What's Wrong with J.D. Vance?
Added 2024-08-10 18:41:28 +0000 UTCIn this episode, your co-hosts take a harrowing journey into the life, mind, and times of J.D. Vance, the Republican senator from Ohio and current vice-presidential pick of Donald Trump. You probably were introduced to Vance as the author of Hillbilly Elegy, his 2016 memoir that attempts to explain the plight of the "white working class" in places like Kentucky and Ohio, and now know him as the deranged post-liberal purveyor of insults to single women, lies about Joe Biden targeting MAGA voters with fentanyl to thin their ranks, and deranged comments about the 2020 election and Jan. 6. In short, how did Vance become so weird—and menacing? We try to answer that question by starting with a close reading of Hillbilly Elegy, and then take listeners from the end of that book through the transformations that made Vance Trump's toadie-in-chief.
Sources:
J.D. Vance, Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis (2016)
— "How I Joined the Resistance: On Mamaw and Becoming Catholic," The Lamp, April 1, 2020
Glenn Kessler, "J.D. Vance’s Claim That Biden is Targeting ‘MAGA voters’ with Fentanyl," Washington Post, May 11, 2022
Colby Itkowitz, Beth Reinhard and Clara Ence Morse, "In Vance, Trump Finds a Kindred Spirit on Election Denial and Jan. 6," Washington Post, July 17, 2024
Ian Ward, "The Seven Thinkers and Groups That Have Shaped JD Vance’s Unusual Worldview," Politico, July 18, 2024
Simon Van Zuylan-Wood, “The Radicalization of J.D. Vance,” Washington Post, Jan 4, 2022
John Ganz, "The Meaning of JD Vance," Unpopular Front, Jul 16, 2024
Dorothy Thompson, “Who Goes Nazi?” Harper’s, Aug 1941.
Comments
UK listener, just became a patron to contribute to your legal costs. May the bastards fail!
Walkersward (Adam)
2024-08-22 19:04:55 +0000 UTCGuys, check out Young D in Dorothy Thompson's essay....
David Gillman
2024-08-21 01:01:30 +0000 UTCThank you for reading the book for me. I heard Vance on a radio interview in 2016. He struck me as a pornographer, and his book sounded like an extended version of the hillbilly scene in Cold Mountain. You acknowledge the luridness but also find more there. Then there's Matt's last word, in which all sympathy for Vance unravels. Maybe the luridness was the point after all.
David Gillman
2024-08-21 00:51:57 +0000 UTCIt’s important to reiterate how much Vance’s rage and spite towards “elites” runs counter to the attitudes that Christ advocates. It’s not just fueling his need to be accepted by elites, but the conflict between his resentment towards them and need to be accepted is ultimately still won by this spite-driven goal of acceptance, resulting in his adoption of policy contempt for his own people. Bootstrap economics and cultural pathology that, taken to its logical conclusion, results in a fascist regime ruled by the very elites he grew up hating.
Turner Stevens
2024-08-19 12:19:14 +0000 UTCFair! (Matt)
Know Your Enemy
2024-08-17 23:42:14 +0000 UTCPersonally, I think the most jarring Vance revelation was his grandmother asking him if he wanted to suck c*** at 10 years old. I'm surprised that didn't make it into the psychologizing, because it raised a few red flags for me (and a few rainbow flags as well).
Axel Herrera
2024-08-16 15:00:05 +0000 UTCI'm glad you raised that bit about payday lending. When I first read Hillbilly Elegy, that was a part that jarred me. It wasn't just that his policy analysis and prescriptions were weak but they were a rehash of common AEI and, frankly, payday industry talking points of the time. It so happens that the Ohio effort to limit payday lending was a state legislative campaign initiated and led in part by Catholics.
Rachel
2024-08-16 14:42:07 +0000 UTChttps://harpers.org/2015/12/who-goes-nazi/ Read it for the first time after listening to the episode. I think they undersold how amazing the essay is.
Ethan Adelman-Sil
2024-08-15 21:12:52 +0000 UTCWhen I was (ugh) re-reading the book recently, I noted this bit: “Now that I’m a lawyer, I marvel that we never considered a medical malpractice suit against the doctor who operated unnecessarily on her back. But Mamaw wouldn’t have allowed it: She didn’t believe in using the legal system until you had to.” One wonders what Mamaw would have made of Peter Thiel's bankrupting Gawker via lawsuit.
Sebastian Stockman
2024-08-15 18:56:59 +0000 UTCIf I stopped listening about 40 mins in, I think I would have I ended up having more sympathy for JD Vance than I did going in. I mean, c'mon guys, yes, the book may be begging for psychology, but I think a little heart here would have helped make the case more credible: it sounds like he experienced some legit trauma -- something I feel comfortable saying because a lot of it seems to mirror my own -- and the effects of the alienation that come with getting dropped in a world where people have a lot of agency compared to the one you come from is maddening. But when we get to "here's what to do about it" and the condescensions that follow, I heard all the cat lady memes scream in my head, again, at once. Also, separately, I know it's become kinda common to say liberals were tripping over themselves to validate Vance in 2016 when the book came out but I really, really don't remember it that way: people saw his policy prescriptions for what they were then, at least "liberals" did, even if they did make overtures to the idea that we hadn't figured out how to connect with the people Vance claims to champion.
Ryan Erickson
2024-08-15 02:12:04 +0000 UTCGreat show, thanks. Could someone perhaps add to the show notes the article about who would be a Nazi. I need to share that far and wide re: Vance.
JoJene Mills
2024-08-15 00:11:25 +0000 UTCListeners to KYE who actually LIKE the far right ideas that are discussed on this podcast would have to be the most soulless, unthinking, and callous people on the planet. Something has fundamentally gone wrong in their lives if they listen to you guys thoroughly discuss these ideas and explain why they are so evil and still say, "Yeah, no, I still dig 'em."
Garett Smith
2024-08-14 21:22:13 +0000 UTCVance, I think, further demonstrates the difficulty the right will have in finding a successor to Trump. It’s been clear for a while that traditional politicians like De Santis have a very hard time saying, basically, “I combine Trumpist values with normal professional competencies.” It's almost a contradictory claim. Maybe a more charismatic politician than De Santis could do it, but there aren't many who are that good. Meanwhile Vance is running into a related difficulty. In order to establish his Trumpist bona fiedes as a junior politician, he had to go on all of these podcasts and say these edgelord things that now, rebroadcast for a national audience, just seem nuts. I guess this difficult switch of audiences has always been part of pivoting from the primary to the general. But the development of a whole separate opinion ecosystem in podcasting and on the web would seem to have made the task almost impossible for anyone but a Bill Clinton-level virtuoso.
Sebastian Lecourt
2024-08-14 15:09:55 +0000 UTCThis is a very good observation, and I think it says as much about the Silicon Valley VC class as it does about Vance himself - a culture and ideology devoted to the idea that the best possible future for humanity is one in which the actual masses of humanity are no longer allowed to "hold back" the "enlightened" few from managing us all the way they'd manage company assets or a stock portfolio. In this way, I think it's not so much that Vance has chosen not to use the resources of SV to help Appalachians, but that he was drawn to SV in part *because* he doesn't think they *ought* to be helped, only managed.
Peter Aidan Byrne
2024-08-13 19:13:10 +0000 UTCMy wife is from an actual place in that part of the country Vance claims to speak for. Her response when asked by her grad school professor to write more stories of her background was “I don’t want to relive all that trauma.” If only she’d had the Tiger Mom there to reassure her it could be monetized.
Andrew HW
2024-08-13 16:13:15 +0000 UTCCatte’s book What You Are Getting Wrong about Appalachia is such a terrific response book as well.
Eira Tansey
2024-08-13 14:13:05 +0000 UTCWhat a terrific episode, this is y’all at your KYE best. As a Cincinnatian and therefore constituent of JD Vance’s, I have two Vance stories and a comment: 1. My first JD Vance story takes place a few years ago, after Vance wrote Hillbilly Elegy and before he had openly political aspirations. He was involved with some kind of opioid addiction nonprofit (grift?) and somehow when the Appalachian Studies Association (an academic disciplinary subfield that has always seemed to have pretty good class and political consciousness) came to Cincinnati, Vance was on a panel about the opioid epidemic in Appalachia. This was already ruffling a lot of feathers among a lot of the attendees well in advance of the conference. I was in a room of archivists having a meeting down the hallway from the opioid panel and we could hear a big ruckus and people singing/shouting “Which side are you on?” In protest of Vance on the panel. I didn’t see it but heard that most of the protestors stood up and turned their backs while he was speaking and started the song. 2. Last year I attended a congressional advocacy day in DC for archivists and we met with our elected reps offices. When you do these kinds of advocacy events you try to find any common ground you can think of for the staff, so in our case when we met with the Vance office staffer we focused mainly on increasing funding for the National Archives to more quickly process veteran service record requests. One of our advocacy group people mentioned something about the George W Bush library and the staff member responded in a very understated but chilly way that they didn’t feel too warmly about Bush. This didn’t surprise me (thanks to y’all’s podcast I think I understand the weird internecine territorial lines between conservative factions) but it clearly caught the rest of our group off guard. 3. Speaking as a Cincinnatian, one thing I want to add to the cultural context of Vance is that southwest Ohio Catholicism runs very deep and very, very conservative. A lot of the early right-wing reactionary right to life movement had their roots in local Catholic organizations, and southwest Ohio has long had a reputation for moralizing conservatism, from prosecuting Larry Flynt to the Mapplethorpe trial. Chilled out humanistic Catholics of the Catholic Worker strains exist here, but they are few and far between, and far more likely to be active in the existing local interfaith social justice organizations than to be trying to do their work within the existing southwest Ohio Catholic institutional infrastructure. Hope this provides Matt with some more context for the cultural geography that Vance’s Catholicism exists within!
Eira Tansey
2024-08-13 14:05:31 +0000 UTCWhy the closeout calling Trump super old lol? Is KYE actblue now? We know he's been old. Follow it up with a call for Biden to resign come on
Roflmaocopter
2024-08-13 09:29:32 +0000 UTCDiffidence only until the point of (conditional) acceptance. Once perceived as having been accepted, he adopts the raiment of the group/ideology/father figure and goes pedal to the metal.
James Talley
2024-08-13 01:38:11 +0000 UTCThanks for this! I haven't read Elegy, so it was especially instructive to hear more detail of the background and subsequent analysis. The best part for me, though: hearing Matt say so plainly that it was a longing for the Eucharist and its regenerative power — not the systematicity, not a religious completist instinct — that got him to Catholicism. Made me stop in the middle of unloading the dishwasher and clutch my heart a bit. I'm a recent convert and the reasons are several, but the real animus is just as he said. (And while I'm here, I'll say that I was *fascinated* by every word of the Girard episodes.)
Sara Hendren
2024-08-13 01:32:32 +0000 UTCI would highly suggest reading Steven Stoll’s Ramp Hollow: The Ordeal of Appalachia as an “anti-Hillbilly Elegy.” It’s a fascinating economic history of Appalachia.
iamonceagain
2024-08-13 01:05:46 +0000 UTCI bumped up my subscription to $10/month. I hope it helps you fight the YAF lawsuit. I appreciate the work you do and look forward to each new podcast. Thank you both and stay strong in this fight!
Souna Koolik
2024-08-13 01:03:23 +0000 UTCAwesome episode. Wow that Thompson excerpt is incredible!
Joel
2024-08-12 21:34:02 +0000 UTCWould agree that psychologizing vance is the dullest tack, he's the classic unlikeable striver which is a common politician type
Erik Wirfs-Brock
2024-08-12 19:30:08 +0000 UTCHit the wrong key, I do have a bit more to say. Many of my fellow hillbillies of a left political and/or cultural bent were outraged by Vance's book, both when it appeared and were reanimated after his being picked by Trump. One of those reactions is unfair, lots of people saying he's not from Appalachia. He never claimed that he is, only that his family has deep roots in Eastern Kentucky, which is true. The second is absolutely fair, to my mind, that he traduced the people of the region by describing their culture as largely flawed, and the source of the continuing misery of a significant part of the population dwelling here today. And not always escaped by those tens of thousands who departed the hills for places like Middletown. Of course, I think that Appalachians are wonderful people, who have given the country, and the world, great music, literature, and art. My neighbors are unfailingly friendly, generous, and helpful, I wouldn't trade them for anybody. Many of them also have Trump signs and flags on display year-round. So, that leads me to some questions: If the people of Appalachia, my people, are so magnificent, why is it that about 90% of the congressional districts in the Appalachian region are represented by Republicans? And why does Donald Trump get 70-80% of the votes in those districts, including in 2020? Why is Marjorie Taylor Greene the only representative from an Appalachian district most Americans have ever heard of? Finally, what, if anything, can we do to change this?
Bob Scott Placier
2024-08-11 23:30:24 +0000 UTCI listened to this episode last night and have been thinking about it off and on ever since. So many things I could say. First, I read Vance's book as soon as it appeared. And, as an Appalachian who has never lived anywhere else, there were elements of Vance's take on Appalachian, or Scotch-Irish, culture that rang true to me, and ways that he really seemed to claim that he and his family were victimized by a dysfunctional heritage. That they were without agency. I was really impressed by the depth of the empathy and understanding that Sam and Matt brought to their examination of the young man who wrote the book. Thanks for that.
Bob Scott Placier
2024-08-11 22:51:57 +0000 UTCYoung Americans clowndation
Sam
2024-08-11 21:45:13 +0000 UTCI haven’t listened through completely, but I had to stop & immediately talk about this. I am born & bred in southern West Virginia. If I had a dollar for everyone who said they’re related to some Hatfield or another… oh boy.
Benjamin Vanston
2024-08-11 21:37:48 +0000 UTCIncredible episode wow
Alyssa Noth
2024-08-11 21:32:13 +0000 UTCWell that was a LOT ... but thanks for a very interesting conversation. I had a couple of reactions/thoughts. When reading Hillbilly Elegy (my word processor once corrected that to read Hillbilly Allergy which I though wasn't really an inaccurate description of the author's reaction to hillbillies) what struck me is that Vance seemed to exhibit many of the same characteristics of people with substance use problems. I've know a number of people who are what I call "dry alcoholics" who pride themselves on never drinking but whose behavior very closely resembles that of alcoholics. In JD's case his "addiction" would seem to be to approval by authority figures, religion (several, in fact, including what I call religious atheism), and 'success' or its appearance, "intellectualism", but perhaps most tellingly anger, fear, envy, and resentment. It didn't surprise me that JD "turned" to Trump because his image of himself, his family, and his people is awash in self-pity, grievance, envy, etc. He wants to be seen as the (innocent) scapegoat being sacrificed for the "sins" of capitalism and the capitalist elite. He accepts no responsibility for his "troubles" — other than for pulling himself up (and for his sister's and father's pulling themselves up) out of those troubles by his own bootstraps — by force of will. So, he is in fact the perfect MAGAtt and the perfect running mate for DJT. Throughout the Elegy, he also refuses to enter into an honest discussion about the failures of "liberal" policies. He gives lip-service to the role of "culture" but spends no real time asking about the source of "culture" — a "bad culture" it is something imposed on its scapegoat victims. A "good culture" such as he's found in his newfound Catholicism is something that is given "by the grace of God". (I'm a lapsed Catholic and a graduate of Georgetown. And tho I do not even claim to be a Christian — something I apparently have in common with Trump — it's not for want of trying over many decades.) But as a liberal who spent his entire career in policy making and implementation, I have to say that I don't know anyone who believes that culture isn't important or who has ever claimed that there is a "purely government-based solution to the problems [he] writes about" — or to any "problem" whether that problem is poverty, or racism, housing, or poor health, or income inequality, or environmental degradation, or crime, or the bad behavior of financial institutions ... or, or, or ... Culture plays a role in all of these problem but government policy and action can contribute to solving those problems. Sorry for going on and on and on. I'd love to hear your thoughts on what ails Patrick Deneen.
Henry Bachofer
2024-08-11 20:50:56 +0000 UTChttps://harpers.org/archive/1941/08/who-goes-nazi/ The saturnine man over there talking with a lovely French emigree is already a Nazi. Mr. C is a brilliant and embittered intellectual. He was a poor white-trash Southern boy, a scholarship student at two universities where he took all the scholastic honors but was never invited to join a fraternity. His brilliant gifts won for him successively government positions, partnership in a prominent law firm, and eventually a highly paid job as a Wall Street adviser. He has always moved among important people and always been socially on the periphery. His colleagues have admired his brains and exploited them, but they have seldom invited him—or his wife—to dinner. He is a snob, loathing his own snobbery. He despises the men about him—he despises, for instance, Mr. B—because he knows that what he has had to achieve by relentless work men like B have won by knowing the right people. But his contempt is inextricably mingled with envy. Even more than he hates the class into which he has insecurely risen, does he hate the people from whom he came. He hates his mother and his father for being his parents. He loathes everything that reminds him of his origins and his humiliations. He is bitterly anti-Semitic because the social insecurity of the Jews reminds him of his own psychological insecurity. Pity he has utterly erased from his nature, and joy he has never known. He has an ambition, bitter and burning. It is to rise to such an eminence that no one can ever again humiliate him. Not to rule but to be the secret ruler, pulling the strings of puppets created by his brains. Already some of them are talking his language—though they have never met him. There he sits: he talks awkwardly rather than glibly; he is courteous. He commands a distant and cold respect. But he is a very dangerous man. Were he primitive and brutal he would be a criminal—a murderer. But he is subtle and cruel. He would rise high in a Nazi regime. It would need men just like him—intellectual and ruthless. But Mr. C is not a born Nazi. He is the product of a democracy hypocritically preaching social equality and practicing a carelessly brutal snobbery. He is a sensitive, gifted man who has been humiliated into nihilism. He would laugh to see heads roll.
seaward
2024-08-11 20:44:10 +0000 UTCGreat episode.
Behold 666
2024-08-11 20:32:09 +0000 UTCHe is just Kendall from Succession. From the emotional dependency on one father figure to the mix of rage and desire toward his upbringing even down to the minor detail of being willing to ignore racism toward his own children. Life imitates art
Zachary Roussie
2024-08-11 18:53:01 +0000 UTCThat Time magazine excerpt from the early 40s that Sam read was absolutely amazing.
DC
2024-08-11 17:14:31 +0000 UTCA lot has been said about Thiel's sponsorship (or ownership) of Vance, and whether his selection represents the wax seal on an alliance between Trump and Bay Area VC firms. But I can't help also noticing that Vance has seemingly no vision for how Silicon Valley innovations could uplift Appalachia (hollow as those promises would be). I think it lays bare the extent to which simply being aggrieved is the foundational emotion of his political life. Despite direct access to these new technologies, he offers nothing to amend or improve the circumstances he arose from. He chides the hill folk for their insularity and imprudence. But what is he promising them? A bunch of data centers sucking the blood from their power grid? More invasively targeted ads on Instagram? When I think about the lack of fidelity this guy has it makes my blood pressure spike.
Broadhead
2024-08-11 16:52:15 +0000 UTCAgreed. Not that I didn’t enjoy this episode and its psychoanalysis, but his trajectory, the Ivy League graduate conservative who’s undergone a spate of “conversions”, and now speaks in memes, is utterly unremarkable. I think the most interesting thing about Vance is the way liberals were duped by him and his book in 2016.
Axel Herrera
2024-08-11 14:27:17 +0000 UTCI am sort of annoyed by the ongoing fascination with Vance. It all revolves around the nonunique quality that at one time, many years ago, he was poor. Otherwise he is an entirely uninteresting King Rat of sniveling ambition, indistinguishable from the ranks of Hawley, Cotton and Buttigieg, with a (current) politics culled from the most-liked internet posts. In the end, I ask of him the same thing I ask of all politicians. Yes, yes, life was hard for you, the way it is hard for all people without money. How are you going to use the government to help them? His answer is the same as so many others: “I won’t. I will use it to punish them.”
Will
2024-08-11 14:03:09 +0000 UTCInteresting how the religious trajectories of Trump’s two VP picks reflect two different generations of conservatism. Pence is a cradle Catholic who became a born-again Evangelical in the 80s en route to a political career as an establishment fusionist. Compare against Vance, who converted to Catholicism in the 2010s when the post-liberal right was ascendant.
Matthew
2024-08-11 12:51:42 +0000 UTCTough to listen to, except in small doses. In one of those, you race through his anti-consumerism to get to his religion. But just based on what you said about his hatred of the way he believes his people have been manipulated into becoming overly consumerist and materialistic, I suggest his analysis and disgust comports with a long line of superb scholars. His solutions are another topic, but I submit that even young members of the 1% are today thoughtfully questioning how one can define and live a moral and good life in today's arguably toxic materialistic and consumerist society. Hamas and the Taliban have one set of answers. Do you have another?
pslerner
2024-08-11 12:22:42 +0000 UTCDiffidence about imposing himself? Seems a strange take on someone desperate to lay down hard rules for those that live outside a narrow band of beliefs. For nearly everyone, that is.
Matt Gately
2024-08-11 12:17:22 +0000 UTCHighly anticipated listening for this east TN native, and it didn’t disappoint. Albion’s Seed is a good point of reference for the ethno-cultural essentialism around “Scots-Irish” ways and habits, but I’ll also put in a word for Elizabeth Catte’s Pure America: Eugenics and the Making of Modern Virginia for more on the kind of uptake those ideas had among expert and casual eugenicists alike through the 20th century — I certainly heard it growing up as a kind of common-sense/folk explanation of mountain folks and what they’re like. This from 2017 is good too, specifically on Vance and the Scots-Irish blood thing as constitutive of certain myths about the region: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/elizabeth-catte-mythical-whiteness-trump-country/
Mags Colvett
2024-08-11 00:01:13 +0000 UTCIs there a transcript of this podcast?
pslerner
2024-08-10 23:35:37 +0000 UTCI couldn’t help thinking about Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (1963) as you were rolling through Vance. Hannah Arendt well described the product of the poison spread. Obviously, history doesn’t repeat but human pathology does seem to produce ample opportunity to create mischief. Trump has certainly got the band back together.
Bill Spater
2024-08-10 23:24:45 +0000 UTCListened to this on my drive back to New York after helping my mom move into her first new house after my father passed, knowing my father fell hard for JD Vance's MAGA conversion, and VERY MUCH dealing with my shit and all that implies, and....this helped.
Scot Sedley
2024-08-10 23:12:38 +0000 UTCHighly enjoyable and enlightening. I was particularly impressed with the level of sympathy you brought to some pieces of JDs narrative while never once forgetting what he has become. Well done lads.
Frank Wofford
2024-08-10 22:57:04 +0000 UTCI read Elegy back in 2017. The part that stood out to me was Vance praising upper class children for not wanting fancy Christmas presents, unlike the ol' hillbillies thinking a tax refund will cover some expensive gift. My thought was 'Of course they don't want a special gift for the holidays. Their whole life is a Christmas present. It would be redundant.' As for his 'cultural' criticism, I didn't agree with it (obviously), but I didn't find it extraordinary for anybody with his background to say. Maybe Sitman would push back on this, but I've often heard people with lower incomes complain about 'lazy welfare takers.' To me it has a 'I'm not THAT person' quality. The truly rabid politics -- the 'weirdness' -- came to fruition when Vance met the post-liberals, the integralists, the white-collar section of MAGA. I think this is why he has made such a bad impression so far on the general public. It's not simply that he's strange, but he's introducing them to a strangeness most people had never previously seen in detail. And, yeah, that unpleasant careerist aspect of him. I once read Rod Dreher being described as a man who doesn't talk to anyone unless he can get something out of it. Not a coincidence that it was Dreher who first introduced Vance to wider politics.
David B Hearne
2024-08-10 22:46:31 +0000 UTCI completely buy the theory that Vance's post-liberal turn is a logical continuation of his beliefs, not a rejection of it - and he sounds like such a weirdo to normies in part because of his inability to say that out loud. And yet there are all of those interviews ranting against childlessness and divorce that mean he can't truly bury it. What strikes me the most is how little he seems to see his grandparents as failing just as much as his mother did, which makes sense given the role they played in his life.. I remember when I first heard about the book, and about Vance's grandparents, I got the impression that they were just a stable working-class couple who had spent their lives living uprightly. It made a lot more sense that Vance would be looking for ways to reject structural explanations in favor of cultural ones if that were the case. But it seems pretty clear that despite getting married young, staying married, and living a traditional lifestyle, they hurt his mother deeply, possibly as much as she hurt him. The root of Vance's ugly worldview, in my eyes, is that he cannot really think deeply about what this might imply, how it really ought to change his diagnosis of the cultural dynamics at work.
Hannah
2024-08-10 22:33:35 +0000 UTCGave HE an unsympathetic reading years ago (book club pick). Due to making the mistake of reading preface and seeing the shout out to Charles Murray, ugh. Main memory of the content was noticing early (but fleeting?) pretentious footnote use. But howlingly too-good-to-check-or-footnote factoids – maybe poor people being lazy and not working as many hours as their economic betters.
John Maline
2024-08-10 22:18:54 +0000 UTCDown with YAF those fascist whiners
Joseph Markus
2024-08-10 22:17:38 +0000 UTCGreat summary, Matt!
H K
2024-08-10 21:45:14 +0000 UTCI was really looking forward to this. And yeah, "creepy fuck" really sums up the vibe!
Sam D.
2024-08-10 21:22:46 +0000 UTCI'm sure there's not a lot you can say about this renewal of the lawsuit, but please do let us know if we as the listeners can do anything to support you all through this!
Elizabeth F.
2024-08-10 19:11:14 +0000 UTCOh hell yeah
Allen
2024-08-10 19:02:07 +0000 UTCYay! Just in time for my drive to Charlotte!
Justice Schunior
2024-08-10 18:53:16 +0000 UTC
