Listen now (118 min) | Another two-parter: the first half with our new favorite lefty Lara Bazelon, professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law, journalist, feminist, novelist, controversialist. After Lara leaves, probably to free someone from prison, the lads take the second half of the show to catch up on the stupid and depressing news of the week.
Matt’s argument at 1:05 about prohibitions drives me crazy...”If millions of people are doing something” Like theft? Rape? Child abuse? Slavery? If you view fetuses as human beings entitled to equal human rights this is not a comparable issue to marijuana prohibition. Abortion abolitionists are starting from the point of defining abortion as a violent act against a second party. Blowing right past that premise to compare abortion to drugs is sort of willfully ignoring the opponent’s primary issue. Claiming a broadly “anti-prohibition” stance simply communicates your personal opinions about fetal life - it completely dodges the actual debate.
I take exception to your comments about Joe Biden lying about inflation. Is he also lying when he refers to Kamala Harris as the President? Or when he thinks his daughter is actually his wife? We called that something else in medical school.
It kinda sounds like Louie CK is going to be the guest (he’s a Masshole, but lives in NY). If that’s the case, I will disown my 3 month old son for not allowing me to attend. Dead to me.
It’s great to hear from sensible people with whom you likely disagree on 90 percent of policy prescriptions. Great episode - see you guys on Wednesday night!
As always stellar work. What great commentary on Roe v. Wade in this sode guys.
Two things..... 1) “Progressive Mad Libs” is my new favorite phrase. Thank you Matt Welch.
2) Moynihan, when you were talking about gas prices tied to inflation...you were pondering the last time prices were this high. The national average hit an **all time** high this week when it hit $4.37 per gallon for regular unleaded.
Luckily for the Biden Administration, they can just keep saying Putin over and over again as journalists nod like trained seals.
Can we talk about how Matt doesn’t even make enough to make him ineligible for the child tax credit? $300/year isn’t enough people! Pony up and help this man.
I’m one of the hated pro-life libertarians, but I would be fine with legal abortion up until the point that the brain is formed to a degree that the fetus feels pain(whether it really understands pain is unknown). Anyways, I understand Matt’s rebranding of “pro-choice” to “anti-restrictionist”, but at what point should there be any restrictions? Can a mother inject heroin or smoke fentanyl at 38 weeks and not be held responsible for what happens to the fetus/child within her? When does my body/my choice end and fetal rights(what I actually consider as human rights. A fetus is just a less-developed human.) begin?
Oh man, please have her back on to defend Chesa Boudin! As a San Franciscan, I’d love to hear that! I have been hard pressed to find people defending Chesa Boudin and his policies on their merits. It’s almost invariably disparaging the type of people who are pro-recall, or saying that crime isn’t as bad ‘If yOu LoOK At tHE dAtA’, or a vague nod towards his views on justice. 0 details on the merits of his ‘diversion problems’, or anything else…other than maybe his Innocence Commission, which does look great. She claims she can take M, M, and K, on 1v3 on this topic, so I would loved to have heard that. The open minded citizens of SF need it!
Also in general, I think public defenders play an important role in society, but have a natural bias. For any guilty clients, they meet them after the harm they have caused. The clients’ every incentive is to be nice and appear innocent to this person who is their lifeline out of a prison sentence, and that process presents a version of the person wildly different than the version who committed harm on somebody’s body or property.
Red Laura is 🔥🔥🔥. Please have her back again soon!
The live show where the guys interview Milo Yiannopoulos sounds amazing!
Matt’s argument at 1:05 about prohibitions drives me crazy...”If millions of people are doing something” Like theft? Rape? Child abuse? Slavery? If you view fetuses as human beings entitled to equal human rights this is not a comparable issue to marijuana prohibition. Abortion abolitionists are starting from the point of defining abortion as a violent act against a second party. Blowing right past that premise to compare abortion to drugs is sort of willfully ignoring the opponent’s primary issue. Claiming a broadly “anti-prohibition” stance simply communicates your personal opinions about fetal life - it completely dodges the actual debate.
I take exception to your comments about Joe Biden lying about inflation. Is he also lying when he refers to Kamala Harris as the President? Or when he thinks his daughter is actually his wife? We called that something else in medical school.
It kinda sounds like Louie CK is going to be the guest (he’s a Masshole, but lives in NY). If that’s the case, I will disown my 3 month old son for not allowing me to attend. Dead to me.
It’s great to hear from sensible people with whom you likely disagree on 90 percent of policy prescriptions. Great episode - see you guys on Wednesday night!
You guys really gotta get David French and Sarah Isgur on to talk the Roe stuff. They always have the best Supreme Court analysis on anywhere.
As always stellar work. What great commentary on Roe v. Wade in this sode guys.
Two things..... 1) “Progressive Mad Libs” is my new favorite phrase. Thank you Matt Welch.
2) Moynihan, when you were talking about gas prices tied to inflation...you were pondering the last time prices were this high. The national average hit an **all time** high this week when it hit $4.37 per gallon for regular unleaded.
Luckily for the Biden Administration, they can just keep saying Putin over and over again as journalists nod like trained seals.
Kmele 2024 vibes around the 1:49 mark
Can we talk about how Matt doesn’t even make enough to make him ineligible for the child tax credit? $300/year isn’t enough people! Pony up and help this man.
I’m one of the hated pro-life libertarians, but I would be fine with legal abortion up until the point that the brain is formed to a degree that the fetus feels pain(whether it really understands pain is unknown). Anyways, I understand Matt’s rebranding of “pro-choice” to “anti-restrictionist”, but at what point should there be any restrictions? Can a mother inject heroin or smoke fentanyl at 38 weeks and not be held responsible for what happens to the fetus/child within her? When does my body/my choice end and fetal rights(what I actually consider as human rights. A fetus is just a less-developed human.) begin?
I would be very enthusiastic about a trade episode! (Even more stuff if you invite Scott Lincicome to the conversation)
Has anyone noticed a particularly long lag time from the podcast posting on Substack and delivery to podcast apps (e.g. Overcast)?
"Controversial chap"— Sullivan and/or Murray come to mind.
What is everyone using as a mixer in their cocktails that require baby formula?
Oh man, please have her back on to defend Chesa Boudin! As a San Franciscan, I’d love to hear that! I have been hard pressed to find people defending Chesa Boudin and his policies on their merits. It’s almost invariably disparaging the type of people who are pro-recall, or saying that crime isn’t as bad ‘If yOu LoOK At tHE dAtA’, or a vague nod towards his views on justice. 0 details on the merits of his ‘diversion problems’, or anything else…other than maybe his Innocence Commission, which does look great. She claims she can take M, M, and K, on 1v3 on this topic, so I would loved to have heard that. The open minded citizens of SF need it!
Also in general, I think public defenders play an important role in society, but have a natural bias. For any guilty clients, they meet them after the harm they have caused. The clients’ every incentive is to be nice and appear innocent to this person who is their lifeline out of a prison sentence, and that process presents a version of the person wildly different than the version who committed harm on somebody’s body or property.