03-05-26 Part Two - Bernie's Wealth Tax

Now, it's Red Eye Radio, Gary McNamara, and Eric Hurley,

“talk about everything from politics to social issues and news of the day,”

whether you're up late or you're just starting your day, welcome to the show from the Relief Factor Studios. This is Red Eye Radio. All across America, we are Red Eye Radio. He is a running-on, Gary McNamara.

Well, to me, good morning. Thanks so much for being here. You know, we've been talking about Bernie Sanders proposal for a wealth tax. 5% on billionaires of their wealth for is would it be gross or net for, but doesn't matter.

It's not going to happen, but probably gross. Well, for their, for their, well, I guess is gross. Well, net wealth. It's not like income. The wealth would be wealth, right?

“Well, he wants the wealth tax on billionaires.”

However, would be, however, because if we're talking about net worth, yeah, you're building valuation on all properties and everything that's considered so, right? Yeah. But I mean, for example, would, would net worth would, your property taxes on the property,

be a deduction. I guess you could do that technically in any type of legislation. I don't think Bernie Sanders would be interested in doing that, though. But what makes it unconstitutional, because we had said it earlier, and I realized, oh, we need to explain it.

And this is where you get into really, really, really, really interesting, possible ways to look at the constitution and the law. Okay. So AI, by the way, defines it as net worth equals assets minus liabilities,

which is basically you pointed out one example on taxes or property taxes or something like that.

So you're property, all of your assets minus your liabilities. All right. So if I am property, and is that why Trump wanted the, the, the 15% well tax, because he has assets, but many liabilities. Yeah, man. Yeah, back in 2000.

Yeah. Right. But all right. That, that would make, that would make sense.

“So if you want to piece of property, you know, if you've got stock,”

there's no, you know, really, there's no liability in there. If you own property, you may have leveraged 95% of it. But the question would be, at what point, like, is it the valuation of your combined stock on what day? Because a couple of days ago, if you're a billionaire, let's, let's say you're one of these mega billionaires. You could have lost, and we see the stories.

Someone's lost three billion in wealth today or six billion in wealth today, because of a big stock market drop.

So where do you draw that line? What where is that valuation on stock? Because that wealth moves every day. In fact, it's moving all the time. And, you know, if you talk about the close of business or the close of the market, that's one thing. But it could drop the market, the doubt could drop a thousand points during the day, during trading hours.

And then come back down and settle at only a hundred above what it did close at a hundred. I just saw to something, why don't they view our property taxes the same way? Which is your assets, your liabilities subtracted from your assets, and that would be your property tax. They didn't care. That's not a great question.

None of our counties care that we don't own the full value of our homes. By the way, but if they did that, we didn't. We didn't ever play off our homes. Right. I keep my house would be perfect. There would be so many improvements in it. I'd be taking out equity loans all the time.

Yeah, or second mortgages is third mortgages.

Because I want to see what's in my ability. I think it's a great question. I wonder if that's ever been challenged in court. Say, look, there are liabilities here against the asset. Well, when it comes to the wealth tax, the reason that we believe it's unconstitutional is when you look at the income tax,

everybody has to pay and income tax based on the level that you're at. Everybody has to file.

And so everybody down the line from billionaires, millionaires, hundreds of thousandaires, tens of thousandaires, tens of thousandaires. Yeah. One dollar, you all have to file. You're all in it. We had talked about this during the whole gay marriage thing because this is when they really changed the 14th Amendment.

The 14th Amendment went from equal protection to equal treatment.

And the 14th Amendment never, in any intention of looking at gay marriage, that was about the civil wars.

We know. The interpretation we believe was a flawed interpretation of the Supreme Court.

“Now, can a state approve gay marriage course again?”

Absolutely. Should it have been a federal issue? No. No. And they made it right and know where in the Constitution does it say marriage is a or excuse me.

Government sanctioning your marriage. Marriage is a right. Who you wish to hang around with? Yeah. Have a bond with.

And have a bond with. Absolutely. Right. That is a right. The state recognizing your marriage is not a right.

It's a licensing process. Right.

And so we always disagreed with that.

And they went to the fact of that it is, you know, that everybody needs to be treated the same. We said fine. Everybody should pay the exact same amount of income tax, not a different percentage. But if you're using remember, the 14th Amendment is is, you know, it's like, well, then, you know, the 14th Amendment equal protection under the law. How do they justify different rates for income tax?

Because everybody in the same situation pays the exact same thing. Yeah. If I have the same deductions as you. Right. And you're in the, everybody in that category based on income and deductions.

My, my adjusted income. Hmm. If it's the same as yours, I have to pay the exact same amount of money.

“And so as long, that's, that's how the Supreme Court looked at it when it was, you know, basically,”

will protection under the law when it's equal treatment now.

We will wait a minute. You changed it. You said now, it's not a buddy who protects. Unless you're going to say it's about equal protection and treatment. And therefore, we can do whatever we want, whatever time we want.

Right. But the fact is the well tax simply goes after billionaires. Capital game stocks goes after everybody. Right. Right.

Sales tax goes after everybody. Hmm. And so that would be that would be the situation there with the, the, the well tax. Well, and it might better do that because get to the point in this is something you've been saying for, well, since the whole gay marriage ruling of all right. Well, let's, let's see if there's a challenge based on the income tax.

Well, certainly. There would be a challenge if the well tax were to be implemented, which is not going to be implemented. But the, and, and one of the reasons that wouldn't be lasting is because we believe it would be found in constitutional. But bring up the 14th Amendment as part of the basis for it. Of wait a minute.

“You know, on on taxes, you can talk about people being taxed, everybody being taxed based on income, right?”

And those categories, whatever income category they fall in on the well tax. It only applies, in fact, in this case, two individuals who have a certain, well, who have a certain amount of property, not not what they're earning during that year. Right. But what they own or are not with their buying, which would be a sales tax and not what they're buying. But what I want to say is that you don't want to get a lot of money at all.

That's a lot of money. But what I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money, but what I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. But what I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. But what I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. But what I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money.

What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money.

What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money.

What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money.

What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money.

“What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money.”

What I want to tell you is that you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

“That you don't want to get a lot of money.”

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money.

That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money. That you don't want to get a lot of money.

I could probably tell you one. No, but you bring up a good point. Because here's this. All right. Okay.

And I mentioned sign felt last hour because it was. I'm intrigued. I love the idea that a stand-up comedian based on his comedy. Based on his comedy about nothing. Can become a billionaire and he's a true stand-up comic all the way to the end.

Even his TV show he was a stand-up comic. But he lives in New York, right? You buy a property. He buys a lot of porches. He's got a few of them.

But think about that. Or Jay Leno. Jay Leno's garage, which is a really cool follow by the way on. On YouTube. I don't know if it's still on CNBC, but it's on YouTube.

It's some really cool episodes. But you've invested in these properties. Land, real estate, or collectibles cars. Something like that. The valuation of them.

Like if Gary, if you own, if you decided, you know, you're a Mustang guy or a core of that guy, whatever. And you bought one. I mean, it was just your live stream to have one. Parting your garage.

You're only going to drive it every blue moon. You wanted to find this very unique, you know, almost one of a kind. Very rare.

“Well, the value for that is going to fluctuate, right?”

Same thing with a piece of right. You know, you can see these things. That go to auction. And, you know, it's like, oh my gosh, you know, millions of dollars at auction.

A penthouse apartment or home in New York City. A lot of people from China. The reverse to what we were talking about. Park their money in the US, a California and New York. Because they realize it's going to be stable.

They can park their money in that real estate. And leave it there. And then when they need to convert that to cash, they can do so fairly quickly. But if you're a taxpayer in the US, you're a billionaire. And you buy your personal property.

That means appraisals every year would be required. Every single year. Because the reason that they can't, you know, the Forbes list of billionaires and all this stuff. They can't nail it down.

And Jerry Simpel is a prime example. This is people came back and said, uh, It's not accurate. That didn't say one way or the other, whether it's too low or too high.

But the reason they can't is because you don't know what those assets that they own, what the valuation is on any of them. It fluctuates greatly. And by the way, that means it also could tank.

Artwork is a great example. There are collectibles in artwork. There are things in the art world. Uh, you just have to watch, uh, but is it the, uh, what's the, and takes road show on PBS?

To know, you'll see something was valued at something in 2005 is something. And then all of a sudden, boom, it plummeted. Because investors in things like that are fickle.

The point being is that you have to go through every single.

“Little thing, they own every item that they own.”

What about that Rolex watch? You've got there. All of that has to, again, where does it? Because if we're getting to the 5% standard, the Rolex watch is part of your wealth.

And you're going to have to get into, okay, you got to have a praisele on everything you own. This is so insane. This idea. But when you follow it through of how it would be enforced,

it becomes impossible. Well, and the other thing is, too, you're actually, since you're going after the billionaires, isn't it also a de facto corporate wealth tax? In essence, uh, if you're a billionaire and you own buildings.

Yeah.

You know, is that, you know, if you're a billionaire,

and that's part of it, are they going to be tax? Because the next thing would be, and I can see the Democrats wanting a corporate wealth tax, which my God would just destroy real estate.

“Oh, you think, you think about downtown areas right now.”

All across United States that are hurting. You know, the vacancy rate and everything else, less than they want, is the government to come in and lower the value of that. We all know that when the far left,

which is the left comes up with any type of tax idea, the thing would expand. Because, okay, this has been such a success for 10 years. Let's redo it again. Right.

Then the next thing is, okay, a corporate wealth tax. Yeah. Yeah.

Because here's what they're going to find out.

Yeah, I think the collective is, I don't know anywhere between six and 10 trillion with the billionaires. I don't know what the total wealth is. I don't think anybody knows accurately.

But if you took 100% of their wealth, right? Well, that's not going to be enough for a burning, right, for an Elizabeth Warren. And the idea would be to go after corporations eventually. And then eventually come after you.

This is all going to affect you. Us, we're going to pay for. Oh, yeah, we would pay for this. We are right, I radio. Brought to you by FPPF, fuel power max.

Owner operator Mike Nichols is least to Wayne transports, pulling in their dry bulk division today. After decades in business for himself. Speaking to Overdrive's Todd Dills recently, Nichols offered a word of advice to any company driver

planning to make the switch to running as an owner operator. Unless you've got access to family money. Or otherwise, independently wealthy, he noted.

“As a company driver, you need to be thinking about”

start-up capital and down payment. And I would just say that you need to treat that like you would firewood. Save what you think you might need and then triple it. If not quadruple it.

And you'll be thankful that you did. You'll be glad you did. That is not just given favorable loan terms with a good down payment. Inevitably with trucking, you'll get hit with a breakdown

and huge repair bill or another of those unforeseen events. You'll need that reserve cash to cover it and avoid taking on debt or going out of business. Here more from Overdrive's 20-24 trucker of the year contenders at OverdriveOnline.com/PIB.

Brought to you by Shell Rotella with advanced synthetic technology is designed to help keep your rig running with more mileage and less maintenance. Coming up more with Gary McNamara and Eric Harley. It's Red Eye Radio.

We are when I'm radio. He's our croning. I'm Gary McNamara. All right. My favorite headline of the day.

James Tallarico, who won in the primary against Jasmine Crockett. Yes, I know. My Congress person. Here's a headline.

James Tallarico wins the coveted endorsement of Better O'Rourke. Covered it. Covered it. Covered it.

Covered it. Just like my silver saw award. Covered it. Covered it. He used the word coveted.

Covered it. The Gateway Ponded headline. The Democrat of just one of the Senate primary in Texas and has a positively bizarre view of God and Christianity just when the prized endorsement of Better O'Rourke

who praised him during appearance on MSNow with Jen Socky. Wow, there's a crowd I want to hang out with. That's where my endorsement's coming from.

By the way, a lot of people are probably asking.

Better who? The Irish guy. The Irish guy from El Paso. [ Music ]

“You're listening to Red Eye Radio from the Relief Factor Studios.”

[ Music ] And he is currently in I'm Gary McNamara, Download our Red Eye Radio app today. Listen, when you choose. All right, so just reading here from Jonathan Turley.

I'd promise us earlier in the show. I want to make sure I get to it. Jonathan Turley wrote yesterday. In the end, the Cain Resolution succeeded in having the opposite effect of voting against limiting the prosecution of the war.

The Senate has now been consulting and voted against limits. Notably, the resolution was more feckless given the exception for imminent threats with the full combat operations on both sides. All threats are now imminent and all tax response attacks. Response, and that's a great point.

Yeah. Yeah, it's like, yeah. Well, the resolution.

“Unless we can't attack Iran and unless there's an imminent threat.”

There is. There is. [ Laughter ] We can go back 47 years if you need. Well, no, he's talking about it now.

I know what imminent it means, but it's the point is, in this case, what constitutes imminent threat is the existence. And pattern of behavior, right, of the regime. As we discussed before, but Turley's talking about how this resolution is ridiculous because the imminent threat.

Everybody agrees is there. And yet the Democrats are saying, you need an imminent threat. As if this would stop anything that was going on. Like they were about to fire a nuclear weapon tomorrow or something. And then he writes, so what is interesting is that even after the Senate was notified,

consulted and voted, Democrats are still calling the war illegal. The Senate just voted against limiting or blocking the use of force. So I mean, it's just, they just want to throw out illegal just to throw out. Just Trump's doing something illegal. Right, big enough.

It sounds good. Right. Well, this, I thought was was superb because there were a lot of discussion over the last 24 hours about the Jasmine Crockett. Talleriko thing, we know on MS now, we played the audio cut yesterday.

There now, since actually they were just getting over the fact that how great it would be to have an AOC Jasmine Crockett ticket for the Democrats for 28. Please, but please make that happen. That's, but that's the debate going on inside the Democrat party. You know, you and I, we, we pounded the, the last few months on Mark Kelly and Arizona.

Yeah.

First, it was the, the interview he was doing with some, I don't know, podcast or whatever.

We're, he agreed. Yes, we need to get rid of billionaires. It's like shut off. Yeah. But an idiot.

I'm sorry. That's an idiotic statement to make. And, and then we saw the state of the union address last week. Then his complete cluelessness. Yeah.

“About the legalities of the war power act and what was the other thing that he brought up?”

That was just, we drove a truck through yesterday on yesterday's show. Hang on here. Uh, one moment to see if I can, I can find it because it was just, it was just absolutely absurd. Um, but the point we're trying to make yesterday is just because you're a pilot fighter pilot. Just because you have military experience.

Uh, just because you're a space shuttle pilot does not mean that in the arena of ideas in Washington, D.C.

that you have any type of critical thinking skills at all.

Right. Look, we, we talked about speaking of senators from Arizona, but like John McCain.

He's the hero.

When it comes to his military service.

“John McCain went through unimaginable things.”

Yep. Now, after that, he became a senator. And you're in this again, debate on what is right in terms of legislation. Well, we're going to have concerns and there is no, it's, it's based on the issues. Disagreement is disagreement.

You can still be wrong and still be in the case of a John McCain. Still be a war hero. So it was, you know, and so many people had, of course, the left would take John McCain. He's a maverick. He's a maverick.

He's a maverick. He's a maverick. He's a maverick. He's a maverick.

But Mark Kelly is as bitter.

You can see it now.

“And he endorses, he was, and the point is, the Democrats now are in this debate right now.”

You know, if we run somebody like Mark Kelly, he's an astronaut, a pilot, a military person. Right. We can portray him as a moderate. Right. He's as radical as any Democrat out there.

All American hero. Right. Exactly. And then, but you get down to the issues. He's as radical as anyone out there.

Yeah. On the Democrat side. Right. This was written a national review. Tell a Rico and theory in practice.

Democrats have, however, or here it is. The Democrat Senator, the Democrat nominee for Senator from Texas wants to win conservative and moderate voters. But without giving them any ground on policy, exactly what we said earlier in the show. Yeah.

At the Washington Post, I argue that's a well-tried and dead end. Democrats have, however, often come to grief by supposing that a candidate with traits associated with conservatism doesn't need to moderate on the issues. Whenever the party nominates military veterans, strategists suggest that their service will insulate them from charges of progressive extremism.

Often it doesn't, John Kerry, a decorated Vietnam veteran and Democrats losing presidential nominee in 2004's one example. Amy McGrath, a fighter pilot who took on Republican Senator Mitch McConnell in Kentucky in 2020, is another.

Her biography helped her raise more than 90 million from Democrats nationwide.

But she lost by nearly 20 points. It was partly for similar demographic reasons. The Kamala Harris shows Minnesota Governor Tim Walls as her runny mate for 2024. She thought he had a special appeal to rural white voters. It did not show in the results.

And that's the point that we've been bringing up with the whole Tallarico thing. Is that it's the Democrats and practice identity politics. Just to make sure, when we make these things, we're talking about how they think, not how we think. Right. And we know that when the whole thing happened with co-bear, just interviewing Tallarico

and refusing to have on Jasmine Crockett, immediately Democrats start screaming, here we go again. It's the Democrat media and the Democrat establishment wanting a, what was the term I saw in Twitter is a powdery, not just a white man, a powdery. What's a, I don't know, I don't know.

“What's the difference between a white man and a powdery white man?”

Am I a white man or a powdery white man? Do I have to have my life, my little compact with the little thing and, you know, I don't know that you have my face. But how do you just have to look like you have a bunch on your face? Kind of like Joe Biden.

But we know because they practice identity politics, which is a judge people by groups and not individuals, they segment every single, every single group. And they go, okay, we can fool independents who trend conservative by putting somebody in the military. That was the whole basis, for example, of of Mark Kelly.

Mark Kelly is his radical. He, you know, you look at it when Trump says they're crazy. Well, they're crazy. They use that. When Trump used that term, as we said, we don't like to use labels all the time,

but when the labels absolutely are accurate as to where you stand on the issues, that's where it hits home. When you call Trump Hitler, people, the average person looks and goes,

Yeah, but he hasn't. You know, but that's the thing, building the fear that the potential is that is his goal. That's his intent.

That's his mission statement that he's going to kill six million people.

Yeah, I'm sure you're going to hear that. Talariko is crazy. He believes are six genders. Exactly. You know what I mean, it's he came out the other day.

He believes the Bible endorses abortion. You know, what's next, those are going to because they are views that are completely and totally outside of the mainstream. And you and I, the part of the proof is when you take Trump's name out of it, the vast majority of things that Trump agrees with,

Democrats do. It's when you attach his name to it. Right. Right. Motor ID.

Right. Motor ID. Well, we go to the Iran deal. Remember the poll on the Iran deal. Should the president leave that to Congress?

Yes. Do you agree that Trump should turn this over to Congress? No. On the Iran deal. It was the opposite.

Well, Trump was saying if if Congress wanted to do an Iran deal, that's one thing. But the president can do it. Okay. Okay.

And so they were saying and in the polls before you mentioned Trump's name, should the president alone do that or should it be left up to Congress? Yeah. And Trump was saying it should be left up to Congress. But once you brought his name into it,

oh, no, no, anything he touches basically becomes spoiled when you

bring his name into it to many people. But when you so when you look at it, this is obvious. What is happening? But then again, there is a great debate.

So yesterday a story out there. The far left wants AOC for president. Right. And that's what they're fighting. Now in Texas, Texas is different than Illinois.

Right. And so they're like, okay, what we need to do is on the national level, we need like for president, we need radicals, but in places in more red states, we need to pretend that these people,

because that's the whole point. You know, that was the whole point with Tallarico, is he's a minister's son. He was a seminarian student. He's a Christian.

No, he's not. Right.

He's a BSer as what he is.

Yes. And we know it. He's as radical as anybody in the Democratic Party, but he wears a nice suit. And his hair is cut to the point where Democrats believe,

that independents who lean conservatives will vote for the Christian guy in a nice suit. Yeah. Young smile and nice hair. Right.

“That's how they think because they're the ones of practice,”

the identity politics of today, and have been doing it, and they're trying to make identity politics work in their favor in some cases. Not at all case.

Well, the whole conversation on MSNow about AOC and Jasmine Crocker being the dream ticket. That's based in identity politics. You know, this is where, and the problem they're having is again,

the rank and file, looking at what's working, what is it? I think the rank and file looks like it goes, who was it?

Oh, was it Eouger? Jank Eouger that was saying, look, you know, I'm some of these things. Yeah. Our side is crazy.

But I think what he was trying to say is, look, promote the ideas, leave out the Gugly eyes. You know, don't post a video.

Don't post a video. I don't do the other thing. I didn't do that one. That may be part of the advice. I'm not sure.

“You should talk to your doctor about this.”

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

“You should talk to your doctor about that.”

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that.

“You should talk to your doctor about that.”

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

“You should talk to your doctor about that.”

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that.

“You should talk to your doctor about that.”

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.

You should talk to your doctor about that. You should talk to your doctor about that.