Bob and Chez Show

The Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show 6/26/14


Seconds to Spear: Man Locks His Boy in a Hot Car for 7 Hours, Internet Embraces Man; Neil Cavuto Destroys Michele Bachmann on Fox News Channel; The Side of the IRS Scandal You Don’t Know About; InfoWars Goon Dan Bidondi is Running for Rhode Island State Senate; Greenwald vs Paul Rieckhoff on Bill Maher; and much more. Brought to you by Bubble Genius, the Amazon Link and the Bowen Law Group.

There’s more political banter in the Bob & Chez Show After Party. If you’re not a member, subscribe already. Only $6/month, cancel any time.

NEW! Download individual After Party podcasts for $2 each via our Band Camp page.

Listen and subscribe on iTunes (it’s FREE!)
Download the mp3 (54 minutes, 23mb)
RSS Feed
Bob & Chez Show Archive
Listen on your smartphone via

Bubble Genius

  • Treading_Water

    Apparently, Michelle Bachmann’s eyes have the super power of making anybody look batsh!t crazy.

  • Victor_the_Crab

    Thank you, thank you, thank you Bob for reading to us Bidondi’s email while imitating that stupid voice of his. It was everything I hoped it would be. The Bidondi theme song playing in the background was a nice touch.

    • HilaryB

      I loved it. “….dot, dot, dot.” Lol.

  • 1933john

    My caption for the pic:

    “The Face of Madness”

    • HilaryB

      It’s amazing to me how people can capture images like that.

  • HilaryB

    Omg. Bidondi’s running for office. I can’t wait to hear the updates on this. I so wish you could interview him on air. Lol.

  • aynwrong

    Sorry to keep bothering you but could you say what music you had playing between segments at about 37:50? Right after you announced you going to start talking about Dan Bidondi’s run for office. That by the way is absolutely priceless.

    • It was Seal – “The Beginning.”

      • aynwrong

        Thanks dude.

  • Fixed the link. Sorry everyone.

    • beulahmo

      I was one of your “dissenters” in the initial blog post thread about Justin Harris. I have respectfully and repeatedly tried to get your attention in order get you to consider an important point that you have not addressed. Since it’s difficult to get your attention from down here in CommentsLand, and since you’re swamped with incoming communication from numerous points (email, Twitter, blog comments, etc.), I’ll try directing a question to you from here. I can’t tell if you simply haven’t noticed my attempts to catch your attention or if you’ve decided to ignore me. Do you plan to respond to any of my comments directed at you? If the answer is “no”, I’ll at least know I should quit wasting my time.

    • beulahmo

      I’ve been patient and I’ve been civil, but you’ve ignored my repeated pleas over the last week to at least engage with me on important aspects of the Cooper Harris story. At this point it’s obvious your intent is to continue the stonewalling, so I’ll make one last public comment on it and be done with it.

      I noticed that you were hawking the Cooper Harris death again on Twitter — “internet embraces child killer” — to draw attention to your podcast and your blog posts.

      In your initial post about Cooper Harris, you cited facts from an organization that collects and publishes data — — which is a non-profit organization whose mission is raising public awareness and promoting programs for preventing accidental deaths involving children and vehicles. But I have the impression you’ve not spent much time on their website, because in a way, what you’re doing is undermining their mission.

      As I said, their mission to raise public awareness and to advocate policy and product changes, and underlying that is the warning to all parents that even good and responsible and caring parents can make mistakes that cause unthinkable suffering and death to the people they cherish more than their own lives.’s repeated warning makes sense to me — I feel that allowing yourself to believe a good character and responsible attitude gives you immunity from stupid mistakes might make you even MORE susceptible to making errors, especially if you misunderstand the how those errors are even possible.

      But rather than respond to the civil and well-reasoned objections that some of us have raised in response to your emotional and ill-considered original post, you’ve doubled, tripled, and quadrupled down on your position that people who’ve dared to feel empathy for parents who accidentally (not intentially, as Justin Harris is now alleged to have done) cause harm to their own children are insane or incapable of “putting children first” or morally deficient.

      I’ve repeatedly explained why I think your broad-brush characterization and dismissal of “dissent” from your own readers who raised objections to your hastily-made condemnation of the parent in this case is reckless and unfair, so I won’t go through it again here.

      But I want you to know that this angers and disappoints me. If you’re wondering why I cancelled my subscription to your podcast, it’s because I think it’s terrible that you didn’t even take the time to pay attention to the website you cited — — and you’re using their public information service to bolster what increasingly appears to be your own outrage p0rn story. So, the money that I used to spend on a monthly subscription to your podcast now goes to a monthly contribution to

      And in case you’re interested, I’m not an isolated “Harris defender” who objects to your tone and tactics. These are some of your other long-time readers who appeared to find at least some problem with your rage-filled initial post: @bumpitmccarthy:disqus , @dbtheonly:disqus, @Christopher Foxx, @stacib23:disqus, @gorilla cookies, @Lauren, @aaronlitz:disqus, and @TomTBlue:disqus. I may have missed some.

      I hope you reflect on what kind of journalist you are and want to be, and what kind of site you want to cultivate. I sense a change in you.

      • Lauren

        I did agree with much of your assessment, but I take issue with the fact that you think Bob owes you a response. He does not. And he’s entitled to his opinion, even if you or I disagree with it.

        And I didn’t disagree with *all* of it.

        ETA: Also, I think it’s unwise to assume you’re sensing a change in his work based on one piece. I wasn’t a fan of that particular piece, either. So what? Bob’s a brilliant editorialist, and in order for *one* piece to change my mind about that, it would have to be…well, I don’t know what it would have to be, but for the record it wasn’t that one.

        Warm wishes to all of you.

        • Christopher Foxx

          I take issue with the fact that you think Bob owes you a response. He does not.

          No he doesn’t. He can choose to ignore the many postings here that offered him a chance to engage on the topic. Whether he involves himself in the conversation his article prompted is entirely up to him.

          BUT it is extremely unfortunate if a leading contributor to The Banter chooses not to engage in an exchange with those would be eager to know his further thoughts. As beulahmo said, it reflect very much on what kind of journalist Bob chooses to be and what he wants to help make of this site. The lack of any response (so far as I’ve seen he’s made none) is greatly unfortunate.

          • beulahmo

            Thanks for taking the time to read and reply, Christopher.

          • Lauren

            I respectfully disagree. Perhaps a follow-up piece **if** he is comfortable writing one would be a great addition, but I don’t think he’s required to battle people in the comments section. Tommy C does it with fervor and God bless him, but that can be mentally draining (not to mention time-consuming) and it’s not for everyone.

          • Christopher Foxx

            I respectfully disagree.

            As I did.

            And suggesting anyone called for Bob to “battle” in the comments section is a misrepresentation.

          • beulahmo

            Yeah — honestly, I wouldn’t be asking for Bob’s response if he hadn’t gone into the comment section to lash out at commenters, and then later, taken to his front page, Twitter, and his podcast to continue his broad-brush mocking and misrepresentations.

            In this case, it was Bob’s initiation of “battle” with his commenters — and using such unfair tactics to do so — that has made me so angry. I fully respect Bob’s prerogatives in expressing his editorial views; however, I think it’s dishonorable to initiate a “battle” in the comments section, and then continue to pursue the “battle” from his megaphone (i.e., front page and podcast), without having to engage thoughtful responses from his readers. It’s a crappy way to treat good-faith, long-time readers and listeners.

          • Christopher Foxx

            I think it’s dishonorable to initiate a “battle” in the comments section, and then continue to pursue the “battle” from his megaphone (i.e., front page and podcast), without having to engage thoughtful responses from his readers.

            Exactly so. It’s cowardly.

          • Lauren

            You absolutely did. I didn’t sense an ounce of disrespect from you. 🙂

        • beulahmo

          Thanks for taking the time to read and reply, Lauren.

          • Lauren

            You’re most welcome!

  • beulahmo

    Bob, Greenwald is rubbing off on you. You’re using a combination of reductio ad absurdum and straw men to characterize all of the pushback to your initial post in order to make all your critics look irrational, foolish, or morally deficient.

    Please do not argue that you did it because the first critical comment you responded to was irrational. It wasn’t. The very first dissenter to your post criticized your tone, and never called for simply letting Justin Harris “off the hook”, yet you characterized him — and any person who had an iota of sympathy for parents who’ve been negligent in these kinds of hyperthermia deaths — as a child abuse apologists. Do you have any idea how insulting that is, especially in a story that involves a child dying in such a horrible way? It’s unfair, and you’re using your relative power in this situation — having a blog and a radio show — to mock your “lowly” commenters. That’s heavy-handed, Bob. I’m neither an authoritarian NSA supporter nor a child abuse apologist, but thanks to high-profile Greenwaldian character-smearing, I now get to hear random accusations of it from internet trolls in Daily Banter threads. Ick.

    With respect to the number of hyperthermia cases where parents claim to have “forgotten” a child: there’s a salient body of knowledge that analyzes cognitive processes, and this area of “forgetting” represents a cognitive error related to the use of cognitive efficiencies and rote memory. You, Chez, and Pat need to humble yourselves for just a moment and consider that there are causal factors at work in some of these cases that you don’t understand. We object to your implication that these negligence cases are invariably the result of parents’ character flaws manifest in the form of careless parenting. We have compelling reason to believe this is incorrect, and therefore unfair.

    And again, we are not calling attention to these things in order to coddle negligent parents or give negligent parents an “easy free pass.” So please stop characterizing all of your critics that way. We think that your refusal to even entertain the actual substance of our criticism has the potential to extend the conditions that make these cognitive errors — and the horrendous consequences — that account for some of the babies who die of hyperthermia in cars.

    If we cannot allow ourselves to consider ourselves vulnerable to cognitive errors (“I’m a good parent; I’d never do that!”), we’ll let our certainty set us up for making these errors.

    I’m convinced you chose to ignore the critical comments made by even your most thoughtful, intelligent, and consistent readers. Again, I urge you to consider the comments made by @bumpitmccarthy:disqus and me. We commented on the threads of both Cooper Harris stories. Please read our comments on the threads; I really, really don’t want to have to write all my points yet again, because frankly, I’m expending a lot of effort, yet it feels like speaking to a brick wall. I’m down here, and you’re up there — for all I know, hearing nothing.

    @muselet:disqus , to answer your question, “If I saw an infant locked in a car, I’d be calling 911. Does that somehow make me an oddball?” No. Trust me. There’s no way passersby would simply ignore it.

    • muselet

      Good to know. I just hope the idiots who make that stupid What Would You Do? show don’t decide to put your assertion to the test (off-topic, but seriously, why does anyone sign a release for that show?).


  • muselet

    “Mongo only pawn in game of life.” Great line, perfectly delivered (who could have known Alex Karras had comedy chops?).

    I agree that even if the death of that 22-month-old was accidental, and it may well have been, the father should still face legal consequences. I have deliberately not followed the story—there are some things I really don’t need to know—so I have no idea what the configuration of the parking lot was, but did no passerby notice a little kid in the back of a parked car? If I saw an infant locked in a car, I’d be calling 911. Does that somehow make me an oddball?

    People on the internet are no worse than people who are offline; the Letters to the Editor in any small-circulation newspaper proves that. What’s different is the size of the megaphone. It’s the amplification that makes people seem so much crazier, and that’s why I spend as much of my life as possible away from the computer.

    Stone the crows! Neil Cavuto is behaving as if he’s an actual journalist? Is it Opposite Day? (The cynic in me says that since Dick Cheney is—to his annoyance—out of office and irrelevant, and Michele “I Can See The Back Of My Own Head” Bachmann is retiring, it’s safe for FNC to take a couple of jabs at them to show it’s a real news channel. Neil Cavuto wasn’t telling John Boehner he was wasting his time, you’ll notice).

    I share John Oliver’s jaded view of FIFA, so frankly I’ll believe the World Cup will be moved from Qatar only when the tournament starts somewhere else.

    Ashby demolished Darrell Issa, Louie Gohmert and Bill Flores on their collective obsession with the IRS today. A thing of beauty it was.

    I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: every time I hear or even think about Dan Bidondi, I immediately think chronic traumatic encephalopathy.

    Bob, you’ve given the Dan Bidondi candidacy ‘way too much thought.

    I watched the Maher video and damn am I sorry I did.

    “Nancy Grace is the worst person in the world.” And the sun rose in the east this morning.


  • aynwrong

    The podcast link keeps going to a “page not found” page.

    • Brookmyre

      I have the same problem..

      • aynwrong

        Ah ha!!! Thank you.

    • Brookmyre

      Aynwrong…use the link in the column on the right.