👮 Behind the Badge: When Valid Police Concerns Meet MAGA Messaging in Tucson Media | WAKE UP LIVE

How a serious officer assault became fodder for political attacks instead of public safety solutions

This is based on Wake Up Live with Chris DeSimone, a MAGA-conservative podcast in Southern Arizona, which was broadcast by Live The Dream Media on 5/9/25.

---

---

😽 Keepin’ It Simple Summary for Younger Readers
👧🏾✊🏾👦🏾

🎙️ A podcast called **Wake Up Live** talked about problems in Tucson 🌆. They discussed a police officer who got hurt 🚔💔, which is very serious, but they blamed the mayor instead of thinking about how to prevent it from happening again ❌. A restaurant owner named Grant 🍽️ explained how rules about parking lots 🚗 make it hard to build nice walkable areas with shops 🏬 and apartments 🏢 together. He also talked about how restaurants are changing because of technology 💻, with computers taking orders instead of people 🧑‍🍳. Some speakers suggested putting homeless people 🏕️ in tent camps, which isn't a very kind or helpful solution 😔. The podcast showed how people can see the same city problems very differently 🤔, depending on what they believe is important.

---

🗝️ Takeaways

• 🚔 Police Safety & Political Weaponization: While a TPD officer's assault deserves serious attention, the incident was used primarily to attack Mayor Romero rather than discuss comprehensive public safety solutions.

• 🏢 Outdated Zoning Hampers Development: Grant Krueger provided substantive insights about how Tucson's antiquated parking requirements prevent the creation of walkable, mixed-use environments that could revitalize areas like Broadway.

• 💰 Restaurant Economics Under Pressure: The full-service restaurant model faces challenges as server wages have increased from $2.13/hour to $12/hour, forcing larger server sections and reduced service quality despite servers earning more overall.

• 🤖 AI Coming to Your Drive-Through: Fast food chains are already recording customer interactions to train AI systems that will soon replace human order-takers, raising questions about service industry job futures.

• 🏕️ Dehumanizing Homeless "Solutions": Rather than evidence-based approaches to homelessness, guests proposed "tent cities" run "like jails" where people would be "scooped up" - revealing a disturbing lack of compassion.

• 🥚 Egg Regulations & Corporate Influence: Krueger's lawsuit against Arizona highlights how administrative agencies can implement regulations that benefit large corporations (like major egg producers) after similar legislation fails.

• 🏛️ Historic Preservation Debate: The tension between preservation and development was evident in complaints about Tucson's 50-year historical designation rule, which critics claim protects "dog crap houses" while limiting growth.

---

Behind the Mouthpiece: DeSimone's Latest Episode Exposes Tucson's Contrasting Realities

A critical analysis of Wake Up Live conversations that reveals the stark divide between conservative talking points and the genuine struggle for a more just Tucson

In the latest episode of Wake Up Live with Chris DeSimone, listeners were treated to a revealing glimpse into how Tucson's conservative voices frame our city's most pressing challenges. As I sat listening to the May 9th episode, I found myself alternating between taking notes on genuinely interesting business insights and cringing at the troubling rhetoric that exemplifies how MAGA-adjacent perspectives distort our understanding of urban issues. From police incidents to restaurant economics to snide remarks about a new city council member, the conversations paint a vivid picture of the ideological battlefield that is modern Tucson politics.

Cast of Characters: The Power Players of the Episode

The podcast featured several notable Tucson figures:

• Raina from Shish Kebab House discussing Mother's Day preparations and her restaurant's special offerings

• Grant Krueger, celebrating his birthday, sharing deep insights into restaurant industry economics as the owner of Union Hospitality Group (Union Public House, Reforma, and Proof)

• Shaun McClusky providing additional commentary and occasional one-liners

• Malta Joe making brief appearances from what they called the "Malta Dome"

Police Violence in Tucson: A Rare Moment of Valid Concern Wrapped in Problematic Framing

DeSimone spent considerable time discussing a genuinely troubling incident where a Tucson police officer was severely beaten during an encounter with a man named Richard Renee Lopez at a QT convenience store.

"This is the face of Tucson government right now. Is this police officer," DeSimone declared while showing a photo of the injured officer. "You guys and girls need to drill this in your head."

The officer sustained serious facial injuries, including a broken cheekbone requiring stitches, and may have ongoing vision problems. Two witnesses stepped in to assist the injured officer during what TPD described as a "dangerous and potentially life-threatening situation."

While any violence against public servants is concerning, notice how quickly this incident becomes weaponized against city leadership rather than prompting a discussion about mental health resources, substance abuse treatment, or community-based solutions.

DeSimone read Mayor Regina Romero's statement acknowledging the need to "address the fentanyl opioid public health crisis we are living through," only to dismiss it entirely:

"She's such a loser. She has such a stone heart to her own people," DeSimone said. "We're talking about the regional fentanyl opioid problem. The hell out of here."

Shaun McClusky added: "This really upsets me. The fact that she won't protect our police officer. She doesn't protect her city at all."

What's conveniently missing here is any acknowledgment that addressing root causes IS protecting officers. Treating addiction and mental health crises reduces these dangerous encounters in the first place.

The New Council Member: Character Assassination by Dating App

In what might be the most juvenile segment of the episode, DeSimone and McClusky spent considerable time mocking newly appointed City Council member Roque Perez because he once worked as a "campus engagement consultant for Tinder."

"The Tinder engagement specialist got rid of all of his Twitter posts," DeSimone announced with evident glee, followed by a literal "chef's kiss" sound effect.

McClusky added: "The campus hookup king is now our city council member. Way to go Ward Five."

Imagine reducing someone's entire professional qualifications to having once worked for a dating app. The implication that this somehow makes Perez morally questionable or unfit for office speaks volumes about how these commentators view both young professionals and sexuality in general.

What's particularly telling is that rather than discussing Perez's actual qualifications, policy positions, or vision for Tucson, they reduced him to childish jokes and innuendo. This substance-free character assassination is exactly the kind of discourse that drives many thoughtful people away from local politics.

Grant Krueger: The Economics of Eating Out in 2025

The most substantive portion of the conversation came from Grant Krueger, whose birthday coincided with Billy Joel's. Krueger provided genuinely fascinating insights into the economics of running restaurants in Tucson and the challenges facing the industry.

On outdated zoning codes that require massive parking lots:

"Our parking codes go back decades at this point," Krueger explained, "from a formula created by a group called the ITE, literally like in the seventies and early eighties...A restaurant needed to have one parking space for every 100 square feet. A bar has to have one parking space for every 50 square feet."

The result? "We end up in this situation where the parking lot needs to be three or four times the size of the actual business, particularly with respect to hospitality businesses like what I do," he continued. "If you've got a 5000 square foot bar, you might need to have 20 or 25,000 square feet of lots to have that."

"Our parking codes create the very kind of businesses we don't want to have—monolithic structures surrounded by a sea of blacktop next to another sea of blacktop with this monolithic structure. Right. We want this like a downtown urban environment, you know, storefront after storefront after storefront. That's walkable. And yet our own codes prevent that from happening."

Here's where progressives and business owners can find rare common ground. Walkable, mixed-use development reduces car dependency, builds community, and creates more vibrant places. It's a win-win that transcends traditional partisan divides.

Krueger noted that Scottsdale and Phoenix have embraced mixed-use development—"seven-story buildings with storefronts on the bottom, offices from floors two to four and market-rent apartments from floors five to seven"—a model that could revitalize areas like Broadway in Tucson.

When McClusky suggested, "Along Broadway, that would be splendid. You got all the restaurants there...everything else is dead. Why not demo it, build business on the bottom, and housing on top?"

Yes! This is actually a solid urban planning principle that would create more housing AND more walkable neighborhoods.

Server Economics: A Revealing Deep Dive

Krueger also described the economic challenges facing full-service restaurants in a surprisingly detailed segment:

"The entirety of the problem could literally be fixed by the server wage," Krueger argued. He explained that server wages have increased dramatically from $2.13/hour twenty years ago to $12/hour today in Tucson, plus tips:

"Servers are getting 12 dollars an hour. Yes sir. Wow. 12 dollars an hour plus tips, mind you. And the tips could be 20, 30, or 40 dollars an hour on top of that."

According to Krueger, this has forced restaurants to give servers larger sections (6-10 tables instead of 4-5), resulting in a decreased quality of service despite servers making more money. He claimed that while food prices have roughly doubled in 20 years, server wages have increased six-fold, creating what he sees as an unsustainable model.

"We've had to cut somewhere, and so you just end up with servers who have a much bigger section, but then this exacerbates the problem because now the server with a six, eight, or 10 table set...is actually grossing more money."

While I appreciate Krueger's candor, there's a contradiction in complaining about servers making too much while acknowledging service quality has declined. Perhaps the answer isn't to roll back wages but to hire more staff? Also missing is any recognition that $12/hour plus variable tips is hardly excessive compensation in our current economy.

The Future of Dining: Less Human, More Tech

Krueger offered a glimpse into how technology is reshaping restaurants, from QR code menus to automated ordering:

"Most of the chains have been recording their drive-through transactions for the last couple of years, saving that data. You didn't know you're being recorded when you were ordering, but you are," he revealed. "The purpose is to teach the AI model what the responses are."

He predicted that AI drive-through ordering will be commonplace "in the next couple of years" and described how restaurant apps are creating a more personalized yet less human experience:

"When you pull in the driveway of insert your favorite fast food restaurant over here, when you pull in the driveway, they're going to know you're coming. And because you've been using the app...they'll know your order history. So it was going to start to suggestively pop up. It's like, 'Chris, the last three times you've come, you've ordered the two Apple pies. Do you want to add that to your order again?'"

The march toward automation is presented as inevitable and even desirable, but what happens to all those service jobs? This technological shift has profound implications for workers that went completely unaddressed.

The Historical Preservation Debate: Character vs. Development

In one telling exchange, Krueger and McClusky criticized Tucson's historical preservation ordinances:

"I'm 49 today," Krueger mentioned, prompting McClusky to quip, "Next year in the city of Tucson, you are historic. It's a 50-year rule. Nothing 50 years old is historic."

McClusky continued: "If you go back to Chicago, you go back to Boston, you go back to New York, you go somewhere back there, you've got a 200-year-old building. We have 50-year-old buildings that are getting a tax break in Jefferson Park and their dog crap houses."

This dismissive attitude toward historical preservation ignores how these policies help maintain neighborhood character and prevent gentrification that displaces long-term residents. Not every issue should be viewed solely through the lens of maximum development potential. Sometimes "dog crap houses" are actually affordable homes for working families.

What Was Missing: Humane Solutions for Tucson's Challenges

What struck me most about the conversation was what wasn't discussed: genuine solutions to Tucson's most pressing challenges. When talking about homelessness, rather than thoughtful approaches to housing and mental health services, McClusky suggested:

"Why don't we do this humanely? We have 100 degrees coming up on Sunday. Why don't we go back our pyro style. We don't have to do the pink underwear and that kind of thing. But let's do a homeless Tent City and have it run by the county and run it like the jail. Just scoop them all up and take them there."

He continued: "You can't say it's inhumane because you got air conditioning. Yes. It might be 115 outside. You nailed it. And it might only be 90 degrees inside your tent but nobody's dying."

DeSimone agreed: "Some city has to be the first one to jump out there and do exactly what you're saying. Okay. Tent city outside breaks them out of their habits and their free bus people to get back to their dealers and their fellow criminals."

I'm sorry, but forcibly confining people experiencing homelessness to a tent city run "like a jail" is the opposite of humane. This dehumanizing rhetoric treats vulnerable community members as problems to be "scooped up" rather than people deserving of dignity and support. And the casual assumption that all unhoused people are criminals or addicts reveals a profound ignorance about who actually experiences homelessness in our community.

The Case of the Eggs: Government Overreach or Corporate Favoritism?

In one of the more intriguing segments, Krueger described his ongoing legal battle with the state over egg regulations:

"We've been suing the state of Arizona and the Arizona Department of Agriculture over an improper way that they created a law," he explained. "Laws are generally made by our legislative branch of the government...In 2020, our legislative branch tried to create a law based on a lobby...about animal husbandry and the size of cages that chickens could be in."

According to Krueger, this proposed law would have favored the state's two largest egg producers, "the Hickman egg ranch and Rose acre farms," but it died in the Senate. However, "months later, the Arizona Department of Agriculture made a rule that had the exact same verbiage as this attempted law."

Krueger said the resulting regulation has driven up egg prices dramatically: "We went from about $28 a case, which was a $15 dozen half case...to about $75 a case right now. So we're looking at nearly three times, not quite yet, nearly a three-time markup."

While this is framed as a story about government overreach, it's equally a story about how corporate interests manipulate regulations. Krueger is right to challenge an administrative agency seemingly doing an end-run around the legislative process, but the original proposed law itself appears to have been written to benefit the largest producers at the expense of smaller operators and consumers.

Reflections: The Tucson We Need vs. The Tucson They Want

This episode of Wake Up Live provides a window into how MAGA-aligned voices view Tucson's challenges through a particular lens. While occasionally landing on valid concerns (police safety, zoning restrictions), their analysis consistently lacks nuance and humanity.

The stark contrast between the thoughtful discussion of restaurant economics and the dehumanizing rhetoric about homelessness perfectly illustrates the challenge we face in Tucson today. We need nuanced, compassionate approaches to complex issues, not simplistic narratives that demonize public officials and vulnerable populations alike.

The Tucson we need is one where:

• Public safety includes both protecting officers AND addressing root causes of crime and homelessness

• Development balances growth with preservation of community character and affordability

• Business interests and worker welfare are both considered essential

• Policy discussions focus on evidence-based solutions rather than partisan attacks

As I listened to DeSimone and company discuss our city, I couldn't help but feel the disconnect between their Tucson and the one I see every day—a vibrant, diverse community working to address very real challenges with creativity and compassion. Their Tucson seems populated primarily by incompetent officials, dangerous "crackheads," and business owners hamstrung by regulations. The real Tucson is so much more complex and hopeful than that narrow vision allows.

Moving Forward: Be Part of the Solution

Despite the challenges facing our community and the divisive rhetoric that often dominates our discourse, I remain hopeful that Tucsonans can come together around shared values of compassion, innovation, and justice to build a city that works for everyone—not just those with power and privilege.

Your voice matters in this conversation. By supporting independent media like Three Sonorans on Substack, you help ensure that alternative perspectives on local issues continue to be heard. Our subscriber-supported model allows us to provide the in-depth analysis and progressive commentary that mainstream outlets often miss.

For just the price of a coffee each month, you can help sustain critical reporting that challenges the dominant narratives and centers the voices of all Tucsonans. Visit ThreeSonorans.substack.com to subscribe today.

What are your thoughts?

1. Have you noticed increased policing of homelessness in Tucson? What alternative approaches might be more effective?

2. Do you think Tucson's historical preservation ordinances help or hurt neighborhood development?

3. How has the changing restaurant landscape affected your dining experiences?

Share your perspectives in the comments below—your insights enrich our community conversation and help us all better understand the complex challenges facing our beloved desert city.

---

Quotes:

---

Have a scoop or a story you want us to follow up on? Send us a message!

---

---