The Great Clock Debate

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Remember when it was impossible to misplace the TV remote
because you were the TV remote. Remember when music sounded
like this, Remember when social media was truly social?

Speaker 2 (00:17):
Hey John, how's it going today?

Speaker 3 (00:20):
Well?

Speaker 1 (00:20):
This show is all about you on the goode. This
is fifty plus with Doug Pipe. Helpful information on your finances,
good health, and what to do for fun. Fifty plus
brought to you by the UT Health Houston Institute on Aging,
Informed Decisions for a healthier, happier life, and by New

(00:42):
Promise Neuropathy Lose the Pain and Numbness, Get your life back,
New Promise Neuropathy dot Com and now fifty plus with
Doug Pipe.

Speaker 4 (00:52):
All right, here we go again.

Speaker 5 (00:53):
Welcome to all of you who are joining me on
this Wednesday afternoon, and right up front here in this
first segment, I wanted to talk about the talk that's
underway and what probably will happen with daylight saving time.
I actually would be fine with being on daylight saving
time all year round, and for quite a few reasons
that I think are all pretty legitimate, making that one

(01:16):
simple change would do an awful lot to help our
whole country. Really, if you stop and think about it,
the most compelling argument for permanent daylight saving time is
public safety. Darkness is a danger for driving, for walking,
for being out just at all, and the evening rush
hour is consistently deadlier than the morning equivalent. More drivers

(01:39):
on the road, visibility drops, fatigue sets in at the
end of the work day, and by extending evening daylight
we just really do increase road safety and significantly, I
think reduced fatal vehicle long pedestrian crashes. That extra hour
of sunlight allows for extended outdoor recreation for families and
kids too.

Speaker 4 (02:00):
I'm a perfect example of that.

Speaker 5 (02:01):
I can't wait for daylight saving time because that means
after I get off work, even if I get off
work a little late, I can still go play a
little golf, I can still go fishing. I can still
do a lot of things outdoors that I can't do
when it's pitch dark. There's a lot to be said
also for the just the mental health aspects of a
little more sunlight in the day. A whole lot of

(02:22):
people in this country experience what they call up north
the winter blues, as daylight hours shrink, and under the
current system, standard time plunges sends us into darknes it's
like four.

Speaker 4 (02:35):
Thirty five o'clock in the evening.

Speaker 5 (02:36):
It's a very unnatural and depressing and premature end to
an active day. If we switch to year round daylight
saving time, that's gonna give us sunsets after six pm,
even in December, and that one little hour gives us
all kinds of opportunities for exercise, socializing, going fishing, and
playing golf, all of that stuff. After work or school,

(02:58):
people are a whole lot more likely to get outside
and move around when the day doesn't feel like it's
already ended before dinner. That same shift boosts our economy too.
The Chamber of Commerce has supported extended evening daylight because
it encourages consumers to participate in outdoor activities, to dine out,
go to sporting events, and shop and do all of

(03:18):
that stuff. And this support's been there since nineteen fifteen.
You think we would have had it figured out.

Speaker 4 (03:24):
By now, but we don't.

Speaker 5 (03:26):
And finally we can look at just the chaos of
this clock change every year, twice a year. One time
you're springing forward, and that causes all kinds of spikes
and heart attack strokes and motor vehicle accidents due to
sleep deprivation.

Speaker 4 (03:40):
If we set the clocks to so that it gets dark.

Speaker 5 (03:44):
One hour later every day of every year, that's not
going to be an issue anymore. Really do like the
idea of consistent, predictable days and just being able to
match our social routines with the natural light.

Speaker 4 (03:57):
That we all need.

Speaker 5 (03:58):
Anyway, I don't lose any sleep when we flip the
clocks one way or the other. That doesn't bother me
at all. But I really do like the idea of
having an extra hour of daylight to go do some
of the things that I truly like to do.

Speaker 4 (04:10):
The only real.

Speaker 5 (04:11):
Downside I see to this is that the kids, the
younger children, the kids who ride the school buses and all,
will have to be at that bus stop a lot earlier,
and that means they're going to be in the dark.
I wish we could have more daylight hours, or maybe
change the hours of school to coincide a little bit
more easily with daylight saving time or with whatever time

(04:32):
they call it after they change it. But that wouldn't
be a bad idea really, to go ahead and just
shift the time that school starts forward an hour so
that the kids don't have to stand out there in
the dark for a lot of them.

Speaker 4 (04:45):
That's got to be pretty scary.

Speaker 5 (04:47):
Now, I want to go ahead, and I want to
shift over to something that I hope I can cover
in just a few minutes, and I'm pretty sure I can.
And that is the story that I saw a while
back about how people who wear sun's green a lot.
With the people who wear sunscreen most often also tend
to be the most likely to develop skin cancers. Right

(05:07):
up front, that seems pretty counterintuitive, but there's a reason
that the results of this long term research are what
they are. For starters, the people more likely to use
sunscreens also are more likely to need it. This is
going to be fair skinned people with more sensitivity to
the sunlight. And concurrently, these same people, while they're out

(05:31):
in the sun, most of those people in that category
also tend to forget to reapply sunscreen as directed and
then forget about it because that flat doesn't work. I
don't think any sunscreen will stay on you all day
long unless you just bring out an entire tube of
zinc oxide and paint your face with it. Just based

(05:52):
on that simple fact that the people most likely to
need sunscreen are also the people most likely to wear sunscreen,
which then makes it logical that the people who need
it and wear it would get the most skin cancers too,
because they're not wearing it the way they're supposed to,
they don't reapply as directed. On the plus side for

(06:13):
wearing sunscreen is the fact that it really does prevent
DNA damage from the ultraviolet rays that are the primary
driver of skin cancers, including basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma,
and melanoma. All three You don't want any of those,
some worse than others, but they're all sunscreen or they're
all skin cancers. And along with helping prevent skin cancers,

(06:35):
those sunscreens also are pretty good at anti aging and
cosmetic benefits as well. Fewer wrinkles, fewer sunspots, that.

Speaker 4 (06:43):
Kind of stuff.

Speaker 5 (06:44):
And on the con side, though, of sunscreens, most of
them anyway, there's potential for systemic absorption of chemicals that
are used in there that aren't quite the safest things
in the world. The sunscreens also kind of give you
a false sense of security that if you have it on,
you don't have to worry about reapplying it. Oh, it's
on it's stick, it's a million SPF or whatever it is,

(07:06):
so I don't have to do anything else all day.

Speaker 4 (07:08):
That's not true.

Speaker 5 (07:09):
All in all, though, the scientific consensus on sunscreens is
that the protective advantages far outweigh the potential risks of
the ingredients themselves. So to maximize the efficacy and minimize
the risk, experts advise using broad spectrum physical sunscreens and
pairing them with other protective habits, such as wearing UV

(07:31):
blocking clothes or wearing a.

Speaker 4 (07:33):
Wide brimmed hat.

Speaker 5 (07:34):
Now, that may not be practical in some situations outdoors,
but just keep that in mind. If you can get
a hat and wear it and not get it blown
off your head like like I almost did Monday over
at the surf side Jetty, anything you do adds up
to being better for your skin.

Speaker 4 (07:50):
Just remember that.

Speaker 5 (07:50):
A few words now on the way out about ut
Health Institute on Aging, that amazing collaborative of thousands of
providers from every medical discipline, mostly in the med center,
also on outlying communities. They are there and have gotten
additional education to what got them their degrees on how
to apply their knowledge to seniors. That is a huge

(08:11):
deal for us and we're all welcome to take advantage
of it. Go to the website, take a hard look
around and see exactly what resources they offer, and then
if you need one of those providers, start your search
right there. Uth dot edu, slash aging, uth dot edu
slash aging. All right, welcome back, fifty plus and thanks

(08:32):
as always, like I always say, for listening to the
program today, whatever day it might be, in this segment,
I want to go to something somewhat comedic, I think
actually a piece that CNBC did and is rightfully drawing
a lot of criticism and pushback from social media, and

(08:53):
that would be CNBC's list of the top ten states
among all these fifty states in our ear Union. Their list,
according to them, anyway, tells us which are the ten
worst states in which to live, and in true liberal

(09:13):
progressive style, they jump before they get their fact straight,
and their list only happens to include deep red conservative states.
The top ten of CNBC's worst states to live in
also happened to be mostly conservative states.

Speaker 4 (09:37):
Let me run them off for you.

Speaker 5 (09:39):
Okay, the worst state in which to live would be Tennessee.
According to this list, Number two is our great state
of Texas. Number three in Indiana, Not Indiana, Number three Indiana,
then Louisiana, Georgia, Utah, Missouri, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. Not
on one of those. See like a terrible place for

(10:01):
me to live. I could deal with all that. Low taxes,
friendly people, great places to start businesses. What's not to
love unless you don't like conservatives? All ten of those
states supposed to be horrible, more horrible than the other forty.
And still Americans are packing up U haul trailers as

(10:22):
fast as they can come available, which doesn't keep up
with demand in many states, by the way. And these
Americans are moving out of those blue states with their
outrageous taxes and crime rates and radical ideologies, and they're
moving to all of CNBC's top ten worse states.

Speaker 4 (10:39):
They couldn't have come up with a worse idea, or
at least a worse list.

Speaker 5 (10:43):
Even if a committee of fifty of them it sat
around a table for six months and tried to say,
what can we do? That would be just absolutely stupid.
They still wouldn't have gotten to this, but they did somehow,
And curiously, no mention whatsoever of California, where taxes are
through the roof and radical liberalism rules anything.

Speaker 4 (11:04):
That's not yet been tied to fraud.

Speaker 5 (11:06):
No mention of New York either, where socialism and all
that's andy American about that pretty much got a stranglehold
on the city. They made fools of themselves with this one.
I guarantee a CNBC did that, and it wasn't the
first time either.

Speaker 4 (11:19):
Mainstream media just it's tending now to lean.

Speaker 5 (11:22):
So far out to the left and the lies that
it sometimes forgets to sprinkle at least a little truth
on it, so they can still call it something at
least partially resembling journalism.

Speaker 4 (11:33):
The big question for me out of this one.

Speaker 5 (11:34):
Is who wrote the questions, Who wrote the criteria for
declaring a state among the ten worst and equally important,
what were those criteria? What on earth could anyone point
at that would make Texas or Tennessee seem worse than
California or New York Speaking of the differences between red
and blue politics when it comes to affordability, by the way,

(11:57):
consider these little tidbits morons on Donnie, a socialist, ran
his campaign on a promise to make New York affordable again.
What he neglected to mention, though, and apparently his voters
didn't bother to question. Was that New York sky high
rents and prices on everything came into being behind decades

(12:18):
of democratic.

Speaker 4 (12:19):
Leadership in that city.

Speaker 5 (12:20):
And as New Yorkers are already coming to realize, Mom,
Donnie's plans are one hundred times worse than pretty much
anything his predecessors promoted and shoved down New Yorker's throats.
Californias know better. They continue to hemorrhage residents as its
state politicians continue to raise taxes. Same in New York too.

(12:40):
Original promises to only tax billionaires, then well, we've had
to look at it again.

Speaker 4 (12:45):
We're only going to tax millionaires.

Speaker 5 (12:47):
And then in the current iterations of new tax legislation
under consideration, I guess the only thing left to do
is promise only to tax people who earn money at
a real job. They can't tax all the illegal immigrants
that they're funding unless you want to. I guess you'd
have to tax the free things that the illegals get.

(13:11):
But if you did that, they wouldn't vote for you.
So there's quite a conundrum right there. It seems that lately,
and not twenty thirty fifty years ago, but lately, The
only thing Democrats do is is promise the moon. They're
going to promise anything they have to to make sure
they get the vote, and everything's going to come up roses.

(13:33):
If their residents just pay a little bit more in taxes,
then they collect that little more and a little more
on top of that, and then half the money raised
by those taxes disappears altogether, and the other half winds
up tied to fraud somewhere. And they repeat that story
that if only, if only a little more money, with

(13:53):
only a little more money, they could provide even more
for state residents, legal or otherwise, more fraud. More to see,
more homelessness, more election improprieties, more and more and more
of the same hot mess. Here's another buzzword for you, affordability.
National level affordability is a buzzword. In January, Chuck Schumer

(14:14):
promised to make affordability a priority, said he was going
to make it the touchstone, I think or something like that.
That was going to be their rally cry affordability. And
then in February, the chair of the House New Democrat
Coalition unveiled it's affordability agenda, claiming they'd address higher.

Speaker 4 (14:32):
Costs all over this great nation of ours.

Speaker 5 (14:34):
But you've got to ask yourself how sincere and genuine
they are on affordability. When they didn't raise a hand,
didn't ask any questions, didn't challenge whatsoever President Biden when
he was in office and the consumer price index was
over nine percent and the cost of living rows twenty percent,
not a peep out of those people because that was

(14:56):
their guy. And when affordability did come up on the
evening news, all they did was blame blame it somehow
on President Trump. They never seemed to talk about things
from the past if the person in charge in the
past was one of theirs, if the person in charge
in the past is President Trump, for example, man, everything

(15:17):
that happened for so long back as he was alive,
all the way back to toddlerhood, for him, the whole country,
everything that's wrong with it is his fault. Okay, I've
got just a couple more minutes now before we have
to go to break again. And on the way out,
I want to ease back to mayor and I'm emphasizing
mayor mom Donnie again because the State Department had to

(15:38):
step in and remind him that he's a mayor he's
not the Secretary of State, he's not a prince, he's
not a king or in any other way qualified or
even allowed to conduct closed door meetings with foreign leaders.
But somehow someone in his office had scheduled a personal
meeting between Mom Donnie and some high ranking official from Iran.

(16:04):
That was until the State Department issued a firm order
to them to cancel that meeting. You know, winning the
mayor race in that city, thanks almost certainly to the
votes of a lot of people too young to realize
what they've done, gives him zero authority to meet with
leaders of other countries, especially the one with which we're
currently in active military operations in combat.

Speaker 4 (16:28):
That title of his has really gone to his head,
all right. Skipping out here for a minute or so.

Speaker 5 (16:32):
Midway Meat Market out there in Katie on Old Highway ninety,
just a few miles west of ninety nine off of Ien,
take that ninety exit and that will take you right
into kind of a little while wrapped downtown Katie in quotes,
but at the end of a strip shopping center there
at the second light on ninety, that's where you'll find
Midway meat Market and the wonder people inside that place

(16:55):
who are there to do nothing more than to provide perfect,
wonderful customers beef chicken and pork cut. However you want
twenty five flavors of premium sausage grabbing goo snacks for
you or the kids, It's gonna lunch counter. And I
guarantee you if you show up hungry and visit that
lunch counter and sit down at one of those tables
and eat what you get, you won't leave there hungry.

(17:16):
Fifty seven years of making people smile midwaymeat Market dot Com.
That's Midway meat Market dot Com.

Speaker 4 (17:24):
All right, welcome back to fifty plus. Thank you all
for listening.

Speaker 5 (17:27):
As always, in this segment, we're going to take a
closer look at how and why so many Americans are
Americans are turning to general purpose AI chatbox for emotional
help and even mental health guidance, which is generally not
a good choice to help. I've got doctor Nicole Benders Hottie,
a board certified psychiatrist and chief medical officer for Talkspace,

(17:51):
right here on the phone.

Speaker 4 (17:53):
Welcome aboard, doctor.

Speaker 3 (17:55):
Thank you so much, thanks for having me.

Speaker 5 (17:57):
Sure, so let's lead with about how many people you
think are turning to AI for emotional support these days,
rather than seeing someone who's licensed and trained for that
kind of help.

Speaker 2 (18:09):
Oh gosh, So I would say it's in the millions.
Right when we see is that millions of people are
turning the chat box for mental health device and support.
The problem is those general models weren't designed for that purpose.
So that's why we at talk Space, as one of
the largest mental healthcare providers, wanted to take that responsibility

(18:30):
to really create a safer and more clinically grounded alternative.

Speaker 4 (18:34):
So that's what we did, Thank goodness.

Speaker 5 (18:36):
And my hunch is as to why they do this
is twofold. Number one is probably the money. They hear
that it's just too expensive to get mental health care.
And I think number two is that the anonymity of
it all. If you're chatting with a chat bot, nobody
sees you, nobody else hears you, you don't have to

(18:57):
sit in a waiting room and risk running into somebody
you might no am I on the right track.

Speaker 2 (19:02):
There, Absolutely, stigma remains very real. There's a number of
barriers for why people don't actually seek mental health care
with humans.

Speaker 3 (19:14):
Cost is a major one.

Speaker 2 (19:16):
Transportation, needing to travel into an office embarrassment, really not
being ready to speak to a human.

Speaker 3 (19:23):
So there's a number of reasons I think that people
are turning to these chatbots.

Speaker 2 (19:27):
The challenge is that general purpose models can also provide
a false sense of confidence and reinforce harmful thinking or
not recognize crisis situations.

Speaker 3 (19:38):
And we've seen how dangerous that can be.

Speaker 5 (19:40):
Yeah, that's what I think is going on really there,
if they're dealing with a robot, basically they're just you're
talking to a computer, and there's no empathy there, there's
no human thought process that can can keep up with
the chatbots just can't do what.

Speaker 4 (19:58):
A human can do. Then that's kind of the bottom line, really,
isn't it.

Speaker 3 (20:03):
Exactly Exactly?

Speaker 2 (20:04):
We don't believe that chatbots can replace human clinicians. That
human connection is really essential to mental health care in particular,
and therapy really by definition is between two people, right,
So AI should not be diagnosing things prescribing treatment. We
do not believe AI will be a replacement for therapists.

Speaker 4 (20:27):
From the viewpoint of someone who has who already knows
the answer. Before you ask the question, have you ever
posed a psychological question to AI just to see how
it answered?

Speaker 2 (20:39):
I have you know, and we as a part of
development of p which as our safe, clinically grounded alternative
to a general purpose AI chatbot, we had to do
that level of testing to really make sure that responses
coming back we're going to be safe and really grounded
it and therapeutic principles.

Speaker 3 (21:02):
So we developed Key.

Speaker 2 (21:05):
As a part of our suite of AI tools, but
it was purpose built for safety. We trained it on
real therapy, data proven techniques. We have risk detection algorithms
running in the background. It's really designed to support emotional
wellness and reflection, and as a part of that training,
we had to pose difficult questions to make sure it

(21:26):
was going to answer appropriately.

Speaker 5 (21:28):
There's a lot of work that's gone into something like that.
I'm sure doctor Nicole Benders Hottie on fifty plus here,
how often would you guess that the information from a
general AI side is right when people pose serious questions
about mental health?

Speaker 3 (21:44):
Gosh, that's a good question.

Speaker 2 (21:46):
I'm not sure I can answer how often, but I
will say that the risk associated with.

Speaker 3 (21:52):
Not getting it right is so high that we want
that to be a never event.

Speaker 2 (21:57):
Right if someone is really dealing with serious mental health concerns, depression,
thoughts about self harm. We have to get those kind
of crisis situations right all of the time in order
to keep people safe.

Speaker 5 (22:11):
Is there any level of help someone might need where
you would say, okay, you got to skip the AI
stuff and just invest in human empathetic support, empathetic support
or maybe even come to talk space where you know
you're going to get information that's based on real data

(22:31):
on mental health.

Speaker 2 (22:34):
Sure sure, So, I will say AI can be well
suited for certain aspects of mental health support, right, things
involving education or practicing skills for those conditions like mild
anxiety and depression or stress management. But generally AI is
going to be less well suited for situations that do

(22:56):
require nuanced clinical judgment or complex inter personal understandings or
crisis intervention. Like I mentioned before, those types of things,
or psychosis or thought disorders or complex trauma are really
better served by humans. And that's why through p our solution,
we have clinical clinical supervision and that can escalate users

(23:21):
to a human therapist, such as with Talkspace, if and
when that's indicated.

Speaker 5 (23:26):
That's a really good backup plan. Obviously, and of course
you've all thought of it all before you put talkspace
up up and running.

Speaker 4 (23:35):
How long has talkspace been in place?

Speaker 2 (23:39):
Oh, talk Space was founded fourteen years ago, so we've
been around for a.

Speaker 3 (23:44):
Very long time.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
We have a large data set of clinical information that
we use to train all of our AI models. We
started to use AI tools back in twenty nineteen as well,
really with the goal of reducing administrative burdens for our clinicians,
helping them prepare for sessions, supporting human clinical decision making,

(24:06):
developing tools that users can use in between sessions. But again,
we believe firmly that AI and the tools we've created
will never be a replacement for human care.

Speaker 4 (24:17):
That's a very good way to approach this.

Speaker 5 (24:21):
You're acknowledging that they're not going to be The AI
responses aren't going to be replacements for human intervention, but
they can sure get enough data to then maybe forward
it to someone such as yourself, who can pick up
the ball and run with it and make sure nobody
ever feels alone to the point of, like you said,

(24:41):
self harm.

Speaker 2 (24:42):
Even exactly right, AI alone can really post serious risks
if it's used in isolation or as a replacement for
human connection and that's one of the things that we
monitor as well.

Speaker 3 (24:55):
We don't want.

Speaker 2 (24:56):
People utilizing p for example, overutilizing it to the point
that they're ignoring those human connections in their lives.

Speaker 5 (25:03):
Should AI companies not yours, but should AI companies who
the generic AI stuff is that, should they limit how
their systems respond to people who come to them with
grief and depression and loneliness.

Speaker 2 (25:18):
Well, theres some benefits I would say for more general
wellness type of concerns. Loneliness can be an example of that,
But I do think that limits around what AI can
and cannot do, being really crystal clear about that is
important for any AI company to really be considering. And

(25:41):
the other thing that I think we've really leaned in
on is around privacy, right and so trust we know
it's built on having clear privacy standards, So being really
explicit and clear about how tools.

Speaker 3 (25:55):
Are built, who own the data, how it's kept cure
and private. Those are all really important questions to be
asking as well.

Speaker 5 (26:04):
Yeah, that's a very good point you bring up about
the privacy aspect of all of this, because a lot
of these generic AIS, the people who are talking to
these chatbots don't realize that all of that information, all
that personal information they're spilling out, might get you somewhere else, right.

Speaker 3 (26:23):
Exactly, exactly. I have to be really clear about that.
And that's why again when we built our solution in t.

Speaker 2 (26:30):
Knew that it's backed by our Hippocompliant platform. We're keeping
all data private and secure on our encrypted network, so
people can feel safe and know that their data with us,
with posts spaces being kept secure.

Speaker 5 (26:46):
Doctor Nicole Benders Hottie, thank you so very much for
your time this morning.

Speaker 4 (26:50):
I really do appreciate it.

Speaker 3 (26:51):
Thank you so much.

Speaker 5 (26:52):
All Right, A quick word now for New Promise Neuropathy,
where patients get the individual treatment they need and deserve.
If you want to take the grandkids to the zoo again,
maybe dance go dancing again. At New Promised Neuropathy, your
care team's going to identify the source of the pain,
the numbness, the tingling or burning in your extremities. And
the very good news about them is that they use

(27:14):
non invasive, holistic methods that reduce your dependency on nerve
blockers and really just get you back in the game.
New Promised Neuropathy even better is also FDA and Medicare cleared,
so by all means, get in touch with them and
they will take care of you. New Promise neuropathy dot com.

(27:35):
Get your life back, New Promise Neuropathy dot Com. And
welcome back to fifty plus once again on this Wednesday
afternoon Segment four. If you're keeping score at home and
tying well, all right, welcome back to fifty plus. As
we tying into last night's All Star game, we're rounding

(27:56):
third and heading home for today, a little less rain
is likely than it was yesterday. It bringed pretty good
over most of the city yesterday, but there's still a
chance of even some pop up thunderstorms later.

Speaker 4 (28:08):
In the afternoon. Ah. That was a lot to get
out in one breath.

Speaker 5 (28:12):
A little bit closer to the weekend too, now, when
we're supposed to see a whole lot more sunshine, thank goodness.
On the flip side of that, though, we're also going
to see a return to the higher temperatures, but clearing
and then clear sky starting Saturday and running at least
through Tuesday. Right up front, I want to talk briefly
about how important it is to keep your head on

(28:33):
a swivel when you're out of your home, especially for
the women in the audience. I saw the story this
morning at click to Houston about the woman who was
out for a walk on White Oak Bio. Just on
the walking trail there, some guy grabs her, drags her
down to the bio, sexually assaulted her, and she said
tried to drown her. But the good news is she

(28:55):
fought back and she got away from that scumbag and
flagged down a constable, and rather than becoming another gruesome statistic,
she gave a description of the guy who, just a
few hours later was caught riding his bike. And get this,
he was out riding his bike in a neighborhood close by,
whistled at another woman whose husband looked up and recognized

(29:18):
him as a suspect in this case. The police came
along found him on that bike, and I presume he's.

Speaker 4 (29:24):
Still in jail now.

Speaker 5 (29:25):
If you're walking out of a store, eyes up, looking
in all directions, phone in your purse, one hand on
your keys or your pepper spray, or both hands on
one of each. If you carry a firearm, make sure
you can get to it easily. It doesn't do you
any good. If you've got a little pistol at the
bottom of your purse and it's covered up by your

(29:45):
wallet and your phone and your keys and everything else.
Bad guys don't walk up to you slowly and ask
permission to assault you.

Speaker 4 (29:52):
They get there quick, out of nowhere, and you have.

Speaker 5 (29:55):
Got to be ready to respond just as quickly, if
not faster. Move com definitely in a parking lot too.
And if you feel like anything at all is out
of place, or maybe someone you feel like somebody's watching you,
go back into the store immediately and get an employee,
preferably a big, strong one to walk you out to
your car.

Speaker 4 (30:13):
And that doubles.

Speaker 5 (30:14):
If there's a van parked next to your car with
its sliding door on your driver's side, as soon as
you get in the car, escort it or otherwise lock
the doors immediately.

Speaker 4 (30:24):
And start that car.

Speaker 5 (30:25):
And if the way is clear, just get yourself out
of that parking lot and back on the road. I
hate having to talk about this kind of stuff, but
it's a sad necessity these days. Okay, moving from there
to something a little lighter and somewhat ridiculous as far
as I'm concerned. Over in the UK and across much
of Europe, the European Broadcasting Union whatever that is, has

(30:46):
kindled the ire of social media over there and here
after issuing new guidelines for photographers and videographers on just
how they should record women in sports, and the best
recions response among thousands to this curious shift was this
from an American named stand. It's kind of lengthy, but

(31:07):
pretty spot on. I think here's what he wrote, and
I quote, this is a very good example of high
sexual neuroticism. But on an institutional level, you have the
implicit idea that male desire is immoral and dirty and dangerous,
that it contaminates female dignity, violates them with unconsented to sexualization.

Speaker 4 (31:30):
But with the added institutional level.

Speaker 5 (31:32):
That male desire is a moral danger and must be
managed from the outside, that some sort of external authority
in this case, the broadcaster needs to be tasked with
managing the possible sexual perception of female athletes because it's
unacceptable and even dangerous that male desire be activated.

Speaker 4 (31:52):
End quote.

Speaker 5 (31:52):
There's a lot more there, but I don't want to
use up the whole segment just reading this. One point
that was brought up by a lot of people in
the comments sections is that it wouldn't hurt if women
would wear more than what appears to be underwear when
they compete in sports. I'm not suggesting that they wear
overcoats to do the high jump or run hurdles, but

(32:16):
their attire for many track and field events could be
called scantily clad. Is that an unfair statement? I don't
think so. And leaving that topic to take on a
very old one, actually a decade's old video clip of
now President Donald Trump being interviewed by Rona Barrett you

(32:36):
remember her. In this clip, he speaks of the Iranian
hostage situation in which fifty two Americans were held in
our embassy into Iran, and he noted that our response
to that situation was totally ridiculous. That was his word,
not mine, us sitting back and letting Iran hold Americans
as they did for four hundred and forty four daysident Trump,

(33:00):
back then, just a real estate guy from New York,
knew that we should never have allowed those hostages to
be left in that hell hole for more than a year.
And now he knows we can't allow Iron to ever
get a nuclear weapon. And he's the first president who's
had the guts and determination to make sure they don't
get one. And additionally, and I found this pretty interesting,

(33:22):
he's instructed our military to unleash if he's assassinated, to
unleash everything we've got on Iran so that chance of
death to America are never heard again. They've been doing
this for forty seven years. The only difference has been
that no former presidents negotiated the way he has from
a position of power.

Speaker 4 (33:42):
And now to the liberal.

Speaker 5 (33:44):
Entertainment desk, a guest host on the Jimmy Kimmel Show,
some guy named Ike Baron Holtz, I guess is his name,
made jokes about Mitch McConnell's hell saying and I quote,
I hope you get the quality healthcare you fought so
hard to deny everyone else in quote. And on top
of that, he also said, and I'll also quote, what

(34:04):
a crazy weekend. Mitch McConnell is alive, Lindsey Graham is dead.
There's so many opportunities to get Jimmy's show pulled off
the air again.

Speaker 4 (34:12):
End quote.

Speaker 5 (34:13):
I'm a First Amendment guy, I'm a free speech guy.
I understand that he has the right to say those things,
but as I've said before fairly recently, actually the right
to say that doesn't necessarily mean that his employer, if
there's any occupational document somewhere that says what the expectations

(34:34):
are of the company for the behavior of its employees,
if he's broken one of their rules of employment, I
don't see why he shouldn't be booted. This country and
this is kind of an example. Seems to have lost dignity,
seems to have lost empathy, seems to have lost just
manners in general. Everybody's trying to just jab everybody. Everybody's

(34:58):
trying to to make everybody uncomfortable, and they hide their
bad manners behind the First Amendment.

Speaker 4 (35:05):
Well, it's it's free speech. I can say whatever I want.

Speaker 5 (35:08):
Yeah you can, but it's probably not necessary to say
some of the things you say to make your point.
The other place they hide is behind comedy. Oh it
was just a joke. Yeah, I was just joking about that. Well,
your joke was in bad taste. And one more and
it's kind of not really a great lunch hour story.

(35:30):
But I want to go ahead and tell you anyway,
because this just shows.

Speaker 4 (35:36):
I don't even know, I don't know what.

Speaker 5 (35:38):
It really says about Oregon. And certainly he doesn't say
anything about the entire state.

Speaker 4 (35:45):
But up in Oregon.

Speaker 5 (35:47):
There's something called I've never heard of it, g u
g O or u g oh, a tournament. Apparently that's
some sort of game. But a card shop in Oregon
had to suspend had to suspend its weekly ugi oh
tournament because too many people were smelly. I can't imagine

(36:11):
in Houston, Texas, or in anywhere in Texas any sort
of a tournament where it had to be completely canceled
and shut down just because everybody stunk to high heaven.
So I guess in addition to manners and decency, we've
also abandoned hygiene in some parts of the country. Sad

(36:34):
but true. I guess all right, that's going to wrap
it up for today. I'll have some better news for tomorrow.
I promise I'll lighten it up a whole lot, just
to make make up for some of this darkness we
had today.

Speaker 4 (36:44):
Thank you all for listening. I do appreciate it. Audios