Latest / Plausibly Live - The Dave Bowman Show Podcast / Down With Socialism!!!

Transcript

Down With Socialism!!! · Plausibly Live - The Dave Bowman Show Podcast

0:12
From the On Air Across America Network newsroom, this is your
0:15
Morning News update. A federal judge has blocked
0:18
President Trump's latest executive order restricting
0:20
birthright citizenship. The preliminary injunction will
0:23
remain in place while a class action lawsuit proceeds.
0:27
President Trump has signed legislation funding the federal
0:29
government through December 11th.
0:31
Congress has not completed any of the 12 regular spending bills
0:35
for the new fiscal year. Australia says the American
0:38
military presence there will expand as the allies prepare for
0:41
rotational deployments of US Virginia class submarines
0:44
beginning in 2027. Journalist and feminist activist
0:47
Gloria Steinem has died at her New York home.
0:50
She was 92. In baseball, the Mariners
0:52
defeated Boston 8 to 3, taking the final two games of the
0:56
series. Seattle opens A4 game home
0:58
series against the Athletics tonight for the On Air Across
1:01
America network. I'm Grant Ledger.
1:03
Stay tuned for the Dave Bowman Show.
1:34
The world is a complicated place.
1:36
Fortunately, Dave Bowman has opinions, some informed, some
1:41
inconvenient, and a few that may require supporting
1:44
documentation, history, politics, and the absurdity of
1:48
modern life. This is the Dave Bowman Show.
1:53
I. Push that button, I can talk.
1:58
Good morning, good evening, or good afternoon, wherever you
2:00
are, whatever you do. A lot of things happening in the
2:03
world today, most of them are far beyond our control, you
2:06
might say. So perhaps it's time we took a
2:08
pause and thought about life, thought about the laws of
2:12
congressional voting. What exactly does that mean when
2:17
they cast a vote? Voter pandering.
2:21
And of course, we'll get into my unfortunate weird sense of
2:26
humor. Don't touch that dial.
2:27
Just try to hear me out for a little while.
2:31
You may have seen the headlines this week, $40 trillion in debt.
2:40
What you may not have caught in all that was the discussion of
2:43
the one to $2 billion a year deficit that we're still
2:46
running, meaning that that 40 trillion goes up every year.
2:55
There's a lot of people spending a lot of time trying to explain
2:59
to you what a trillion is. A trillion is a number that has
3:03
almost no meaning in the in the broad spectrum of things.
3:05
You don't know what a trillion is.
3:07
You can't even get your mind around it.
3:11
It's that big. It's that huge.
3:14
You can't really think to yourself a trillion, you know,
3:20
the joke in Congress used to be, you know, a billion here, a
3:23
billion there. Pretty soon you're talking about
3:24
real money. We're so far beyond that now
3:30
it's, it's hard to imagine. And so it, it brings us to this
3:36
question about what the hell is Congress actually doing?
3:40
Because it doesn't seem like they're actually doing anything
3:45
governance wise. We're taught that legislators
3:50
will will examine an issue, consult their principles,
3:55
perhaps get some advice from from folks that they know, and
3:59
then vote according to their judgement on a given issue.
4:03
That's what we're told will happen, but there's very little
4:09
evidence that that's actually happening.
4:12
The news this morning is, of course, that the president has
4:14
signed a new continuing resolution.
4:17
We still don't have a budget. And is the reason that we don't
4:22
have a budget because 40 trillion's a incomprehensible
4:28
problem? Or is it because, well, if we do
4:34
this, then the other side wins and we can't have that?
4:40
Which of those two is more likely?
4:44
In recent days, Congress, the House particularly took up what
4:49
was known as House Resolution 1490.
4:53
Now, House Resolution 1490 is not law.
5:00
Even if it passed, and by the way it did, even if it passed,
5:04
it's not law. It's not going to benefit this
5:08
nation in any way, shape or form.
5:10
Nothing in HR 1490 is going to jump off the page and change
5:14
your life in any meaningful way whatsoever.
5:19
And yet our Congress, specifically the House, spent a
5:23
good deal of time both debating this and voting on it.
5:28
And of course, because it was a Republican resolution,
5:32
Republican sponsored, it didn't matter what was in it because
5:37
the Democrats basically said from the word go that they were
5:41
going to oppose it. Why?
5:43
Because if it passes, well, that's a Republican victory.
5:46
And that can't happen. We can't have that going into
5:50
the midterms. We we can't have that.
5:52
Now. Oddly enough, it did pass.
5:57
It passed with five Republicans either abstaining or voting
6:02
against it, but 8 or 8 Democrats voting for it.
6:08
And the title of this bill was in fact, the condemnation of
6:13
socialism. So we had a we had a resolution
6:20
that said we condemn socialism. Only that's not really what it
6:27
did. Which of course meant that this
6:30
whole thing was not a great congressional debate over
6:32
socialism. It was.
6:34
In fact, it was a collection of politicians using the voting
6:40
board to send campaign mail to their constituents without
6:44
paying any postage. This vote didn't mean anything.
6:49
And while I certainly oppose socialism, I'm I'm not a
6:53
socialist, I'm a capitalist, I'm an American.
6:58
I spent a good portion of my life serving this country to
7:01
defend America against socialist idealism.
7:04
And I will continue to do so as best I can.
7:09
The battle. The bottom line is this was
7:11
never about governance. It was always about politics.
7:15
It was always about campaigning. The vote was not about party
7:23
obedience. Let's let's just stay right
7:25
there. Legislators are supposed to
7:27
examine issues, look at their principles, and then vote to
7:31
govern the country. But instead what we're getting
7:35
is bills and resolutions that are being used to send campaign
7:39
mail. As they said, this is not a
7:40
debate over socialism, capitalism or even
7:43
constitutional government. It was exercise in manufacturing
7:48
campaign collateral, campaign material.
7:52
Democrats expected every member of their caucus to vote against
7:55
the rule, regardless of whether they supported any underlying
7:58
measures. Democratic Whip Kathleen Clark
8:03
explained the the expectation of her party very plainly.
8:07
Quote, one of the rules of being on a team is that we vote
8:13
against the rule. So before there was ever any
8:17
actual debate about anything that might actually have been in
8:20
the resolution, Well, it's a Republican resolution, so
8:24
therefore we again it. And before you send me the
8:29
emails, I know that if it was reversed the other way, it would
8:32
have been exactly the same in reverse.
8:34
The Republicans would have said, Nope, we're again it even
8:38
without having read it. And this, of course, reveals how
8:43
Congress actually, you know, functions in the big scheme of
8:48
things. This is how things actually end
8:51
up working because it really isn't about what you or I want
8:57
or need. It's about what they need to
9:02
stay in power. Now, the controversy in all this
9:06
came about because one of the I got to find the right slide
9:10
here. I guess the slides are out of
9:12
order. Sorry.
9:14
It's a big deal up here in Washington because one of our
9:17
local Congress people, and I say local, it's 70 miles away.
9:21
But Marie Glusenkamp Perez voted against or I'm sorry, voted for
9:28
this resolution. Now, Marie Glusenkamp Perez is
9:31
in fact a Democrat. She is from one of the most
9:34
contested seats of for election this this November.
9:40
And she wants to portray herself in a way that will show herself
9:47
as being, I don't know, in tune with her constituency.
9:57
She, she talks about these things as, as, as she's doing.
10:00
It's the, you know, the standard interpretation of this as well.
10:04
I'm, I'm defending my, my personal independence.
10:07
I'm standing on my principles and those kinds of things.
10:09
And, and that's a defensible policy argument.
10:12
But the problem is, of course, when there's no pressure on her,
10:20
there's no reason to send a Democrat to send a signal saying
10:24
I'm, I'm not like all the other Democrats.
10:26
I'm, I'm a Democrat you can trust.
10:29
Only when there's an election in place.
10:31
Does she want to do this? When she wants electoral
10:34
survival, that's when she's she's into this whole thing.
10:40
One of the other Democrats who voted for this thing, Jared
10:42
Golden out of Maine, he's retiring, so he doesn't care.
10:46
But Marie, listen, Camp Perez up here, she wants to hold on to
10:51
her. As Mel Brooks once said, these
10:53
people are working very hard to held on to their phony baloney
10:56
jobs because they're not actually governing anything.
11:00
And she's working very hard to do this.
11:02
So the question becomes, was her vote in favor of HR, the bill?
11:08
I forgot the number 1490. Was it actually her position or
11:14
was it just, you know, I need to pander to my voters?
11:20
She's trying to remind SW Washingtonians that she is,
11:23
quote, not like those other Democrats.
11:28
And that's of course, where we get into the problem.
11:31
This entire thing was never about whether you support or or
11:35
oppose socialism. If it was, it would have been
11:38
one sentence. We, we hereby, the House of
11:41
Representatives, the United States of America, condemn the
11:43
concept of of socialism. We're not a socialist country.
11:48
Irony. Now, the problem if you're a
11:51
Democrat, of course, is you can't vote in favor of that
11:54
either, because in recent days, what's happened to your party is
11:58
indicative of the fact that you don't oppose socialism and
12:02
you're not going to be able to get away with that.
12:05
But if you look at this entire thing, you have this outer shell
12:10
kind of a hook. We oppose socialism, but once
12:14
you get past that shell and get into the heart of the bill, the
12:16
heart of the resolution, because it's not a law, there are
12:20
references inside that to condemning the Democrats,
12:23
Socialists of America, which of course, you know, Democrats
12:29
aren't going to do that. You and I might.
12:31
I certainly would. I think the Democrats,
12:33
Socialists of America are morons.
12:36
Yes, I said that. Saw a phrase yesterday that I
12:39
just love. Neiman Marxists.
12:42
They're fake Marxist. They're not real Marxist.
12:45
Marxist. These are people who pretend
12:47
they adopt all the trappings of Marxism and socialism, but you
12:51
would never see any of them anywhere near a Walmart.
12:54
They're Neiman Marxists. There are also in this thing
12:58
references to the Save America act.
13:01
There are ideas in here about election integrity and, you
13:08
know, non citizen voting, voter identification, and I think I
13:11
already said the Save American Act, but all of these things are
13:13
in there and, and Republicans did not put those things in
13:16
there by, you know, accident. They, these are there for a
13:21
reason. But the point is that this is
13:25
not, this is not a bill. So no matter how anybody votes
13:30
on it, there's no law enforced here.
13:33
There's no money being appropriated for anything here.
13:35
There's no governance here whatsoever.
13:38
None zip, none. NATA meaning that there is 0
13:44
practical effect of this whole thing.
13:46
It's just a trap. It is nothing more than a
13:49
political trap. If you vote yes and you're a
13:54
Democrat, you endorse this Republican election security
13:57
language and you alienate your progressive DSA base.
14:02
If you vote no, then you are posed as you are unwilling to
14:06
condemn socialism. And guess what the ads against
14:09
you are going to read? And if you vote present, well,
14:14
that looks like you just, you know, you're weak, unwilling to
14:18
take a position at all. You're not.
14:23
What is it? The rabbi said you're, you're
14:25
lukewarm. I'm going to spit you out.
14:29
Democrat socialists aren't going to support that.
14:31
So there you go. Ultimately, everybody followed
14:36
the playbook. Everybody involved in this did
14:39
what they plan to do all along, the Republican leadership wrote
14:43
the resolution condemning socialism was the excuse, but
14:46
the practical reality was they were constructing an election
14:49
year trap. The Republican dissenters, there
14:52
are five of them, withheld their rule support because they
14:55
allegedly stand for fiscal responsibility, which, again,
14:59
maybe they do. But $40 trillion in debt and no
15:06
budget, no plan tells me they don't really.
15:11
They are completely protesting a a totally unrelated funding
15:14
dispute. Democrat leaders played their
15:17
role. They demanded united opposition
15:20
to protect their procedures, was what they said.
15:23
But reality was they were just trying to deny the GOP a
15:26
messaging victory, which they couldn't do anyway because they
15:28
didn't have enough votes. These eight Democrat moderates
15:33
who defected, they call them moderates, They're not.
15:35
But like Luisenkamp Perez, they voted yes, claiming that they're
15:41
defending working class values. But reality is they were
15:45
reinforcing independent brands in districts that are likely to
15:48
go pro Trump, pro Republican in very tight election races.
15:54
If I actually believe that Luisenkamp Perez believe these
15:57
things, then I might not be as upset about it.
16:00
But we have years of her being in Congress not supporting those
16:04
things, supporting the Democrat majority, supporting the
16:07
Democratic ideas, and now all of a sudden that she's in a tight
16:11
race. Now all of a sudden she's OK
16:13
with this. And of course, Democratic
16:16
progressives voted no because they oppose voter suppression,
16:20
reassuring their deep blue base that they are dead set against
16:26
that. That act, that Save America acts
16:30
are The problem here is, of course, we're trying to
16:35
distinguish representation from actual pandering.
16:40
Edmund Burke, of course, argued that representatives owe their
16:42
constituents judgement, not merely obedience.
16:46
A representative's neither party employee nor a human opinion
16:49
poll would that would that any of our representation in any of
16:54
our history have ever been that. This should be a simple process.
17:01
Does the public position have a binding legal legal effect or
17:04
policy consequence? In other words, if is what we're
17:08
voting on actually meaningful, is it going to change something
17:11
in an any American's life, yes or no?
17:14
If the answer is yes, then it's representation.
17:17
And as a representative, I owe you my judgement, not obedience.
17:21
I'm not a party employee. I'm not a human opinion poll.
17:24
You sent me here because you trust my judgement.
17:27
I'm going to vote yes or no on this based on what I believe,
17:31
what my principles are. If it affects anybody, if the
17:35
answer is no, it doesn't have any binding legal effect or
17:39
policy consequences, then it's just pandering.
17:43
That's all it is. And if it's just pandering, then
17:49
what's the freaking point? I'm not, I'm not trying to be
17:53
rude here or anything, but we're $40 trillion in debt.
17:57
Do you understand that? I, I don't think you do.
18:00
I don't think Congress understands that.
18:02
I don't think they possibly know what that means. 40 trillion
18:06
that just, you know, it's a lot of money, but you know, there's
18:12
nothing we can cut. We've cut everything to the
18:14
bone. Spent too many years as an
18:22
accountant, too many years as a manager to know that that's
18:24
true. But when everything is tied to
18:27
politics and everything is tied to power, that's when we're
18:30
going to have this problem. And it doesn't take a historian
18:34
to go back and look at numerous revolutions throughout history,
18:40
particularly revolutions that led to a socialist last
18:43
communist government. Because as VI Lenin said, the
18:47
goal of socialism is communism, period.
18:50
So, you know, again, you can tell me that he that doesn't
18:54
mean that, but I'm going to go with the guy that actually, you
18:57
know, did it. So it's at the end of the day,
19:00
when Marx and Lennon disagree with you, you are not true
19:04
Marxists or true communists either.
19:06
But the bottom line is that's the goal.
19:11
And in order to do that, power becomes increasingly needed by
19:16
the by the, by the elites. And if you go through all these
19:21
revolutions, you start seeing the same patterns build up over
19:24
and over and over again. And two of the most critical
19:28
are, of course, economic collapse and combat wars.
19:34
Those two things go together like, like chocolate and ice
19:38
cream, man. Words and music.
19:41
Sorry, you can't see that. If you're looking at the camera
19:43
words and music from Eddie and the Cruisers.
19:45
It's the same thing, $40 trillion in debt.
19:50
Do you understand that? 40 trillion, 'cause I'm telling
19:55
you right now, your Congress people don't understand that.
19:58
And more importantly, they don't care.
20:00
And I don't give a rat's behind which party they're in 'cause if
20:04
they did, we wouldn't be voting on things that are designed
20:08
solely as political campaign ads.
20:12
We'd actually be voting on things that, you know, matter.
20:16
Like, I don't know. A budget.
20:28
You can text or call the show today, 209565 Dave, that's
20:34
209-565-3283. E-mail is
20:39
dave@thedavebowmanshow.com and check out past episodes at the
20:44
Dave bowmanshow.com. Welcome back.
20:54
Still I gave. So yesterday I got a little
21:00
weird, I guess, to get some blowback, feedback about my
21:06
music, this little song I threw together about the the Lindsay
21:12
Clancy case. Again, I don't want to talk
21:15
about the case because things move so quickly.
21:17
I've, I've been on the air now for 20 minutes or so and I
21:21
don't, for all I know the case is over.
21:24
I don't know because I'm doing this and I won't know until I
21:27
get done. I don't want to talk about it
21:30
because, you know, you might be listening to this five years
21:32
from now and you'll be going, you'll be yelling at your
21:36
speakers. David, this happened.
21:39
Sorry, I don't know because I'm doing this.
21:42
That's the problem. But I did put that song together
21:48
yesterday because the the night before I had been reading the
21:51
tweets. X's, we still call them tweets,
21:54
right? So I've been reading the tweets
21:56
about this case and just this morass that you're going into.
21:59
And I'm one of those people that took me a long time to get
22:03
Twitter working In my world, Twitter is not for the faint of
22:07
heart. It just isn't.
22:08
It's, it's a very difficult thing to use at first.
22:13
You got to learn its flow. You got to learn how things
22:16
work. And it took me a long time to
22:20
have the patience to actually use Twitter in a way that was
22:27
meaningful. And now I'm kind of wishing I
22:31
hadn't because it just goes on and on and on, folks.
22:34
And some of this stuff, it's a stream of consciousness.
22:39
I get that part of the problem is we live in the 21st century
22:43
when people's consciousness and, and their streams are
22:48
grammatically horrific. And so you have to learn how to
22:52
interpret things. If you're expecting to be spoken
22:55
to an English on X, you're, you're probably, probably going
23:02
to be severely disappointed because it's, it's, it's not
23:05
that. And it goes on and on and on.
23:06
So anyway, I took a bunch of these tweets and I stuck him
23:10
into the computer and I said here, write a song with this.
23:12
And it did. And and the song is confusing.
23:14
It's it's all over the place because the tweets are all over
23:17
the place. And while I got some feedback
23:22
about it that was positive in the sense of Mike Bennett and I
23:25
had a discussion about, you know, the hot crazy scale and
23:29
some of the things that he's concerned about as a society.
23:32
And I love talking to Mike, Mike and I Mike should be on this
23:35
show. Mike, if you're listening, you
23:37
and I need to do show together. Anyway, The the the point is,
23:39
there were several people who were very upset about it because
23:43
you're just making fun of this. Yeah, you're right.
23:47
I'm making fun of something that's insane because I don't
23:53
know how else to deal with it. Do you understand what's
23:57
happened here? There are people in this country
24:00
who believe that this woman who murdered her three children, who
24:04
admits that she murdered her three children, didn't do it.
24:10
And at that point, you just kind of shake your head and go.
24:14
And it'd be one thing if she said, well, I didn't do it.
24:20
I, I was mistaken. And here's circumstantial
24:23
evidence that someone else did it.
24:24
You know, and you're again, you're talking to the guy that
24:26
was on the air during the whole, you know, Scott Peterson trial,
24:33
having murdered Laci Peterson and then the insane theories
24:38
that they came up with or that, you know, the OR her Colombian
24:40
neckties. And was that, well, that might
24:43
have been OJ because I went through OJ too.
24:47
And just the, the incredible lengths to which people will
24:50
reach is it's no wonder Congress does this because we do it too
24:55
in our criminal justice system. We hey, wait, maybe I didn't
25:00
actually murder these people. Maybe an alien came down and
25:05
grab things and, and, and move me up and, you know, maybe I was
25:11
being, maybe I was like a marionette.
25:13
Maybe I did it, but I wasn't under my own control.
25:14
And of course, now she's, she's saying that she heard male
25:17
voices, male voices telling her to do this.
25:19
But of course, this is the only time she'd ever heard these male
25:22
voices tell. The whole thing is insane
25:24
people. And the very fact that this jury
25:28
had to deliberate for more than 5 minutes tells us that there
25:32
are people on that jury who are buying into insanity, who are
25:36
not thinking, who are not acting as representatives of the
25:40
people. They are, in fact, more
25:43
concerned with their own power, their own input, their own ideas
25:47
in order to make themselves feel better about something.
25:51
I don't know. You can't possibly tell me that
25:56
there's some benefit to this, because there isn't that
25:58
everybody. You don't have to be a tech whiz
26:02
to go on the Internet and and find out the the columnists who
26:06
are explaining to you why this is a bad thing and why this is
26:09
going to hurt women overall. Nobody wants that, I don't think
26:15
maybe there's, you know, some snake handling church in West
26:18
Virginia somewhere that does. But, but I certainly don't very
26:24
proud of my wife, very proud of the things she does as a labor
26:28
and delivery nurse. And I will say that one of the
26:30
one of the things in that song that bothered me was that some
26:32
guy claimed that labor and delivery nurses do abortions.
26:36
They do not. And I can assure you that my
26:39
wife would not participate in that at all.
26:42
Even though we believe that that's between ourselves and our
26:45
doctor, not you. It's our decision.
26:49
The bottom line is, the only way I have of dealing with insanity
26:53
like this is through my humor. Yes, my humor is weird.
26:58
Yes, it is dark. Yes, it is dry.
27:00
Yes, it is based in the fact that I was once spent, you know,
27:03
four years of my life underwater on a submarine.
27:06
And believe me, when you're underwater on a submarine
27:09
sleeping between 24 nuclear tipped missiles, well, I'm
27:12
sorry, I can't confirm or deny if they were nuclear tipped.
27:15
All I can say is if they weren't, it was a hell of a
27:17
waste of taxpayers money. But when you're doing that, you
27:22
know, you tend to develop defense mechanisms.
27:25
And one of them is, I'm sorry, I make fun of things.
27:28
Sometimes it's inappropriate. I personally don't think it was
27:32
in this case. I'm quite proud of that.
27:35
I'm quite proud of the whole way that that came together.
27:39
And at the end of the day, that's my sense of humor, folks.
27:44
And if that's, you know, going to be a problem for you, then
27:46
maybe the Dave Bowman show isn't for you.
27:49
I've, I've never said that I'm everybody's cup of tea.
27:51
I, I'll freely admit I'm not. I freely admit that not
27:55
everybody loves me. And I don't care.
27:59
I'm not doing this for you. I'm doing it because, well,
28:04
someday my son is going to want to know what I thought about
28:07
things. And when he does know, I want to
28:08
know what I thought about things.
28:11
It'll be there to tell him. It'll be there so that he
28:13
understands, and it'll be there because I want him to know.
28:18
Take the time right now. Tell the people that are mad in
28:20
your life. You love them very much.
28:21
You'd miss them if they weren't there.
28:22
So don't pass up those opportunities.
28:25
You don't want to have that regret plausibly live.
28:27
I'm Dave Bowman, don't know if I'm going to be here tomorrow or
28:29
not. I'm going to try, but you know
28:31
how it is. Things get weird.
28:35
We'll see you later folks, have a great day.