Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (2014–…): Season 4, Episode 28 - National Flood Insurance Program - full transcript

[HBO] HD. Main story: Floods; plus, opioid epidemic; Alabama Senate Republican candidate Roy Moore; Australian vote on legalizing same-sex marriage.

Are you wondering how healthy the food you are eating is? Check it - foodval.com
---
LAST WEEK TONIGHT
WITH JOHN OLIVER

Season IV
Episode 28

Welcome to Last Week Tonight.
I'm John Oliver.

Thank you for joining us,
we begin with President Trump,

the person who most deserves
to look like that.

I know, right now,
all anyone can think about

is the reported indictments
coming from Robert Mueller:

please, let it be Jared !

A lot has happened this week,

including Trump addressing
America's opioid crisis,

which claims 140 lives every day
or, as one newscaster put it...



Good evening.
I'm Anthony Mason.

By the time this broadcast is over,
three people will be dead.

Holy shit ! The only thing
creepier than that

is if he specifically named
who those people are.

Three people will be dead: Jason Kohler
of Waltham,Massachusetts,

Diane Forant of Spokane, Washington,
and you.

Combating opioid crisis was one
of Trump's central campaign promises.

A lot of his solutions
were underwhelming,

including one of the key
announcements on Thursday.

It's really easy not to take 'em.

That's going to be
our most important thing.

Really tough,
really big, really great advertising,

so we get to people
before they start.

So, an ad campaign.



It is important not to start
abusing opioids,

but that doesn't help the people
who are struggling with addiction.

It's like seeing someone neck deep
in quicksand and then putting up

a "don't do quicksand" sign.

The whole ad-blitz strategy has
famously been tried, and failed,

with Nancy Reagan's
"Just Say No" campaign.

It still seems to be
Trump's preferred approach,

going by what happened
at one of his rallies.

Don't take drugs. Okay ?
Raise your hand.

I promise Donald J. Trump.

That I will never take drugs.

I don't want to say no alcohol,
but take it easy on the alcohol !

What are you doing ?

Why are you walking back
the pledge as you go ?

He would be a terrible
wedding officiant.

Do you take this woman, I don't
want to say 'forsaking all others',

there are gonna be others,
but take it easy on the others.

Don't let them call you at home.

It is good that the president is
calling attention to the opioid crisis.

The problem is, attention
is pretty much all he's giving it.

He didn't put out a detailed strategy
and his splashiest step

declaring it
a "public health emergency",

doesn't do very much.

It will streamline some access
to addiction treatment,

but provides
few new resources.

Financing comes from
the Public Health Emergency Fund,

which has a balance
of just over $56 000.

The federal government estimates
the crisis costs $75 billion annually.

Trump chimed in with his two cents
about how to tackle this crisis,

and it involves allotting for the
2,6 million Americans addicted,

literally about two cents each.

Trump's fix for our opioids
epidemic essentially boils down to:

"Here's two pennies.
Throw them in a mall fountain"

"and wish your addiction away."

Let's turn to Alabama,
the South's "The South".

On December 12th,
they are holding a special election

for the Senate seat left open
by Attorney General Jeff Sessions,

a position he will be leaving any day
now for his regular holiday job.

This special election
has gotten a lot of buzz,

because the Republican candidate

is former Alabama Supreme Court
Chief Justice Roy Moore.

And he is a lot.

He's called American Indians "Reds"
and Asian Americans "Yellows".

He's called Islam a false religion.
Homosexual activity should be illegal.

He reportedly said in February
that the 9/11 attacks

might have been punishment for
America's turning away from God.

And on Monday, he caused
a stir by waving a gun.

I believe
in the second amendment.

During a campaign rally.

He also personally
kicked a panda in the balls

and he once called Tom Hanks
the n-word.

Just in case you thought
he couldn't get any worse,

Moore is also an aspiring poet.

Listen to him recite a poem
he calls "America the Beautiful."

America, the beautiful,
Or so you used to be.

Land of the pilgrims' pride.
I'm glad they're not here to see

Babies piled in dumpsters,
Abortion on demand.

Sweet land of liberty,
Your house is on the sand.

I don't support everything Roy Moore
says, but we can all agree:

that is objectively good poetry.

I would say that's the best use
of dumpster baby imagery

since Frost's "Stopping by a Dumpster
Full of Babies on a Snowy Evening."

Whose babies these are,
I think I know.

His babies are in the dumpster,
though.

He will not see me stopping here,
To say

"Holy shit,
this dumpster is full of babies."

Listen to Moore's feelings
on homosexuality.

As bad as you assume they are,
they're worse.

He favors criminalizing sodomy
and if you ask him about that,

things get weird fast.

Sodomy is against the law of nature.
Ok, let's take another one.

Is there a right
in the Constitution for bestiality ?

There is no right in
the constitution to commit bestiality.

There's nothing that says a man
can have sex with a donkey.

Or a woman can have sex
with a donkey, right ?

It's not in there.

Say what you will about Roy Moore,
he is a man who believes

that a woman can fuck a donkey
every bit as well as a man.

And that is something. Hashtag
tap that ass. Hashtag feminism.

Moore has also stoked
fear of Muslims,

suggesting Keith Ellison's faith should
prevent him from serving in Congress.

Now luckily, Republicans in both
the House and the Senate

condemned Moore
and his views,

have even gone so far as to...
I'm obviously kidding !

He entered into a fundraising
agreement with the RNC

and multiple Republican senators
are fundraising on his behalf.

If you are wondering
why they would do that,

I'll let Texas senator
John Cornyn explain.

Have you seen these comments

when he said that homosexual
conduct should be illegal ?

Do you agree with that ?

I don't have to agree with somebody

to support them
over the Democratic nominee.

I support the nominee of my party.

But that kind of blind loyalty

means there is nobody
you would not support.

If the Republican Party nominated
a swarm of smallpox-infected bees,

John Cornyn would say
"we disagree on a lot of things,"

"but all those bees
is a reliable vote on tax cuts."

"I support the nominee
of my party."

Even senators
who are not publicly supporting Moore

are hardly condemning him.

Here are their reactions after being
asked to comment on his campaign.

Senator Dean Heller of Nevada:

"Who won ? I wasn't paying attention.
I'm just worried about taxes."

Senator Rob Portman of Ohio:
"He's going to be for tax reform..."

"I don't know him." Senator
Tim Scott of South Carolina:

"I'm not going to comment.
I have not followed that race."

I haven't followed that one ?
Come on.

This is your own party's senate
candidate, not "Ray Donovan".

I haven't been following that one.
What is his character ?

The poster gives me nothing !
Is he an assassin ? A sommelier ?

An uncle showing up drunk
at a christening ?

A member of the Wahlberg family ?
I'll never find out.

If any of that made you feel sad
about the state of our democracy,

spare a thought for Australia:

not the birthplace of
Outback Steakhouse

but very much the Outback
Steakhouse of countries.

Australia is in the midst
of a major vote of its own.

16 million Australians
are being asked to vote

in a postal survey
on same sex marriage.

The Australian government
is conducting a postal survey

on whether same-sex marriage
should be legal.

Polls already exist, showing around
two-thirds of Australians support it.

Parliament could simply
pass it into law.

They are inexplicably holding
a non-legally-binding postal vote

at a public cost of $120 million,
which is the weirdest waste of money

since every Baz Luhrman
movie ever made.

The ballots are due by November 7th
and the campaign has been toxic,

with members of parliament
delivering ridiculous arguments.

There are all sorts
of relationships.

I have an affectionate relationship
with you, Sam.

We're not married.

- That's right, we're not married.
- You have a very lovely wife.

I have an affectionate
relationship with my cycling mates,

who we go cycling,
but that's not marriage.

We do fuck. We finish cycling,
we peel our cycling clothes off

by the side of the bucolic
country road and we fuck.

That's not marriage.
That's fucking your cycling mates.

That's different your cycling mates.
It's not marriage.

You cycle, you fuck.
It's not marriage though.

One activist seemed unusually
obsessed with terminology.

Ladies and gentlemen,

if I may still use that term
in these gender fluid times.

I speak for marriage.

Speaking against same-sex marriage
is Sophie York from Marriage Alliance,

which says unions of same-sex
couples shouldn't be called marriage.

That idea of having a different word
has been floated and it still will be

and someone else put forth
the word "garriage" as a possibility.

"Garriage".
That is a stupid word,

except in the rare case of a wedding
between two men named Gary,

in which case, they should be
getting "garried".

As stupid as that is, it is the sort
of argument you would expect.

The "no" campaign has had
some surprising members.

I used to be a supporter.
I proposed to Ben five years ago.

I explained to him. I said:
"I don't think it's my cup of tea".

Even if same-sex marriage
is legalized,

Mark and Ben
won't be walking down the aisle.

If it's yes, congratulations.
Everyone can get married.

We will not be getting married.
We'll stand by our commitment.

We don't need marriage
in our lives. Definitely not.

Two things: Ben ?
You are cold blooded !

Mark, you can do
so much better than him.

You deserve someone as committed
to you, as you are to them.

This relationship is going nowhere.
Don't stay together for the dog.

He knows you're unhappy, too !
Respect yourself, Mark, and leave.

Get yourself on Australian Grindr
and swipe,

the exact opposite
direction than we do.

This whole debate got so heated,
it even spilled over

into Australian rugby's version
of the Super Bowl.

An online petition is calling on
the league to stop rapper Macklemore

from performing his gay rights
song "Same Love"

as part of Sunday's
final entertainment.

That is putting me
in a tough position.

I support gay marriage,
but I refuse to ever say:

"let Macklemore perform !"

His music belongs in one place
and that is the Pandora station:

"Now That's What
Your Mom Calls Rap Music".

Let's not pretend Australia
has high standards

of who performs
at their sporting events.

Not after this memorable performance
at the 2011 AFL Grand Final.

Step aside, Buddy Holly,
Richie Valens and the Big Bopper.

There is a new
"the day the music died" in town.

Fighting the debate with
words and songs is one thing.

The progay-marriage head
of Qantas got pied in the face,

while the anti-gay-marriage
former Prime Minister Tony Abbott,

a man whose very smile says:
"smell that ? I just cut one"

had an unfortunate incident
on the street.

A gentleman sang out:
"Hey, Tony."

I turned around, he said:
"I want to shake your hand."

I saw him coming towards me.
I held out my hand,

he grabbed my hand
and it turned into a head-butt.

Tony Abbott was head-butted
by this man, a Tasmanian anarchist

who goes by the names
"Astro Labe"

and, even better, "DJ Funknukl".

According to DJ Funknukl

the attack wasn't connected
with the gay marriage issue.

It has nothing to do
with marriage equality.

Someone
had stuck a sticker on my jacket.

I was thinking, there's Tony Abbott,
I'll head-butt him.

Here's the important thing.

I am in no way condoning
Tony Abbott being attacked.

Thinking to yourself: "there's
Tony Abbot, I'll head-butt him"

is entirely natural,
it's an automatic human response.

It's like "there's a puppy,
I'm going to pet it"

or "there's Sean Penn,
I'm not going to see that movie."

This has been a dispiriting,
ultimately pointless process,

and there are only two good things
that could come out of it:

one is if Australia's parliament
legalizes gay marriage.

And two, that Mark heeds my words
and puts himself out there

and meets someone
who deserves him.

Mark, you can find someone
who would do anything for love,

including that.

And now this.

If it makes Australia feel better,

here's Meat Loaf butchering
"America the Beautiful".

Mitt Romney !

Moving on. Our main story
tonight concerns floods.

They are clearly catastrophic,
traumatic events.

They've also been responsible for
one of the most memorable clips

in the history of broadcast news.

Good morning ! We're getting
a nice break from the rain,

but not the flooding.

This is essentially now a part
of the Passaic River.

That's it, fuck James Cameron.
And fuck "Titanic".

That is the greatest boat
disaster ever captured on film.

Floods were everywhere this summer.
The "Despacito" of natural disasters:

persistent, ubiquitous and no fault of
the Puerto Rican government.

90% of all natural disasters
in the U.S. involve a flood,

which is the reason FEMA's website
once referred to flooding

as "America's #1 Natural Hazard,
exclamation mark !"

Which is a pretty weird tone to take
when describing something horrible.

It's like saying: "Boils:
America's #1 Staph Infection !"

or "Parks: America's #1 Place
To Die Unnoticed !"

Floods are only going to get
worse, due to climate change.

People will dispute that, we don't
have time tonight to litigate

whether extreme weather events
are exacerbated,

so for now, let's just say...

They are.

Yeah, they just definitely are.
It is a complicated issue

and we may not have definitive
proof until the late 1980s.

While floods are often referred to
as natural disasters, the truth is,

the damage they do is often
within our control,

we have made decisions that put
and keep people and property

in the path of flooding
and that is what this story is about.

Let's acknowledge that people live
near water for all sorts of reasons.

It's where their families lived,
or a necessity for the work.

For others, it's a luxury and living
next to the water is attractive,

despite the risks like flooding
or stepping on pointy seashells

or mistakenly giving a Tostito
to a seagull,

means that you will spend your life
haunted by a Tostito-addicted seagull.

Whatever the reason
to live by the water, many do it...

For fuck's sake !
I don't have any Tostitos !

I've been telling you that
for six years. Look ? No Tostitos !

Get out of here,
you flying beach rat !

Sorry !

Dangers of waterfront
living are real.

But many people, like this man
who lives on the water in Tampa Bay,

feel the benefits outweigh the risks.

Mark knows that life here is tenuous.
But he doesn't dwell on it.

Every morning when I walk out
to get the paper, I see dolphins,

and Roseate Spoonbills walking
around the edge of the Bayou,

so, it tends to make you forget
about all those sorts of things.

Seeing a Roseate Spoonbill would take
your mind off things,

you're spending your day
trying to figure out

how a flamingo could have gotten
its face stuck into a panini press.

Even people who like birds
don't like this bird.

The Audubon Society
an organization who champions birds

says they are: "gorgeous at a distance
and bizarre up close."

Which is like the American
Kennel Club saying:

"we celebrate all dogs and honor
them as man's best friend,"

"but the Dandie Dinmont
has a trash personality"

"and looks like a Scottie
fucked Phil Spector."

If you are overlooking a bayou,
you are aware that flooding is a risk.

But not every flood-prone area
is directly along the coast.

Aggressive development can
exacerbate the risk of flooding.

Look at Houston, which
was recently rocked by Harvey.

The metro area's development
exploded. One study found

the Houston area added
25% more pavement over 15 years,

replacing soil-rich wetlands
with concrete-covered suburbia.

That made Harvey's damage worse.
Concrete isn't good at absorbing water.

Why people don't dry off at the beach
by rolling around in the parking lot.

It's not just global warming
or unchecked growth

that have put more people
in risky, flood prone areas.

It's also the fact that it's possible
for people to take that risk

because they have
flood insurance.

Look at "Buying the Beach", a show
for people who want to live near water.

One episode featured two brothers
named Mitch and Daniel,

arguing over a particular house,
which led to this exchange.

What'd you think about
the island house ?

There was a lot of good
and a lot of bad on it.

- Off those steps: into the beach.
- We are close to the water.

- That's got me concerned.
- That's what insurance is for.

That may be the most reckless
statement ever said on a boat.

And I am very much including:

"I can definitely
make this shot work",

and "let's feed these gulls
some Tostitos !"

I don't have any !
All I did was say the word !

Get out of here ! No Tostitos !

But Mitch... No Tostitos !

Mitch isn't wrong that, they
could get flood insurance cheaply.

And it's worth taking some time
to understand why that is the case.

Unlike other forms of
homeowner's insurance,

flood protection is underwritten
by the government through

the NFIP,
or "National Flood Insurance Program".

It started 50 years ago,
after historic floods wiped out

many people's homes
in the 1960s.

There was a problem: insurance
companies wouldn't cover floods,

it was too risky.

Government was spending way
too much on disaster relief.

So they created the NFIP,
which offered discounted insurance.

And that sounds great.
But crucially,

the aim was not that people would be
staying in at-risk homes permanently,

as the program's current
administrator explains.

They presumed that if we told people
they were at risk, they would move.

They presumed
that over the life of the program,

those discounts
wouldn't need to be continued

because once people knew they
had the risk they would move out.

That has not proven true.

No, but of course it hasn't.
That's not how people work.

We will accept huge risks
for the sake of a discount.

That was the premise behind
the McDonald's dollar menu.

That is one of the many flaws with
how this program was designed.

Because everything about it
from who participates,

to the incentives it creates,
needs fixing.

And let's start with the fact
that eligibility for the program

is determined
through floodplain maps.

You are required
to buy flood insurance

if you have a federally-backed
mortgage and FEMA's maps show

you live in a risky area.

Lots of people
don't buy insurance who should.

The maps can be both out of date
and wildly inaccurate.

Days before Harvey struck,
a study of Houston-area flood maps

was published
and the results were alarming.

Researchers at Rice University and
Texas A&M Galveston studied

one section
of Southeast Harris County.

FEMA's flood plain maps missed
about 75 percent of the damages.

75 percent ! You might as well
predict floods

by having blindfolded 6-year-olds
pin little cardboard puddles.

Even if the maps were perfect,
there would be another flaw

with the NFIP,
how it's administered.

The government
doesn't directly insure you.

It pays private insurance companies
a fee for every policy they sell.

The federal government is responsible
for covering any losses.

Which is a sweet deal
for those companies.

They take none of the risk
and yet, they get all the rewards.

They also get paid
for each claim they handle.

And when Frontline
crunched some of the numbers,

they found something shocking.

There was one number
that really jumped out.

With all the claims
in the wake of Sandy,

the profits were more
than 400 million dollars.

They're handling a lot
of claims that year

and they make a lot of money
when they do that.

When a big storm hits,
they make more money ?

Yeah, at the very time you need
them to make less money,

because the burden is going
to be borne by the taxpayers.

For insurance companies,

the bigger the disaster,
the more they stand to profit.

A business model not seen outside
of Nicolas Cage's career.

While the insurance industry may
dispute how much profit they make,

the government and the taxpayer
are the ones eating the losses.

Which is one of the reasons why,
even before these latest hurricanes,

the program
was $25 billion in debt.

And there are not enough
Roseate Spoonbills in the world

to take your mind
off that and just to be clear,

there are exactly enough
Roseate Spoonbills in the world.

Do we all really need
more of this ?

Kids, come see !

The dirty pink dinosaur is noisily
devouring its young !

Helping people after a disaster
is what government is for.

A big chunk of that money
is going to the insurance companies.

Another, shockingly big chunk
goes to very few homes.

Along the Gulf Coast and Florida,
one percent of properties covered

have accounted
for a quarter of flood claims.

These are so-called
"repetitive loss properties".

They are homes that can flood
over and over again.

Some of them
are costing us a fortune.

Washington Post highlighted
a home in Pointe Coupee Parish

that has flooded 40 times.

The house is valued at just
$56 000,

NFIP has doled out nearly
$430 000 to cover flood claims.

That is just stupid.
If your house floods 40 times,

Mother Nature is sending you
a pretty clear message:

"You mind leaving ? Some weird fish
would like to fuck in here now."

Some parts of the country
have extreme examples of this.

Remember Mitch and Daniel ?
The deathtrap that they were looking at

is on Dauphin Island,
where over the past two decades,

homeowners have
"paid just $9.3 million in premiums",

"but they've received $72.2 million
in payments for their damaged homes."

The island got written up by
Bloomberg under the headline:

"Love Of Coastal Living Is
Draining U.S. Disaster Funds",

and at first glance,
we thought, hold on:

isn't that the same eyesore on stilts
that Mitch and Daniel almost bought ?

The good news is it's actually not.
The bad news is,

it's the house next door, was also
featured on a different episode.

It's right in the water.

It wasn't close to the beach,
it was in the ocean.

The waves
are just right here.

It's literally in the ocean.
This is insane.

Yeah, it is insane.
But what's even crazier is,

at the end of the episode,
they decided to buy that house.

Even if you were able to overlook
the repetitive loss properties,

nearly one out of every five homes
covered under the NFIP

is a second home.

Because the program
isn't means-tested,

the benefits frequently go to
wealthy individuals' vacation homes.

One property belonged to
John Stossel: a Fox News personality

and partially hydrogenated
Tom Selleck.

I'll let Stossel, who answers
the question:

"what if Freddie Mercury became
manager at Men's Warehouse ?",

I'll let him tell you all about it,
he knew it was ridiculous.

Years ago I built this beach house.
That's younger me, there.

The house was on the edge
of the Atlantic Ocean.

A risky place to build,
but I built anyway,

'cause a federal program
guaranteed my investment.

A storm swept away my first floor,
but I didn't lose a penny.

I never invited you there,
but you paid for my new first floor.

Stossel is just baiting people.

Under no circumstances
does anyone want to be funding

the reconstruction of the world's
smuggest man's rickety sea prison.

There is lots to be confused about,
not the least of which that photo

of Stossel, posing shirtless,
in skin tight white swim trunks.

Who took that photo ? It can't
be another human who wanted it.

I think that he put a camera
on a long-delay timer,

then sprinted for a full 45 seconds
back to the deck of his house,

whispering "hurry" to himself
and got in position just in time.

That is the only scientifically
possible explanation.

We debated this and it's the only
scenario that we could all agree on.

Here's the thing: if you choose
to build something in a risky place,

like John Stossel's salt-battered,
bottoms-only beachmistake,

you should
be allowed to do that.

But you shouldn't expect the government
to repeatedly help you rebuild

when things inevitably go wrong.

The vast majority
here of NFIP beneficiaries

are not wealthy
or second homeowners.

They often need this program and
cannot afford for it to go under.

For those stuck
in repetitive loss properties,

it is easy for anyone to just say
they should just move,

but it's much more difficult,
as this Kentucky woman will tell you.

We couldn't sell our house.
Who would want to buy

a house that's had
this many repetitive floods in it ?

Neighbors have had their houses
up for sale for three years,

that haven't even had anyone
come and view the house.

We need a buyout from FEMA or
from whoever is responsible for this.

Her decision to try and leave that
home could not have been easy.

You don't want to throw out
the baby with the floodwater,

but the responsible thing to do
is to get a more water-resistant baby.

Also the title of Britain's bestselling
book on teaching children to swim.

Our buyout programs are underfunded
and prohibitively slow.

It can take years for buyouts
to get approved by which point,

homeowners have had
to rebuild their house,

and it may have
already flooded again.

A program that was supposed
to help people in flooded homes

is sometimes trapping them
inside them indefinitely.

Trapping people in structurally
unsound homes

isn't what the government is for:
it's what "Buying the Beach" is for.

There has to be a better way.
There are some key things

we can do to improve
this program.

We can meanstest it and get rid
of discounts for second homes

and gradually increase the insurance
rates so they reflect actual risk.

The last time that Congress tried
a major reform of the NFIP,

the result was that many people's
rates skyrocketed overnight.

Politicians were so spooked,
they scaled back many reforms.

I'm not saying that this
will ever be politically easy.

Even if you do properly fund
and streamline a buyout scheme,

there are still going to be cases
where people want to stay put.

In New York, there is a low-lying
community called Broad Channel

where the streets
can flood twice a month.

Its residents fought against
those rate increases a few years ago.

Many of them
have no interest in leaving.

The neighborhood is too great.
My house got destroyed by Sandy.

I redid my whole house.
People are like, you should move.

Absolutely not.

But you're standing
in water right now.

Maybe the people telling
you to move were saying:

"can you move up
five inches to dry land ?"

Even expensive interventions

are likely to only buy
that community a little more time

and people in Broad Channel
will be leaving,

whether it's by moving truck
or by boat.

Environmental conditions
are going to get worse.

Heavy downpours increased
and sea levels have been climbing.

I'm not saying that that is because
of climate change, even though...

It is ! It just fucking is !

It just is, precisely.

The NFIP is actually due for
reauthorization this December

and it's time to take another
shot at serious reform.

Without it, we have an unstable,
unsustainable program

that is indirectly harming
people it was designed to help.

I don't have any,
I told you last time that I haven't...

Relax.
I'm not here for Tostitos.

Really ?
Hold on. You can talk ?

Seagulls can talk. We just
choose to listen most of the time.

That's actually very nice.

I heard what you said about
flooding, and you are right.

I've seen it. I'm a seagull.

Some people in high-risk areas
will need to move.

We should give them the help
they can do that with.

While leaving your home is hard,
being forced out is ten times harder.

Your home
isn't just walls and a roof.

It's where the people you love are.

- That was absolutely beautiful.
- Not bad for a flying beach rat.

No. Don't talk like that
about yourself. No, don't.

I know it's true. You know it's true.
Everybody watching knows it's true.

I eat French fries
out of the garbage.

You're right.
You're absolutely disgusting.

I am sorry for misjudging
your motives in coming here.

That's okay, Johnny.
Just one more thing !

- Sure, anything.
- Do you have any Tostitos ?

Fuck you !
I do not have any Tostitos.

They're all gone !
Get the fuck out of here !

And now this !

A few of the things
Tucker Carlson is not against.

This is the way
America is heading.

I'm not against gays, I'm not
against people getting married.

Not against learning
about gay.

Not against transgenders
or gay cowboys !

Not against female firefighters
or federal employees.

I'm not against immigration !
I like immigrants.

I liked every Mexican I've met.
And I like the country.

Not against Sweden. I'm not
against people from Somalia.

I played squash
and I like the Canadians.

Canada is a sweet country,

like your retarded cousin
you pat him on the head.

I went to the Million Man March
and I had nothing against it.

I'm not against art.
I'm not attacking Oprah.

I'm not against George Clooney.
I like Morgan Freeman.

I have nothing against Jane Fonda.
I'm not against Matthew McConaugh.

I don't even understand
but I'm against it. But I like it.

That's our show.
See you next week, good night !

I have a Tostito. Ok ?
There you go. That's it.

I've got another Tostito.
Take it easy.

Look just peck it.

Just have the bag.
Shit !

LAST WEEK TONIGHT
WITH JOHN OLIVER

END OF EPISODE 28,
SEASON IV