2 POGs Save the World Podcast
Two Army veterans—one left, one right—unite for the ultimate mission: tackling real-world problems with common sense, logic, and a healthy dose of military humor. 2 POGs Save the World isn’t your typical political podcast. Hosts Kj Bradley & Lance O'Neil bring unfiltered discussions, sharp debates, and tactical solutions to the chaos of modern society.
From politics and national security to sports and pop culture, no topic is off-limits. With battle-tested insights and zero tolerance for BS, these two POGs (Personnel Other than Grunts) prove that you don’t have to agree on everything to find real solutions.
Join the fight every Sunday at 8:30 PM EST, where the only thing sharper than the takes is the wit. Mission: Common Sense. Execution: Hilarious. Victory: Inevitable
🎙️ Listen. Debate. Disagree. Laugh. Take Notes.
2 POGs Save the World Podcast
When Tech Takes a Break: The Show Must Go On
Sometimes, the best conversations are the ones you didn’t plan.
In this special Mother’s Day episode of 2 POGs Save the World, K.J. and Lance roll with the flow after a last-minute technical glitch prevents our featured guest from joining. But the show must go on—and it does. From reflections on futurism, farming, and family, to the unpredictable nature of live podcasting, this episode is a raw and real reminder that adaptability is the name of the game.
Tune in for sharp takes, a few laughs, and some unexpected insight on what it means to pivot with purpose.
What do you want to do tonight?
Speaker 2:The same thing we do every night. Pinky, Try to take over the world. Alright, yo, let's get into it. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 1:Try to take over the world.
Speaker 2:The hands of the greatest chaplain in the world, mr Lance O'Neill. Try to take over the world. And the greatest chaplain in the world, mr Lance O'Neal, what's up? What's up? What's up everybody. It's your boy, kj, and the greatest chaplain in the world, mr Lance O'Neal, and we are back for this very special, very, very special in the world, mr Lance O'Neill, and we are back for this very special, very, very special Mother's Day edition of Two Pogues. Thanks for joining us. What's up, chappy? How you doing, how was your Mother's Day?
Speaker 3:Pretty good. It's funny, my wife doesn't cook very often, but she actually cooked tonight. Afterwards I was kind of laughing like the one. The one Sunday I don't cook Mother's Day, but that's why I look at it. Mother's Day is every day. It should just be one day saying how much you love your mother. But you know, I should probably call my mom after this.
Speaker 2:Yeah you should definitely call it before midnight. All right, for those of you guys who have been following along. We were expecting to have futurist Jesse Hurst on board with us. He's running a little bit late, having some technical difficulties over there in the great up north, so hopefully he'll be able to jump on the pod a little bit later, but in the meantime we got more than enough political chaos to talk about in our own little space of the world.
Speaker 2:Chaffee, let's say we jump into it. My brother, let's get hot and heavy. I got two words for you. I got two words for you. Abias Corbin, let's go. You already knew, you know, you know it was coming, you know we had to talk about it All right. So you know, you know I've been ready to call this administration the F word. I think they are definitely 2025 version of a fascist regime. You got Stephen Miller out there running point and the dude is literally step by step with the playbook. They got the people in place. I think we just added what? Janine Pirio for her head attorney in DC. Are you ready yet? Are you ready yet? Oh, we still are we still wait.
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 3:Judge Perino, are we talking about an actual judge who has been a practicing lawyer and a practicing judge on the bench? That is a very at least. That is a very at least she's qualified.
Speaker 2:You can't, she's not qualified he is absolutely qualified, but that is a very low standard for and I will give you that, given the we can get into, the nomination of which makes absolutely no sense. But let's go. Let's start with habeas corpus first. Let let's talk about it. What do you?
Speaker 3:think. Well, first, if you don't know what habeas corpus is, it's basically that anybody who is arrested or for whatever necessary reason has the right to demand habeas corpus, which is to be physically present in front of a judge. Okay, so one of the big issues right now is people getting deported and claiming well, now they want habeas corpus, they want to be in front of the judge before they are sent out of the country. And so then the question becomes well, is habeas corpus protected constitutionally? The answer is mostly because the legislature can, in fact, suspend habeas corpus under the Constitution. It has been suspended as well previously.
Speaker 3:Now it's been a while. I know Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus during during the Civil War so a little while ago, 60 years ago but he was using it under the War Powers Act, which is actually very similar to what Trump is kind of doing. He's saying look, this is an assault on American sovereignty and the people that are here are illegal, are not only here illegal, but they are a real and present danger to citizens of the United States whether they be gangbangers, whether they be murderers, rapists, but then they're extending it all the way down to.
Speaker 3:Well, you are. It's tough, because all the way down to are you supporting Palestine, which is essentially the equivalent to supporting Hamas which is a, the equivalent to supporting Hamas.
Speaker 3:It is a terrorist organization. So it's a nuance for sure. It is a nuance for sure. I understand. I'm trying to argue it from the administrative side. I got you and this is why, yeah, you and I have talked about this. As far as the law, we like to think the law is black and white and this is what the law says and this is how it is. But if that was true, we wouldn't have lawyers. So if the legislature would just do a better job of saying this is what the law is and write it constitutionally to begin with, we wouldn't have these issues as habeas corpus goes.
Speaker 3:I will tell you firsthand my experience with habeas corpus was being a guard in Guantanamo from 02 to 03. So I was down there for about eight months, nine months. I'd like to consider myself that I was one of the good guards, meaning I just they were a guard. You know they were detainees. I was a guard. I didn't go out of my way to harass them or do anything to them to make them make their lives any worse than it was. I was like, hey, they're still human beings as much, even though they're the most dangerous people in the world, which I think was definitely exaggeration for many of them, considering how many were released afterwards. But one of the guys who was down there was funding for Al-Qaeda. He was a middleman and so he was basically money laundering and providing funds.
Speaker 3:And so he the whole time oh no, I'm not, I wasn't that, I'm here by mistake. I was just caught up. Oh no, no, no, and he was kind of banking and I had a conversation with this guy. He had good English, I'm here by mistake. I was just caught up. Oh no, no, no, and he was kind of banking and I had a conversation with this guy. I had good English and I had a conversation with him. No-transcript. Guantanamo Bay is not technically the United States. And suddenly he started saying well, what can I tell you guys to help my case?
Speaker 3:And I said tell us what you know, and suddenly he started singing like a little songbird, right? So yeah, so the part of it for me is tough, because I get both sides. You'll have people you included, I believe who say if you are here illegally and even if you're a gang member, you have to have the right of cavious corpus, you have to be in front of a judge and all that. My problem is for a lot of these detainees I'm sorry, not detainees a lot of these people that are in the country illegally. It's already gone through the judge. The judge has already written orders that say you're out. Then ICE comes in and grabs them. Well, now, if they've already had their trial or their hearing, I should say and the judge has already signed off on the deportation order, but they didn't appear do they still have the right to habeas corpus? I think that's one of the nuances of this.
Speaker 2:In that case, that's cut and dry. You had an opportunity to see the judge. You chose not to take that opportunity. Then, in my opinion, you got to go. Where I have an issue with is where we're literally snatching and grabbing people off of the street, sending them to Venezuela and then being like, hey, my bad, this administration is getting extremely loose with regulations. Right, they are. They have found the magic loophole in the government where it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission. Call it what you want, but snatching kids off the street for protesting Hamas college kids protest, right, that's what they do. They protest. You snatch kids off the street, you throw them in cages and deport excuse me, deportation centers right. And then you hold them and say, oh, you don't have any rights because you were supporting a terrorist group, because they wrote an opinion piece. That's sketch right. Because now you're stretching the terrorist group because they wrote an opinion piece. That's sketch right. Because now you're stretching the very limits of the Constitution, right Is it?
Speaker 3:But is it Absolutely Okay? So let's go. Let's look at that a little bit differently. Sure, anybody who's in this, let's say foreign national students Sure, let's go with them by themselves. Yeah, a foreign national student has to's go with them by themselves. A foreign national student has to have a green card I'm sorry, a visa. A student needs it to be in this country. If, at any point, the federal government who issues the green card says we don't want you here anymore, it can be literally for any reason. It can be we have too many kids here.
Speaker 3:We don't like the look of you.
Speaker 1:We don't like that.
Speaker 3:You didn't pay your rent on time. We didn't like how you're walking down the street. You pissed off the wrong crossing guard right. The federal government has a right to revoke the visa and there's no habeas corpus there. It's you have no visa.
Speaker 2:No, no no, that was it.
Speaker 3:Right Now you need to GTFO, you need to get the family out, right, okay. So that's a little bit different issue. I pretty much have little problem on those. When you're out protesting because again I support Israel and I look at all this stuff that's going on in Palestine protesting because again, I support Israel and I I look at all this stuff that's going on in Palestine and I've said, look, you didn't want this stuff going, you shouldn't have gone in and done October 17th or October 7th. You go in and kick a guy in the shin and say F you and he catches you and puts you on the ground and starts beating the living crap out of you. Well, you probably shouldn't kick the guy in the shins.
Speaker 2:Oh yeah, but you can't exterminate an entire race of people for that, though. That's what we started to get to. That's what we started to get the questionable, questionable actions Right, like I mean Israel if we were, if we were to take the names off of this aggression Right, let's say, we removed Israel and Palestine and we just had country and country B Right. There is no international court that would not rule, rule this as intended, intended eradication of a of a population, and that is absolutely a war crime.
Speaker 3:So here's why I disagree. Now, I don't know what the numbers exactly are right now, but when you're looking at the percentage of Israeli citizens that died on that day, I believe it was close to 1% of the population, from the terrorists and the hostages. And all that Wait, no way.
Speaker 2:That was not a mass kill, sorry, 0.1%.
Speaker 3:I was going to say, yeah, no way, that was not a mess.
Speaker 2:Sorry, 0.1%. I'm going to say, yeah, 1%.
Speaker 3:Yeah. So I look at it like this and I say, okay, so if you're going to do that, and I'd be curious what the actual percentage in. Palestine is. Palestine is Because the other part of it is when the terrorists, when October 7th happened, it was targeting civilians, purposefully targeting civilians, families, old people, young people. It's as bad as anything you can possibly see OK, including babies getting stomped on and laughed at by these, these terrorists.
Speaker 2:Let's be fair. Let's, let's be fair. The Israeli army has had more than their fair share of the same. So there are there, have there have we, not we? We cannot say I for not to for two. Then they'd be like oh well, they're bad because they were kicking babies, like the Israeli, but I do the Israeli army is known.
Speaker 2:Well, I mean, hold on before you go, because the Israeli Israeli army is known for playing bully ball and blending and blurring the lines. That's why the US uses them as a hit job. So we know, we know whenever you call in the Israelis, you're going to get dirty, they're going to cut off the body cameras, they're going to cut off the body cameras and then they're going to throw a pistol under you and they're going to tell you stop resisting while they beat the shit out of you. That's just how the? Israelis get down.
Speaker 3:But go ahead. So do you dispute thatrael drops pamphlets and warns civilians to get out of certain areas, which is well documented? Sure they do?
Speaker 2:okay, and then? But two things can be true, two things can be absolutely they can, they can absolutely, they can absolutely. You know, because they, they do the pr thing, they, they do the pr thing. Hey, we're dropping leases. Of course, we gave them fair warning, we gave them fair warning, we gave them fair warning. But there's no way in the hell you're going to tell me. There's no way in the hell you're going to tell me a four-year-old or a three-year-old or two-year-old baby, still wearing diapers, getting shot in the head, is an enemy combatant because we dropped pamphlets. Well, we dropped pamphlets a week ago.
Speaker 3:Hold on. First of all, I agree that that's any time. That that is a situation is horrible. I will also say this, though A lot of those videos that came out from Hamas were able to be shown that Israel was like these people getting shot, getting snipered. We didn't even have troops there. That was on the southern border, and it was us, and it was Hamas shooting their own people.
Speaker 2:Wait a minute. There's been, yeah, there's been propaganda, right, but propaganda on both sides. The same way. Israel has been like oh see, they killed that. You know they did it. But what I'm saying is you've had more than your fair share, like when the Israelis destroyed that aid, that aid convoy on camera, when they clearly had their sirens flashed, and what did they do? They went on, they went on and they ran the PR and said, oh, we didn't know who they were, but then the video from the people inside the convoy clearly shown that they were properly identified. So I mean, at a certain point, right, your reputation precedes you and we know that.
Speaker 2:The Israeli army, we know how to get down. That's why we use Right. I've worked beside them, I've trained them, I know how to get down. They will look at the rules and be like yeah, ok, ok, if we don't get caught, we don't get caught. If we get caught, we say I'm sorry, hey, man, listen, I'm going to give you the rules and you do what you want to do from there. And that's how they play. Even in training, even in training, they were roughing dudes up.
Speaker 3:And it was a. It was a training event, so I can only imagine what they're like with no cameras around and the hinges off and the handcuffs off, so to speak. So, yeah, ok, kj, so let's make this personal. Let's make this personal. Then, sure, you are out on the street and five or six guys come up walking up around you and they start harassing you and they start throwing stuff at you and kicking you and you're just kind of doing everything you can and they're hitting you and smacking you and then finally you snap and you beat the crap out of all six of them. Right, you just turn around and beat the living crap. You take the first one, drop him with an you jack reacher these guys, yeah, you pull the jack reacher, sure then.
Speaker 3:And then you're walking down the street a couple years later and the same guys, plus a couple more, they come up and they do the same thing and you snap again. The whole time you beat the living crap out of them. Now fast forward a month or two later, maybe a couple more years later, right Now this time, they come in and they grab one of your kids and they stab your mom. What are you going to do? There's a point where Israel there's only so many, and the whole time you've been going, hey, you know what? I know these guys. I've been watching these guys. When I can, you know, I make sure to take their guns away. If I can get a single without being, I break in their house and maybe steal their guns, whatever. But these guys keep antagonizing and that's the history of Israel, and I can. I know I already know certain people are going to be like oh, that's really simplified. Yeah, it is. It's very simplified because we're talking about a 70 year history.
Speaker 3:I just look at it as there's a point where you have these Israel doesn't mess around because they can't mess around. When they start messing around, they will be wiped out. They will not be on this earth anymore.
Speaker 2:I've heard that since the inception of Israel and they have not been wiped out yet. But you know what they have done. You're right, they wiped out a shit ton of Palestinians to the point to their damn near extinct. That is that. That is where we have the blurring of lines, right, we and I you know call me a pessimist, but I've seen this playbook. It's the oh, we got to get to them before they get to us, though, right, and every time we see that in history it turns out the person that's throwing their hands up. It's like wrestling, right, it's always. In wrestling, it's always the heel who cries to the referee. They're picking on me, they're picking on me, and as soon as the referee turns their back, they're kicking the damn guy in the groin, or something like that. So I just, I hear you Absolutely. I'm not saying, hey, ali, how you doing? Oh man, what's up, girl, how you doing? No, we, I don't dispute at all that they have a right to defend themselves.
Speaker 3:But what? Let me ask you a question yeah, go ahead. How many people now? Now, I can only go by the estimates here given by Gaza's health ministry, and my guess is Gaza's health ministry is higher than. They're probably inflating the real number, right, ok, but You're talking about wiping out, okay. So how many palestinians have been killed since, since the uh october 7th massacre?
Speaker 2:oh, so I don't know, somewhere between 60 and 100 k somewhere. I'll give it a 40,000.
Speaker 3:As of May 12th 2025. I don't know how they do that since today's May 11th, but I'm going by, you know, Google. So, maybe their numbers are off, but it says that Gaza's health ministry has reported 45,000. Okay, okay, so how many people were in Palestine in 2023?
Speaker 2:I don't know what, maybe a mil, half a mil 5.5 mil.
Speaker 3:Okay. So if you're going from 5.5 mil and 50,000 dead, let's see 5 million, 500,000, 5 million, 500,000, 50,000. You're talking about again. Let's see 500,000 is 10%, 50,000 is 1%. 1% versus less than 1%. That's a lot of Palestinians still left around. It's not justifying, it's not for now but I got to hold tight, though.
Speaker 2:Here's the thing right, we say Taliban is a terrorist organization because they vowed to wipe Israel off the map. Right, and then we say as Balo, are you talking?
Speaker 3:about Taliban or?
Speaker 2:Hamas, well, taliban, for for different reasons. I'm saying, when you, when you categorize a terrorist organization, one of the main themes of that terroristic organization is their intent to wipe another population off the map, to make them extinct, right. So when you hear the prime minister of Israel say that he won't stop until every Palestinian is dead, that's a problem on an international scale, because if anybody else says it, it is a cold red terrorist organization. But because we have to support Israel, because Israel must be defended and all that, so we turn a blind eye to it. And I understand the politics of the game, right, israel knows where all our bodies are buried, mainly because they're the ones doing the burying. So I understand why. But at the same time, we'd be remiss to sit back and say, oh well, israel has a right to defend itself. Ok, so will. Israel has the right to defend itself.
Speaker 3:Okay, I think what you're referring to is this Netanyahu says Israel's goal is to wipe out all possibility of a Palestinian state. That's very different than wiping out all Palestinians. Fair, because here's the other thing. Or that statement is true.
Speaker 3:Well, and that's the problem is when we you know you said that, hey, whose words. And right with all that. Sure, so you're talking about Israel with 10 million people, Palestine with five and a half million people. You know that's not really a fair fight. Except Israel is on its own, outside of really being. The United States has definitely taken care of Israel, Got it, but as far as boots on the ground.
Speaker 1:But as far as boots on the ground, you've got.
Speaker 3:Palestine, syria, lebanon, iran, iraq, saudi Arabia. Who you said Taliban, which would be? I'm not going to include the Taliban in that, but ISIS, some of the terrorists, egypt, so so around Israel, you've got nobody that's friendly. Nobody that's friendly like when. That's one of the things that really blew me away about Trump's first 45 is the Abraham. I think it was the Abraham Accords is what they were calling, or is that Carter.
Speaker 3:Anyway, the peace deal, the peace deal that basically Trump had in place and one of the things that happened with October 7th, if the reporting is accurate, one of the reasons that Hamas attacked Israel was because there was going to be a peace deal where, I believe, saudi Arabia was ready to actively recognize Israel and so part of that was to shut down that recognition. So I mean there's a lot of geopolitical stuff that's going on. I personally look at Israel like Liam Neeson in Taken, because Israel has a certain set of skills. You came in and you took its citizens and they still don't forget. There's still dozens of Hostages that that are in custody by Palestine and by Hamas. So I just I don't have a lot of I have. I have sympathy for any noncombatant that gets killed in any situation. You and I I remember we talked about this a while ago and you said that Hamas was not voted on by you know it was kind of like they had to vote for Hamas.
Speaker 2:I mean, the rules are the rules. To be honest with you, hamas and Israel is like low on the priority poll. If Hamas didn't want to be attacked, they shouldn't have left Israel alone. However, comma, israel cannot just go around. Oh, just because I believe this is mine, I'm just going to be the bully in the block and then claim oh well, we have to take them out before they take us out. That's bullshit. We know that. You know that. Every sensible person knows that. But that's just how the world works, man, you got the freedom and power backing you.
Speaker 3:it's kind of like get down to lay down but at the same time, israel has done a lot of stuff where they've even held their own people accountable maybe not as much as they should have for going in setting up illegal settlements. And all that too, you're talking about y'all I'm talking about over, about the last decade. There have been some efforts like you said not as much as they should have.
Speaker 2:I was going to say, yeah, you're going to Netanyahu is not. That's like saying that's like. That's like saying Putin's, putin's trying to trying to broker a peace deal.
Speaker 3:You know, it's funny that it's funny. You just said that, though, because I was actually thinking like Netanyahu is very much like Putin in the sense that he remembers what it's like to fight on the front lines, and so that definitely colors his perception of everybody in the region. Speaking of which, let's go to the next one. Let's go. I think that's an interest with Putin. What do you think about Europe to me finally really stepping up to the plate and standing up to Putin and basically giving him an ultimatum that, by tomorrow, if Putin doesn't agree to an immediate ceasefire, they're going to slap sanctions on them. I don't know where this has been, but bravo, it's only taken 11 years since the first time Russia came in and took that land in Ukraine.
Speaker 2:When he took Crimea, they should have done it. I'm sitting back like, I'm like what are you waiting for? But see again too. It's another thing where that's why I say I'm not anti-Trump and I've said it yes, you are.
Speaker 3:Oh, just come on. Yes, you are, I've said it till I've turned blue in the face.
Speaker 2:I recognize Trump for who he is and what he is, and he is a product of the union. Right, I am more concerned about the people, and I told you that during the election cycle. It's not so much Trump, because I can deal with one, but when you feel your administration full of people who are people full of ill intent, that's when I have a problem and just like you know, the sky is blue, it's been.
Speaker 2:it's almost prophetic, but that's a different story. So what I'm saying is when, when, when Putin annexed Crimea, right, they had an opportunity to stop it. When Putin first started lining troops up on the Ukrainian border, talking about it's a training mission, they should have seen that play, because that's the same exact play that they ran in in 39. Oh, we're just, we're just training, we're just wait.
Speaker 3:But we're leaving. That would be. That would be. That would be the fascist KJ.
Speaker 2:But I mean, it's the same. It's the same playbook that the Americans are running. Oh, absolutely, they're just running it and running it on one of the citizens. But what I'm saying is, history doesn't repeat itself, but it damn sure mimics itself, right? So when you see the play of aggression, right, and you have an opportunity to stop, it same thing I say with the United States. Now you see the play of aggression coming, they may not be, they may not be intently saying hey, we're coming after the reconstruction amendments, hey, we're going to test the, we're going to test the limits of this code, just to see what we can get away with. They might not tell you that's what they're doing, but their actions very much so prove that that is exactly what they're doing. And it's up to it is up to those of concern to stop it. And I think right now, the United States is in a similar situation as Europe, except the population of the United States is Europe in this case, and the government is Putin in this case. They're going to keep prying and keep trying to get away with stuff, and unless the population decides that enough is enough, we don't know where this line is going to end at, because we're certainly in a cycle of transformation. You know how it ends is going to be up to. You know what the population can stand.
Speaker 2:But it's interesting, man, being a student of history, you know and I don't want to call myself an expert because it's so much you learn one version of history and then you find something else that completely validates and contradicts everything you learn. So you got to relearn it again. That's the cool thing about history You're always learning about nuances and changes, right? But one irrefutable fact is there's always a hero and a villain, right? Somebody's fame conqueror is somebody else's you know, evil, super villain, right? That's what I'm saying, depending on what story you read. So that's what makes it. That's what makes it.
Speaker 1:And that's why I said I can't.
Speaker 2:I can't be mad, being a student of history, but at the same time I recognize it for what it is and like man. Hey, they're running the same playbook. You should probably take a look at that.
Speaker 3:Yeah. And you wonder, you wonder why they didn't. But even though they didn't, they continued to, didn't. They continued to, didn't he? Yeah, if that's a word, right. So Trump comes in and Putin kind of lays low for four years. Now people say, oh, trump and Putin are besties and all that Okay. Well, regardless, he didn't do it, putin didn't do anything else during 45. And then here comes 46. And I think putin saw an opportunity and he took it because again, he also saw that europe was following kind of the pacifist chamberlain style europe that was going all through there. Germany does not want to be involved in any wars. France obviously a very left government, leaning government. The British have been going further and further left and then opening their borders and being overrun by, especially Muslims.
Speaker 2:I find that extremely ironic though, don't you? You have to appreciate the irony in Britain's dilemma right now, right.
Speaker 3:Are you talking about for centuries, Britain going in and taking over populations that were not British?
Speaker 2:Yeah, and then just, you know, just to see it, just to see it being the preeminent issue is like, oh, too many immigrants. You're like, well, hell man, you just spent 200 years. Yeah, you just spent 200 years making damn near half the world you know, Five or six, 700 years, you just made half the world English. And then you're upset that they decided to come home.
Speaker 3:No, you're, you're right. It's probably actually three or four hundred years age of expiration. But yeah, you're right. But I mean, it's kind of amazing that if you go in and you have any real understanding of and this is not a slam on islam, this is not against islam but if you look at islam, they are more than happy to play the very, very long game. When you're talking about the long game for islam, we're not talking about years, months or even years. We're talking talking about years, months or even years. We're talking about decades and centuries. And so right now, what you're seeing in England is a takeover of many of the large. London has a mayor who is Muslim and a lot of the other big cities do too.
Speaker 3:So they're taking over england bit by bit without shooting a single single weapon. Right, and don't get me wrong. Of course there are the, the here and there, the terrorists, the stabbings, and those are horrible, and you know, and the problem is like in america. You look at america and you see some of that going on, very limited in places like Minneapolis.
Speaker 2:I would say that it's more the Christian nationalists are taking over. Right, and I say that with the distinction that Christian nationalists are absolutely and objectively different than Christians. Right, so you have a Christian nation in America. Right, so you have a Christian nation in America. Right, and you have Christians in America, but then you have a subset of Christian nationalists who I deem as an extremist group, and they infiltrated every level of government and now you're starting to see the same thing that Britain is seeing with Muslims, and now you're starting to see the same thing that Britain is seeing with Muslims we see now with Christian nationalists in America. Right, and I'll give you an example Right In England, I was just talking to a buddy of mine, over, over and across the pond, as you will and they're upset that the Muslims are trying to infiltrate the school system and get equitable rights to prayer and decide what needs to be taught and what books can be in the school, and it's becoming problematic, right, and I said, man, that's interesting because here in the state we have a lot of Christian nationalist organizations who are doing the exact same thing.
Speaker 2:So to me it's one in the same right. I love Christians, I consider myself a Christian. However, I also understand and recognize Christian nationalism is the most prominent issue that nobody's addressing in the state right now, I don't want to discount your concern.
Speaker 3:It's hard, right, right. But I will say this, and this goes the difference of viewpoint, right, you're coming at it from the blue side and I'm coming at it from the red side. Sure. You're looking at it saying as a I'm just going to from the red side. Sure. You're looking at it saying as a I'm just going to say Democrat, so it's easier. Sure, let's just say with blue and red right. You're good. Blue and red.
Speaker 3:Yeah, so as a blue, you're looking at these Christian nationalists coming in and trying to take over government and do those things. As a red, I've seen that happening and has happened and well-established entrenchment by what I would call and what Trump calls. I wouldn't call it that until Trump, but the deep state that's what it is are more than happy to become part of the New World Order, who think that we are all part of the community of the world, that humanism is more important than any religion, all the stuff that goes against the Judeo-Christian foundations of this country. Now people forget.
Speaker 3:One of the things about the Judeo-Christian founding of this country was that A we don't have a national religion. There is no single religion endorsed by the United States and never will. That's the first amendment to the Constitution. That's how important they thought it was. It'll never happen because, well, I shouldn't say it'll never happen. I think it's more likely. Honestly, the way things go, I think it's more likely that Islam or Mormonism becomes the national, because we're the only two groups that continue to have babies at a rate that is well above replacement level, right. Yeah.
Speaker 3:So I'm not overly worried about either of those, but I think most people would probably feel a little more comfortable with LDS versus Islam Because, anyway, without going into the whole religious side of it but I think that when you're talking about these things because this goes back to what we were talking about Islam versus Judaism in Israel and Palestine it's strange that you're going to have this conflict because, like realistically most Christians would say, biblically it says you should be peacekeepers, you should be peacemakers, you should turn the other cheek, you should do those things. And then you have people on the far right that are Christian nationals that say well, yeah, jesus said to turn your cheek the other time, and if somebody smacks you on the cheek, turn you know how many times. It's seven times 70. Well, we've been smacked on the cheek more than 70 times, 70 times. And now it's time to go in, like the temple, and flip over the table in the temple and go crazy, like Jesus did. Okay, meanwhile you have people on the left go, jesus was bisexual, don't you guys know? Jesus didn't actually have gender. So it's the ridiculousness of like you guys, just read what the Bible.
Speaker 3:If you're going to make the argument of what the Bible says A you should probably know what the Bible says. And B use it in context, and that's a big problem. Most people don't use it in context, and that's a big problem. Most people don't use it in context or they leave things out. And they do that with quotes too, like, not biblical quotes necessarily, but those as well, like. I remember one the customer is never wrong, right. Well, the full quote is the customer is never wrong. The customer is never wrong in terms of taste. I think is the full quote, which means yeah, they like the customer's never wrong. If they say they want a pink flamingo fluffy outside their door, they're not wrong because that's their taste, right. Another one was what is it when you copy somebody is the sincerest form of flattery oh yeah, what was it?
Speaker 2:imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Yeah, but there's more to it. Yeah. They don't continue to quote.
Speaker 3:Yeah imitation is the clearest form of flattery when it comes to the mediocre yeah reaching for greatness or something like that.
Speaker 2:It's like, yeah, you suck, and so you're trying to copy somebody who's awesome, but you suck, so you can't read my favorite one is the constitution is the founding document, the principal document of this nation, and I've read it cover to cover and I keep it close to my heart because this is how much it means to me. But they don't know anything in the Constitution. That is my favorite so far, or at least it's your favorite.
Speaker 3:Okay, let's be fair. The Constitution is not the easiest read. A, I'll give you Well B, a, b, well B. You have lawyers, you have judges and you have Supreme Court justices who argue what the Constitution says. So, like, for me, that's kind of when I go back and again, perception is reality. So I read certain things and I go well, of course, alito's right, that's exactly what it says. And somebody else goes, especially when they lose, like if it's Clarence, thomas and Alito, they're going hey, we're over here and the other seven are over there. I can go well, clearly, yeah, I mean, it's Thomas and Alito, that's my worldview is, yeah, I agree with them out of my worldview. So of course I'm going to be more partial to them, but I can't really argue that the other seven are idiots. You know, I I think the dissents generally. To me the dissents are honestly better reading than the majority stuff I have been pleasantly surprised with scotus this season, like I am.
Speaker 2:I told you. But see, I told you before I said I am going to be. I knew going in, I said Trump 2.0 is going to test the limits of SCOTUS and I was especially. And I told I remember telling you specifically, I have to watch Clarence because he is such an originalist. I have to see how much he's going to let POTUS get away with him and Alito are hilarious. Have you been? Have you been reading the judgments and like the commentary from from the justice? Yeah, holy they are. But I can only imagine in my mind and you got the baby. You got the baby justices who are? They're more moderate than than I would imagine the reds would have preferred when they elected them. Especially they are not textualists.
Speaker 2:They are not at all at all and that is pissing this administration off. And he's like dude. I think I love the chaos because the scope. I'm telling you and I don't know why I tell people all the time, like I knew for a while, like I told you, I've been done with Congress for a long time Like they are ineffective, they just we should flush all of them out. But SCOTUS is like that's why I thought I didn't when they were. I think we were having a conversation about Amy Comey, barrett and and Kavanaugh when they were getting elected Right and a lot of people on the left was, was in an uproar about this elected right and a lot of people on the left was, was in an uproar about this, that.
Speaker 2:And I was like, hold on. I was like if you go back and you look at the way they, they, they've ruled, this may not be as bad as you think. And everybody, you know, I remember I got destroyed. I remember for like two weeks straight I got destroyed right, bootlicker, you know this, that and the other. And then I, I, you know I don't want to toot my own horn and pat myself on the back, but I got to tell you, man the baby, scotuses, even Ketanji the baby Scotuses. I am super impressed with man. It's just I knew that those older Scotuses were going to have an aneurysm because they're such originalists.
Speaker 2:And then when you have guys like Stephen Miller and you have Pam Bundy, and these guys are saying, oh well, the constitution is subjective, I can just see the vein in Clarence Thomas's neck bulging like what. And so Alito even had to come out and I think he was doing an interview. Was it last week or week before last? He did an interview where he he sat back, said listen, judges rule, and that's the Supreme Court. We rule based on the Constitution, end of story. He didn't say no names, he didn't say what it was sent to, but he let it be known clearly like yo, this is what we're judging off of. Stop the madness, right.
Speaker 3:Here's the funny thing. There's two parts of that. Remind me that second part about that, about the judges. But yeah, in 2019, when everybody was freaking out about Kavanaugh, because when whoever died at the end of Obama's and then the Republicans blocked, that was Ruth Baker.
Speaker 2:They wouldn't, they wouldn't die. Yeah, they wouldn't, they wouldn. Uh, that was Ruth Baker. They wouldn't. They wouldn't let her. Yeah, they wouldn't, they wouldn't let her feel Ruth again.
Speaker 3:I don't remember who, what. No, she, no, no, no, no, no that was, that was 2019 because it was in 20, in 2015, somebody else, somebody else passed, and but our RGB remembered they were all talking about her. Oh, you might be right. They were talking about her retiring, you might be right.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 3:Yeah, you're right, you're right. So so the Republicans blocked it Right, and then, in 2019, uh, before Trump was out, somebody died and the Democrats weren't able to block it Right. Okay.
Speaker 3:So one of the things for me was I said, well, look, I'm, I'm more than happy for trump to get this and put it in and everybody's like, oh, they're gonna have a republican and and majority, blah, blah, blah. And I said you guys, I don't think you understand. Like if you put, if you put textualists in there or conservatives in there, they're going to limit trump's power, like they're going to that's what power, like they're going to, that's what traditionalists are going to do. And so that's the funny thing is, how many times now have we seen where this administration is pushing the boundaries and I don't blame, honestly, I don't blame them for pushing the boundaries and then SCOTUS is doing their job of saying, no, that's too far. Now here's the other thing that this is one of my bigger problems with what, um, you said. It was alito that said it yeah, that was alito okay so how?
Speaker 3:what did he say? Because I want to know the quote right I'll see if I can get it okay, because words matter and and the way you said that there's a little. There's something I want to say, but I want to make sure it was the right quote, because I I would hate to have the wrong quote here cool, give me a sec, I, I think I can get it up no problem, luckily it's just ally. So hi, ally, I didn't say hi earlier maybe ally's not even on anymore.
Speaker 3:Who knows, maybe she's just got in the background. Oh, where's that in liberty, by the way?
Speaker 2:they'll be in. They pop in usually a little bit later. A little bit later. I can't find it um jesus. Where is he? I?
Speaker 3:cannot find it right now.
Speaker 2:Oh, there he goes, talk about something. Talk about something, fill the air while I, while I find it, it's gonna take me so if you find it, and this is why I say that, okay, the judicial, let's.
Speaker 3:Let's go back to saturday morning cartoons and the schoolhouse rock. There are three branches of government. There is the legislature legislative which makes the laws. There's the judicial, which interprets the laws, whether they're constitutional or not. And then there's the executive, which is supposed to enforce the laws.
Speaker 3:And it was never the intent of the framers that I can find that. The intent was that the judicial was the end-all, be-all and whatever the judicial said, that was just it. And they trump the other two. And that's where we're at, I think, 206 years later, where the judicial has especially the Supreme Court has, I think, way more power than the framers meant them to have. I think it was supposed to be much more equal. And you can say well, they don't really have that much power.
Speaker 3:But when you have a judge, a federal judge in, I don't know, let's just say randomly, let's say New Mexico, right, and New Mexico judge says I don't like what the administration is doing and we've had this argument, but I'm going to file, I'm going to sign an injunction that limits what the president of the United States can do when it comes to border security or when it comes to ejecting people from this country or whatever it is right. And so, again, this falls back to a large degree to the legislature not doing their jobs. It also comes down to what you and I and Greg Easterbrook were talking about a few weeks ago. If the executive branch basically says to the judicial even the Supreme Court and I understand the constitutional crisis and all that right. But if the executive branch says, okay, we're going to deport all MS-13, we don't care what the court says, you can say habeas corpus, to take it full. You know, we, you, the judicial say hey, if you don't, if you don't do this, we're going to file an injunction.
Speaker 3:And then the and the white house says and like, what's going to happen? You could impeach, and that's where the legislature comes in and would be doing their job in that case. Um, but at the same time, impeachment's a pretty high bar these days. And so are Republicans going to turn around and impeach Trump? I doubt it. I mean, do you think they would do that?
Speaker 2:OK, so that's a, that's a bridge. That's a bridge very, very far, man, I don't know.
Speaker 3:Right, no, no, no, I don't think that's all honestly so, ok, so, but let's go. Let that would have been the case at all, honestly. Okay, but let's go down. What the argument from the left is Okay, is that Okay? We're going to take it full circle with habeas corpus, the court's rule, including the Supreme Court, that every and I don't think this is right personally, but every person in this country illegally has to be in front of a judge because of habeas corpus. Now, that includes those that the order has already been signed by a judge. It includes those who have missed their hearing, whatever the case is.
Speaker 3:They have the opportunity, but they don't care. So then they call up the lawyer and they say hey, I'm at the ICE detention center. They gave me the one call. The lawyer goes running down habeas corpus, and there's enough of these that it goes immediately up an emergency up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court says every single person who was arrested, whether legally in this country or not, no matter what their status, whether they are a student, whether they're an MS gang member or whether they're just somebody that is scheduled for deportation, has to have habeas corpus. They have to personally, physically, appear in front of a judge. And Trump says, nah, we're not going to. We're going to take them and throw them on a plane and we're going to send them out. To what country? He just said that there was a country that said they were in negotiations for taking a lot of these guys. I don't remember who it was I don't know.
Speaker 2:I know we're, I know we're in venezuela now, but I can't remember libya yeah, there was gaddafi, whoever it was okay.
Speaker 3:So let's, let's say guiana, french, french guiana, let's make it, let's make it interesting, let's make it exotic. They're gonna, they're gonna send people to French Guiana, right, and so they keep grabbing. Well, el Salvador is a few, but there's another country that just recently said they're in negotiations. I think it's Libya.
Speaker 2:I think Libya is the hot spot.
Speaker 3:Is it Libya? Yeah, it may have been Hot spot, literally. Okay, well, whoever it is. So then the Trump administration says, nope, we're going to keep doing it. And the Supreme Court says, no, here's what, like, we are keeping habeas corpus. And the Trump administration says, no, we're not going to, we are going to keep doing this. So then, what is the next step, the only way to make any change in that situation?
Speaker 2:I believe would be impeachment now. Well, congress would have to clarify before that, congress will have to clarify which is which is. That's a dual that. But a lot of that would be a lot of that would be circumvented if congress would just do their damn job in the first place, which is why, which is why I loathe congress so much like hey, dude, make it plain, you had a majority.
Speaker 2:If you decide there, there's no way the blue team can block you. If you decide that this is what it's going to be, then that's just what it's going to be, then that's just what it's going to be. The problem is we have too many representatives in both chambers of Congress that are afraid to have a decision on their record because it'll come back to bite them.
Speaker 3:That's why I told you oh no they're going to get primaried.
Speaker 2:The government's full of grifters, man. They don't want to cut off the money train, so they're not going to make a decision. Like I said, depending on which way the wind blowing Lindsey Graham is going to bend and fold Like I'm, I'm so. I'm so disgusted with our Democratic Somebody sent me something.
Speaker 3:It was so funny. Somebody sent me something on Lindsey Graham. Some tweet, right, and it was just this ridiculous tweet. It goes Lindsey Graham is the most spineless guy. This ridiculous tweet. He goes Lindsey Graham is the most spineless guy. And I read it. I went dude. This is clearly a parody, but the funny thing is it could have been real. Lindsey Graham is the perfect example of that.
Speaker 2:It's so sickening man to where I don't care what you stand for, I can stand for something. You know what I'm saying. It's not that difficult. I can understand and respect you saying, hey, this is not how it's going to be, and until enough people care enough to vote me out, this is the way it's going to be. I can deal with that all day long. But what I don't like is people getting in there and being like oh well, it depends.
Speaker 2:I don't know. That's why we talked about what was that? Senator McCaskey a week ago. Mccaskey out of Alaska a couple of weeks ago. Well, we're too scared to make a decision because there's a lot of money involved and we're going to get primary.
Speaker 3:We're getting threatened With what You're getting threatened with being primaried Gas.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you're getting, you're getting threatened with with somebody exercising the democratic right, like so yeah and so, like you and you have it on both sides.
Speaker 3:Honestly, I do think democrats do a better job of, when a push comes to shove, whipping their, their caucuses and passing what they want to pass. But they're not perfect by any stretch, because you look at when they had the house and the Senate from 2020 to 22, when Biden's first two years, they could have passed a lot of this legislation, they could have done some things and gotten, you know, the border in line and all that, but you had mansion and you had seismic from those those cinema.
Speaker 2:How do you say cinema, christian cinema?
Speaker 3:cinema, yeah. Cinema cinema, yeah. And then she and of course, like cinema she was, it blew me away. It's like I expected her to be this goofy green party lefty out in the woods type guy and instead she was was like no, look I am. I am a absolute liberal. That said, there are still certain parts of the government that the government needs to do things the right way, and I don't think they're doing the right way. Now there's also the plus I need my pound of flesh, thank you.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I was going to say. Yeah, I was going to say that she was open to the hype. I think she was trying to run as an independent. Yeah, she did.
Speaker 3:But at the same time you look at Fetterman, who legitimately has brain damage, and the Democrats are dragging him across the line.
Speaker 2:Yeah, but we knew that beforehand, remember, we talked about how that was going to come back to bite him in the ass.
Speaker 3:Of course, Well, there's one issue with Fetterman. Fetterman's like look, if you're going to come in and you're a Palestinian lover and you're supporting Hamas and the people that are on these campuses, you need to GTFO, so F you guys, I'm with Israel and suddenly he was like oh, fetterman doesn't take his medication. The reason why is?
Speaker 2:because before Trump got elected, Fetterman was quiet as a church mouse pissing on cotton. He's another grifter who's just trying to kiss the ringer who's in power.
Speaker 3:I don't think Fetterman has. I don't think Fetterman hasn't. I don't think Fetterman had any pull. Honestly, that's part of it.
Speaker 2:What I'm saying is, if Harris had won the election right and the country was trending blue, you would not hear a word from Fetterman, and that's what pisses me off about him. This isn't an issue that you care about. This is an issue that gets you further along the line to protect your pockets. You're full of shit. You're a griptok. Maybe he's going to get primary, and I don't think he survives the primary. He should have survived the first one, but the Democratic machine just had to have it Tammany.
Speaker 2:Hall absolutely won that for him. Just because you have a blue or red sticker beside your name does not mean you're true. That's just, you have found the easiest path to get to the money and once you get in there, your true color is coming. I mean, we've seen that in both parties.
Speaker 3:And maybe I'm naive and maybe I do try to look at people's best case scenario and maybe I look at Betterman and go, I hope he actually believes that Israel's in the right and if he doesn't, no, I just hey, I try to give benefit of the doubt to a Democrat. But again, I mean I look at. It's so ridiculous. If you've ever driven through West Virginia you should see how many buildings have Senator Byrd's name on different buildings the National Guard building up there and all that stuff. What's he say about Kevin?
Speaker 2:No, he's talking about I am kind of.
Speaker 3:Yeah, oh, my favorite part of the whole. Just a side note, the whole thing with Barbie that cracks me up is when the the uh, feminist women were freaking out. It's like oh, of course, ryan gosling's the one. The man who's in the movie is the one who gets nominated for an oscar and I'm like he was the funniest part of the movie. Are you kidding? I liked that movie. I liked uh, I'm blinking on her name that played barbie. I like the speech that America what's her name gave. I like the movie. But Ryan Gosling, he kind of stole that movie.
Speaker 2:It was probably a lot better, man, oh yeah.
Speaker 3:But it was so funny them freaking out A feminist movie and here's the man who gets nominated for that. It's like, well, okay, whatever. But yeah, I look at and we rehash this every week, like we can talk about the stupidity of Congress, we can talk about how bad journalists are, we can talk about all this stuff, and that's just kind of how it goes. There are certain things in America that tell them, hey, we're not going to put up this crap anymore and we're going to. We're going to to put up this crap anymore and we're going to rid you to say even journalists, what's his face from? From NBC or no, cnn, the bald guy. That guy looked like a potato. That people uh right glasses.
Speaker 3:No, the white guy. Oh the white egg. Looking he's a potato. He used to give him a hard time for deer.
Speaker 2:They would say anytime he would tweet uh, hold on, you're coming up on our hour. Yeah, we gotta hit the hour mark yep yeah, so.
Speaker 2:So all right, hey, we're coming up on people. We are still going to stay here, we're going to keep rolling, but we got to say goodbye to our guys who are streaming live on the CTR network. We'll see you guys next week. If you want to keep on the episode, follow us on Facebook, youtube, linkedin, twitter, where we are. Come see us on there. But we got to say goodbye. We're signing off on CTR CTR network. Thank you guys for logging in and spending time with us. Check it out on the app, the Roku channel, ctr man. Enjoy yourself. Bye you guys. All right, we are back. One minute has passed. Boom, there we go. All right. So one hour has passed. Get back to it. I'm sorry, lance, I didn't mean to cut you off, brother, go ahead.
Speaker 3:No, no, that to it. I'm sorry, Lance, I didn't mean to cut you off, brother, Go ahead. No, no, that's fine, I knew what it was. Yeah, so no, I just again. There are certain things in America that we just it's the same old, same old. We've got crappy people who are in Congress that want to be there to make the money. They don't want to solve any problems because, oh, we were talking about Brian Stelzer, who's now. He moved from CNN to Substack and doing his brand of journalism.
Speaker 2:Yes, now the gloves are off, I can be who I really am, which is bullshit. I got a question for what. I want to switch gears a little bit for this next segment. Kristi Noem is running out of money. Is she? Yes, the department is running out. So they had a congressional hearing last week. What? Is she? Kristi Noem is.
Speaker 3:HHS, dhs, yes, dhs, I'm sorry, dhs.
Speaker 2:So they went to Congress asking for more money and they kind of blew through their budget. And I wish, man, if I didn't know we were going to do this, I'd have had clips aired up. But that's okay, we'll roll with the punches. Going to do this, I'd have had clips aired up. But that's okay, we'll, we'll roll with the punches. So the during the congressional hearing they was like hey, I'm not sure if you understand how this works, but we can't give you more money than you were already allocated in your budget this year. So he's like where did the money go? And she was like I don't, I don't know. And he was like I don't, I don't know. They were like I don't know. And, uh, congress is like well, there's not really a lot we can do because you got to make it. You got to make it to the end of september until we can fund you again. Um, man, I gotta go find a clue. That was hilarious, um, but I want to come. What else else? What else? What else, christy?
Speaker 3:Well, she testified in the White House's 2026 budget request five days ago that might have been it. Lawmakers question. I'll bet it's this. Lawmakers question. No, I'm overcuts to no FEMA TSA. No, no, no Grants testifies before Senate. Dhs budget. It's got to be that Funding partnership, but it doesn't really break it down. I got to see Funding two days ago I got to see days ago. Homeland Security told lawmakers her office is working to restore funding to the National Fire Academy. No, harvard sends energy.
Speaker 2:This one Hold on. I wonder if I can get it to come up. I wonder if I can get it to come up.
Speaker 3:So I mean Do you know what DHS's budget is?
Speaker 2:I don't know offhand, I know. So they went to the hearing and then I found Chris Murphy's interview where he was interviewing and asking what happened with the money. But you're running out of time, yeah let's hear it. It's six minutes long, but I don't want to play all of it. We'll find a way to cut it. Hold on, let me see if I can get it shared.
Speaker 3:You can just stop it when we get tired of it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you know what. We're going to stay live, let's do this live. Where are we at Share screen? This is called Zoothing on the Fly. Baby, do somebody see to your pants?
Speaker 1:Here we go. Thank you very much, madam Chair. Madam Secretary, thank you for being here. I'm sorry that I missed your call yesterday. I look forward to working closely with here. I'm sorry that I missed your call yesterday. I look forward to working closely with you.
Speaker 1:I say this with seriousness and respect, but your department is out of control. You're spending like you don't have a budget. You're on the verge of running out of money for the fiscal year. You are illegally refusing to spend funds that have been authorized by this Congress and appropriated by this committee, by this Congress and appropriated by this committee.
Speaker 1:You are ignoring the immigration laws of this nation, implementing a brand new immigration system that you have invented that has little relation to the statutes that you are required, that you are commanded to follow, as spelled out in your oath of office. You are routinely violating the rights of immigrants, who may not be citizens, but, whether you like it or not, they have constitutional and statutory rights when they reside in the United States. Your agency acts as if laws don't matter, as if the election gave you some mandate to violate the Constitution and the laws passed by this Congress. It did not give you that mandate. You act as if your disagreement with the law, or even the public's disagreement with the law, is relevant and gives you the ability to create your own law. It does not give you that ability.
Speaker 1:Let's start with your spending. You are on track to trigger the Anti-Deficiency Act. That means you are going to spend more money than you've been allocated by Congress. This is a rare occurrence and it is wildly illegal. Your agency will be broke by July, over two months before the end of the fiscal year. You may not think that Congress has provided enough money to ICE, but the Constitution and the federal law does not allow you to spend more money than you have been given or to invent money. And this obsession with spending at the border, as the chairwoman mentioned, has left the country unprotected elsewhere. The security threats to the United States are higher, not lower, than when before Trump came to office. To fund the border, you have illegally gutted spending for cybersecurity. As we speak, Russian and Chinese hackers are having a field day attacking our nation. You have withdrawn funds for disaster prevention. Storms are going to kill more people in the country because of the withholding of these funds Jeez.
Speaker 3:Okay, here's my problem with this. I know they don't, but at what point do they? Where's the question? You know what I mean. If I was no more. And they both do it, don't get me wrong. They both do it right, but they just go and go and go and go, and that's just what I have to say. So how do you answer that? And they're like you were just talking for like five minutes straight. How much? Yeah, which?
Speaker 2:part. Yeah, which part?
Speaker 3:yeah, and so, like you're doing this and you're doing that, and you're and my guess is she, she's going to turn around and say well, senator, I don't agree with your assessment. I, you, we are, we are well aware of the budget and and we're doing the things we need to, and one of the reasons our budget is the way it is is because we are oh my gosh, you went through the whole thing. Look, she didn't even get.
Speaker 2:We don't. Yeah. Yeah, he talked the whole thing. I'm cutting it right there.
Speaker 3:Yeah, that's fine, and I don't know what she said. So don't get me wrong. I'm not defending her in terms of what she said, but my guess is she's saying things like well, you know when you're part of the organization that is rounding up people that are here illegally.
Speaker 3:that costs money and that man hours and blah, blah, blah, blah blah, and so we've had to spend more and so you know, part of that is, but the funny part about him saying is, it's wildly and we don't just give you more money. Really, Is that why you don't have emergency budget measures that every single year, all the time happen? So you know, I don't know. I I think we're pushing it out of control.
Speaker 3:yeah, maybe I I don't know, and if it is okay, there needs to be something done. But at the same time, here would be my question like if I, if I'm dude, trying to actually get to an answer, right, I would say something if I'm murphy and I act, no, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that if he actually wants an answer, right, I would say something if I'm Murphy and I act no, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt that if he actually wants an answer, because he doesn't remember, he said I'm sorry, I missed your call. I'll get with you later and we'll talk.
Speaker 2:Yeah, a lot of that was just for a lot of that was just for a lot of that was just for sure, right.
Speaker 3:I want to all bark A senator that was grandstanding and spotlighting that was grandstanding and spotlighting, but I will.
Speaker 2:I will tell you I like murphy. Murphy is one of the few new democrats who I might not always agree with them, but they give a shit and I can take that better than blumenthal. I can take it as a starting point, like if you care, that means we have a starting point. You're right, liberty. I don't think voters believe that Voters are dumb. I'm going to be honest. I don't care if it's controversial. An American a citizen.
Speaker 3:They're ignorant for sure.
Speaker 2:An American, a citizen, ignorant for sure. Yes, an American, a citizen, is a smart, informed individual. Americans citizens are ignorant and we've proven it time and time again. No matter the voting bloc, no matter the representation, you have citizens voting against their interest in every political cycle. Right, and that's irrelevant. Yeah, that's irrelevant whether you're blue or red. You have this large block of constituents who blindly vote for colors, like they're representing gang members, instead of voting on issues.
Speaker 3:Um, and that that, I think is, is really, really bad um, yeah, so liberty, I I agree with you we've talked about this before that I think one of the number one, if not the number one issue was is the border. We've talked about how the trans issue came up. I think the trans issue was more just one of those shiny objects that that was easy to kind of kind of show how out of touch the Dems were. The Dems were because if you go, if you're a common sense person and you say girls, sports should be for girls, and you have the other side say no no, no, no, no no that's an easy win, and so I think that's why that became such a big deal, when realistically, it's a minor issue that should be fixed pretty easily for the most part did.
Speaker 2:I show you the one where they said she's a third gender. Now, did you see that one yet? Oh yeah, yeah, I saw that one that was hilarious, um yeah well.
Speaker 3:What that was too, though, is she's talking to somebody else, and then the dude who is is interviewing that's not really him interviewing you yeah, no, no.
Speaker 2:Yeah, that was a cut in, but this is listening to her talk about. It is just, I think a lot of I think, for good or bad, people like that are have taken over the voice and the platform of the blue brain. Right, those words, that's the image that pops up. Right, you know, for better or for worse, that's the image that pops up, like when you hear BLM or you hear woke or something like that. Right, you automatically, you know, inherently have an image that pops up right, based off of portrayals. Same way with MAGA right, you sit back and you say, oh well, when you hear MAGA, you think a certain way. But in real, you know, the real picture is just. Most of it is just people trying to live their lives Right, and they're just trying to do what they believe is right, based off how they grew up in their belief system. Where the media has, they've manipulated their responsibility and take advantage of people's inherent trust or inherent biases. Right, and they amplify it. They amplify it and it's perverse what they're doing, man. That's why I really wish I guess what it came on this week, but that I'm sure we'll get him res're doing man. That's why I really wish I guess what it came on this week. I'm sure we'll get him rescheduled, man, he had some issues and he apologized, but we'll get him rescheduled.
Speaker 2:That bothers me to no end because I don't like to see people being manipulated either way Good, bad, indifferent. I am principled in the fact that I can deal with I would rather deal with an outright racist right, a devout racist who tells me and a devout separatist who says I don't like you, I don't want you near me, you go left. I don't have any ill intent. If you decide to do great things, do great things, just do it over there. Right, I can deal with that all along. Like I told you, the greatest threat to societal progress is a fake ally, and we just got. We got too much of that in society. We got too much of that, too much lip service where people are so quick to say they support a cause, whether it's red or blue, but when it's time to influence policy that truly affects or benefits people, they're silent. And that's where, I guess, that's where the frustration and the irritation for me kind of hit.
Speaker 3:For me, part of the problem is that the best and brightest don't go into politics, because we've seen how dirty and gross it is right. Go back, let's say, 30 years and it's 1996. Instead of Bob Dole on the Republican ticket, it's Thomas Sowell, an actual conservative, an actual yeah he well, I mean he would have been the pre-obama but I would you know what?
Speaker 2:I would have took a, I would have took a power ticket. We talked about that before.
Speaker 3:Right, oh for sure, yeah, yeah, I would have voted for colin powell too yeah, the missed opportunity of power. Sure, so I'm. I'm just talking about a, the reason I say Thomas Sowell, you could say Krautheimer. I'm talking about a talented conservative intellectual, right, right, and at the same time now you could say there are some people on the left that are seen as intellectuals, as well.
Speaker 3:Now you could say there are some people on the left that are seen as intellectuals as well. That I mean, like if Krugman, who wrote for the Economist, who won the Cruz, is a red Ted Cruz is a. I like Ted Cruz too, but Ted Cruz is a red meat Republican. I don't think he's a. I don't necessarily think he is a conservative, conservative stalwart, like again, I take Mike Lee over Ted Cruz. That said, I originally thought Dan Crenshaw was going to be a really strong standard bearer for Republicans as a conservative, and he has not been. That he's turned into a grifter Surprise. And they all do it.
Speaker 3:AOC People who think AOC was going to be this. You know, leftist a a, somebody who stands up for the workers because she comes from a common background and she was just a bartender, so she's going to work for the common person. No aoc, yeah, she's a cult of personality. Ted cruz is to a degree, um crenshaw was trying to be.
Speaker 2:I mean for sure AOC is trying to take over Bernie's banner, right? I think Bernie has taken, he's ready to hand it to her and I think she's going to. He's going to pass the baton to AOC for this next wave.
Speaker 3:And I just I can't, I can't tell you how many Republicans I see online and on X say please let her be the her and Crockett they're like, please let that be the ticket.
Speaker 2:I will tell you, I will tell you be fearful of Crockett.
Speaker 3:Nope.
Speaker 2:She has so many idiocracy moments.
Speaker 3:You can say she's smart and she might be, but she has so many soundbites out there that are just ridiculous.
Speaker 2:Here's the problem you got with Crockett, and I love Jasmine, jasmine is a fire starter. She's a fire brain, and if you stand in front of the camera long enough, you're bound to make a gasp. See president Trump. See Margaret Taylor green. See pick Pick a person right Jasmine Crockett is smart enough to move the masses and she gives a shit and she's real.
Speaker 2:You can sit back and say, yeah, well, I don't know, but I'm telling you Crockett is the anti-Trump. Telling you Crockett is the anti-Trump, she is to young Democrats what Trump was to moderate Republicans. Looking for a face in a movement, I would be More than AOC. Yeah, absolutely, because AOC is Really, because here you have progressive fatigue and that's the problem that the Democrats are going to have to face with. I believe they got progressive fatigue Right, like, hey, man, we don't care, we don't care.
Speaker 2:Nothing you say right now is is resonating, right, you talk about. You talk about prices. We don't care, you talk about. What I care about is am I safe at the border or am I perceived to be safe at the border? Is am I safe at the border or am I perceived to be safe at the border? And do I? You know, can you govern from a position of strength? And I don't think the Democrats have picked that up yet, right, like everything you hear from the Democrats is oh, the only reason you say that is because you hate Trump, no matter who's the messenger from the Democratic Party. The only thing that the only thing the average person on the street is hearing is I hate Trump or we're doing this to stop Trump? As long as the perception of your platform is you hate Trump, you're destined to fail. It doesn't matter what face you put in there.
Speaker 3:What are you for about what you're against? I think the red team will be there. What are you for not?
Speaker 2:what you're against, right and it I would. I think the red team would be exceptionally happy to have Jasmine Crockett stay in Texas and attack her from there, because if she is allowed to gain momentum on a national stage, she could be problematic.
Speaker 3:I don't think. So that's fine. Yeah, there's a. I just don't think, even Now, if you say in 2040 maybe, I'm not saying for a national presidential contender.
Speaker 2:She's far from that right now. No, that's what, that's right. Yeah, no, no, no, no, twenty, if we're talking twenty eight, I'm looking at, I'm looking at the boy they passed over in Pennsylvania, shapiro. Shapiro Buttigieg is another one who has secretly held his own. I think he's going to have an issue because of the whole homophobia thing.
Speaker 3:I don't think so. I think he's going to run it. You remember, in was it 2012, scott Walker for Minnesota, who originally had a lot of buzz around him and then his personality just fizzled because he really didn't have one.
Speaker 2:That's how I see Buda getting. We'll see a lot of that's going to come down into the primary. He's going to have to be battle tested in the primaries you got. Even Brashear out of Kentucky is a name to be looking out for in 2028. Who?
Speaker 3:was it this week that came out and said I like governors because governors have oh, you know, it might have been the former, the former Republican speaker of the House. He was on Bill Maher and he said I like governors because governors have experience in actually running states, they actually have the experience of doing some of these things, and the senators, and that they just they don't have that type of experience, right. So you know, if I do think again, I think you're going to have, on the Republican side, you're going to have DeSantis 2.0. You're going to have, of course, jd Vance. I think Vivek, if he was smart, he actually would have run for governor he's running for. Is he running for governor or Senate of Ohio?
Speaker 2:I think he was trying to run for.
Speaker 3:Senate seat. If he's smart, I think he would do better as governor and get that governor time under your belt. I still think Abbott out of Texas is a great pick. You know Greg Easterbrook has said the governor of Rhode Island he really likes. He's brought up Gretchen Whitmer from Michigan. I don't see her.
Speaker 2:I don't see her surviving on the national stage. Man, like she's good. She's good regionally, but for me she reminds me of what's the boy out of california? Um, I don't think newsom stands for fans like newsom. Newsom is the democratic version of ron de sanchez, right, like he's. He's pseudo popular, but like if you put him on the fire he folds like a wet blanket every time.
Speaker 3:I don't think well, and you and you see newsom making the rounds of turning and trying to run to the. He's going to run because he's running to the middle right now. Yeah, he came out last month and said, well, obviously boys shouldn't be playing in girls sports. It's like, dude, that's not what you've been saying for the last four years. Like, you know how easy it is to do that. That. Um, as far as that goes, it's going to be.
Speaker 3:I think it's going to be really interesting because the democrats, uh, they aoc crockett some of those people. They're trying to go with the younger, but then they turn around and do something to me incredibly stupid and named david hogg as the vice chair of the democratic party. It's like, really, that's, that's who you think should be, should be the second in charge of the DNC. Listen, I mean that kid. If, if, that kid isn't just at a school shooting and, by the way, he was not really involved in the school shooting. From all reports he was like on the other end of school. He wasn't where the danger was, his life was never in danger. Um, he got funded by some, some people that that said, here's a young, good-looking, articulate guy.
Speaker 2:I was danger close, it counts. He could have got it. He could have got a case a mortar might have gone off.
Speaker 3:If I was only because I was 150 yards away, a mortar might have hit me. So, yeah, right, I was, I was within range of a cruise missile. And but you know the Democrats I think they do stuff like that. They shoot themselves in the foot and not to say Republicans are perfect. Don't get me wrong, republicans do stupid things too, but ultimately, you and I are on the same page.
Speaker 3:I don't care who it is, as long as it's somebody that is going to actually go in and try to do the job, and try to pass the budget, and try to pass laws that actually have teeth and meaning, and try to do the things that make this country a better place, and I mean the budget. I don't know, call me crazy. I think there are certain things that should be done, like passing a budget. We haven't had a budget. I don't think we've had a budget signed and passed since Clinton was in office. So at what point do you go?
Speaker 3:I would love, and I would love for Democrats to get behind this. I would love for Republicans to get behind this. I would love for Republicans to get behind this. All of the governors get together and do a constitutional Congress, since Congress isn't going to do it and pass some new, new constitutional amendments. Federal term limits, the second being Congress shall pass no law from which they are exempt, and the third one being any year that a federal budget is not passed by the legal date, whatever date that is, shall make every member of Congress ineligible for re-election for four years. You pass those three. What does that do to this country?
Speaker 2:So before we head out of here, you mentioned term limits and I got to bring it up. So the argument for the third term is that because the POTUS is the only elected official who has term limits and no other official has term limits, then his term limits is unconstitutional.
Speaker 3:So they should be able to present the constitution now which is bananas.
Speaker 2:But see again, that goes back to that goes back to pushing the limits of what I can and can't get away with. They know it's in the Constitution. I know they know that's the thing that pisses me off. I know they know, but it's a great soundbite.
Speaker 3:Isn't there a better argument and I don't know, I'd have to go wrong, what the exact wording is but isn't the better argument to say well, the Constitution says you can only be elected for two terms, and I haven't been elected for two terms, I was elected for one and now I'm elected for a different one, and so my times are—to me at least that's a more clever argument. I don't know, maybe the Constitution is pretty clear. I think it's pretty clear. Regardless, he's not going to—he's not going to but, liberty, I'm going to disagree with you.
Speaker 3:I used to believe the same thing. I used to think term limits hey, every election is a term limit. But I think that the way the media works, the manipulation and the powers that be between the Republicans and the Democrats, and the uneducation, miseducation, de-education, non-education of the voting public, makes it impossible to have a well-informed electorate. And so, unless you're going to put litmus tests in and the problem with that, not even litmus tests, but general, not litmus but general knowledge tests in place, and people will say, well, that's disenfranchising for poor people or whatever, which is kind of funny because it's like I want to disenfranchise stupid people. Let's be honest, I don't want stupid people voting, but they're going to because that's their right and so, whether I want it or not like if somebody can't tell me how many Supreme Court justices there are not their names, just how many Like I think there's some very basic questions that should be involved.
Speaker 2:You would eliminate 60% of voters who are eligible for voting. Cool, I mean, we should come up with our civics test, the most basic how many branches of government are there? How many members of the Supreme Court are there? Let's see how many states are there.
Speaker 3:Have you seen those man on the street interviews? Oh, yeah, yeah, they purposely do the worst ones, you know, you know they probably interview a hundred people.
Speaker 2:oh, yeah, I'm sure they do. It's just hilarious though I'm just. Oh, they are imagining. Yeah, I'm just imagining it's yeah, liberty, absolutely.
Speaker 3:They could not pass that test. But I'm not even saying pass the citizen test, that's not even what I'm talking about.
Speaker 3:I'm talking about just the bare basic civics question and you don't have to score 100. Let's say 10 questions and again things like how many branches of government are there and maybe one of them is you get lucky to name one of them and maybe you even make it stupid. Like question one is how many branches of government are there and the second one name one of the three branches of them and maybe you even make it stupid. Like question one is how many branches of government?
Speaker 3:are there and the second one name one of the three branches of government. Let me ask you a question.
Speaker 2:If, right now, you were required to go renew your driving test after five years, how many people do you believe will be able to pass the driving test renewed on percentage base?
Speaker 3:If, if they knew, okay, well, no, no, they didn't know they had to.
Speaker 2:No, they didn't know. So you're no study. And based off of experience, based off of your driving experience.
Speaker 3:So you've driven five years and then they just randomly call you up and say, hey, you got three days to come and renew your driver's test, or we're taking your license from you. How many people? 20 to be extremely optimistic. That's your voting block. Well, that is your thing, but remember, you're voting well, and the reason I say that, though, is because you also a large number of drivers, are over 60 years old and haven't taken a driver's test, and the driver's test has changed well, it's the same thing in congress.
Speaker 2:A large number of our members of congress are over 60 years old and they haven't read the constitution since they took a citizen class in in the ox but we're, but we're not talking.
Speaker 3:We're not talking about the people that are in congress, we're talking about the voters. I, I, I think you took the average. I believe if you took the average senator or congressman and the questions we're asking, they're going to get up and down, they're going to get 90 percent right, because I'm talking about like, oh yeah, do you think the average senator can say how many, how many justices of the Supreme Court there are?
Speaker 2:Senators, yes, representatives.
Speaker 3:You're a congressman. Representatives In the House, yeah, no, no, no, I'll bet them I don't think there's any that would probably miss that question. How many branches of government? They all get that one right.
Speaker 2:I'm not so sure, but I just that is extremely optimistic for our Representatives. Man.
Speaker 3:Well, yeah, but at the same time, I don't think they are effectively. If you, what is the word we use? I don't know what the word.
Speaker 2:Hold on, I'll give you. We got two candidates right and we can cut it off here. So we're going to find out. So I'll give you to keep going, I don't care. Well, you got. So you got Marjorie Taylor Greene representing the red team, you got Jasmine Crockett representing the blue team, right, and we're going to do the 10 question, civics question. Who do you think gets the most right, or do you think either one of them packs?
Speaker 3:what's passing out of 10, we'll call. We'll call. 7 out of 10, we'll go. 1990, standard the above. Here's the crazy thing. I think they both get 9 out of 10, at least no way I, I don't think here's why because we're not talking about tough questions, we're not asking what article of the Constitution guarantees the legislature is writing the laws.
Speaker 3:OK, but I'm talking the most like do I think they both know that there are 50 states? Yeah, do I think they both know the capital of the United States of America is Washington D? Can they name one of the three branches of government? Yes, they can. I'm sure they can Listen, man. I'm talking about stuff that is so ridiculously. What is the name of the war where the United States battled itself between the Confederacy and the Union? Do I think they both know that's the Civil War? Yes, what document is used as the basis of government, now that one does one of them say the Declaration of Independence instead of the Constitution, maybe. Maybe one of the two misses that two. Wait a minute.
Speaker 2:Your own president who was asked about the Constitution. Well, you know, I'm going to go with Declaration of Independence and he said well, it's a declaration, obviously, and it's a declaration of love and unity, and he was talking about when they asked him what was the Declaration of Independence. So if you got the POTUS saying this right, I have to believe that we got just as many not so informed members of Congress about our founding documents and the importance thereof. Hell, if you asked them what was the preamble, I don't think half of them would know.
Speaker 3:I'd have to review the we Enough to remember the we, the people.
Speaker 2:I'm not even asking you to tell me what it says. Just what is it? Oh, just the. We, the people. If you ask the average Congressman, where does the, where does the preamble go to? Does it go to the pledge of allegiance? Does it go to the US constitution? Does it go to the or just some random stuff? Or does it go to the article of the federation? Or Does it go to the or just some random stuff, right? Or does it go to the Articles of Confederation, or does it go to the Bible?
Speaker 2:Yeah, Like I guarantee you. I guarantee you, a significant number of our representatives will fail that question and that is scary, but the thing is that's my point.
Speaker 3:I don't want it to be difficult. That's not difficult though. I understand that, but for some people it is.
Speaker 2:What is the bar? What are the colors of the flag? Washington DC God damn right, All right, you're good Congressman, Go ahead and go.
Speaker 3:So here's the funny thing like that, like if that could be one of the questions. What are the three? What are the three prominent colors on the flag? You might have some people like yellow and green, the gas flag, that's the only flag I reckon, or is it yellow or black? So? But preamble OK, you could trip some people up with the preamble, sure.
Speaker 3:You know what is how many, how many questions or how many, how many amendments are in the Bill of Rights. That would get some people the original Bill of Rights. But again, if you're saying you still only need to get seven out of ten, I think they all pass. I do think MTG and Crockett, both again depending on which question, and then what you have to do is you actually have to have about 20 questions. So when you hand it out they're all different, just like in high school, you know. So you can't look over at somebody else. What did you get for three? I don't know, that's a different one than you, oh my God. Three, the three, the Bible? No, no, that's not mine. Mine doesn't say the Bible on three, mine says the legislature. What do you mean?
Speaker 2:number three so I can cut this point clean. If we were to give the members of Congress the sitting members of Congress a 20 question civics test With the grading criteria being 70 percent above, what is the percentage of sitting Congress members do you think will pass?
Speaker 3:When we're talking about basic level civics.
Speaker 2:Basic. We're talking 9th grade. What is 9th grade?
Speaker 3:civics 9th grade civics. I think there is a 95% pass rate at least. No way, no way. Now high school civicsics I think if you're talking high school civics it probably drops down to around 85 percent so what do you think about?
Speaker 2:what do you think? Members of the administration. Members of the administration how many? You think okay? Yeah, we, we're definitely cutting this up and I got to get the comments. Matter of fact, this is going to be the first segment we run this week, because I have to hear the comments.
Speaker 3:There is no way I never see the comments anyway, I'm thinking 60% at best and with that you could put a thing that says go to the poll and vote and see what happens, but okay, but hold on. This goes back to a very similar thing in terms of if you ask the average person, if we asked you 20 questions about the country, about civics first of all, how many people don't even know what civics is? Right country about civics.
Speaker 3:First of all, how many people don't even know what civics is Right? But if you were to say we're going to ask you 20 questions, what would the average person and again, let's go ninth grade civics or high school, because you're going to have a huge drop, because I don't think even ninth graders. I think if you had ninth grade civics questions for ninth graders, they do better than the average American because hopefully they've been studying it that year. But the further you get away from a civics class, it's like anything, you forget about it, unless you're somebody who likes politics, like you. Ask our audience anybody who's watching this and is willing to pay attention to what we're saying. Ask our audience anybody who's watching this and is willing to pay attention to what we're saying. My guess is their knowledge on civics is actually probably pretty high. Right, but if you talk to Sportsbro, who is only worried about NFL or NBA or what's going on in the playoffs yeah, I mean civics I don't give a crap. I don't care about government stuff. What do I care?
Speaker 3:I think that's the person who's still going out and voting every four years. Yeah, I think they have to Not even that, though, what's our voting turnout every year of eligible voters Are we lucky to get. Have we even broken 50% recently?
Speaker 2:No, I think the Biden one was the highest turnout because he was, you know, you literally could do it from your couch, literally. You know what? I think they have a show. Are you Smarter Than a Fifth Grader? For a Reason? Yeah, I am extremely pessimistic, so I'm betting low when it comes to that sort of thing.
Speaker 3:So, liberty, I get your point. That said, knowing what they like by the media or whoever it is, I think that that's where the problem becomes. If you are going to listen to Trump or Biden, or MTG or OAC and say, oh well, what they say is just good enough, I'm good, that's the problem.
Speaker 2:I'll give you a prime example. Right, I'll give you a prime example. So they did a split poll when they were doing testing. They sent a poll out to Republican voters and they asked them two questions Out of the two policies, which policy did you prefer and why? The first policy was Obamacare. The second policy was the Affordable Care Act. Right, and astoundingly, they voted overwhelmingly that they could not. They hated the Obamacare plan and they had every reason in the book about privacy and my lawyers and this, that and the other. But on that same exact poll, the very next question, they voted overwhelmingly for the Affordable Care Act because it was a solid policy. So that's why Liberty knows they need to know more than just the policy, because people, again, are ignorant and they can be. They can be manipulated easily.
Speaker 3:Yeah. And if you did that same poll for Democrats and said what, what was your favorite part of the inflation reduction act? Exactly For Democrats, 95% would say what it brought down inflation.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it's, that's what I'm saying. So either red or blue is the same thing. Just, the vast majority of people. They don't care to go past the headline, right? Or you can attach it A prime example what was the other one? The uproar about the emails, right? Or I'll give you a better one. Right, trump and Mar-a-Lago with the documents? Right, it was absolutely, absolutely. And then two weeks later, biden had him in a Corvette, in a garage and everybody's like but it's the same thing, it's the same thing. So people are easily manipulating it and that's a psychology thing, right? You know, it just depends on what your biases are.
Speaker 3:Oh, liberty, you're now making our argument for us, the information that they get. If it's not a, if kids are out of school, I would argue at least 90% of kids do not read a book after high school. I defend the right of people to remain stupid as well, but I don't want them voting.
Speaker 2:But they affect the rest of us, though, with their voting. But you know what the cool thing about it I found out? You know what's really cool about that is that's how America no, you're good, that's how America always has been right. So, matter of fact, what was the election cycle when David Crockett was getting elected into the Senate out of Tennessee? They did. They did the exact similar thing, right? So a lot of this, a lot of this was the exact same way, right? But they use newspapers and people were sending in comments and all this other stuff, the exact same way we're doing digitally. And it just showed it. Yeah, it just showed the majority of the country. If you don't recognize the name, or if you don't don't, you know, recognize the policy that that your favorite politician has associated the name with you, don't give two shits about it, right? So it's not. It's not unique what we're going through. It just. I guess, with the access, we're able to see it more abundantly. Right, like America has always done.
Speaker 2:We've I mean we've always been misinformed or easily manipulated Americans have when it comes to voting.
Speaker 3:So I think there's a little bit difference here, because in the 1700s and 1800s the problem was there weren't enough schools and there weren't enough kids going to school and getting formal educations because of the agrarian style of America.
Speaker 2:Fair enough, because of the agrarian style of America, fair enough.
Speaker 3:So those that went to school got a pretty decent education, more classical education, 20th century rolls around. There you go Right, right. Then you roll around into the 20th century and this is when the public school system starts coming into play and they start making it. Basically some of the well, I mean it was, it was social engineering by a lot of the mega, you know the Rockefellers and I'm not saying Rockefeller himself, but Rockefeller, chase Ford, all those guys and they were basically saying we need workers, so we're going to educate them just well enough to be able to read an instruction manual, so then go work in the factories. So until we get to the point where education becomes a priority and I don't know if that will ever happen, I don't know.
Speaker 3:It's amazing to me I talked to my kids about this that they don't like to read and they don't like to read books. And you know my youngest, she does TikTok or whatever. And the amazing thing is like, if you're a boomer or you're a Gen Xer, you look at this and you go this is the most incredible thing in the history of humanity. This little device is more revolutionary than airplanes, than nuclear power, than fire, like really. This is it. This is the pinnacle of human evolution, where we're at, and human knowledge. And these kids use it to watch silly videos about silly things and lip syncs and whatever else. And if you say, hey, I'll give you $10 if you go on and you actually read a book, and they go, man, it's not worth it. You know it's such a disconnect. And when idiocracy becomes the reality, of whether it's the United States or whatever, of whether it's the United States or whatever, I don't know if it'll quite get that bad, because by then we'll be under the Japanese overlords who actually are still worried about education.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I want to bring this up, so I left it up for a reason. So, liberty, when he was talking about you know in rural areas with low literacy rates.
Speaker 2:Crockett's legend being passed around like folklore is the exact same thing that AI is doing and deep fake manipulation. It's the same thing, right, it is the same thing. And I'll give you a prime example. Right, people will say, oh well, biden was good for the economy Eventually sure, there are some things that could be manipulated. Or they'll say, oh, I'll give you the immigration issue, right? Oh, immigration is that the other. But then you tell them well, president, 44 deported more people than Trump and Biden combined. And they're like oh well, I didn't know that. Right, so it's the same thing, it's. There's a difference.
Speaker 2:We have access. We have access now to more knowledge than at any other time in human history, yet we are the most ignorant. I think we are. We are at the precipice of being the most ignorant society in human history, and I don't think that's a coincidence, I think it's by design. And I said this before with the racist diatribe right, they used to have this racist trope that came out in the 90s. We used to hear it a lot, and I think I told you about it before. If you wanted to hide anything from a nigga, put it in a book, and I think, just like, yeah, you can't say that I got it, I got this part. So I think, just like with that, just like with Pratt, it spilled over into society's mainstream. What was once meant for a certain segment our poorest and our uneducated has now spilled over into the mainstream. And now it is normal to be uneducated, it is normal to be loud and wrong, or loud and misinformed than to be quiet and knowledgeable. But yeah, I talked a lot, dan, go ahead.
Speaker 3:Okay, no, that's fine. I want to talk about Thad's point and then keep going through and Liberty's last point. Okay, thad said we place a value in everything but education. We punish people for becoming educated in this country. I don't know if punished is the right word. I think mocked might be the right word, but that's true of. That's been going on for a long, long time, because when you have the kids going out in public schools, those kids who excelled were called bookworms, they were called eggheads. They were oh, look at that nerd. This goes. Look, this happened to me back in the. You know, I was growing up in the 80s and oh, what a nerd. Oh he's, he's just a total. Yeah, he can go, he'll look at him, he does his test and get a's on everything. What a nerd and like. And then you had and the ironic thing is, then you had a movie like revenge of the nerds come out and suddenly it was like, maybe it's okay to be a nerd, right get out of my head, man.
Speaker 3:No, the nerds got the nerds come out and suddenly it was like maybe it's OK to be a nerd, right, the nerds you know. Hey, look at the end of the movie the nerd got the girl out Right. So there's this whole turnaround and you start seeing the jocks kind of as the big meathead idiots. But ironically, you know most jocks honestly most jocks do actually pretty well in school. So it's this kind of this idea, this stereotyping, that happens. But Liberty as far as by design or conspiracy, the fact that people or the fact that people are lazier, now I do think. Originally again, I do think it was by design to some degree, because those people that were funding a lot of the education initiatives in this country were the very large, powerful men that ran factories and things that you need. You need to have a certain level of I don't want to say stupidity, because that's not the right word you have to have a apathy. You have to have a certain level of apathy to be able to take, take a uh a a nut and put it onto a post and repeat 5 000 times a day, because your job is to put the gears onto the gearbox and that is your job. You have to do that 5,000 times a day. If you don't have a level of apathy, you're going. What am I doing? This is the dumbest thing ever. But here's the funny thing I've been making this argument now for almost 20 years. We are all now George Jetson. Do you remember what George Jetson's job at Spacely Sprockets was? On the Jetsons, he pressed a button. That was his job. Service industry. Now it's pressing a button. You go online and you are pressing buttons, or you're a bank teller and you press buttons or whatever. We are a service industry driven country that has got away from building things and doing things ironically, from doing the sprocket to pressing buttons, but it's the same idea. So I think that it did come off of that. But now, now Liberty. Yes, you're absolutely right, and that's a whole nother thing we've we've talked about, I think. I think some of our upcoming guests. We've got a guest that's coming up in the next two months. We're going to be talking about schools and how schools are failing and anti intellectualism. I've started reading a book that she brought up. We've talked to her and we're going to bring it the idea of liberty. They want to work, less part-time work. They want their ideas respected. Here's the problem. That's not even what they want. They want to be able to become rich and famous because they made funny videos yeah, and famous because they made funny videos yeah. And when you have an unrealistic expectation of I'm going to become an influencer and I'm going to make money because I can create, and you see it, there are.
Speaker 3:There are people who do this, mr Beast. I think we all know who Mr Beast is. I read a report that Mr Beast was offered a billion dollars for his channels and his content and to continue to a billion dollars, and he turned it down and that was the right move. Who broke it down and said, with how much he's making, he shouldn't sell it because this is what he does. But for every one, mr Beast, there's a thousand guys like KG and I who do podcasts that aren't going to go anywhere. Kg and I really don't do this because it's like, oh, we're going to get big and we're going to get a big audience, we're going to start making money, we're going to be able to retire For us. Like KG and I, my wife has said why do you do that? You guys don't make any money on it. Blah, blah, blah. I say it's not about money.
Speaker 3:This guarantees that I can talk to my friend for an hour or two every week, and so this started off as us just BSing over lunches and it's evolved into us being able to talk online the same way as we did in lunches and we think it's interesting for us, so maybe other people find it interesting. So, yeah, ai is going to do a lot of this stuff. Ai is going to Grok. You can make music on some of this AI stuff that sounds.
Speaker 2:Time is kicking our ass in content production anyway, right Like that sounds. China's kicking our ass in content production anyway, right Like that's.
Speaker 3:Yeah.
Speaker 3:We are, ai will never be able to sit down and have a discussion. That, to me, I don't think, though I don't think AI will be able to sit down and have an off-the-cuff discussion in a way that is interesting enough to keep it involved. But I could be wrong, because I've had some discussions with Grok recently and tried to trip up the AI, and I've been able to. I've been able to get AI to contradict itself, and then suddenly it goes oh, you're right to point out the contradiction. It's like yeah, because the algorithm tells you to do that. Right, china's not way smarter than us. China just has way more people.
Speaker 2:That's what Zillow got in trouble for. That's what got him kicked out of Doge.
Speaker 3:Yeah. So here's that. I agree it will never replace human creativity completely, but it will be able to create mediocre content that people will watch and ingest enough that it will damage the average mediocre. So if I'm a writer for the Hallmark movie, if I'm a writer of Hallmark movies, I'm scared crapless about AI. Because if I go in and say, hey, ai, write me a tool, write me a script, go back and read all the scripts from Hallmark movies over the last 20 years and write me a script about a young girl in a small town that does this, this and this and kind of, just put it in and it'll spit out a very generic and somebody will produce it. It because you already see Hallmark making the movies like that True comedy and truly interesting movies. Are you going to have a AI be able to do what Christopher Nolan does? No. Are you going to be able to have them do what Larry David does? No. Are you going to have an AI late night host that is basically Space Ghost? Yeah, you will, and people will watch it.
Speaker 2:Was that Gene Simmons that talked about? I think Gene Simmons had an issue with that a while. He said something to the effect of people are afraid to suck right, and that's what drives a lot of this AI. Like, back in the day, you had to, like, get some friends and, like you know, get booed off of talent shows in high school and, you know, get booed out of a couple of bars and play crappy music in your garage for a couple of years before you got to that point.
Speaker 2:But now everything is so instant gratification. People don't want to go through that sucky phase, right, and I think we're a product of that on our own, because we kind of steamrolled it as a society which shows like American Idol and this, that and the other. We give the illusion of overnight success, but the reality is it takes years of hard work to become an overnight success, right, and that's where people not only in entertainment but people are realizing that in school too, like, oh, nobody wants to put in the work to learn, right, they want a micro loan, they want to do everything in micro doses. What's the most bang I can put in the least amount of time.
Speaker 3:Yeah, why do I need to know? Why do I need to know? I've got it all right here.
Speaker 2:I don't know, man. I think we're past the tipping point of changing.
Speaker 3:Maybe, I hope not.
Speaker 2:You have again, like I said, history with its indicators. In the 80s we had a president out of California who was a governor, who had an issue with an educated African-American populace, right. So his solution to that was to raise the prices of schools, right, and I think that was the creation of of our friends Fannie and Freddie Right who with the. That was the creation of of our friends Fannie and Freddie Right who with the provisionalization of student loans and that's, when you see that, that huge boom in tuition.
Speaker 3:So we got the, but then you had W come in and do. No Child Left Behind.
Speaker 2:Well, again too. But that was no Child Left Behind, with the addition of cutting out the service, the service courses which led to creative thinking and entrepreneurship. Right, it was no child left behind. But at the same time, we're taking out your shop, we're taking out a, we're taking your music class, we're taking out.
Speaker 3:Oh for sure, Liberty, it probably didn't even take a minute. However long it took you to write in the prompt, it probably took AI half a second to actually create music. But I think that Thad's point is right in that whatever AI can do, it can't do creativity better than a human.
Speaker 3:I think that's kind of the big thing. Now we dumb ourselves down to a larger degree, because I've always argued with things like American Idol. Okay, who wins American Idol? For the most part there is some talent. They can sing. For the most part, right. But do you think Bob Dylan could have won American Idol? No Of course not Tom Petty. No, of course not. There are some like does Olivia Newton-John win American Idol Absolutely.
Speaker 2:Does Bruce Springsteen win American Idol?
Speaker 3:No, Not a chance. But then again we also have transgenders that are winning women's pageants. We have we have, shall we say, gravitationally blessed women that are now in beauty pageants Look.
Speaker 2:Personally, I think a beauty pageant should, should be about people yeah, you should be natural, like you shouldn't be able to do. Pageant should be about beauty. It's a beauty pageant. Yeah, it should be natural, like you shouldn't be able to do. See, and that's you know what. Man, I don't know if we got enough time for that.
Speaker 3:And people might get mad at me and say how dare you say that? It's about looks, it's a beauty pageant, the whole point. Now, if you want to have a, just a pageant for the most talented person, Look, I'm going to. Okay, so when I went on my mission in Taiwan, there was a sister missionary and if this gets back to her Sorry, sister Ramirez, who I did not I thought Sister Ramirez had a lot of Sister Ramirez and I did not see eye to eye on a lot of things. Okay, after our missions. Now she went back to Wyoming. She won the Miss Wyoming pageant. Now, she was very talented musically and I think.
Speaker 3:But as far as, like, attractiveness, I didn't see it. Now, I'm not going to win any, any beauty pageants or handsome pageants either. So don't get me wrong, I'm very realistic about it. But when I saw that I was just like, seriously, I thought it was a beauty pageant. So I think we get away.
Speaker 3:We've evolved in ways that are good and we've evolved, evolved in ways that are bad, and I think there is a way back.
Speaker 3:And honestly, I think AI is going to either pull us back from the precipice or push us over with both hands.
Speaker 3:Because, again, I look at AI and I say, if AI is done in a way that is for the benefit of mankind, we are going to turn the corner and take off in every field imaginable, because AI will be able to train people how to learn and push them in ways and push them in ways Again. Like I would love to have a situation where my 11-year-old sat down in front of a computer and, according to what interactions AI has real AI had with my daughter, ai comes back and says all right, my daughter's really talented in this, so we're going to make it harder for her to learn, you know, challenge her more in English, because she's a good writer or whatever it is Right, and where she's not as strong at math. I'm going to slow down a little bit. Make sure you understand the basic more and do all that they can. They can Liberty, but not in a. It's not in a way that I think is intuitive enough to hand my daughter off to the AI.
Speaker 2:That was the Chinese. Remember? We watched a video a couple of months ago about the Chinese school system, who had integrated that. So you have your own Japanese Japanese, your own, your own AI tutor, specifically tied into your lesson plan. So the teacher would give the instruction, but, based on your performance in homework and classwork, the tutor would then create an individualized plan on your strengths and weaknesses to help you. I think that would be phenomenal. But here's the problem, though. That leads to a more educated society and a society of thinkers is dangerous to those in power. So do I think it's by design. Sure, it's easier for me to fill your algorithms up with mundane dances and you know trends and stuff that's going to keep you distracted, as opposed to give you the information and the tools you need. To know that I'm stealing from you and I'm not working in your best interest, because the minute you find out that I'm not working in your best interest, you're going to try to hold me accountable, and that's the last thing I want you to do.
Speaker 3:My wife spends time online Not a ton, but she does. My kids do. My wife didn't know what was going on with India and Pakistan until I told her a couple days ago we were at the brink of nuclear war and it never came up in her feed. And yes, the government is intentionally keeping voters stupid. Yes, Absolutely.
Speaker 2:I will tell you that. What happened with the governor from California who won the presidency? It started with him. It started before that.
Speaker 3:Well, before that, it started in the 20th century.
Speaker 2:No, no, no, I'm talking about the intent of that. It started in the 20th century. No, no, no, I'm talking about the intent. The intent was to shift the lower income and disenfranchised from being able to be self-sufficient. What happened was you saw a big shift in the age where they took out the classes of. They took out the skills classes, right, both parties. So they took out the skills and entrepreneurial classes, right, because I think we kind of talked about this with Dubois and Washington right, where one says, hey, man, as long as you have a skill, you're useful. And then Dubois was like no, no, no, go to college, get an education and then you'll be more useful, right. So we kind of saw that playing out. Yeah, that's what I'm saying, that we kind of saw that playing out.
Speaker 2:So what happened is they got rid of the auto shops, they got rid of the home makes, they got rid of all the service-based classes, right, and they filled it with all this mundane stuff. That's crazy, right. And then they allowed the students to rack up all this debt, getting these degrees and stuff that holds no quantifiable value, right, and over time it just amplified, right. So it started in the 80s. You had this kind of resurgent in the 90s, where you had this, this, this Focus shift from being a self-sufficient individual to go to college, get an education Right.
Speaker 2:So society shifted and then in the 90s everybody got degrees and they had all kinds of weird degrees in philosophical arts and I got a degree in 13th century painting and all this other stuff right. And then, as that became more lucrative, people started to see it as a business opportunity, right. So then they realized that hey, if I keep offering you degrees and I keep raising the requirements, I can keep getting money, because you're going to have to keep getting loans to pay for college. So yeah, I do believe it's all by design.
Speaker 2:And if I got to go get my 10-4 hat, I will absolutely go get my 10-4 hat, but I am convinced the government wants to keep us stupid my 10-4 hat, but I am convinced the government wants to keep us stupid.
Speaker 3:I will say the pendulum is swinging back to a degree at least. Here in Georgia there are opportunities for, and in Texas too. Construction is a class you can take. You can specialize in construction, you can do cosmetology here. I've seen shop here is actually one of the classes had a firefighter. They could go in and they were voluntary firefighters yeah, some different. So it's kind of swinging back where college degrees now are not necessarily the end. All be all Right. And I've tried to push my son towards plummet honestly, because I think everybody needs a toilet. But if that's not what he wants to do, so be it. The arts are important, but we also push the idea that everybody can be an artist. There's no such thing as good or bad art, it's all subjective. Meanwhile the government went in and bought all the Truman Capote art just to confuse the Russians. So there's a lot of stuff that happens behind the scenes. And.
Speaker 3:I agree that degrees used to be. I do believe degrees used to be about you went to school for four years and you showed employers that you had the willingness to go in and stick with something for four years and then that showed something. But now I'm with KJ. It's a moneymaker and you have professors that go in and they check the box maker. And you have professors that go in and they check the box, and as long as they get their really pretty solid paycheck and without having to do too much, especially once they get tenure, then they can do whatever they want and there is there's some legit, legitimate pushback for that, and so I think I'll, I'll go last, I'll go last word for me, yep, and then KJ, you can wrap it up.
Speaker 3:But I think that as parents and grandparents, it is going to be imperative that the adults that care make sure that the children understand why education is important, why critical thinking is important, and then, if the kids aren't willing to do it, force their kids to learn how to critically think, because if you and I've caught, I've been caught sometimes if you're not able to tell the difference between a real image and an AI image and it's only going to get worse.
Speaker 3:A real image and an AI image, and it's only going to get worse. You're going to have to really put on your cynical glasses and go. It's all fake. And so I'm going to have to figure this out on my own, and maybe that's going to be. The positive pushback is, I can't trust anybody, so if I can't figure this out on my own, then it's on. You know, I'm not going to believe anybody else until I accept it for myself, and maybe that's the basis of that's the basis of religion too, and maybe that's what it becomes is the religion of self-education, which is not a bad thing.
Speaker 2:That's it. I like it, man? Um, I guess I would. I would just piggyback off of that and say you know, no, no ruling society will give you the information to overthrow them. Right? I've always been a firm believer that I will teach my kids everything they need to know and I will allow them to supplement my teaching because it's my responsibility. Nobody's going to teach my kid black history because it's not their responsibility. Nobody's going to teach my kid history or math, or it's my responsibility. The school system will supplement, and then they do a shitty job at doing that.
Speaker 2:So, personal responsibility, training your tribe, getting your own people where they need to be I think we've got to get back to that. We've supplemented, we've supplemented too many, too many of our responsibilities to the government, and now it's time, as a society, to to take back our own responsibility. Right, we can no longer blame the school systems for our kids being dumb. As a parent, you have to take some some right. Right, and you can't you just, you just can't rely on the government. It was never meant to be relied on, and people have, you know, perverted and manipulated your belief system to making you feel that way. So you got to take your power back. You know self--sustain, get in the garden, learn how to feed yourself, learn how to cook, learn how to educate yourself and get ready. Parents got to get educated too. Parents got to get educated too Everybody. It's a societal issue. It's's systemic and the only way to break it is to be the first one. Somebody got to be the first one, other than that lance. You got anything else? Utah?
Speaker 3:hey, man, nba draft, nba draft tomorrow night let's go jazz hey, let's let the ping pong balls fall, in your favor may may the nba ping pong balls. Be forever in the jazz's favor, because if there's something we need, we need need a white superstar in Salt Lake City, a white superstar man.
Speaker 2:I'm telling y'all we'll see y'all next week man. Hey, liberty, dad, everybody thanks for coming through. Allie, I know you're gone, baby, but thank you for stopping by. We always appreciate y'all. See y'all next week, we out.
Speaker 1:Gee man, what do you want to do tonight?
Speaker 2:The same thing we do every night. Pinky, Try to take over the world. All right, yo, let's get into it. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 1:You're preaching freedom. Try to take over the world.
Speaker 2:The hands of the greatest chaplain in the world, mr Lance O'Neill, try to take over the world. And greatest chaplain in the world, mr Larson Neal. Take over the world, yo.
