September 25, 2025 • 37 mins
Mary Katharine Ham and Karol Markowicz break down some of the week’s most talked-about issues—from the Biden administration’s role in social media censorship and the lasting impacts of COVID-era restrictions, to the uproar over Jimmy Kimmel’s return. They also examine the looming government shutdown and what recent polling reveals about growing fractures inside the Democratic Party. Normally is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
I think normal, like the show with normalis takes to win,
the news gets weird. I have many Catherine, and.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
I'm Carol Mark Wins. Is this the weekend? Yet it
feels like should we be again?
Speaker 1 (00:14):
I don't think it's even and.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
This is like a really long week, and I don't.
I don't know why. I just maybe the news is
again NonStop and so much going on. You know, I
was thinking about this as we were discussing our topics today.
We're not even going to talk about that. Trump said
that Ukraine could win the war against Russia as a
side yesterday. I liked the entire maybe I'll get it
(00:38):
like next week, but not today, in.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
The entire speech at the you in General Assembly, which
would have been a two week story like ten years ago.
But we'll get right at some point.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Right, we're not even We're not even getting into it
because there's so much.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
Other news goodness.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
I think that one of the biggest stories that doesn't
feel like a big story is that Google has admitted
that the Biden administration and pressured them to shut down
various YouTube accounts, including that of FBI Deputy Director Dan Bengino,
White House counter Terrorism chief Sebastian Gorka, it's really kind
(01:13):
of crazy, So Google, This is from Fox. Google detailed
it's remarkable shift in a document first obtained by Fox
News Digital that a lawyer for the company provided to
the House to just share a committee the new policy
from Google could affect both average users and well known figures.
The document included a section about the Biden administration and
said the White House officials at the time pushed Google
(01:35):
behind the scenes to remove perceived information related to COVID nineteen. Now,
why this is not a huge story is because we
all knew this. We knew it, We knew that this
was happening. This confirmation is very good because we could
point to it and be like, look, we were right
once again. But it doesn't feel new. We all knew it,
(01:58):
we were right.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Well.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
The other reason it's not a big story is because
much of the media thinks that this was the right decision,
This was right good, this.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Was a good censorship.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah, and Jim Jim Clyburne, a representative a Democrat representative,
said as much on Abby Phillips's show on CNN. She
strangely did not interrupt him while he was skewing his
own misinformation about how it's good to shut people down
for misinformation, which, by the way, we now know was
not in misinformation much. Right, Right, we were right, We
(02:32):
were all right about so many things. Yeah, I think
this should be a giant deal. I have been consistent
in saying that the head of the SEC should not
be job owning. Is the term which is I was.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
Gonna say, is this job owning? Because I only learned
the word job owning that everybody's using like in every
other sentence, like two days ago, is this job owning?
Speaker 3 (02:56):
Term?
Speaker 1 (02:56):
Job owning is for when the government publicly threatens or
pressures a private entity to make decisions that would limit
people's speech.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
We know that the Biden administration was engaged in this
four years. And not only were they engaged in it
against both misinformation, which is obviously allowed and true information
which was you know, detrimental to people's knowledge base on COVID,
but they did it on the Internet and social media,
(03:26):
where they have absolutely no plausible place or power for regulation. Now,
the SEC does have regulation powers over broadcast networks, right,
so that's.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Don't understand that distinction.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Yeah, there's a slight difference here. I still don't think
Brendan Carr should be doing that. But there is a
slight difference in that there's no plausible place where they
have power to do this. But of course this is
one of those things where it's like the medium mostly
agrees with the Biden administration. They think it was wise
or that it just had you know, at least they
(03:59):
were doing it for the right reasons. I mean sometimes
people explicitly say that. Derek, I believe it was. Derek
Thompson wrote that just the other day. It was like,
you know, at least they had good reasons for doing
It'm like, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
No, no, lot the reasons for doing it.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Hello, not how we evaluate these things. But yeah, it
had really deleterious effects on people. People lost money from this,
By the way, Where can they go sue them and
get the money back that they would have made from
these channels, because they should because they're like, we're reinstating
your channels, Great, where's my money?
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Mm hmm. The years have lost money and look, not
everybody got to have a career after that. A lot
of people that you've never heard of lost their channels
and that's it for them. They didn't go on to
administration jobs. They didn't go on to fame and fortune elsewhere.
Some of them just quietly disappeared and lost the money
that they were making from their channel. It's look, are
(04:55):
we still mad bro about the COVID years? Yes, But
what's particularly galling here is that, you know, there's so
little conversation about this on the left. They're not doing
any soul searching. And this always makes me crazy because
there's so many people on the right who are like,
I don't like what happened to Jimmy Kimmel. I'm not
(05:16):
one of them. By the way we talked about this,
I'm like, I don't see a problem here. But a
lot of people on the right did see a problem
and spoke out about it. You just don't see that
kind of thing on the left at all. And that's
why the COVID years do still matter to us so much,
because they won't admit what happened. They won't talk about
(05:37):
the shutdowns of speech, they won't talk about the misinformation
that was actually correct. All of that leaves me with
bitterness forever.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
Yeah. Well, and if you play this unequal game for
too long and the other side never admits error or
backs down, and you're consistent the whole time. This is
the part of the argument from folks like you that
I'm very friendly to. It's like, how does that work out?
Exactly right?
Speaker 4 (06:04):
Right now?
Speaker 2 (06:04):
The one side gets this, Yes, exactly.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Greg Lukianov, who runs fire which I like, occasionally slightly
disagree with on some things, but largely think they're they're
good and consistent, he writes, The maddening thing is that
if Google had chosen to stand up to the Biden
administration's job owning, they definitely would have gotten standing, and
I believe they would have won. Instead, we got the
terrible Mrthy v. Missouri decision, in which I do think
(06:29):
there was more than enough evidence to get standing, but
I digress. That was the important case on this kind
of thing, that the court decided that the folks who
were censored did not have standing. Again, I disagree with
him as well. Right, instead of a resounding rebuke to
the idea that the government can make private companies censor
speech that it is forbidden from censoring under the First Amendment,
(06:50):
we still need that decision, O, Titans of Silicon Valley.
So the next time your job owned, consider suing with
us with us. Okay, agree with Greg on this, And also,
isn't the problem for conservatives over and over again that
the government and the corporations are happy to work together
(07:10):
when it's for the right reason.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
The only reason they're coming out now is because they
were invested by investigating by Republicans in Oversight Committee. And
now they're like, ooh, we're on the wrong side of
things now, right, They just they just basically agreed the
censorship was okay. Yeah, So how do we get rid
of that part? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Right, Yeah, all of that is really tough to swallow.
And I don't know how we move forward from this,
because yes, they're all falling into line now now that
there's a Trump administration, now that there's investigations. It shouldn't
have to be that way, And I just I don't
know where we go from here.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
I really don't. And when it's after the fact, the
entire media can go snooze, y'all. Yeah, it's an old story,
old news story.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Yeah yeah. Brian Stelter is not working about this for
some reason.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
Oh yeah, no, that's not in his not in his
newsletter this week.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
No, probably not want to. I want to give a
shout out speaking of COVID to a new documentary that's
out called Fifteen Days The Real Story of America's Pandemic
School Closures if you want to get all riled up.
But also I think it's important to have that kind
of stuff, go into the history of what happened. And
I just think that they lied to us, they kept
(08:28):
things from us, they shut down speech they didn't agree with,
and we have to move forward, but we have to
remember what happened.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Yeah, And of course while this is all happening, everybody's
very angry about the current free speech story, which isn't
that a person was killed in the act of debating
on a college campus, but is that Jimmy Kimmel was
off of work for several days.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
Yeah, for Jimmy.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
As I have said, I think the government did the
wrong thing here by open and it's big old trap. However,
I want to go through Kimmel's monologue, but before we
get to that, I want to play a little clip
first from Ryan Long, who's a comedian who's very clever
and based is probably the word for him, and good
(09:16):
at sort of making front of woke things and conventional
lefty wisdom. And I just want to play this real
quick clip because it embodies how I feel, as a
consistent free speech person about these moments.
Speaker 5 (09:29):
I had a friend she came up to me and
she was like, isn't it crazy? The free speech is gone.
I'm like, you supported every guy get kicked off of
everything for ten years. It feels like a friend that
was like an alcoholic for eight years and just a menace,
then coming back to the party after one day sober
and being like, you guys need to get your life together,
and you're like what.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
You're like, I'm like, you came.
Speaker 5 (09:52):
To my wedding and shit on the game, and the
only reason you're not an alcoholic anymore is because.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
Of the ankle bracelet.
Speaker 5 (10:01):
What are we talking about right now?
Speaker 4 (10:04):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Yeah, it's good.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
No, that's That's how I feel about many of these folks,
including Kimmel, who, by the way, was happy to join
in with cancelations of others with advocacy for censorship of
others as long as they were for the right reasons,
which are the less reasons obviously. Okay, So I listened
to his entire monologue You're welcome everyone seventeen minutes. It
(10:32):
opens with the same line that Trump opened with when
he returned triumphantly after almost being assassinated in Butler, He says,
as I was with his like as I was saying
before I was.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (10:45):
First of all, that was a great line from Trump
into Cribbit is yeah, lady. Also, it makes light of
an assassination attempt by equating it with returning to give
a comedy monologue. Okay, So there's that. That's how he opens.
Four minutes in he thanks some people who are consistent
(11:08):
free speech folks, Clay Travis, ted Cruz among them, people
who he says, it took courage for them to say
that the administration had done the wrong thing on this
courage that, notably Kimmel does not.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
Have, does not have right completely, does not possess that courage.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
No, he's He's happy to jump on any bandwagon during
the Biden administration on any of these issues. By the way,
can we just reflect on the fact that Jimmy Kimmel,
of all people of man show and repeated black face
now passed was never canceled before, Like right, yeah, amazing
he made it through that, Okay, Sam Pinolegiell. So six
(11:50):
minutes in we get this, which is his attempt at
an apology about the whole thing. I think we have
a little clip of it.
Speaker 6 (11:58):
I don't think what I have to say is going
to make much of a difference. If you like me,
you like me. If you don't, you don't. I have
no illusions about changing anyone's mind. But I do want
to make something clear because it's important to me as
a human and that is you understand that it was
never my intention to make light of the murder of
a young man.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
I don't.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
I don't think there's anything funny about it. I posted
a message on Instagram of the daves killed, sending love
to his family and asking for compassion, and I meant it.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
I still do.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
Nor was it my intention to blame any specific group
for the actions of what it was obviously a deeply
disturbed individual. That was really the opposite of the point
I was trying to make. But I understand that to
some that felt either ill timed or unclear, or maybe both.
And for those who think I did point a finger,
I get why you're upset. If the situation was reversed,
(12:53):
there's a good chance I'd have felt the same way.
I have many friends and family members on the other side,
who I love remain close to, even though we don't agree.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
On politics at all.
Speaker 6 (13:04):
I don't think the murderer who shot Charlie Kirk represents anyone.
This was a sick person who believed violence was a
solution and it isn't it ever?
Speaker 2 (13:16):
Okay, Yeah, I mean his friends and family on the
right have heard him blame Republican voters for school shootings.
I just I'm sure he has people on the right
in his life, but he has said horrendous things about
our side.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
Also, I don't appreciate an apology that is like, I'm
sorry you felt if.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
You if you feel if you're mad, then.
Speaker 1 (13:40):
I'm sorry you misheard me. The sentence was very clear.
I think people are gaslighting by telling you it meant
something other than what it meant. The truth is that
he was trying to critique the right for hoping it
was anyone but them, when what he was doing in
that sentence was trying to create a fiction in which
it was but his people. He continues that fiction in
(14:03):
this monologue by saying he didn't represent anything. That's not true.
That's not true. What Kimmel is doing is owning for
himself and I agree with him that his benching was
a speech issue, but he will not allow that Charlie
(14:24):
Kirk's murder is a free speech issue. He will not
allow it. He says that stands for nothing. That was
just violence.
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Right.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
He does not take a moment to be like, hey,
it's really important that he be able to do what
he was doing. I think it's important I do what
I'm doing, But like this man doesn't get to go
home to his family now. He later goes on to
note that satire is a very important part of an
especially important part of American speech and political speech and
(14:55):
protected speech right. He never mentions that debate is a
very important protected part of American free speech culture. Then
he mentions a bunch of things we can all come
together about as a country, including that he shouldn't be benched.
(15:19):
What those unmentioned is we could come together to agree
that Charlie Kirk should not be murdered for saying thoughts
on campus. So, in this way, he has made himself
the only free speech martyr.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Yeah, the only.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
Free speech martyer of the week. And I just think
it's trashy, it's vile, and this is why he will
never be a teammate on this right.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
Yeah, absolutely, he can't be trusted to defend free speech.
He could only be trusted to defend himself.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
Also, one more thing, he has cried on television many
more times than I have in my entire career, and
I have had much more, better, many more better reasons
to cry than this man has. So I would just ask,
in the age of the crying selfie, cut.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
It out, get it together. I want to just add
one more thing. Dave Portnoy has been I think, very
very good on this, and he tweets here's my last
point on Kimmel. If Kimmel came on and apologize like
this the day after his remarks, he probably wouldn't have
been suspended. But by all accounts, he wanted to double
down again for the billions time. This isn't a free
(16:32):
speech issue. He works for Mickey Mouse on Network TV.
Nobody said he was going to jail. He was dealing
with the consequences of making off color jokes about the
murder of a guy who meant a ton to a
ton of people and blamed it on the very people
who love him the most before the body was even cold.
So yeah, there was outrage that Mickey had to deal with.
Then the pendulum swung the other way and they put
him back on the air. Either way, it was never
(16:54):
a free speech issue. When you work for somebody else
and you offend a ton of people, you deal with
the consequences. Him framing this as free speech as a joke.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
By the way, look.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
At him going Dave Portney.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
And by the way, is no one concerned at all
that ABC made its decision after an ABC affiliate had
been shot at by a person who explicitly wanted Kimmel
back on the air. Because that seems like it should
be a big story, and we should.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Interrogate the job owning.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
I don't know, well, we should interrogate the notion just
as cars talking might have put pressure that the shooting
might have put pressure on ABC. And then one last thing,
of course, this terrible California house member or state legislature remember,
(17:46):
always is like popping off about stuff. And he's like,
we got to take away Sinclair's ability to broadcast, which
is the affiliates want to not they want to opt
out of Kimmel. Elizabeth Warren the other Democratic lawmakers have
launched an investigation into next Star and Sinclair, two major
TV station owners that are refusing to air Jimmy Kimmel's
(18:09):
talk show because now you see, it's job owning for
the right reasons.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
It's okay when they do it.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
It's okay when they do it. And she wants to
shut up Sinclair and Next Star and not let them
have freedom of association or freedom show. The free speech.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
Warriors and the left who woke up this last week
are going to be putting it all over their Instagram stories.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
And yeah, they're very principled about that. I can see
it coming. It's gonna be the next Kimmel monologue, which
I will not be watching me neither.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
We'll be right back with Moron normally, where we will
talk governments shut down, and how fun polls have gotten lately.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
But first, it was nearly two years ago that terrorists
murdered more than twelve hundred innocent Israelis and took two
hundred and fifty hostages. Today it seems as if the
cries of the dead and dying have been drowned out
by shouts of anti Semitic hatred. The most brutal attack
on Jewish people since the Holocaust is in danger of
being forgotten in a lot of sectors. Yet as the
world looks away, a light shines in the darkness. It's
(19:08):
a movement of love and support for the people of
Israel that I know you guys are going to want
to get involved with, called Flags of Fellowship and it's
organized by the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. On
October fifth, just a few weeks away, millions of Americans
will prayerfully plant an Israeli flag in honor and solidarity
with the victims of October seventh, twenty twenty three. And
they're grieving families. And now you can be a part
(19:29):
of it too. To get more information about how you
can join the Flags of Fellowship movement, visit the Fellowship
online at IFCJ dot org. That's IFCJ dot org. Check
it out. We're back with normally right after this. Oh righty,
we are back on normally. Let's talk about the government
shutdown because we have to do this periodically, because the government.
(19:52):
Can we just partting to shut down periodically?
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Can't we just play what we said six months ago?
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Or no? Nah, it's like a slightly friend every time.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
A little bit different each time. Right, It's like, here's
the thing.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
I wish they would do their jobs before the deadline.
But as a person who's never done a job before
a deadline, I must have sympathy for this.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Yeah yeah, I actually I also think we said this
last time.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
Yeah, so I have some sympathy. Yeah, here's what's happening,
and I just want to give you guys a little
preview of the fight that's going to go down. So
I believe September thirtieth is the date by which there
needs to be a continuing resolution to continue the funding
of the government. It would be short term. The House
(20:36):
has passed one. The House has passed what is called,
with Republicans in charge, a clean CR. That means there's
nothing else in it. They're just like, let's just do this.
We can all get on the same page that the
government needs to continue to be funded for this short
period of time. We will argue again later. Here's the
clean CR. Pass it in the Senate. We shall be done. Okay,
(20:58):
that's where we are right now.
Speaker 2 (21:01):
That's very diligent of them.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
It actually sounds like the thing democrats and everyone in
the press asks for time what so Yeah, so houses like, okay,
we'll do that. Democrats in the Senate have decided that
they want to add to the clean CR, thereby making
it dirty, dirty, dirty CR, a dirty CR. They have
(21:26):
decided they want to add an extension of COVID era
Obamacare subsidies that were giant extra subsidies that were part
of one of one of many slush funds created during
COVID under alleged emergency conditions that we didn't really need
(21:47):
and that are basically fraudulent and in fact raise everyone's premiums,
because why when people don't have to pay for premiums
and you're subsidizing them, your costs go up. So they
approved these during COVID they put an expiration date on them.
That expiration date is this year, so.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
They'll put a date so far into the future. They
were just like, we'll figure out how to deal with
this by then.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Well, and now their argument is fix our problem we
made for ourselves. And Republicans are like, no, you have
a clean CR. We know you want to continue these subsidies,
which are billions of dollars in handouts to insurance companies,
but we never voted for them. We don't want them.
This is not our job. Take it up with someone else.
(22:37):
And they're like, you're making a healthcare crisis. So that's
where we stand at the moment.
Speaker 2 (22:43):
Can Republicans fight back on this or will they ultimately
fold just to get the cr through.
Speaker 1 (22:49):
I think they can fight this effectively. And that's why
I'm sort of staging it for you guys, because I
think it's important to understand what they're doing here, because
they're saying healthcare cuts, right, Well, there's not a cut.
This is a program that was superfluous to begin with, right,
went mostly to insurance companies. Because, by the way, can
(23:11):
I just point out speaking of things we were right
about that, we've been right about Obamacare the whole time, Yeah,
which is that premiums would go up, the risk pools
would get worse, things would cost more, care would get worse,
coverage would get worse. Have to keep throwing money at it.
And that's what they're doing. And they're afraid that on
(23:31):
October first, when the insurance companies are required by law
by Obamacare, their original failure to send out their notices
that say your premiums are going up, right, that that's
going to be a problem for them. Yeah, I think
you're trying to prevent it by making us do it.
Speaker 2 (23:47):
Yeah, it's getting so far away from the Obama years
that are people even going to connect it to Obamacare?
I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
I'm not sure either, And these things can get so muddied.
And look, Ocrats are really good at just saying crisis, crisis, crisis,
They want to end everything. But I would encourage everyone
to remember that basically any Biden era program approved as
part of IRA or Save whatever Saves America Act or
(24:16):
whatever they were all called are mostly slush funds and
nonsense to put us on a higher spending level that
then Democrats could claim we can never come down from
and therefore get all that money for the future.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
Right, all of them are named, Yeah, all of them
are named like not a slush fund, we promise bill.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
So they made their own problem. They want Republicans to
solve it, and Republicans are like, pass, no, you guys
are going to have to deal with this. So in
the Senate, that's the the game board as it is.
They want to have a meeting with Schumer wants a
meeting with Trump, and Trump's like, why we gave you
a clean cr and they're like, a ha, see he
(24:59):
won't go with us. What dude, you got the thing?
Speaker 2 (25:04):
So yeah, I hope he sticks to that. I hope
he doesn't negotiate, because it sounds like Republicans are for
the first time in forever in a winning situation where
they have done the right thing. I like that.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
I mean, we'll probably fight each other over the cr anyway.
I guess it's different, but that is where we stand
at the moment.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
All right, we'll be right back with more on Normally,
where we preview twenty twenty eight, talk about the latest
polls and Kamala Gavin, what's going on with them? Let's
talk about it. All right. We are back on Normally
with a fun little segment where we get to enjoy
the Democrats disarray and look, we know it's not going
(25:47):
to last. We know it won't always be this way,
but polls have been so much fun lately. Every poll
that comes out, it's like, who even are the Democrats?
Do they even exist? The latest Reuters has which party
has a better plan on crime? Republicans are up by twenty. Immigration,
Republicans are up by eighteen, Foreign conflicts Republicans are up
(26:10):
by twelve. Economy Republicans are up by ten. Corruption Republicans
are up by six. Gun control, Gun control Republicans are
up by four. Political extremism Republicans are up by four.
The only things Democrats are up on for a better
plan are environment, women's rights, healthcare, and respect for democracy.
(26:30):
And that's fine with me.
Speaker 1 (26:33):
Yeah, I mean this is this is probably an indication,
by the way of why they're going after healthcare messaging
on the CR is that they're trying to submit that
for next year as they're winning issue, that they're going
to harp on this even though most of it is
made up, but it is, you know, one of the
few places that they outperform Republicans. Those numbers are tragic
(26:59):
if you crap right.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
And even like women's rights, how are they even up
thirteen points on women's rights? When was the last time
they cared about women's rights at all? I know it's
just code for abortion, I get it, but wow, do
they not care about women's rights? And if Republicans were
better at messaging about it, and you know, maybe Erica
Kirk gives Republicans the kick that they need to become
(27:22):
better messengers on women's rights, I think things could even
turn around on that.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Yeah, on that subject, by the way, Spanberger, who I
keep referencing, But she's important because she's running in Virginia
for governor and she is the great normy hope for Democrats.
She was once again asked about boys in women's locker
rooms or boys in women's sports and couldn't give a
straight answer because even though it's the most normal position
you can have, she can't do it.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
Yeah. Yeah, she runs away because she doesn't want to
be on the record answering, which she really thinks, and
that's sad empathetic.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Yeah. Well, I think part of the problem might be
that these folks just sound like freaked out weirdos all
the time, and like, look, I concede that Donald Trump
is a weirdo, but he's an entertaining weirdo, and that
has made all the difference.
Speaker 2 (28:17):
He is hilarious, and every time I hear him, he
is just He's got a very good natural sense of humor.
And I don't think Democrats can emulate that as well
as they think they can.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Andvin Newsom certainly cannot.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Gavin Newsome, he's funny without meaning to be, Like you know,
apparently Kamala asked him for an endorsement the day that
Biden stepped down and he wrote to her, I think
we talked about this last episode, but Hiking will respond later,
and then never responded. I mean, that's hilarious, but I
don't think he was trying.
Speaker 1 (28:50):
To be I've definitely done that to people before, but
it wasn't over something that important. Shall we listen to
Gavin Newsom's pitch about why twenty twenty eight is important.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
The most important election I'm sure of our lifetime.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
Yeah, let's hear about it.
Speaker 5 (29:02):
I fear that we will not have an election in
twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
I really mean that.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
And the core of my soul unless we wake up
to the code red what's happening in this country, and
we wake up soberly to how serious this moment is.
The core of his soul? What soul? What's sould?
Speaker 1 (29:25):
Also, then why are you in South Carolina?
Speaker 3 (29:28):
Dude?
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Right? Well, what are you doing? You don't believe that
there won't be a twenty twenty eight election?
Speaker 2 (29:34):
Right, You're just.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Full of it. And I don't understand why this apocalyptic
pitch is the only one they can do. It's crazy
one they can do.
Speaker 2 (29:45):
Yeah, and you know, if they're not going to lower
the temperature at ever, now would be a really good
time for that, and they're completely disinterested in doing that.
Noah Rothman tweets about that clip. That's why he staffed
out with Clinton and Harris Aids, who have little experience
in Sacramento and doing speaking tours in South Carolina, which
(30:06):
has almost no competitive races in twenty twenty six, because
he's sure there won't be an election. Maybe it's insurance
just in case. Yeah, he knows what will be an election.
And look Trump, you know, for better or worse, it
could have at different points in his last presidency canceled
elections or on January sixth, after January six refused to
(30:28):
leave the White House. He didn't do any of that.
So I'm pretty confident we're going to have a twenty
twenty eight election. Another tweet that I liked about this,
per Deep Shankar tweets, these are the kinds of unsupported,
politically charged statements that make mentally unstable wackle progressive terrorists
consider violence exactly.
Speaker 1 (30:49):
It does seem like an issue. Also, are you not
doing voter suppression by telling them that there will be
no voting?
Speaker 2 (30:58):
Right?
Speaker 1 (30:58):
I mean, it seems like you're on voters. Yeah, I guess,
but I don't understand this approach because there are people
on the margins who will go Why would I register
to vote? He said, there's going to be no twenty
twenty eight election. Yeah, are you doing this to yourself?
Speaker 2 (31:12):
Had a moment where I was worried they were doing
this to themselves in you know, in the during the
Biden administration, and when i'd be on the road for
speeches and stuff, I'd have people come up to me
and say, I don't think there's a point in voting.
They're they're going to steal it anyway. And I'd be like, yo,
go vote. Don't don't think this because you know.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
Well Trump Trump famously in the runoff with the with
the two Senate seats in Georgia.
Speaker 2 (31:39):
Oh yeah, since I was a messenger.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
And turned Georgia Senate seats blue right, so you can
tell people that their votes don't matter and they might
believe you. So you shouldn't do that.
Speaker 2 (31:50):
He's tone that down, he really has. He's become like, definitely,
go vote guy.
Speaker 1 (31:55):
So yes, so we've corrected that particular messaging problem. I
don't know why they're doing it to themselves. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
So on our last last person we're going to talk
about in this segment, Kamala Harris. Her book is more
interesting than I thought it'd be, not a lot more interesting,
but a touch more interesting. She is taking it to Biden.
How dare he not step down? In advance? She tears
into her husband for not doing enough for her birthday.
(32:24):
She's she's got some grievances and you know it's festivus.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
So I mean, like that part's entertaining. I guess she
has a She has an interesting quality of being simultaneously
extremely cringe and uncompelling at the same time because you're
just listening to slop of words and you don't but like,
some of this is like medium interesting. The problem for
(32:50):
the party is that it has no answers, right, There's
there's no answer as to why she was the person
and didn't get it done. Why none of it's her fault,
As I think Dave Weigel put it, it's all mistakes
made by other people years ago that hurt her. And
(33:11):
it's like, yeah, but you you were supposed to be
the one who wanted to be president, right, you didn't
say anything about those mistakes.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
At all at the time about how like Biden was like,
Now you're like, oh, when I hugged him, he seemed
really feeble, Like you could have mentioned something at the time.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
Yeah, you have seven days because of that. Yes, we
have one comal oclip of her talking about her uh,
her journey on whether she should pick Pete Budajenje for VP.
Here it is.
Speaker 3 (33:39):
You know, you're the first woman elected vice president, You're
a black woman and a South Asian woman elected that
high office, very nearly elected president. To say that he
couldn't be on the ticket effectively because he was gay,
it's hard to hear.
Speaker 4 (33:51):
No, No, that's not what I said that that's that
he couldn't be on the ticket because he is gay.
My point, as I write in the book, is that
I was clear that, you know, one hundred and seven
days in one of the most hotly contested elections for
(34:11):
president and United States against someone like Donald Trump, who
knows no floor, to be a black woman running for
president United States and as a vice presidential running mate
a gay man, with the stakes being so high, it
(34:31):
made me very sad, but I also realized it would
be a real risk.
Speaker 2 (34:38):
It wasn't that hotly contested. Trump won every single swing state.
That's important because how much more could she lose? Like
with a gay man on the ticket, where's her bottom
on this?
Speaker 1 (34:51):
Well, also she says, no, no, no, I didn't say
I didn't hire him because he was gay. I said
I didn't hire him because the stakes were too high
for him to be gay.
Speaker 2 (35:01):
What does that mean?
Speaker 1 (35:02):
It's like, okay, well that's the same thing. You know,
it takes a real special person to just straight up
torpedo the whole DEI thing they have going on. That
she so the liability to do the de I thing
to begin with at this point in time, and then
to continue to embrace it but also admit that you
(35:25):
didn't hire somebody because he was gay. You're you're the
worst of all the worlds. Yes, you're the worst of
all the world.
Speaker 2 (35:31):
Right. And it was obvious also at the time that
she didn't pick jos Shapiro because her party was having
a jew problem. And so it's funny, you know, there's
lots of jokes also, like she didn't want to pick
the gay man, so she picked Tim Wong.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
Yeah, she's I think the biggest disadvantage of this book
tour for Republicans is that it might truly convince the
Democrats that she has no past future right to the
nomination in the future, which would have, of course behoove us.
Because she is so very bad at this.
Speaker 2 (36:07):
Come on, say the terrible with you.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
She's so terrible, horrible, horrible, she really is, and she's
bad in the most friendly places. I watched her on
Madout and I watched her on the View, and she's
terrible in both places. She has not thought through what
these answers should be. She has no anticipation of what
the tough questions I put that in clods because they're
(36:32):
not tough questions are going to be. And she just
flups it once again, once again.
Speaker 2 (36:39):
She doesn't work that she does not put in the work.
She thinks she is smarter than everybody and doesn't have
to do the work. And as I tell my kids
all the time, that doesn't work.
Speaker 3 (36:48):
So won't work.
Speaker 2 (36:49):
It won't work. Yeah, No, it doesn't matter how smart
you are. You gotta do the work, alrighty. Thanks for
joining us on normally normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and
you could subscribe anywhere where you get your podcasts. Get
in touch with us at normallythepod at gmail dot com.
Thanks for listening and when things get weird, act normally
I think normal, like the show with normalis takes to win,
the news gets weird. I have many Catherine, and.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
I'm Carol Mark Wins. Is this the weekend? Yet it
feels like should we be again?
Speaker 1 (00:14):
I don't think it's even and.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
This is like a really long week, and I don't.
I don't know why. I just maybe the news is
again NonStop and so much going on. You know, I
was thinking about this as we were discussing our topics today.
We're not even going to talk about that. Trump said
that Ukraine could win the war against Russia as a
side yesterday. I liked the entire maybe I'll get it
(00:38):
like next week, but not today, in.
Speaker 1 (00:41):
The entire speech at the you in General Assembly, which
would have been a two week story like ten years ago.
But we'll get right at some point.
Speaker 2 (00:47):
Right, we're not even We're not even getting into it
because there's so much.
Speaker 1 (00:50):
Other news goodness.
Speaker 2 (00:52):
I think that one of the biggest stories that doesn't
feel like a big story is that Google has admitted
that the Biden administration and pressured them to shut down
various YouTube accounts, including that of FBI Deputy Director Dan Bengino,
White House counter Terrorism chief Sebastian Gorka, it's really kind
(01:13):
of crazy, So Google, This is from Fox. Google detailed
it's remarkable shift in a document first obtained by Fox
News Digital that a lawyer for the company provided to
the House to just share a committee the new policy
from Google could affect both average users and well known figures.
The document included a section about the Biden administration and
said the White House officials at the time pushed Google
(01:35):
behind the scenes to remove perceived information related to COVID nineteen. Now,
why this is not a huge story is because we
all knew this. We knew it, We knew that this
was happening. This confirmation is very good because we could
point to it and be like, look, we were right
once again. But it doesn't feel new. We all knew it,
(01:58):
we were right.
Speaker 3 (01:59):
Well.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
The other reason it's not a big story is because
much of the media thinks that this was the right decision,
This was right good, this.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
Was a good censorship.
Speaker 1 (02:09):
Yeah, and Jim Jim Clyburne, a representative a Democrat representative,
said as much on Abby Phillips's show on CNN. She
strangely did not interrupt him while he was skewing his
own misinformation about how it's good to shut people down
for misinformation, which, by the way, we now know was
not in misinformation much. Right, Right, we were right, We
(02:32):
were all right about so many things. Yeah, I think
this should be a giant deal. I have been consistent
in saying that the head of the SEC should not
be job owning. Is the term which is I was.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
Gonna say, is this job owning? Because I only learned
the word job owning that everybody's using like in every
other sentence, like two days ago, is this job owning?
Speaker 3 (02:56):
Term?
Speaker 1 (02:56):
Job owning is for when the government publicly threatens or
pressures a private entity to make decisions that would limit
people's speech.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Right.
Speaker 1 (03:05):
We know that the Biden administration was engaged in this
four years. And not only were they engaged in it
against both misinformation, which is obviously allowed and true information
which was you know, detrimental to people's knowledge base on COVID,
but they did it on the Internet and social media,
(03:26):
where they have absolutely no plausible place or power for regulation. Now,
the SEC does have regulation powers over broadcast networks, right,
so that's.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
Don't understand that distinction.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
Yeah, there's a slight difference here. I still don't think
Brendan Carr should be doing that. But there is a
slight difference in that there's no plausible place where they
have power to do this. But of course this is
one of those things where it's like the medium mostly
agrees with the Biden administration. They think it was wise
or that it just had you know, at least they
(03:59):
were doing it for the right reasons. I mean sometimes
people explicitly say that. Derek, I believe it was. Derek
Thompson wrote that just the other day. It was like,
you know, at least they had good reasons for doing
It'm like, no, no, no.
Speaker 2 (04:09):
No, no, lot the reasons for doing it.
Speaker 1 (04:12):
Hello, not how we evaluate these things. But yeah, it
had really deleterious effects on people. People lost money from this,
By the way, Where can they go sue them and
get the money back that they would have made from
these channels, because they should because they're like, we're reinstating
your channels, Great, where's my money?
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Mm hmm. The years have lost money and look, not
everybody got to have a career after that. A lot
of people that you've never heard of lost their channels
and that's it for them. They didn't go on to
administration jobs. They didn't go on to fame and fortune elsewhere.
Some of them just quietly disappeared and lost the money
that they were making from their channel. It's look, are
(04:55):
we still mad bro about the COVID years? Yes, But
what's particularly galling here is that, you know, there's so
little conversation about this on the left. They're not doing
any soul searching. And this always makes me crazy because
there's so many people on the right who are like,
I don't like what happened to Jimmy Kimmel. I'm not
(05:16):
one of them. By the way we talked about this,
I'm like, I don't see a problem here. But a
lot of people on the right did see a problem
and spoke out about it. You just don't see that
kind of thing on the left at all. And that's
why the COVID years do still matter to us so much,
because they won't admit what happened. They won't talk about
(05:37):
the shutdowns of speech, they won't talk about the misinformation
that was actually correct. All of that leaves me with
bitterness forever.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
Yeah. Well, and if you play this unequal game for
too long and the other side never admits error or
backs down, and you're consistent the whole time. This is
the part of the argument from folks like you that
I'm very friendly to. It's like, how does that work out?
Exactly right?
Speaker 4 (06:04):
Right now?
Speaker 2 (06:04):
The one side gets this, Yes, exactly.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Greg Lukianov, who runs fire which I like, occasionally slightly
disagree with on some things, but largely think they're they're
good and consistent, he writes, The maddening thing is that
if Google had chosen to stand up to the Biden
administration's job owning, they definitely would have gotten standing, and
I believe they would have won. Instead, we got the
terrible Mrthy v. Missouri decision, in which I do think
(06:29):
there was more than enough evidence to get standing, but
I digress. That was the important case on this kind
of thing, that the court decided that the folks who
were censored did not have standing. Again, I disagree with
him as well. Right, instead of a resounding rebuke to
the idea that the government can make private companies censor
speech that it is forbidden from censoring under the First Amendment,
(06:50):
we still need that decision, O, Titans of Silicon Valley.
So the next time your job owned, consider suing with
us with us. Okay, agree with Greg on this, And also,
isn't the problem for conservatives over and over again that
the government and the corporations are happy to work together
(07:10):
when it's for the right reason.
Speaker 3 (07:13):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
The only reason they're coming out now is because they
were invested by investigating by Republicans in Oversight Committee. And
now they're like, ooh, we're on the wrong side of
things now, right, They just they just basically agreed the
censorship was okay. Yeah, So how do we get rid
of that part? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:30):
Right, Yeah, all of that is really tough to swallow.
And I don't know how we move forward from this,
because yes, they're all falling into line now now that
there's a Trump administration, now that there's investigations. It shouldn't
have to be that way, And I just I don't
know where we go from here.
Speaker 1 (07:48):
I really don't. And when it's after the fact, the
entire media can go snooze, y'all. Yeah, it's an old story,
old news story.
Speaker 2 (07:56):
Yeah yeah. Brian Stelter is not working about this for
some reason.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
Oh yeah, no, that's not in his not in his
newsletter this week.
Speaker 2 (08:05):
No, probably not want to. I want to give a
shout out speaking of COVID to a new documentary that's
out called Fifteen Days The Real Story of America's Pandemic
School Closures if you want to get all riled up.
But also I think it's important to have that kind
of stuff, go into the history of what happened. And
I just think that they lied to us, they kept
(08:28):
things from us, they shut down speech they didn't agree with,
and we have to move forward, but we have to
remember what happened.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
Yeah, And of course while this is all happening, everybody's
very angry about the current free speech story, which isn't
that a person was killed in the act of debating
on a college campus, but is that Jimmy Kimmel was
off of work for several days.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
Yeah, for Jimmy.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
As I have said, I think the government did the
wrong thing here by open and it's big old trap. However,
I want to go through Kimmel's monologue, but before we
get to that, I want to play a little clip
first from Ryan Long, who's a comedian who's very clever
and based is probably the word for him, and good
(09:16):
at sort of making front of woke things and conventional
lefty wisdom. And I just want to play this real
quick clip because it embodies how I feel, as a
consistent free speech person about these moments.
Speaker 5 (09:29):
I had a friend she came up to me and
she was like, isn't it crazy? The free speech is gone.
I'm like, you supported every guy get kicked off of
everything for ten years. It feels like a friend that
was like an alcoholic for eight years and just a menace,
then coming back to the party after one day sober
and being like, you guys need to get your life together,
and you're like what.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
You're like, I'm like, you came.
Speaker 5 (09:52):
To my wedding and shit on the game, and the
only reason you're not an alcoholic anymore is because.
Speaker 1 (09:58):
Of the ankle bracelet.
Speaker 5 (10:01):
What are we talking about right now?
Speaker 4 (10:04):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (10:04):
Yeah, it's good.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
No, that's That's how I feel about many of these folks,
including Kimmel, who, by the way, was happy to join
in with cancelations of others with advocacy for censorship of
others as long as they were for the right reasons,
which are the less reasons obviously. Okay, So I listened
to his entire monologue You're welcome everyone seventeen minutes. It
(10:32):
opens with the same line that Trump opened with when
he returned triumphantly after almost being assassinated in Butler, He says,
as I was with his like as I was saying
before I was.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Okay.
Speaker 1 (10:45):
First of all, that was a great line from Trump
into Cribbit is yeah, lady. Also, it makes light of
an assassination attempt by equating it with returning to give
a comedy monologue. Okay, So there's that. That's how he opens.
Four minutes in he thanks some people who are consistent
(11:08):
free speech folks, Clay Travis, ted Cruz among them, people
who he says, it took courage for them to say
that the administration had done the wrong thing on this
courage that, notably Kimmel does not.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
Have, does not have right completely, does not possess that courage.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
No, he's He's happy to jump on any bandwagon during
the Biden administration on any of these issues. By the way,
can we just reflect on the fact that Jimmy Kimmel,
of all people of man show and repeated black face
now passed was never canceled before, Like right, yeah, amazing
he made it through that, Okay, Sam Pinolegiell. So six
(11:50):
minutes in we get this, which is his attempt at
an apology about the whole thing. I think we have
a little clip of it.
Speaker 6 (11:58):
I don't think what I have to say is going
to make much of a difference. If you like me,
you like me. If you don't, you don't. I have
no illusions about changing anyone's mind. But I do want
to make something clear because it's important to me as
a human and that is you understand that it was
never my intention to make light of the murder of
a young man.
Speaker 1 (12:16):
I don't.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
I don't think there's anything funny about it. I posted
a message on Instagram of the daves killed, sending love
to his family and asking for compassion, and I meant it.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
I still do.
Speaker 6 (12:31):
Nor was it my intention to blame any specific group
for the actions of what it was obviously a deeply
disturbed individual. That was really the opposite of the point
I was trying to make. But I understand that to
some that felt either ill timed or unclear, or maybe both.
And for those who think I did point a finger,
I get why you're upset. If the situation was reversed,
(12:53):
there's a good chance I'd have felt the same way.
I have many friends and family members on the other side,
who I love remain close to, even though we don't agree.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
On politics at all.
Speaker 6 (13:04):
I don't think the murderer who shot Charlie Kirk represents anyone.
This was a sick person who believed violence was a
solution and it isn't it ever?
Speaker 2 (13:16):
Okay, Yeah, I mean his friends and family on the
right have heard him blame Republican voters for school shootings.
I just I'm sure he has people on the right
in his life, but he has said horrendous things about
our side.
Speaker 1 (13:33):
Also, I don't appreciate an apology that is like, I'm
sorry you felt if.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
You if you feel if you're mad, then.
Speaker 1 (13:40):
I'm sorry you misheard me. The sentence was very clear.
I think people are gaslighting by telling you it meant
something other than what it meant. The truth is that
he was trying to critique the right for hoping it
was anyone but them, when what he was doing in
that sentence was trying to create a fiction in which
it was but his people. He continues that fiction in
(14:03):
this monologue by saying he didn't represent anything. That's not true.
That's not true. What Kimmel is doing is owning for
himself and I agree with him that his benching was
a speech issue, but he will not allow that Charlie
(14:24):
Kirk's murder is a free speech issue. He will not
allow it. He says that stands for nothing. That was
just violence.
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Right.
Speaker 1 (14:33):
He does not take a moment to be like, hey,
it's really important that he be able to do what
he was doing. I think it's important I do what
I'm doing, But like this man doesn't get to go
home to his family now. He later goes on to
note that satire is a very important part of an
especially important part of American speech and political speech and
(14:55):
protected speech right. He never mentions that debate is a
very important protected part of American free speech culture. Then
he mentions a bunch of things we can all come
together about as a country, including that he shouldn't be benched.
(15:19):
What those unmentioned is we could come together to agree
that Charlie Kirk should not be murdered for saying thoughts
on campus. So, in this way, he has made himself
the only free speech martyr.
Speaker 2 (15:35):
Yeah, the only.
Speaker 1 (15:36):
Free speech martyer of the week. And I just think
it's trashy, it's vile, and this is why he will
never be a teammate on this right.
Speaker 2 (15:47):
Yeah, absolutely, he can't be trusted to defend free speech.
He could only be trusted to defend himself.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
Also, one more thing, he has cried on television many
more times than I have in my entire career, and
I have had much more, better, many more better reasons
to cry than this man has. So I would just ask,
in the age of the crying selfie, cut.
Speaker 2 (16:11):
It out, get it together. I want to just add
one more thing. Dave Portnoy has been I think, very
very good on this, and he tweets here's my last
point on Kimmel. If Kimmel came on and apologize like
this the day after his remarks, he probably wouldn't have
been suspended. But by all accounts, he wanted to double
down again for the billions time. This isn't a free
(16:32):
speech issue. He works for Mickey Mouse on Network TV.
Nobody said he was going to jail. He was dealing
with the consequences of making off color jokes about the
murder of a guy who meant a ton to a
ton of people and blamed it on the very people
who love him the most before the body was even cold.
So yeah, there was outrage that Mickey had to deal with.
Then the pendulum swung the other way and they put
him back on the air. Either way, it was never
(16:54):
a free speech issue. When you work for somebody else
and you offend a ton of people, you deal with
the consequences. Him framing this as free speech as a joke.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
By the way, look.
Speaker 2 (17:04):
At him going Dave Portney.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
And by the way, is no one concerned at all
that ABC made its decision after an ABC affiliate had
been shot at by a person who explicitly wanted Kimmel
back on the air. Because that seems like it should
be a big story, and we should.
Speaker 2 (17:21):
Interrogate the job owning.
Speaker 1 (17:23):
I don't know, well, we should interrogate the notion just
as cars talking might have put pressure that the shooting
might have put pressure on ABC. And then one last thing,
of course, this terrible California house member or state legislature remember,
(17:46):
always is like popping off about stuff. And he's like,
we got to take away Sinclair's ability to broadcast, which
is the affiliates want to not they want to opt
out of Kimmel. Elizabeth Warren the other Democratic lawmakers have
launched an investigation into next Star and Sinclair, two major
TV station owners that are refusing to air Jimmy Kimmel's
(18:09):
talk show because now you see, it's job owning for
the right reasons.
Speaker 2 (18:14):
It's okay when they do it.
Speaker 1 (18:15):
It's okay when they do it. And she wants to
shut up Sinclair and Next Star and not let them
have freedom of association or freedom show. The free speech.
Speaker 2 (18:26):
Warriors and the left who woke up this last week
are going to be putting it all over their Instagram stories.
Speaker 1 (18:31):
And yeah, they're very principled about that. I can see
it coming. It's gonna be the next Kimmel monologue, which
I will not be watching me neither.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
We'll be right back with Moron normally, where we will
talk governments shut down, and how fun polls have gotten lately.
Speaker 1 (18:46):
But first, it was nearly two years ago that terrorists
murdered more than twelve hundred innocent Israelis and took two
hundred and fifty hostages. Today it seems as if the
cries of the dead and dying have been drowned out
by shouts of anti Semitic hatred. The most brutal attack
on Jewish people since the Holocaust is in danger of
being forgotten in a lot of sectors. Yet as the
world looks away, a light shines in the darkness. It's
(19:08):
a movement of love and support for the people of
Israel that I know you guys are going to want
to get involved with, called Flags of Fellowship and it's
organized by the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. On
October fifth, just a few weeks away, millions of Americans
will prayerfully plant an Israeli flag in honor and solidarity
with the victims of October seventh, twenty twenty three. And
they're grieving families. And now you can be a part
(19:29):
of it too. To get more information about how you
can join the Flags of Fellowship movement, visit the Fellowship
online at IFCJ dot org. That's IFCJ dot org. Check
it out. We're back with normally right after this. Oh righty,
we are back on normally. Let's talk about the government
shutdown because we have to do this periodically, because the government.
(19:52):
Can we just partting to shut down periodically?
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Can't we just play what we said six months ago?
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Or no? Nah, it's like a slightly friend every time.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
A little bit different each time. Right, It's like, here's
the thing.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
I wish they would do their jobs before the deadline.
But as a person who's never done a job before
a deadline, I must have sympathy for this.
Speaker 2 (20:11):
Yeah yeah, I actually I also think we said this
last time.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
Yeah, so I have some sympathy. Yeah, here's what's happening,
and I just want to give you guys a little
preview of the fight that's going to go down. So
I believe September thirtieth is the date by which there
needs to be a continuing resolution to continue the funding
of the government. It would be short term. The House
(20:36):
has passed one. The House has passed what is called,
with Republicans in charge, a clean CR. That means there's
nothing else in it. They're just like, let's just do this.
We can all get on the same page that the
government needs to continue to be funded for this short
period of time. We will argue again later. Here's the
clean CR. Pass it in the Senate. We shall be done. Okay,
(20:58):
that's where we are right now.
Speaker 2 (21:01):
That's very diligent of them.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
It actually sounds like the thing democrats and everyone in
the press asks for time what so Yeah, so houses like, okay,
we'll do that. Democrats in the Senate have decided that
they want to add to the clean CR, thereby making
it dirty, dirty, dirty CR, a dirty CR. They have
(21:26):
decided they want to add an extension of COVID era
Obamacare subsidies that were giant extra subsidies that were part
of one of one of many slush funds created during
COVID under alleged emergency conditions that we didn't really need
(21:47):
and that are basically fraudulent and in fact raise everyone's premiums,
because why when people don't have to pay for premiums
and you're subsidizing them, your costs go up. So they
approved these during COVID they put an expiration date on them.
That expiration date is this year, so.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
They'll put a date so far into the future. They
were just like, we'll figure out how to deal with
this by then.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Well, and now their argument is fix our problem we
made for ourselves. And Republicans are like, no, you have
a clean CR. We know you want to continue these subsidies,
which are billions of dollars in handouts to insurance companies,
but we never voted for them. We don't want them.
This is not our job. Take it up with someone else.
(22:37):
And they're like, you're making a healthcare crisis. So that's
where we stand at the moment.
Speaker 2 (22:43):
Can Republicans fight back on this or will they ultimately
fold just to get the cr through.
Speaker 1 (22:49):
I think they can fight this effectively. And that's why
I'm sort of staging it for you guys, because I
think it's important to understand what they're doing here, because
they're saying healthcare cuts, right, Well, there's not a cut.
This is a program that was superfluous to begin with, right,
went mostly to insurance companies. Because, by the way, can
(23:11):
I just point out speaking of things we were right
about that, we've been right about Obamacare the whole time, Yeah,
which is that premiums would go up, the risk pools
would get worse, things would cost more, care would get worse,
coverage would get worse. Have to keep throwing money at it.
And that's what they're doing. And they're afraid that on
(23:31):
October first, when the insurance companies are required by law
by Obamacare, their original failure to send out their notices
that say your premiums are going up, right, that that's
going to be a problem for them. Yeah, I think
you're trying to prevent it by making us do it.
Speaker 2 (23:47):
Yeah, it's getting so far away from the Obama years
that are people even going to connect it to Obamacare?
I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
I'm not sure either, And these things can get so muddied.
And look, Ocrats are really good at just saying crisis, crisis, crisis,
They want to end everything. But I would encourage everyone
to remember that basically any Biden era program approved as
part of IRA or Save whatever Saves America Act or
(24:16):
whatever they were all called are mostly slush funds and
nonsense to put us on a higher spending level that
then Democrats could claim we can never come down from
and therefore get all that money for the future.
Speaker 2 (24:30):
Right, all of them are named, Yeah, all of them
are named like not a slush fund, we promise bill.
Speaker 1 (24:39):
So they made their own problem. They want Republicans to
solve it, and Republicans are like, pass, no, you guys
are going to have to deal with this. So in
the Senate, that's the the game board as it is.
They want to have a meeting with Schumer wants a
meeting with Trump, and Trump's like, why we gave you
a clean cr and they're like, a ha, see he
(24:59):
won't go with us. What dude, you got the thing?
Speaker 2 (25:04):
So yeah, I hope he sticks to that. I hope
he doesn't negotiate, because it sounds like Republicans are for
the first time in forever in a winning situation where
they have done the right thing. I like that.
Speaker 1 (25:16):
I mean, we'll probably fight each other over the cr anyway.
I guess it's different, but that is where we stand
at the moment.
Speaker 2 (25:25):
All right, we'll be right back with more on Normally,
where we preview twenty twenty eight, talk about the latest
polls and Kamala Gavin, what's going on with them? Let's
talk about it. All right. We are back on Normally
with a fun little segment where we get to enjoy
the Democrats disarray and look, we know it's not going
(25:47):
to last. We know it won't always be this way,
but polls have been so much fun lately. Every poll
that comes out, it's like, who even are the Democrats?
Do they even exist? The latest Reuters has which party
has a better plan on crime? Republicans are up by twenty. Immigration,
Republicans are up by eighteen, Foreign conflicts Republicans are up
(26:10):
by twelve. Economy Republicans are up by ten. Corruption Republicans
are up by six. Gun control, Gun control Republicans are
up by four. Political extremism Republicans are up by four.
The only things Democrats are up on for a better
plan are environment, women's rights, healthcare, and respect for democracy.
(26:30):
And that's fine with me.
Speaker 1 (26:33):
Yeah, I mean this is this is probably an indication,
by the way of why they're going after healthcare messaging
on the CR is that they're trying to submit that
for next year as they're winning issue, that they're going
to harp on this even though most of it is
made up, but it is, you know, one of the
few places that they outperform Republicans. Those numbers are tragic
(26:59):
if you crap right.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
And even like women's rights, how are they even up
thirteen points on women's rights? When was the last time
they cared about women's rights at all? I know it's
just code for abortion, I get it, but wow, do
they not care about women's rights? And if Republicans were
better at messaging about it, and you know, maybe Erica
Kirk gives Republicans the kick that they need to become
(27:22):
better messengers on women's rights, I think things could even
turn around on that.
Speaker 1 (27:27):
Yeah, on that subject, by the way, Spanberger, who I
keep referencing, But she's important because she's running in Virginia
for governor and she is the great normy hope for Democrats.
She was once again asked about boys in women's locker
rooms or boys in women's sports and couldn't give a
straight answer because even though it's the most normal position
you can have, she can't do it.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
Yeah. Yeah, she runs away because she doesn't want to
be on the record answering, which she really thinks, and
that's sad empathetic.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Yeah. Well, I think part of the problem might be
that these folks just sound like freaked out weirdos all
the time, and like, look, I concede that Donald Trump
is a weirdo, but he's an entertaining weirdo, and that
has made all the difference.
Speaker 2 (28:17):
He is hilarious, and every time I hear him, he
is just He's got a very good natural sense of humor.
And I don't think Democrats can emulate that as well
as they think they can.
Speaker 1 (28:28):
Andvin Newsom certainly cannot.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Gavin Newsome, he's funny without meaning to be, Like you know,
apparently Kamala asked him for an endorsement the day that
Biden stepped down and he wrote to her, I think
we talked about this last episode, but Hiking will respond later,
and then never responded. I mean, that's hilarious, but I
don't think he was trying.
Speaker 1 (28:50):
To be I've definitely done that to people before, but
it wasn't over something that important. Shall we listen to
Gavin Newsom's pitch about why twenty twenty eight is important.
Speaker 2 (28:59):
The most important election I'm sure of our lifetime.
Speaker 1 (29:01):
Yeah, let's hear about it.
Speaker 5 (29:02):
I fear that we will not have an election in
twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 1 (29:07):
I really mean that.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
And the core of my soul unless we wake up
to the code red what's happening in this country, and
we wake up soberly to how serious this moment is.
The core of his soul? What soul? What's sould?
Speaker 1 (29:25):
Also, then why are you in South Carolina?
Speaker 3 (29:28):
Dude?
Speaker 1 (29:28):
Right? Well, what are you doing? You don't believe that
there won't be a twenty twenty eight election?
Speaker 2 (29:34):
Right, You're just.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Full of it. And I don't understand why this apocalyptic
pitch is the only one they can do. It's crazy
one they can do.
Speaker 2 (29:45):
Yeah, and you know, if they're not going to lower
the temperature at ever, now would be a really good
time for that, and they're completely disinterested in doing that.
Noah Rothman tweets about that clip. That's why he staffed
out with Clinton and Harris Aids, who have little experience
in Sacramento and doing speaking tours in South Carolina, which
(30:06):
has almost no competitive races in twenty twenty six, because
he's sure there won't be an election. Maybe it's insurance
just in case. Yeah, he knows what will be an election.
And look Trump, you know, for better or worse, it
could have at different points in his last presidency canceled
elections or on January sixth, after January six refused to
(30:28):
leave the White House. He didn't do any of that.
So I'm pretty confident we're going to have a twenty
twenty eight election. Another tweet that I liked about this,
per Deep Shankar tweets, these are the kinds of unsupported,
politically charged statements that make mentally unstable wackle progressive terrorists
consider violence exactly.
Speaker 1 (30:49):
It does seem like an issue. Also, are you not
doing voter suppression by telling them that there will be
no voting?
Speaker 2 (30:58):
Right?
Speaker 1 (30:58):
I mean, it seems like you're on voters. Yeah, I guess,
but I don't understand this approach because there are people
on the margins who will go Why would I register
to vote? He said, there's going to be no twenty
twenty eight election. Yeah, are you doing this to yourself?
Speaker 2 (31:12):
Had a moment where I was worried they were doing
this to themselves in you know, in the during the
Biden administration, and when i'd be on the road for
speeches and stuff, I'd have people come up to me
and say, I don't think there's a point in voting.
They're they're going to steal it anyway. And I'd be like, yo,
go vote. Don't don't think this because you know.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
Well Trump Trump famously in the runoff with the with
the two Senate seats in Georgia.
Speaker 2 (31:39):
Oh yeah, since I was a messenger.
Speaker 1 (31:41):
And turned Georgia Senate seats blue right, so you can
tell people that their votes don't matter and they might
believe you. So you shouldn't do that.
Speaker 2 (31:50):
He's tone that down, he really has. He's become like, definitely,
go vote guy.
Speaker 1 (31:55):
So yes, so we've corrected that particular messaging problem. I
don't know why they're doing it to themselves. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (32:03):
So on our last last person we're going to talk
about in this segment, Kamala Harris. Her book is more
interesting than I thought it'd be, not a lot more interesting,
but a touch more interesting. She is taking it to Biden.
How dare he not step down? In advance? She tears
into her husband for not doing enough for her birthday.
(32:24):
She's she's got some grievances and you know it's festivus.
Speaker 1 (32:28):
So I mean, like that part's entertaining. I guess she
has a She has an interesting quality of being simultaneously
extremely cringe and uncompelling at the same time because you're
just listening to slop of words and you don't but like,
some of this is like medium interesting. The problem for
(32:50):
the party is that it has no answers, right, There's
there's no answer as to why she was the person
and didn't get it done. Why none of it's her fault,
As I think Dave Weigel put it, it's all mistakes
made by other people years ago that hurt her. And
(33:11):
it's like, yeah, but you you were supposed to be
the one who wanted to be president, right, you didn't
say anything about those mistakes.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
At all at the time about how like Biden was like,
Now you're like, oh, when I hugged him, he seemed
really feeble, Like you could have mentioned something at the time.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
Yeah, you have seven days because of that. Yes, we
have one comal oclip of her talking about her uh,
her journey on whether she should pick Pete Budajenje for VP.
Here it is.
Speaker 3 (33:39):
You know, you're the first woman elected vice president, You're
a black woman and a South Asian woman elected that
high office, very nearly elected president. To say that he
couldn't be on the ticket effectively because he was gay,
it's hard to hear.
Speaker 4 (33:51):
No, No, that's not what I said that that's that
he couldn't be on the ticket because he is gay.
My point, as I write in the book, is that
I was clear that, you know, one hundred and seven
days in one of the most hotly contested elections for
(34:11):
president and United States against someone like Donald Trump, who
knows no floor, to be a black woman running for
president United States and as a vice presidential running mate
a gay man, with the stakes being so high, it
(34:31):
made me very sad, but I also realized it would
be a real risk.
Speaker 2 (34:38):
It wasn't that hotly contested. Trump won every single swing state.
That's important because how much more could she lose? Like
with a gay man on the ticket, where's her bottom
on this?
Speaker 1 (34:51):
Well, also she says, no, no, no, I didn't say
I didn't hire him because he was gay. I said
I didn't hire him because the stakes were too high
for him to be gay.
Speaker 2 (35:01):
What does that mean?
Speaker 1 (35:02):
It's like, okay, well that's the same thing. You know,
it takes a real special person to just straight up
torpedo the whole DEI thing they have going on. That
she so the liability to do the de I thing
to begin with at this point in time, and then
to continue to embrace it but also admit that you
(35:25):
didn't hire somebody because he was gay. You're you're the
worst of all the worlds. Yes, you're the worst of
all the world.
Speaker 2 (35:31):
Right. And it was obvious also at the time that
she didn't pick jos Shapiro because her party was having
a jew problem. And so it's funny, you know, there's
lots of jokes also, like she didn't want to pick
the gay man, so she picked Tim Wong.
Speaker 1 (35:49):
Yeah, she's I think the biggest disadvantage of this book
tour for Republicans is that it might truly convince the
Democrats that she has no past future right to the
nomination in the future, which would have, of course behoove us.
Because she is so very bad at this.
Speaker 2 (36:07):
Come on, say the terrible with you.
Speaker 1 (36:12):
She's so terrible, horrible, horrible, she really is, and she's
bad in the most friendly places. I watched her on
Madout and I watched her on the View, and she's
terrible in both places. She has not thought through what
these answers should be. She has no anticipation of what
the tough questions I put that in clods because they're
(36:32):
not tough questions are going to be. And she just
flups it once again, once again.
Speaker 2 (36:39):
She doesn't work that she does not put in the work.
She thinks she is smarter than everybody and doesn't have
to do the work. And as I tell my kids
all the time, that doesn't work.
Speaker 3 (36:48):
So won't work.
Speaker 2 (36:49):
It won't work. Yeah, No, it doesn't matter how smart
you are. You gotta do the work, alrighty. Thanks for
joining us on normally normally airs Tuesdays and Thursdays, and
you could subscribe anywhere where you get your podcasts. Get
in touch with us at normallythepod at gmail dot com.
Thanks for listening and when things get weird, act normally
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.