Speaker 1: Good morning, peep Sena. Welcome to WIKA F Daily with
Speaker 1: Meet your Girl Danielle Moody, recording from the home Bunker, Folks,
Speaker 1: I want to start off today by talking about something
Speaker 1: that is not going to get as much news as
Speaker 1: it should, which is this. You'll hear about it, you know,
Speaker 1: maybe you will have heard about it yesterday. Maybe you'll
Speaker 1: hear about it for a day or two, but then
Speaker 1: it'll go away as most things do in the news cycle.
Speaker 1: But it's this. The Congressional Gold Medal was given to
Speaker 1: the officers who defended the capital on January six, who
Speaker 1: put their lives on the line, including officer Brian Sicknik,
Speaker 1: who was killed during the mob riot attack on our
Speaker 1: democracy in our capitol building. And at the event was
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy, among others,
Speaker 1: and as these heroes because that's what they are, right Like, yes,
Speaker 1: their job is to serve and protect, but I don't
Speaker 1: think that anybody thinks about the potential of a government
Speaker 1: overthrow when they become a Capitol police officer. And when
Speaker 1: those officers, including Brian Sicknick's family, were going up to
Speaker 1: shake the hands of members. They skipped over Mitch McConnell
Speaker 1: and Kevin McCarthy, and it was a very public snub.
Speaker 1: We knew that, you know, this was going to be
Speaker 1: a clip that was going to go and be played,
Speaker 1: you know, over and over again for a day or so.
Speaker 1: And I want to say bravo to those families, to
Speaker 1: those officers, because the audacity, first of all, that there
Speaker 1: were Republican members who didn't even vote, They didn't even
Speaker 1: want to have a ceremony, let alone give these heroic
Speaker 1: officers the Congressional Gold Medal. No, if you remember Marjorie
Speaker 1: Taylor Green, as the Republicans come in to take power
Speaker 1: in January, third of the House by a very slim
Speaker 1: like five or six feet margin, wants an investigation into
Speaker 1: the treatment of the rioters so she could give a
Speaker 1: fuck about the treatment of the officers on that day.
Speaker 1: You see, the Republicans are always so you know, bold
Speaker 1: when they want to chant blue lives matter. But when
Speaker 1: those blue lives were actually put on the line to
Speaker 1: defend our democracy and to defend their pathetic lives, they
Speaker 1: can't be bothered with so much as a thank you,
Speaker 1: with so much as a vote on something that should
Speaker 1: be a no brainer, because regardless on that day, on
Speaker 1: January six, twenty twenty one, could have been a lot worse.
Speaker 1: And you know, sometimes I think about it, and not
Speaker 1: because I wish death or harm upon anyone, but I
Speaker 1: wonder if members of Congress had been murdered, if the
Speaker 1: Vice President of the United States had been hung on
Speaker 1: a gallows in front of the Capitol building, if they
Speaker 1: had found his location or the location of Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker 1: or the location of Alexandrio Cassio Cortez, and they were
Speaker 1: brutally murdered or beaten as Paul Pelosi was in his
Speaker 1: own home, what would the response be Would it be
Speaker 1: just more of the same, because we have all been
Speaker 1: sitting around wondering and waiting to figure out where is
Speaker 1: the bottom here? For Republicans, where do they draw the line? Well,
Speaker 1: they don't. There is no line for them to be drawn.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, And this is but a blip in the
Speaker 1: way that the mainstream media is also covering this story.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump a couple of days ago, gets on his
Speaker 1: broke gass Twitter knockoff truth social and says that one
Speaker 1: once again is just continuing to spread the lie. This
Speaker 1: man is so stuck in three fucking years ago from now.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is one of those old people who you
Speaker 1: would think his brain is deteriorating because nothing about the
Speaker 1: present or the future is actually in focus. For Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: Everything everything is in the past. Everything has to do
Speaker 1: with this last election, not the midterms, of course, but
Speaker 1: the last presidential election in twenty twenty. Folks. We're entering
Speaker 1: into twenty twenty three in a couple of weeks, and
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is still talking about the twenty twenty election.
Speaker 1: But on top of that, on his broke ass Twitter
Speaker 1: truth social he decides to say that we need to
Speaker 1: abolish the Constitution altogether. This comes on the heels of
Speaker 1: him meeting with two anti semites and white supremacs, both
Speaker 1: fucking ya Kanye West and Nick Flente's both believe in
Speaker 1: and spout the same series of bullshit. So there is
Speaker 1: you know, one and the same there. But Donald Trump says,
Speaker 1: we need to get rid of the Constitution, we need
Speaker 1: to get rid of the articles. We need to get
Speaker 1: you know, when there's been such an assault on paraphrasing
Speaker 1: his bullshit, But when there is such an assault like
Speaker 1: there was in twenty twenty, when I should have been
Speaker 1: anointed king of America. We need to just get rid
Speaker 1: of everything. Well, there have been a few Republicans that
Speaker 1: have had tepid responses, as they do to the assertion
Speaker 1: that the former president of the United States says that
Speaker 1: we need to do away with our constitution. Now here's
Speaker 1: the thing. Donald Trump has been telling us that he
Speaker 1: doesn't believe in the constitution or the values of this
Speaker 1: country ever since he came down his fucking escalator and
Speaker 1: decided to run for the presidency and then, against all odds,
Speaker 1: actually win with all due help from the mainstream media.
Speaker 1: So the same way that they're not connecting the dots
Speaker 1: right now to tell the American people like m this
Speaker 1: is what authoritarianism and dictatorships look like. This is danger alert,
Speaker 1: alert alert, because you see, if a Democrat would ever
Speaker 1: utter such a absolutely batshit crazy statements such as we
Speaker 1: need to do away with the constitution, Republicans would have
Speaker 1: a field day. But these people don't give a fuck
Speaker 1: about the rule of law, they don't care about the Constitution,
Speaker 1: they don't care about democracy. Right now, folks, the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court is deciding a slate, a slate of cases that
Speaker 1: have to do with the ability of businesses to continue
Speaker 1: to discriminate against the LGBTQ community on a hypothetical, fucking case.
Speaker 1: Jonathan and I will talk about that next. You have
Speaker 1: Harper More v. Harper which is coming up, which it
Speaker 1: would essentially up end all of our elections and the
Speaker 1: Court would have no ability to intervene whatsoever, and basically
Speaker 1: giving all power to the states to run away with
Speaker 1: what it was that Donald Trump wanted to happen in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, which is that these state electors get to
Speaker 1: decide elections as opposed to the people that actually go
Speaker 1: out and vote. So when we think that like, oh,
Speaker 1: we're winning, we have to understand that the battle for
Speaker 1: our democracy and the sanity and the values of this
Speaker 1: nation actually rest in the hands of people who were
Speaker 1: not elected by you. They were chosen by a corrupt
Speaker 1: criminal twice impeach President and Mitch McConnell. Three justices sit
Speaker 1: primed and ready to continue the erosion of our democracy.
Speaker 1: And majority of America is none the wiser. As I
Speaker 1: speak right now, the polls have yet to close in Georgia.
Speaker 1: We won't know the outcome of that race. And I
Speaker 1: pray to God that Reverend Warnock doesn't just win. I
Speaker 1: hope that he wins overwhelmingly, that the people of Georgia
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly reject a fucking idiot puppet as their potential US Senator.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you something, who you vote to rep
Speaker 1: resent you says a lot about who you are. And
Speaker 1: if the people of Georgia overwhelmingly decide to vote for
Speaker 1: a herschel Walker, well then we know everything we need
Speaker 1: to know about the people of Georgia, don't we. When
Speaker 1: I think about the slate of Supreme Court cases, when
Speaker 1: I think about Donald Trump wanting to do away with
Speaker 1: the Constitution, when I think about the Republican Party that
Speaker 1: has turned into a white supremist cult, I mean, as
Speaker 1: we look to go into this new year, I don't
Speaker 1: really know if the people of this nation have the
Speaker 1: wherewithal to be as activated as they need to be. Now. Look,
Speaker 1: the midterms went a lot differently than many had anticipated.
Speaker 1: But like I always say, do not pay attention to
Speaker 1: the fucking polls. Pay attention to the polls that matter,
Speaker 1: which is the one that people go inside and actually
Speaker 1: vote in, because otherwise people are just throwing shit up
Speaker 1: against the wall and guessing right they're guessing about what
Speaker 1: is going to happen. But when I look at twenty
Speaker 1: twenty three, which will be roughly the start, right of
Speaker 1: the longest election cycle ever for the presidency, righted, everything
Speaker 1: will be about who's going to run, who's announcing, when
Speaker 1: they're going to announce, what's happening with Donald Trump, Will
Speaker 1: we see indictments? You know, it's all very exhausting just
Speaker 1: to even think about it. But there's another thing that
Speaker 1: I'm thinking about on the heels of this awards ceremony
Speaker 1: of these Capital Police, is that January six, twenty twenty three,
Speaker 1: will mark the second anniversary of January sixth, of the insurrection,
Speaker 1: of the attempt to overthrow our government. And aside from
Speaker 1: last week's seditious conspiracy verdict against Stuart Rhodes, one of
Speaker 1: the founders of the Oath Keepers, the subsequent trials that
Speaker 1: are happening with the rest of the oath Keepers and
Speaker 1: the Proud Boys, the Architects right, the Donald Trump, the
Speaker 1: Rudy Giuliani, the Johnny Smith's right, the Virginia Thomas, the
Speaker 1: you know, the people, the Steve Bannons, the people who
Speaker 1: were in the war room in the Willard Hotel, are
Speaker 1: still walking around free two years later, and our democracy, friends,
Speaker 1: is still hanging on by a thread. So I just wonder, first,
Speaker 1: we're not going to have a big marking and recognition
Speaker 1: of that day because the Republicans will control the House.
Speaker 1: So unless the Senate actually decides to do something, you know, again,
Speaker 1: they have the ability to erase history by not acknowledging it,
Speaker 1: by gaslighting the rest of us that like, oh, January
Speaker 1: sixth is just another day. It's not. It's the day
Speaker 1: that the world watch as Trumpers and Maga storm the
Speaker 1: Capitol Building, broke in, killed police officers while the President
Speaker 1: of the United States was in the White House throwing
Speaker 1: catchup at the walls because he was so angry that
Speaker 1: he couldn't be there, and he still no indictments, was
Speaker 1: able to announce his second attempt at the presidency. Third,
Speaker 1: I guess I don't know what this new year has
Speaker 1: in store politically, but I can tell you that personally,
Speaker 1: we all need to recommit to fighting for this country,
Speaker 1: to fighting for our democracy, because unless the Republican Party
Speaker 1: is put down in a very clear and distinctive way,
Speaker 1: they're going to keep pushing, pushing for fascism. Pushing for
Speaker 1: a dictatorship, pushing for authoritarianism until they have their way.
Speaker 1: We are the ones that we are waiting for. We
Speaker 1: are the patriots that we are looking for to defend
Speaker 1: this country. It is up to us and only us.
Speaker 1: Coming up next, dear friends, my conversation with our in
Speaker 1: house doctor, doctor Jonathan Metzo. Folks, you know that whenever
Speaker 1: we have the opportunity to speak with our in house
Speaker 1: doctor or our good good friend, doctor Jonathan Metzel, I
Speaker 1: am always super pleased. Jonathan. You know, the last time
Speaker 1: we spoke last week, we talked about the seriousness of
Speaker 1: the fact that we are becoming numb to the issues
Speaker 1: of gun violence, to the issue issues of mass shootings.
Speaker 1: And during that time mayors across the country have actually
Speaker 1: come together and written a letter to the Senate to
Speaker 1: I believe also the President in saying that we need
Speaker 1: to take action, we need support. There's only so much
Speaker 1: that we can do in our own cities, in our
Speaker 1: own states in order to keep people safe. And don't
Speaker 1: don't people don't our citizens have the right to be
Speaker 1: able to leave their homes, go to the grocery store,
Speaker 1: go to church, go to a synagogue, go to a mosque,
Speaker 1: go to school and be safe. So I wanted to
Speaker 1: get your thoughts, Jonathan on this. This is not the
Speaker 1: first time, this is not the first time that a
Speaker 1: collection of mayors have come together to call on the Senate,
Speaker 1: to call on the president to do something. So I
Speaker 1: just want to get your thoughts on their letter, on
Speaker 1: this collection of leaders, and whether or not there will
Speaker 1: be anything other than thank you so much for writing
Speaker 1: to us. Well, I think it's important right moral authority
Speaker 1: of groups who are standing up against the kind of
Speaker 1: insanity that we see. It's super important. I mean, it
Speaker 1: reminds me also of doctors who have mobilized in a
Speaker 1: campaign called this is My Lane, and victims families, the
Speaker 1: people I study from mass shootings, they have mobilized also,
Speaker 1: And so you know, the more the more people are
Speaker 1: out there forming elitions that can not just write letters
Speaker 1: but also form effective voting blocks and mobilized during elections
Speaker 1: and things like that. Of course, that's all very important
Speaker 1: and brave, and people are fighting upstream. I will say that,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the lesson of my research is
Speaker 1: that the power for gun policy ultimately rests in judges,
Speaker 1: and so liberal America has just been far too slow
Speaker 1: to recognize that while we were out there doing marches
Speaker 1: in the streets after mass shootings and all these important
Speaker 1: great things, the other side was not making a ton
Speaker 1: of noise. They were just putting in judges who were
Speaker 1: bought and paid for by the NRA, And ultimately judges
Speaker 1: are the ones who are going to be setting a
Speaker 1: lot of gun policy. I mean, we see this with
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, but it's true throughout entire our entire system,
Speaker 1: and it just took liberals way too long to figure
Speaker 1: this out. That's why this Georgia election is so important,
Speaker 1: right because what does the Senate do, Among other things,
Speaker 1: they appoint judges, And I think that gun reform, if
Speaker 1: that there's power from mayors, from communities, from survivors, from doctors,
Speaker 1: from everybody else, it gives the Senate the authority to
Speaker 1: then seat judges who will uphold even the most basic, reasonable,
Speaker 1: common sense gun policies. But without that, we've just let
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell have a kind of federalist society checklist of
Speaker 1: judges who, I mean, some of these judges had never
Speaker 1: heard a case. They're only criteria for being a judge
Speaker 1: is that they get an a rating from the NRA,
Speaker 1: and so we need to reverse that trend at the judiciary.
Speaker 1: And so it's all cumulative, it's all summative. But I
Speaker 1: would say that without that, without that judiciary piece, it
Speaker 1: becomes a protest move as opposed to a power move. Yeah,
Speaker 1: And that was my feeling in question was whether or
Speaker 1: not this was just a collective action that was going
Speaker 1: to be taken. But was anything going to come out
Speaker 1: of it? Was there going to be any real response? Right?
Speaker 1: Because I mean, I, Jonathan, you've been doing this work
Speaker 1: longer than most and I don't know the question that
Speaker 1: the mayors pose, what was what is it going to take?
Speaker 1: How many more lives need to be lost, how many
Speaker 1: more you know, funerals need to be attended to, how
Speaker 1: many more people you know have to look across their
Speaker 1: table and you know, and and lose family members. And
Speaker 1: I don't empathy. We always seek, Jonathan. I think that
Speaker 1: in most of these battles to appeal to people's humanness,
Speaker 1: to appeal to their heart to we talk about changing
Speaker 1: hearts and minds, And what you've just you know, iterated,
Speaker 1: is that this isn't a hearts and minds issue anymore, Right, like,
Speaker 1: this is this is a legal issue. This is about
Speaker 1: who is going to be sitting on that bench that
Speaker 1: is going to make decisions that are about the betterment
Speaker 1: of this country, the safety of this country, and not
Speaker 1: and not about who has a one hundred percent rating
Speaker 1: with the n r A. Do you think then again,
Speaker 1: that the messaging needs to shift in terms of what
Speaker 1: we're asking for, because we keep saying, how will history
Speaker 1: remember these people? How will the well what who cares?
Speaker 1: They've rewrite history all the time. So I'm like, what
Speaker 1: is what is the appeal and the push here? I
Speaker 1: mean I do kind of laugh sometimes about how will
Speaker 1: history remember these people? Because that implies people in the
Speaker 1: future are going to be any more reasonable than people today, Right,
Speaker 1: But I mean, look at now compared to the past,
Speaker 1: Like you know, it's I think we have a pretty
Speaker 1: good proof right now that history doesn't matter all that much.
Speaker 1: It's kind of like who has the power to write
Speaker 1: the history? And so I mean there's another case not
Speaker 1: linked to guns right now, the imaginative gay people use
Speaker 1: your business case that was in front of the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court yesterday, which just shows the power of having a
Speaker 1: radicalized judiciary. No, I'm not suggesting liberals radicalized the judiciary,
Speaker 1: but I am, But I mean, I mean what radicalized
Speaker 1: means just reeling it back from the madness that's happened
Speaker 1: right now, which is just incredible. And so I would
Speaker 1: just say, I would just say that, you know, we
Speaker 1: have a lot of repair to do again. Again, that's
Speaker 1: why having fifty one senators is going to be so
Speaker 1: incredibly important because Mitch McConnell, well, you know, while everybody
Speaker 1: else's blah blah blah, you know, he's, as we know,
Speaker 1: been running the table on all these judiciary appointments for
Speaker 1: so long, and Trump appointed many, you know, three important
Speaker 1: Supreme Court judges. And so what we're seeing right now
Speaker 1: is this really radical intertion of the Supreme Court and
Speaker 1: moved to up end long had long held civil liberties
Speaker 1: and rights. And so I just think that I just
Speaker 1: think that getting this back to some kind of normal
Speaker 1: middle ground, it's not it's about elections, but elections leading
Speaker 1: to judges, I think it is going to be where
Speaker 1: this is. And I'll tell you one thing about the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court case yesterday that I've been thinking about. This
Speaker 1: is the case of the Colorado woman who didn't even
Speaker 1: have a web wedding business. But if she did, maybe
Speaker 1: some gay people would have maybe wanted her to use
Speaker 1: their services. Like it was totally a speculative case. There
Speaker 1: was no there's no litigant, there's no grieved party here.
Speaker 1: The case that she imagined never happened. She actually didn't
Speaker 1: even have the business yet, and so she's just saying,
Speaker 1: I could be doing this with my business and gay
Speaker 1: people could come to me, and I imagine, and so
Speaker 1: she was, it's all speculation. And it's funny because I
Speaker 1: see this with guns a lot too, that a lot
Speaker 1: of gun policies. They'll they'll ask all these like Angela
Speaker 1: Stroud as a sociologist. She wrote this great book, Good
Speaker 1: Guys with Guns, and basically she went around Texas and
Speaker 1: asked the guys, why do you why do you have
Speaker 1: an air fifteen round your back and three pistols on
Speaker 1: your waist, these white good guys with guns. And they
Speaker 1: would say, well, a gang banger could come, or a
Speaker 1: carjack or could come, or I could pull up to
Speaker 1: the bodegas, somebody said, and mister baggy pants saggy pants
Speaker 1: rapper could come and whatever, like all these really racist
Speaker 1: racial stereotypes. And then she said, Man, I guess see
Speaker 1: how you want a gun? Has that ever actually happened?
Speaker 1: And in every case they were like, well no, but
Speaker 1: it might. So it was all about this projection, this
Speaker 1: kind of speculation that minoritized or aggrieved or you know,
Speaker 1: disadvantaged group might do something to me and take my
Speaker 1: privilege or wealth. And that's what kind of spread this
Speaker 1: fear of guns, you know. And we saw it even
Speaker 1: in New York, like a black guy could push you
Speaker 1: on the subway tracks and stuff like that. Well maybe
Speaker 1: that happened one or two times, um, but it was
Speaker 1: it's all this speculation that plays into implicit bias and stereotype.
Speaker 1: And it's just funny because, like I saw the same
Speaker 1: method being used in the Supreme Court case that this
Speaker 1: woman really was not aggrieved in any way. There was
Speaker 1: no case, no gay people that ever come to her business,
Speaker 1: which she didn't even have yet, So she was just
Speaker 1: speculating like, oh, maybe some gay people could come to
Speaker 1: me and therefore whatever. It reminded me so much of
Speaker 1: these gun cases, and it's just another example. I mean,
Speaker 1: in a in a balanced judiciary, this stuff would not
Speaker 1: be seeing the light of day. It's completely undemocrat right,
Speaker 1: because there's no there's no place, there's no plate, like,
Speaker 1: there's no case, like, there's no case like giraffes are
Speaker 1: protected by the Endangered Specie to Act. But if a
Speaker 1: giraffe wants to come take my college class, why don't
Speaker 1: I start a lawsuit now, just in case a giraffe
Speaker 1: comes to take my class. Like this is never going
Speaker 1: to happen, and so it and like it's not like
Speaker 1: this woman was going to have a lot of gay clients.
Speaker 1: I don't think if she ever did open her business.
Speaker 1: And so we're just in we're in the we're in
Speaker 1: the kind of right, we're in speculative law where people
Speaker 1: are just sitting around in their free time. I mean,
Speaker 1: I had a tweet yesterday that I said, in psychiatry,
Speaker 1: when you imagine gay people are going to do things
Speaker 1: to you, we call that projection. Right, it has actually
Speaker 1: something to do with you, not with actually the world.
Speaker 1: And so we're in the world of kind of speculative
Speaker 1: judiciary activism right now, which is a pretty dangerous place
Speaker 1: to be. And so again I just think it's all
Speaker 1: the more important for guns for everything else. Guns are
Speaker 1: part of this same agenda that we that we turn
Speaker 1: this turn the ship around as quickly as we possibly can,
Speaker 1: and that means rebalancing the judiciary and particularly serve in court. Jonathan.
Speaker 1: If somebody is sitting around imagining nonsense right whe there,
Speaker 1: it is the guys with six guns around their belt,
Speaker 1: or this woman who's imagining all these gay people whose
Speaker 1: money apparently she does not want because that makes sense,
Speaker 1: and she doesn't even have that, she didn't even have.
Speaker 1: She doesn't she doesn't even have the business. And gay
Speaker 1: people are going to make better websites than her anyway. Intersect,
Speaker 1: how do you not intersect? How do you inject reality?
Speaker 1: Or do you not? No, that's the thing is like
Speaker 1: there there are crackpot of pains all the time. It's
Speaker 1: just more like are they validated? And the minute you
Speaker 1: have judges who are validating these crackpot things, I mean,
Speaker 1: that's the issue is we've had, you know, we got
Speaker 1: three hundred years or crackpots in this country. But if
Speaker 1: the question is are these minority positions or are these
Speaker 1: mainstream positions? And having them validated by the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: makes this kind of projected, implicit, biased nonsense into into
Speaker 1: an acceptable mode of lawmaking and so again that's the
Speaker 1: issue is I don't know, I just you know, you
Speaker 1: it's funny because you and I've been talking about this
Speaker 1: for like years now that the Democrats were not did
Speaker 1: not do what the Republicans did, which is the minute
Speaker 1: somebody won an election, come in with a slate of
Speaker 1: like judges that are going to uphold your position. And
Speaker 1: so I feel like it's it's kind of being figured
Speaker 1: out now, but it's certainly taken a pretty extreme turn
Speaker 1: of events to have that happen. You know, do you think, Jonathan,
Speaker 1: that if the Supreme Court continues to rule in the
Speaker 1: way that it's been ruling right with the Dabb's decision overturned,
Speaker 1: we have mor v. Harper coming, we have you know,
Speaker 1: voting rights case, that's the voting rights case. We have
Speaker 1: you know, affirmative action, we have all of these cases
Speaker 1: are coming down the slate for the Supreme Court, which
Speaker 1: is why the voting rights one is going to be
Speaker 1: the biggest is the biggest one. Do you think that
Speaker 1: Americans have it in them to do what the women
Speaker 1: and the youth in Iran are doing, Like if everything
Speaker 1: is taken away, which is the goal of the Republican Party,
Speaker 1: is to delegitimize every bit of equity that has been
Speaker 1: earned and fought for over the past six decades. If
Speaker 1: those things are all overturned, ripped away, precedent no longer matters.
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court's completely weaponized. From your evaluation as a doctor,
Speaker 1: do you think that we have the capacity to do
Speaker 1: what the people in Iran are doing? I will say,
Speaker 1: I mean our country is divided, right, but I mean,
Speaker 1: look what happened, like Dobbs was the worst trauma people
Speaker 1: could have imagined, and there were protests for quite a
Speaker 1: long time, and really energize protests that we're on par
Speaker 1: with any protests anywhere. But what's where the protests right now? Right?
Speaker 1: And so the lesson of how the Conservatives got here
Speaker 1: is that they had a fifty year campaign of starting
Speaker 1: at local school boards and then local judge ships and whatever.
Speaker 1: It was a fifty year campaign and they literally never
Speaker 1: went home. And I would say that the anger, the passion,
Speaker 1: the dedication are all very real. And look what's happening
Speaker 1: with voting now in Georgia, like it's incredible. So I
Speaker 1: hope we do, and I think we do. But I
Speaker 1: would also say that the lesson of the conservative movement
Speaker 1: is that it took them fifty years and in national
Speaker 1: strategy and starting at the grassroots level and building up slowly.
Speaker 1: And so I think the frustration for me with the
Speaker 1: kind of the liberal position is it's kind of like,
Speaker 1: I'm thinking about this thing right now. I wanted to
Speaker 1: change right now, we need to expand the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: right now, but not seeing the kind of long game,
Speaker 1: and not that we have to rep kate the long game,
Speaker 1: but the other side certainly got in their position with
Speaker 1: with a long game. And so I think that's that's
Speaker 1: really the message is beyond any immediate protests, I just
Speaker 1: don't know if America is the kind of place where
Speaker 1: those kind of protests can be sustained over time in
Speaker 1: a way that they are in Iran, in a way
Speaker 1: that I mean, the issue in Iran is like the
Speaker 1: entire system was going to collapse. They had to make
Speaker 1: some changes. We'll see what happened. But I don't know.
Speaker 1: Our country is so divided right now, I don't know
Speaker 1: what what the what what the effect of these kind
Speaker 1: of protests would be. But I would also say that
Speaker 1: again it's it's not an immediate thing, unfortunately, which is
Speaker 1: frustrating for a lot of people. Yeah, I mean, I
Speaker 1: just think that if your rights are being taken away
Speaker 1: one by one by one, at some point you have
Speaker 1: to recognize that voting alone isn't going to be the answer. Right,
Speaker 1: Like we're we just came through this hotly contested midterm election.
Speaker 1: The red wave that was rejected to come never happened.
Speaker 1: It was more of a drip if anything. And we're
Speaker 1: still divided the Congresses. The houses within five seats, right,
Speaker 1: the Senate is going to be within hopefully in two
Speaker 1: within two seats. I just don't know about the sustained
Speaker 1: power of the people. Yeah, And again it's it's just
Speaker 1: that the problems we're facing are not going to get
Speaker 1: changed by just protests, right. You need you need a
Speaker 1: long strategy for judiciary power and other kinds of power.
Speaker 1: So it's not just protests that we're facing. Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: as always, doctor Jonathan Metzo, we will come back to
Speaker 1: you to pick this conversation up and see, you know
Speaker 1: where the power of the people is going to lie.
Speaker 1: What is going to be the spark, What is going
Speaker 1: to be the sustainer in order to continue the fight
Speaker 1: for justice. I mean a lot a lot, a lot
Speaker 1: on the line in the Senate election. So that's one
Speaker 1: very good start, you know, hopefully that it goes the
Speaker 1: right way. So yeah, here's hoping. Appreciate you, Jonathan as always.
Speaker 1: That is it for me today, Dear friends on Woke
Speaker 1: a F as always, Power to the people and to
Speaker 1: all the people power, get woke and stay woke as fuck.