'Heaping scoop of incompetence' - Pat and Stu lament 'terrible' Democratic debate

October 15, 2015

Editor

Pat and Stu filled in for Glenn on radio Wednesday, sharing their reactions to the gaffe-ridden Democratic presidential debate hosted by CNN Tuesday night.

"I seriously couldn't take it," Pat said. "It's probably the worst field ever gathered to run for a party's nomination, I would think."

Stu shared Pat's sentiments, comparing one of the candidates, Lincoln Chafee, to the eagle from The Muppets.

Later, the conversation turned toward Hillary Clinton's statement about "big government" Republicans trying to cut funding for Planned Parenthood.

"That remark by Hillary Clinton was the dumbest thing ever uttered by a human being. To say that a cut of $500 million is evidence of big government is quite possibly the worst point ever made by a politician," Stu said.

Listen to the segment or read the transcript below.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors.

PAT: I couldn't -- I seriously couldn't take it. I couldn't take it -- it started at what, 7:30, by maybe 25 after 8:00, I'm like, okay, I can't. I just can't do it.

JEFFY: I was praying for the first commercial break.

PAT: I know. The lies. The deceit. The attacks. The deception. The communism.

(laughter)

STU: And also, let's add on a giant heaping scoop of incompetence.

PAT: Oh, man.

STU: That's a terrible field in comparison.

PAT: Wow. Oh, it's a terrible field. It's probably the worst field ever gathered to run for a party's nomination, I would think.

STU: By a major party, I think you could seriously make that argument.

PAT: If it was the Green Party or the --

STU: Or even the Libertarian Policy. I'm not talking about policy here. I'm just talking about how bad the candidates are. If you had like -- there's a party called the Peace and Freedom Party or something, that's basically a socialist party, like that's a field of candidates I could see them putting out there.

PAT: And policy-wise, they all fit in.

STU: They could all fit in and all get that nomination. It was embarrassing.

PAT: Jeez. Oh, my gosh. Lincoln Chafee is just -- I mean, what is he doing on the stage? What are you doing running for president?

STU: Well, first of all, he looks like the muppet eagle, I don't know if you noticed that.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: If you see them side by side, they're almost identical.

PAT: We have to see them side by side.

STU: I posted actually on my Facebook page. I came up with a campaign poster for them, which is Eagle Chafee 2016. And they look -- Sam the eagle and Lincoln Chafee are almost identical. That's number one.

But perhaps slightly more importantly, the man -- I've never seen anything like it. His answer as to one of his first votes.

PAT: Yeah, we have that. Let's check that out.

ANDERSON: Governor Chafee, you've attacked Secretary Clinton for being too close to Wall Street banks. In 1999, you voted for the very bill that made banks bigger.

LINCOLN: Glass-Steagall was my very first vote. I just arrived. My dad had died in office. I was appointed to the office. It was my very first vote.

ANDERSON: Are you saying you didn't know what you were voting for?

LINCOLN: I just arrived in the Senate. I think we get some takeovers, and that was one of my very first vote. And it was 95 -- 9 to 5 was the record.

ANDERSON: With all due respect, sir, what does that say about, that you were passing a vote for something you weren't really sure about?

LINCOLN: I think you're being a little rough. I just arrived at the United States Senate. I had been mayor of my city. My dad had died as I was appointed by the governor. It was the first vote. And it was 90 to 5.

JEFFY: Thank you.

PAT: I had hay fever that day. I put on brown and yellow. I didn't look very good.

JEFFY: I didn't even know where I was.

PAT: I think it might have even been beyond hay fever. It might have been a sinus infection.

STU: I was eating a hash brown, and some of the oil got on my shirt and it made it like clear. I was very nervous. I was self-conscious.

PAT: But there was a stain.

STU: Yeah, there was a stain there.

PAT: So I was looking at that more than I was the bill.

STU: I think you're being a little rough here, Anderson, considering that it was one of my first days. I mean, when you go in and you have a job for the first day, you walk around, you shake hands with a couple people, you have some doughnuts in the office. I wasn't expecting to vote. I just pressed a button. I didn't even know what happened.

PAT: I didn't even know there was voting going on in Congress. When did this start? Well, good follow-up would have been, well, what's going to happen on your first day of president?

STU: Look, I happened to bomb Idaho. It was my first day in office.

PAT: My wife was sick. I was worried about her. So, yeah, I sent some P52s over Idaho.

JEFFY: I think you're being a little rough.

STU: Is that one of the more unbelievable moments you've ever seen from a candidate?

PAT: Oh, it is.

STU: He was saying because it was his first day, he had no idea what he was voting for. And that was his excuse for supporting this particular bill. I mean, that's an unbelievable moment. Now, he is an absolute zero in every way, including the polls. So it's not -- he's not the guy with all the attention on him. But that field -- because it's one thing to say, okay, Hillary Clinton is a bad candidate. And she is a bad candidate. She's supporting policies -- some of the stuff she said and we'll get into it in that debate. In every other election say pre-2008 would be a complete disqualifying as a run for president -- to have any chance to win the presidency. It was that bad. But on that stage, there is no chance anyone on that stage can beat her.

They're terrible.

PAT: Although, they loved him.

STU: Bernie Sanders was laughable. They loved him in that room.

PAT: He won the debate on Drudge. And they loved him in the room.

STU: The Drudge poll is an internet poll.

PAT: And most people are saying Hillary won.

STU: Because Hillary does not have to win those debates. She just has to not be terrible.

PAT: Although she was. She was terrible.

STU: I think she was for a general election. I think she certainly was for anyone that has ever seen or heard --

PAT: She might be great for the new Democrat Party.

STU: Right.

PAT: She might be great. I mean, you've got a stage filled with people who are seriously qualified to run for the socialist or Communist Party.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: They absolutely could be running for that nomination. And the only one there who probably couldn't is Webb. And he has no place anymore. Jim Webb has no place in the Democrat Party. He's an actual Democrat like you knew them 40 years ago. Jim Webb seems to be, for the most part, a fairly reasonable Democrat. A moderate guy.

STU: Yeah, I think it was National Review who said he would have had a good chance of winning the nomination in 1948.

PAT: Exactly, yeah. Now, there's no way. He's not nearly communist enough. Not nearly. And they keep throwing out the Republicans like they're so extreme. Like they're so wild-eyed. Are you crazy? You guys are all communists. And you've got a guy who is very reasonable. He has no place in your party anymore. No place in your stinking party.

STU: Yeah. No place in your party. I mean, you have a guy here who is saying he's a socialist. And the mainstream candidate is doing everything she can to get to his left. Everything she can to get to his left.

PAT: Right. It's working out pretty well too. I mean, listen to this.

STU: Yeah, she just keeps going that way.

HILLARY: We've got to do more about the lives of these children. That's why I started off by saying, we need to be committed to making it possible for every child to live up to his or her God-given potential. That is really hard to do if you don't have early childhood education, if you don't have schools that are able to meet the needs of the people or good housing. There's a long list. We need a new New Deal for communities.

PAT: Okay. So if that doesn't send a chill down your spine. We need a new New Deal.

STU: Yeah, now, is that a newer New Deal than the new New Deal that they proposed in 1935?

PAT: Yes. We already had that new deal.

STU: Well, there was a New Deal. Then there was a new New Deal. This would be the new new New Deal?

PAT: This would be the super mega doppler New Deal.

STU: Wow.

JEFFY: And she's really concerned about childhood education. Really? How about that Planned Parenthood? At what age does child education start?

STU: She actually had, and I use this intentionally, the balls to say that she cared about the lives of children.

JEFFY: Right.

STU: Is that a serious point? You don't get to make that on the Democratic debate stage.

PAT: Not if you're as pro-abortion as she is.

STU: No.

PAT: Not if you love Planned Parenthood as much as she does. And she does.

HILLARY: It's always the Republicans or their sympathizers who say, you can't have paid leave, you can't provide health care. They don't mind having big government to interfere with a woman's right to choose and to try to take down Planned Parenthood.

PAT: Okay. Let's attack that now. They're not taking down Planned Parenthood. The government -- the big government we fight against is currently funding Planned Parenthood to the tune of $500 million a year. And they want to stop doing that.

STU: Yep.

PAT: They want the big government to stop being so big that they're funding that organization. And if they then survive, so be it. If they fail, so be it. Let them get their own private -- my guess is they get plenty of funds anyway. Because last year, what did they have? 2 billion, wasn't it?

STU: I think it was 1.5.

PAT: Yeah, it was definitely -- somewhere over one and $2 billion.

STU: Yeah. And I don't want to put too fine a point on this, but that remark by Hillary Clinton was the dumbest thing ever uttered by a human being. To say that a cut of $500 million is -- is evidence of big government is quite possibly the worst point ever -- ever made by a politician.

PAT: Stupid. And she doesn't get challenged on it.

STU: No. In fact, I was listening to CNN earlier today, and it was, this was her big moment. Where she came out and she said, the -- the Republicans love big government when it comes to defunding Planned Parenthood. Are you listening to yourself speak? Defunding. You're talking about taking government money away from an organization is big government.

PAT: Right.

STU: Every time they come out and they say, they want to cut childhood education funding. They want to cut health care spending. Is that all big government too? When they want to cut those things?

PAT: It doesn't seem like it to me. No.

STU: You're shrinking the size of government in theory. Again, the proposal doesn't even do these things. It doesn't even cut the money going to women's health organizations. It just redirects it from one that's under criminal investigation or at least very well may be soon.

But you have an issue where cutting money to an organization -- a government gives free money to somebody. That's big government. That is what conservatives fight against.

PAT: Right.

STU: Big government giving money to their friends. To other -- private organizations. That is what we fight against. When we say that we don't want that. She identifies that as big government.

PAT: Big government. Yeah. Well, she also ties in. That's where they want to tell women what to do with their body. Yeah, well, we also want government to tell people what to do with other human beings that we don't want them to kill. We do allow certain things. We allow access to the government to do certain things like prevent murder. That is a function of the government.

STU: Yes.

PAT: It's not that we want bigger government. We just want the government to do what it's supposed to do. And that's protect life.

STU: And of course, this comes from a party that is telling you the size of sodas you're allowed to ingest. They don't care about the government being involved with your body. They want the government involved with every aspect of what you do.

PAT: Yeah, it's unbelievable. And she had more.

HILLARY: They're fine with big government. I'm sick of it.

You know, we've been doing these things -- we should not be paralyzed. We should not be paralyzed by the Republicans and their constant refrain, big government this, big government that, except for what they want to impose on the American people. I know we can afford it because we're going to make the wealthy pay for it.

PAT: Oh.

STU: Of course. Of course. The wealthy.

PAT: Oh.

STU: They can pay for everything.

JEFFY: She almost did it there. She almost did it where she almost went to the Hillary screech. And she pulled it back. I know.

PAT: Very close.

STU: She got close though.

PAT: Very close.

STU: She is not good with big crowds like that. Luckily, she doesn't have to worry about that at her rallies because no one has been showing up, but she is not good.

Kamala Harris' first interview as nominee: Three SHOCKING policy flips

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Thursday, Kamala Harris gave her first interview since Joe Biden stepped down from the race, and it quickly becameclear why she waited so long.

Harris struggled to keep her story straight as CNN's Dana Bash questioned her about recent comments she had made that contradicted her previous policy statements. She kept on repeating that her "values haven't changed," but it is difficult to see how that can be true alongside her radical shift in policy. Either her values have changed or she is lying about her change in policy to win votes. You decide which seems more likely.

During the interview, Harris doubled down on her policy flip on fracking, the border, and even her use of the race card. Here are her top three flip-flops from the interview:

Fracking

Citizens of the Planet / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2019, during the 2020 presidential election, Harris pledged her full support behind a federal ban on fracking during a town hall event. But, during the DNC and again in this recent interview, Harris insisted that she is now opposed to the idea. The idea of banning fracking has been floated for a while now due to environmental concerns surrounding the controversial oil drilling method. Bans on fracking are opposed by many conservatives as it would greatly limit the production of oil in America, thus driving up gas prices across the nation. It seems Harris took this stance to win over moderates and to keep gas prices down, but who knows how she will behave once in office?

Border

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

In her 2020 presidential bid, Harris was all for decriminalizing the border, but now she is singing a different tune. Harris claimed she is determined to secure the border—as if like she had always been a stalwart defender of the southern states. Despite this policy reversal, Harris claimed her values have not changed, which is hard to reconcile. The interviewer even offered Kamala a graceful out by suggesting she had learned more about the situation during her VP tenure, but Kamala insisted she had not changed.

Race

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

When asked to respond to Trump's comments regarding the sudden emergence of Kamala's black ancestry Kamala simply answered "Same old tired playbook, next question" instead of jumping on the opportunity to play the race card as one might expect. While skipping the critical race theory lecture was refreshing, it came as a shock coming from the candidate representing the "everything is racist" party. Was this just a way to deflect the question back on Trump, or have the Democrats decided the race card isn't working anymore?

The REAL questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Democrats don't want the American people to know who they are voting for. It has been well over a month since Biden dropped out of the presidential race and Kamala was hastily installed in his place. During that time, Kamala has not given a single interview.

The Democrats' intention is clear: they have spent the last month gaslighting the American left into believing that Kamala is their new "super-candidate." Now that they've taken the bait, they can allow Kamala to take a softball interview to combat accusations from the Right.

Kamala's first interview will be hosted by Dana Bash on CNN and is scheduled for 9:00 p.m. ET tonight. Kamala will be joined by her running mate, Tim Walz, for an unusual interview. Between the tag-team approach and the more-than-sympathetic interviewer, it's almost certain that this will not be a particularly substantial interview full of easy, soft-ball, questions.

The American people deserve to know who is on the ballot, and that means that they should be able to see how their candidates stand up against tough questions. Here are five questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight:

Will she build a border wall?

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

After years of bashing Trump for his proposed border wall, Kamala has suddenly changed her mind. During the DNC, Kamala pledged to support a bill that included money for a border wall and other border security measures. This change seems like a knee-jerk response to recent criticisms made about her abysmal performance as the "border czar." The question is: how genuine is it?

What is her stance on the Israel-Hamas war?

BASHAR TALEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has been mushy on the issue of the Israel-Hamas war so far. She said that she would support Israel while simultaneously expressing sympathy for the Palestinians in Gaza. With mounting pro-Hamas support within the American left, just how far is Kamala willing to go?

How does she explain defending Biden against allegations that he was too old for office now that those allegations have proven true?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

For the last four years, Kamala and the entire mainstream media have vehemently defended President Biden's mental fitness, despite countless incidents that indicated otherwise. After Biden's senile performance at the June presidential debate, the truth couldn't be hidden any longer, and Kamala was quickly swapped into his place. Now that the cat's out of the bag, how does Kamala justify her lies to protect the incompetent president?

How does she plan on fixing the economy, and why hasn't she already done it?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has claimed that she could lower consumer prices starting on the first day of her administration, accompanied by other promises to fix the economy. So why the wait? If she knows how to fix the economy that is causing so many Americans to suffer, can't she do something right now as the Vice President? Why has the economy only gotten worse within her three-year tenure in the White House?

Why does she keep flipping on her policies? Where does it stop?

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

As mentioned above, Kamala has already changed her stance on a border wall, but it doesn't end there. During her 2019 presidential campaign, Kamala vowed to end fracking, a controversial method of drilling for oil, in the name of climate change. But now it seems her position has softened, with no mention of a fracking ban. Why does she keep changing her stance on these major policies? What other policies has she changed without any indication? Why has she so far failed to produce a clear campaign platform?

POLL: Who is better equipped to bring our astronauts home, Boeing or Glenn's dog, Uno?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Two astronauts who went up to the International Space Station for an eight-day mission are going to be stranded for another six months... thanks to the ineptitude of Boeing and NASA.

Astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams went up to the International Space Station aboard Boeing's newest spacecraft, the Starliner, in early June. The eight-day mission quickly became a nine-month mission as Boeing and NASA had one problem after the next over the past three months, which culminated with SpaceX being brought in to bail them out. In six months, SpaceX is set to launch a Crew Dragon spacecraft to retrieve the stranded astronauts.

This is more bad PR for Boeing coming after several high-profile malfunctions on commercial airliners, which have raised serious questions about the safety of Boeing's aircraft. This is also another glaring example of the government's ineptitude. Despite all of your taxpayer dollars, they are once again relying on a private company to bail them out.

So, what do you think? Can NASA retrieve the astronauts? Who is the most equipped to bring them home? Let us know what you think in the poll below:

NASA

GREGG NEWTON / Contributor | Getty Images

SpaceX

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Boeing

Scott Olson / Staff | Getty Images

A class of kindergarteners

Could Kindergarteners bring our astronauts home?

JENS SCHLUETER / Contributor | Getty Images

Glenn's dog, Uno

(Not an actual image of Uno)

Stu Burguiere

How Harley-Davidson’s woke pivot betrays true American values

Archive Photos / Stringer | Getty Images

Modern progressives are attacking American greatness, one beloved brand at a time. But you are not powerless.

I once read an amazing analysis about the birth of modern America. It explained how veterans returned from World War II and how programs like the GI Bill opened new avenues and opportunities that hadn’t existed before.

As American soldiers returned home, many of them were battle-hardened warriors who had faced the worst of humanity. They fought for freedom and brought back skills that aren’t taught in any elementary school or university.

We learned to see American brands as icons for what we stood for, but we are now being conditioned to be 'unburdened.'

Veterans’ benefits made the American dream possible for over 13 million people. Some went to college, while others bought homes. Many started businesses, empowered by new skills in engineering, auto mechanics, and air mechanics — all fueled by a grit and determination reminiscent of the American pioneers.

A few years later, some of those men helped build the U.S. interstate highway system, which connected this new generation of American pioneers like never before. “Go West, young man” was replaced with “get your hands dirty,” “work for what you believe in,” “improve your community,” and “fix what is broken.”

Americans once took pride in maintaining their heritage. We valued American brands like John Deere, Tractor Supply, Ford, Chevrolet, Indian, and Harley-Davidson, and we actively protected their legacy. We worked on these products in the fields and in our home garages, building businesses to ensure they continued serving the American public. These weren’t just commodities. They were our livelihood. They plowed our fields, fed our families, and took our kids to school. They embodied the American spirit, symbolizing everything we were willing to fight and die for.

To the children of some of those returning veterans, how many of you learned about real American muscle while leaning over the front end of a 1965 Shelby GT, a 1969 Chevrolet Camaro, or a 1970 Chevy Chevelle, or learned about the internal combustion engine while Pop tore apart a 1941 Harley-Davidson Knucklehead?

How many of you assisted your dad in keeping the plowing season alive by repairing the family’s 1949 Model B John Deere tractor? How many trips to Tractor Supply did it take?

You no doubt bloodied a bunch of fingers. You sat in the garage, on the hood, or in the field and dumped about 10 gallons of sweat, but you did it proudly. You listened as Dad or Granddad patiently said, “There’s where the crankshaft is. That’s the water pump. That’s the alternator. That’s the fuel pump, and that’s the line that goes up to the carburetor.” He might have even let you pull on the throttle linkage so you could hear that baby sing.

There was no agenda here besides pure American greatness. American brands built our country. We relied and depended on them. We built businesses of our own from them, and we passed that legacy on to our children. It was their birthright, and it created modern America.

Harley’s woke surrender

This is a big part of the reason why today’s corporate “diversity, equity, and inclusion” craze is such a huge slap in the face. Woke politics have replaced the purity of the American brands that we grew up with. We depended on these products. We built income from them, and we supported our communities with their logos displayed proudly on barns and in garages. Those symbols are now being replaced by corporate boards who get their marching orders from people like Larry Fink at BlackRock.

Robby Starbuck has recently exposed multiple companies for this behavior: John Deere, Tractor Supply, and especially Harley-Davidson.

Can you think of a bigger slap in the face than the woke capitulation of Harley-Davidson? Harley is one of the brands that helped win World War II. The Harley-Davidson WLA carried American GIs to war against the Nazis. The WLA was brought back to the United States, and a new era of motorcycles was born after the veterans began chopping them up for civilians to use. The “chopper” was born.

Bettmann/Getty Images

Veterans returning from war from the 1940s through today have ridden Harleys as both a therapeutic mechanism to deal with what they saw on the battlefield and as an homage to experience the openness of American freedom. And that legacy has been taught and handed down to Harley-Davidson riders from father to son enthusiastically since 1903.

What has Harley-Davidson done with that legacy? Here are just a few of the things that Starbuck exposed:

Harley-Davidson openly supports the Equality Act, which would allow men into girls' bathrooms, sports, and locker rooms.
The company funded an all-ages Pride event that featured a "rage room" next to drag queen story time.
1,800 employees were required to attend a virtual training course on how to become “LGBTQ+ allies.”
The woke CEO, Jochen Zeitz, signed the CEO Action for Diversity and Inclusion Pledge.
The company made February and March "months of inclusion" because, apparently, Pride Month isn’t enough.
The company hosted multiple woke United Way trainings.
Harley-Davidson sent some employees to a “white male only” woke diversity training program.
To top it off, the company is openly working to have fewer white suppliers, dealers, and employees.

And the list goes on.

What globalists want ... and fear

The purpose of modern cultural Marxism and progressivism is to destroy what was once great by attacking everything that made it great back in the beginning. You have to be “unburdened by what has been,” as Kamala Harris says, in order to open the door to “the fundamental transformation of America," to quote Barack Obama.

Twenty-first-century fascists are doing this, one beloved brand at a time, and we’re seeing it happen in real time. Woodrow Wilson once said, "The use of a university is to make young gentlemen as unlike their fathers as possible.” We’ve been seeing that from academia for decades. By and large, universities are lost.

Teach your kids that getting their hands dirty is a good thing. Something fought, bled, and sweat for has meaningful value. It’s part of who we are as Americans.

But that wasn’t enough. Progressives then turned their sights on our children in grade school. But that wasn’t enough either. They’re now going after the heart of the American entrepreneurial spirit and the beloved brands that made us who we are today. We were brought up to love them. We learned to see them as icons for what we stood for, but we are now being conditioned to be “unburdened.”

Reconnect your children to the basics of what makes American products so great. “American made” is more than just a slogan. It represents the weary men and women working in factories in small towns across Middle America. It’s the dad teaching his kids to change their own tires and oil. It’s the multiple trips to the local parts store and the thrill of victory as the family tractor roars back to life.

Teach your kids that getting their hands dirty is a good thing. Something fought, bled, and sweat for has meaningful value. It’s part of who we are as Americans. It benefits the family. It supports the community. It spreads that beloved American brand all over the country — and the world.

That connection goes all the way to the top of the corporate boardroom. That connection is what the globalists fear the most. Your passion has the power to destroy every coercive motive they can ever dream up. It is the same passion that fueled the American pioneer. It carried our soldiers into war against the Nazis and then drove them to catapult this country into the modern era.

That passion is why they’ll ultimately lose.

Unburden your families from the unburdening. Teach them the history of what made this country great. If a corporation tries to pervert a beloved American brand, show your kids what made them beloved to begin with.

Explain how the Harley-Davidson engine noise was specifically designed to be iconic, how the crankshaft has only one pin, and how the arrangement of the cylinders makes the pistons fire unevenly. No other motorcycle sounds the same. Why? Because it’s a friggin’ Harley! It’s part of Harley's story, and that is why American companies are so beloved to us. Sure, they sell quality products, but we fall in love with their story.

Reconnect these great American brands with their incredible stories. Get some oil, grease, and brake dust on your hands, and take pride when your kids ultimately cover their faces in it while trying to help you. Passion drives change, and it is your passion that scares these tyrants the most.

Editor's Note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep