Democrat Delusions
S1: It’s Thursday, December 17th, twenty twenty from Slate’s The Gist, I’m Mike Pesca. Here in the Northeast, we’ve been hit by winter snow, not a blizzard, maybe a nor’easter, though. Everything’s a nor’easter. I don’t know. Is there a scale? Not quite. Nor’easter strength. I think they make it up. You know what else? They make up branding every storm’s name these days.
S2: Winter Storm Gale is one for the history books.
S1: Winter Storm Gale. That’s this one gal which may I suggest may not be the best name for a weather phenomenon because Gale is already the name of a weather phenomenon. A gale warning is issued when sustained surface winds of thirty four knots, which I don’t have to tell you is thirty nine miles per hour or forty seven knots. Fifty four miles per hour. Simple rule at five or maybe seven. I’m not here to understand knots when winds of that speed occur. A developing gal refers to well and I’m published Judy Blume novel but also an extra tropical low or an area in which gale force winds of thirty nine point fifty four mph are expected. OK, that’s a gal. This isn’t a gal. The following should be off the list of winter storms and hurricane names. Aurora, Misty, Sunny, Tempest, Sky or Zephyr, Zephyr Teachout. You get to stay Zephyr. The weather doesn’t. I’m also philosophically opposed to naming hurricanes that rhyme with the word hurricane. So hurricanes Deyn, Blaen, D’Wayne, Charlamagne or Barack Hussein. Sorry, you have to take a back seat. Barack, by the way, is said to mean lightning. But I’ll allow it. I will allow it. But please, can we be a bit more detailed as we engage in this ridiculous project of naming every weather phenomenon? I’m not going to be able to put to this particular snowflake back in the cumulonimbus just don’t name weather after other weather. And this has been almost literally old man yells at cloud. And now remembrances of things Trump. A few days after Republicans registered losses in the midterm elections, CNN reporter Jim Acosta asked President Trump a question the president didn’t like. So the president said so, feuded with him a little and gestured for a White House aide to grab the microphone away from Acosta. So typical Trump versus the press squabbling that improves each one’s standing among their specific audiences. But then White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee. Sanders shared a clip of the interaction, which was digitally manipulated to exaggerate the moment when Acosta used his hand to shield the microphone from the aide trying to take it. The Washington Post headline The Next Day was straightforward White House Share is Doctored Video to support punishment of journalist Jim Acosta. The punishment was he had his press credentials revoked. Asked about this fact that the video first shared by Paul Joseph Watson, who cut his teeth making conspiracy theory videos on Alex Jones’s Infowars, was in fact, in fact slowed down and exaggerated. The president said this.
S3: Nobody manipulated it. Give me a break. See, that’s just dishonest reporting. All that is, is a close up. See, that’s just that is just dishonest reporting. I watched that. I heard that last night. They played it close up. They showed it close up. And it was not nice to that young woman. I don’t hold up for that because it wasn’t overly, you know, horrible. But it was. But all that was when you say, doctor, you’re a dishonest guy because it wasn’t doctored. They gave a close up view. That’s not doctor.
S1: If, in fact, it was manipulated. And Acosta did get his press credentials back and he go on to write a best selling book about his tussles with the president. And Paul Joseph Watson’s Twitter feed today reposted a story titled Foushee Wants Christmas Canceled. This has been remembrances of things Trump on the show today. I spiel about an AOC interview that included a good idea and a couple of confusing ones to me. But first, Mabel’s a yellow lab. A black lab, very human companion is the Scottish broadcaster, sports broadcaster Andrew Cotter. He’s done Wimbledon. He’s done major golfing events. But a few weeks into the pandemic, all of Andrew Codders work had dried up. But the dogs were there staring, wagging, eating, licking and sitting in bogs. This thought Qatar could be the source of the most brilliant commentary ever.
S4: I’m just saying that we all have to do our bit and there are plenty of jobs that you could be doing around the house. Well, official food taste is not a job, and I’m lifting everything. Will you to just eat or sleep or mess about and what are you, bad quality eggs on again? It’s a job, it’s not it just give me a hand and get me the Phillips head screwdriver. No, that’s not it. That’s getting close to being it. Yes, it’s great the noises it makes, but I can’t turn screws with a Christmas pudding.
S1: And so codders descriptions of the sporting lives of these two lazy but lovable beasts took flight millions of years later. The dogs are celebrities. Qatar is known as a YouTube sensation. And of course, there is a book deal. And the greatest Pluma Vorlon interview on the gist, the most thorough breakdown of the philosophy and construction of charming dog videos with the author of All of Marvel in Me Life and Adventures with Two Very Good Dogs and Krakatau, up next.
S5: Andrew Carter is an accomplished broadcaster of sports, he would say sport, since he is based in the UK, but you probably don’t know him for that.
S1: I don’t know. Maybe you listen to overseas feeds of the Six Nations championship and you do if you do know Andrew Cotter, it is because he has been filming vignettes with his two dogs and they have gone. Here’s a phrase I just learned. McGarvey Andrew Cotter is the author of All of Mabel and Me.
S5: He’s the me. The dogs are Oliver and Mabel. Thanks for coming on, Andrew.
S2: My pleasure, Mike. How are you?
S1: I’m well. How are you? Forget you. How are Olive and Mabel?
S2: I’m very well. They are super well. There are McGarvey. Well, they are. I like the way you described in those vignettes as well. That’s the best description for them because the videos the McGarvie was at McGarvey, you said or hyperfocus megabyte. Yeah. McGarvey the ones that went McGarvey were it’s vital for the noncoms. They were the ones that were part of the commentary. So part of their me being a sports announcer, as you call them, over in America, me doing commentary on my dogs eating breakfast or fighting over a bone or just out on a walk, doing absolutely bugger all. But then I moved on to do these little vignette. So I had a part of the not part of the 100 doing a zoom meeting. And then I had them doing online dating and I had them building flat furniture. This is basically because I’ve had no work this year in terms of sports broadcasting because it all disappeared. I mean, that’s how it started.
S5: What was the first video that you did and was that the first one to go viral?
S2: Yeah. So the first one I did was back at the start of March, which was then both the racing to eat breakfast and be commentating on that particular race. And that went viral. And, you know, you know, something has happened. Something odd has happened within seconds of pressing and it just took off. And so that’s hard on Twitter or, you know, about ten or twelve. I think it might be twelve million views now anyway. Overall, it’s probably about twelve or thirteen. No more than that, actually, because on YouTube it had quite a few views as well. So and we’ve plenty of views. And then, you know, the second one was the game of Born’s, one of them just fighting over a bone or playing. And that one the interesting one about that, that went double. I mean, that’s gone way over twenty million. No, but the interesting one about that as so a viral video suddenly gets appreciation from big accounts and big names and they all get on board with it. And then it’s sort of just does its thing and simmers for a few months. And it keeps on racking up the viewers, but it’s kind of had its big peak. And then suddenly two weeks ago, Dance Avenue Junior Uma, you know, I’m a deputy White House chief of staff. He took the video and he didn’t accredit me at all, which is something that actually bugs me a little bit when you’ve actually made something and whatever it might be anyway. So he took the video, typical of the Trump administration, but go ahead. And he used it as an allegory for for Trump waiting for Biden, Biden of celebrating. So basically in this video, if people hadn’t seen all of my black Labrador has got the rubber ball and she’s toying with it and enjoying it, and Mabel’s just waiting, waiting, waiting. And Mable gets it in the end. So he presented this as this allegory for Trump piddled Mabel, my lovely, hopeless younger Labrador, the other one she’s she’s supposed to be Trump and this and then all of us. Biden and then I got passed on by James Woods, the actor who I didn’t realize until this point has reasonably right wing leaning tendencies as well. So he passed.
S5: I would I would question I would question the word reasonably well, reasonably as it is just a quantifier.
S2: No, there’s nothing reasonable about it, but it’s a quantifier in terms of I just like sort of downplay it slightly for comedic effect. But anyway, he he passes it on. And so suddenly everybody thinks everybody in the American right thinks I’ve made these videos as some sort of allegory for, you know, so I was getting I was suddenly getting huge numbers of of American right wingers starting to follow me. They may they may have gone by. No. When the I mean, I’ve kept politics out of it. And I do like to keep politics out of the olive and marble thing because they are it’s the charm of their escape from the human nonsense world that we have at the moment and all the unpleasantness. So just watch these two dogs and have a laugh of these vignettes, these sketches for a bit. But just forget about everything else. But anybody who knows me knows that I would not want them to be appropriated by Trump regime.
S5: It’s so funny because I didn’t realize that people would watch them and think anything other than you did them for the reasons you did them. And maybe someone was riffing on them either in parody or pastiche. But it’s interesting to me that you’re you’re saying that many people just think you went out and you said, OK, now we need to cast a Trump character. Oh, this one has similar color. This one a similar coloring. Yeah. And you did it with that in mind. That’s crazy. I know it’s the craziest thing that they believe, but clearly.
S2: No, but but the whole the whole year has been crazy. In terms of Olive and Mabel, I honestly when when videos go viral, you are opening the world. Yourself, up to the world of craziness, and so any number of offers to commentate on ads, you know, commentate on yogurt, commentating on guinea pigs, doing karate, commentate on rental cars, being clean commentate and online shopping. So I stopped by NPR and I didn’t do any of them. I did one tourism demand for a tourism body down in Australia commentating on penguins because that was actually quite funny. But there were any number of things where she toned down. But suddenly when people see something exploding in numbers, they think, right, I’m going to try and hop on board with this. And it’s nice. It’s nice to be offered things. You know, when I wasn’t working for eight months, I had no work. But you’ve got to I didn’t want to be the funny joke commentator and also very much didn’t want to be seen to be cashing in on my dogs. I like again, the whole thing is just an escape from all manmade things. Just watch these dogs sort of bit and have a laugh at their nonsense.
S5: But nothing more than that is the method for you to commentate as the action is happening, or do you take them and then you post production. Ah ah.
S2: The mysteries. Yeah. No it’s well, well the first three which were commentaries, so they were all pretty much done and I say pretty much they were all pretty much done as you see them. I commentates it as it was happening but then thought I can take that up a little bit. So yeah there’s a little bit of post-production in there but not much. But then you move on obviously to doing the zoom meeting or doing the online dating or building flat like furniture or trick or treat, you know, Halloween. And I made a documentary as well, a mockumentary behind the scenes with Olive and Mabel, which is my favorite video of them all, actually, because of the amount of I thought sort of the creative nonsense that had got into it, but so that those all involve a huge amount more in terms of post-production and timing and scripting and whatever it might be. So, yeah, but but the really heavily produced ones will never get the same number of views that the very natural and one take or one and a half take early ones got. So it’s it’s an interesting lesson for us all.
S5: Obviously they’re appealing because people like dogs and you’re a professional and the residents of ah, commenting on sport very much applies until it doesn’t. And that’s where comedy lives. But I also think that it’s appealing in terms of sport or, you know, a race to eat a dish or the game of bones because the two dogs are different colours. And that’s exactly like how uniforms are. You would call them Cat’s work in sport. And in fact, the two colours are ones like a home. And one’s in a way, it’s very luckily, very luckily applies to the whenever you layer two different genres on top of each other and there are slight discordance, is there in lies at least the potential for comedy?
S2: Well, exactly. And with the different colours of the strips of the forehead, then then you have got different personalities as well. And I think in the two, in any comedic double act as like Laurel and Hardy, they although in the end actually they’re quite similar in that they’re both fairly, but one of them pretends to be or thinks that he is slightly more qualified and sensible and intelligent than the other one. You know, it turns out that both of them are actually pretty dumb, but and heartless. But Oliver’s definitely the one who is she’s got a different personality to Mabel. So when you get that juxtaposition and all that contrast and personalities, then it really makes for even better humour. If there were both black Labradors and if they both had exactly the same personality, then you’re right, it wouldn’t quite work as well. And I therefore sort of slightly tweak. I just turn up the the the personalities a little bit. I exaggerate a caricature slightly of the personalities, but they are pretty much true to what you see there. Mabel is lovable and simple and wagging her tail constantly and her face is just one of utter beautiful dimness. But and Olive is just slightly more distant and a slightly more aloof but has already chaotic moments as well. That’s why in the online dating one, I loved the fact that Olive has got on online dating and made up all these lies and she looks fairly sort of cool about it and fair enough. I made up some lies. What are you going to do about it? And then Mabel Mabel at the end is just wagging your tail saying, look, I just want to be loved, to be honest.
S1: And Mabel does look up to all of and that is the relationship and age to that is the dynamic.
S2: Yeah. Mabel’s Labels fourth birthday is is very soon and Olive has just turned dates. So four years between them. And she absolutely worships Mabel worships Olive. And, you know, that’s one of the things about the book was that I was pleased with as the reaction of heard from because it’s been out for a while in the UK, not quite so long in the US, is that people have come back and said, you know, I wasn’t sure what to expect from the book or whether I was going to like it because, you know, I like the videos. But how do you transpose that humour from audio visual humor into the books? And they said, but this honestly is so as good as the videos. And that’s the only hard sell. But I’m going to do on this podcast is that if you like the video, as people hop on board with the book and just join me for a romp through the world of dogs, the sport that the book.
S5: Most reminds me of is, well, I would say baseball, but maybe you’ve announced some cricket, but a sport where there is a lot of time in between plays and there’s not so much urgency, like if it’s an up and down sport, basketball, hockey, rugby, you’re always talking you have to be on the action. But once you have a little time to breathe, you can make a side. You could say, you know, I poured myself a cup of ambition instead of a cup of coffee. Whatever strikes you as being interesting in the moment, we’re going along for the ride because we’ve all signed up for a somewhat languorous journey.
S2: Yeah, I think it’s quite a nice escape. Again, you know, we’ve I’ve I’ve tried to escape into the world of my dogs this year. You know, that’s what we’ve all tried to do. If you’ve got dollars, you’ve got pets or if you could do anything, which is in any way normal. You’ve tried to cling to that this year and say, look, I just want to escape from this. And the book’s a bit of an escape. It’s an escape into the world of dogs. It’s an escape into the mountains as well. But you’re absolutely right. It’s you know, the sports I commented on, the main ones would be rugby and athletics or track and field tennis and golf. And golf is, as you said, very much. Golf commentary is very much like doing baseball commentary or cricket commentary, whereas if it is a long, drawn out sport where you have time to just develop some stories and some poems in observation, and it’s sort of observation that the observational humor of the hopefully of the book is there, because it just sort of you know, it’s a it’s a nice, comforting escape. You just sit there and you escape into that world of dogs and there’ll be some chuckles along the way. But it’s not a fast paced thriller. Maybe I should have done that. All of the solving whatever crime, I don’t know, some sort of dangerousness then that will just sell millions.
S1: It turns out you were the main character all along of was. Yeah.
S2: And that maybe takes off her mask and she’s actually a black Labrador underneath and or she’s a cat. That’s that. That’s the twist. Oh my God. There we are, the cats underneath and she’s taken us all for a ride.
S5: So I know that you did the equivalent of the behind the music. You did the four minute film where you talked about the workings, the workings of your dynamic. You revealed there that Mabel no Olive had the drinking.
S2: No, no. Mabel’s got the drink problem and she doesn’t have it anymore. Thankfully, she went into the Priory to get sort of better rehab and she’s all right. But see, I like that. I like I like having through Olive and Mabel examined popular culture. I mean, I remember The Simpsons, one stayed behind the last ten episodes, you know, when The Simpsons was still really, really good. And it was. And so it was a it was kind of a bit of that, really. You know, these are this is the nonsense. I watch The Simpsons and Family Guy and American Dad and, you know, any number of other I was going to say great comedies. But these are, you know, people look down on the cartoons, they’re they’re just brilliant. So it’s I don’t know. But I like to examine the media and any aspect of human life, but also popular culture through all of them, maybe. So putting them into the that’s what the Zoome call was about. That’s what online dating was about. It’s wreckages, situations that we would all recognize, but to Labrador’s being in them instead.
S5: But my my question was in sincerity, not the fiction of that video that you put up in sincerity has any of this, if it’s really think hard about it, affected them at all in any way that you could discern.
S2: No lockdown this year has affected them in that they are slightly more clingy, but they have no idea. They do get stopped on walks knowing people take photos with them, but they have no idea at all. We’ve been in bookshops, you know, doing signings. And, you know, when we we actually did an appearance at the Cheltenham Literary Festival, a big literary festival over here, and we were on stage at this lovely theater in Cheltenham, and they only allowed 100 people in because of the social distancing measures. But then afterwards, we come out the stage door with the two dogs and there were, you know, 40 people waiting there, going all up and all of them. Can I get a photo? Can I get it? So but I think I think all of it in particular thinks, well, I deserve this because I’m amazing. But she doesn’t realise what it’s for. She just thinks that, yeah, everybody loves me. That’s because I’m awesome. And maybe I’ll just get slightly nervous because she thinks why all these people making so much noise? But have they do they realise anything about what’s going on? No. No, they don’t. And if they did, they would just adapt to it as laboratories do and get on with it and then ask for some food.
S5: Andrew Cotter is the author of All of Mabel and Me. He is also the owner of two of those characters, the collaborator with, I should say, Life and Adventures with two very good dogs. Thank you. Thank you so much, Andrew.
S6: Mike, thank you very much.
S1: And now the spiel. These seemed to be sophomore representative from the Bronx and Queens, Alexandra Ocasio. Cortez was interviewed by Jeremy Scahill on The Intercept podcast. Now, I know there is a counterargument to the idea that AOK is a very powerful force within Democratic circles. She says it, too. You know, I don’t know if a soon to be sophomore legislator from Queens has as much power as you say she does, or she’ll demure and say, well, you’re giving me way too much credit, especially when the right holds her up as emblematic of the whole party. But, you know, power comes in many forms, titular power of the purse and power of persuasion. So if you want to say, look, I doubt one congresswoman from Queens has so much sway, that sounds good. But if you said no, I don’t know if a politician with more Twitter followers than Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi combined has sway, I would say, yeah, she has sway, important sway. She also gets to areas beyond Twitter that they don’t even know exist. Yeah, I’m thinking a twitch. So Alysse was on the record as saying Chuck and Nancy should have Swade or sashayed outside the Democratic leadership positions a long time ago.
S7: Isn’t this grounds, though, to take a stand and say, no, I’m sorry, Nancy Pelosi should not be the speaker and Chuck Schumer should not be the leader?
S8: Well, you know, I do think that we need new leadership.
S7: And if that was too subtle for you, are you ready to say Pelosi and Schumer need to go?
S1: I mean, I think so, you see says it should not be her, it should be someone else, she says, though, the leadership, the current leadership didn’t groom the next generation of leaders. It’s a common complaint, happens a lot. But let’s also note that of the representatives in Aoki’s specific coalition, the justice Democrats, almost all are just in Congress or were just elected a couple of years ago, like Roe Kohana and Pramila Giant Paul, there is one justice Democrat who’s been in Congress earlier than 2017, Raul Grijalva of Arizona. So what you this is of the opinion that Nancy Pelosi does not allow enough progressive votes to come to the floor and does not appoint enough progressive members to key roles generally. And I think genuinely believes that the only reason more Democratic voters don’t hold her beliefs is that the free expression of those beliefs is being suppressed by the media and by other Democrats, centrist Democrats. She has a theory of the electorate that it is not that voters disagree with her, it’s that they just don’t yet agree with her. That is kind of motivating. It’s optimistic. I can see why an activist would want to think that way. It also, I believe, is bad policy or a bad tactic for a politician to take if that politician really wants to win. And I would say if you have a realistic view of the electorate or let’s just say if you’re inclined to believe what voters say they believe, instead of believing what voters just could believe, if only if you’re if you’re let’s just take the voters at their word type, you’re probably going to make better decisions about those voters who you see as a somewhat unfalsifiable belief system. This is why we call such people true believers. I’m not here to cast aspersions or slap a label on someone. A true believer probably would get offended and consider that a bit of a pejorative. They would just say, no, I have deep convictions, by the way. I happen to be right and maybe they are right. I’ll give you an example of how all this works or doesn’t work. The question is, why do so many why in the last election did so many people criticize socialists? And the easy answer is, and this is according to asking people why they do it, they say we don’t like socialism. Right. The counter response from a socialist is something like they just don’t understand socialism or they just they just haven’t learned what real socialism is. Or the socialism they’re thinking about isn’t the socialism that I’m peddling, unless it is, in which case they might be immoral or racist. So here is Aoki talking about criticism of socialism. She calls such criticism red baiting.
S8: When Democrats start to engage in this red baiting and they engage in this, you know, oh, these protesters are gentrifiers or they’re white people essentially are racing all left activism of color in the United States. They may not know it or maybe they do know it, but they are also participating in a very ugly legacy of white supremacy.
S1: Well, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. When activists, meaning socialists, are criticized as gentrifiers, you’re saying they’re white, maybe rich and white. She also literally said you’re white. And then she said that that criticism, criticizing people or dismissing people for being white is engaging in white supremacy, the white supremacy of calling out white supremacy. I understand why she has to say this. White supremacy is a very salient charge within her circle. And she is sensitive to the charge that say, oh, all those Portland protesters, all these Bernie backers, you know, they’re all white. They don’t really speak for people of color. And one of the few ways to counter the charge of white supremacy is to lob the charge of white supremacy. It’s not illogical, by the way. It’s not like just because she says that you can’t take her at her word. Here’s how it might work. If there are BIPAC activists who are being I will use the lingo erased with the charge, ignore them. They’re white, which could be going on. Those by BIPAC activists are having an injustice done to them and an injustice done to people of color is an example of white supremacy, especially if it’s a white person doing the dismissing. But the fact that the whole argument, oh, dismiss these Bernie people, they’re just gentrifiers. The original dismissal of them might not be as effective if the left overall didn’t default to and concede to accusations of white supremacy. So often. That’s a little bit of a quibble. I really just was taken by and. I thought a lot about this, this statement is her political thesis.
S8: It’s not just elected Democrats, but it also seems like the Democratic electorate seems to believe that conservative Democrats are the ones that win. And it’s almost as though our electorate is tricking itself. You know, it’s like we all know that we want something different, but we’re afraid we’re so afraid of losing, or at least we’re told that if we indulge what we want, we’re going to lose.
S1: Think about that. Think about believing that it’s not tactical. I don’t think I think that’s what she genuinely believes. The voters have tricked themselves into thinking something. And that thing is a thing that she disagrees with. By the way, what’s the difference between tricking yourself into thinking something and just thinking something? Maybe all thinking is a trick, I think is just a way not to grapple with or accept the fact that they disagree with you. Look, I know not everyone agrees with me, but I think H.R. 15 should be banned. I say that I don’t think people like a fifteens have tricked themselves into liking it. I think they disagree with me. So try to make the case that will convince some or convince enough people to ban a AR 15s. Got it. Or here’s another one from the other side of the aisle. Look, I know not everyone agrees with me, not even most Democrats, but we literally can take a large percentage of the funding to the police, take it away and it’ll still work. And I’ll explain how. And that’s fine. I say that’s a good debate, but I don’t believe that you really disagree with me. I only believe that you’ve tricked yourself into that disagreement or the more straightforward phrase. I’m sure it’s really annoying when you hear this in your own life. You don’t really believe that. Do you ever been told that I know what your answer is? Your answer is, my God, by pointing it out, you’ve you’ve made me realize. I don’t believe that. No, the answer is always. Yeah, I believe that. Who are you to tell me? I don’t. Of course, if you’re saying you don’t really believe that, that’s the answer you’ll get if you’re saying to your like minded group, you know, they don’t really believe that, you’ll probably get nods. Now, here’s the thing and here’s the problem. If you’re right that the people you disagree with don’t really hold those disagreements, they’ve tricked themselves into having those disagreements. There’s not much of a tactical difference that you should engage in versus what I how I would interpret people who disagree with me, thoughts that they actually disagree with me. I would just try to argue them off their case or present my case or establish a bigger coalition so that their opinions don’t matter. So arguing with someone who disagrees with you and arguing with someone who’s tricked themselves into disagreeing with you, there should be no difference in that. But, you know, I can’t really tell here who is the deluded and who is the dilute. Our agency is, like I said, she’s smart, she’s talented. She has the ability to change a lot of minds. I’m just not sure if she has the right mindset to do so. And that’s it for today’s show, Margaret Kelly could listen to Andrew Kottoor read the Glasgow phonebook only that would be a huge gaffe because Andrew Cotter is from Dundee and there is bad blood between the unions and the Glaswegians. Daniel Shrader produces the gist. He yearns to break free of the good dog, bad dog diad. And maybe we should just realize within dogs there is a goodness, but also a badness like the time they swallow grandma’s pillow. Bad, bad, bad dog, but with the potential for redemption. Alicia Montgomery is the executive producer of Slate podcasts. She thinks Qatar maybe should have gone to prompt booksellers Gousse book sales, something like Andrew Potter and the Sorcerer’s Bone, Andrew Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Andrew Potter and the Half-Blood Prince may be, you know, full a couple of people. The gist. Here’s my pitch. It’s from the dog’s perspective about when the owner comes home. Welcome Back Kotter, featuring the sweat dogs Leif, Lachlan, Rory and the Puerto Rican Scotsman won McGregor. I’m proud that producer, and thanks for listening.
