Well, howdy there, internet people, it's Bell again. And welcome to the roads with Bell.

Today is October 16th, and we're going down the roads to your questions about, well, all kinds of

stuff. Really, an eclectic mix today. Our first question. I was wondering what you think about Rand

Paul's tweet about federal workers not being missed. It seems like it'll become a Republican

talking point. You're probably right. They'll try to use it as a talking point. Here's what he said. Quote,

everyone is quick to talk about the need to bring back federal workers, but we need to ask

ourselves a serious question. If entire departments and divisions are gone, yet nothing

changes for the American people. Were those government employees truly

essential? This is a cheap gotcha that doesn't hold up to scrutiny. This is literally the

opposite of Chesterton's fence. Take it down and wait to see if something bad happens. In 2018, Trump disbanded the National Security

Council pandemic unit. After all, they weren't doing anything. That was a really bad decision in hindsight.

Right now, it looks like the administration is getting rid of the Education Department Office that oversees the education for children with disabilities.

As time goes on, and the civil rights of children with disabilities are violated, that will be a really bad decision in hindsight.

The U.S. hasn't used a nuclear weapon in combat since 1945. Obviously,

we should just disband at all. Deterrence isn't real. We were told that the NWS cuts showed those

people weren't needed. I think there are people in Texas and Alaska who would disagree. By the way,

Senator Paul, Congress isn't doing anything right now. And if nothing bad has happened, then why do we

need Congress? Next. There have been a few cases lately where you and other commentators have said,

this is going to end up in the Supreme Court. I'm particularly thinking of the cases between

states and the president over troop deployments. If it's inevitable that certain cases go that

far, why doesn't the Supreme Court hear them in the first place?

I realize they're busy, but why go through the bother and expense of multiple tiers of lower courts before getting to the top, if it'll just end up there anyway?

...