Ep. 1847 - This Political Ad Is Going Viral. Is It The Worst Ad Ever Made?

Imagine setting your makeup, then forgetting it's even theirs. Meet new groupie setting mist from Mabelie, New York. Gel to mist technology locks in your look for up to 24 hours, with flexible all-day comfy grip. No tightness, no stickiness, no residue. Just plump, dewy, hydrated skin that still feels like your skin. Try new groupie setting mist from Mabelie, New York. Maybe it's Mabelie. What you're about to see is one of the most cowardly and self-defeating political ads ever produced in modern American history. But just over a month to go until the midterms in a year that's been dominated by completely legitimate concerns about the cost of living and the difficulty of finding stable, long-term employment that can support a family and a mortgage. The Republican governor of Arkansas, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, has just made the baffling decision to demonize the most loyal supporters of her party, namely White Men. Now I call this decision baffling, and it is, but that doesn't mean that it's unexpected or surprising. I mean, this is the Republican party, after all. They might be useless and unreliable most of the time, but at least you can always count on them to be openly contemptuous of their own voting base. So you can rely on them for that at least. According to Republicans in Arkansas, you know, contrary to what you're seeing every day with your own eyes, the truth is that lazy White Men are the real problem. Yes, it's White Men. White Men are the ones dragging us down. They are the cinder block chained to our ankle, pulling us as a nation into the icy depths. They're defrauding the government. They're ripping off the treasury. They're unwilling to work or improve their own lives or contribute to society. So forget everything you've seen or think you've seen about Somali daycares and EBT scams and home health care shams and welfare fraud, you know, all that rampant, pervasive corruption that's overwhelmingly committed by non-whites, many of them, not even Americans. Well, in the eyes of the Republican Party establishment, you should focus your disdain instead on an imaginary epidemic of 20-something white male welfare queens. Hey Brad, Brad is turned relaxing into a full-time profession. But you, you actually work hard. You pay taxes to cover welfare for guys like Brad who just choose not to work. That's why I launched a welfare to work requirement. Almost there. Well, more arcansons are working than ever before. Of course, you know, at first glance, it's surprising to see a white male depicted in an advertisement at all. I mean, that's a rare sight these days, as we know. I was watching football on Sunday and I don't think I saw a single commercial with a white male unless he was depicted as part of a biracial couple or like a multi-racial friend group. Aside from that, you only see white males in commercials if they're portraying, of course, the burglars in a home security ad or, you know, maybe the greedy credit card company executives in an ad for a different credit card company that doesn't have greedy executives, of course. That's the kind of brilliantly subtle messaging we've come to expect from our nation's illustrious marketing departments. And it's also, apparently, exactly what we can expect from the Republican Party, which rose to power in the last election by campaigning quite explicitly against DEI and against anti-white discrimination in general, even if usually they won't call it that. Now they're trying to convince us that the prototypical welfare parasite is a 23-year-old white guy named Brad, which is exactly like producing a PSA, calling attention to plummeting math scores, featuring a procrastinating incompetent East Asian math student named like Zhang Chen or something, you know, exactly the sort of person that immediately springs to mind when we think of people who aren't good at math. Now, the truth, of course, is that white males are among the least likely to be on any kind of welfare at all, and young white males like Brad are virtually non-existent on the welfare roles. You know, we'll dig into the numbers more in a minute because this is actually a much more revealing moment in American politics and culture than it may at first appear. There's a reason why when Republican politicians and consultants get together in a room to come up with an ad for their new welfare policy, which, by the way, is a good policy. We'll talk more about that in a moment. They make the deliberate decision to represent welfare leeches with a stereotypical lazy white male caricature. I mean, there's a reason they specifically chose not to use a more statistically accurate caricature. You know, if you think conservative, the conservative critics of this ad are overreacting, well, then just imagine how basically everyone would have responded if they had used the exact same approach, but with a different race. Now, somebody on X called Dr. Clown PhD, who may or may not be a legitimate medical doctor, I don't know, posted in AI mockup with the races swapped out. So, this is basically the exact same ad, but with the stereotype this time being of a black guy, here it is. Oh, hell no, that's a hole. Throw the flag, man. Meet Dishon. Dishon has turned relaxing into a full-time profession. You pay taxes to cover welfare for guys like Dishon, who just choose not to work. Now, more arkinsons are working than ever before, even Dishon. Now, that, of course, is AI Slop. I object to it on the grounds that it is AI Slop on those grounds, at least. It's also not really representative of the statistically standard welfare moocher, who is more likely to be a black single mom with multiple children. The people attaching themselves to the welfare system, like barnacles on the hall of a ship and staying on the dole for their entire lives and costing the taxpayers untold billions of dollars every single year are generally not young male gamers of any race, but the point still stands. That AI Slop video is a low-brow, insulting, crass, black male caricature. And the whole point is that you would never see that, or anything like it, AI or otherwise, from any politician on the left or right. And if you ever did, it would be widely condemned as racist. Nobody would pretend they don't see the problem with it, that they don't understand what the ad is doing or why. And when people objected to that ad, if it ever did exist, which it never would, you're not going to get people saying, what, I don't, oh, you're upset about that, I have no idea why. That wouldn't happen, because this kind of demonization only ever goes one way. Only ever targets one group. White males have been degraded, demeaned, and systematically disadvantaged by every institution in the country explicitly, so openly so for decades. That's a fact. You know, that's, that's not just like a sob story, that's actually just a fact, it's true. Some of us are tired of it. And we expect our elected representatives to push back against it, or at the very least, if they don't have the gumption to push back against it, at least don't participate in it. Now not every conservative feels this way, as the ad, you know, provoked a loud and justified backlash from many on the right, there were others who are quick to rush to its defense. For example, Joel Berry, who used to write for the Babylon B, posted this, quote, there's a strategic reason behind using a white guy in the sad, it's designed to keep the conversation on the merits of the policy instead of making it a racial issue. That would have worked a great 10 years ago, but now we have a growing contingent of whites who are just as cripplingly insecure and neurotic about race as a BIPOC SJW. Now I don't know why Joel is pretending he doesn't understand the point, but I do know that he is pretending. He's smart enough to know that there is a rather significant difference between the white people criticizing this ad and the quote, BIPOC SJWs. The difference is that the ladder group complains about systemic and institutional bigotry against their favorite demographic groups, except that the systemic and institutional bigotry is not real. On the other hand, the growing contingent of whites, as Joel calls them, complaining about systemic and institutional bigotry against white males, you know, in that case, the systemic and institutional bigotry is real. To work a planning about a thing that is real, it's actually happening as opposed to complaining about a thing that is not real and not happening. Joel, do you understand the distinction between complaining about a thing that isn't happening and complaining about a thing that is happening? Do you see why there is no logical or moral equivalence between those two? I think you do see it. See it. I think you're pretending that you don't see it. In fact, I know you see it because you admit it in the first sentence, you say, again, there's a strategic reason behind using a white guy in this ad. It's designed to keep the conversation on the merits of the policy instead of making it a racial issue. Why would that be? the case, Joel. Why would political consultants assume that the only way to avoid a racial controversy is to portray the "officed dishonest, useless parasite" as a white male? Why is it? Is it because white males are the only group that can be portrayed that way in our society? Is it because that is the unspoken and sometimes actually spoken, in this case, by you, rule that every major institution in the country has followed for decades? Yes, you're right. And that's the point. Some of us are not okay with white males being the default punching bags. We're not okay with the situation where we say, okay, well, we need a group to be the punching bag here. Let's just use white male. Obviously, it's going to be white males. We need a bad guy. Gotta be a white male. Like, yes, I agree that that is the strategy, that is what they're doing. Our point is that that is bad. Okay, we shouldn't accept that. Okay, we're critiquing that. And if that makes us cripplingly insecure, then so be it. But I'd say, you know, someone appears to be emotionally crippled in this conversation, and it's not us. You know, any white male, in the other hand, who's willing to just sort of lie down and take it, I'd say there, there may be the crippled one, even the insecure one. Now, meanwhile, in the face of this backlash, instead of firing her communications team at admitting the ad was a terrible idea, Sarah Huckabee Sanders proceeded to make the situation infinitely worse. She didn't simply double down. She took a cue from the Joel Berry camp and pretended that she didn't understand what everybody was upset about. Here's what she wrote, quote, "Some critics online don't like my welfare work requirement ad. Next thing you know, they'll say I should have used cookies instead of cheese balls. If you're able-bodied, you should not collect welfare simply because you choose not to work period." Again, these critics online are conservatives who are simply tired of seeing even our own side demonized young white men. Okay, your team, Governor, made an obviously intentional decision to not depict a more statistically representative welfare leech, which as you know would be a black single mom. Can you explain why you made that decision? Don't pretend it wasn't a decision. It might fool Joel Berry. It's not going to fool the rest of us. Don't pretend that it wasn't a deliberate decision where you've got consultants and marketing people you're sitting around in it, trying to decide who is going to be the villain in this ad. Don't pretend it wasn't deliberately decided, "Oh yeah, that's got to be a way." There's no way we're putting a black guy in that position. You're insulting our intelligence. Can you explain why there's no way in hell, no way in a million years, you would ever produce that kind of ad with any other group as the villain? Can you tell us why? If you don't want to explain it because it's precisely the answer we already know, then again, at least don't insult our intelligence by pretending you don't understand the point we're making. Now you certainly know that we aren't upset about work requirements for welfare. I mean, Republican voters support work requirements generally where people have to demonstrate that they're trying to find a job before they get benefits. Really, many of us want to go much further than that. Speaking for myself at least, I don't know what the numbers are with Republicans generally, speaking for myself, I'd like to eliminate food stamps entirely. I'm more anti-welfare leeches than you are, Governor, a lot more. I'd say get rid of the whole thing. The SNAP program has no reason to exist. It's the single easiest welfare program to defraud, and that's obviously saying something. And it's built on a faulty premise, which is that millions of Americans need free food or else they'll starve. That's just not true. It's a fantasy. It's not true. Nobody in America is at a risk of starvation. We're all going to die. We're at risk of many different kinds of physical calamities, but starvation is not going to be the thing that takes any of us out. Americans are by orders of magnitude, pun intended, more likely to die from eating too much than too little. As the Wall Street Journal reported this year, quote, "America doesn't have a hunger problem about three-quarters of adult food stamp beneficiaries are overweight or obese. Only three percent are underway. More Americans of all income levels die from illnesses caused by overindulgence than by hunger." Yes, three-quarters of adult food stamp recipients are overweight or obese. This is a program that costs around $100 billion per year, and 75 percent of the recipients by definition do not need food assistance. If anything, they need the opposite. I mean, you can make a much more compelling case for distributing taxpayer-funded ozemic than for food stands. Not that I'd be in favor of that, but the point still stands. If anyone doesn't need help accessing food, they have about 10 other welfare programs that they can draw money from, not to mention private charities and soup kitchens and food pantries, and so on and so on. That's why if you spend five minutes on TikTok, you'll find that food stamp recipients are generally obese and highly entitled. They're also bragging about making plates and selling them on the street using their food stamp money. Watch. I'm going to tell y'all straight up like this. I just got that text that the link is definitely cut the fuck off for a November. Y'all better stay the fuck out of my way in these sources. I'm walking out with Carson. I'm not paying for shit. Trump, if you won't, I'm a fucking movie. I was gonna happen. Before my kids go broke it, it's my joke. I'm gonna be stealing like it ain't no tomorrow. I am going to go in that store and get everything I get regularly. I'm going to bag my stuff, swipe my link across all that day. Ain't no pin the balance on there. I'm going to walk the fuck out. I'm going to try in the strawberry kiwi. 100 out of 10. 100 out of 10. Come on now. Watch. Now this is the kind of fraud that would be worth depicting in a political ad. It would actually resonate with voters because it's really happening and it's costing us tens of billions of dollars every single year. So what are the actual numbers? Well, you know, there are many different figures floating around on social media about how different groups collect welfare at different rates. We're not going to take their word for it, but unfortunately calculating the exact number of people on welfare is complicated and the government makes it difficult to do so. That may be partly intentional. After all, if America's welfare programs are really distributing wealth from people of one color to people of another, then they wouldn't really want us to know that. Another reason is that welfare is a patchwork of dozens of different programs, some administered by the federal government and some by the state, some like what Huckabee is talking about in her ad or federal programs administered by the state. So to keep things neat, we'll focus on one of the biggest programs, SNAP, which provides food assistance, as we know, to low income people. This report on the SNAP program is the most recent government statistic published last month by the Department of Agriculture. On page 75, breaks down SNAP recipients by race and demographics. And according to the data, about 40.1 million Americans are on SNAP, which is a ridiculously high number already. We're supposed to believe that 40 million Americans would not be able to eat without taxpayer assistance. That's what the systems, that's what we're supposed to believe. That's just under 12% of the population. About one in eight people, one in eight people are not capable of feeding themselves in a first world civilized country is what we're supposed to believe. Now, according to the official government data, 35% of SNAP recipients are white, despite them being almost 60% of the population. So that is wildly disproportionate, in the sense that non-Hispanic whites are using welfare much less often than the other groups. Black Americans make up roughly 25% of SNAP recipients, despite being 14% of the population. Again, wildly disproportionate in the opposite direction, wildly overrepresented on the welfare roles. Hispanics are 16% of SNAP recipients and are 20% of the population. So if you're going to pick any group that represents kind of the standard welfare recipient or represents a group that is the most likely to be on welfare, whites are the last group you should pick of the three major American racial categories. Women are also 55% of the SNAP recipients, despite being 50.5% of the population. So if you're going to pick a typical welfare recipient, it'd be a woman, not a man. In fact, based on these numbers, non-Hispanic white men aged 18 to 35 are among the least likely to be on welfare at all at around 5% of total recipients. And I suspect that even that might be a massive of overcount. But it's a It's a vanishingly small group. So to recap, the Sarah Huckabee Sanders team is going out of its way to demonize one of the few demographics in the country who are actually net contributors to the US economy. And that may not have been the conscious motive. Okay, they might not have sat in a room and said, but let's figure out a way to demonize white men, although maybe they did. The conscious motive was more likely to simply avoid offending racial minorities in particular black women. And that's exactly what makes the decision so ludicrous. Okay, this is a demographic. When they're trying to decide, well, who would we rather risk offending? Which racial group? And they always decide, oh, well, you know, white men. Again, that's the, that's the Jolberry approach. That makes, that's unjustifiable morally, also politically, strategically, it makes no sense. In particular, black women are demographic that overwhelmingly votes Democrat in every single election. I mean, overwhelming, something like 92% of black women supported Kamala Harris. 95% went for Joe Biden. 94% went for Hillary 2016. 96% went for Obama. You can't find a single election where black women supported Republicans to any significant degree. Never mind a majority. That's never happened, never will. You can't find even a, you can't find an election where the proportion has been not minuscule. And yet, Republicans would rather alienate their actual base to appease groups that nearly universally despise them and will never feel any differently toward them no matter what happens. These cowards don't have the guts to criticize groups that will never vote for them anyway. They just never learn. There used to be this assumption that with most things, you know, you could pick two, fast, affordable, or reliable. Apparently you weren't allowed to have all three. Wireless companies have benefited enormously from that theory, but I have a pure talk line and the reason I keep telling you about them is pretty simple. The coverage is phenomenal. They offer unlimited data and their unlimited high speed data is just 34, 99 a month. So it turns out you don't actually have to choose. At least when it comes to cell phones, you can have it all. And don't just take my word for it in a recent industry survey of more than 120,000 wireless customers. Pure talk was the only wireless company to receive five out of five stars in every category, coverage, support, value, and data. At some point, paying more for worse service stops being unfortunate and starts becoming a decision that you're making voluntarily. So stop doing that, go to puretalk.com/walsh. Say 50% off on your first month. That's puretalk.com/walsh. You know, a lot of people have a tendency to ignore a problem until ignoring it is just no longer physically possible. The check engine light comes on, you keep driving, something in the house starts making a strange noise and you decide that perhaps the noise will eventually resolve itself. And unfortunately, you know, we can take the same approach with our own bodies. As you get older, if your energy isn't what it used to be, your recovery has changed or you simply don't feel quite a sharp, the intelligent response isn't a panic, but it also isn't to ignore it. Pay attention, get your numbers checked, talk to your doctor, and when it comes specifically to supporting healthy testosterone levels, there's a product that men should know about. It's called Mars Men. Their formula is built around ingredients that have been studied for their ability to support healthy testosterone levels naturally. There are no synthetic hormones or weird stimulants, and it's made in the USA and third party tested. The point isn't to pretend that you're 20 years old forever. The point is that if something has changed, you should probably pay attention to it rather than automatically accepting that this is simply how, you know, how you're supposed to feel now. And Mars Men comes with a 90 day money back guarantee so you can look into it without much risk. For limited time, our listeners get 50% off for life plus free shipping and three free gifts at mengo-tomars.com. That's mengo-tomars.com for 50% off and three free gifts when you check out. After you purchase, they'll ask you where you heard about them and please support our show and tell them we sent you. So to be clear about this, Sarah Huckabee Sanders does not oppose the idea of snap in general, we should note. A year ago, she publicly advocated to ban snap for junk food, which is a good policy, but at the same time, she demanded that the federal government allow people to buy hot rotisserie chickens with their snap benefits. And her stated reason was that she wanted people to be healthier, even though there's already plenty of healthy foods that people can buy with snap if they want to, especially if they're willing to cook their own food, which they should watch. Right now, you can use food stamps to buy a soft drink or a candy bar from a gas station, but you can't use them to buy an Arkansas-raised hot rotisserie chicken from a grocery store. That's the definition of crazy. Governor Sanders says she's acting because America is facing a chronic disease epidemic, with millions of Americans struggling with obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. She says one-third of all our canzans have diabetes or are pre-diabetic. When the numbers are that high, it's important for us to examine a system that actively encourages and subsidizes unhealthy, highly processed, addictive products. Now, the honest explanation for what's going on here is that it's corporate welfare. And some of the biggest corporations in Arkansas, Walmart, Tyson, Sam's clubs, Kroger, and so on, sell hot rotisserie chickens. If Sanders was able to secure an exemption allowing people to buy these chickens with snap benefits, it'd be a very big deal for all these big grocery stores. In general, snap isn't allowed to be spent on prepared foods since it's supposed to be an absolute last resort. It's supposed to help people get the essentials that they can prepare at home, but she wanted an exemption, which would benefit companies like Walmart. And as you probably guessed, the Walton family, which owns Walmart are major donors to Sarah Sanders and her various initiatives. The Walons were some of the largest individual donors to Sanders campaign. Jim Walton sent half a million dollars to an education focus group that employed Sanders's campaign manager, Chris Caldwell, in a high-level position. So is that what this is about? Who knows, but doesn't look good. And if we really want those dastardly 20-year-old gamers to get off the couch and find a job and stop building the welfare roles, all like five or six of them who are doing that, why exactly should we be paying for them to eat hot rotisserie chickens for Walmart? Why don't we tell this mostly fictional group of welfare recipients to eat rice and beans every day until they finally put the controller back and down and go to work? Hot rotisserie chickens taste good. It's the kind of food people can eat every night, and it's very convenient. And that's the opposite of the kind of food that we want to give people for free. You want to give the bare minimum. You want there to be some effort involved if you're going to do this at all, which I don't think you should. Since again, virtually all welfare recipients are already overweight. And also, the idea is to motivate people to not, this should not be a lifestyle choice. If you're going to have a system like this, which for the umpteenth time you shouldn't, it should be a last resort, a stop along the way to you getting your life back together. And by the way, if Sarah Sanders were truly concerned about the plight of young white men, she'd not to take a total detour here, but she'd be talking about the rise of mobile sports gambling or state, which is, which the government legalized just a few years ago. In 2019, in Arkansas, a total of $11 million was wagered on sports according to the Arkansas state government. And then they legalized betting on smartphones and everything changed. And by 2025, more than $655 million was being wagered in a single year in Arkansas. This year, more than $2.5 million is wagered on sports in Arkansas every day. It's a massive financial problem for young men in the state. Instead of investing in their own retirement or a home, there are many of them making extremely risky bets on their phone. And mostly without realizing it, they're playing a rigged game. The sports books go to great lengths to ban anyone who wins too much. As the governor of Arkansas said anything about this as far as I could tell she hasn't, she's allowed gambling to proliferate instead. In fact, the Arkansas Racing Commission just approved a petition from Casinos to partner with all the major national sports betting apps to expand access to gambling even further. We're told not to worry about any of this. We're supposed to mock the unemployed white guy living in his mom's basement. We're not supposed to criticize the sports books in any way. And while we're at it, we're supposed to pay for everyone to buy chickens at Walmart. It's not really a coherent message. And politically, it's catastrophic. It's the kind of messaging you get when a political party wants to lose, or at least doesn't know how to not lose. What's interesting here is that Sarah Huckabee Sanders far from the only Republican who's pushing the message that white people are lazy to generate. She's far from the only one to do that. This is a common message from Republicans. Here's the speaker of the house, along with his deputy Steve Scalise. These are clips from 2025, for example. Watch. You don't want able-bodied workers on a program that is intended, for example, for single mothers with two small children who's just trying to make it. That's what Medicaid is for. Not for 29-year-old males sitting on their couches playing video games. We're going to find those. guys and we're gonna send them back to work. That's what everybody supports. That's what the Republicans are for. And by the way, we find dignity in our work. That's gonna be good for everybody. - We're actually cutting spending in this bill, getting rid of a lot of waste fraud and abuse, putting work requirements, for example, in a program like Medicaid, so that the truly disabled and needy will be able to get better access to Medicaid because those able-bodied adults who are turning down work the 35 year old, who's sitting at his mom's basement, playing video games, is gonna have to go get a job again. Those are gonna be good things for the economy, but it's also something that helps reduce waste fraud and abuse and saves hundreds of billions of dollars in those programs. - So, I know I'm being insecure, apparently. Even though I, you know, here's the thing. I'm a, I am a white guy, but I don't quite, quite infamously, I don't play video games. I'm not a big, I'm not a big gamer at all, and I don't live in my mom's basement. So, there's no reason for me to take this kind of thing personally, and I don't take it personally, but I do object to it. Because it's just not, this is not the problem. Okay, when we think about all the people, we're spending billions of billions of billions of dollars, we're forking over billions of dollars to leach his and parasites who are just living off the government as a lifestyle. These are not, you know, men in their 20s playing video games, for the most part. That is a minuscule fraction of the problem. You could kick every 20 plus year old white gamer in his mom's basement, off of the welfare roles, kick 'em all off, and one fell swoop. It would make basically no difference. Okay, be like a thimble of water being taken out of the ocean. But this is the go-to talking point on the right. The people who are sucking up the welfare dollars aren't black women or Somalis or Venezuelans or anything like that. The real enemy we're told is gamers in their mother's basement. Young white males named Brad who are playing with their virtual reality headsets on the sofa. They're the ones bleeding us dry. That's the message that the consulting class is telling Republican politicians to push. It's clearly sabotage and Republicans are either unable or unwilling to see it. They're paying enormous sums of money to consultants who are telling them to go to war with their own voters. Meanwhile, back in reality, again, women are more likely to be on welfare than men and black people are more likely to be on welfare than white people, significantly so. So the number of single young white male brads of using the welfare system is minuscule, practically non-existent. And yeah, Republicans don't have the balls to do this ad with Shaniqua as the villain, even though that would actually be an accurate portrayal of the problem in hand. Summer has one major advantage, which is that everyone collectively lowers their standards for how they're supposed to dress. Shorts, t-shirts, whatever shoes happen to be closest to the door for three months, apparently all of this is acceptable or so some people think. But now, fall is here, which means it's time to start dressing like an adult again. And this is actually the perfect season for Tacovas. I have a few pairs of Tacovas and they're exactly the kind of thing that I want this time of year or really any time of year. They're simple classic leather boots that look great with jeans and you can wear them casually or dress them up without looking like you're trying particularly hard. They're also genuinely comfortable. Tacovas handcrafts their boots in more than 200 steps. There's no miserable break-in period. Mine felt great right out of the box. And if you're refreshing, the rest of your wardrobe for fall Tacovas also makes tons of other stuff that make denim, shirts, belts, wallets, plenty of other things with that same classic understated style. So summer's over, put the flip-flops away. We've had enough. Right now, get 10% off at Tacovas.com/mat. When you sign up for email and text, that's 10% off at t-e-c-o-v-a-s.com/mat. Tacovas.com/mat, cease-civer details. Tacovas, point your toes west. But even as Republicans go out of their way to attack their own voters, Democrats are, of course, adopting the exact opposite strategy as they always do. Democrats don't attack their voters. They know where their bread is buttered. Now, they don't do this. They're not gonna demonize and make a caricature of their own voting base. In fact, they do the opposite. You know, they build up an entire mythology around their favored voters, particularly black women, even though it's transparent nonsense. So here's just, for example, and this was tweeted out today or this week. So it's a really interesting contrast. Here's Iana Pressley, who represents Massachusetts in Congress. Keep in mind how Republicans talk about young white males. Here's Iana Pressley talking about black women. Quote, black women are the backbone of our economy, and we all benefit from their essential contributions to our workforce and communities. By pushing black women out of our economy, everyone is being denied their brilliance and intellectual capital. And then she posted this video where she elaborates on her grand thesis. A thesis that's, by the way, and we'll get into this, but wrong on every level. It's wrong to say that black women are the backbone of the economy. That's just total nonsense. But also this, there's also the claim that black women are getting pushed out of the workforce. Where's that, the exact opposite is happening and has been happening for decades. Every institution goes out of its way to change the rules, to change the hiring process, to hire as many black women as they possibly can. But anyway, here's Iana Pressley describing this fantasy in greater detail, listen. - With the so-called reckless actions of the Department of Government Efficiency, that took a sledgehammer to the infrastructure of our federal government. If you processed a FAFSA application of the Department of Education, it was probably a black woman doing that. If somebody in your family was preyed upon by a predatory financial product that got scanned, that they got justice, it was probably a black woman in the consumer finance protection bureau. If your house and laws were being enforced and housing and urban development, it was a black woman doing that. If your public health was being protected in health and human services, it was likely a black woman doing that. You know, and I could go on. So this is just rough of a livelihoods and lives, but this is devastating or everyone that they are being denied the brilliance and the intellectual capital of black women. - Now by the way, I don't get, this doesn't make me angry when I see this kind of thing. I hear this, it's total nonsense. It's a complete fantasy. But I get why they're doing it. I mean, it's a smart strategy. As we just said, black women are like 92% vote for Democrats at a rate of 92%, 95%. Your most loyal voters. I mean, black women as a demographic are more loyal to Democrats than any demographic has been loyal to any party ever. I mean, it's unheard of, 95%. Again, that's where your bread is buttered. And so you talk 'em up. You have nothing but positive things to say about this group that votes for us at a clip of 95%. I get why they're doing it strategically. But again, it's false. You know, she's talking about the intellectual capital black women and how we should all be in all of their brilliance. And as evidence of this claim, she lists a bunch of federal government agencies that employ black women as bureaucrats doing mostly routine and unremarkable government work. She literally says that black women are processing applications for student financial aid, as if we're supposed to sit back and awe. The brilliance it takes to, oh, they processed an application. That's like building a rocket. Move over Elon Musk. Sure, you build a rocket ship, but can you process an application? I mean, yeah, you could definitely do that you're a business owner, so you processed paperwork all the time, but still. What's next, did a black woman give someone a parking ticket? Maybe successfully stamp it envelope at the post office? So we're all supposed to be impressed here, but all that Presley is demonstrating is what is actually true, which is that black women hold a disproportionate number of government jobs, which is really a barely disguised form of welfare, which is designed to minimize humiliation while maximizing payouts to black women. Now, there's a reason why only around 2% of black women in the workforce are employed in the fields of science or engineering while around 22% are employed in roles involving the government, jumping over 30% when you include roles in non-profits and public administration. Then if you had EBT and all other forms of welfare, you end up with a hugely vastly disproportionate number of black women who are on the public goal in one form or another, more than any other single demographic in the country and it's not close. Now, everything that Democrats say that I underpriced Presley says about black women about how they built the country, they're essential to the economy, country would collapse without them. And so on is actually true of white men. Now, it's not statistically or historically true of black women. I'm sorry, there's just no actual evidence to support the backbone of the economy claim. And she didn't even say like they're one of the back, I mean, you only get one backbone, but they're part of the backbone of the economy or they're, you know, an essential ingredient in the overall, she wasn't even say they're one of the important instruments in the symphony of, no, she said the backbone, the backbone of the economy. And that is pure mythology. Not true. I mean, the fact is that if black women got sick and tired of being so oppressed and persecuted by a horrible country and all decided to book jet blue tickets and leave for greener pastures tomorrow, there's no statistical database reason to think that it would bring America to its knees, as I honestly claims. Now, if white men were to all leave, though, I'm not really sure where we would go, it would without question cripple our society overnight. That's the reality. And if black, if white men never came here in the first place, there would be no country. If white men never came here in the first place, this country would not be a country. It would be a land mass only populated by primitive tribes, most of whom still would not have invented the wheel. Again, that's just a fact. And yet no elected Republican on the national stage, and I really mean none of them. Not a single one would ever get up on stage and say about white men. What Iana Presley and every Democrat says every day about black women. No Republican, not Sarah Huckabee Sanders or anyone else. None of them, even the ones that we think are, you know, kind of based kind of, you know, kind of right wing. Even them, they are not going to get up and say, quote, white men are the backbone of our economy. And we all benefit from their essential contributions to our workforce and communities by pushing white men out of our economy. Everyone is denied their brilliance and intellectual capital. No Republican will ever say that, even though it's true on every point. It's obviously not racist to say, it's just a true thing about this particular group that is essential to the country, you know, currently and historically in a way that no other group is. It's true. It's true that they're the backbone of the economy. It's true that their contributions are essential. It's true that they're being pushed out of the economy. Yet this is not a truth that will be explicitly acknowledged by any of our so-called representatives. The most that some of them might do maybe is to speak glowingly about, you know, the wonderful ways that various groups contribute to American culture and then include white men in that list. But most of them won't even do that. And they certainly won't say anything uniquely positive about white men. They'll say it about every other group. They would never say that about white men. Again, we all know that. If you pretend you don't know that you're insulting our intelligence, we all know that's true. Should we just accept that? Should we surrender ourselves to this state of affairs? Should we just learn to love or at least accept without complaint the idea that white men can only be condemned but never praised? Should we even sit back silently while the insulting stereotypes rightfully earned by other demographic groups are put around our neck instead? Should we just allow ourselves to be the kind of like sacrificial goats of modern Western society, saddled with the sins of the village and exiled into the wilderness? My answer to that is not only no, but hell no. And that should be the answer we all give. It should be the answer the Republican Party gives. That will only happen if they start by getting rid of all their communications consultants, particularly the girl bosses and the DEI hires, and replace them with people who understand why they won the last election and why they're currently on pace to lose the next one. Instead of running a demoralization campaign against your own voters, try something productive. And that goes beyond rhetoric. I mean, yeah, it wouldn't kill you just to every once in a while say something positive about your own base. It wouldn't kill you. Maybe if like once every 100 years, maybe you might do that. But it goes beyond that. What about suspending the H1B program or shutting down SNAP entirely or launching a civil rights investigation into every government agency that has deliberately refused to hire white men as a matter of policy, spoken or unspoken. Maybe take a single concrete step to improve the lives of white Americans. Instead of mocking them. That's one way you can have some chance of actually staying in power, assuming you actually want to. A white man did not simply build the United States. They also built the Republican Party. And without them, this party, as we know it, will cease to exist in a very short order. I'll do it with the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to you tomorrow of a great day. Godspeed. Every significant movement in history started with protesting. This is our generation civil rights. I have no idea what the protest is about. Bingo, given the current climate, should have figured as polarizing as late Saunders. He would be allowed on pants. Okay, hear me okay. Saunders is a close personal friend of Chancellor Freeman. This is a decision I cannot find. Islam will conquer the west. Some more liquid. Are we paying attention? They've taken over the building, the downstairs and they've blocked the doors. I seek forgiveness from Allah, the Almighty. We cannot run and hide. Muhammad is the messenger of God. There is no God but Allah. What do you say? We turn those vessel bees into a fine red mist. As we move, one man will cover while the other guys go. They call that leaf front. You need a course in safe weapons handling. Meet new groupy setting mist from Mavily New York. Gel to mist technology locks in your look for up to 24 hours with flexible all day comfy grip. Just plump, dewey hydrated skin that still feels like your skin. Try new groupy setting mist from Mavily New York. Maybe it's Mavily.