Open Phone Line Friday: Kamala's Interview | Nuclear Energy | Flip Flops

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is the date that they want to raise awareness
for the International Coalition against Enforced Disappearances. The entire web
page that gives all this information is in Spanish. I've
been learning a little Spanish to go to Spain with,
but I don't know enough to even kind of read this.
So I'm just gonna go ahead and guess that the
premise of this is to if there are disappeared people

(00:24):
out there, especially you know, involved with governmental situations of
some kind, let's not give up on the disappeared. I
think is keep looking. There are people out there that
are just waiting to be found. Remember what that is
that Elizabeth Smart?

Speaker 2 (00:38):
Was that?

Speaker 1 (00:38):
Who it was that the girl that was kidnapped and
like disappeared for a long time. I don't know if
that's the same thing as this, but I mean that
just sounds terrible. So don't give up on those cold cases.
Don't don't give up on the people that I mean,
have you heard of Johnny Gosh? No, that's the milk
carton guy, the kid that we missing in the Des

(00:59):
Moines in like the early eighties, and then his mom
and stuff. They put him on the milk carton. Oh
he was he the origin of that. Yeah, and yeah,
I wasn't great. It wasn't great. His mom's still looking
for him. I mean, Johnny gob should have would be
like almost fifty now, but his mom has like never
stopped the search. I couldn't imagine the torturous existence that
would take right like looking for clues anyway, a couple

(01:25):
of things that we want I wanted to get to.
You heard in the newscast about Johnny Gudreau and his
brother Matthew. These are two hockey players. Johnny Gudreaux is
a really like a seven time All Star, played for
Calgary and then most recently the Columbus Bluejackets riding bikes
in New Jersey, where they're originally from, and hit by

(01:47):
a suspected drunk driver while they were on bikes. It
was dark and it was at night time. I don't
want to spend time further condemning driving drunk, because I
is there anybody that defends that. I don't think there is.
I think we all know that that it's bad and
you shouldn't do it. And because this one guy did it,
these two brothers are gone forever now and it's incredibly sad,

(02:11):
especially if you use the context, their sister was supposed
to be married today. They were in town for her
wedding weekend. It's unspeakable, unimaginable tragedy for that family. But
it's just a reminder of how fragile this life can be,
and that we need to take every possible moment, I think,

(02:32):
to appreciate what we do have, and you just never know,
You never know what the next day is going to bring.
I'm grateful to be spending as much time as I
get to spend with you, and hopefully you feel the
same about us. But man, just not to say there
are tragedies every day, but this is a person of fame,
right that people know, And then you hear a story

(02:55):
like that and you're just like, it could happen to
anybody at any time. It's really really sad. Now, our
condole insists anybody out there that's going through anything. I
know that different times of the year can be difficult
for some people. But one thing that I do know
is that people are paying much closer attention to the
election this November. Now, if you've got thoughts, you can

(03:15):
call us four h two five five eight eleven ten
four H two five five eight eleven ten on the
phone lines, and there's all sorts of different angles that
we could go to to start the show today. But
I think it most importantly for me is to start
with the Kamala Harris interview that we talked about at
length yesterday. Basically I was wrong about a lot of it.

(03:37):
She talked more than Tim Wallas at least it felt like,
and I didn't see actual time stamps, but she definitely
led the conversation throughout. I don't know how much of
it was edited. Did have a guy message me on
Facebook and say, Hey, I hope you talk about the
fact that CNN was helping They were selling it as
if it was live, and we knew it was not live.

(03:58):
It was you know, one of the It's one of
those things right where the network wants to make themselves
seem super provocative in hard hitting, but really, if you
do any further research into the matter, if they admit
to it or not, which I guess they don't have to.
But it was taped earlier in the afternoon, so they

(04:22):
had time to make any adjustments to it it was.
There's reason to believe that they had doctored it up,
not just to fit into a certain timeframe, but also
to clip some stuff in or out. It happens all
the time. Why wouldn't it happen with a political person AnyWho.
The conversations that they had that I thought were kind
of more prevalent is she talks about supporting that bipartisan

(04:46):
border bill, which we know is probably two lax and
it's in the backbone of it. But it's a staunch
change from what we know of her and her past
and the way that she has viewed immigrat even as
part of this current White House, and for her to
now all of a sudden say hey, I'm really going

(05:06):
to be bullish on the border. I feel like it's
worth us asking questions like what changed. Talked a lot
about different things that we could do better in some
of the shifting, including fracking, right. I mean, she says,
I'm not going to ban fracking and trying to allow
natural gas and oil and have the opportunity to be

(05:26):
harnessed to make ourselves a little bit more energy and dependent.
And she says, hey, you know, I think that banning
that would be a bad idea. That's completely the opposite
of things that she has said before. We taught we
played the thing that Donald Trump said yesterday about six
weeks of like a fetal heartbeat abortion band. That's not enough.
He said he's going to vote in favor of removing

(05:47):
a six week abortion band in Florida. That goes against
things that I think we expected Donald Trump to go by.
So the bigger question today after hearing this conversation, and
not a lot was long. I'll be honest with you,
there wasn't a lot that she said that surprised me.
But I will say that it's interesting to watch both
candidacies and campaigns move closer to the middle and try

(06:11):
to take some of those middle of the road independent
voters in a way that's pretty unabashed for Kamal even
to have the audacity to say, my values are the same,
my values have not changed. I don't know, which is
something that she did reiterate last night as well. How
can you say that when you are obviously contradicting things
that you have said in the last few years about

(06:32):
some of these major topics people are interested in. I
don't know, but this is politics one oh one. How
much of this is being said to get people to
vote for you versus how much will be done to
actually do anything about these issues. We're not going to
know until after the election's over, which is kind of
the tough thing, right. This is like, as far as
I'm concerned, Matt, tell me if this is crossing a

(06:53):
line or if this is somewhat accurate. Imagine that the
college football season is all about just talking about who's
going to be best, and we have to decide for
however many weeks and months based on how people are
talking about their team, Nebraska, Colorado, or anyone else. Right,
we just anoint a team like the national champions. Like

(07:15):
we say Colorado is the National Champions because I mean,
look Deon Sanders, I mean, he knows what he's talking about.
And they're brash, they're loud, and they're they got good
players like Travis Hunter and Shadur Sanders. They're a good team.
And then we vote them as the national champions, and
then we play the games and then we see they're
definitely not as good as we thought. Well, that's essentially

(07:36):
what an election is. It's all talk. There's no proof
of action whatsoever. You can kind of look back and
see what people have done before, but that doesn't mean
that that's what they're going to do in the future.
There's a bunch of presidents that have you know, had
a history of one thing, and then when they got
into office, they govern in a completely different way, either
to the joy of Americans or maybe to the peril

(07:59):
of them Americans. But we're not going to actually know
what either of these people are going to actually do
when they are in office until they're elected, or how
much it really maybe doesn't even matter until we also
know how much Congress is going to be willing to
work with them. The House and the Senate. We have
racists to decide there, to figure out who's in control
there too, So that's going to be the intriguing thing

(08:20):
for me is to see how much of the stuff
that we're seeing with both Trump specifically on things like
abortion Kamala specifically on things like immigration and energy, and
see how much of this stuff that seemingly they are
going against their party and their hardcore values on whichever
side of the aisle to meet in the middle on

(08:40):
some of that stuff, how much of that would actually
be practiced by the person who wins. Only time will
tell that is not that is not a queue to
play the Asia song by the way, if you want
to call us in be a part of Open Phone
Line Friday, you can four h two five, five, eight,
eleven ten, whether it's Kamala, Nebraska football, anything on your mind.
We'll take your calls now on He's Radio eleven to
ten kfab Hello, Jeff, what's up?

Speaker 3 (09:02):
Can you hear me?

Speaker 4 (09:03):
There?

Speaker 1 (09:03):
You are? Yep, Yep, you're good.

Speaker 3 (09:05):
Okay, Sorry, I just want to know how you can
say that these candidates we don't know what they're going
to do when they're in office, so we've actually seen
both of them in office.

Speaker 1 (09:14):
Yeah. Well, I guess the only thing though, Jeff, is
that the change of opinions on certain things. I mean,
I think people can reserve the right to change what
they are or what they think about things, but having
both candidates do so on really important issues, at least
to the political parties, it's, you know, both sides are
just saying that the other side is lying about what
their changing minds are. Trump on abortion, Kamala on you know,

(09:38):
energy and the border and stuff like that. So, I mean,
you're right. I know what I would prefer as an American,
and I know what many people would probably prefer to
listen to this radio station. But it's interesting that people,
both of them seem to be changing their mind on
these policies during the middle of an election season, well especially.

Speaker 3 (09:59):
Her, and she's changing very dramatically. His opinion to me
is pretty much constant. Who's believing it in the hands
of the state.

Speaker 1 (10:08):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, well I'm with you. I'm with you, Jeff.
He's just been a lot more outspoken about like the parameters.
But I understand, like the fracking thing is, like she
was like three years ago, she was saying we need
to end it forever, and now she's saying she's not
going to ban it. So to me, that's like an
election thing for sure.

Speaker 4 (10:26):
You can't.

Speaker 1 (10:27):
You can't tell me you're changing your mind that quickly
just because you actually know more about it now than
you did before.

Speaker 4 (10:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (10:34):
I know that's not true. That's exactly why. That's why
I wanted to call in and ask that question. Totally wanted.

Speaker 1 (10:40):
No, I appreciate it, Jeff, Thanks for calling in and
being part of our show today.

Speaker 2 (10:46):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (10:46):
No, he's right. I say that only time is going
to tell on this, because there is always still a
chance when someone is elected that they govern differently than
the way that we would predict them to govern. The
thing about Kamalay is where like, even though she served
as an attorney general and a senator, she was never
really a leader in that way. So I'm not so

(11:07):
sure we like she was a part of the Biden administration,
we can blame her for that stuff. I'm just not
so sure we know for sure what that would look
like with her in charge, especially if she doesn't have
a cooperative Congress, if that makes sense. It's just, you know,
worth asking a question. I think Adam's on the phone line. Adam,
look into the show today. What's on your mind?

Speaker 5 (11:28):
So I just have a few questions. I'm hoping you
can answer when Kim Kamla wherever you pronounce her name,
when she ran for vice or she was picked as
the vice president pick, And I just had to fact
check myself, and I think it was an ABC field

(11:49):
that said she would be the first black female vice president.
So during the Democratic National Convention, did they not say
when she come on the stage that she was the
first Asian American presidential pick.

Speaker 1 (12:09):
Yeah, So so this is the other thing. And I've
gotten caught in this too, Adam, And I'm not trying
to give anybody any any like, especially a large organization,
but we all have to have her own responsibility. So
she is of I think both. She's like, like, her
dad's Jamaican, I think, and her mom is from Asian descent.
So you know, it's kind of like a Dwayne the

(12:30):
Rock Johnson situation, where like there's two different kind of
ethnicities there. And I think the assumption was before we
knew more about her. The assumption was before that she
was just an African American woman and that's the way
that she like we would identify her racially. And I
think now that we know that her mom's from more
of an Asian descent and her dad is from a

(12:52):
Jamaican I mean, I've been called out by people just
for calling her African American because they say, well, she's
not African American at all. It's like, sorry, geez, you know,
like that's my bad for not knowing exactly who her
parents were. But yeah, I think technically she could be both.

Speaker 5 (13:08):
Okay, So that was who my question was, are they
just doing? Is she picking whichever fit the demographic that
she's trying to get to vote for her?

Speaker 1 (13:20):
I mean, Adam, Adam why do you think she was
picked as the vice president candidate.

Speaker 5 (13:24):
I know exactly why it wasn't.

Speaker 1 (13:27):
It wasn't that she was going to do a good
job right as identity politics one oh one. Now, I
think it is unfair for us just to like tossed
out into the wind that she's like completely incompetent. I mean,
she certainly still is more intelligent than somebody like I am,
but she's definitely not had the same type of experience
politically that most of the other people that were in
the field that she was competing against in twenty twenty,

(13:50):
nor the people that were vying for that vice president's spot.
The only real thing that we can come to terms
with is why she was picked was because she would
bring that additional demographic into the fold for the Democrats
stronger in twenty twenty. And I'm not saying that's exactly
why she inherited this position, because I think that they
were a mess and they didn't know. Maybe stupidly, they

(14:12):
didn't know that Joe Biden wasn't going to make it
to November, and they waited too long to really make
a decision on anything. But I do think that when
you can use it they're going to use it the
best that they can, especially with that political party. And
I do think that's one of the things that Trump
may have missed the boat if he was going to
have Tulci Gabbard in the bag, not to pick her
as VP, because she is every bit as experienced in

(14:33):
politics as Jade Vance, if not more, and she's served
in the military like Jade Vance. She's very well spoken.
But the things that she brings, like the whim. She's
a woman, she's a woman of color, she is, you know,
somebody who's a former Democrat. I think she would have
been the perfect answer to somebody like Kamala because then
that would have neutralized all of this identity stuff, you
know what I mean?

Speaker 5 (14:52):
I agree. And the other thing I had was is
there going to be a vice president debate?

Speaker 1 (15:00):
Yeah, that's a good question. I'll look into that, Adam.
I have him been following as closely because it wasn't
until this week that they have confirmed the presidential debate.
But I will as soon as we get to the
next break, I will come out of that break and
I will see if I can't find more information on that.

Speaker 5 (15:13):
I'm just looking forward to jd Vance tearing the Fauls
a new one over his service record. Yeah, that's way
for that.

Speaker 1 (15:22):
If that happens, it certainly will be one worth watch,
and that's for sure, Adam. Thanks for the call. Yep,
all right, it sep a phone line Friday. You want
to be a part of the show, call us four
two five five eight eleven ten. Four h two five
five eight eleven ten. It could be about Comma, it
can be about Nebraska football, it could be about anything.
We'd love to chat with you here on news Radio
eleven ten.

Speaker 4 (15:38):
Kfab I tried to watch her last night, and I
find it a little confusing sometimes how she kind of
skips around and glosses over things. But she was asked
a question about about Twitter and disinformation, and to me
it sounded like she said if he doesn't if she

(16:01):
disagrees with something, she wouldn't have a problem taking it
down from Twitter or from ex Twitter. She called it Twitter,
but she meant, yeah, yeah, So doesn't that sound to
you like like you know, she's against freedom of speech?

Speaker 1 (16:17):
Yeah, well I would have to re listen to the
quote just because we know she's also not like and
this isn't to say she's not intelligent, because I don't
want that to be how it sounds. But she isn't
like a wordsmith necessarily right, like she's she's not a
person like I could listen to somebody like vivek Ramaswami
read the dictionary because he understands words and how to
put them together in sentences. A very smart, book smart

(16:40):
kind of guy like that. I've not known Kamala in
my limited hearing of her speak on the fly, I
haven't heard her really do that, So there's a chance
that maybe she meant like, if she's on social media
as a user like I am, you should have the
ability to mute different things or to control the algorithm

(17:01):
to the way that you like it. And I don't
like to do that. I don't like to block stuff
or you know, like eliminate things that are in my feed.
Now she's talking specifically, kind of like when I think
you're insinuating, Jim, that if she was the overlord of
the social media network and she was able to control
things that were like, hey, this isn't what I want

(17:21):
people to know or to hear, and I think nobody
should hear it, then we got a major problem. Because
that's absolutely against the First Amendment and free speech. So
I would be careful about the way I would say
it if I were her, But I'm not willing to
say that that's exactly what she meant when she was
talking about it.

Speaker 4 (17:37):
Well, I listened to it a couple of times, and
that is the takeaway I took from it, is that
when she's president, she will limit what she beams misinformation.

Speaker 1 (17:52):
Yeah, well, I mean she couldn't do that legally anyway.
Those are private companies the best that you know, like
Congress would have to pass rules before she would even
see them about that. And then earlier this week, I mean,
there's going to be a bigger spot, like Zuckerberg sent
that letter and said that the Biden administration was trying
to censor things on social media that they found to

(18:12):
be in bad taste during the pandemic, And Zuckerberg said
he didn't want to do that. So you know, the
fact that the fact that they even think that that's
something they can do as the government is just insane
to me.

Speaker 2 (18:25):
Yeah, I agree, And you know, Elon as.

Speaker 1 (18:27):
Long as he's in charge of X is never going
to let somebody in the government do that to his
his platform. So you know, at least we know that
I appreciate the call of Jim. That's an interesting point.
We'll have to keep an eye on that.

Speaker 4 (18:40):
Okay, thank you, yep, you too.

Speaker 1 (18:41):
Mark's on the phone line of four h two five five,
eight eleven, ten, Hey, Mark, what's up.

Speaker 6 (18:45):
Yeah, I just had a couple of comments on the
upcoming debates. You know, the last caller indicated he was
looking forward to JD tearing apart Tim Walls on the debates.
And you know, in my opinion, JD's not going to
tear Tim Walls apart on anything. And if Trump could
walk back that VP decision, he would do it in
a heartbeat.

Speaker 1 (19:05):
Yeah. Well, so just interrupt Mark, I'll let you finish.
But I forgot I was going to mention this. There is,
at least now CBS News says there's going to be
a vice presidential debate in New York on CBS on
October the first. So I forgot to mention that because
I was going to confirm on that date. But October
first seems like that's going to be the vice presidential debate.

Speaker 6 (19:24):
Okay, continue right, and then as far as the presidential debates,
you know, to me, in my opinion, if Trump was
all ahead in the polls, he in no way would
debate Kamala. I. You know, she is quick thinking. I
think she's intelligent. You might not think she is, But
I think she's going to call him out on his

(19:46):
lies and he's going to become extremely frustrated in debating her.
And I really don't think he wants to do it. Yeah,
but I think he has to do it at this point.
He's behind in the polls and he's got no choice
but to go.

Speaker 4 (20:01):
Yeah, go forward.

Speaker 1 (20:02):
So hold on, Mark, a couple things. I want to
start with your first point about jd Vance and then
wanting to walk that thing back. I tend to agree.
I feel like, I don't know jd Vance is the
kind of person you would have had there. I think
it makes sense if it's Biden Harris against you and
you feel comfortable about the prospectives of winning in November,
who would you? I mean, like, I don't know if

(20:23):
you support the Republicans. Doesn't sound like you do. But
if either way, who do you think he would he
should have gone for if he was going to maximize
that role in his administration.

Speaker 6 (20:34):
I mean, I think I think Rubio would have been
a better choice, less controversial than JD. You know, I
think he was choosing between what three individuals, and I
think he picked the wrong one in my opinion.

Speaker 1 (20:50):
Yeah, well, I tend to agree of all the and Rubio,
there was a caveat there that they're both technically Florida residents,
and that can't happen. They would have one of them
would have to relocate if they were going to make
that work. But either way, okay, And then the last
part that you said, I just want to clarify. I
don't think Kamala is unintelligent. Now, I don't think she's
as much of a wordsmith as some other people in Congress.

(21:16):
But the people in Congress in general are a lot
more intelligent than people who are not in Congress. Not
to say they aren't smart people not in Congress, but
these are mostly lawyers. These are people that have gone
to law school, and relatively amongst themselves, you can say
that people may not be the smartest people in the room.
I was in the top ten percent of my class
in high school and I struggled in an ap calculus.

(21:40):
I couldn't do it. I was easily the stupidest person
in that class. That doesn't mean I was a stupid
person in relative to the rest of the class. So
I just want to make sure I don't think she's
dumb or anything. I just don't think that she's as
clear of a speaker as maybe some of her contemporaries.
And now, as far as the debate itself, what about
her style, because we have not seen her off the

(22:02):
cuff have to deal with things or somebody like Donald Trump.
Before the only debate that we saw with her involved,
she was getting completely figuratively undressed in front of us
by people like Tulsa Gabbert. So what makes you confident
that she's going to be able to have, you know,
Donald Trump in a pretzel this time?

Speaker 6 (22:19):
Well, first of all, I watched that Tulsa Gabbert debate
and I disagree. I do not think she was dressed
down as much as you're leading on.

Speaker 1 (22:31):
But so individual, why did she drop out then? Mark?
Like right after that?

Speaker 6 (22:35):
Well, it just wasn't her time. I mean, I mean
she was not she was not ready at that point
in time. And I don't know really the you know,
she was obviously behind in the polls. It could have
been financing. I'm not sure why she dropped out, but
I think at this point she's a different person and
she's a seasoned prosecutor. I don't know if you heard

(22:56):
her on the congressional hearings at all, but she is.
She is extremely intelligent. In my opinion, She's gonna come
across very well. She's quick thinker, and she's used to
dealing with individuals that lie. And Trump does lie in
the debates, There's no question about it.

Speaker 1 (23:15):
I mean, everybody lies. Everybody lies, so I mean we
but I guess she is. But here's the last thing
I want to talk to you, Mark before I move
on to the next guy. I she is really changing
a lot of her opinions. You know the border, the
border wall heard about the last night. A big thing
was about fracking and saying she doesn't want to ban fracking,

(23:36):
some stuff that really kind of pulls her away from
this hole. Well, she's an incredibly radical liberal and certainly
is going to make like if people believe that those
things that she's saying, it will make her a more
viable candidate for somebody who's in the middle. So do
you believe that she feels that way now? And she's
changed her mind over the last few years, or do
you think this is being said to win an election?

Speaker 6 (23:58):
Well, is Trump changing his opinion on abortion to win
an election? Or what does he think about abortion?

Speaker 1 (24:03):
Well, and that's the thing too. I had a caller
earlier said they think he's been pretty consistent. He just
hasn't really said his opinion that strongly before. He's always
thought it was a state's rights issue. But hearing him
yesterday talk about six weeks fetal heartbeat bill, that's not enough,
like it needs to have more time to it. I
mean that is radically different than most conservatives right now exactly.

Speaker 6 (24:23):
And I think people do adjust their opinions over time.
And sure it's for politics, there's no question about it.
Both sides do it. She's going to do it, Trump's
going to do it. And that's politics. I mean, if
you're going to criticize her for it, you've got to
criticize Trump for it.

Speaker 1 (24:40):
So I don't disagree with my opinion. I don't disagree
with that at all.

Speaker 4 (24:43):
Mark.

Speaker 1 (24:43):
I appreciate you calling in today. Good stuff, all right, thanks,
all right, Well we'll get to Jerry, We'll get to
the rest of the calls. Calling in if it's an
over fall line Friday, you got something on your mind,
call it's four oh two five five eight eleven ten.
Four h two five five eight eleven ten. Good stuff there.
On news radio eleven ten Kfab.

Speaker 7 (25:00):
Emery Sunger on news radio eleven ten kfab.

Speaker 2 (25:05):
I have a rather simple question. Tim Wallz came from Nebraska.
We're told he came from a poor family, was able
to put enough money together to go to college, and
was a teacher for many years. Was a member of
the National Guard at the time. But having been a

(25:28):
teacher and in the National Guard, I can tell you
that neither one will make you wealthy. Where did he
get the money to become governor?

Speaker 1 (25:39):
Yeah, it's a good question. First of all, Jerry, thank
you for your service as well. Thank you for doing
that for our country as well. I mean, it's a
good question. I'm sure there are different things that one
could potentially do. I know he's got like that Chinese
connection and all that stuff. I'm not here to say
that he's got Chinese government money in his back pocket,
but maybe things are a little bit, I don't know,

(26:01):
more financially stable in that regard. I think a lot
of the whole poor family thing is coming to kind
of neutralize the JD. Vance story a little bit because
he wrote a best selling book about his childhood growing
up as a person that didn't have a lot growing up.
I didn't have great parent situation, stuff like that, and
they kind of need the hero's journey, right. They want

(26:23):
people to think that Tim Walls overcame all of these
incredibly difficult hurdles to get to where he is today,
when his hurdles were certainly nothing compared to the stuff
that we hear from JD Vance, especially in that book
that he wrote. So it's a good question, Jerry. I
don't have a good answer for you. I guess the
only way to really know is to get into the

(26:44):
weeds with somebody who's followed Tim Walls's entire life. I
am not that guy, but I do know the strategy
behind wanting to make it sound like he didn't come
from much at all, because it makes it seem like
he rose from the ashes and has all this experience
being somebody in the lower middle class.

Speaker 2 (27:01):
Right. Well, we've seen how he flip flops on things,
and you know how, I guess inaccurate. So much of
what he says is. I was just curious about that,
because no one gets in the position of being governor,
especially of the state like Minnesota, without either a pack
or a substantial money based behind, and that of course

(27:25):
will make you be olden to them.

Speaker 1 (27:28):
Sure, and that's a good question, Jerry. And it's a
good point to bring up, right, because he did eventually
get there. He is the governor of Minnesota, and whatever
aid that he had getting there, I guess we'll have to,
you know, find out over time. Hey, I really appreciate
the call, Jerry, Thanks for listening to us.

Speaker 2 (27:44):
Sure, thank you.

Speaker 1 (27:46):
Let's go to Brian on the phone line. Brian, welcome
to the show today. What's on your mind?

Speaker 7 (27:50):
Oh, to get on so fast. Let me turn off
to my air condissioner real quick so it's not so loud,
all right. Yeah, I wanted to talk about what's being
characterized communistic price controls, and it's a proposal to something
about price gouging. But it would actually be would be
to ask clear direct Congress to pass clear rules as

(28:12):
to what constitutes price gouging, and Federal Trade Commission to
investigate and impose penalties on that. And Kroger's recently want
to buy Albertson's for twenty five billion dollars and the
administration is trying to block that. And then emails. Their

(28:35):
director of pricing had an email where they said they
raised prices significantly higher than they were required to adjust for.
The higher costs are above inflation.

Speaker 1 (28:48):
Well so, yeah, Brian, I'm running out of time. I
get what you're saying about all this. I do think
that there's a lot of questions about stuff like that
in the way that it kind of cuts out the middleman,
or cuts out middle America. I should have said, not
a middleman. But you know what I'm saying. And there
is no control on the gouging of this, but there
are things in ways that our government can put different
things in place to help protect us the consumer. Whether

(29:11):
or not that happens in the near future, I guess
the only time will tell