Weaponized Justice becomes the doorway into a larger fight over race rhetoric, January 6 restitution, ICE enforcement, biblical conviction, civic courage, public money, and whether New York can still tell the difference between compassion and control.
Peter Vazquez and Bob Savage press into the tension between truth and performance, asking whether citizens will keep accepting institutions that weaponize language, soften disorder, and demand trust without accountability.
Weaponized Justice. There are days when the microphone feels less like equipment and more like a witness stand.
Not because the country lacks noise. America is drowning in noise.
It has panels, pressers, slogans, hearings, outrage loops, political labels, professional victims, manufactured enemies, and enough moral theater to keep every camera operator employed until the republic collapses from exhaustion.
The problem is not silence. The problem is that truth keeps getting shouted down by people who benefit from confusion.
Peter Vazquez steps into that storm with Bob Savage and the callers not to polish the chaos, but to name it. Race. Justice. January 6. ICE. faith. Israel. media corruption. nonprofit dependence. public money. civic courage. Every thread pulls toward the same torn seam: what happens when institutions stop forming free people and start training them to fear, resent, obey, and accuse?
The conversation begins where many Americans still quietly live, around the kitchen-table question most politicians avoid because it does not fit neatly inside a campaign ad: are we dealing with real injustice, or are we being taught to see one another through a permanent lens of grievance? There is a difference between acknowledging sin in history and allowing political actors to make a business model out of inherited resentment.
There is a difference between confronting racism and obsessing over race until every disagreement becomes evidence, every policy debate becomes accusation, and every citizen is reduced to a color-coded defendant.
That distinction matters because words do not stay words. They become maps. They become policies. They become juries. They become classrooms. They become mobs.
The FBI’s 2024 hate-crime data reported 11,679 incidents involving 14,243 victims.
Those numbers are serious enough without politicians inflating every cultural disagreement into supremacy and every political opponent into a threat to human dignity. A country that cannot distinguish between evil and disagreement eventually loses the ability to fight either one.
Then the hour turns toward January 6, not as a slogan, not as a tribal chant, but as a wound that still exposes how selectively America now applies justice. More than 1,600 people were charged in connection with January 6. More than 140 law enforcement officers were injured. Those facts matter. So does the possibility that some citizens were overcharged, mistreated, ruined, or used as examples by a government that discovered how easily process itself can become punishment.
That is the hard ground where cheap people reach for easy answers. Peter does not. The tension is left standing in the room because the truth requires it. Defend police. Defend due process. Reject political prosecution. Reject political violence. If government abuses a citizen, there must be restitution. If someone assaults an officer, there must be accountability. Law and order cannot change uniforms depending on who is wearing the jersey.
That is where the Vanbōōlzalness Crisis shows its face: government power wrapped in virtue, media narratives wrapped in concern, political vengeance wrapped in justice, and citizens told to applaud while the scale is quietly replaced with a club.
The danger is not theoretical. The United States Capitol Police reported 14,938 threat-assessment cases in 2025 directed at members of Congress, their families, staff, or the Capitol Complex. That was up from 9,474 in 2024, a rise of roughly 58 percent in one year. That is not democracy breathing. That is the sound of a republic wheezing through clenched teeth.
And then New York enters the frame, because dysfunction loves a local address.
Governor Kathy Hochul says she is “not asking” for an ICE surge. She frames federal enforcement as danger, disruption, and political overreach.
Then she says if ICE comes through New York State, “there won’t be a Republican standing in this state” and that it will be “weaponized against them.”
That word matters. Weaponized.
The same political class that mocks concerns about weaponized government suddenly reaches for the word when the political consequences become useful. That is not a side note. That is the confession buried inside the sentence. Once enforcement is discussed as campaign damage, citizens have every right to ask whether law is leading politics or politics is leading law.
From there, the question becomes larger than ICE. It becomes a question of order. If local police are told to focus only on local crimes, what happens when federal law intersects with public safety? If New York limits cooperation, does enforcement disappear, or does it move from controlled jail settings into homes, worksites, schools, streets, and neighborhoods? If compassion removes clarity, who pays when disorder arrives wearing a human face?
The answer, as usual, is the citizen.
And still, amid the noise, there is a small, almost stubborn light: a 17-year-old in Batavia stepping into the immigration debate with the simple line, “You can disagree without having to hate.” That sentence should not sound revolutionary, but here we are, because adults managed to turn civic disagreement into a demolition derby and then acted surprised when young people learned how to crash.
That is why this conversation keeps returning to formation. Children learn from homes before they learn from judges. They learn from parents before they learn from probation. They learn from churches, schools, neighborhoods, and dinner tables before the state arrives with programs and paperwork. When the family collapses, government expands. When the home stops forming character, police, courts, schools, nonprofits, and taxpayers inherit the wreckage.
New York’s debate over Regents exams belongs in the same moral neighborhood. Beginning with the 2027-2028 school year, students will no longer be required to pass Regents exams to earn a diploma.
Maybe the old system needed reform. Maybe students are more than test scores.
Both can be true. But a diploma must still mean something. Standards cannot be erased and renamed compassion. Readiness cannot be assumed because the state changed the paperwork.
Faith stands in that same storm. There is a difference between mercy and surrender. Between welcome and doctrinal collapse. Between loving people and pretending truth is negotiable. A church that trades revelation for applause may gain acceptance and lose its soul in the same transaction.
Then the conversation lands where every grand theory eventually lands: money.
Nothing is free. Not transit. Not grants. Not watch parties. Not programs. Not compassion. Everything of value is produced by labor, materials, sacrifice, taxes, or someone else’s bill arriving later with official letterhead.
RGRTA reported about $123 million in expenses while ridership fell more than 40 percent from 2014 to 2024. Monroe County highlights meals, benefits, technology centers, investigative operations, and public investments. Some of that work matters. Veterans should receive benefits. Hungry families should not be ignored. Community institutions can do real good. But public spending is not automatically public renewal. A grant is not a guarantee. A ribbon cutting is not revival.
The question is not whether people need help. They do.
The question is whether help strengthens people or trains them to kneel. Whether public money restores families or feeds systems. Whether nonprofits stand with the people who fund them or become comfortable managers of decline.
By the end, the theme is unavoidable. Truth has to be more than a slogan. Liberty has to be more than branding. Faith has to be more than decoration. Justice has to be more than a weapon. Charity has to be more than dependency with a softer voice.
A free people cannot shrug this off.
They have to listen. They have to discern. They have to ask who benefits from the chaos, who profits from division, who hides behind compassion, and who is willing to say the obvious when the obvious becomes dangerous.
Because when law becomes a mask and truth is chained to power, the people do not get the luxury of looking away.
They become the witnesses.
Promote your brand on the Next Steps Show, airing on WYSL1040.com's AM 1040, FM 92.1, and FM 95.5 West stations. Discover more at nextstepsroc.com/advertise-with-us or dial (585) 346-3000 to get in touch with the WYSL team.
Have you ever dreamt of sharing your unique voice, stories, or expertise with the world through a podcast? Perhaps you're bubbling with ideas but uncertain about where to begin? The journey from idea to launch can be daunting, but that's where we come in. Dive Into the World of Podcasting with Next Steps Radio PODCAST Network! Visit NextStepsRoc.com or call Peter at (585) 880-7580.
Transcript
Opening
Peter Vazquez:
When justice becomes a weapon and law becomes a mask, and when truth becomes chained to power, the people must become witnesses. That means you and me. We have to pay attention. We have to listen.
Bob, on my way into the studio today, I was listening to Fox News. I believe it was The Faulkner Focus, and they were playing parts of a hearing regarding the SPLC investigation. Congressman Johnson had his time to speak, and he used words like, “We are victims of white supremacy.” That was said on national television.
Bob Savage:
Which Johnson was this?
Peter Vazquez:
I did not catch the full details, but I will have it for tomorrow. It was not Speaker Johnson. It was one of the representatives from a southern state.
Bob Savage:
Was it the guy who thought Guam was going to tip over?
Peter Vazquez:
From what he was saying, he sounded about that ridiculous. His entire point was that Trump is somehow the leader of white racism or white supremacy, and that this investigation into the SPLC is the result of white supremacy. He even gave examples of how this administration, and people like you and me, stand against institutions, colleges, and others using DEI. His question was, how do we move forward as a country when the president is stripping diversity, equity, and inclusion from these institutions?
But DEI is racism, sexism, and misogyny dressed up in institutional language. I am trying to connect the claim that Donald Trump is responsible for this with the fact that the SPLC was reportedly paying Klan members to stay with the Klan and paying for their activities under the pretense that they were insiders.
Bob Savage:
Let us remember the historic roots of the SPLC. It was originally launched as “Klan Watch.” That was its first name. It was supposed to keep an eye on the Klan. The Klan is not a significant national threat anymore. There are roughly 5,000 actual members of the Ku Klux Klan now.
Peter Vazquez:
Not according to this Congressman Johnson. But that is why I bring this up, Bob. This is the kind of thing I try to counter on the show. This is why I talk about race.
I think it is important that everybody look out there not through colored glasses, not by saying, “that poor Black kid” or “that poor Hispanic kid,” but through discernment. People need to understand the language being used by those we put into office.
People I know, and they are not all conservatives, do not sit around the kitchen table saying, “We are victims of white supremacy.” I have never had that conversation with a fellow Hispanic.
There are jerks. I have said on this show that a municipality where I own property told me they did not want “my kind” there. I believe stupidity is real. I have been told by family members that they did not want “my kind” around. Fine. Whatever.
You are never going to eliminate every individual racist, misogynist, jerk, or loser. They exist because there are different kinds of people on the face of the earth. But internalizing that and becoming hypersensitive to race is dangerous.
Bob Savage:
With all due respect, Peter, I have never said I do not want to talk about race. What I said is that I do not want to obsess over race. There is a flip side to constantly discussing race, and that is that it empowers and enables race-baiting opportunists, people who want to profit from race by exploiting it.
Peter Vazquez:
That is exactly what this gentleman was doing on the floor of Congress today. I think that is dangerous. I have noticed that since Obama was president, this discussion on race has taken center stage again. I remember when he was running, I thought, as a nation, we truly had defeated things like racism. Biracial couples exist. People, if they want opportunity, can seek it. Depending on circumstances, some may have to work harder than the person next to them, but that is not always a racial issue.
Bob, I apologize for saying you did not want to talk about race.
Bob Savage:
That is an important point. If we are going to be a colorblind society, we have to stop obsessing over race. Institutional racism in this country is dead. White supremacy is isolated, just as Black supremacy is also a thing.
Peter Vazquez:
Lines are open for the entire show. Call us at 585-346-3000 or 866-552-1009. Race is not the topic today, but when you hear words like “victims of white supremacy,” and when elected officials are still supporting the SPLC, I want to know what you think.
Yesterday, when we ended the show, I asked whether you had heard these words and who said them: “If it was up to me, I would pay them the kind of money they deserve.” Do you remember who said that?
Bob Savage:
Donald Trump.
Peter Vazquez:
Yes, in reference to January 6. Many on the left are acting like everyone involved was automatically guilty, but I have friends who went there innocently and have been scarred for life.
Trump is pushing this anti-weaponization fund, about $1.8 billion, for restitution to people impacted by January 6. I think that is a good thing.
Bob Savage:
A lot of people impacted by January 6 had worse things happen to them than being scared. Many got severe sentences. Some were subjected to inhumane treatment. Some were deprived of civil rights and assistance of counsel. That is the kind of thing that happens under totalitarian regimes.
Peter Vazquez:
Sixteen hundred people faced charges related to January 6. Some were not even there. The left says, “If you were there, you were wrong.” That is wrong. We are judging people by groups instead of individual merits or facts.
These are the same people pushing reparations. They say people of color should be paid because someone of color was once enslaved.
Bob Savage:
There is a difference between reparations and compensation.
Peter Vazquez:
Reparations are payment for a status deprived from someone years ago, such as slavery. Compensation is for an act of wrong done to you, like deprivation of civil rights under color of law.
We are going to break. We will be right back on The Next Step Show on the Voice of Liberty.
Commercial break removed.
Segment Return
Peter Vazquez:
This is not some shallow left-versus-right argument. That is for shallow people who demand shallow answers, and the country has been buried under enough of those.
Keith, thank you for calling. Welcome again to The Next Step Show.
Keith:
When the doctor says it all started with Obama, I agree that he is both Islamist and Marxist. I want to preface this by saying that white people have to acknowledge that people of color, certainly African Americans with the slavery issue, have a very real history. I hope my tone does not discount that.
The problem is that as Americans, all of us have to come to grips with our sad slavery history. Obama and Michelle said we had to start a different conversation. White people have to understand that many Black people see American history differently. Whether white people want to acknowledge it or not, African Americans were enslaved, and many still say white people do not get it.
I want to bring up the murder trial in Texas where a young Black male athlete stabbed a young white male athlete. During jury selection, an African American woman said she could not send a brother to prison even if he committed murder.
Bob Savage:
Was she actually a juror, or a potential juror?
Keith:
A candidate. She was disqualified, and rightly so. The point is, we have to have a real discussion in this country. Whites, Blacks, and every category of American have to come together and put hard feelings aside.
Peter Vazquez:
Keith, I agree that we need a real conversation. The only thing I would add is that this kind of bias is not limited to one race. The statement she made was racial, but I have heard similar loyalty-based statements from others regardless of skin color.
Bob Savage:
And the fact that she was excluded shows the system worked. The jury selection process uncovered her bias. Fortunately, she was honest enough to say what she believed, so she was excluded and could not taint the trial.
Let us go to Lorraine. Lorraine, what is up?
Lorraine:
I am afraid my phone will run out of charge, so I will talk fast. Yesterday, Peter made a comment about three callers who had been on about President Trump bringing us into the Iran situation. He mentioned Mike, Rick, and Lorraine, and it sounded as if I agreed with them. I absolutely do not think it was a mistake. I disagree with Rick and Mike, and I want to make that clear because you repeat these programs.
Peter Vazquez:
I am glad you clarified that. I was stating that you were all part of the dialogue, and I appreciate that. That is important.
The point I want to return to is this: Keith said many Black people are still angry about America’s history. My rebuttal is, are people of color truly angry because of history, or is this an organized Vanbōōlzalness Crisis created by language like “victims of white supremacy”?
I know Democrats and liberals who understand there was history, that we learn from it, continue to learn, and move forward. The people who benefit politically or financially from grievance are the ones who cannot move forward.
Can we play Cut 6?
Audio Cut 6: Donald Trump:
People have been hurt so badly by radical left lunatics that worked for the Biden administration and Sleepy Joe. They are vicious. They are violent. What they did to people, and of course they went after me more than anybody else. They raided Mar-a-Lago and all the other things. But people have been badly hurt. They have committed suicide. They have lost their jobs. They have lost their families. They have lost their wives. They have lost everything over a fake weaponization of government.
If it was up to me, I would pay them the kind of money that they deserve. People have been destroyed. Lives have been destroyed. Many suicides. Think of it. People have committed suicide because a bunch of thugs went after them. So me personally, I think the weaponization fund is a great idea, and so do many other Republicans. You have to get it approved. If they get it approved, that is great. If they do not get it approved, I would be disappointed.
Peter Vazquez:
That weaponization fund of $1.8 billion is specific to January 6. The whole concept of weaponizing laws matters. We saw it under Biden. That is why this is important. Free people cannot shrug that off.
Rick, thank you for calling. Welcome back to The Next Step Show.
Rick:
Nice to talk to you again. I was a little too passionate yesterday, and I want to clarify one thing. I truly respect Mike Hennessy and what he is doing with the Fatherhood Initiative. He said I was wrong on my eschatology. There are different beliefs when it comes to Israel’s role in the Bible, and that is not necessarily a faith issue.
My main point is that we would all agree there is a lot of propaganda going on right now. I voted for Trump three times, and I voted for someone who was not going to get us aligned in another war. I agree with him on much more than I disagree with him on, but I see this issue hurting his support.
I used to listen to Fox constantly, but they are on one train of thought, while Democrats are on another, out in space. Iraq and Afghanistan should have taught us something. I care about American sovereignty. I do not want us acting on behalf of another country. What pains me is that people get called antisemitic just for questioning these things.
Peter Vazquez:
That comes from the Biden administration and the left. Have you ever stood with the Right to Life people on University Avenue and seen how local police act?
Rick:
I met you at Planned Parenthood once when you were there.
Peter Vazquez:
Yes, and I will be back there again. What we are seeing in this nation is dangerous. But let me ask you this before I let you go. If gas prices dropped to $1.99 like Trump had during his first term, and affordability stopped being such a pain point, would that change your opinion on the war in Iran?
Rick:
No, it would not. I have seen enough pictures of what happened in Gaza. I do not discount October 7 or Israel doing what it had to do, but many innocents were slaughtered. I served in the military for eight and a half years and was on the Rochester police force for twenty years. I value life. I do not want us being partially responsible for what is happening over there. If Israel has to fight, they should fight, but the money coming from us is an issue.
Peter Vazquez:
Rick, I appreciate your call. Lines are open at 585-346-3000 and 866-552-1009.
Let me restate this: a free people cannot shrug it off. A free society cannot exist with a corrupt media.
Station break and ads removed.
Segment Return
Peter Vazquez:
Text me if you have a comment or leave a social media comment. We will share it, and I will not say your name if you do not want me to.
The question is not whether one side can find victims and the other side can find villains. That is not what this discussion is about. Yesterday, I played Cut 6, with Trump saying we should pay these people if Congress approves it because they were done wrong. The left continues in its own world.
Let us play Cut 2.
Audio Cut 2: Media Panel:
Carol, let me ask you, because he did make some of his most extensive comments defending that anti-weaponization fund that a lot of Republicans do not like.
Panelist:
He got very animated about this. Clearly, if the president had his way, this fund would go forward. It remains to be seen if there is a way he tries to revive the fund or find a way for people he thinks deserve payouts to get those payouts. This is something he feels very passionate about. You saw that in the interview. It is another instance where he is at odds with top officials in the administration who say this thing is dead.
Panelist:
The problem is that everything centers around Donald Trump and his administration. His grievances, his tariff policy, which he doubled down on, has cost Americans millions of dollars. His focus should be on the economy, but the reality is he does not have answers.
Peter Vazquez:
And people wonder why the media has such low approval. The misrepresentation of what is going on with this anti-weaponization issue is incredible. Did I hear that correctly? Did they imply that Republicans oppose the anti-weaponization fund?
Bob Savage:
That is not true.
Peter Vazquez:
They led people to believe Republicans are just like Democrats on this. They lie about Trump all the time. Let us call out the lie.
Mike, thank you for calling The Next Step Show.
Mike:
How are you doing, gentlemen? First, regarding the SPLC, who founded it and who is running it? Second, for Reverend Mike, who is extremely pro-Israel, does he know about an organization called Show Faith by Work LLC? I have read that they are going around with a list of churches and offering money to ministers for geofencing information. The group is reportedly registered under FARA as connected to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. How many politicians, Democrats and Republicans, have accepted AIPAC money?
Peter Vazquez:
Now you are talking politics, and I want to separate that. You are not entirely wrong in raising the influence question, but a politician will often take money from wherever. A person focused on themselves will take money without looking deeply into it. People like Chuck Schumer and Joe Morelle do not care where money comes from.
Support for Israel itself is not politics. That is why I keep beating that drum.
Mike:
Everything is politics. If you take money from someone, you are beholden to them. Even if Trump tomorrow says he wants out of Iran, Congress may push something through anyway. These groups are pushing people.
This creates chaos and confusion in the United States.
Peter Vazquez:
I am glad you said that because chaos and confusion in the United States is exactly what I believe the left is creating. That may be where we differ. I think there are a lot of distractions and different people saying different things, but the reality is what you just said.
Mike:
Thank you. Have a good day.
Peter Vazquez:
Appreciate you, Mike.
When we talk about weaponization and the Vanbōōlzalness Crisis, this is where we are. And when it comes to Israel, I am realizing that more people may be dissatisfied with my response than satisfied.
Bob Savage:
How do you know that?
Peter Vazquez:
Because of calls like Mike’s. That response often comes from people who are not biblically grounded. Mike has said he is “Christian-ish.” You have to understand what it means to be Christian to understand this.
Bob Savage:
I do not think there is such a thing as “Christian-ish.” I think there are Christians and non-Christians.
Peter Vazquez:
Then I will have to push this a little. There is a Catholic church not affiliated with the Vatican that says LGBTQ ideology is biblically grounded.
Bob Savage:
That has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus Christ. That has to do with delusion.
Peter Vazquez:
And when we look at New York State, things like that do not surprise me. Look at Governor Kathy Hochul, who once said people should be her apostles. Is that Christian-ish or anti-Christian?
Bob Savage:
Very much anti-Christian.
Peter Vazquez:
This whole weaponization issue matters because the left says Trump is disconnected and going on a vendetta against those who went against him. But I played, just a few shows ago, Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie saying plainly that they will redistrict to favor Democrats and change the constitution to solidify it.
That is not saying, “We will not answer wrong with wrong.” That is weaponization.
Now we have a governor saying this. Let us play Cut 7.
Audio Cut 7: Reporter and Governor Hochul:
Can we ask you about Tom Homan’s threat made on Fox News? He said they will be coming. Is he lying?
Governor Hochul:
He is going in a different direction than what the president said he wanted to have happen. I think he has to take that up with President Trump. President Trump told me to my face, in a room full of governors, when he was asked about the lessons of Minneapolis, “We are not going where we are not welcome.” He looked over at me, the governor of New York, and said, “For example, I will not go to New York unless Kathy asks.” And I said, “I am not asking.” So we are good. I am not asking now. That will never happen.
Peter Vazquez:
She says she is not asking. She claims they saw what happened in Minneapolis and mentions the murder of two innocent civilians who were simply exercising their right to protest.
Bob Savage:
That has been disproven. Those people were not murdered.
Peter Vazquez:
But hear the confidence in her voice. Does that make you want to stand behind her as she says, “I am not asking,” standing against the supposed leader of white supremacy who created all these “victims of white supremacy”?
Bob Savage:
I think she is not telling the truth.
Peter Vazquez:
Her ally in New York City, Zohran Mamdani, whom she did not stand with during an election, is now saying how brutal ICE is and that we need to abolish it.
We will be right back.
Commercial break removed.
Segment Return
Peter Vazquez:
Listen to these words for a second, because this describes the jokers in Albany and the Biden administration.
There are no words, so this is an edit with no vocals. The content mirrors the lack of cranial content in Albany.
If you are not familiar with the song, it is “Insane in the Membrane,” a little Cypress Hill for you. Let me tell you why these jokers in Albany are insane in the brain.
Cut 8, please.
Audio Cut 8: Reporter and Governor Hochul:
Do you trust Donald Trump?
Governor Hochul:
What is behind that question?
Reporter:
You said he made a promise to you. Do you trust he will keep it?
Governor Hochul:
I am going to tell him that he made this promise. He said he would not go where he was not welcome. If you want to look at it through a different lens, if they come here and go throughout New York State with a surge in ICE, there will not be a Republican standing in this state. This would be weaponized against them. That is not why they would do it or not do it, but they should look at the political calculation because Americans have had enough of the overreach of ICE.
I am also going to be very clear: New York State is not a sanctuary state for criminals. No matter what you hear, it is not. The law I passed simply says that I want our jails and our local police used to stop local crimes. I have a right to protect every single New Yorker. ICE, go ahead and do your job if you want. Go do your job somewhere else.
Peter Vazquez:
So we are not going to prosecute federal crimes in New York? Is that what she is saying?
Bob Savage:
That is what it sounds like.
Peter Vazquez:
That is a threat. I think that is weaponization, Bob.
Bob Savage:
It is inflammatory rhetoric and divisive. It is typical of the left in New York politics.
Peter Vazquez:
Let me show how they present it. Satan always presents himself in an attractive way. That is biblical.
The Batavia ICE rally is an example. A 17-year-old high school student, based on this kind of language and weaponizing language, organized an ICE-focused rally in Batavia. This is why Trump is right again.
Bob Savage:
Put the student’s name on the radio. Give credit.
Peter Vazquez:
That student is getting credit from government schools for this kind of activity.
Let us go back to the SPLC for a minute. They created a hate map. It just so happens that the hate map coincides with where a lot of people stand for God, country, and family.
Imagine sitting down and creating something called a hate map. What kind of person would you have to be to do that? Is that the kind of person you want to be in front of your kids, your family, and your community?
Young people learn from adults, Bob. That is where they learn this.
Bob Savage:
We knew saving this country, saving our way of life, and overcoming the global left would be ugly and difficult. We have to brace ourselves to our duties, so that if the United States lasts for a thousand years, men will still say this was their finest hour.
Peter Vazquez:
That sounds familiar.
The student said, “You can disagree without having hate.” But what is the hate map? Is it a disagreement map or a hate map?
You do not have to be a doctor to tell the difference between men and women, and you do not have to be a doctor to tell the difference between hate and misunderstanding.
There are veterans who served in war who buy into this stuff too. I had a conversation once with someone in a leadership position who bought into the whole purple-hair movement, and suddenly the values we learned about God, country, and family went to the side because they wanted to feel good.
Bob Savage:
We are close to the end, so we probably should not get into too many deep subjects. Let us talk about something exciting, like the Knicks playing last night and Trump being there.
Peter Vazquez:
Trump stood strong. I loved watching him sit there, raise his hand, and salute while leftists were booing him. He stood for God, country, and family.
Bob Savage:
It is not surprising. It is New York, and it is a Knicks game. The average ticket price has been observed to be around $9,000, so these were likely leftist elitists, and they were not going to be warm toward Donald Trump.
Peter Vazquez:
People should watch the opening clips online. When the camera panned over players during the national anthem, some had their hands over their hearts. Most did. Some gave a little fist bump, and others smiled while handling the ball. They did not kneel, probably because they were afraid of the consequences from a country that is done with that kind of display.
Let us come back to Rochester.
Mamdani says everything is free. Rochester tried that at one point too. RTS bus drivers would tell you that. Mamdani and Hochul seem to think everything should have no cost, not reduced cost, not taxpayer-funded, but free. Who pays for it? Nobody. That is what free means, right, Bob?
Bob Savage:
Nothing is free. Everything of value is produced by labor and raw materials. Somebody has to pay for it.
Peter Vazquez:
Exactly.
Now $2 million is going to a nonprofit that has been around since before I was born. It is a $2 million state grant for Baden Street Settlement for property improvements. I am not beating up on Baden Street. It has been around for a while and does good work. I just want to make sure we understand how this works.
I work for a nonprofit. We benefit from taxpayer dollars. But every nonprofit that takes taxpayer money needs to remember that the money came from taxpayers. Aside from groups like Youth for Christ and Open Door Mission that do not take taxpayer dollars, many organizations receive public funding while their executives make good money and their average employees remain tied to the very social programs pushed by the left.
Bob Savage:
We want to assure our friends on the charitable side that we believe in them and are on their side.
Peter Vazquez:
Absolutely. Do not take my doom-and-gloom response the wrong way. The point is simple. A caller once asked whether they should write a check to an organization helping someone who was an illegal immigrant. Your money needs to matter. That is why you give it.
Be a leader. Be a leader. Be a leader.
God bless these United States of America, and do not let a second go by where you are not a voice for liberty.
Closing music and commercials removed.