Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
You're listening to Charleston's Morning News on ninety four to three.
Doubusc Now back to Kelly and Blaze.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Weloko man, what's the edition of the program?
Speaker 1 (00:12):
Here?
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Eight five on ninety four to three WSC. We appreciate
you listening.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
We're covering this morning's top stories. President Trump's National Security
meeting on the next steps in the Israel Iran conflict
took place yesterday morning. There are multiple reports that the
White House is considering an offensive strike against Iran. The
reports come after President Trump said he wanted an unconditional
surrender from Iran. There's growing speculation whether the US will
(00:38):
enter the conflict offensively on behalf of Israel and take
out Iran's remaining underground nuclear facilities. Israel has dealt a
significant blow to Iran's nuclear program, but lacks the technology
to reach sites buried beneath layers of mountain.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
Four.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Do you keep hearing people discuss this several one hundred
feet below ground? And does Israel have the capabilities? They
have some capabilities, they don't have our capabilities at least
all eyes on is it in Minnesota. I believe the
base there that has the bunker busting capabilities. People are
watching this to see if there's any movement in that
(01:18):
area and what could come of this, you know, nuclear
facility three hundred feet underground because Israel, I mean, if
they can't get the job done, I mean, while they're
some would call it a tactical wind, but it's not
going to be a strategic victory. If the hard line
and our president has put the hard line in the sand,
Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
Well, I think you can believe this president when he
draws the line. It's not John Carey and President Obama
constantly moving the line and backing off.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Oh yeah, he's proven that first go round.
Speaker 4 (01:50):
For sure.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
He says what he means, and he means what he says,
which is why you've got all these people out here,
you know, upset on both sides. I mean, there's a
lot of fracture in what we're what, you know, what
should we be doing here moving forward?
Speaker 3 (02:05):
Well, yeah, I mean I don't know if i'd I
don't know if i'd describe it as a fracture. There's
certainly a difference of opinion, and you know, both within
and outside of the government, and so the left stream
media wants to paint this as.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
A fracture, a civil war.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
A fracture among Mega. Uh, they've been describing it. Watch
for this word. You're going to be hearing it a bunch.
I'm going to lay steak dinner on it. Okay, schism.
You're going to be hearing schism a lot. How do
I know this because I was listening to MSNBC this
morning and I heard schism repeated over and over and
(02:48):
over again. So we've all seen, you know, the compilations
where the media latches onto a certain phrase or a
certain word and then it's just all over the place.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
So listen, I want to hand them anything. There is
a divide blaze, that's that's obvious. Whether it's Tucker Marjorie
Taylor Green.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
You know you said a divide and a fracturer or
two different things in my opinion.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Okay, I mean the point being that.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
The fracture is it's breaking. I'm breaking off from you.
I'm fracturing because this is too much. I don't agree
with you, and I'm audi here. Yes, that's a fracture.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
There is a break within a very pro America. First, Mega,
you know, people influencers, whether it's Tucker or lawmakers, whether
you know, we could go down the list Thomas Massey's
and others who don't have an appetite for World War
three in America's involvement. So I, you know, whatever you
want to call it. Listen to some of our callers
(03:48):
here this morning as well. You know, well I.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
Get that, but I don't hear anybody saying they're leaving
the Republican Party or they're abandoning Mega or anything over this.
To me, that would be a fra. So, yes, there's
a debate. There's a difference of opinion, you know, is
this are people fracturing off from the party or from
this president over there.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
I think you're taking a little bit too literally. The
fracture is of the idea of getting ourselves into World
War three. I'm like, not, you know, walking away from
this president.
Speaker 3 (04:21):
I get what the point is, but I think, well,
words are important. We're covering this morning's top stories. The
Democrats continue to disrupt the effort to rid our country
of illegal immigrants, and investigation is underway after New York
City mayoral candidate and comptroller Brad Lander was arrested at
immigration court on Tuesday and later released. He was trying
(04:43):
to escort out an immigrant who has taken into custody
following a court appearance in Lower Manhattan. Homeland Security officials
say Lander assaulted an officer, which Lander denies. No formal
charges were brought, and now the US Attorney's Office in
the Southern District of New York says it's investm gatting
the matter.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Oh here we go, another whack job out here, coddling illegals.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
I mean, whether it's Chris Padilla Padilla, you know, senator
crying how he bum rushed the stage at Christy Noman
was tackled and handcuffed and then released, Or whether it's
Maxine Waters getting the door slammed in her face trying
to make her way into the make her way into
this ice detention center. Or the member of Congress I
(05:32):
can't remember her name that was throwing her literal girth,
her weight around and she's not a small woman, you know,
at the gates in Jersey of an ice facility. Or
it's this guy. I mean, what are these what do
they think they're doing and what do they think the
end result is.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
I don't know how any of their constituents could look
at them and look at this and go, yeah, that's
what I voted for. I mean, but I you know,
I can't. They don't right in the head to me.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
So well, I.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
Mean right, I mean of course we would think that.
I mean I think that about all of them. But
here's where we find ourselves. It's a difference of opinion.
But you're like, you know, I keep thinking, well, a
difference of opinion is one thing. It's like, you know,
should it be right or blue? Not this crazy stuff.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Well, and in some ways you have to imagine, you know,
are they in some way just continuing to attempt to
make this is their idea of relevancy. I just because
we know how the tactics of the democratic playbook, you know,
they'll use any crisis.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Well, I'll see if I can articulate this properly. Probably not.
So I go back to the sixties. So these people
were all raised to think that the sixties movement was heroic,
and in a lot of ways it mirrors what's happening
today for several different reasons. But there was also an
(07:00):
infiltration by other countries and by communists and Marxists and
disruptors that you know, infiltrated our universities and our culture,
and especially our youth culture. And we saw the Revolution
of the sixties, the social revolution take place, and during
(07:23):
that time, you saw all of these protests and you
saw everything get out of hand, and they kind of
rewrote history to make that a heroic movement and brought
up new generations of people to think that's a heroic movement.
(07:45):
And so in a lot of cases, you have those
same people that were doing that in the sixties. Now
they're old and they're still doing it.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Oh yeah, Maxine would be one.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
And they have their new followers that they've brainwashed into
thinking that that was all heroic. Now, agree with it
or not, I'd stop short of calling it heroic. It
was an awful time in American history, and they were
you know, whether you agreed with the Vietnam War or not.
(08:13):
And Vietnam was only one aspect of it. You know,
you didn't need to spit on the soldiers and call
him baby killers and go over there and mingle with
the enemy like Jane Fonda did and all of those things. Right,
So that's not heroic, although I'm sure Jane Fonda thinks
she was heroic and then you have the you know,
(08:37):
civil rights movement, which was way more heroic than the
anti Vietnam movement, and especially under the leadership of doctor
Martin Luther King Junior and people like him who believed
in peaceful protest and took a beating to show that
this is the way that it is. And he knew
(08:58):
that if they fought back, they'd probably lose the argument,
and because they'd changed the nrave and just say they
were out there rabble rousing. So that's why he wanted
to remain peaceful and why they came under attack and
showed the world how unfair that was. Now he was
murdered for that, and then a more militant, violent wing
(09:22):
took over. And that's what we're seeing today again. Is
and I always look at history as like this wave,
we're still riding it years and years later, and so
this is the result. And I think so these people
think that they're being heroic and standing up to the man,
(09:44):
in all.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
Of this, it's just a history of repeating itself with politicians,
you know, profiting off of you know, peddling victimhood. They're
holding onto power desperately, so so desperate that they're standing up,
not for their own constituents. They're not even standing up
for people who are American citizens. It's pathetic.
Speaker 3 (10:02):
Well that's the bottom line. This is not you know,
the civil rights movement, and they're not standing up for
American citizens who've been wrong. They're standing up for people
that don't even belong here in the first damn place.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
You have Texas centator Ted Cruz saying we can destroy
this nuke facility Israel, you know, has basically started the
challenge with and says it's in our interest to do so.
But where do our interests? Well, we know where our
interests lie. No nukes for Iran.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
Well, Tucker Carlson's been pushing back against this whole Iran
narrative with Steve Bannon. He was a guest of Steve
Bannon a couple of days ago, and then Steve Bannon
was his guest yesterday, and somewhere they found the time
to have Tucker interviewed Ted Cruz on Tucker's podcast and
(10:56):
it got heated right out of the gate.
Speaker 4 (10:58):
How many people live around by the way, I don't
know the population at all. No, I don't know the population.
Speaker 5 (11:04):
You don't know the population of the country you seek
to topple.
Speaker 4 (11:09):
How many people living around.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
Ninety two million?
Speaker 4 (11:11):
Okay? Yeah, how could you not know that? I don't
sit around memorizing population tables.
Speaker 5 (11:18):
Well, it's kind of relevant because you're calling for the
overthrow of the government.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
Why is it relevant whether it will be ninety million
or eighty million or one hundred million. Why is if
you don't know anything about the country. I didn't say
I don't know anything about Okay, what's the ethnic mix
of I wrong? They are Persians and well predominantly Shia. Okay,
this is not even you don't know anything about Iran.
So okay, I'm not the Tucker Carlson mix bird on Iran.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
You're a center who's calling for the government about the country.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
No, you don't know anything about the country. You're the
one who claims they're not trying to murder Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (11:51):
I'm not saying that.
Speaker 4 (11:52):
Who can't figure out to say General Solamony? And you
don't believe they're trying to murder Trump?
Speaker 5 (11:57):
Yes, because you're not calling for military strikes against them
in retaliation.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
If they really believe that carrying out military strikes today?
Who said Israel was right with our help? I've said
we Israel is leading them, but we're supporting them.
Speaker 5 (12:09):
Well, this you're breaking news here because the US government
last night denied the National Security Council spokesman Alex Feiffer
denied on behalf of Trump that we were acting on
Israel's behalf in any offensive capacity.
Speaker 4 (12:20):
We're not bombing, then Israel's bombing that you just said
we were. We are supporting as.
Speaker 5 (12:26):
You're a senator. If you're saying the United States government is,
we're with the run right now, people are listening.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
I have to say that, like Tucker kind of got
the best of Ted.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Kruz absolutely got bested, and I don't like.
Speaker 3 (12:39):
To see He's usually pretty sharp.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Yeah, I'm a I'm a massive text center Ted Cruz fan. Honestly,
I'm a Tucker fan. I don't like seeing this fighting.
I really don't. And it all boils down to Israel
needs our bunker busters. They have a few of their own,
but some are suggesting that they're just they just can't
penetrate deep enough to finish this job that they need us.
(13:02):
And so if that's the case, you know, we and
we move forward and finish the job, which again the
President has been very clear about no, no nukes. This
isn't going to happen. So what does that look like. Well,
there's all kinds of inherent dangers, and Iran's out here blustering,
you know, if we're coming for you and you can
(13:24):
expect the tax, you know, with regards to Americans, and
we know we've had a porous open border with millions
of people could be Irani and terrorist sleeper cells just
waiting to be activated in the West. So it's got
people concerned and upset. And I get it. I mean,
there are a lot of people who have fought these
quote unquote regime change wars, and they're asking like, hey,
(13:46):
I don't I don't the regime change wars in the
past under previous administrations haven't worked. Trump's been on the
campaign trail saying over and over I don't support these
and we got to get out of them.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Well, you know, I wouldn't describe this as a regime
change war. This is trying to stop Iran from having
the capability to wipe Israel off the map with a
nuclear weapon and terrorize the rest of the world. And
I think that everybody's all blustery at this point. You
just heard Ted Cruz and Tucker going at it and
(14:17):
getting all blustery. Iran always saber rattles. I don't know
if they have the capability to follow through with what
they threaten. And notice how they haven't threatened anything specific.
And I don't mean to dismiss the sleeper cells in
the United States. That's a pretty scary prospect, but that's
going to be terrorist attacks. That's not going to be
(14:37):
something on the level of bunker busting bombs. And I think,
in my opinion, the whole idea here is to get
Iran to change their regime, and I think all of
this posturing by the United States is exactly to do that.
(14:58):
And you start to see the frackictures in the Islamic
Republic of Iran and that this Ayatola is probably on
his way out, and that the people of Iran are
sick of this, and I think that this administration is
trying to exacerbate that situation and take advantage of it
by threatening military action. Hopefully it won't come to that.
(15:23):
Hopefully the people of Iran will stand up and topple
this regime, and then we'll see where we stand with
any kind of new government in Iran. And I think
that's the best case scenario that this administration is hoping for.
That's just my opinion. I don't know. Maybe we are
planning to go in there and drop our bunker busters,
(15:44):
but I think that you know that this is a
chess game, and I think that the whole idea here
is to not institute who we want to be the
new leader of Iran, is to let the Iranian people
do it and in a way force their hand.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Well, I guess we'll see. Curious what you have to
say seven to and talk seven five five. But if
you look at the president and the piece through strength,
they first go around on the first term, he utterly
destroyed ISIS with a moab, I mean, their caliphate. Next
he took out Solamani, the general, you know, the leading
state sponsor tear it was with strength. I mean he
(16:24):
took out all about Daddy. Remember he died like a dog.
I'm the leader of ISIS. He he didn't hesitate to
act when protecting American lives. And I mean, if if
we're going to act, I think it's going to be
something big. You know, this is what in the past
he has done.
Speaker 3 (16:40):
So I don't know, Well, we can do at this
point is speculate and wait and see. Good Wednesday morning
to you. Thanks for listening this morning. Hopefully your day's
off to a good start. So would it be called
a horror film, not a horror film, but a horror film,
or would it be well, it's certainly a thriller. Fifty
(17:02):
years after it's scared people right out of the water.
The movie Jaws is coming to streaming. The Steven Spielberg
directed thriller is now on Peacock to celebrate its fiftieth anniversary,
along with the rest of the franchise, Jaws two, Jaws three,
and Jaws the Revenge. Jaws is also making a comeback
to movie theaters August twenty ninth through September fourth, And
(17:27):
of course, if you're not into horror movies, but you're
into horror movies, there's plenty of those available online for you.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
So Jaws is coming back to scare new generations of
little children out of the water. Do you think that's
going to be the case now, because at the time,
I mean I remember being very small and being it
scared me. Man. Jaws was you know, he was a
big robot, great white but man, it was realistic to
(17:56):
me at the time.
Speaker 3 (17:59):
Well, it was scared. And you know, I don't know
if it was the cheesiness factor that didn't just scare
the bejeebers out of me for some reason, or it
was the fact that, you know, I grew up in
the Great Lakes region and when we went swimming and stuff,
it was in fresh water. There were no sharks. There
was nothing that was going to eat you.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
No. See. Here I am in the low Country growing
up at the beach and you know, salt salt water life,
and man, that done, done done. I'm like scarred for life.
When I hear that, it's like, hell, geeze, thanks Jaws.
Speaker 3 (18:33):
Well it was effective and it was a good movie,
and you know, and they're celebrating it and trying to
make some more money off of it.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
Dudnhing wrong with that.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
So I'm sure you know, people will, but I don't
you know, I don't know. I don't see young people
going and watching it, do you I don't know. I mean,
I could be wrong, But do you think they're going
to be heading the movie theaters? Do you think some
sixteen year old or whom whatever age they are, is
going to be like, hey, let's go see jaw Let's
go see this fifty year old movie.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
I don't know. I there are a lot of young
people surprising me lately with older references to things that
they absolutely are aware of. And I don't know if
it's just because the internet's at everybody's fingertips now and
they're you know, it's just well, yeah, in their algorithm
or who knows what. But I'm shocked sometimes I'm like, hey,
do you know who? So you know, I can't think
of a reference at the moment. It like, yeah, yeah,
(19:26):
I know, And.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
Well that's our culture though, you know, and it sells
it to them just the same way they sold it
to us, so the same way we grew up knew
and who you know what I Love Lucy was and
all of that. I mean, that wasn't our era. Well
that we know what it was.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
That being the case, then yeah, maybe maybe you'll see
this become another, you know, remain an iconic thing.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
You know, and you look at you know, A Wonderful Life?
How old is that movie? And everybody still watches it
every Christmas. So these things get ingrained in culture, and
they try their best to ingrain it so they can
keep soaking the money out of it. Not that there's
anything wrong with that. I mean, it's the American way
in free enterprise.
Speaker 1 (20:12):
Thanks for listening to the Charleston Morning News podcast. Catch
Kelly and Blaze weekday mornings from six to nine
You're listening to Charleston's Morning News on ninety four to three.
Doubusc Now back to Kelly and Blaze.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Weloko man, what's the edition of the program?
Speaker 1 (00:12):
Here?
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Eight five on ninety four to three WSC. We appreciate
you listening.
Speaker 3 (00:16):
We're covering this morning's top stories. President Trump's National Security
meeting on the next steps in the Israel Iran conflict
took place yesterday morning. There are multiple reports that the
White House is considering an offensive strike against Iran. The
reports come after President Trump said he wanted an unconditional
surrender from Iran. There's growing speculation whether the US will
(00:38):
enter the conflict offensively on behalf of Israel and take
out Iran's remaining underground nuclear facilities. Israel has dealt a
significant blow to Iran's nuclear program, but lacks the technology
to reach sites buried beneath layers of mountain.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (00:56):
Four.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
Do you keep hearing people discuss this several one hundred
feet below ground? And does Israel have the capabilities? They
have some capabilities, they don't have our capabilities at least
all eyes on is it in Minnesota. I believe the
base there that has the bunker busting capabilities. People are
watching this to see if there's any movement in that
(01:18):
area and what could come of this, you know, nuclear
facility three hundred feet underground because Israel, I mean, if
they can't get the job done, I mean, while they're
some would call it a tactical wind, but it's not
going to be a strategic victory. If the hard line
and our president has put the hard line in the sand,
Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
Well, I think you can believe this president when he
draws the line. It's not John Carey and President Obama
constantly moving the line and backing off.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Oh yeah, he's proven that first go round.
Speaker 4 (01:50):
For sure.
Speaker 2 (01:51):
He says what he means, and he means what he says,
which is why you've got all these people out here,
you know, upset on both sides. I mean, there's a
lot of fracture in what we're what, you know, what
should we be doing here moving forward?
Speaker 3 (02:05):
Well, yeah, I mean I don't know if i'd I
don't know if i'd describe it as a fracture. There's
certainly a difference of opinion, and you know, both within
and outside of the government, and so the left stream
media wants to paint this as.
Speaker 2 (02:21):
A fracture, a civil war.
Speaker 3 (02:24):
A fracture among Mega. Uh, they've been describing it. Watch
for this word. You're going to be hearing it a bunch.
I'm going to lay steak dinner on it. Okay, schism.
You're going to be hearing schism a lot. How do
I know this because I was listening to MSNBC this
morning and I heard schism repeated over and over and
(02:48):
over again. So we've all seen, you know, the compilations
where the media latches onto a certain phrase or a
certain word and then it's just all over the place.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
So listen, I want to hand them anything. There is
a divide blaze, that's that's obvious. Whether it's Tucker Marjorie
Taylor Green.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
You know you said a divide and a fracturer or
two different things in my opinion.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
Okay, I mean the point being that.
Speaker 3 (03:15):
The fracture is it's breaking. I'm breaking off from you.
I'm fracturing because this is too much. I don't agree
with you, and I'm audi here. Yes, that's a fracture.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
There is a break within a very pro America. First, Mega,
you know, people influencers, whether it's Tucker or lawmakers, whether
you know, we could go down the list Thomas Massey's
and others who don't have an appetite for World War
three in America's involvement. So I, you know, whatever you
want to call it. Listen to some of our callers
(03:48):
here this morning as well. You know, well I.
Speaker 3 (03:50):
Get that, but I don't hear anybody saying they're leaving
the Republican Party or they're abandoning Mega or anything over this.
To me, that would be a fra. So, yes, there's
a debate. There's a difference of opinion, you know, is
this are people fracturing off from the party or from
this president over there.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
I think you're taking a little bit too literally. The
fracture is of the idea of getting ourselves into World
War three. I'm like, not, you know, walking away from
this president.
Speaker 3 (04:21):
I get what the point is, but I think, well,
words are important. We're covering this morning's top stories. The
Democrats continue to disrupt the effort to rid our country
of illegal immigrants, and investigation is underway after New York
City mayoral candidate and comptroller Brad Lander was arrested at
immigration court on Tuesday and later released. He was trying
(04:43):
to escort out an immigrant who has taken into custody
following a court appearance in Lower Manhattan. Homeland Security officials
say Lander assaulted an officer, which Lander denies. No formal
charges were brought, and now the US Attorney's Office in
the Southern District of New York says it's investm gatting
the matter.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Oh here we go, another whack job out here, coddling illegals.
Speaker 3 (05:08):
I mean, whether it's Chris Padilla Padilla, you know, senator
crying how he bum rushed the stage at Christy Noman
was tackled and handcuffed and then released, Or whether it's
Maxine Waters getting the door slammed in her face trying
to make her way into the make her way into
this ice detention center. Or the member of Congress I
(05:32):
can't remember her name that was throwing her literal girth,
her weight around and she's not a small woman, you know,
at the gates in Jersey of an ice facility. Or
it's this guy. I mean, what are these what do
they think they're doing and what do they think the
end result is.
Speaker 2 (05:52):
I don't know how any of their constituents could look
at them and look at this and go, yeah, that's
what I voted for. I mean, but I you know,
I can't. They don't right in the head to me.
Speaker 4 (06:01):
So well, I.
Speaker 3 (06:02):
Mean right, I mean of course we would think that.
I mean I think that about all of them. But
here's where we find ourselves. It's a difference of opinion.
But you're like, you know, I keep thinking, well, a
difference of opinion is one thing. It's like, you know,
should it be right or blue? Not this crazy stuff.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Well, and in some ways you have to imagine, you know,
are they in some way just continuing to attempt to
make this is their idea of relevancy. I just because
we know how the tactics of the democratic playbook, you know,
they'll use any crisis.
Speaker 3 (06:38):
Well, I'll see if I can articulate this properly. Probably not.
So I go back to the sixties. So these people
were all raised to think that the sixties movement was heroic,
and in a lot of ways it mirrors what's happening
today for several different reasons. But there was also an
(07:00):
infiltration by other countries and by communists and Marxists and
disruptors that you know, infiltrated our universities and our culture,
and especially our youth culture. And we saw the Revolution
of the sixties, the social revolution take place, and during
(07:23):
that time, you saw all of these protests and you
saw everything get out of hand, and they kind of
rewrote history to make that a heroic movement and brought
up new generations of people to think that's a heroic movement.
(07:45):
And so in a lot of cases, you have those
same people that were doing that in the sixties. Now
they're old and they're still doing it.
Speaker 2 (07:51):
Oh yeah, Maxine would be one.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
And they have their new followers that they've brainwashed into
thinking that that was all heroic. Now, agree with it
or not, I'd stop short of calling it heroic. It
was an awful time in American history, and they were
you know, whether you agreed with the Vietnam War or not.
(08:13):
And Vietnam was only one aspect of it. You know,
you didn't need to spit on the soldiers and call
him baby killers and go over there and mingle with
the enemy like Jane Fonda did and all of those things. Right,
So that's not heroic, although I'm sure Jane Fonda thinks
she was heroic and then you have the you know,
(08:37):
civil rights movement, which was way more heroic than the
anti Vietnam movement, and especially under the leadership of doctor
Martin Luther King Junior and people like him who believed
in peaceful protest and took a beating to show that
this is the way that it is. And he knew
(08:58):
that if they fought back, they'd probably lose the argument,
and because they'd changed the nrave and just say they
were out there rabble rousing. So that's why he wanted
to remain peaceful and why they came under attack and
showed the world how unfair that was. Now he was
murdered for that, and then a more militant, violent wing
(09:22):
took over. And that's what we're seeing today again. Is
and I always look at history as like this wave,
we're still riding it years and years later, and so
this is the result. And I think so these people
think that they're being heroic and standing up to the man,
(09:44):
in all.
Speaker 2 (09:44):
Of this, it's just a history of repeating itself with politicians,
you know, profiting off of you know, peddling victimhood. They're
holding onto power desperately, so so desperate that they're standing up,
not for their own constituents. They're not even standing up
for people who are American citizens. It's pathetic.
Speaker 3 (10:02):
Well that's the bottom line. This is not you know,
the civil rights movement, and they're not standing up for
American citizens who've been wrong. They're standing up for people
that don't even belong here in the first damn place.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
You have Texas centator Ted Cruz saying we can destroy
this nuke facility Israel, you know, has basically started the
challenge with and says it's in our interest to do so.
But where do our interests? Well, we know where our
interests lie. No nukes for Iran.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
Well, Tucker Carlson's been pushing back against this whole Iran
narrative with Steve Bannon. He was a guest of Steve
Bannon a couple of days ago, and then Steve Bannon
was his guest yesterday, and somewhere they found the time
to have Tucker interviewed Ted Cruz on Tucker's podcast and
(10:56):
it got heated right out of the gate.
Speaker 4 (10:58):
How many people live around by the way, I don't
know the population at all. No, I don't know the population.
Speaker 5 (11:04):
You don't know the population of the country you seek
to topple.
Speaker 4 (11:09):
How many people living around.
Speaker 2 (11:10):
Ninety two million?
Speaker 4 (11:11):
Okay? Yeah, how could you not know that? I don't
sit around memorizing population tables.
Speaker 5 (11:18):
Well, it's kind of relevant because you're calling for the
overthrow of the government.
Speaker 4 (11:21):
Why is it relevant whether it will be ninety million
or eighty million or one hundred million. Why is if
you don't know anything about the country. I didn't say
I don't know anything about Okay, what's the ethnic mix
of I wrong? They are Persians and well predominantly Shia. Okay,
this is not even you don't know anything about Iran.
So okay, I'm not the Tucker Carlson mix bird on Iran.
Speaker 5 (11:42):
You're a center who's calling for the government about the country.
Speaker 4 (11:46):
No, you don't know anything about the country. You're the
one who claims they're not trying to murder Donald Trump.
Speaker 5 (11:51):
I'm not saying that.
Speaker 4 (11:52):
Who can't figure out to say General Solamony? And you
don't believe they're trying to murder Trump?
Speaker 5 (11:57):
Yes, because you're not calling for military strikes against them
in retaliation.
Speaker 4 (12:01):
If they really believe that carrying out military strikes today?
Who said Israel was right with our help? I've said
we Israel is leading them, but we're supporting them.
Speaker 5 (12:09):
Well, this you're breaking news here because the US government
last night denied the National Security Council spokesman Alex Feiffer
denied on behalf of Trump that we were acting on
Israel's behalf in any offensive capacity.
Speaker 4 (12:20):
We're not bombing, then Israel's bombing that you just said
we were. We are supporting as.
Speaker 5 (12:26):
You're a senator. If you're saying the United States government is,
we're with the run right now, people are listening.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
I have to say that, like Tucker kind of got
the best of Ted.
Speaker 2 (12:35):
Kruz absolutely got bested, and I don't like.
Speaker 3 (12:39):
To see He's usually pretty sharp.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
Yeah, I'm a I'm a massive text center Ted Cruz fan. Honestly,
I'm a Tucker fan. I don't like seeing this fighting.
I really don't. And it all boils down to Israel
needs our bunker busters. They have a few of their own,
but some are suggesting that they're just they just can't
penetrate deep enough to finish this job that they need us.
(13:02):
And so if that's the case, you know, we and
we move forward and finish the job, which again the
President has been very clear about no, no nukes. This
isn't going to happen. So what does that look like. Well,
there's all kinds of inherent dangers, and Iran's out here blustering,
you know, if we're coming for you and you can
(13:24):
expect the tax, you know, with regards to Americans, and
we know we've had a porous open border with millions
of people could be Irani and terrorist sleeper cells just
waiting to be activated in the West. So it's got
people concerned and upset. And I get it. I mean,
there are a lot of people who have fought these
quote unquote regime change wars, and they're asking like, hey,
(13:46):
I don't I don't the regime change wars in the
past under previous administrations haven't worked. Trump's been on the
campaign trail saying over and over I don't support these
and we got to get out of them.
Speaker 3 (13:56):
Well, you know, I wouldn't describe this as a regime
change war. This is trying to stop Iran from having
the capability to wipe Israel off the map with a
nuclear weapon and terrorize the rest of the world. And
I think that everybody's all blustery at this point. You
just heard Ted Cruz and Tucker going at it and
(14:17):
getting all blustery. Iran always saber rattles. I don't know
if they have the capability to follow through with what
they threaten. And notice how they haven't threatened anything specific.
And I don't mean to dismiss the sleeper cells in
the United States. That's a pretty scary prospect, but that's
going to be terrorist attacks. That's not going to be
(14:37):
something on the level of bunker busting bombs. And I think,
in my opinion, the whole idea here is to get
Iran to change their regime, and I think all of
this posturing by the United States is exactly to do that.
(14:58):
And you start to see the frackictures in the Islamic
Republic of Iran and that this Ayatola is probably on
his way out, and that the people of Iran are
sick of this, and I think that this administration is
trying to exacerbate that situation and take advantage of it
by threatening military action. Hopefully it won't come to that.
(15:23):
Hopefully the people of Iran will stand up and topple
this regime, and then we'll see where we stand with
any kind of new government in Iran. And I think
that's the best case scenario that this administration is hoping for.
That's just my opinion. I don't know. Maybe we are
planning to go in there and drop our bunker busters,
(15:44):
but I think that you know that this is a
chess game, and I think that the whole idea here
is to not institute who we want to be the
new leader of Iran, is to let the Iranian people
do it and in a way force their hand.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Well, I guess we'll see. Curious what you have to
say seven to and talk seven five five. But if
you look at the president and the piece through strength,
they first go around on the first term, he utterly
destroyed ISIS with a moab, I mean, their caliphate. Next
he took out Solamani, the general, you know, the leading
state sponsor tear it was with strength. I mean he
(16:24):
took out all about Daddy. Remember he died like a dog.
I'm the leader of ISIS. He he didn't hesitate to
act when protecting American lives. And I mean, if if
we're going to act, I think it's going to be
something big. You know, this is what in the past
he has done.
Speaker 3 (16:40):
So I don't know, Well, we can do at this
point is speculate and wait and see. Good Wednesday morning
to you. Thanks for listening this morning. Hopefully your day's
off to a good start. So would it be called
a horror film, not a horror film, but a horror film,
or would it be well, it's certainly a thriller. Fifty
(17:02):
years after it's scared people right out of the water.
The movie Jaws is coming to streaming. The Steven Spielberg
directed thriller is now on Peacock to celebrate its fiftieth anniversary,
along with the rest of the franchise, Jaws two, Jaws three,
and Jaws the Revenge. Jaws is also making a comeback
to movie theaters August twenty ninth through September fourth, And
(17:27):
of course, if you're not into horror movies, but you're
into horror movies, there's plenty of those available online for you.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
So Jaws is coming back to scare new generations of
little children out of the water. Do you think that's
going to be the case now, because at the time,
I mean I remember being very small and being it
scared me. Man. Jaws was you know, he was a
big robot, great white but man, it was realistic to
(17:56):
me at the time.
Speaker 3 (17:59):
Well, it was scared. And you know, I don't know
if it was the cheesiness factor that didn't just scare
the bejeebers out of me for some reason, or it
was the fact that, you know, I grew up in
the Great Lakes region and when we went swimming and stuff,
it was in fresh water. There were no sharks. There
was nothing that was going to eat you.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
No. See. Here I am in the low Country growing
up at the beach and you know, salt salt water life,
and man, that done, done done. I'm like scarred for life.
When I hear that, it's like, hell, geeze, thanks Jaws.
Speaker 3 (18:33):
Well it was effective and it was a good movie,
and you know, and they're celebrating it and trying to
make some more money off of it.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
Dudnhing wrong with that.
Speaker 3 (18:45):
So I'm sure you know, people will, but I don't
you know, I don't know. I don't see young people
going and watching it, do you I don't know. I mean,
I could be wrong, But do you think they're going
to be heading the movie theaters? Do you think some
sixteen year old or whom whatever age they are, is
going to be like, hey, let's go see jaw Let's
go see this fifty year old movie.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
I don't know. I there are a lot of young
people surprising me lately with older references to things that
they absolutely are aware of. And I don't know if
it's just because the internet's at everybody's fingertips now and
they're you know, it's just well, yeah, in their algorithm
or who knows what. But I'm shocked sometimes I'm like, hey,
do you know who? So you know, I can't think
of a reference at the moment. It like, yeah, yeah,
(19:26):
I know, And.
Speaker 3 (19:27):
Well that's our culture though, you know, and it sells
it to them just the same way they sold it
to us, so the same way we grew up knew
and who you know what I Love Lucy was and
all of that. I mean, that wasn't our era. Well
that we know what it was.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
That being the case, then yeah, maybe maybe you'll see
this become another, you know, remain an iconic thing.
Speaker 3 (19:51):
You know, and you look at you know, A Wonderful Life?
How old is that movie? And everybody still watches it
every Christmas. So these things get ingrained in culture, and
they try their best to ingrain it so they can
keep soaking the money out of it. Not that there's
anything wrong with that. I mean, it's the American way
in free enterprise.
Speaker 1 (20:12):
Thanks for listening to the Charleston Morning News podcast. Catch
Kelly and Blaze weekday mornings from six to nine
Popular Podcasts
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.