I've Worked All My Life So I Don't Have To Drink Fermented Hotdog Water

Summary

Armstrong & Getty On Demand

Episode: I've Worked All My Life So I Don't Have To Drink Fermented Hotdog Water
Date: October 17, 2025
Host: iHeartPodcasts

---

Brief Overview

This episode features Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty tackling a variety of hot-button political and cultural topics with their signature irreverence and skepticism. The show covers several Supreme Court cases—including those on conversion therapy bans, racial redistricting, home equity theft, and transgender athletes in sports—with guest civil rights attorney Anastasia Bowden from the Pacific Legal Foundation. The hosts also riff on viral trends (like hot dog water alcohol), discuss recent political debates (notably the New York City mayoral race), critique the homeless count in Los Angeles, and dissect the ongoing “woke” controversies surrounding representation in media. The episode is a mix of legal analysis, political commentary, and cultural critique, all punctuated by the hosts’ trademark humor and cynicism.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Supreme Court Roundup and Civil Rights Cases

Guest: Anastasia Bowden, Pacific Legal Foundation
[00:28] – [12:38]

• Race and Redistricting:

  • The episode opens with analysis of arguments in a recent Supreme Court case about Louisiana's congressional redistricting, where the NAACP representative is accused by the hosts of "continuing racism in the name of ending racism."
  • Anastasia Bowden criticizes the logic of considering racial group voting preferences, noting:

    “Baked into this whole system is the idea that racial groups think alike, vote alike, have the same preferences, and therefore must have a majority district so they can get their candidate. So it's a very racist way to think about voting in the names of equal protection.” ([07:36])

• Conversion Therapy Ban (Charles v. Salazar):

  • The court is hearing a challenge to state bans on "conversion therapy."
  • Bowden calls the ban a "viewpoint-based ban on speech” ([02:53]), arguing that it criminalizes only one side of the debate about gender and sexuality.
  • She recounts a pivotal oral argument:

    “If you admit as the government that back in the 1970s, you could affirm therapy affirming homosexuality on the theory that those people have a mental condition, I think at that point you've lost. No justice is gonna uphold the law after that.” ([05:02])

  • She predicts a plaintiff win, possibly a 9-0 decision, with Justice Jackson as the only potential holdout ([05:24]).

• Voting Rights Act vs. 14th Amendment:

  • Hosts and guest discuss the tension between the equal treatment mandate of the 14th Amendment and the race-conscious approaches required by the Voting Rights Act.
  • Jack Armstrong summarizes:

    “The Constitution says you've got to treat everybody equally and The Voting Rights Act says you got to look super carefully at race... as opposed to a colorblind society.” ([08:12])

• Home Equity Theft:

  • Bowden discusses a new Supreme Court case where a family's home was seized and sold for back taxes, with the government keeping sale proceeds far above what was owed.
  • She relates this to earlier PLF wins, expressing outrage at ongoing state attempts to circumvent constitutional limits:

    “The supes have to get rid of that. Oh, my God. That's outrageous and rapacious.” ([11:13])

• Transgender Athletes in Sports:

  • Brief preview of a pending Supreme Court case on state bans against transgender athletes in girls’ and women’s school sports.
  • Bowden highlights the collision between rights for trans individuals and those for women under Title IX:

    “It's going to be interesting to see what the court does when these purported rights of individual trans people are depriving women of the very rights that the Civil Rights Act was intended to protect.” ([12:38])

---

2. Viral Oddities and the Hot Dog Water Saga

[15:24] – [16:51]

• Armstrong reads a viral recipe about fermenting hot dog water to create homebrew alcohol, joking about the depths one must reach to drink such "garbage bin" booze.
• Memorable Quote:

  “If you could collect the liquid that's at the bottom of the garbage bin at a baseball game. That is what we're drinking.” (Jack, [15:54])

• Getty sums it up:

  “I've worked all my life so I don't have to eat—or drink—fermented hot dog water.” ([16:46])

---

3. On Free Food and Self-Control

[16:51] – [18:30]

• An anecdote about being offered free Oreo mint chip ice cream sandwiches at a grocery store leads into a broader discussion:

  “Don't eat it because it's free. That's not a good enough reason, right?” (Jack, [18:30])

• They reflect on adult eating habits, temptation, and self-delusion.

---

4. NYC Mayoral Debate Recap

[19:18] – [28:12]

• Hosts recap the “boring” New York mayoral debate featuring Andrew Cuomo and Zoran Mamdani, noting widespread audience disinterest.
• Cuomo's attack on Mamdani’s inexperience is countered with this retort:

  “What I don’t have in experience, I make up for in integrity. And what you don’t have in integrity, you could never make up for in experience.” (Mamdani, as quoted by Jack, [24:24])

• Broader observations on the left-leaning youth of NYC and concerns about “double down” progressive politics if Mamdani wins.

---

5. California and the Rise of the Fringe

[28:33] – [30:43]

• Discussion of Scott Wiener’s candidacy for Pelosi’s congressional seat.
  • Getty:

    “He is a crackpot, aberrant, sexual guy, like so far out there on every issue you can't even imagine.” ([29:48])

• Teasing Katie Porter and other potential successors in California politics, often lampooning their most controversial moments.

---

6. Homelessness and Bogus Statistics

[32:07] – [34:55]

• A story from LA Times is dissected, showing the city's homeless count underestimates by as much as a third because it excludes “living rough”—people without tents or cars, just sleeping on the street.
• Armstrong:

  “Anything that undercounts anything by a third is not a thing worth doing.” ([34:28])

---

7. Cultural Controversies: Race, Representation, and Wokeness

[35:09] – [39:20]

• Coverage of a case where a white actress was barred from performing historic black women's stories at a San Diego library—called “nuts” by the hosts.
• Armstrong:

  "You're not going to honor Harriet Tubman … and only have white people because she's white. You don't, you don't understand how you're doing your, your side more harm than good here. Are you crazy?" ([37:57])

• Discussion of director Paul Thomas Anderson being criticized for casting black women in prominent roles, and the contradictory pressures now put on filmmakers to both increase representation and fear accusations of tokenism or “appropriation.”
• Getty closes:

  “These people are insane. They're cultists. Don't listen to them.” ([39:11])

---

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• “It's a very racist way to think about voting in the names of equal protection.”
  – Anastasia Bowden, [07:36]

• “If you could collect the liquid that's at the bottom of the garbage bin at a baseball game. That is what we're drinking.”
  – Jack, [15:54]

• “I've worked all my life so I don't have to eat—or drink—fermented hot dog water.”
  – Joe, [16:46]

• “Don't eat it because it's free. That's not a good enough reason, right?”
  – Jack, [18:30]

• “What I don’t have in experience, I make up for in integrity. And what you don’t have in integrity, you could never make up for in experience.”
  – Zoran Mamdani (quoted by Jack), [24:24]

• “Anything that undercounts anything by a third is not a thing worth doing.”
  – Joe, [34:28]

• “You're not going to honor Harriet Tubman … and only have white people because she's white. … Are you crazy?”
  – Jack, [37:57]

• “These people are insane. They're cultists. Don't listen to them.”
  – Joe, [39:11]

---

Additional Segments

• Sports Highlights ([20:25] – [21:45]): Brief NFL game commentaries and changing end-of-game strategies.
• Media Critique ([35:51] – [39:11]): Analysis of the cultural backlash against inclusive casting, revealing the deep contradictions on the cultural left.

---

Episode Tone & Style

The Armstrong & Getty Show retains its conversational, irreverent, and skeptical tone, mixing humor and sarcasm with pointed political and cultural commentary. The hosts frequently mock “woke” excesses, bureaucratic inanity, and political hypocrisy—while also sharing personal anecdotes to ground their analysis.

---

This summary covers all core podcast content, providing listeners with a structured, thorough guide to the major topics and takeaways of the episode.

Transcript

[A]

This is an iHeart podcast.

[B]

Broadcasting live.

[A]

From the Abraham Lincoln radio studio at.

[B]

The George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.

[A]

Armstrong and Getty.

[C]

And now here's Armstrong and Getty.

[B]

And in the state of Louisiana that that analysis was conducted in the Nairn and it was clear that regardless of party, white Democrats were not voting for black candidates, whether they were Democrats or not.

[C]

And we know that there is such.

[B]

A significant chasm between how black and white voters vote in Louisiana that there's no question that even if there is some correlation between race and party, that race is the driving factor.

[A]

Hmm, what's that?

[C]

That is a representative from the NAACP arguing in a recent Supreme Court case to continue racism in the name of ending racism, specifically race specific redrawing of congressional districts. One of the important cases in front of the Supreme Court. This decision, this session, rather super interesting group of cases. And what a great opportunity this is around here at the Armstrong and Getty Show. We love the Pacific Legal foundation that has for decades now fought for individual liberty in the United States. And Anastasia Bowden is a civil rights attorney at the Pacific Legal foundation focusing on economic opportunity and equality for the law, before the law, including a lot of great stuff I'd like to talk about, but I don't want to take the time. Anastasia, how are you? Welcome.

[B]

Doing well. Thanks for having me.

[C]

Oh, it's our pleasure. So I've come up with a truly innovative plan. Let's talk about the cases they've already talked about this session, then move to the cases they haven't talked about yet.

[A]

So, okay, for the first one that.

[C]

Really got my attention was Charles versus Salazar. That bans what they, the attorneys kept referring to as conversion therapy when in my opinion it was just counselors helping kids who were confused about their gender sort it out. How did that go?

[B]

Yeah, well, it's interesting because notice that term conversion therapy is a one way ratchet. If someone wants therapy to affirm that they are straight, it's considered, it's actually considered conversion therapy. But if you wanted to say, hey, I'm queer, but I want you to affirm that that's considered affirmation. So it's only if you want to affirm you're straight that it's that it's considered conversion. Which means this is a viewpoint. It's a viewpoint based ban on speech.

[C]

Well, yeah, it absolutely is. I was going to say the more blatant and obvious example is if I'm a boy who wants to become a girl, that's affirmation. And totally legal. If I'm a boy who wants to stay a boy, that's called conversion therapy. What's being converted?

[A]

Exactly.

[C]

It's utterly dishonest.

[A]

It is.

[B]

And the state, I think, knows that if the court considers this a ban on speech, which it obviously is, it's gonna lose. The state can't ban one viewpoint on speech. So it's come up with this novel argument that, no, it's not banning speech, it's banning medical treatment, which it considers conduct, because when conduct is at issue, then courts are far more deferential to the legislature. So this whole argument sort of circled around whether conversion therapy is speech or medical conduct, meaning that the state has a lot more leeway in regulating it.

[A]

So.

[C]

And it's entirely talk therapy they were talking about. So it's almost a ridiculous question to me. But I know it's hard to interpret how the oral arguments went and that sort of thing. We've heard that a hundred times. But how do you think the oral arguments went?

[B]

Well, I think the plaintiff here is absolutely going to win. And for me, that's because there was one jaw dropping moment in the oral argument where the state had to admit that if this were the 1970s, when attitudes towards queer people were a lot different and more anti and antiquated, Justice Leo asked, could the state have banned therapy affirming that you're queer on the prevailing theory back then that people with those feelings were experiencing mental illness? That was the prevailing idea at that time. Of course, we've gone beyond that now. We don't believe that anymore. But at that time, that was the prevailing medical consensus. And Justice Leo says, hey, if that was the consensus, could they have banned that type of therapy affirming homosexuality in the 1970s? And the government, they have to lean into this. They have to say yes. They have to say that whatever the prevailing medical consensus is means that they can ban what's outside of that consensus. And I think when you admit as the government that back in the 1970s, you could affirm therapy affirming homosexuality on the theory that those people have a mental condition, I think at that point you've lost. No justice is gonna uphold the law after that.

[A]

Yeah. Some of my favorite pundits have said, if it's. They're only gonna be disappointed if it's not 9 nothing. That's because it should be.

[C]

Right, right. Right. Now I could.

[B]

Justice Jackson was really. She was the only holdout here, in my opinion.

[A]

Can we boot her off the court? Is there a way to do that is there a constitutional way to just eliminate her and have an eight person court?

[C]

I could talk about this stuff all day long, but we need to move along because of limited time. The Louisiana, Louisiana vs Calais on the Voting Rights act thing, can you explain for layman real quickly the tension between the 14th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act?

[B]

Yes. So the 14th and 15th, the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments were passed in the wake of the Civil War to guarantee the rights of recently freed slaves. But also, you know, these amendments were written broadly to protect all people. So those amendments get rid of slavery, they protect the rights of everyone. And then they also say that states shall not deprive people of the right to vote. But of course, even after those amendments were passed, states continued passing laws that burdened people's right to vote, and in particular, black Americans right to vote. So, you know, the traditional things we all think of in history, like poll taxes and these things that were meant to sort of subtly depress the black vote. So after that, Congress goes ahead and passes the Voting Rights act, which is intended to be a stronger enforcement tool, a stronger deterrent to states to stop suppressing the black vote. But over time, that act has been interpreted pretty liberally to not just prohibit outright voter suppression, but things like what the government calls vote dilution. So this is when an election system, usually through drawing district lines, you know, redistricting, diminishes the ability of minority voters to elect candidates and I quote, of their choice. And notice this language here. Oh, minority voters can't elect the candidates of their choice, which is a really odd thing to say because usually when we think about equal protection, we think of it in terms of protecting individual rights and the right of people to be free of stereotypes. And yet here, baked into this whole system is the idea that racial groups think alike, vote alike, have the same preferences, and therefore must have a majority district so they can get their candidate. So it's a very racist way to think about voting in the names of equal protection.

[A]

Well, I've always said that as a white male, we're the only group that is looked at as getting to just make decisions based on who we think would be the best person. Every other group other than white males, you're kind of supposedly beholden to your gender or race or whatever your situation, right?

[C]

And you. And the only thing you would ever do is vote for one of yours because we know people like you. Well, and the super simplified version answer to the question I asked is the Constitution says you've got to treat everybody equally and The Voting Rights act says you got to look super carefully at race and who's. What color and how they might vote and where they live and the rest of it, as opposed to a colorblind society. But it'll be interesting to see how that comes out. A couple big cases coming up. What's. What do you think is the most impactful or important one that they're about to hear? Anastasia?

[B]

Oh, this is a great question, because this is actually a really big term, and I love when the Supreme Court's back in session.

[A]

Why not?

[B]

They're free. Yeah. Okay.

[A]

Yeah.

[B]

This is because this is our chance, you know, when the court's back in session, to claw back our rights, effectively, from overreaching government. So the court's going to hear a really interesting case involving home equity theft. This is the practice where if you owe even a few dollars. We had a case at PLS here where somebody by mistake owed $8 on their tax bill. And so the government seizes your house in order to recoup those funds, and it keeps not just the $8, but everything from the proceeds of the sale of your house.

[A]

Oh, my God.

[B]

Yeah. It's horrifying. It's absolutely horrifying. And, you know, fortunately, actually, PLF got rid of that practice at the Supreme Court a few years ago when the court deemed it unconstitutional. But states are gonna state, and they're really recalcitrant about this, and they find ways to sort of evade what the Constitution demands. So in this case that's now before the Supreme Court, this term, a family, effectively, they argue that they never owed money at all. It's pretty clear that they didn't. But the government said that they had improperly claim some tax credit for their home, and so they ended up owing that money back retroactively. And before they can kind of litigate it out, the government seizes their house, sells it, doesn't even give them proper notice. They don't even really have the time to fight it, and then tries to keep everything right. And, of course, PLF won the case. So now, okay, the family's entitled to get their money back. We want a separate case entitling this family to their money back. But what the government did was, even though it itself had assessed that house at $200,000, made the family pay taxes at a value of $200,000, it sold the house for $76,000 at auction. That investor. Yeah, crazy. That investor turns around the next week or month, sells it for $200,000. So there's no doubt this house is worth $200,000, but the question is, what does that family owed? Because they're owed the excess above their alleged tax deficiency.

[D]

Right.

[B]

And the government it. For $76,000, you owe $2,000. So we owe you just $74,000. And the family says, no, our home was worth $200,000. All right, 198,000.

[C]

Of course. Yeah. The supes have to get rid of that. Oh, my God. That's. That's outrageous and rapacious. Anastasia Bowden is with the Pacific Legal Foundation. We've just got, like, one more minute. Can you give us thoughts on the upcoming banning transgender athletes in sports case? Because around here, we don't. As an adult, you have the right to live, present however you want, and it's none of my business, but leave the kids alone. And I'm a pretty firm believer in preserving girls and women's spaces in sports. What are the Supes being asked here?

[B]

Yeah, they're being asked to consider a couple of states bans on transgender athletes and single sex sports in schools and whether those bans violate the Civil Rights act or the Equal Protection clause. And it's really interesting because in past cases and previous terms, the courts, you know, in some cases at least, said that those laws protect the individual rights of trans people to not be discriminated against. But here, those rights are, as you said, bumping up against the rights of women in sports with the civil rights laws. Title 9 was passed specifically to protect those women's rights to compete fairly. And so it's going to be interesting to see what the court does when these purported rights of individual trans people are depriving women of the very rights that the Civil Rights act was intended to protect.

[C]

Anastasia Bowden is a civil rights attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation. Really enjoyed the chat, Anastasia. I hope we can do it again.

[B]

Thanks so much for having me.

[C]

Absolutely. Our pleasure. Jack, follow up quickly or do you want to?

[A]

The. The decision on that trans sports thing is going to be huge. If it goes the wrong way, especially.

[C]

Oh, it's an open and shut case. My God. Title 9 can't exist unless there are men and there are women. Otherwise, why is it there? Good Lord. Word from our friends at Simplisafe Home Security. Holy cow, is this better than the old systems? It's AI powered cameras identifying someone lurking around your home and alerting Simply Safe's professional monitoring agents who can take action immediately confront the criminal, trigger sirens, spotlights, dispatch the police and kill the interloper with a ray gun. All right. That last part's my personal fantasy. But they can do all that other stuff.

[A]

I like that they can talk to the person. Hey, Captain Lurk, what are you doing out there? We can see you.

[C]

Then they get a job, junkie boy.

[A]

They probably scamper off, which is good. Then they didn't break into your house.

[C]

My favorite line what do your grandparents think of you and your life right now, huh? Why don't you think about that, you jackass? Anyway, simply, Simply Safe Home security is amazing. 60 day money back guarantee. No long term contracts. Simply Safe earns your business every single day. Keeps you and your stuff and your loved ones safe. And right now our listeners can save 50% on a SimpliSafe home security system at simplisafe.com Armstrong that's simplisafe.com Armstrong there's no safe like Simplisafe.

[A]

Trump threatened to kill Hamas again yesterday. We will kill Hamas. We can talk about that and a whole bunch of other stuff we'll get to this hour. Stick around.

[B]

Armstrong and Getty.

[D]

Life's messy. We're talking spills, stains, pets and kids. But with Annabe, you never have to stress about messes again. At washablesofas.com, discover Anabe Sofas, the only fully machine washable sofas inside and out, starting at just $699. Made with liquid and stain resistant fabrics, that means fewer stains and more peace of mind. Designed for real life, our sofas feature changeable fabric covers allowing you to refresh your style anytime. Need flexibility? Our modular design lets you rearrange your sofa effortlessly. Perfect for cozy apartments or spacious homes. Plus, they're earth friendly and built to last. That's why over 200,000 happy customers have made the switch. Upgrade your space today. Visit washablesofas.com now and bring home a sofa made for life. That's washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.

[A]

In order to turn hot dogs into delicious alcohol, I needed a way to extract the hot dog flavor into something fermentable. Once I had a concentrated pot of hot dog water, it was time to stir. Sterilize it with a pressure cooker and our hot dog water can be used as a base for a meat. I started with a few pounds of honey, enough to supply enough sugar to hit 16 alcohol. All that was left to do was add our yeast and let this hot doggy mix ferment for 30 days. Now all that's left to do is have a taste. If you could collect the liquid that's at the bottom of the garbage bin at a baseball game. That is what we're drinking, Right?

[C]

If you've ever wondered how to use hot dogs to make alcohol now, you.

[A]

Know.

[C]

The hot dog water.

[A]

After you make hot dogs, you boil them.

[C]

What. What is the scenario I find myself in whereby I have hot dogs I.

[A]

Want to get my buzz on, but.

[C]

I have no alcohol nor means to get it. All I have are hot dogs, honey, apparently.

[A]

And 30 days to wait and problems I need to forget.

[C]

Yes.

[A]

I gotta believe it tastes really horrible. You can make booze out of really practically anything. Right. Which is, I guess, kind of the point there. So.

[C]

Yeah, yeah, I think I'll pass, thank you.

[A]

Oh God. I just read this.

[C]

I've worked all my life so I don't have to eat fermented or drink fermented hot dog water.

[A]

Right?

[C]

Right.

[A]

The grocery store.

[C]

You go ahead.

[A]

We're at the grocery store last night, we're leaving the Mercado, it's called, near my home, say Mexican. Mexican grocery store. Anyway, the owner there, super nice guy, very friendly, always welcomes us in every time we go in there and we're leaving is kind of later at night. And he said, hey, you want a couple of these? I was going to throw them away, but better to give them to you and throw away. And it was big giant mint chocolate chip ice cream sandwiches. No, Oreo mint chocolate chip ice cream sandwiches, which. Which looked fantastic, but. So my son was gonna eat one and I said, I'll take this one to Henry. He said, you don't want it? I said, no, it's not. It's not the lack of money that's keeping me from eating Oreo mint chocolate ice cream sandwiches tonight. The fact that it's free. He said it was free. Yeah. That is not really the defining factor for me.

[C]

On the other hand, you're the greatest treat scavenger I've ever known. Between freebie donuts at the end of the day and giant ice cream sandwiches from the local mercado. Good gracious.

[A]

I know when to show.

[C]

You make the rounds at 6:45 every night, don't you?

[A]

But I gotta say this out loud to convince myself because we've all done it many, many times. You know, you're trying to eat well, you had no intention of eating crap, but somebody brought crap to work and then you eat it because it's there and it's free. I mean, unless you're really on hard times. The difference between having three donuts this morning and not is not the price. You didn't think it was a good idea in the first place, right? That's why I didn't buy the donuts on the way to work or plan.

[C]

To buy them on the way.

[A]

Or I didn't order them, I didn't doordash them.

[C]

I don't want them.

[A]

So donate them.

[C]

Oh look. Donuts in the lunchroom, right?

[A]

Anyway, so the thing I have to say in my mind all the time, don't eat it because it's free. That's not a good enough reason, right? Anyway, I was reading this thing about the womanosphere. Do you know the manosphere that they claim exists and is powerful? Maybe it is, I don't know. With your Joe Rogan's and your Theo Vaughans and your the Tate Brothers and all these different things that they claim are the manosphere. Somebody. They're trying to get this thing going at that There's a woman womanosphere out there that is catching hold. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. I don't know. Maybe we can talk about that later. I don't know. New York debate last night for a mayor. I can summarize it for you and we got a pretty good clip from it. Mamdani is good. Cuomo sucks and is a criminal. That's why they're gonna end up with a communist mayor in that town. But we'll play that for you coming up.

[B]

Armstrong and Getty.

[D]

Life's messy. We're talking spills, stains, pets and kids. But with Annabe, you never have to stress about Messes again. @washablesofas.com discovery Anabe Sofas. The only fully machine washable sofas inside and out. Starting at just $699. Made with liquid and stain resistant fabrics. That means fewer stains and more peace of mind. Designed for real life, Our sofas feature changeable fabric covers allowing you to refresh your style anytime. Need flexibility? Our modular design lets you rearrange your sofa effortlessly. Perfect for cozy apartments or spacious homes. Plus, they're earth friendly and built to last. That's why over 200,000 happy customers have made the switch. Upgrade your space today. Visit washablesofas.com now and bring home a sofa made for life. That's washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.

[C]

Black O down the sideline.

[A]

Caught and sliding to a stop at the sixes. Higgins. Brilliant. Just brilliant.

[C]

Could have got in, but this way he stops the clock.

[A]

137 forces Pittsburgh to use its timeouts.

[C]

And sets up what could be a game winning field goal.

[A]

Couple of 40 year old quarterbacks looking like they were in their super bowl winning heydays last night in a shootout that they called an instant classic. I wish I had seen the game because it looked very exciting.

[C]

Those guys get hurt. What do you go with like 50 year old guys just moving up the ladder in the NFL? Just too many injuries.

[A]

Right. They did. I think this needs to start happening more often as the NFL has become a the last three minutes lots happens league where you, you can't score too early. The Chiefs did this a week or so ago. You, you scored your touchdown, your big fourth quarter drive which used to work but now the other team's always going to score if they got like a minute left. So you need to drag your heels and they did that last night. The Bingles guy was going to run in for a touchdown. He laid down to. To eat up time so that you couldn't let the other team march down the field. It's. I think the strategy is going to have to change partially because of what you said. Because guys can kick 55 yard field goals. You don't have to get that far down the field. Oh, and more.

[C]

Yeah, 55 is like you ought to make this.

[A]

Yeah, yeah, yeah. You're expected to anyway. That's fun. I'm glad I did not watch the New York mayoral debate last night. I don't live in New York. I hate the emphasis mainstream media puts on everything New York. I do think it's a big deal that a guy, it's practically a communist and anti semi Semite.

[C]

The second one is the second extremist or supremacist I should say.

[A]

The anti Semite part's completely true. The communist is like, you know, you could quibble but he's close enough. Is probably going to be the next mayor. So they had their debate last night. It was him up there against Andrew Cuomo, which just a quick reminder in case you don't remember, he was the governor of New York during the pandemic. He forced old people into old folks homes, killed a whole bunch of people, lied about it, destroyed evidence to try to cover it up and groped female staff. He's all kinds of an awful human being. He's on.

[C]

And the other guy's a communist.

[A]

He's on stage with Mondani and then he got this other guy, Curtis Lewa, who you're not going to hear his voice. I just took in the post game coverage. It was a Mark Halperin with the New York Post Combined YouTube video last night, I watched like a half hour of it and they said this was the most boring debate I've ever seen. It was two hours long with three candidates, which is way too long with only three people on stage. And they all talked about how they. They were scrolling their phones and shopping on Amazon halfway through. And they get paid to pay attention. So they didn't think anybody else was paying attention. Nothing was. Nothing was learned, nothing was changed.

[C]

So.

[A]

So you. Sounds great. So you didn't miss anything. And so we're not going to waste our time on a whole bunch of highlights, but I've heard people regularly talk about how good Mumdani is just a good speaker, charismatic and is good in that Trump sort of way or Barack Obama sort of way, like getting to things quickly. And I think this is a fairly good example here where Andrew Cuomo is going to try to do the whole he's inexperienced fang in. Mandani's reply was pretty clever. In other words, what the assemblyman said is he has no experience. And this is not a job for someone who has no management experience to run 300,000 people, no financial experience to run $115 billion budget. He literally has never had a job. On his resume it says he interned for his mother. This is not a job for a first timer. Any day you could have a hurricane, you, God forbid, a 9, 11, a health pandemic. If you don't know what you're doing, people, we have to.

[B]

Mr. Mamdani want to respond.

[A]

And if we have a health pandemic, then why would New Yorkers turn back to the governor who sent seniors to their death in nursing homes? That's the kind of experience that's on offer here today. What I don't have an experience, I make up for an integrity. And what you don't have an integrity, you could never make up for an experience. I thought that was pretty good.

[C]

Yeah, it's not really a satisfactory answer, but it's clever as hell.

[A]

Yeah, well, and if I'm quote most.

[C]

People, I'm like, you idiot, how many times have we told you, don't bring up the effing pandemic.

[A]

No kidding. No kidding. Shame on it. Not only did you make an incredibly unwise decision that killed people, but some people could give you a pass for that. You know, you get he makes quick decisions and you're doing your best with the information you had at the time, something, but then you destroyed evidence to try to Hide any investigation. You're a crook, so don't bring up the pandemic, you moron.

[C]

It's like Joe Biden running for reelection bringing up. And then we had our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Yeah, that was great. I read a quote from some prominent New Yorker who said Andrew Cuomo would be a terrible mayor, but next to mum, Donnie would be Winston Churchill. There are a lot of New Yorkers who just hate the idea of Mamdani running the city. And now I, I still say it will lead to the sort of things that thoroughly discredit progressives.

[A]

I hope you're right. I hope you're right. The only other thing, Douglas Murray, who we like, was, was making the argument the other day that that might not be true, that it just discredits socialism because you got a young left leaning crowd there that might just continue to double down on the. Well, it hasn't been implemented enough, you know, for, for cycle after cycle and do a real lot of damage.

[C]

We just taxed the rich, rich 2%. It ought to be 10% more. You know, we ought to take 75% of what they make. Yeah, sure. That you can keep doubling down. The only other thought I had in reading various recaps of the debate was that Mandani, Mamdani, Zoran Mandani. That's actually wrong, Leticia, you jackass. Anyway, the. That he disavowed his long held dis. Defund the police stuff. Two days after refusing to answer Martha McCallum's question about whether Hamas should lay down their arms, he finally said, of course, course. That's what a ceasefire is. Everyone needs to lay down their arms. And I'm reminded once again of, you know, what I've harped on a couple of times today. Marxists just lie. They lie overtly and blatantly. A conversation, a debate is not a way of getting to the truth. It's a forum for manipulation. They lie routinely.

[A]

So one of Mark Halpern's questions was pretty funny last night. So they went to viewer calls and there was a young guy in there saying that he leaned Mandami, whatever his name is for just because he was hitting on some of the issues. He cared about prices and all that sort of stuff. And Halperin's reply was, how do you feel about having a mayor who just nine years ago wasn't old enough to rent a car? Which is pretty funny.

[C]

Well, the guy's never had a real job.

[A]

Yeah, that should be a. Pointed out more often your resume, your only job is you worked for your mom once.

[C]

Wow.

[A]

Yeah.

[C]

That's so weak.

[A]

Wow. And New York's gonna experiment with that. And he's got like a 20 point lead, so, I mean, it's not even close. That's wild. And the Republicans are gonna do their best to hang the Democratic Party nationally around this guy's neck the same way they tried to do that fairly successfully with Nancy Pelosi for many years.

[C]

Well, Nancy Pelosi is dead and gone, relevance wise. Do we have that? Do we have a Nancy Pelosi clip today? I hear the visuals.

[A]

The visual is the key to my mind.

[C]

Yeah, but she just turns around and screeches. Shut up.

[A]

Well, she should have. I wish, I wish. I. Every time I see Nancy Pelosi, I don't think she drives me crazy. I think, why don't we have a Republican as good as her? Sure, that's what I think every time.

[C]

Especially in her prime. Yeah. But anyway, Nancy Pelosi's dead and gone in terms of like visible leadership of the party. And it's now AOC and Bernie. You hear Republicans saying that. Yeah, all the time. And if they could add the curly, that is mum Donnie to the M.O. and Larry, that is AOC and. And Bernie, then I think that that will work very well. But. But the interim is going to be really interesting.

[A]

I'll move off inside California politics after this. But did you hear who's going to run for Nancy Pelosi's seat? Scott Wiener. And so, people, those of you nationally, you don't know who Scott Wiener is. He is a crackpot, aberrant, sexual guy, like so far out there on every issue you can't even imagine.

[C]

So, man, boy love is fine. Drag queen kindergarten just, you know, legalizing teenage prostitution.

[A]

So I kind of hope he ends up in Congress to discredit those views and make them more well known.

[C]

Oh, that reminds me. I know you said we're gonna move on from state politics whether New York or I guess that was city politics, but how about next hour? You remember Katie Porter? Get out of my effing shot.

[A]

That.

[C]

That angry, bitter ball of hatred. Anyway, one of the gals who intends to step up and grab the baton from her and become. Become the governor has decided to raise her profile. She was on Piers Morgan the other day. Went poorly. Very poorly. We'll feature that for you in hour four.

[A]

Okay. Saw a story yesterday. Maybe we can get to that. Coming up, counting homeless in Los Angeles. They weren't even close in counting, according to one activist group because of this wild criteria they used you know, to fudge the numbers. Pretty interesting. Among other things on the way. Stay here.

[B]

Armstrong and Getty.

[D]

Life's messy. We're talking spills, stains, pets and kids. But with anibe, you never have to stress about messes again. At washablesofas.com, discover annabe sofas. The only fully machine washable sofas inside and out. Starting at just $699. Made with liquid and stain resistant fabrics. That means fewer stains and more peace of mind. Designed for real life, our sofas feature changeable fabric fabric covers allowing you to refresh your style anytime. Need flexibility? Our modular design lets you rearrange your sofa effortlessly. Perfect for cozy apartments or spacious homes. Plus, they're earth friendly and built to last. That's why over 200,000 happy customers have made the switch. Upgrade your space today. Visit washablesofas.com now and bring home a sofa made for life. That's washablesofas.com offers are subject to change and certain restrictions may apply.

[A]

Asleep and the doorbell rang. I answered the door and opened the door and there was a guy standing here and he was stark naked. Threw a potted plant through my truck window and tore the lights off the front of the house.

[C]

He pulled this screen out, laid it down, attempted to get the window open, we guess, and couldn't. So then he goes back here, grabbed.

[A]

An axe and came back onto the back porch. We don't know why he didn't use it.

[C]

We see him open up the fridge, grab a bottle of beer and a can of soda.

[A]

You know, the fact that the guy is naked in terrorizing the neighborhood is really kind of just a interesting side note. I mean, if his sartorial excellence was, you know, in the top 1%, you still come on my back porch with an ax and start breaking out my door. You know, I still don't like it.

[C]

So a couple of the neighbors pointed out we're all second amendment here in Pinellas Park. We will shoot you. He's lucky we didn't wake up. Wow, he's a guy. Looks exactly like you'd think. Scabby, drug addict, loser.

[A]

Yeah, yeah. Which we got to figure out a thing to deal with. Which brings me to this. This is from the LA Times. Yesterday, the LA homeless count misses people who aren't in tents or cars. According to a new RAND study, it's well known that 86% of statistics are worthless. And the older I get, the more I believe that just because everybody's always got an agenda and a reason to Come up with a way to count things that benefit them. And then this. In a lot of cases there's, there's an advantage to counting, having, coming up with a higher number of homeless people because you're trying to get funding, but sometimes politically you're trying to come up with a lower number so that there's not so much pressure to do something about your problem. And in this case, for whatever reason, they were counting homeless people in la, but they didn't count people who are what they call living rough. According to the Rand people, living rough means you're not in a car or a tent, you're just on the street. Well, that's a lot of people. And so nearly a third of the homeless people haven't been getting counted any of the numbers that they throw out. So whenever you hear a number in LA or lots of cities probably, and you think, man, it sure seems like there's a lot more people than that. There are a lot more people than that.

[C]

Anything that undercounts anything by a third is not a thing worth doing.

[A]

Correct. And also you don't count the people living rough. Those are the people that are affecting my quality of life the most. The guy who's got a car parked somewhere and living in it, it technically homeless. We gotta figure out whether we should do something about that or not. But he's not scaring my kids or getting in my way, going to the ATM or whatever. So you're not counting the people we care most about odd, living rough.

[C]

And again in the state of Cal Unicornia. Not only do they not have any idea how effective the billions of dollars they've thrown at the problem are, they don't even have a means for finding out.

[A]

I hope Gavin Newsom is already practicing his answer to that one because somebody's gonna hit him with half of the homeless people in America live in your state. What's the deal? He needs to come up with an answer for that.

[C]

He needs to have Abraham Lincoln and Shakespeare co write his answer because it's gonna have to be really, really good. So speaking of the left beclowning itself, this is one of my favorite examples of this sort of thing I've come up with in recent days. Christian Schneider in the National Review, you know, the whole a non deaf person shouldn't portray a deaf person in a movie, or a person who's Hispanic must portray a Hispanic character.

[A]

Well, it's even gone so far as you can't have a straight person play a gay person.

[C]

I mean, that's exactly yeah, absolutely true. Oh, for God's sake. Hang on a second. Hang on. Is this it? Oh, my God. Sorry. Stupid website. That doesn't keep me signed in. Okay, there it is. There we go.

[A]

Okay.

[C]

So in 2023, San Diego County Libraries was gonna. It invited author and actress Annette Hubble to perform a few selections from her book Woman warriors, which tells the story of female heroes throughout history. Okay, that's good stuff.

[A]

It's.

[C]

It's also, you know, sympathetic to the left stuff. But weeks before her performance, she was informed she needed to remove two black historical figures, Harriet Tubman and Mary McLeod Bethune, from the show. What? Because Hubble is white. So you can't tell the stories, including quotes from those women as a white woman, because it would be weird to have a white woman doing a black woman's words. Quote, the branch manager said, our administration was uncomfortable with you performing a black character as the white woman and asked her to replace these women with white historical figures. This is the woke left insisting on that. Ms. Hubble, Ms. Hubble to her credit, said, I'm not going to just pay tribute to white women. So the library canceled the performance altogether.

[A]

Oh my God, you people are so crazy.

[C]

I know. Hubble filed lawsuit against the library arguing its decision to kill the show solely because of a race violated the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act.

[A]

I don't know what the particular law involved in here is, but can't there be some sort of blanket you're nuts statute? You're nuts. You're not going to honor Harriet Tubman who people have, you know, talked about ought to be on the $20 bill. Right, and only have white people because she's white. You don't, you don't understand how you're doing your, your side more harm than good here. Are you crazy?

[C]

They're cultists. Yeah. Such bar are still erected movies and plays across America. Paul Thomas Anderson's recent film One Battle After Another features a full slate of black women in challenging, complicated roles. The types of characters Hollywood has lacked for nearly its entire history. Yet Anderson, who wrote the film, is being criticized for his, quote, hypersexualization of the women and his fetishized depiction of interracial relationships. By the way, Anderson, who is white, is famously in a long term relationship with biracial actress and comedian Maya Rudolph, with whom he has four children.

[A]

I didn't know Maya Rudolph was his wife.

[C]

His.

[A]

Whatever.

[C]

Anyway, in so and, and in the original novel, the women are white, but he thought, I'm gonna put black women in the movie. I think it would be more interesting and give black women roles. And he's being now condemned for that. So according to the racial bean counters, America would be better off had an influential white filmmaker like Paul Thomas Anderson refused to fight for more black representation in his films. Get it? I get it. It. Oh, my gosh. There's. Oh, that is crazy.

[A]

Well, you got to bring it back up an hour for because that, that. What an interesting them eating themselves nut job story.

[C]

This year's Tony Award winner for best musical, a perfect example of what we're talking about. These people are insane. They're cultists. Don't listen to them.

[A]

If you don't get this, our four subscribe to our podcast, Armstrong and Getty on Demand.

[B]

Armstrong and Getty.

[A]

This is an I heart podcast.