Good evening to her students in the audience in our viewers welcome to the College Grade on the Vice President of the college. Its based in michigan. We are here in washington dc campus. Also the dean of the school of government here at the nations capital. You find out more about our programs that are website. When the library with Michael Anton who is lectured Research Fellow here. We would discussing his new book space, america at the point of no return. Welcome mike. Im glad youre here. You might know michael from his previous work. He wrote flight 93 election. Under at the time, becky us moves. Was working private sector at the time. Under another tenant until he was outed. Then he went to work for the Trump Administration and the National Security council. Thats work safe say saw the election 2016 is the x essential question. And now were at the point of no return. Some tempted to ask one of the top. What you say to those who consider you to be an alarmist but look around me and i see what is going on all around us right now. What is going on what is your general assessment to set up our conversation. Mike i would agree with those people. I am an alarmist. So us on a question. The question is am i right or wrong. So im somewhat by the fact a lot of people say this isnt sounding insane in 2016 that, not to say, i dont know, maybe he was right after all. Maybe im now completely convinced. Id say someone, comforted. Because to be i would rather than just been wrong. When everything turned out okay. So i wrote the bulk of the book for lockdown before the local riots. They had sort of a bad direction. Its something that i would rather have been proved wrong and everything become a harmonious and i can go down in history as a crank who wrote an alarmist thing. In turn out to be inaccurate. Be our have a much better outcome. Everybody also be a lot happier. Thats okay. Matthew spalding both of these books are about collections. Is there something about where we are in our history hundred history are all election is going to be of this magnitude or this is a temporary thing. Mike is definitely temporary. But thats also not a comforting answer. Because one way to solve the problem is just have one more election and elected Democratic Party and let them joe biden, if you read the immigration plan. There essentially promising to bring in a combination of amnesty immigration rules, 52 million americans. From an all reaching citizenship. The highest correlation of liberal democrats believe for district with her be congressional or state. A county or whatever is percentage of foreign. They know this. They been saying this for decades that the more immigrants coming into the country, and safe when their democratic and this will be great way to build a permanent democratic majority. The so that is one example of what i think is on the table in 2016 and its on the table 2020. Someone wake to stop that is just have or not have election or have meaningless elections forever. In california, there zero because everybody knows, you know whos going to win. Not the same program as everybody else. The country could become like that shortly as well. Thats what i most worried about. Matthew spalding so in the general question. Then i want to walk through some me part of the book. The 2016 election, the 2020 election. Is the 2020 election more let or less in a preface that by pointing out that the founder of the transition integrity project which is a bipartisan group. Michael anton no. Kilman has tweeted that you were a hard time to be treated that way. He was executed. Whats going on. This is election more or even more heightened in 2016 the net premiums executed for writing an without a trial. In this person has been criticized by a lot of our friends and has refused to apologize her back down. And city extremely wellfunded. In his prestigious and barely has no problem with him tweeting out that threat. Is a lot at the left who endorsed it. So what is it tells about where we are. I think that where we are is expecting to win the 2016 election by a landslide. The expected the transition to oneparty state to be smooth and uneventful. In which they could just begin implementation of the programs. They were shocked by the election of trump. They were shocked that there was an effective resistance. In the been very angry and vengeful and moved. The angry and vengeful mood has reached a fever pitch. I feared that if they get the power 2020, believe is a transition, it wouldve been less turbulent 2016 i think it would be extremely turbulent part because they will be out to settle scores. And for example. One person the window i was spoken to in years is actually called for a truth and refuse and elation in the commission. This is something that happens when a dictatorship follow you dont want to put everybody in jail. Ulees tried to flatten out the distances. Will crimes are there for the president and for the program. Were talking about the truth and reconciliation. Were getting that. Theres no democratic policies. Theres no justified oppositions. Theres just one side and an enemy. That is the way they see it. Matthew spalding lets back up and work through the book. They flight 93 election, it was an essay was turned into a book with discipline out more of an extensive work to think through some of the underlying problems that we face. You open this book with the extended essay if you will. From a chapter about california im from california. You spent time in california. But you. That california is a study of americas possible future. So backing away from the election you see a larger trend going on here. Tell us more about that. Michael anton the schwarzenegger, the governor he became governors we call an effort and less than two years trying to close republican conservative that was defeated in every respect. He never formally switch parties but effectively was democratic. In the congressional delegation was like 45 seven are overwhelmingly democratic. The hunt oneparty government at the state level the city level. Much every county level of the large population. There were some red counties but those red counties the right people. There are millions of them in california. They have no effective vote or safer they can vote. He just doesnt matter. They will be outvoted on everything imported present california shows what happens when the Democratic Party takes power. They left especially well represented by us. By financing this managerial class. In the socalled knowledge workers. These are the people that cram that little thing up and down the california coast and come up with all kinds of enthusiasm and they impose them on the rest of the state. Is this a very, vincent mostly, i feel like california propaganda about the natural bey and Silicon Valley innovation all of these things. Everybody hears that freedom of denying that is their freedom to saying that underneath tip of the iceberg, theres a big giant rest of the iceberg which is dysfunction and decay. And people dont hear about it. Matthew spalding what really makes it the example where things are going. Obviously theres a culture question. Michael anton how it actually operates. I start almost in the book of begin mike bloomberg, former mayor of new york city, very briefly the democratic primary as a present. Said this the model for the future. To prototypical type. Dont know how much money he has 50 billion. And he founded his own company. Not taking away from his successfully very much is all about the knowledge economy, the finance economy. The hightech economy. And without concern for the middle class of the manufacturing. His vision of new york, used to call it luxury product. It is very expensive to be here no kinds of things dont work. But it works for those at the top and thats what matters. In the Global Economy thats what matters. Doesnt care about the rest of the country. In any significant way. Mike bloomberg was very much a candidate for the coastal area. In the parts of california that he was praising are the only parts that are working. He seemed to neglect the rest. I would say the same about gavin newsom and Mark Zuckerberg and schwarzenegger. In all of the great california success stories. The famous people there. As long as San Francisco and laguna beach and handful of other places are doing okay, california is working. In fresno the foothills in the cascade mountains. In the high deserts the low deserts in the inland empire. Not only do they not care about this places, they dont even really know the there. Matthew spalding theres a sense, and just oppose that, he also talk about the regime. The old regime. Michael antontheres court sorts justification your broker the submittal regime. Which has a model of where things seem to be going. In this other old regime. Talk about later to afford your net analysis but i want to talk about those two bottles. Give california model. But this regiment to talk about the older america. Tell us more about how you analyzed that. It and talk about the confusion about the left in the right over that. Michael anton the main thrust of chapters two and three to say that were supposed to be government. Not anymore. Anyway it is meant to take the conservatives by the lapels and say, i revere the constitution and the bill of rights. And just as much as you do. But, its time to own up to the fact that the United States is no longer governed by this phrase fundamentally government away. I dont really give lessons about how is supposed to be governed. But i do spend a lot of time in chapter two discussing the tax on the original understanding of how americas post be governed. Spend more time of the right wing attack. The rightleaning tax have not gotten much of the tension. Matthew spalding lets dig into some of those little bit. And in some places we spent a lot of time talking about the Core Principles behind it. The declaration and the constitution. We think those are very important to define a regime. But its also the case that our teachers have talked about any times. When you go into some depth about how there has been a debate within the right for some time over how to understand the founding. But has that kind of taken the conservatives, the defenders of founding often the wrong path. Michael anton theres maybe to a second with this. First of all are interrelated and tabulated. This intact and says, the founding is what will be put it this way. Am trying to speak to those who look at the world of 2020 and say, i dont like this. Somethings gone terribly wrong and it needs to be fixed. Which we sent him a list. Lets list things dont like. My listener list looks about the same. But how do we get here. And then they will say, maybe one or two things. Tovar civil five. The founding. All men are created equal. Number shouldve done it. The related tactic is the enlightenment which the founding is simply a byproduct of. I dont mean to disparage it. But he basically characters america in that book in 19827 is nothing but a kind of lock in a petri dish. Puts life on a political stage. So try to answer this the best again. Neither one of the charges is true. Its a deviatio deviation from e founding that god is in trouble. The banners in fact were not straight up walking and absorbed libertarians or concerned only with the satisfaction and the appetite and things like that. Building a regime thats all right. Weve heard all of these things before. In fact they were doing the best they could and probably the best that anyone could with the circumstances of 1776 which is fundamentally, still prevails today. In the sense that we still live in the modern world. We still live in the christian world. Release we live in a world which civil religious law have been separated. I dont want to get into the philosophy to deeply visit any of these fundamental circumstances still prevail. And answers their proposed by people in the right, are things that i think are unviable. I think you know that. They chip away a lot of the founding and then they hint that maybe is altered. Maybe it is a kind of old new right that comes from 20th century. I find all of those ultimately unsatisfactory. I find some of them that might be reasonable if there included in other elements free to to schedule this out. I am trying the chapter not to bash the rightwing critics of the founding who gets 2020 correct. Little seo it helps anything. Trying to say that im with you on the diagnosis. Dont think youre right in the cure prayed and god hear me out. And from what i have heard, ive been on the fence about it. But i was impressed by that. So literally five people told me that so maybe there will be more. Thats an important aspect. Matthew spalding this will come to your serious criticism of current policies. In modern aspects of the movement if you well. There really stems from a misunderstanding or failure to comprehend the grounding. Michael anton is that a fair. Its an original case. And of think the most original thing about chapter two is putting it all in one place and trying to directly address criticism say over the last ten years. Im not going into all of the cases from the 70s. And not reciting the civil war. Not going into any of that. Its all about, and were addressing serious right wing critics of the regime thats developed in the last couple of decades. Regime which i oppose. I think its far from what it should be. But i think that i have diagnosed reasons why. Matthew spalding lets talk about the left him a little bit. So we have this 6019 project. The first 1776 project. What you make of all of that. Especially that is the root of it. Michael anton is a good question. I isolate to movements. The early 20th centuries. In the 60s leftism and beyond. The 1619 project. Some of those scholars are skeptical. But i find some good in them. The only thing i find good is that none of them were there. Theres Something Different about it. They were anti founding. It got that they thought it was bad at the time they just thought, think of them as somebody coming to the state of the art computer and finding a software, this the way they looked at america. The constitution of 17827 is cannot possibly work on these machines. They love the machines. They wanted to bring about progress. By the time you get into the 60s radicalism, the machine is terrible. I need a sledgehammer and one breakage. It. Matthew spalding so what happens there. Sue and so arises from a kind of l irrational passion. Utopianism. Residual marxism. Maybe a lot of discontentment built up in the system. Some of it i think also arises from just critiques. You telling the history one way a lot of people been left out. A lot of this begins with conclusion. Why we telling the story not the story. And then it is like well youre right, we should tell all the stories. Why are we emphasizing it. Will change the matter of emphasis and so finally were not going to tell the story anymore. And then a disparaging wind and has me about the stuff that was formally excluded. His momentum to it i guess. It took on a life in its own and culminates. I will say but the 1619 project if you been for the last couple of days. Theyre starting to deny that theyve never said some of the most radical things that they said in the new york times. They been gone so far as to disingenuously metro actively change the tweets but as they say the internet is forever. All these things have been captured summer. Turn back into their face. Matthew spalding thats kind of a, i guess for the purposes of our conversation bro make a distinction some intellectual ships that are going on. It also some structural practical things that are happening as well. One of the things that any of our friends went out about what they called the administrative state. There are some structural things that are happening. Hello there intellectual critiques and arguments. Sue and but because of the intellect. To go back to the software analogy, and the constitution this old software that we are commissioning it is too complex for a going to come up with new software. The part of the problem is that the old software is let the people decide. Because the question is too complicated. They should not be decided. They need to be decided in basis of Scientific Authority and then implement a nine person way. In order to do that we will have to build credible apparatus. They do it cleverly. Theyre still only three branches of government. In ministrant of state, not quite been almost entirely built with in the executive branch. It becomes unaccountable branch, people who work are not elected. Theyre not really responsive to electoral voting. On paper theres an org chart which the executive branch, the presences at the top everybody has aligned to the boxes go. The ceo of the company for you think all these people report to me. In the ceo actually, that is more or less true. You have a lot of leeway. The president does not. The administrator state is so insulated from political authority. Matthew spalding here we see the breaking away if you will of the regime. The regime of the founders, that was an intellectual thing. In various different ways. It was a break there but the progressives. Even though there were some things that were not quite is radical as what comes later. Sue and theres a break and it takes a while to build these things. Sometimes the most radical movements dont go anywhere. And sometimes they do but you only notice because when the progressives are talking about the want to do in 1998. In 1910. Actually pushed through a lot of socalled progressive reforms. In a immigration systems. It i listed bunch of health and safety things. But they do all of that legislatively. Theyre using the old system. Takes a while to you get the point where Unaccountable Agency can say, passing this regulation. Congress had nothing to say about it. The president did not order us to do it. If you found in violation of the week tried. And we found a way 104 agents. And then you can be brought up before an administrative judge. All three powers constitutional powers invested in one unconstitutional branch where they can charge you, try you, send you if i knew. And within one system. Against the administrators but lets say the epa says a inadvertently killed and endangered insect in my backyar backyard. They charge me with the law im hoping for an administrative judge on the proceeding that has no president and then im convicted and fined and whatever. So in one sense the old order but on the other sense ive seen that cartoon godzilla defeats b b. And shifting political power from the elected branches in the delegation which begins at the progressive themselves little structural things are going on now looking at the shift of power that is called the administrative state. By talking about the ruling class not necessarily the same thing. But what is the ruling class . So it is the land of aristocrac aristocracy. And the ruling class it is disparate and they all get the same education the most senior members are those that run the banks and the big corporations and foundations and universities some of them are extraordinarily rich. The junior members those that didnt go to harvard they went to oakland the well indoctrinated into the religion instead of paying a managing director at Goldman Sachs who assistant secretary of treasury another barely making six figures he can barely for the closet and his condo they are not successful but that is an important part of the ruling class. So as a populist push against those who are in control and the washington establishment. There seems to be more to it. That includes the bureaucrat bureaucrats. But not merely that. It is intellectual in which broader than a populist complaint until two is currently in power and how they are educated. It was the true unity. And Mark Zuckerberg may be somewhat smarter there were 66 billion but the make up of his mind and the things that he wants to see done what he thinks is just and unjust and to enable certain ends and there is no difference between him and the low sixfigure scribe. They work in the same way. You make some distinctions loaders and offenders who are these people . I call them the ruling class. The ruling class army with a constituency. Ship class needs people behind them. Stars on their shoulders but without an army what good are they . Perhaps thats a loaded term for fundamentally people to lose interest in the political system is to get free stuff so that freeloader and socialism its unfair to me i deserve more and then for the government. But they are more true believers in the religion. They dont necessarily feel as a defining characteristic they are not in it because they feel they personally have been harmed but they feel a religious sense that america has harmed people and thats terrible and i will dedicate my life to address that. And ventures are people who think they have harmed them personally with the Demographic Group more broadly and that there is a cosmic ledger that needs to be squared and that squaring requires the punching of america are certain segments of the american population. This is a bipartisan group. Because its hard to imagine with the republican constituency and it is more of a descriptor where liberalism has gone. Its a weird left that has no problem with the concentration but of the partisan divide today whose democrat and republican the dominating the states versus blue states. Is there a ruling consensus . The stable consensus . Now a show that it think it shows is not stable may realize the instability alternately requires further coercive measures on their part is that they are gearing up for the day when the selection. Let me put it this way they do manage to in the white house somehow. Speaking in terms of the old left in the new left the democrats in a new democrats there is a sense of which those that have come to dominate cannot control that. Where they went over to the republicans. With non collegeeducated union workingclass are in the big cities. Big cities dont have manufacturing. I dont mean that entirely but its mostly true knowledge workers and finance and tack on and technology they are independence or they dont know and many who had not voted in decades trump which caused a surprise and 2016 the ballot between the new left in the old that the new one without and that is all settled. I see them coming back from tha that. Out of the window those voters . Especially are trump voters are the left that trump . Maybe old left is too much but the old left like the John Steinbeck novels organizing cells in the central valley. No. If youre that committed to the left you are not each pump of but maybe women or jfk or the humphrey or a democrat a lot of people for humor humphrey later voted for reagan so they are showing that generation back. You have a number of places in your book you talk the operations of the book and the mechanisms of the left talk about the narrative and the megaphone explain those. The number one tool right now maybe just a little bit is ruled by propaganda this was a disturbing element of 2020 to see more all right coercive measures so i do want to measure one mention this one thing that is disturbing to me we see a lot of violence and a lot of that is excused or denied by the media social legacy and by mayors and governors seem to do anything about violence or to encourage and the few times ive seen on investment get a candlelit under them is to go after progress aggressively go after those constitutional right thats a stay acting forcibly in a tyrannical way weve never seen before ive never seen as much of that is i have in 2020 and the trend in that direction. That said mostly its propaganda broadcasting one narrative on any subject and a extraordinarily high omnipresent way junior only hearing one thing that another dispute with the Police Shooting yesterday but the narrative all shootings are unjustified and the police are systemically racist the cases presented to be entirely sympathetic shes asleep shes not guilty it turns out it was not a no knock warrant the friend had a felony and he shot at the Police Everything is complicated is not inevitable anymore but a refusal to bring down indictments and two of the three officers and its for a much lesser charge not the murder. So that narrative use the writing to say this cannot be justified the Police Always at fault and it is totally innocent. That is the narrative. Omega from players that out whenever you read that is all you will hear and see and the few places to tell that story is censored recent from social media so its hard to get the alternative story out. By only telling one story and one side of it and everywhere constantly as long as possible and by suppressing other versions and attacking those. And the idea of a narrative itself you have a long history of liberal and academic thinking to narrative in the way of doing things. You use to hear this disregard and academia there is no truth. They have moved beyond that now its too sophisticated so the truth america is systemically racist or the police are out for blood and to say thats my truth but it is the truth. And honestly as stupid as i find it depending on your perspective its a little smarter than saying this is the truth if you have a pile of facts i can show to undermine it you still insist its the truth ampersand those facts are not there are youre just a bad person to bring it up with that naive sense kids at college merely learning relativism merely learning relativism woke religion now five years ago that they were saying the colleges are a problem because they are so radical how long ago was it for instance we had that crazy meltdown . Remember there was an email saying yale without a notice picture for the costume you wear because you can then people the professor we did just dont wear anything stupid use your judgment and the students went crazy it was all caught on videotape as they went screaming at the professors wife. Several smart liberal said they are doing a disservice because when the kids get out in the real world with a real job and will result they will be eaten alive. This is terrible so it turns out the joke is on them they went to the real world and they the companys life when 2020 rolls around the time there was a controversy with a 50 yearold middle and Senior Management again state woke radical they would win every time. So the effects of the academy is the subject of criticism for decades now for what we see now is a fruition of that definitel definitely. That may be the biggest. Lets shift and layout for us Chapter Eight which is how this could possibly be saved what would turn this around another way . It also brings up a particular chapter on your book of immigration talking about a number of things as a way to look at these criticisms of the modern parties. If thats even possible the first step is to create unity which we dont have it in my own view to try to make cultural unity the first parity not permanently hopefully out of reach so is to create economic unity i think the country is economically divided but is more culturally than economically but maybe economic unity is a pathway and essentially the for implantation but also flushing out of the program with all kinds of things raise wages at the bottom in the middle prevent healthcare from cannibalizing the way it has make housing more affordable so people can get married and have kids younger they finally have their first down payment and a ridiculously expensive house at the age of 40. I say in the book and not a policy wonk. I had help from the chapter together myself it would myself got ideas for other people to say inequality doesnt matter a rising tide lifts all boats requires a Republican Party to realize the private sector is the enemy and the public pretty to realize wall street needs to start thinking about advancing regulations that yes we reduce wall street profits that yes we reduce wall street profits only benefits at the expense of the red middle on the blue coast. Is the Republican Party the vehicle . It might be right now Republican Party is divided the Republican Leadership they look at the polls and they see this Republican Base 96 percent of trump but they are waiting for him to go away and i think they can go back to the playbook consensus. Except it will not do us any good and 2020 or 20 before. It doesnt work for these times. Host setting aside the Republican Party for consensus. Parties change. You made a couple of points of the coalition behind it and the Reagan Coalition of the eighties the libertarianism or social conservativism and you see them in a different way and that needs to operate differently with the coalition behind the party. Is the standard way of looking the foreignpolicy hawks and the libertarians take that in reverse order i think the Republican Party still needs to be the party of the social conservative. Talks a good game and then rolls over so with that enormous social change over the last five years and claims to be standing but the results are entirely ineffective. I rake on and recuse the public party but notes it cannot take on the judiciary. With that piece it has left a disagreement. People just talking a good game because they that they have to. On economics will have to be the biggest change the Republican Party, its not 1980 anymore it is not 70 percent. Reagans first crisis government is the problem not the answer now in a different crisis and government can be the solution. It can help with outsourcing and rebound Us Manufacturing reagan himself is not against tariffs i think was awfully he was as a College Student and economic major but after the first term to do trade imbalances and shined on by the trading partners then he got results and he said i know theoretically the alternative is better but i cannot be the sucker and let them exploit my country. Host the american tradition is not fairly free trade there is a lot of tariffs. The Republican Party is founded about 45 miles from Hillsdale College i cannot vouch for the accuracy and its a tariff party from the presidency all the way up to the great depression. So the second point you are making that intellectual point you are making is the notion that markets and trade and commerce are extremely importan important. And they say what works for the citizenry at the time and thats the problem. And the American Free trade i dont know how many they realize that they inherited from the democrats inherited the free trade emerges after world war ii to help rebuild the economies of europe and democrats argue for it and to say we have to do this because of the dont the economies will be rebuilt and subject to communist takeover but we can afford it we are 50 percent right now. Even though they had a big Union Democratic base to which they say when we control the economy dont worry about it were the strongest economy in the world the republicans take over the free trade argument to the point where bill clinton has a democrat wins the first time in 12 years they are still considered to be the tariff party and there is a lot of pressure he will side with her then he goes to the congress and they said no. He has to rely on the republicans. That continues through the nineties and the republicans are the rigid freetrade party and only trump has shaken that up. I think that will be a tough one. Just in the composition of the Trump Administration itself all of the top aides and cabinet especially struggled with the idea we have to be tougher in our trade negotiations even to think of tariffs even though there is a deep strain going back to lincoln but not much in the party today. The third category to be hawkishness the should be easier because the Republican Party threat to the 20th century the Republican Party there was much more inclined to restrain door of foreignpolicy standoffish this but also a strong jacksonian strain and this is for about 20 years ago to identify the jacksonian tradition we will leave you alone as long as you leave us alone dont expect the proportional but if you pull up one tank we will blow up 100 is not only jacksonian but it crystallizes the thinking if you look at the average voter we dont go around picking fights or get into foreign wars overseas for nationbuilding but we will defend ourselves and if we are hit we were hit back ten times as hard. So that intellectual case for that foreignpolicy defines interest narrowly and defends them vigorously and tries to get along with everybody. And complete common sense and to some extent that they say you have to be active and engaged and aggressive that argument is easier to win especially after two decades of failure in iraq and afghanistan. Running out of time but just to close that, do you think there is a coalition there or is this difficult . In my estimation, im not a quantitative political person within the voting matters but it seems to me that question entirely depends on whether or not a trump policy a platform can pick up a significant number of middle working a lower middleclass nonwhite voters hispanic and black not majority but enough to eat into the Democratic Coalition to get them in the comfortably low to mid fifties of that can be done yes, but if the cultural issues trump the Economic Issues and economics cannot help page that coalition then it cannot thats the answer. Right now it looks like trump will do he did a percent of the black vote which is terrible 20 hispanic which is also not a great other republicans have done better. We have to wait and see now it looks like hes doing significant better now and if that pans out and there are successors and demonstrable cases my policy will make your life better. It policy will put the money in your pocket it will give you these benefits and then there is a chance. Host is there anything i havent covered . You to bring up the doomsday scenarios. [laughter] they will have to buy the book. I talk about not because i wishing for them or even protecting them but i think things are very rocky and rough the way they havent been for a long time if i start thinking to the possibilities of a recession a civil war for their jewelry and roll over forced federalism were states assert their positions thats what you said washington . Will make me im not leaving the union so force that on me. Some of these things could happen but the point is you have written a book warning about those things to prevent those things not advocating those things. No. We cannot prevent them if they dont think about them or talk about them. The first time we went to into the National Consciousness is when it is attempted thats a bigger problem than if you think about it in advance. At the book and read it. Thank you michael his book is called the states directory publishing. It is a great read i read it many times that the process and i encourage everyone to get a copy and thank you to those who are here tonight. I really believe you have a right to say whatever but i think the basis of that argument in the book if you talk about the holocaust or whatever or kids in cages were racis racism, whatever it is it has to be funny. You can tackle the issue. But you better craft a beautiful joke around it because gratuitously the emphasis with new joke attached to it we can think of at the same time as a comedian. I am a lesbian and i came out in the mid nineties but i came out on stage is a gay analyst because every comic talks about their family. And i had so much material because i was always talking my mother i never talked about my partner because it was boring frankly. Then oh my god. This is amazing. Loss of the things that people say. So after a few minutes because its the same stuff. And at one point in the late nineties early 2000s and we have come so far it is the early 2000s and it really was ridiculous. All the people that are allowed to get married and cannot get married. Like menendez kill their parents and end up in jail mary kayla turnout and a student. Sandusky married more whites than i do. I was in houston who came up to me in the show and said now i understand it. The power of comedy is so amazing and break so many stigmas. And is so charming. Hello everyone. So since april 2 or 3 times a week a great way to stay connected to you and we meet a lot of new people that have never been to tulsa or