I. All right. So I have two stories here focused
on the trans community since the administration's
at war with this community. So let's just go
ahead and kick it off. Oh my gosh. I can't say
that title. So I write like mean idols here when
I'm like really mad and then I forget to change
them. So let's just say duck face. Rainbow crosswalks.
All right, so in a federal letter dated January
or sorry, July 1st, transportation secretary
Sean P. Duffy gave states 60 days to review intersection
crosswalks and identify compliance concerns as
part of his Safe Roads initiative. Duffy argued
that non -standard colors have no place on public
streets. Quote, roads are for safety, not political
messages or artwork, he said. The Florida Department
of Transportation, love that state, issued a
similar memo cautioning city and county leaders
that state funding could be withheld if they
fail to comply. this directive specifically called
for the removal of non -compliant traffic control
devices and service surface markings including
pavement art art and installations. Now, I wonder
who they're trying to go after here. Like what
what kind of crosswalks are there so mad about
and why are they all of a sudden mad about it?
I don't know. But anyways, The agency had also
pointed that the impact of autonomous vehicles
stressing that consistent application of pavement
surfaces is critical for their safe operation,
which I mean, let's be real here. They're talking
about, you know, the rainbow crosswalks. And
if that messes up a Tesla or whatever POS autonomous
car that you have, I don't think it's safe for
the streets. Now what's really interesting here,
available research contradicts the safety concerns.
A 2022 study which reviewed crash data from 17
asphalt art sites nationwide with at least two
years of records found that colorful crosswalks,
aka your rainbow crosswalks, the gay ones that
everyone's afraid about, found 83 fewer crashes
after the installations representing a reduction
of more than 50 percent compared to the period
before the crosswalks were painted, which this
makes sense. Right. Because like when I encounter
a quote art crosswalk or just rainbow crosswalk,
it kind of like brings your attention to it.
Like you kind of when you're driving, you almost
get kind of in this like zone of your driving.
Everything's gray, whatever. And then you have
this very colorful crosswalk. It pops out at
you, kind of like jogs you, I don't know, awake
and you're like, oh, this is a crosswalk. I can
see a person very clearly against all the colors
of the rainbow. But yeah, so the administration
is trying to do away. So they're trying to do
away with gay marriage. And now they're trying
to do away with rainbow crosswalks. What do you
think? I want to come back to the gay marriage
one in a minute, because I think that there's
some interesting things happening there, specifically
within the Republican Party. They have really
tapped into the fact that they're just leaning
into the culture war stuff. Right. Their economic
policies are crap. They're having a harder and
harder and harder and harder time defending them
every single fucking day because shit's still
getting expensive. Vegetables are going up in
price. Everything else is still getting worse
economically and none of their plans are working.
And we're six months into the administration
right now. And again, they did the same thing
during the first administration where they were
like, look how fast it'll get better. And it
didn't. Right. And and so they they they go back
to the well. It's red meat for their base. And
that's that's that's all it is. Right. You're
the transportation secretary and you have nothing
better to do than worry about what color a sidewalk
is painted. Congratulations. Like. Come on. And
autonomous vehicles. We're just making crap up
now. Just let's let's. be done with with the
nonsense. Again, I kind of want to come back
to the gay marriage one later as I had some time
to kind of look into it. And I've got some some
thoughts on that one. But why don't you tell
us the other thing they're trying to do? Well,
they didn't try. They 100 percent did. And by
them, I mean our National Park Service, specifically
Yosemite. So this is coming from the New York
Times, but you can find the story everywhere
today. So the National Park Service has fired
Shannon Jocelyn, 35, who studies bats and has
a PhD in genetics. They were employed as a wildlife
biologist at Yosemite National Park. They got
fired because they helped drape a large transgender
flag from a rock face back in May. They stated
that the demonstration had taken place in a prohibited
area and lacked the required permits. But this
is where like things get a little interesting
here. So the park banned public protests like
this on May 21st after this had already happened.
And Dr. Jocelyn said in an interview that the
new rule had not gone into effect yet. When several
climbers scaled the mountain face with the flag
and the group had not been aware of the pending
ban. The group also took down the flag before
being ordered to. The demonstration also occurred
during their own personal time. They were not
on the clock. They also stated that everything
that I did was off the clock and I had absolutely
nothing to do with my capacity working for the
National Park Service. I think that the administration
is using me as a sign to tell all of our other
federal employees that they have to be silent
and comply or they will be eliminated. We made
sure that no part of the flag would get in any
kind of way of any climbers trying to climb the
routes that go through that area. So this is
a very interesting stance. I believe this is
a pretty In my opinion, this is a pretty harsh
stance for a community that is. I mean, being
attacked. Now, yes, if I went to where I work
right now and I hung a flag on the side of the
building. I would probably get in trouble. I
don't even know if I would get fired. I might
get fired, but. For a national park on your day
off, when people are there climbing already.
And then making an example out of this one person.
I don't know. I think it kind of sends the wrong
message, but also I think the Park Service is
kind of afraid of the current administration.
What do you think? I got two things to think
first. I almost feel bad for saying this, Dr.
Jocelyn. Quote, everything I did was off the
clock. Oh, sorry. I think the administration
is using me as a sign to tell the federal employees
to be silent and comply or they'll be eliminated.
Yes, and water wet news at 11. Yeah, the administration
is going to use jobs, your federal jobs to to
make you comply with their political ideology.
Again, water wet like. Look, if you guys want
to fight. This is the consequence, right? This
this is the consequence Okay, and the thing that
I have to say to people on this topic when they're
like Why aren't people more people fight because
they're not willing It hasn't gotten bad enough
for people where we where people are willing
to accept that there's gonna be like you want
to really rebel and fight There's gonna be fucking
consequences kids That's how this works Again
Do I think she should have been fired? Absolutely
not. I think it's a pretty clear First Amendment
issue. I wouldn't even call it a demonstration
or a public protest. But again, it's a First
Amendment issue and am I shocked at the administrations
going after First Amendment rights that goes
against their political ideology? No. This isn't
surprising to me at all not at all. It's sad,
but it's not surprising So It's just this whole
thing again makes you shake my head again, none
of the economic policies are working either There's
no peace deals, you know, there's nothing the
wars are continuing and they can't get squat
done right Of any real consequence. So this is
what they're gonna do to feed red meat to the
base That's that's all there is to it Yeah Also
speaking about feeding red meat to the base Something
that I've a story that kind of popped up that
I honestly do not understand I did not put it
on the on the rundown actually kind of forgot
to like look into this a little bit more so let's
have a discussion a little miniature discussion
here about this all the internet freaking out
over a male NFL player sorry male NFL cheerleader
which I honestly do not understand, like I really
legit do not understand their stance because
I think from the dawn of time or the dawn of
cheerleading, there's always been male cheerleaders
because they actually help support some of the
girls. Did you guys not watch Bring It On? OK,
come on. Classic fucking teen comedy with Eliza
Dushku and Kirsten Dunst. And what is it? They're
a bunch of male cheerleaders. It's a thing. It's
always been a thing. There's male cheerleaders
all over the thing. Again. Yeah, I. It's specifically
the things the Minnesota Vikings, right? And
I've seen it spun two ways from conservatives.
And let's be clear, it's not the internet, it's
conservative internet people, right? And honestly,
because they're bored, right? Somebody in the
YouTube chats bring up George W. Bush was a male
cheerleader at Yale, right? Like the fact of
the matter is, is that I've seen it spun both
the, why are you taking jobs from women? And
I'm going to come back to that one in a minute,
okay? Cause fuck you. And two, men and women's
sports again, right? We're back on that thingy.
So on that one, let's take the second one first.
You guys have been using that on the trans community.
They're not trans people. They are men who are
cheerleading. So let's not cross your streams
with your weirdo fucking messaging, okay? And
then I heard somebody be like, women can't play
in the NFL. That's actually not true, okay? there
have been women who've tried out and I think
there was a couple who were like kickers who
were close right and put it this way if there
was a woman who could kick a 67 yard field goal
do you not think that the nfl they don't give
a shit they're they want to win okay okay this
that's that but let's go back To the first thing
the jobs thingy do not you fucking? Shit head
hypocritical conservatives pretend for one fucking
minute. You gave a shit about cheerleading as
a job Okay cheerleaders across the NFL are underpaid
Treated like fucking dirt right subject to what
should be illegal working conditions and do this
for love of what can only be described as a paid
hobby Because all of those women have to have
other jobs to support themselves. They cannot
be cheerleaders. There is nowhere in the National
Football League where cheerleading is a full
-time paid position. It doesn't fucking exist.
So don't go be like, they're taking women's jobs.
Fuck you. We didn't, you didn't give a goddamn
about cheerleaders as a profession, right? Until
this happened, that's one. Number two, you're
talking about 32 NFL teams, okay? Yeah. How many
fucking cheerleaders? What, like 50 per team?
What, probably 160 NFL cheerleaders in all of
existence at any given time? This is not a giant
industry that the men are taking over all of
a sudden. Okay? So fucking miss me with that
shit. Just fucking miss me with it because it's
just bullshit. Right? It's just bullshit. It's
it's another thing for them to one and again,
I just I don't fucking get it Who cares I don't
know why they care I really don't Yeah, I I really
I really did not get this I mean when I was in
high school there was a male cheer cheerleader
who was Not part of the LGBT community. It's
how to do the little tossing shit and the catching
Yeah, he was a little new He was on the track
team He legit was like I'm here to hang out with
the girls Seems like a good idea to me Yeah,
right Okay, and again, this is not new go watch
bring it on okay You guys got a screening room
in the White House, do me a favor, go flip it.
It's a classic teenage comedy. It's actually
a pretty good movie, okay? And the lives of the
douche crew is hot, right? Like, let's just call
it Spade Spade. It's fine. On the gay marriage
thing, which you brought up earlier, right? And
let me, for the audience who may not have kept
up with this. Here's what's going on, and this
is, I'm going to get to my weird takes about
this in a minute. What's happening is Kim Davis,
who is the woman we remember from ever so long
ago, who got sued for not providing marriage
licenses to gay couples after Obergefell, she
was eventually fined and blah, blah, blah, blah,
blah. She has now gotten her appeal. That's right,
this is a blast from the first Trump administration,
right? She's gotten her appeal all the way back
up to the Supreme Court. She has applied for
a writ of cert, right, which is the thing that
you need to appear before the court. And what
she's saying is that her fine should be wiped
out and that Obergefell was wrongly decided.
Okay? Now, two things that are interesting about
this, right? I have seen more conservative backlash
against this idea than liberal backlash. There
are so many Republicans who are like, don't do
it. Don't do it. This will kill you. The gay
marriage thing is settled. Most Republicans are
in favor of it. Leave it the fuck alone. Do not.
Take four. Now, here's where my hot take comes
in. Are we ready? If I was a liberal justice
on the court, I'd absolutely fucking do it. Yeah.
Let's hear her case. Right now. Let's do it.
Right? If I was one of the three liberal justices
on the court, I would absolutely give her fucking
rip. I would say, let's hear this case. Join
with Alito or what's his name? Why can't I think
of his damn stupid name? Black guy, what's his
name? God dang it chat help me out here. I don't
know why I'm blanking on this Supreme Court justice
name Thomas. God dang You know Alito and Thomas
want to do it Alito and Thomas want to do it.
Okay. Oh I do it I do it force him to force him
to do it because here's the deal It's the same
thing with row. Okay the republican party has
relied on these evangelicals to be a good 30
to 40 percent of their base for a long time a
long time and the evangelicals were not getting
what they were promised by the GOP now they are
the checks are come and do okay the evangelical
base is demanding demanding action on Roe Obergefell
all this crap make them do it make them hear
the fucking case and make them come out on one
side or the other, okay? Because I'll bet you
money, I will bet you money, they will not overturn
Obergefell. They are not that fucking stupid,
okay? A couple of reasons. Here's what you got.
You got the three liberals, right? You have the
three liberals. I know this is so weird. Go look
at Gorsuch's opinions. Gorsuch frequently pisses
off the conservatives because he's got a weird
libertarian streak in him and he also really
likes Native Americans, okay? Literally, go look
up his court stuff. Gorsuch never votes against
Native Americans. If the Native Americans are
suing the U .S. government, he's on the Native
side. No one knows why. It's his pet project.
It's weird. Go look it up. Gorsuch has come down.
He came down actually on the trans issue. He
was the deciding vote in Bostock that added gender
identity to the items that you could not discriminate
against and Gorsuch was the deciding vote and
the one who wrote the majority opinion. He's
got a weird libertarian streak to him where he's
like, I don't like you guys fucking with this
shit. Roe you can get away with because you're
sending it back to the state so that kind of
fits into his stupid libertarian mind, right?
You can't do the same thing with Obergefell and
he knows it. He fucking knows it. Okay. So you've
got four. Alito and Thomas are going to vote
to overturn Obergefell. That's not a fucking
question. I don't think Roberts will do it. I
think he will say it's settled case law and he's
not gonna overturn precedent. But what do you
think of my hot take? Do you think the Liberals
should make them do it? I know it's a risk, but
I honestly agree with a lot of the conservatives
I hear. You overturn Obergefell, man, that's
the fuck, and you're gonna piss so many people
off. Oh God, I don't, ooh. I mean... Kind of
want to say like yes Take the risk. I don't think
they'll overturn it. I don't think they will
either but then there's like a there's part of
me that's like No, Jay, they are that dumb. They
want the they want the Civil War. I don't know
where that voice came from. But yeah I don't
know Yep Uh, and I want to say it was Gorsuch.
Here's the opinion in Bostock, right? And I want
to show you guys this. Again, Gorsuch was the
deciding vote, right? It's Bostock versus Clayton
County. In each of these cases, an employer fired
a long -time employee for being homosexual, transgender.
Held. An employer who fires an individual merely
for being gay or transgender violates Title VII,
right? and I want to say and so this was Bostock
this got decided in uh 2020 right just before
the election right and then who wrote the Bostock
opinion I want to say it was Gorsuch yep it was
Gorsuch The 63 majority opinion was written by
Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was Trump's first nominee
to the Supreme Court. Remember, he was the first
guy. He came before Kavanaugh and what's her
name, right? Neil Gorsuch was the one that said,
no, you can't fire transgender people for being
transgender. Sorry. And I remember when that
opinion came down and conservatives lost their
minds because you got to remember Gorsuch was
a Trump appointee. He was supposed to be their
guy. and then he was like no no trans people
you can't fire trans people for being trans like
that's that's not allowed right these some of
these justices get weird right and I don't know
what it is Yeah, he has a notable record conservative
Native American law advocating for tribal rights
and sovereignty How many of these has he got
one two three four five decisions? Right that
he has been like nope When it comes to Native
Americans versus the US government I side with
the Native Americans And no one knows why It's
I always thought it was really interesting So,
I don't know what do you think? Yeah, it I I
kind of think they're going to try it like legit
I Mean the simplest way out for Roberts because
Roberts being who Roberts is is to is to convince
them to not to deny cert And I go we're not even
gonna hear the case. Fuck you we're not doing
it okay and wait two more years right um i i
don't i think the most likely scenario is that
they're not gonna they're not gonna go right
i think that gorsuch and the three liberals are
gonna say no and i think roberts is gonna say
no and then i think cavanaugh or barrett Tony
Barrett are going to say no to cert Just because
they don't want the controversy They just don't
want to deal with it So yeah, I don't think they're
gonna hear the case I'm just saying if I was
a liberal justice, I'd be like fuck. Yeah, let's
do this. Come on fuckers. Let's go Put up a shut
up time Yeah, you know just as good Gorsuch is
the least terrible and occasionally helpful trouble
would I do again I Don't I don't know why he
is the way he is. He's really weird Right The
boss doc one was the one where I went excuse
me You did what now and I'm a nerd. Look, I read
Supreme Court decisions because I think they're
funny Right because sometimes they'll insert
funny things like the words jiggery pokery Yes,
the word jiggery pokery is in the Supreme Court
decision from the last ten years Take that for
what it's worth