretty pretty racist.
00:44:13
Speaker 6: And he's talking about the Obama ape meme. Of course he's gonna think it's racist. It's not racist, but even if it was, that would actually make it even funnier. We're making racist memes great again.
00:44:26
Speaker 1: Go back. Oh, that was a lovely way to end that video go back in the closet. No, and uh not gonna happen. You're not gonna make us and uh, I'd like to see you try. That is why we have a second amendment, folks. I'll just say that and uh, listen, he's obviously it's not just racist jokes to him. I think the context of this video we just listened to is actually, yeh, you're just racist or intolerant in some way, and that is h. It's sad to me that people tune into somebody so unseerious and with such incoherent and unhinged presentation of the news and of different developments that so quickly just goes to invoking identity politics and false claims to try to tear down stuff that makes them uncomfortable for whatever reason. And I would like to think that over a million dollar or over a million subscribers, you could probably get a better green screen situation than whatever the heck that is hot take my dude, but I think you can do better and I'm rooting for you. You guys, let me know what you think of this stunning and brave takedown of me from Magastar Mark Dze. Let me know what you think in the comments makes your subscribe? Do you consider becoming a channel member to make the Markiss of the world very sad and to support my content? And with that, guys, that'll be it for today's episode of the Brad Versus Everyone podcast. Thanks so much for listening and we'll talk again. We also voting
Speaker 1: Democrats double down on radical transactivism, some Maga voices christ sexism over Christy Nome criticism, and the far right YouTube star calls me out in an unhinged rand. All this and so much Morris coming up on today's episode of The Bread Versus Everyone Podcast, our daily show where we take on the craziest stories from across the Internet and social media, all from an independent political perspective. Guys, up, first, we've got to check in with the Democrats in Congress, both in the Senate and the House, and with so much of the Trump administration's basically public relations being in turmoil between the Ebstein files and overreach on different issues, the Democrats have come together and decided to be normal and present a sane alternative to the American people that shows like we're not crazy, We're not out of touch with reality. You can trust it. Just getting, just getting. I almost had your fooled there for a second, didn't I know. Many prominent elected Democrats in both the House and the Senate have instead to decide it that now is the perfect time to rally behind and promote a so called transgender Bill of Rights which also includes non binary people. Don't you dare for a second think that the they them's are left out of this. That goes far beyond what any you know, reasonable freedom minded American would be cool with, which is adults who identify as trans living however, will make them happiest, and instead would enshrine basically, if actually carried out, it's just a resolution, but if actually carried out, would enshrine every nonsensical, far left extreme gender activist idea into our laws and is almost beyond parity in its scope and some of the things that it quite openly states. Where to take a look at it in some detail today, First, though, I'll just show you a clip from one of the main sponsors of the legislation or the legislative resolution, technically speaking, Congresswoman Prima Jaya Paul here. She is speaking about it too often when.
00:02:13
Speaker 2: We discuss transwrits, we're on the defensive, discussing how to protect trans people from horrific Republican attacks and how to ensure that trans people can live authentically in our community.
00:02:27
Speaker 1: Okay, just to pause for a second of context, There are definitely some genuinely hateful people just attacking and mocking all trans people, but some of these attacks they're talking about are literally just laws that say no biological males and female sports, or laws that say you have to be eighteen to medically transition. And that's not a hate crime, like, that's not a vicious attack on trans people. That's common sense compromise legislation. And the failure to parse those two things out and to draw those distinctions is one of the reasons the Democrats have lost so totally on this issue in this question lately, and these lawmakers don't seem to be changing course at all. Let's keep listening.
00:03:07
Speaker 2: Our communities today, though we are not on the defensive, we are looking forward with the transmel of Rights. We are laying out a comprehensive vision to provide protections for transgender and non binary.
00:03:21
Speaker 1: People, a vision that pause transgender and non binary people. That's how you now know this is a joke, and that's how you know this is so deeply unserious. Non Binary is not a real thing. It is not even a quantifiable or coherent idea. Adults or just people who have severe gender dysphoria is one thing that has existed. We can certainly talk about the spread of it and the new forms of it, and people who claim to have it without actually having any diagnosis, but it's at least there's a real underlying phenomenon there that's been studied for many years. Is non binary doesn't mean anything? Oh I just don't feel male or female in my gender presentation. Explain that without doing sexism right, because there are only two human sexes, male and female, and then there are very rare gen intic conditions where people can be intersex, but even most of them can technically be qualified as male or female based on the structure of their reproductive system. But that's like, according to almost a red herring when they bring that up, because that's not most non binary or trans people. And so to say, oh, well, I don't feel male, What because you don't like stereotypically masculine things, or I don't feel female I want to be they I'm not a female? Why because you don't want to wear a dress or make like that's fine, you don't have to do that. And if your identity suggests otherwise, then it's actually perpetrating gender stereotypes and sexism. So it's not a real or coherent concept. It's a pure fad, just a made up identity that people adopt as kind of a social trend and to cash in on the victimhood currency of social media. But yet they're lumping that in with something that's apparently worthy of federal civil rights protection. So sorry, black people, right your civil rights protection. Sorry gay people, your civil rights protections are the same thing as a she slash of day in bio. What a joke. And honestly, guys, there's a decent chance that my little rant against non binary there is going to get this YouTube video demonetized, as I've had when I tell the truth about non binary sometimes I get demonetized for hate speech. But I'm okay with that. But do consider becoming a channel member to support my content. Hit the join button or the link of the description and sign up to support me. You'll unlock early access to add free full length episodes with no annoying YouTube mid rolls, and you'll help support me dropping truth bombs on the thems when YouTube seems not to like it. But regardless, make sure she subscribe to the like button and let's keep going here. We'll listen to the rest of what the Congress will has to say.
00:06:01
Speaker 2: That ensures that every single person has a chance to thrive a vision that says you are us, you belong and you are worthy of the same rights as everyone.
00:06:15
Speaker 1: And of course, like I agree with that part. I do believe all Americans trends are not confused about being non binary or not, are entitled to the same rights and freedoms one hundred percent. But this is the kind of rhetoric that they'll use, and then what they're actually proposing is something very different. So we're going to go through the actual substance. I went and read this congressional resolution, the so called Transgender Bill of Rights, and I expected it to be kind of crazy, but it's actually like way worse and way more explicit than I thought it would be. I do want to show you one video of the Senate sponsor, Democrat Ed Markey from Massachusetts. I believe he decided to team up with a influencer, a trans influencer, to make content promoting this legislation. Let me know if you recognize this person, and then after I'll tell you why you might you might.
00:07:08
Speaker 3: Today is a very exciting day because you're introducing to the Senate the Transgender Bill of Rights, which will mandate federal protections of transgender people what do you hope that this legislation will accomplish for transgender people across the nation.
00:07:23
Speaker 4: Well, we want to put transgender issues right on the front burner of American politics in or to make sure that they have equal protections in their schools, in their places of employment, in healthcare, in all of the of the protections which they are entitled to trans rights, to our human rights, and that the day will come when we'll look to the history books to find that we have had such a debate. Well, not the trans community was entitled to all of the protections that are built into ways.
00:07:54
Speaker 1: There's so much to unpack there. I mean, for one, the idea that you're like his so I he's a Democratic senator from Massachusetts, so he's got a safe seat. His swing state colleagues must despise him, must hate him, because to say something like we should be putting trans issues at the forefront for the Democratic Party is such absurdly foolish like political strategy for anybody not in a deep deep blue district or state that they represent, because on a lot of these issues, Democrats are very out of touch with common sense in the public. And he's like, yeah, let's do it, and I find it laughable to suggest that, like, oh, we'll look back at the different debates over trans issues and the people who were against it will be well, look back and we'll marvel there ever was a debate kind of how we view like segregation now is the implication that I pick up on there we look back and we're like kind of astonished that large swaths of people could ever really think that it made sense to have blacks only in whites only schools and water fountains and all of this. I almost think he's drawing that parallel or that kind of parallel, and I'm sorry, but that is certainly not going to be the case. In fact, I think it's more likely that history will remember the people that stood ten toes down on unproven experimental medical transition of minors will be viewed how we more similar to how we view the lobotomy now. And maybe the idea that we actually allowed biologically male people to compete in women's sports and biologically male sex offenders to be placed in women's prisons in blue states like California and Massachusetts. Yeah, I think that will actually age like milk and be viewed as on the wrong side of history, not the people who had questions and concerns about it. And sorry I got a little bit off track there, but I want to talk about the person that you've seen in this video, the transgender influencer. Well, this is an influencer named Rose Montoya. And this is a curious choice of person for the Democratic lawmaker, the senator here to team up with, because Rose Montoya is the transgender influencer that President Biden to the White House and then the influencer flashed I guess her if we're being polite and using this person's pronouns, but her prosthetic breasts at the White House for a photo and it was this whole controversy. It embarrassed the Biden administration. But to their credit, they banned Rose from the White House. And Ed Markey and his team are like, you know who we should team up with it for this, that trans influencer who flashed people at the White House. Like it's almost beyond parody that they would do this, that they would pick these people of all the messengers to team up with to make content about it. It's just bizarre. Maybe they didn't do their due diligence, but wow. And then when you get into the substance of this resolution, it is really astonishing stuff. And over fifty or more, dozens and dozens of Democratic lawmakers cosign this, including Alexandria Okazio Cortes, who's kind of a rising star in the Democratic Party and possibly a twenty twenty eight nominee, maybe for the presidency or maybe for the the peace slot. And let's just look at the text without further ado. So here's the first part that stood out to me, where they suggest that transgender and non binary people face significant barriers to legal recognition of their truest selves on government issued documentation and identification that reflects their gender. So this just struck out. This stood out to me because it's like, I wasn't aware this was a thing that existed, the idea that you were entitled to legal recognition of your truest self. And I would love to know if there is a limiting principle on that, because I've always found it bizarre this idea that a non binary person who claims to be non binary is entitled to have government documents reflect their denial of reality because it's their truest self, even though it's actually like literally false. So that's an interesting dichotomy there, But is there a limit to that, like not to stretch to the point of absurdity, But sometimes that can be useful for testing an argument, like if I identify as a dog, should I be able to have my species listed as dog? But that's aren't I entitled to my truest self being just It's kind of a microcosm of this affirmation without limit principle that I think is embedded into a lot of progressive thinking about these issues. Okay, next part that stood out to me. President Trump has issued several executive orders that attempt to unlawfully discriminate against transgender people. Anti trans individuals strive to deprive transgender and non binary people of access to gender affirming care, despite the overwhelming consensus of the medical community that gender affirming care is essential and life saving healthcare. So this was an interesting statement to me because I find it insanely gas lightly and bizarre. How the same many of the same Democrats who told us for years trust the science and trust the experts, when frankly we probably should not have nearly been so deferential to the science and the experts are now actively like just refuting what actual evidence and medical consensus and literature suggests. There is not evidence proving that gender affirming care is life saving for non binary people, which it doesn't even make sense why a non binary person would want or need gender affirming care, by which they mean different chemical or hormone therapies as well as surgeries and the like. But there's not evidence proving that that is life saving. Even with transgender care, more traditional transgender care, the evidence is very low quality, even for adults. Now, I'm a believer that you own your body and should be able to do almost anything with it until the point when you start hurting someone else. So I have absolutely no issue with transadult to getting surgeries or taking hormones if that's what they want to do. But when they're making claims definitively that this is life saving care, those are not evidence based claims, especially but actually all around, as applied as applied to minors, it is not an evidenced based claim to claim there is that this treatment is life saving for trans miners. Yet they repeat this ad nauseum. There is no actual evidence to support that claim, and even the ACLU admitted before the Supreme Court that they had no proof of that claim, so I just thought that stood out. Next year, they say the federal government has a duty to protect the rights of transgender and non binary people by implementing a transgender Bill of Rights that includes ensuring that transgender and non binary people have equal access to services and public accommodations that align with their gender identity, by amending the Civil Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, including gender identity and sex characteristics in public accommodations and federally funded programs and activities, and expanding the definition of public accommodation to address the full range of places and services that members of the general public utilize. That might sound like not particularly controversial, because I would agree in general that like, it's wrong to have your restaurant say, like, we don't serve trans people or anything like that. I certainly would not ever be okay with that form of discrimination. But that's actually a breath takingly radical stance. They just suggested that essentially all public accommodations and services, by which they mean public businesses and like, have to be open to everyone according to their gender identity. The practical consequence of that, as we have seen in Blue states, is that locker rooms are for women, spas like Korean spas that are nuwe only for women. Any man or male who simply says they feel like a woman at that moment, no diagnosis, no treatment, no anything, or they don't even have to say they feel like a woman. They could say they feel like a non binary in California at least, and they are entitled to walk into whatever women's changing room or locker room or nude spa or space. They feel like that is insane and that actually puts the whims of random people, some of whom are not many of whom have no ill intent, but many people of ill intent will take advantage of such a system, puts that over the basic comfort and safety and dignity of women. And so it's the kind of thing that it's astonishing these people support and justlies under the radar. How actually radical that it is. Furthermore, another piece from this resolution amending federal law to ensure it protects students from discrimination based on sex, including gender identity and sex characteristics. Now I'll pause on that just to say it seems kind of contradictory to me. How can how can laws protect on the basis of discrimination of sex and gender identity when those two things are in direct conflict or they're the opposite of each other in the cases that we're talking about here, but anyway, thus guaranteeing the right of students to participate free from discrimination, including harassment and sexual violence in all areas of school life, including in classes, extracurriculars, including athletics, access to facilities, and other school activities. Of course, and this is the problem that they like lump in utterly uncontroversial things with extremely controversial things. Nobody trans or not should ever be harassed or subjected to sexual violence, of course. However, this resolution also says that no one should ever be denied access to athletics because of their gender identity, which means women's sports are no longer for females and biologically male athletes are able to compete at the high school or collegiate level. And that's crazy, that's unfair. In some cases, that's unsafe, and it's an eighty twenty issue that these democrats are once again doubling down on. So if you thought they were learning, if you thought they were waken up, that at least does not apply to the dozens and dozens of Democratic politicians who have co signed this statement. Up next, they write that they want to clarify and reaffirm the rights to bodily autonomy and healthcare for transgender and non binary people. And then the second part of this says, by eliminating unnecessary governmental restrictions on the provision of an access to gender affirming medical care and counseling for transgender and non binary adults and adolescents. Emphasis on that last part because I do agree with the first part. Like I said, adults freedom, do what you want with your own body. But adolescens, So thirteen fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seven, ten year olds should not be chemically castrating themselves, should not be getting double misectomies. All of this is barbaric. It is not supported by evidence. They cannot understand the lifelong decisions and their ramifications that they are making. And yet Democrats who sign this document and are standing on this, they think that should be legal. That is what that statement very clearly means. And I think that's astonishingly ignorant and extreme, but hey, I love this. They also wrote as part of their Transgender Bill of Rights, codifying the right to abortion for everyone. I'm not even trying to give my hot take on abortion here, I'm just saying I find this thing that Democrats do annoying, where they make everything about everything. Abortion is a totally separate issue from trans Could you just not conflate every It's like so annoying. Another piece here that I just love. They require then an X marker be available on federal government identification and records that require gender. Yeah, I'm sorry that. I'm gonna crash out if I think about that for more than a second. No human being sex is X, even intersex people. That doesn't apply to But the people getting this on their passports were basically never intersex, So that's kind of, once again a red herring. So what we're doing is we're saying that you have a right to list inaccurate information on government documents. I'll never get that. That will always strike me as absurd. Now, the final piece here cracked me up, because, like, you're never woke enough. They say the federal government must make an ongoing commitment to the rights of transgender and non binary people. Policies concerning transgender rights must be led and informed by transgender communities in particular, black and indigenous women due to their intersect identities. I hate it here. So imagine being a Democrat and having to flagellate yourself like this, listen to indigenous trans women of color, oh my god, or just listen to people who make sense what a crazy thought, regardless of their identity. And I'm sorry, but if they just they're so clearly pandering, and they so clearly do not mean a word of this, because if they did, then this white dude wouldn't be on stage giving all these remarks about it and everything. This straight white dude from Massachusetts. How about you shut up and let a queer, non binary, trans indigenous woman of color take the stage call in Blossom. Okay, they actually don't mean it. It's just obvious pandering, and it is really, really breathtaking stuff. Part of me had kind of hoped, though I never really believed this, that Democrats were were going to chill out and be a more moderate and normal and I think some of them are, but many are not, and many seem deeply captured by some of this radicalism. And that is really concerning for the future of the country because we need a sane alternative to the Republicans, but at least among these folks from this resolution, that is not what we have. That's my take at least, but you guys will have to let me know what you think in the comments below. Make sure subscribe if you aren't yet, to hit the like button, and please consider becoming a Channel member if you haven't yet. Up next, we got to talk about a controversy that is a brewing in Congress and on the Internet concerning the head of the Department of Homeland Security, Christy Nome, who is very controversial for her handling, and many would say botched handling of Trump's increased immigration enforcement, like when she falsely called people domestic terrorists who had just been killed with no real evidence and then never really apologized for that. But more importantly, people are upset that she is getting mocked and people are calling her ice barbie because she often dresses up in costumes like border patrol costumes, even though she is not actually a law enforcement agent for television hits, and she's all glammed out while holding guns and all this stuff. So progressives and just critics. I've even said it myself, so shoot me. I guess people are saying this is a sexist attack on her. And the most recent recent person to say this, who's going viral for having made this comment is actually a moderate Democrat, Senator John Fetterman, and he made these comments and then mega accounts across the internet are uplifting them and agreeing with him. So let's listen to what he had to say.
00:23:51
Speaker 5: Now, I met with Secretary Nome and I've always treated her with respect. I met with her in my office, and I refuse and I never will engage on the kinds of sexist kinds of terms like ice Barbie from a lot of the left media will use those.
00:24:08
Speaker 1: Kind of things.
00:24:10
Speaker 5: And now I said, hey, I'm a Democrat. Then I say secure our border, yeah, and deport all of the criminals.
00:24:19
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know.
00:24:20
Speaker 5: We also, I think we can signed up on that. And then my friend Katie Britt came to me and said, we want to bring the Lincoln Riley Bill there, and I'm like, yeah, I was going to be the Democrat to bring that there, and now we the co sponsor as a Democrat. So I believe that we should have those kinds of appropriate things.
00:24:41
Speaker 1: So there's parts of that that I certainly agree with. I agree with his position on securing the border and deporting criminal illegal immigrants who are here in committing crimes are abusing welfare. I think mass deportation is a different question when you're trying to round up millions of people, including people who have been here for decades and haven't done anything wrong, and being here illegally, including people who are brought here as kids and have lived their whole lives in America. I have a different view on that than the Trump administration. But the piece of this that's getting picked up on is when John Fetterman sticks his neck out for Christy Nome and says that the mockery of her as Ice Barbie is sexist. So some mega accounts praised him for these comments. I'll show you these here. The account Nick Sorder wrote, Wow, John Fetterman just called out the left for their unfair attacks on DHS Secretary Christie Nome. Maga Voice, a huge X account wrote, holy shit, Democratic Senator John Fetterman exposed the Democratic Party for being sexist. Another mega account wrote, watch John Fetterman just called out the left for their unfair sexist attacks on DHS Secretary Christie Nome. I think you get the idea. They love what Fetterman had to say here, ate it up and shared it and agreed the left is sexist and people who criticized Christy nomean co ice Barbie are hypocritical sexists. And I roll my eyes so hard. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm not gonna. I cannot engage with this. I generally believe in civility and decency and substantive debate, So I mean, calling people names or nicknames is not something I, in an ideal world would support. I will say I have done it once or twice with Christinome, just because I find her antics so ridiculous. And I'm going to get into that why it's not sexist. She literally acts like she's a barbie playing dress up, and she has probably at this point a higher silicone percentage of her body composition than your typical barbie does a higher plastic percentage, rather with how much work she's obviously had done. But I find it like hilarious that people who love Trump and don't care about how he speaks to women quiet piggy and all this stuff and all the controversies involving him and women and sexist things he said and done, and him being a pig towards women. You're gonna start policing people who come up with a nickname for Christinome. That's not nice. I agree, we should all want to be in a more civil time in our politics, and maybe that means not using nicknames. But like Trump is the king of nicknames, this administration insults people, and Christinome just defamed a dead person as a domestic terrorist. I just don't really have it in me to clutch my pearls over Ice Barbie, and I find it kind of ridiculous that they're even unironically suggesting this given all of the contexts that I just mentioned. And also, I'm sorry, I'm not sorry. She literally treats her job as if she is a Barbie and has for a long time. And I'm going to walk through this for y'all because I don't want you to think I'm just being petty, right, But glam dot Com went through and cataloged her different costume changes she has done over the years for political stunts, and it goes back to her as a governor of South Dakota. So she for example, in twenty twenty three, she played dress up as a nurse and as an electrician for different ads for the South Dakota Governor's office, and in all of these she's wearing uniforms for no discernible reason, like costumes, and has a full face of glam like ridiculous amounts of makeup on. So I'm sorry, but to call somebody who dresses up in outfits and wears makeup and is very concerned about all of that a barbie? Is that a sexist attack? No, it's not. Now maybe you think, oh, we should all be polite and civil, and I would in theory, I do agree, and I want us to get back to that, But don't cry. I hate the snowflake bullshit weaponization of the identity and victim stuff. It suxes, is it?
00:28:50
Speaker 2: Or?
00:28:51
Speaker 1: Does she literally adopt costumes? I mean she also look she also did a highway patrol officer costume in another ad as the governor, and she did a I guess that's supposed to be a construction worker outfit, and I think in both of these you can see how much work she has had done. So I'm sorry. Is it really like such a horrific thing to make fun of somebody who dresses up in costumes and has tons of plastic surgery as a barbie. Is that really a microaggression? Am I supposed to clutch my pro I'm just not gonna sorry. And the thing that makes me crash out is that this woman is the head of the Department of Homeland Security in America, and yet she dresses up in costumes for TV appearances. Here she is on Fox News doing a sit down interview wearing a Border Patrol outfit live on air. So she's got a Border Patrol uniform and hat on as she is sitting on television being interviewed by Laura Ingram, I mean, what are you going for a ride along after this? No, you are not. But she's dressing up like an agent to cost play like I'm a tough girl, I'm leading the Border Patrol. No, you are an administrative official. A cabinet secretary is literally like a political appointee who runs an organization, but they don't become like a rank and file trained law enforcement officer. And you're almost mocking those people by putting on their costumes for TV hits. No, but we're supposed to be more offended by people calling her a barbie than by her doing that. This is my favorite one. This is a photo shoot she did or for a video I believe with some DHS officers where not only does she have full glam on while holding some sort of heavy duty firearm and being dressed in costume because maybe for a ride along it is appropriate. I don't know for her if she's riding along with officers to be wearing that, But I love this. I am not a firearms person, but somebody who is. If you're supposed to hold your gun like that so it's pointing at someone's head next to you while you do a photo op, I'm call me crazy, but I don't think that that is how firearms trainers typically recommend that you hold firearms even when they are just not being actively fired or aims. Call me crazy, I don't know. I just listen. I have to say that. And I've talked about this with the bad Bunny thing and other stuff. The MAGA snowflakery is getting a bit much for me. It's it is what it is at this point. But Republicans have decided to make Trump like the head of their party, and he constantly mocks and insults people and calls people nicknames and all this, and I don't like it. I've never liked it. But what you can't do, but it is what it is at this point, right What you can't do is elect a person like that, elevate them to the forefront of national politics. But then tis tics even the most minor and frankly justified similar insults or nicknames from the other side. It's just hypocritical, so hypocritical. I don't know what do you guys think. Let me know in the comments, make sure you subscribed. Am I an evil sexist pig for calling her ice Barbie once or twice? I will admit I have said it. Let me know in the comments, and we'll leave it there for that one okay, guys, one final thing we're gonna cover on today's show. I have been catching a lot of heat, a lot of anger from right wing commentators for my apparently controversial hot take that someone singing in Spanish on stage for fifteen minutes is not an attack on America and is actually just not that big a deal with bad Bunny, didn't love his performance, didn't hate it. I'm fine with people not tuning in, flipping change in the channel, tune into turning points, alternative, but I don't view it as an attack on America for somebody to sing in a different language. Music transcends languages. Puerto Rican culture is a part of America. Got no issue with it being represented at the halftime show. Obviously, if every halftime show ever was in Spanish, that would be weird. But just doing it once yea with one of the biggest artists in the world, does not bother me at all. And you could quibble with some of the lyrics that he used. A lot of people are being fed misinformation about that, and I've talked about that because the actual lyrics that he used during the actual performance were edited for TV. They're not the super vulgar ones you see floating around on Twitter. Anyway, I've said all this, and I've said that magazinems some people in Mega, not everybody. Of course, a lot of people have actually disagreed with the snowflakery, but high profile commentators crashing out over it are acting like snowflakes. And I've said so, and I've gotten a lot of heat, first from Matt Walsh, we talked about that on the show, but now from a far right YouTuber named Mark Deese who has a lot of subscribers, a lot more than me. I think, over a million, and he really did not like what I had to say in a tweet that got a lot of attention about this. And when I'm quite the rant about me that we're going to react to, I guess, without further ado, let's listen, and I'll pause into my thoughts on some of his commentary on the underlying situation as well, because it was strange. Let's listen.
00:34:14
Speaker 6: By now, most people have either witnessed the cultural insurrection at the Super Bowl halftime show or heard that the entire show was performed in a foreign language.
00:34:25
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm sorry to pause. I'm so quick, but there's already so much wrong with this, first off, cultural insurrection. And it's somebody singing in Spanish for ten minutes. It's an American citizens sing in Spanish. It's like show Me on the Doll, my friend, where the dude spinging and speaking in Spanish touched you. It's not the end of the world. It is not an insurrection. Millions of people in America speak Spanish and singing Spanish, and Spanish songs play on the radio here all the time. Little did I know that desp Sito from a few years ago was part of a cultural insurrection. Actually, just America is a melting pot and has lots of people with different cultures and languages and they all blend together and that's part of our big, vast pluralistic society. And it's not a cultural insurrection. You sound ridiculous. Oh my gosh. Also, you're just you're also just like, maybe this is a little pedantic, but you're also incorrect. Objectively, the entire halftime performance was not in Spanish. It was mostly in Spanish, but Lady Gaga did sing in English. So I do think it's significant that these people don't even speak factually about these things.
00:35:39
Speaker 6: Language by a foreigner, a bisexual, of course, entertainer who goes by the name of bad Bunny.
00:35:46
Speaker 1: Did he just call an American citizen a foreigner, No.
00:35:55
Speaker 6: A bad Bunny who usually wears dresses during his performance. First of all, for those who claim that Bad Money is an American because Puerto Rico is part of America.
00:36:08
Speaker 1: Uh, yes, well, he's like setting this up as if this is this ridiculous straw man argument. For those who claim that a person who is born in America and literally is a US citizen with a US passport? Is an American? You mean anyone in touch with reality? I mean maybe, like it's kind of a weird take, but maybe you think Puerto Rico should not be part of America. Puerto rican should all be stripped of their American citizenship. But right now they are citizens, and they are Americans. This is just a fact. How are we debating a fact? What are we doing here? Guys? I have more to say about this man, and we're about to get to the part where he rants about me being gay for some reason, But first to make sure they'll subscribe to do it the like button while you're at it, and please consider becoming a channel member. I push back on the far left and the far right, and frankly, the biggest way to blow up on YouTube is just a pandera to one side. But that's not what I do. So call me PBS if you like, but I need support from viewers like you. Hit the joint button or the link in the description to become a channel member. Now you will unlock early access to full length at free episodes with no annoying mid rolls interrupting me mid sentence, and more importantly, you will help me support my content and expand, and you will make people like Mark here cry every time you sign up. So hit the joint button now if you can. Now, let's listen to more of this super normal rant Erica.
00:37:34
Speaker 6: Well, it's a territory, it's not a state. And that's like saying Caitlin Jenner is a woman. Okay, you can say that, but we all know the truth. There's a big difference between an American territory.
00:37:48
Speaker 1: And a state.
00:37:49
Speaker 6: They have their own history, their own culture, their own holidays, their own language. In America, Americans can vote for the president of the United States. Puerto Ricans cannot because they're pseudo Americans there.
00:38:08
Speaker 1: This is like just really really strange. So he's saying that because Puerto Rico is a territory and not a state and doesn't get electoral votes for the presidential election as a result in the Electoral College, that it's therefore they're not Americans. And the funniest thing about that is that it's also wrong. He's saying Puerto Ricans aren't really Americans because they can't vote. That's only true to the extent that they live in Puerto Rico. So I don't know where bad Bundy lives, but say that, like I was born in Rhode Island, if I moved to Puerto Rico, I will now live in a territory and not a state, and therefore I will not be able to vote in a presidential election and cast a meaningful ballot. Does that make me no longer an American? I was before and now I'm not and I'm on the contrary. For example, one of our friends in Michigan was born in Puerto Rico, and now she lives in Michigan. She can and presumably will vote in the twenty twenty eight presidental central election as Michigan as a Michigan voter, even though she's Puerto Rican, because she is an American, whether you like it or not, like you're just it's just I really don't I'm the last person to jump to just like racism. But I'm really not sure what else could be motivating motivating this bizarre mental gymnastics here to try to figure out a way in which Americans are not Americans, and some Americans are more American than other Americans.
00:39:32
Speaker 6: I don't know, guys, due to Americans, they're Americans on paper, they're I knows, they're American in name only. Most of them don't celebrate or care about Independence Day, the fourth of July or Thanksgiving or anything about American culture or the Founding Fathers or anything about US real America.
00:39:54
Speaker 1: Obviously, that's an interesting statement with no evidence or basis whatsoever. I don't think he has any idea what percentage of Puerto Rican celebrate the fourth of July or Americans Founding or anything. You just say things. I guess also like, yeah, non Puerto Rican Americans spend a lot of time thinking about the Founding Fathers. Uh huh. Anyway, here's the part where he comes to my tweet, and.
00:40:18
Speaker 6: You see the only people other than the libtards who think that this was great are the rhinos, the fake Republicans who are always welcomed by the liberal media.
00:40:31
Speaker 1: Pause on that. I no longer consider myself a Republican. I consider myself an independent, So go off.
00:40:37
Speaker 6: I guess the industrial complex like this clown Brad Palumbo who says that a Spanish language Super Bowl halftime performance by a top American artists, see, they try to reinforce that fake news that he's he's an American.
00:40:51
Speaker 1: No, no, well, because he literally is, factually speaking, an American citizen with a US passport in facts, don't care about your racist feelings. He's an American.
00:41:00
Speaker 6: No, he's an I know, he's an American in name only. And artist is not an attack on American culture. It's a reflection of it more than true. FA million Americans speak Spanish, Yeah, which is a major problem. It's called assimilation. You're supposed to assimilate here.
00:41:17
Speaker 1: Yeah, they speak English too, buddy, They also assimilate and they speak both. And we live in a multicultural society with a common culture that people should assimilate to. But it's still okay to have your own traditions and cultural heritage as well as part of that. Like you're gonna, you're gonna, Oh no, I have to live in the same country as some people who also speak Spanish. I am much more sympathetic to the critique of people who come here as immigrants, for example, and don't learn English. I think that's crazy, Like that's wild. But still having both is not a problem.
00:41:52
Speaker 6: Sorry, not sorry, You're you're supposed to come and start speaking our language, engage in our customs, engage and so our holidays in thriving American cities like Miami, where I live. It's commonplace, of course that it's part of the reason why America is becoming a hellhole. A third world hellhole.
00:42:13
Speaker 1: Is the third world hellhole in the room of us. That is certainly not the uh impression that I have of Miami. I actually think it's a thriving and flourishing and very well run, very safe city, very clean, very well policed, too much construction, lots of traffic. But uh, third world hellhole it is not. I would suggest that our our friend here needs to touch some grass and probably get some some sunlight as well out of the basement hellhole.
00:42:43
Speaker 6: If you feel attacked simply by people speaking in or singing Spanish, you're the Probut well, we're the problem, yeah, because we don't want foreign ours speaking of foreign land on our soil. In a case you can't tell O gate.
00:42:57
Speaker 1: Clown is oh so I I'm a gay CNN contributor. Clown, I guess one out of three am bad calling someone a CNN contributor. For people who are not in the political commentary industry, you might not understand this. I am not a CNN contributor. I have appeared on CNN the network three times. I've actually probably appeared on Fox News over one hundred times. I'm also not a contributor there and never have have been. A contributor refers to somebody who has a contract and is paid to be a regular talent for the network. So like Scott Jennings, for example, is a CNN contributor, I am not. So it's just actually wrong. And then you got me there. I guess, oh, gay, it doesn't really have anything to do with our debate about the Spanish language and bad Bunny. But I guess if you're really into identity politics, you can bring up unrelated stuff for no reason. All right, it's post.
00:43:56
Speaker 6: Well, here's five seconds of him speaking.
00:43:58
Speaker 1: We got to talk about controversial to say the very least social media point that Trump? Why am I kind of eating good night? That is? Uh? I think most people would just say it's pretty pretty racist.
00:44:13
Speaker 6: And he's talking about the Obama ape meme. Of course he's gonna think it's racist. It's not racist, but even if it was, that would actually make it even funnier. We're making racist memes great again.
00:44:26
Speaker 1: Go back. Oh, that was a lovely way to end that video go back in the closet. No, and uh not gonna happen. You're not gonna make us and uh, I'd like to see you try. That is why we have a second amendment, folks. I'll just say that and uh, listen, he's obviously it's not just racist jokes to him. I think the context of this video we just listened to is actually, yeh, you're just racist or intolerant in some way, and that is h. It's sad to me that people tune into somebody so unseerious and with such incoherent and unhinged presentation of the news and of different developments that so quickly just goes to invoking identity politics and false claims to try to tear down stuff that makes them uncomfortable for whatever reason. And I would like to think that over a million dollar or over a million subscribers, you could probably get a better green screen situation than whatever the heck that is hot take my dude, but I think you can do better and I'm rooting for you. You guys, let me know what you think of this stunning and brave takedown of me from Magastar Mark Dze. Let me know what you think in the comments makes your subscribe? Do you consider becoming a channel member to make the Markiss of the world very sad and to support my content? And with that, guys, that'll be it for today's episode of the Brad Versus Everyone podcast. Thanks so much for listening and we'll talk again. We also voting
