With federal funds a pipe dream and no advertiser dumb enough to sponsor it, Milwaukee’s “Hop” is hemorrhaging money and some aldermen say it’s time to get rid of it. Mark offers his take on banning cellphones in schools and Tim Michels may be considering another run for Governor.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The Mark Belling Podcast is presented by you Line for
quality shipping and industrial supplies. You Line has everything in stock.
Visit you line dot com. The Markbelling Podcast is a
production of iHeartRadio podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
I Told you So.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
I've explained many times why those are four very important
words for those of us on the right. First of all,
we get to say it all the time. But secondly,
and this is the part that people miss, it's important
to say it not just because it's gloating and crowing,
(00:45):
which it is, but because it is critical to keep
pointing out not only why you were right and why
the other side was wrong, but to remind people that
they were wrong so that we can learn from these
idiotic things that they do. And the reality is is
(01:08):
that we're always right. I get to say I told
you so all the time. Unfortunately it's often years decades later,
and it's often then very very hard to do anything
about it. But we have another example of this, and
(01:29):
for those of you who just found me in podcast world,
this is something that I vowed I would, at some point,
if I lived long enough, be able to say I
said there was no way that I was going to
be wrong about the subject none. There's always a chance
on almost everything, but not this one. I guaranteed it,
(01:52):
and I'll share with you the new information on that
story in just a moment.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
Here.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Have you ever been offered an add on option for
premium or white gloves service? But you never take that?
Do you?
Speaker 2 (02:07):
At Casco?
Speaker 3 (02:07):
You do? We can't be putting that into somebody else's
commercial in here. I just wanted you to say, no,
I'm a chief skate and I never do it. I
actually usually do take that kind of stuff because I
think I'm you know hot, you know what. Anyway, I'll
re ask the question, have you ever been offered an
add on option for premium or white gloves service? You
Line provides only one type of service, the best from
(02:31):
knowledgeable customer service available twenty four seven three sixty five
to keeping every product in stock ready to ship the
same day. When your business needs quality shipping supplies, reliable
warehouse equipment, or office furniture fast, contact you Line and
get the best service because you Line believes service is essential,
(02:52):
not an option. I have been waiting for this day
to come, and as I.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
Say, it was inevitable.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Some members of the Milwaukee City Council are now admitting
that the trolley is a flop and that we need
to get rid of it now. I said some we're
not in a majority point yet in the mayor. It's
not like they're gonna take it. They're gonna shut this
thing down, but reality is sinking in. I need to
(03:22):
give the background for some of you that aren't from Milwaukee,
or perhaps are new here. For about as long as
I've been doing a program in Milwaukee, and it started
in the radio in nineteen eighty nine, I have been
railing so clever, railing against all proposals to do any
type of transit that's on rail. It's all so stupid.
(03:44):
The biggest problem, of course with it is we have
roads everywhere, but the only ways, the only way that
you can run something on rail is where you put
tracks just in and of itself. That defeats any argument
for any of these real things. Nonetheless, for years and
years and years, two Milwaukee mayors one became obsessed with it.
(04:06):
They came up with this notion. First they called it
light rail, then they called it this, then they called
it that, and eventually they decided to call the thing
a streetcar. I continue to insist on calling it a trolley.
The reason I call it a trolley is for whatever reason,
they hated it when I called it a trolley, So
thus I continue to call it the trolley. All right,
(04:27):
For years we stopped the thing, and then finally they
got their hands on some federal grant and they started
ripping up the streets in downtown Milwaukee to put these
tracks in. They originally said we're going to charge a
dollar a ride, and I said, nobody's gonna pay a
dollar a ride. Secondly, I said, the thing is doomed
(04:52):
to fail because it's only able to go where the
tracks are, Meaning if you're not starting somewhere near the
tracks and ending somewhere else near the tracks, the thing
is of no use to you. There are a very
very limited number of people who would therefore be in
a position to use it. Basic common sense. They didn't listen.
(05:15):
They ripped up these streets and they put in this loop.
It took them forever to complete the second leg of
the loop, in part because the second leg of the
loop initially wasn't going anywhere because it was to dead
end at the Koteur, the high rise building that it
took forever to put up now is put up and
is still apparently only about half fall. Nonetheless, the trolley's done.
(05:37):
Immediately upon starting it, they realized nobody was going to
pay a dollar a dollar a ride, as I told
you they wouldn't. They never even bothered to put fair
boxes in. It's been free from the beginning. Now here's
some basic math. If it's free, there's no revenue. Obviously
(05:58):
there will be expenses. The thing has been a money
hemorrhaging sieve forever. The only way to continue functioning it
would be to continue to get government grads to subsidize it.
Or here was the brainstorm they came up with, we'll
sell advertising and put advertising signs on the side of it.
There are advertising signs on the side of a bus.
(06:20):
How much can you get for putting a sign on
the side of this stupid trolley that's running around. I
suspect not much. Initially, Potawatami said, we're making so much
money down here with our tight slot machines that only
pay out at ninety one percent, that we'll come up
with the money for this. But then even they said,
you gotta be kidding. Now, one of the arguments that
(06:43):
I made forever is given the fact that the thing
is only in downtown and only on one side of
downtown east of the river. Well, kind of, there's a
small portion near the post office where it starts, where
the intermodal station is, that's over there, but the overwhelming
majority of the road is east of the river. That
(07:04):
why would any other aldermen in any other part of
the city support this. The neighborhoods in Milwaukee are eroding, going.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
To hell, et cetera.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Why are they spending all of this money to run
a street car in an area where basically a bunch
of white people in downtown business employees live. Another question
I asked, all right, well, years have gone by. Almost
nobody rides the trolley. Every now and then you'll get
(07:34):
something going on where some people will jump on it
like hitch a ride and save themselves six blocks, like
say Summerfest and so on.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
But by and large it's empt and you see.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
The trains running around very very very slowly. They screw
up the traffic downtown because when they approach an intersection,
all of the lights have to go red in all
four directions so that the trolley can go through the intersection.
The avert speed of the trolley is minus two miles
per hour? Is that physically impossive? Physically possible? I suspect
(08:05):
it isn't. Could something be a negative speed, Well, it'd
have to be going in reverse.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
I mean, I guess if you could were.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
Counting the forward progress of something and you put it
in reverse, But that would be anyway.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
It goes very slowly. So now we have jas online
without any sense. See.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
Part of the problem is you have these reporters who
write these stories. All reporters now seem to be in
a live in a city for the for two years
prior just for two years, so they never know any
of the background of the history. I, on the other hand,
have the advantage of having been here since eighteen twenty four.
Who is the president in eighteen twenty I actually know.
I think I know who won, but that would mean
he took over in twenty five. I think that was
(08:43):
John Quincy Adams who won in eighteen twenty four.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
You shake your head. You have no clue.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
You think we were still under the rule of King
George of England in eighteen twenty four, You have absolutely
I'm and I think.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Monroe was the president. If I'm not isn't this great?
Speaker 3 (09:00):
Beck?
Speaker 2 (09:00):
When we were doing a radio show.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Nine million people would be calling you up and telling
you an almost all with brawing on answers. Now that
we have a podcast, they're gonna be calling up at
eleven thirty at night when they're listening to the thing,
or worse yet, just anyway. The reporter's name is Vanessa Swales.
Well that's her name. Some here, I'll read the headline. First,
(09:25):
Milwaukee officials clash over maintaining downtown street car. I'm thinking
we go finally some of the ultimate and of course
are the ones who aren't from downtown as they take
a look at the city budget or wondering why we're
putting a fortune to keep this thing running. Here's the
first thing. There's no prospect for federal funds. Do you
(09:48):
know why there's no prospect for federal funds?
Speaker 2 (09:51):
No?
Speaker 3 (09:52):
No, no, no, no, there's no prospect for federal funds. It's
very very simple. It's a five letter t R U,
M P. Trump's not gonna give you any more money
to run a trolley around more? Are they gonna give
(10:12):
them any more money any more federal funds to try
to expand the thing. I mean they're great dreamous to
take it over to the fiser form and all of
that stuff. It's it's not gonna happen. They can hold
out and hope that Mamdani or AOC or somebody gets
elected president in twenty eight and then get the Congress
(10:33):
to pass the thing in twenty nine. But in the
Inn there's nothing, so there's no prospect of getting any
more outside money. And the thing is I say, costs
a fortune to run because A it breaks down all
the time. B they have to maintainded and see it's
unionized employees that operate the thing. And here they are
(10:53):
with all these other you know, city governments always have
tight budgets because there's all this stuff that they.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
Want to spend money on.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
And actually now some pressure to spend at least a
little money on our understaffed police department. So you've got
some alderman looking at it, this thing, why are we
doing this? Okay, even if it might have been a
good idea, maybe if some of us were dumb enough
to think that it would work, it's not working. Alderman
Scott Spiker, he represents the southeast side. By the way,
(11:24):
there are no conservatives on the Milwaukee Common Council. There
are just some that are less insanely radical than others,
and then there are some that are liberal but pragmatic
liberals and so on. In this case, though, Spiker represents
the southeast corner. For those been around for a while,
this is the old Bob Anderson area and it was
one time conservative. But there's no part of the City
(11:46):
of Milwaukee this conservative anywhere. But that's the part that
Spiker represents, and he has the advantage of not having
been on the council when they approve this thing in
the first place. You have a loop that goes two
miles locked in and no prospect for ex at Alderman
Scott Spiker told budget officials, by the way, I have
been pointing this out for fifteen years, the.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Exact same sentence that he offered.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
It would just make that lives or lefties a lot
easier if they would simply listen to me in the
first place. They're incapable of doing that, however, which is
why the I told you so that I started the
podcast off with today is so critical. Spiker, who has
called the hop and elbatross around the city's neck and
transportation for the unhoused and well healed.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Do you understand what he means by that, You don't
the unhoused and the well healed. Well, I'll explain this.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
I would think you would. You you should. You should know.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
There's two groups of people that ride on this thing,
rich people and homeless people. Coming The homeless people write
it because they just sit in the thing all day
because it's free and it's I actually was on the
thing once or twice after I had my stroke and
they told me I couldn't drive for a week. I
think I took it like I actually at one point
lived on the trolley line. I just said, this thing
(13:07):
is just absolutely hilarious. The only person who might actually
benefit from this is actually me. Yet not being a
non selfish person, I put anyway, it was either really
cold or it wasn't cold.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
It was one of the two.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
But I mean, street people will sit on there and
ride it all day, and the other thing will be
people in very very expensive condos and townhouses. Are people
who work on the high end business district of downtown Milwaukee.
They well, that's so that's the point that Spiker's saying,
really really poor people like homeless people, et cetera, or.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Well healed.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
He has railed against the city's free transportation option, especially
as the city is on the hook to continue covering
expenses built in twenty eighteen. The streetcar system is now
expected to have listen to this number a six point
nine million dollar operating.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
Costs for next year. Let's round it up seven million
million dollars a year to run this thing. Seven million.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
According to Mayor Cavalier Johnson's post twenty twenty six budget,
the hop is partially sustained by two point seven million
dollars in sponsorship, advertising and grant revenue, leaving the city
on the hook for roughly four million dollars to keep
it continuing, to keep it continue running. Quote, that's four
million dollars we don't plan to put forward libraries, four
million dollars we don't keep put towards streets. That's four
(14:29):
million dollars we don't put toward new fire trucks. And
our needs are growing and our status quot is slowly
killing us. Then you get the defense of this from
the Public Works department. They keep saying the same thing,
and it's quasi true. Quasi true means it's true, but
it doesn't have to be true. If that isn't what
it means. I've just defined it as such and just
(14:50):
you're just gonna have to live with it.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
When you get a.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Federal grand for transportation project, you have to continue to
use the thing that you got the great for for
the transportation or give it back. Did you know that? Well,
in fact, this is how they built the They came
up with the initial funding. In the first place, they
(15:13):
ripped down the city's transit garage garage, and because that
was built with a federal grant, they used money from
that to be able to build the street car in
the first place. That's why the thing runs over to
where the Kotour is. Because the cotur was built adjacent
to the old city transit garage.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
It was a reach.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
But the point that they make is, look, if we
stopped doing this, we got to give back the money
they gave us to put the track lines in in
the first place. That is, in fact quasi true. But
I'm just here to tell you that if you went
to Ron Johnson and he got the word to President
(15:56):
Crumb's people, I think they would be more than happy
to tell they don't have to pay the money back
for this stupid thing that we shouldn't have done in
the first place, because almost everyone who is a conservative
thinks that this is stupid and if we can get
the thing, just end it and be done with it
and walk away. You're never going to get that money
back anyway, and otherwise you're simply throwing good money after bad.
(16:20):
The story goes on with some alderman trying to defend
this Krishki the apartment public gurs does that mean we
can't expand it in the future. I'm not going to
say no again, holding out this hope that the Democrats
will come in and at some point, you know, you'll
get a Democratic president and they handed all these federal
grants for transit again and they'll be able to run
the thing over to the West side, et cetera. And
(16:40):
that's always been the defense for any transit project that
doesn't work. They build it in, then they say nobody's
riding it because it doesn't go anywhere. So then they
expand it even further, and they'll say nobody's riding it
because it still doesn't go anywhere, And it becomes an
argument to put the thing over the entire city of Milwaukee,
where still nobody is actually going to ride it. They
(17:00):
would prefer the bus because the bus is faster and
the bus can go on all sorts of roads, whereas
the train can only go where the tracks are. I
could go on about this, but I've made the point sufficiently.
Now let's go to Wauka Shaw. There is an income
(17:23):
poop member of the city council in Wauka Shaw. This
story is like ninety percent hilarious and ten percent furious.
First of all, the guy's name is Rico Camacho. He
sounds like I mean, I was gonna say it sounds
like he should be a boxer, but I'm just thinking
of Macho Camacho, so that so that maybe it doesn't
(17:45):
eat I don't know, it just Rico Camacho.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
It sounds like an athlete's name, doesn't it. It does.
Speaker 3 (17:51):
Now some will say, Oh, you're just saying that because
it's a Latino sounding name. No, there's all sorts of
Latino sounding names. Don't sound particularly athletic. He just sounds
But anyway, I don't think he is. I just think
he's kind of dumb. He's wandered around in walk A
Shaw last week and he sees some guys in uniform
running downtown. Now put yourself in the mind of the
(18:16):
Paul's never able to do this. He's never able to
put himself in the mind of the average addle. That
dope be lefty. I have no problems doing it whatsoever.
What do you think, he concludes, You have no idea.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
I'll tell you as Ice.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
He posts on Facebook that Ice is swarming downtown walk
a shaw, that there's a raid underway.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
He's an alderman. Let's start with.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
If it was Ice, why is a member of a
city council of a community that supported Trump.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
Warning people about it. But that point is literally neither
here nor there, because that wasn't Ice.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
This idiot sees a bunch of people running around in
the in uniforms and thought they're Ice. I gotta admit
I don't know what a nice uniform looks like because
many of the Ice people that I see are playing clothed.
I mean, if I saw somebody walking up in a
nice uniform, unless I saw the badge and it said
Immigrations and Customs and Force, I probably wouldn't know what
(19:26):
their color uniform is. It probably is when they're in
unicorm it's probably some type of cop colored uniform, which
are well, I don't this guy thought they were ICE.
It gets even better. They weren't even cops. It was
a security firm that was doing a drill. It's the
(19:48):
business that's owned by Brian Doro who This is where
it actually gets a little weird. He actually at one
point worked for ICE. He was in the first Trump administration.
He was part of Homelandecurity. But he now owns a
business that provides security services, and they provide security services
in all sorts of areas including help and protect businesses
(20:09):
against you know, threats, et cetera. So they do drill
from time to time as well any company that's training
their employees.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
It's all it was. They were just doing a drill.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
Mike guess is that there isn't a single person in
the city of Waukeshaw who thought that this was anything
other than what it was, a company doing a practice drill,
other than this idiotic, idiotic alderman Rico Camacho. So he
finds out that in fact, it wasn't ICE. He apologizes
over the weekend and says, I'm sorry that I made
this mistake. In fact, I've got the story that walka
(20:45):
trip for it, said, like the biggest headline.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
You can imagine.
Speaker 3 (20:48):
Alderman apologizes after false ICE alert in downtown Waka Shaw.
Security firm employees mistaken for ICE agents. Right now, the
story goes on. The Waukeshaw Freeman is reporting today that
Camacho is no longer employed as a teacher at Catholic
Memorial High School at Waukeshaw. The story then does not
(21:09):
have to tail. It's not clear whether or not he
was fired or asked to resign, but obviously someone who
would make such an incredibly inflammatory statement, and given the
fact that we all know that ICE agents are being
targeted right now, clearly was putting people's lives at risk
by putting this warning out there, and in this instance,
(21:30):
putting a warning out for security people who aren't even ICE.
So Camacho is no longer a teacher at Catholic Memorial
High School. There's another component of this story, though, that
I find quite interesting. The city attorney in Waukeshaw. That's
an elected position. In some cities, the city attorney is
simply a guy you hire. In other cases they contract
(21:52):
with a law firm to provide it. But at Waukeshaw.
The city attorney's an elected position. His name is Brian Running. First,
he told no, he said no officials in Waukeshaw should
comment on this, which I always find intriguing when a
city attorney tells somebody who's another elected official that they
can't talk. I don't think any city official has any
(22:14):
obligation to listen to one department head till him the
canadon they can't do. But he said he was going
to conduct a review, and after his review is concluded,
he concluded that this is a statement of personal opinion
and not an official warning from the government of Waukeshaw.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
And he then claimed that.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
These comments are not subject to the state open records law.
I'm sure some people are inquiring about what other posts
that he's made out of any number of things, and
the city attorneys saying, well, this is his personal opinion.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
Well, I would think any.
Speaker 3 (22:41):
Elected official who expresses an opinion, it's a personal opinion.
He's an alderman of wauk a Shaw and he was
commenting on something going on in walk Ashaw or that
he thought that he would So I think perhaps somebody
should challenge this and see what other crap this goof
is doing on social media. Good thing, there weren't any
(23:04):
little kids running around playing cops and robbers. Camacho might
have seen them and thought that it was some sort
of invasion or something or other. A dope, I mean, seriously,
And the only way that this this is, you know,
all this weekend, those are the nod King's thing.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
Ice is just on his head.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
Remember after nine to eleven, and you know they said
if you see something, say something. Everybody who saw a
car like idling in front of a house is calling
up the police thinking that it was some terrorists.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Of the bomb and so on. This is just on
the guy's head.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
He sees somebody in a uniform run it could have
been anybody in a uniform. Not to mention, I shouldn't
say most lots of security companies, their guards wear uniforms
and they look quasi like law enforcement. They're not allowed
to do certain things that would be law enforcement. And
there's people who are aposts of law enforcement. But lots
of security companies will have somebody put on like a
(23:54):
uniform that kind of looks like it.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
So this immediately thinks the ice Ice.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
Next during the no King's rally in Chicago over the weekend.
One speaker got up and called upon the crowd to
shoot ICE agents. As it turns out he's been identified.
(24:23):
There was way less effort to identify him than to
identify the poor woman from Milwaukee who got on the
Dodger fan and said, somebody call ICE after he was
harassing them. But he's been identified. His name is Mois's
Bernald Puentes, and he actually works at Wilbur Wright College,
(24:43):
which is a community college in Chicago. So far as
we can tell, he has not been fired, which I
guess means that if you retort to someone who is
Latino who is harassing you and making a jackass out
of himself, somebody call ICE, that that is a fireable offense.
But if you actually say you should murder Ice, that
(25:06):
that is not a fireable offense. You see the standards
that are at work here, and why I have some
sense of empathy, if not sympathy for the woman who
lost her cool and ended up getting canned from a
big time job. She was an associate counsel at Manpower
for making hurts dam And in the meantime you can
(25:26):
run around and say, yeah, I guys to kill people
who work for ICE and apparently do that without any
consequence whatsoever. Let me move to this story, and this
is one of these stories that I've alluded to a
couple of times in I always have a sense when
things aren't sinking into people. I don't know why that is,
but I just have this. Then I look at Paul,
(25:48):
and then I think it's sinking into him. But then
I don't know if you're the best example of whether
or not something some kid do. Obamacare is going to
go broke at the end of the year. I've covered
this a couple of times, going to cover it again
very briefly. The reason it's going to go broke and
there are going to have to be massive increases in
premiums is when Obamacare was created and then during Biden's
(26:13):
administration with COVID. During those two periods of time, massive
subsidies by the government were put in place to lower
the costs of the premiums for people that were covered
under Obamacare, otherwise known as the Affordable Care Act. In
both cases, they had an expiration date. The original subsidy
expired early in Biden and the Democrats, when they controlled
(26:35):
the Congress in Biden's first year extended those subsidies die
at the end of the year, meaning the people who
are covered under Obamacare are going to see monster increases
in their premium unless the Congress and President extend the subsidies. Now,
(26:57):
this is an opportunity to say I told you so,
but rually not my point here For the people who
argue that Obamacare the math never added up and it
would always need massive subsidies, despite what Obama said when
this came in that it would be a break even proposition,
it obviously isn't, and it requires these subsidies or the
cause of Obamacare, which is already somewhat high, explodes. Who
(27:26):
created Obamacare? This is very important. I'm not sure you
all remember Obamacare was passed in I believe fourteen. Who
created Obamacare? Well, who else? Obama can't sign a piece
of paper and issue at executive order created It was
(27:46):
passed by the Democratic Senate in House without a single
Republican vote. Do I remember that there wasn't one Republican
vote for it. And when the subsidy was passed extended
early in Biden, who did that?
Speaker 2 (28:03):
The Democrats? So now this.
Speaker 3 (28:06):
Program that was created and then essentially renewed by the Democrats.
Is going broke as we knew it would, and they
want the Republicans.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
To bail out the thing they created. You see the.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
Problem with this Now, I acknowledge the following. We've had
Obamacare for ten years and there are people that are
dependent upon it, and it will be a hardship for
many of them if their premiums explode. I acknowledge that
it's not my fault because I said this would happen,
(28:40):
but I acknowledge that this problem is here.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Senator Mark Wayne Mullen has a very good quote on this.
Speaker 3 (28:54):
And his position is my position if you have to
read between his lines of quote. Dems wrote Obamacare. They
passed Obamacare without a single GOP vote. They created the
Obamacare COVID credits without a single GOP vote, and they
extended those credits and chose a twenty twenty five expiration
(29:15):
date with no GOP votes. If the Dems want to
discuss their Obamacare failure, we welcome the conversation after they
end the Schumer shutdown. First of all, let's deal with
the second part of that first. There ain't gonna be
any extension of anything as long as the government is
(29:36):
shut down, and it's the Democrats that have shut down
the government.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
So let's start right right there.
Speaker 3 (29:40):
There's no extension of anything and no creation of any
new federal funds for anything during the period in which
there's a shutdown. But secondly, what else did he say
between the lines? Don't worry if you don't know, because
I'm here to tell you. I'll read the key line.
If Dems want to discuss their Obamacare failure, we welcome
the conversation. In other words, I think what Mullin is
(30:01):
saying is the Republicans are open and to continuing some
of these subsidies, but it means Obamacare is going to
be changed. It has been a racket that enriches the
insurance companies. And let me tell you the deep dirty seat.
I don't know if it's that deep of a secret.
Maybe it's commonly known. Obamacare policies are not really good.
(30:26):
They cover rezillion things because it's one size fits all,
so if you're a male, you have to get a
policy that covers pregnancy and so on. They cover lots
of things, but the policies themselves have extremely high deductibles.
So until you hate your out of pocket maximum. You're
paying a lot for your healthcare because the insurance doesn't
(30:48):
kick in. One of the problems is is that they
don't allow specifically tailored policies under Obamacare so that individuals, employers,
and individuals that bio Obamacare under the healthcare marketplace are
able to opt out of all sorts of stuff they
don't need. You come up with that reform and the
(31:10):
policies could become less affordable, But the insurance companies don't
want that. Insurance companies love policies that require people to
carry coverage for something they will never use. Okay, put
yourself in the shoes of the insurance company. Do you
want to be Pall's insurance company? Imagine what a crappy
operation that would be. You'd never pay out. I'd be
(31:33):
on the phone and the line I'd be ringing if
your Pall's insurance company. Wouldn't you love to sell health
insurance to a man the covered pregnancy. You'd love that
because you know there's not any unless you're like redefining man,
like these trans people, there's no chance you're ever gonna
have to pay it out. So, as I say, if
(31:57):
the Democrats want to bail out of this terrible place
government policy that they created Obamacare. It's going to have
to be with reforms that are put in place by
Obamacare that Republicans approve of it. As I say, I acknowledge,
if you simply kill Obamacare entirely right now, what are
you going to do for all of the people for
whom that's been their healthcare for the last eleven years.
(32:23):
And I don't think the Trump would be in favor
of doing it. But these subsidies are a total It's
a massive amount of money that we're kicking in for
a program that is constructed idiotically, where you're charging and
requiring coverage for healthy twenty six year old people that
is identical the coverage of a sickly fifty eight year
(32:43):
old person. Let me move to another issue. This is
one of those topics that I can do three podcasts on,
but I'm going to cover it. This is going to
be the Cliff Snodes version of it. This debate's going
on in a lot of suburban public schools in fact,
and a lot of schools, and some of them private schools.
(33:05):
It's going on in fact, just state in a lot
of schools, whether or not to continue to allow students
to use their cell phones in school.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
I think it's insane. I think it's.
Speaker 3 (33:21):
Insane if a kid is sitting in a classroom, the
notion that the kid is running around texting, going on Facebook,
looking at porn or whatever else they're doing is preposterous.
It's a very simple solution to it, ban them, and some.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Schools have gotten very, very good at it.
Speaker 3 (33:42):
What they do is they'll bake you at the beginning
of the day, turn your phone in and they put
it in like it's a bag or an enclosure or
something that you can't get into, and they give it
back to you at the end of the day. There's
a term for these things, and I forget what it is.
Do you know what that term is? Paul says, they
call it the cell phone bag. Well, it makes sense.
Maybe there isn't other neah, but I've been throw it
(34:03):
in the cell phone bag. In the suburbs. There seems
to be more blowback to the bands than in the city.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
No. I know why this is.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
You have these helicopter moms that apparently feel the need
to text to text their children all day when they're
at school.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
I think that's what it is, don't you part? Yes, Well,
what other part is it?
Speaker 1 (34:26):
No?
Speaker 3 (34:26):
I'm talking about I'm not talking about the student's objections
to this. I'm talking about why the parents are of
Jeffney to it.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
That's what it is.
Speaker 3 (34:33):
Well, in Pewaukee, which is the case that we're going
to study here, the school board has wanted to ban
cell phones in school and say that you couldn't have
them all day.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
Students screamed, and so did parents scream.
Speaker 3 (34:45):
That's the parents say, well, what if I have to
contact the kid because there's a tragedy, what did you
do before we had cell phoods? You call the school's
office and the principal tell us little Johnny, Hey, come
over here, here we have our disaster or whatever.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
I mean. There is somewhere a.
Speaker 3 (35:02):
Happy medium between the child neglect that many children go
through and the overparenting that some of these hovering parents do.
As for the students objecting, they'll come up with all
of this stuff that they want it. We all know
what they want to do. And secondly, a big part
of the problem that goes on in schools is the
(35:24):
cyber bullying that I admit I didn't have to go through,
nor Paul had to go through. I mean, you know,
when I was kids would pass notes around and all
of that stuff. It's far more harmful to past on
social media, and it just and people have proven to
be far more vile when they've got a phone or
a device in their hand than typing something out.
Speaker 2 (35:40):
It's a problem.
Speaker 3 (35:42):
So they've reached a compromise in Milwaukee after everybody yelled
and screamed, and that is that they can't have the
phones during class, but they can have them during the
lunch hour and break periods. They can't have them when
they're walking in the hallway from one class to another,
but there are periods in which they don't have a
class scheduled at all, when they have total, if not
total free time, more free time like a study hall,
(36:04):
of the lunch hour and so on, and they're able
to use their phones. Then I can live with this,
but I think we have to err on the side
of getting these things out of the hands of kids.
If you want to be able to teach kids, if
a teacher has any ability to control the classroom, they
can't have the kids running around doing crap on their phone. Well,
the teacher's supposed to be teaching well, and you know
(36:25):
that's a separate issue. Many of these schools still have
devices that you can use, like the laptops and notebooks
for researching someone. This is specifically the phones themselves, which
are convenient to do all sorts of things that I
think have nothing to do with a good educational environment.
And the parents object to this that they want to
they want to hear from their kids all day.
Speaker 2 (36:45):
I mean, give me a break. We had phones.
Speaker 3 (36:49):
Your daughters were young enough that there were cell phones
when they were still in school, right, I don't mean college.
Speaker 2 (36:53):
I mean like high school. In grade school, they were
just kind of like coming into it. So that was
too early for they weren't allowed in school then. Yeah,
so you'll have to go through this.
Speaker 3 (37:03):
Now with your grandchildren and so on it and you'll
like bother them by talking like an archaic wh I
was a kid waiting even have a phone. We had
to be like Caliver Douglas and climb the pole. Remember
that in Green Acres you had to climb the pole.
I I'm old enough that I don't recall anybody having
to do that. No, you didn't have to get a signal.
(37:23):
You got to climb the pole because they didn't wire
the phone to go down into his house.
Speaker 2 (37:26):
You had to climb to the top of the phone pole.
Speaker 3 (37:28):
The use you don't remember, Green Acres, you don't remember these,
the tails you don't remember. Well, you didn't remember why
I had to climb at the top of the pool.
They had to climb at the top of the pole
because they didn't wire the house for the phe.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
He was the only one.
Speaker 3 (37:43):
Everybody else who lived in Hooterville they actually had the
phone in their house.
Speaker 2 (37:46):
Nobody else is climbing to the top of the pole.
Speaker 3 (37:47):
Only I'll play am I talking about this? This is
the Mark Belling podcast. This is the Mark Belling Podcast.
The Republican Party in Wisconsin, as we know, it's not united,
and as we also know, that's one of the reasons
(38:08):
that my side continues to lose a lot of statewide elections.
It's not the only reason. A couple of things to
talk about here. There are indications that Tim Michaels may
be running for governor again. He went to the White
House yesterday. It is known that President Trump is not
(38:34):
happy with the field so far of Republican candidates for governor.
As I've explained, one of the reasons he's unhappy about
this is he doesn't want members of the House running
for other offices. He's made that clear. He doesn't want
(38:56):
Tom Tiffany running for governor. He wants him to run
for reelection to the House of repres editives why incumbents
have a far better chance of winning an election than
a challenger. Trump wants all the Republican inccumbents to run
for reelection because he knows that keeping control of the
House is going to be very hard. And I don't
(39:19):
think that there's much of a chance that Trump is
going to endorse Tiffany because he doesn't want Tiffany running
for governor, and he really doesn't like the notion that
Tiffany's not doing what he's supposed to do, which is
what Trump is telling him to do. From the perspective
of Tiffany, Okay, Trump's the president, but he's not the
boss of my personal life. I want to be the
governor of the state of Wisconsin and have a chance
to think I have a chance of winning. In addition
to that, I believe you don't need Tom Tiffany to
(39:43):
keep that House seat. That district is the most Republican
district in Wisconsin. Tiffany's district is essentially up North. Almost
all of up North except the northwest, a portion of
northwestern Wisconsin is Tiffany's district. But basically, and for those
of you who don't understand, up North, up North is
not the Fox Valley. Up North is up North. It's
(40:06):
become a very Republican area. So if Tiffany isn't the candidate,
I think they keep the seat. In any event, Trump's
not happy with the field. Josh Shouman, the Washington County executive,
is also running Showman's People don't like it when I
say this, but I don't think many people are very
impressed with the campaign that he's shown so far, and
they're very skeptical that you can emerge out of a
(40:30):
position like Washington County executive and use that as a
platform to win the governorship. Trump is close to Michael's.
Trump endorsed Michaels when he ran in twenty two. Tim
Michaels is a home in Palm Beach, It's not far
from mar A Lago. He and Trump are friends. Does
(40:53):
that mean that Michael should run for governor? Well, there
is this concern I have about somebody running for an
office that they lost the last time around. Rarely does
that result get reversed. It is possible when you're the challenger,
I believe it's never possible when you're in the incumbent.
You lose and then try to regain your seat. It
(41:14):
just doesn't happen.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
In Wisconsin. There have been cases, however, of a.
Speaker 3 (41:18):
Challenge you're running more than once for the position and
winning it the second time or the third time around.
More importantly, my concern is that we have another contentious,
divisive Republican primary. The Democrats police themselves. They have avoided
these contentious primaries, so A you don't have the candidates
(41:40):
ripping one another and providing all this foddy that can
be used against them in a general election. And b
they're not wasting their money. We saw the problem in
twenty twenty two with the Republicans in which Rebecca Clayfish
and Kim Michael spent a fortune trying to knock the
other one out of the primary. Well, that's all money
that couldn't be spent therefore by Michael's in the general
election and second late there were very very hard feelings
(42:03):
and the party did not unite and while I blamed
the Clayfish people for that, I've also said that if
Clayfish won, I think that Michaels' supporters, which was kind
of the Tommy Thompson.
Speaker 2 (42:13):
Wing of the party, they wouldn't be united behind Clayfish.
Speaker 3 (42:17):
Neither side was able to put their egos aside for
the good of the state of Wisconsin. And I fear
that the same thing is going to happen again if
Michaels does run. There has to be a way, I
think of convincing Tiffany to get.
Speaker 2 (42:33):
Out of the race or vice versa.
Speaker 3 (42:38):
I think in this instance, Republican leaders need to settle
upon a candidate who's going to be supported by the
majority of them, or you're on this suicide mission again
in which the Democrat. Now there is some indication that
Democrats might have their own fight. I think the path
is being paved pretty clearly for Sarah Rodriguez to win.
Others disagree with me. David Crowley, the Milwaukee County Executive,
(42:59):
is run as are about six lefties of Madison. But
I think Sarah Rodriguez is going to be the anointed one.
Crawley being African American and being the city from the
city of Milwaukee. Maybe that gives him a chance. I'm
skeptical of that. I think it's Democrats are going to
have when they see the polls. Whoever is behind it,
(43:20):
June's going to drop out of the race, the same
thing that they did with Mandela Barnes Senate race back
in twenty twenty two as well. In any event, there
is this potential here for more Republicans to get into
the race, and there could be somebody that isn't Michael's.
It isn't Tiffany still jumping into.
Speaker 2 (43:35):
This thing next.
Speaker 3 (43:39):
This story has gotten scant coverage in the media, but
I'm going to cover it.
Speaker 2 (43:44):
The treasurer of.
Speaker 3 (43:45):
The Republican Party of Wisconsin has resigned, and she's resigning
by taking a shot at the leadership of the party.
And the leadership of the party is Brian Shimming. Her
name is Kelly Rue.
Speaker 2 (43:56):
Are you age? I'm going to read it.
Speaker 3 (44:00):
I am writing to formally resign my position as Treasurer
of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, effective immediately. After careful consideration,
I have concluded that I can no longer meaningfully contribute
to our party's executive leadership team under the current circumstances.
The absence of a strategic plan, defined objectives and measurable outcomes,
(44:21):
as well as budgetary issues, have created an environment in
which progress is difficult to assess and nearly impossible to achieve.
As the saying goes, what gets measured gets done. Unfortunately,
without metrics or accountability, it is unclear what we are
working toward or what our capacity is to achieve our objective. Now,
(44:44):
let me interject, she wants definable metrics. In other words,
we're going to raise X amount of dollars in twenty
twenty five or in twenty twenty six, we're going to
win the governorship and keep the state to keep the
State Center and keep the State Assembly.
Speaker 2 (45:00):
Other Wards, a.
Speaker 3 (45:01):
Measurement and if it isn't achieved, you dump the people
that are in charge. That would be a metric on
an accountability, she's saying, they don't have any. And if
you don't have any, it's because the people in charge
don't want to be accountable if they fail.
Speaker 2 (45:15):
That's her point that she's making here.
Speaker 3 (45:17):
Continuing moreover, the internal dynamics of our PW's Publican Party
of Wisconsin, particularly the dysfunctional leadership I think that's cruly
a shot at shimming. Have made attempts at collaboration increasingly
unproductive and discouraging. The Lack of transparency, direction, and respect
for different perspectives or even basic board oversight has fostered
(45:40):
a culture that is not only ineffective but also absurd.
I love my country, my state, and my community. That
is why I volunteered my time in the first place.
It pains me that the Republican Party of Wisconsin continues
to repeat the same mistakes time and again. Well, Kelly,
join my club. I've been drawing attention to this for
(46:03):
about ten years. The dysfunction in the Republican Party of Wisconsin,
the misdirection of funds, the fact that the party is
run by a click of Madison types, the fact that
they will not get that party headquarters out of Madison
and get it into a part of the state of
(46:24):
Wisconsin where actual Republicans live.
Speaker 2 (46:28):
On and on.
Speaker 3 (46:31):
There is no grassroots organization of the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
There's no attempt to raise any money for it. There's
no accountability toward anyone. There was zero attempt by the
Republican leadership of the state to stop Dan Kelly from
losing another state Supreme Court seat. They're not any good
at any of these things, and they've been tuned up
(46:53):
by the majority of Republican voters, and they've lost sense
of what their mission is. Their mission is grassroots organizing, fundraising,
and get out of the vote. It is not sitting on
your fat butt in an office in Madison hanging out
with all your lefty buddies who work across the street
at the Capitol. Anyway, back to Kelly Rue's piece, recent
(47:13):
election results in Wisconsin are clear. If URPW does not
drastically change its approach to everything leadership, fundraising, messaging, organizing,
addressing issues that Wisconsin I's care about, then it will
plan no role in deciding our state's future as a Conservative.
This greatly disappoints me, but it is clear that the
required change is not likely to come from rpw's current leadership.
(47:34):
I appreciate the opportunity to have served with our PW
over the past decade. My sincere hope is that those
who remain in positions of authority will institute the critical
changes that must be made to our party. Regards Kelly Rue,
that's her resignation letter is treasurer of the Republican Party
of Wisconsin. In the meantime, the story in js online
today that I think is a week behind, but it's
(47:56):
in there. It's by Laurence Andrea, who has been reporting
on the internal fight between Turning Point. That's the organization
founded by Charlie Kirk and the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
Turning Point is doing all the things the Republican Party isn't. A.
It's attracting tons of volunteers, B, it has a huge
budget in his paid staff. C. It's organizing in the grassroots. D.
(48:20):
It's walking up to human beings and persuading them to
vote and telling them which way to vote. All the
things the Democrats have been doing forever and ever and
ever that the Republicans are incapable of doing. In the process,
Turning Point has been trying to get its people in
charge of a number of the local chapters of the
Republican Party, and the Republican Party leadership doesn't like it.
(48:41):
But the story goes on and dissects the current relationship here.
The Milwaukee County Republican Party has been I'll saying, kind
of taken over by Turning Point. Hilario DeLeon, who is
the chair of the Republican Party of Milwaukee County, is
in fact a volunteer for Turning Point, and he's been
critical of the statewide organization, and he's becoming one of
(49:02):
the Turning Point people that is criticizing or at least
raising questions about the poor priorities of the Republican Party
of the state of Wisconsin. The story says that a
lot of state Republicans think that, well, Turning Point's good
at working with young people, but they can't do this,
that and the other thing. In Turning Points, you keep
its focus on converting young people to vote for Republicans. Well,
(49:24):
that should be their focus, but I think the Turning
Point has ambitions of being larger than that. And I
think that the Charlie Kirk ideology, and hopefully it will
carry through now that he's no longer with us, in
which you have to meet people change their minds, and
the likeliest person whose mind can be changed as a
younger person because they don't have thirty or forty years
of buying into this leftist clap trap, is the way
(49:50):
to succeed. I have tried for several years to get
pressure to change the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
Speaker 2 (49:58):
I have not succeeded.
Speaker 3 (50:00):
However, the donor base has voted with its checkbooks. They're
giving money to individual candidates, and they're giving money to
independent political organizations, but they're not giving money to the
state Republican Party because they don't believe it is being
well spent. The twenty six election is fast approaching. I
think that the state Supreme Court race next spring is
(50:21):
a long shot at best. We now do have a candidate,
Maria Lazarre is running. She's running against another left wing,
lunatic judge from Madison, Chris Taylor. Our side has shown
no ability to win these state Supreme Court elections. The
governor's election of the state legislative elections are in the
fall of next year twenty six, and those are critical,
(50:42):
and those are ones in which the Republicans I think
of a clear chance of winning because the Democrats have
gone nuts, and in a state like Wisconsin, Democrats running
for statewide office do not want to run well having
to defend the policies of Mandani AOC, Bernie Sanders, and
those other left wing cooks that have alienated the majority
(51:04):
of the people in regular Old America, including regular world Wisconsin,
which creates this opening, but the opening is again.
Speaker 2 (51:12):
Going to be missed.
Speaker 3 (51:15):
There are two things critical in winning elections. A you
have to get all of your people, not most of them,
all of your people to vote, and B you have
to raise money. The Democrats have mastered this in part
they have way more billionaires than our side has. Just truth,
the whole tech thing, the mass vast majority of them
(51:38):
are lefties, the sorrows thing. They've got all of that,
and they've taken advantage of mailan voting and all of
these other changes in voting rules to get almost all
of their people to vote in almost all of the
elections that we have. In the meantime, it is not
hunky doryan Democratville. Let's start with the optics of No
(52:03):
Kings Clay Travis, half of Clay and Buck. It's about
forty seconds here. He was on Jesse Watts showing I'm
gonna quote him. I could play the cut here, but
Paul begged me not to give him any additional work,
So I'm just gonna read what it is that he
had to say that that's not true. It's short enough
that I'm just gonna read what Clay said. The party,
(52:30):
the Democrats. The party has lost touch with mainstream America,
particularly younger generations, and risks becoming a relic of the past.
The Democrats emphasis on identity politics, elite driven policies, and
performative activism. Let me pause, what does that mean? Performative activity?
That means just dressing up.
Speaker 2 (52:48):
And showing up.
Speaker 3 (52:48):
And the whole point of holding your rally is look
at me with my pink and blue hair and women
with the hairy arm pitts say, you know, running around
with your trans signs.
Speaker 2 (52:58):
And it's performative. That's the term for.
Speaker 3 (53:00):
Back to Clay's common and performative activism has alienated working
class voters and independence. As social media amplifies these moments, KeyPoint.
See everybody saw these no Kings things because a they're
videoing themselves and be Conservatives.
Speaker 2 (53:17):
Are videoing all of them.
Speaker 3 (53:19):
As social media amplifies these moments, the viral cryps of
cringeworthy protests, the party's image suffers further. With Trump back
in the White House, Republicans are capitalizing on the moment,
portraying themselves as the party of strength, freedom and fun.
I think that's a very good analysis. In the meantime,
(53:43):
this piece it appeared in The Hill. The Hill is
a website that covers Congress. It's not a conservative site.
They are quoting without not by name, without attribution, moderate
Democrats in the Congress who say that they want to
(54:05):
vote to end the shutdown, but they're terrified of doing so.
We know who they're terrified of. Again, this is being
reported on the Hill, and I'm going to read here.
Speaker 2 (54:15):
A brief portion of the report.
Speaker 3 (54:17):
People are going to get hammered if they vote for
the House pass bill to reopen the government and keep
it funded through November twenty first, said one Democratic senator
who requested anonymity. Centri Senators are fearful of breaking with
leaders while party activists are planning the anti Trump rallies.
Democratic strategists say the main driver of the political fear
(54:39):
within the Democratic caucus is online fundraising, which is largely
driven by social media. In other words, they're fearful of this.
A Democrat who votes for the House bill to end
the shutdown will be targeted with opposition. Somebody's going to
run against them in a primary, and that primary opponent
will raise a f fortune nationally online from these lefties
(55:03):
who don't want anything other than socialists Mamdanni types AOCS
in the Congress. So you have Democrats, who, I think
now that nol Kings is over, want to reopen the government,
but they're terrified of the left wing LUNs that are
driving their party. There's an editorial that appeared yesterday in
(55:26):
the Wall Street Journal Mamdani and the Democrats. First of all,
ma'm Donni's gonna win. He's got to be the mayor
of New York, which is a terrible thing for this country.
But some Republicans think it might be good for the
Republicans in twenty six because the crisis in New York
will be immediate and it will be a walking advertisement
to voters all over America to not vote for these
(55:47):
Democrats in twenty six. That's the backdrop the editorial for
the Wall Street Journal. Democrats have a problem, and we
don't mean Donald Trump. The arguably bigger danger is the
socialist insurgency building in their own party, and the latest
test of their resistance is candidate Zoraon Mumdani and New
York City's mayor race. Republicans might want to hold off
(56:08):
on the gloating the thirty three year old Mamdani is
leading in the race, having won the Democratic primary as
a proud member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Andrew Cuomo,
who lost in the primary, is running as an independent
and has has closed the polling gap since Mayor Eric
Adams left the race, but it remains in double digits.
The story then goes on and discusses the radicalism of
(56:29):
Mundani and how while it may play among some younger
voters and may get him elected in an overwhelmingly liberal
city like America, is the kind of thing that has
driven mainstream middle Americans who may have leaned Democratic in
the past away from the party. I'll point out there's
(56:51):
almost nothing in this type of socialism for African Americans,
and there isn't much for a lot of Latinos, those
are primarily working clas last parts of the American economy
and the voter base. You see very little support for, say,
the trans movement in the African American communities, and when
you see the focus on these kinds of niche elitist issues,
(57:16):
it's created this opening for Trump and the Republicans to
go after them, and the farther the Democrats move themselves
to the left in cities like New York, the easier
it is for someone running for, say, governor of Wisconsin,
to link the Democrat in their state.
Speaker 2 (57:36):
To that crowd.
Speaker 3 (57:39):
When we come back after the break, I'm going to
explain something to you, and it's something that includes a
story that at least has some negative connotations for Milwaukee.
This is the Mark Belling podcast. This is the Mark
Belling podcast. Story in the Wall Street Journal, most and
Cores says it's going to cut about nine percent of
(58:02):
its America's workforce. America's means not just the United States,
our hemisphere, nine percent, Molsencore's owns Miller, et cetera. Many
of the jobs that are going to be eliminated are
salaried positions as opposed to production line people. The story
goes into all of the reasons that it's going on.
They want to focus on their growth areas of their
(58:24):
business and perhaps orphan off the stuff that isn't growing,
et cetera.
Speaker 2 (58:29):
But the bigger backdrop to this is.
Speaker 3 (58:33):
Beer consumption in America is declining, and in fact, last
year there was a decline in overall alcohol consumption. This
is something that if you go back twenty or twenty
five years, you just would not have predicted it. In fact,
in fact, one of the the alcohol industry has always
been thought to be kind of recession proof. No matter
(58:57):
what the economy is, people are going to drink, and
as the population grows, there's more potential drinkers. The drinking
in the American culture were just linked that it was
the ultimate slow growth industry. Never have great, huge growth
because most Americans already drink. So how do you create
Do you have fifteen percent growth?
Speaker 2 (59:16):
You can't.
Speaker 3 (59:17):
But the slow and steady growth just seem to be
an inevitability. So what's going on here? Well, I know
what's going on in pulse are the same thing. There's
so many people that are using pot in its various
forms and pills that they're getting their buzz that way
rather than from alcohol. This creates I suppose the argument
(59:41):
of what's better or what's worse, And my answer has
always man, it depends. If you become addicted to alcohol,
your life can become a mess. Drunk driving, ruining your life,
behavioral changes, becoming a terrible employ all of the stuff,
you know, being a mean person. Among the ramifications of
(01:00:07):
alcohol is and particularly if you're the kind of drunk
whose personality changes for the worst after drinking. On the
other hand, the overwhelming majority of people who drink do
so in a benign fashion, and I think only a
tiny fraction of people who drink ever become addicted. To me,
(01:00:27):
it's just obvious that marijuana is far more addictive than
alcohol is most people who drink alcohol, other than those
who I think have an addiction problem. You know, okay,
you're not going to drink this We go, okay, fine,
I won't drink that week. They can somehow survive that.
When you tell a pot head that they can't use
pot in a given week, they'll freak out. Now, imagine
(01:00:49):
if it's something stronger than that, if it's the meth
and the phenotol and everything else. The next part, all
this stuff costs money. Whatever money you're spending on pot,
whatever money you're spending on fetanola, that everybody you're spending
on meth is money that you can't spend.
Speaker 2 (01:01:02):
A Miller lite. As the drugs have become.
Speaker 3 (01:01:07):
More pervasive, and in particular, as the pot has become legalized.
And don't think for a moment that legalization of pot
doesn't increase use.
Speaker 2 (01:01:15):
Of course it does.
Speaker 3 (01:01:17):
There are people who did not use pot because they
didn't want to be busted and go to jail and
lose their reputation and so on. But once it becomes legal,
that stigma's gone. Secondly, when pot was illegal, you'd have
to buy it from people on the street and all
of that stuff. Walking into a dispensary and doing something
that's perfectly legal eliminates that stigma. So I think that's
(01:01:39):
the simple explanation for what's going on with the alcohol industry.
Whether or not it's good or bad, it is I
think undeniably.
Speaker 2 (01:01:48):
What's happening. One of these years, I'll get out of
this whole Kradom thing. Do you know about this? Yeah,
I see one of these years.
Speaker 3 (01:01:58):
It's one of those topics that if I ever have
a show in which I can't think of anything to do,
it's a good one to be able to do. But
I never have any of those days where I can't
think of anything to do. You like, see it at
gas stations and you'll see that if the place sell,
here's the rule on it. If the place sell, it
sells it it will always be in huge letters on
the window there's nobody that sells it that doesn't have
it all over their thing, because apparently there are people
(01:02:21):
that seek it out and look.
Speaker 2 (01:02:23):
To buy it.
Speaker 3 (01:02:25):
I just I should like tease it and say I'm
going to do it in a future podcast and get
people to listen every day for the next thirty seven years,
hoping that that'll be the that I actually bring up the.
Speaker 2 (01:02:39):
Why are you thinking that this You don't even know
what it does for you. I just hear.
Speaker 3 (01:02:49):
I believe it is kratum. I should look that up
before I just give that out there. I've ever used it.
I just heard people say, and I see the signs
and gas stations. It's in the area of quasi illgality.
You know, if something isn't specifically illegal, that means it's legal.
The same thing with like the designer pot that they've
come up with, and that's not what that is. But
(01:03:10):
for example, you didn't if you don't read a law
that says that fake pot isn't illegal, that means it's legal.
You have to say a specific thing. So people, it's
the same thing with the you know, the steroids in
sports and so on. You beat all of these steroids,
well then somebody in a lab in vins a new
type of steroid that isn't on the specified list and
you use it until you go ahead and you Paul says,
(01:03:31):
the thc celser's are the big things in the verbs. Yes,
they probably put a big sign on the window saying
that that is what they have in there. Then too,
that's when you could tell that there's a demand for something.
As I say, that was my whole thing on the
create on that you put in a big sign on
the E sign on the window. Paul would like to
discuss this with other people. So if any of you
are further interested in further exploring this, Paul has a
(01:03:53):
high level of curiosity, and you can contact Cam and
I'm sure he'd be happy to engage.
Speaker 2 (01:03:58):
On you at.
Speaker 3 (01:04:02):
Great length. See, some people are just into explore. They're
experimenting and all of that stuff.
Speaker 2 (01:04:11):
That's their whole thing. Do you know what I want
to experiment in? Nothing, whatever it is I already do.
That's enough stuff for me to do.
Speaker 3 (01:04:18):
I don't want to try anything new in any area
of life.
Speaker 2 (01:04:21):
Bye.
Speaker 1 (01:04:24):
The Mark Belling podcast is a production of iHeartRadio Podcasts,
production and engineering by Paul Crownforest The Mark Belling podcast
is presented by you Line for quality shipping and industrial supplies.
You Line has everything in stock. Visit you line dot com.
Listen to all of Mark's podcasts, always available on the
iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your
(01:04:47):
favorite podcasts.
The Mark Belling Podcast is presented by you Line for
quality shipping and industrial supplies. You Line has everything in stock.
Visit you line dot com. The Markbelling Podcast is a
production of iHeartRadio podcasts.
Speaker 2 (00:20):
I Told you So.
Speaker 3 (00:24):
I've explained many times why those are four very important
words for those of us on the right. First of all,
we get to say it all the time. But secondly,
and this is the part that people miss, it's important
to say it not just because it's gloating and crowing,
(00:45):
which it is, but because it is critical to keep
pointing out not only why you were right and why
the other side was wrong, but to remind people that
they were wrong so that we can learn from these
idiotic things that they do. And the reality is is
(01:08):
that we're always right. I get to say I told
you so all the time. Unfortunately it's often years decades later,
and it's often then very very hard to do anything
about it. But we have another example of this, and
(01:29):
for those of you who just found me in podcast world,
this is something that I vowed I would, at some point,
if I lived long enough, be able to say I
said there was no way that I was going to
be wrong about the subject none. There's always a chance
on almost everything, but not this one. I guaranteed it,
(01:52):
and I'll share with you the new information on that
story in just a moment.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
Here.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Have you ever been offered an add on option for
premium or white gloves service? But you never take that?
Do you?
Speaker 2 (02:07):
At Casco?
Speaker 3 (02:07):
You do? We can't be putting that into somebody else's
commercial in here. I just wanted you to say, no,
I'm a chief skate and I never do it. I
actually usually do take that kind of stuff because I
think I'm you know hot, you know what. Anyway, I'll
re ask the question, have you ever been offered an
add on option for premium or white gloves service? You
Line provides only one type of service, the best from
(02:31):
knowledgeable customer service available twenty four seven three sixty five
to keeping every product in stock ready to ship the
same day. When your business needs quality shipping supplies, reliable
warehouse equipment, or office furniture fast, contact you Line and
get the best service because you Line believes service is essential,
(02:52):
not an option. I have been waiting for this day
to come, and as I.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
Say, it was inevitable.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
Some members of the Milwaukee City Council are now admitting
that the trolley is a flop and that we need
to get rid of it now. I said some we're
not in a majority point yet in the mayor. It's
not like they're gonna take it. They're gonna shut this
thing down, but reality is sinking in. I need to
(03:22):
give the background for some of you that aren't from Milwaukee,
or perhaps are new here. For about as long as
I've been doing a program in Milwaukee, and it started
in the radio in nineteen eighty nine, I have been
railing so clever, railing against all proposals to do any
type of transit that's on rail. It's all so stupid.
(03:44):
The biggest problem, of course with it is we have
roads everywhere, but the only ways, the only way that
you can run something on rail is where you put
tracks just in and of itself. That defeats any argument
for any of these real things. Nonetheless, for years and
years and years, two Milwaukee mayors one became obsessed with it.
(04:06):
They came up with this notion. First they called it
light rail, then they called it this, then they called
it that, and eventually they decided to call the thing
a streetcar. I continue to insist on calling it a trolley.
The reason I call it a trolley is for whatever reason,
they hated it when I called it a trolley, So
thus I continue to call it the trolley. All right,
(04:27):
For years we stopped the thing, and then finally they
got their hands on some federal grant and they started
ripping up the streets in downtown Milwaukee to put these
tracks in. They originally said we're going to charge a
dollar a ride, and I said, nobody's gonna pay a
dollar a ride. Secondly, I said, the thing is doomed
(04:52):
to fail because it's only able to go where the
tracks are, Meaning if you're not starting somewhere near the
tracks and ending somewhere else near the tracks, the thing
is of no use to you. There are a very
very limited number of people who would therefore be in
a position to use it. Basic common sense. They didn't listen.
(05:15):
They ripped up these streets and they put in this loop.
It took them forever to complete the second leg of
the loop, in part because the second leg of the
loop initially wasn't going anywhere because it was to dead
end at the Koteur, the high rise building that it
took forever to put up now is put up and
is still apparently only about half fall. Nonetheless, the trolley's done.
(05:37):
Immediately upon starting it, they realized nobody was going to
pay a dollar a dollar a ride, as I told
you they wouldn't. They never even bothered to put fair
boxes in. It's been free from the beginning. Now here's
some basic math. If it's free, there's no revenue. Obviously
(05:58):
there will be expenses. The thing has been a money
hemorrhaging sieve forever. The only way to continue functioning it
would be to continue to get government grads to subsidize it.
Or here was the brainstorm they came up with, we'll
sell advertising and put advertising signs on the side of it.
There are advertising signs on the side of a bus.
(06:20):
How much can you get for putting a sign on
the side of this stupid trolley that's running around. I
suspect not much. Initially, Potawatami said, we're making so much
money down here with our tight slot machines that only
pay out at ninety one percent, that we'll come up
with the money for this. But then even they said,
you gotta be kidding. Now, one of the arguments that
(06:43):
I made forever is given the fact that the thing
is only in downtown and only on one side of
downtown east of the river. Well, kind of, there's a
small portion near the post office where it starts, where
the intermodal station is, that's over there, but the overwhelming
majority of the road is east of the river. That
(07:04):
why would any other aldermen in any other part of
the city support this. The neighborhoods in Milwaukee are eroding, going.
Speaker 2 (07:11):
To hell, et cetera.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Why are they spending all of this money to run
a street car in an area where basically a bunch
of white people in downtown business employees live. Another question
I asked, all right, well, years have gone by. Almost
nobody rides the trolley. Every now and then you'll get
(07:34):
something going on where some people will jump on it
like hitch a ride and save themselves six blocks, like
say Summerfest and so on.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
But by and large it's empt and you see.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
The trains running around very very very slowly. They screw
up the traffic downtown because when they approach an intersection,
all of the lights have to go red in all
four directions so that the trolley can go through the intersection.
The avert speed of the trolley is minus two miles
per hour? Is that physically impossive? Physically possible? I suspect
(08:05):
it isn't. Could something be a negative speed, Well, it'd
have to be going in reverse.
Speaker 2 (08:09):
I mean, I guess if you could were.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
Counting the forward progress of something and you put it
in reverse, But that would be anyway.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
It goes very slowly. So now we have jas online
without any sense. See.
Speaker 3 (08:23):
Part of the problem is you have these reporters who
write these stories. All reporters now seem to be in
a live in a city for the for two years
prior just for two years, so they never know any
of the background of the history. I, on the other hand,
have the advantage of having been here since eighteen twenty four.
Who is the president in eighteen twenty I actually know.
I think I know who won, but that would mean
he took over in twenty five. I think that was
(08:43):
John Quincy Adams who won in eighteen twenty four.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
You shake your head. You have no clue.
Speaker 3 (08:49):
You think we were still under the rule of King
George of England in eighteen twenty four, You have absolutely
I'm and I think.
Speaker 2 (08:56):
Monroe was the president. If I'm not isn't this great?
Speaker 3 (09:00):
Beck?
Speaker 2 (09:00):
When we were doing a radio show.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
Nine million people would be calling you up and telling
you an almost all with brawing on answers. Now that
we have a podcast, they're gonna be calling up at
eleven thirty at night when they're listening to the thing,
or worse yet, just anyway. The reporter's name is Vanessa Swales.
Well that's her name. Some here, I'll read the headline. First,
(09:25):
Milwaukee officials clash over maintaining downtown street car. I'm thinking
we go finally some of the ultimate and of course
are the ones who aren't from downtown as they take
a look at the city budget or wondering why we're
putting a fortune to keep this thing running. Here's the
first thing. There's no prospect for federal funds. Do you
(09:48):
know why there's no prospect for federal funds?
Speaker 2 (09:51):
No?
Speaker 3 (09:52):
No, no, no, no, there's no prospect for federal funds. It's
very very simple. It's a five letter t R U,
M P. Trump's not gonna give you any more money
to run a trolley around more? Are they gonna give
(10:12):
them any more money any more federal funds to try
to expand the thing. I mean they're great dreamous to
take it over to the fiser form and all of
that stuff. It's it's not gonna happen. They can hold
out and hope that Mamdani or AOC or somebody gets
elected president in twenty eight and then get the Congress
(10:33):
to pass the thing in twenty nine. But in the
Inn there's nothing, so there's no prospect of getting any
more outside money. And the thing is I say, costs
a fortune to run because A it breaks down all
the time. B they have to maintainded and see it's
unionized employees that operate the thing. And here they are
(10:53):
with all these other you know, city governments always have
tight budgets because there's all this stuff that they.
Speaker 2 (10:57):
Want to spend money on.
Speaker 3 (10:59):
And actually now some pressure to spend at least a
little money on our understaffed police department. So you've got
some alderman looking at it, this thing, why are we
doing this? Okay, even if it might have been a
good idea, maybe if some of us were dumb enough
to think that it would work, it's not working. Alderman
Scott Spiker, he represents the southeast side. By the way,
(11:24):
there are no conservatives on the Milwaukee Common Council. There
are just some that are less insanely radical than others,
and then there are some that are liberal but pragmatic
liberals and so on. In this case, though, Spiker represents
the southeast corner. For those been around for a while,
this is the old Bob Anderson area and it was
one time conservative. But there's no part of the City
(11:46):
of Milwaukee this conservative anywhere. But that's the part that
Spiker represents, and he has the advantage of not having
been on the council when they approve this thing in
the first place. You have a loop that goes two
miles locked in and no prospect for ex at Alderman
Scott Spiker told budget officials, by the way, I have
been pointing this out for fifteen years, the.
Speaker 2 (12:06):
Exact same sentence that he offered.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
It would just make that lives or lefties a lot
easier if they would simply listen to me in the
first place. They're incapable of doing that, however, which is
why the I told you so that I started the
podcast off with today is so critical. Spiker, who has
called the hop and elbatross around the city's neck and
transportation for the unhoused and well healed.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
That's it.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Do you understand what he means by that, You don't
the unhoused and the well healed. Well, I'll explain this.
Speaker 2 (12:43):
I would think you would. You you should. You should know.
Speaker 3 (12:45):
There's two groups of people that ride on this thing,
rich people and homeless people. Coming The homeless people write
it because they just sit in the thing all day
because it's free and it's I actually was on the
thing once or twice after I had my stroke and
they told me I couldn't drive for a week. I
think I took it like I actually at one point
lived on the trolley line. I just said, this thing
(13:07):
is just absolutely hilarious. The only person who might actually
benefit from this is actually me. Yet not being a
non selfish person, I put anyway, it was either really
cold or it wasn't cold.
Speaker 2 (13:17):
It was one of the two.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
But I mean, street people will sit on there and
ride it all day, and the other thing will be
people in very very expensive condos and townhouses. Are people
who work on the high end business district of downtown Milwaukee.
They well, that's so that's the point that Spiker's saying,
really really poor people like homeless people, et cetera, or.
Speaker 2 (13:38):
Well healed.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
He has railed against the city's free transportation option, especially
as the city is on the hook to continue covering
expenses built in twenty eighteen. The streetcar system is now
expected to have listen to this number a six point
nine million dollar operating.
Speaker 2 (13:54):
Costs for next year. Let's round it up seven million
million dollars a year to run this thing. Seven million.
Speaker 3 (14:08):
According to Mayor Cavalier Johnson's post twenty twenty six budget,
the hop is partially sustained by two point seven million
dollars in sponsorship, advertising and grant revenue, leaving the city
on the hook for roughly four million dollars to keep
it continuing, to keep it continue running. Quote, that's four
million dollars we don't plan to put forward libraries, four
million dollars we don't keep put towards streets. That's four
(14:29):
million dollars we don't put toward new fire trucks. And
our needs are growing and our status quot is slowly
killing us. Then you get the defense of this from
the Public Works department. They keep saying the same thing,
and it's quasi true. Quasi true means it's true, but
it doesn't have to be true. If that isn't what
it means. I've just defined it as such and just
(14:50):
you're just gonna have to live with it.
Speaker 2 (14:52):
When you get a.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Federal grand for transportation project, you have to continue to
use the thing that you got the great for for
the transportation or give it back. Did you know that? Well,
in fact, this is how they built the They came
up with the initial funding. In the first place, they
(15:13):
ripped down the city's transit garage garage, and because that
was built with a federal grant, they used money from
that to be able to build the street car in
the first place. That's why the thing runs over to
where the Kotour is. Because the cotur was built adjacent
to the old city transit garage.
Speaker 2 (15:32):
It was a reach.
Speaker 3 (15:33):
But the point that they make is, look, if we
stopped doing this, we got to give back the money
they gave us to put the track lines in in
the first place. That is, in fact quasi true. But
I'm just here to tell you that if you went
to Ron Johnson and he got the word to President
(15:56):
Crumb's people, I think they would be more than happy
to tell they don't have to pay the money back
for this stupid thing that we shouldn't have done in
the first place, because almost everyone who is a conservative
thinks that this is stupid and if we can get
the thing, just end it and be done with it
and walk away. You're never going to get that money
back anyway, and otherwise you're simply throwing good money after bad.
(16:20):
The story goes on with some alderman trying to defend
this Krishki the apartment public gurs does that mean we
can't expand it in the future. I'm not going to
say no again, holding out this hope that the Democrats
will come in and at some point, you know, you'll
get a Democratic president and they handed all these federal
grants for transit again and they'll be able to run
the thing over to the West side, et cetera. And
(16:40):
that's always been the defense for any transit project that
doesn't work. They build it in, then they say nobody's
riding it because it doesn't go anywhere. So then they
expand it even further, and they'll say nobody's riding it
because it still doesn't go anywhere, And it becomes an
argument to put the thing over the entire city of Milwaukee,
where still nobody is actually going to ride it. They
(17:00):
would prefer the bus because the bus is faster and
the bus can go on all sorts of roads, whereas
the train can only go where the tracks are. I
could go on about this, but I've made the point sufficiently.
Now let's go to Wauka Shaw. There is an income
(17:23):
poop member of the city council in Wauka Shaw. This
story is like ninety percent hilarious and ten percent furious.
First of all, the guy's name is Rico Camacho. He
sounds like I mean, I was gonna say it sounds
like he should be a boxer, but I'm just thinking
of Macho Camacho, so that so that maybe it doesn't
(17:45):
eat I don't know, it just Rico Camacho.
Speaker 2 (17:47):
It sounds like an athlete's name, doesn't it. It does.
Speaker 3 (17:51):
Now some will say, Oh, you're just saying that because
it's a Latino sounding name. No, there's all sorts of
Latino sounding names. Don't sound particularly athletic. He just sounds
But anyway, I don't think he is. I just think
he's kind of dumb. He's wandered around in walk A
Shaw last week and he sees some guys in uniform
running downtown. Now put yourself in the mind of the
(18:16):
Paul's never able to do this. He's never able to
put himself in the mind of the average addle. That
dope be lefty. I have no problems doing it whatsoever.
What do you think, he concludes, You have no idea.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
I'll tell you as Ice.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
He posts on Facebook that Ice is swarming downtown walk
a shaw, that there's a raid underway.
Speaker 2 (18:42):
He's an alderman. Let's start with.
Speaker 3 (18:48):
If it was Ice, why is a member of a
city council of a community that supported Trump.
Speaker 2 (18:55):
Warning people about it. But that point is literally neither
here nor there, because that wasn't Ice.
Speaker 3 (19:05):
This idiot sees a bunch of people running around in
the in uniforms and thought they're Ice. I gotta admit
I don't know what a nice uniform looks like because
many of the Ice people that I see are playing clothed.
I mean, if I saw somebody walking up in a
nice uniform, unless I saw the badge and it said
Immigrations and Customs and Force, I probably wouldn't know what
(19:26):
their color uniform is. It probably is when they're in
unicorm it's probably some type of cop colored uniform, which
are well, I don't this guy thought they were ICE.
It gets even better. They weren't even cops. It was
a security firm that was doing a drill. It's the
(19:48):
business that's owned by Brian Doro who This is where
it actually gets a little weird. He actually at one
point worked for ICE. He was in the first Trump administration.
He was part of Homelandecurity. But he now owns a
business that provides security services, and they provide security services
in all sorts of areas including help and protect businesses
(20:09):
against you know, threats, et cetera. So they do drill
from time to time as well any company that's training
their employees.
Speaker 2 (20:17):
It's all it was. They were just doing a drill.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
Mike guess is that there isn't a single person in
the city of Waukeshaw who thought that this was anything
other than what it was, a company doing a practice drill,
other than this idiotic, idiotic alderman Rico Camacho. So he
finds out that in fact, it wasn't ICE. He apologizes
over the weekend and says, I'm sorry that I made
this mistake. In fact, I've got the story that walka
(20:45):
trip for it, said, like the biggest headline.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
You can imagine.
Speaker 3 (20:48):
Alderman apologizes after false ICE alert in downtown Waka Shaw.
Security firm employees mistaken for ICE agents. Right now, the
story goes on. The Waukeshaw Freeman is reporting today that
Camacho is no longer employed as a teacher at Catholic
Memorial High School at Waukeshaw. The story then does not
(21:09):
have to tail. It's not clear whether or not he
was fired or asked to resign, but obviously someone who
would make such an incredibly inflammatory statement, and given the
fact that we all know that ICE agents are being
targeted right now, clearly was putting people's lives at risk
by putting this warning out there, and in this instance,
(21:30):
putting a warning out for security people who aren't even ICE.
So Camacho is no longer a teacher at Catholic Memorial
High School. There's another component of this story, though, that
I find quite interesting. The city attorney in Waukeshaw. That's
an elected position. In some cities, the city attorney is
simply a guy you hire. In other cases they contract
(21:52):
with a law firm to provide it. But at Waukeshaw.
The city attorney's an elected position. His name is Brian Running. First,
he told no, he said no officials in Waukeshaw should
comment on this, which I always find intriguing when a
city attorney tells somebody who's another elected official that they
can't talk. I don't think any city official has any
(22:14):
obligation to listen to one department head till him the
canadon they can't do. But he said he was going
to conduct a review, and after his review is concluded,
he concluded that this is a statement of personal opinion
and not an official warning from the government of Waukeshaw.
Speaker 2 (22:26):
And he then claimed that.
Speaker 3 (22:28):
These comments are not subject to the state open records law.
I'm sure some people are inquiring about what other posts
that he's made out of any number of things, and
the city attorneys saying, well, this is his personal opinion.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
Well, I would think any.
Speaker 3 (22:41):
Elected official who expresses an opinion, it's a personal opinion.
He's an alderman of wauk a Shaw and he was
commenting on something going on in walk Ashaw or that
he thought that he would So I think perhaps somebody
should challenge this and see what other crap this goof
is doing on social media. Good thing, there weren't any
(23:04):
little kids running around playing cops and robbers. Camacho might
have seen them and thought that it was some sort
of invasion or something or other. A dope, I mean, seriously,
And the only way that this this is, you know,
all this weekend, those are the nod King's thing.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
Ice is just on his head.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
Remember after nine to eleven, and you know they said
if you see something, say something. Everybody who saw a
car like idling in front of a house is calling
up the police thinking that it was some terrorists.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Of the bomb and so on. This is just on
the guy's head.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
He sees somebody in a uniform run it could have
been anybody in a uniform. Not to mention, I shouldn't
say most lots of security companies, their guards wear uniforms
and they look quasi like law enforcement. They're not allowed
to do certain things that would be law enforcement. And
there's people who are aposts of law enforcement. But lots
of security companies will have somebody put on like a
(23:54):
uniform that kind of looks like it.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
So this immediately thinks the ice Ice.
Speaker 3 (24:02):
Next during the no King's rally in Chicago over the weekend.
One speaker got up and called upon the crowd to
shoot ICE agents. As it turns out he's been identified.
(24:23):
There was way less effort to identify him than to
identify the poor woman from Milwaukee who got on the
Dodger fan and said, somebody call ICE after he was
harassing them. But he's been identified. His name is Mois's
Bernald Puentes, and he actually works at Wilbur Wright College,
(24:43):
which is a community college in Chicago. So far as
we can tell, he has not been fired, which I
guess means that if you retort to someone who is
Latino who is harassing you and making a jackass out
of himself, somebody call ICE, that that is a fireable offense.
But if you actually say you should murder Ice, that
(25:06):
that is not a fireable offense. You see the standards
that are at work here, and why I have some
sense of empathy, if not sympathy for the woman who
lost her cool and ended up getting canned from a
big time job. She was an associate counsel at Manpower
for making hurts dam And in the meantime you can
(25:26):
run around and say, yeah, I guys to kill people
who work for ICE and apparently do that without any
consequence whatsoever. Let me move to this story, and this
is one of these stories that I've alluded to a
couple of times in I always have a sense when
things aren't sinking into people. I don't know why that is,
but I just have this. Then I look at Paul,
(25:48):
and then I think it's sinking into him. But then
I don't know if you're the best example of whether
or not something some kid do. Obamacare is going to
go broke at the end of the year. I've covered
this a couple of times, going to cover it again
very briefly. The reason it's going to go broke and
there are going to have to be massive increases in
premiums is when Obamacare was created and then during Biden's
(26:13):
administration with COVID. During those two periods of time, massive
subsidies by the government were put in place to lower
the costs of the premiums for people that were covered
under Obamacare, otherwise known as the Affordable Care Act. In
both cases, they had an expiration date. The original subsidy
expired early in Biden and the Democrats, when they controlled
(26:35):
the Congress in Biden's first year extended those subsidies die
at the end of the year, meaning the people who
are covered under Obamacare are going to see monster increases
in their premium unless the Congress and President extend the subsidies. Now,
(26:57):
this is an opportunity to say I told you so,
but rually not my point here For the people who
argue that Obamacare the math never added up and it
would always need massive subsidies, despite what Obama said when
this came in that it would be a break even proposition,
it obviously isn't, and it requires these subsidies or the
cause of Obamacare, which is already somewhat high, explodes. Who
(27:26):
created Obamacare? This is very important. I'm not sure you
all remember Obamacare was passed in I believe fourteen. Who
created Obamacare? Well, who else? Obama can't sign a piece
of paper and issue at executive order created It was
(27:46):
passed by the Democratic Senate in House without a single
Republican vote. Do I remember that there wasn't one Republican
vote for it. And when the subsidy was passed extended
early in Biden, who did that?
Speaker 2 (28:03):
The Democrats? So now this.
Speaker 3 (28:06):
Program that was created and then essentially renewed by the Democrats.
Is going broke as we knew it would, and they
want the Republicans.
Speaker 2 (28:16):
To bail out the thing they created. You see the.
Speaker 3 (28:20):
Problem with this Now, I acknowledge the following. We've had
Obamacare for ten years and there are people that are
dependent upon it, and it will be a hardship for
many of them if their premiums explode. I acknowledge that
it's not my fault because I said this would happen,
(28:40):
but I acknowledge that this problem is here.
Speaker 2 (28:46):
Senator Mark Wayne Mullen has a very good quote on this.
Speaker 3 (28:54):
And his position is my position if you have to
read between his lines of quote. Dems wrote Obamacare. They
passed Obamacare without a single GOP vote. They created the
Obamacare COVID credits without a single GOP vote, and they
extended those credits and chose a twenty twenty five expiration
(29:15):
date with no GOP votes. If the Dems want to
discuss their Obamacare failure, we welcome the conversation after they
end the Schumer shutdown. First of all, let's deal with
the second part of that first. There ain't gonna be
any extension of anything as long as the government is
(29:36):
shut down, and it's the Democrats that have shut down
the government.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
So let's start right right there.
Speaker 3 (29:40):
There's no extension of anything and no creation of any
new federal funds for anything during the period in which
there's a shutdown. But secondly, what else did he say
between the lines? Don't worry if you don't know, because
I'm here to tell you. I'll read the key line.
If Dems want to discuss their Obamacare failure, we welcome
the conversation. In other words, I think what Mullin is
(30:01):
saying is the Republicans are open and to continuing some
of these subsidies, but it means Obamacare is going to
be changed. It has been a racket that enriches the
insurance companies. And let me tell you the deep dirty seat.
I don't know if it's that deep of a secret.
Maybe it's commonly known. Obamacare policies are not really good.
(30:26):
They cover rezillion things because it's one size fits all,
so if you're a male, you have to get a
policy that covers pregnancy and so on. They cover lots
of things, but the policies themselves have extremely high deductibles.
So until you hate your out of pocket maximum. You're
paying a lot for your healthcare because the insurance doesn't
(30:48):
kick in. One of the problems is is that they
don't allow specifically tailored policies under Obamacare so that individuals, employers,
and individuals that bio Obamacare under the healthcare marketplace are
able to opt out of all sorts of stuff they
don't need. You come up with that reform and the
(31:10):
policies could become less affordable, But the insurance companies don't
want that. Insurance companies love policies that require people to
carry coverage for something they will never use. Okay, put
yourself in the shoes of the insurance company. Do you
want to be Pall's insurance company? Imagine what a crappy
operation that would be. You'd never pay out. I'd be
(31:33):
on the phone and the line I'd be ringing if
your Pall's insurance company. Wouldn't you love to sell health
insurance to a man the covered pregnancy. You'd love that
because you know there's not any unless you're like redefining man,
like these trans people, there's no chance you're ever gonna
have to pay it out. So, as I say, if
(31:57):
the Democrats want to bail out of this terrible place
government policy that they created Obamacare. It's going to have
to be with reforms that are put in place by
Obamacare that Republicans approve of it. As I say, I acknowledge,
if you simply kill Obamacare entirely right now, what are
you going to do for all of the people for
whom that's been their healthcare for the last eleven years.
(32:23):
And I don't think the Trump would be in favor
of doing it. But these subsidies are a total It's
a massive amount of money that we're kicking in for
a program that is constructed idiotically, where you're charging and
requiring coverage for healthy twenty six year old people that
is identical the coverage of a sickly fifty eight year
(32:43):
old person. Let me move to another issue. This is
one of those topics that I can do three podcasts on,
but I'm going to cover it. This is going to
be the Cliff Snodes version of it. This debate's going
on in a lot of suburban public schools in fact,
and a lot of schools, and some of them private schools.
(33:05):
It's going on in fact, just state in a lot
of schools, whether or not to continue to allow students
to use their cell phones in school.
Speaker 2 (33:18):
I think it's insane. I think it's.
Speaker 3 (33:21):
Insane if a kid is sitting in a classroom, the
notion that the kid is running around texting, going on Facebook,
looking at porn or whatever else they're doing is preposterous.
It's a very simple solution to it, ban them, and some.
Speaker 2 (33:40):
Schools have gotten very, very good at it.
Speaker 3 (33:42):
What they do is they'll bake you at the beginning
of the day, turn your phone in and they put
it in like it's a bag or an enclosure or
something that you can't get into, and they give it
back to you at the end of the day. There's
a term for these things, and I forget what it is.
Do you know what that term is? Paul says, they
call it the cell phone bag. Well, it makes sense.
Maybe there isn't other neah, but I've been throw it
(34:03):
in the cell phone bag. In the suburbs. There seems
to be more blowback to the bands than in the city.
Speaker 2 (34:11):
No. I know why this is.
Speaker 3 (34:13):
You have these helicopter moms that apparently feel the need
to text to text their children all day when they're
at school.
Speaker 2 (34:19):
I think that's what it is, don't you part? Yes, Well,
what other part is it?
Speaker 1 (34:26):
No?
Speaker 3 (34:26):
I'm talking about I'm not talking about the student's objections
to this. I'm talking about why the parents are of
Jeffney to it.
Speaker 2 (34:32):
That's what it is.
Speaker 3 (34:33):
Well, in Pewaukee, which is the case that we're going
to study here, the school board has wanted to ban
cell phones in school and say that you couldn't have
them all day.
Speaker 2 (34:41):
Students screamed, and so did parents scream.
Speaker 3 (34:45):
That's the parents say, well, what if I have to
contact the kid because there's a tragedy, what did you
do before we had cell phoods? You call the school's
office and the principal tell us little Johnny, Hey, come
over here, here we have our disaster or whatever.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
I mean. There is somewhere a.
Speaker 3 (35:02):
Happy medium between the child neglect that many children go
through and the overparenting that some of these hovering parents do.
As for the students objecting, they'll come up with all
of this stuff that they want it. We all know
what they want to do. And secondly, a big part
of the problem that goes on in schools is the
(35:24):
cyber bullying that I admit I didn't have to go through,
nor Paul had to go through. I mean, you know,
when I was kids would pass notes around and all
of that stuff. It's far more harmful to past on
social media, and it just and people have proven to
be far more vile when they've got a phone or
a device in their hand than typing something out.
Speaker 2 (35:40):
It's a problem.
Speaker 3 (35:42):
So they've reached a compromise in Milwaukee after everybody yelled
and screamed, and that is that they can't have the
phones during class, but they can have them during the
lunch hour and break periods. They can't have them when
they're walking in the hallway from one class to another,
but there are periods in which they don't have a
class scheduled at all, when they have total, if not
total free time, more free time like a study hall,
(36:04):
of the lunch hour and so on, and they're able
to use their phones. Then I can live with this,
but I think we have to err on the side
of getting these things out of the hands of kids.
If you want to be able to teach kids, if
a teacher has any ability to control the classroom, they
can't have the kids running around doing crap on their phone. Well,
the teacher's supposed to be teaching well, and you know
(36:25):
that's a separate issue. Many of these schools still have
devices that you can use, like the laptops and notebooks
for researching someone. This is specifically the phones themselves, which
are convenient to do all sorts of things that I
think have nothing to do with a good educational environment.
And the parents object to this that they want to
they want to hear from their kids all day.
Speaker 2 (36:45):
I mean, give me a break. We had phones.
Speaker 3 (36:49):
Your daughters were young enough that there were cell phones
when they were still in school, right, I don't mean college.
Speaker 2 (36:53):
I mean like high school. In grade school, they were
just kind of like coming into it. So that was
too early for they weren't allowed in school then. Yeah,
so you'll have to go through this.
Speaker 3 (37:03):
Now with your grandchildren and so on it and you'll
like bother them by talking like an archaic wh I
was a kid waiting even have a phone. We had
to be like Caliver Douglas and climb the pole. Remember
that in Green Acres you had to climb the pole.
I I'm old enough that I don't recall anybody having
to do that. No, you didn't have to get a signal.
(37:23):
You got to climb the pole because they didn't wire
the phone to go down into his house.
Speaker 2 (37:26):
You had to climb to the top of the phone pole.
Speaker 3 (37:28):
The use you don't remember, Green Acres, you don't remember these,
the tails you don't remember. Well, you didn't remember why
I had to climb at the top of the pool.
They had to climb at the top of the pole
because they didn't wire the house for the phe.
Speaker 2 (37:41):
He was the only one.
Speaker 3 (37:43):
Everybody else who lived in Hooterville they actually had the
phone in their house.
Speaker 2 (37:46):
Nobody else is climbing to the top of the pole.
Speaker 3 (37:47):
Only I'll play am I talking about this? This is
the Mark Belling podcast. This is the Mark Belling Podcast.
The Republican Party in Wisconsin, as we know, it's not united,
and as we also know, that's one of the reasons
(38:08):
that my side continues to lose a lot of statewide elections.
It's not the only reason. A couple of things to
talk about here. There are indications that Tim Michaels may
be running for governor again. He went to the White
House yesterday. It is known that President Trump is not
(38:34):
happy with the field so far of Republican candidates for governor.
As I've explained, one of the reasons he's unhappy about
this is he doesn't want members of the House running
for other offices. He's made that clear. He doesn't want
(38:56):
Tom Tiffany running for governor. He wants him to run
for reelection to the House of repres editives why incumbents
have a far better chance of winning an election than
a challenger. Trump wants all the Republican inccumbents to run
for reelection because he knows that keeping control of the
House is going to be very hard. And I don't
(39:19):
think that there's much of a chance that Trump is
going to endorse Tiffany because he doesn't want Tiffany running
for governor, and he really doesn't like the notion that
Tiffany's not doing what he's supposed to do, which is
what Trump is telling him to do. From the perspective
of Tiffany, Okay, Trump's the president, but he's not the
boss of my personal life. I want to be the
governor of the state of Wisconsin and have a chance
to think I have a chance of winning. In addition
to that, I believe you don't need Tom Tiffany to
(39:43):
keep that House seat. That district is the most Republican
district in Wisconsin. Tiffany's district is essentially up North. Almost
all of up North except the northwest, a portion of
northwestern Wisconsin is Tiffany's district. But basically, and for those
of you who don't understand, up North, up North is
not the Fox Valley. Up North is up North. It's
(40:06):
become a very Republican area. So if Tiffany isn't the candidate,
I think they keep the seat. In any event, Trump's
not happy with the field. Josh Shouman, the Washington County executive,
is also running Showman's People don't like it when I
say this, but I don't think many people are very
impressed with the campaign that he's shown so far, and
they're very skeptical that you can emerge out of a
(40:30):
position like Washington County executive and use that as a
platform to win the governorship. Trump is close to Michael's.
Trump endorsed Michaels when he ran in twenty two. Tim
Michaels is a home in Palm Beach, It's not far
from mar A Lago. He and Trump are friends. Does
(40:53):
that mean that Michael should run for governor? Well, there
is this concern I have about somebody running for an
office that they lost the last time around. Rarely does
that result get reversed. It is possible when you're the challenger,
I believe it's never possible when you're in the incumbent.
You lose and then try to regain your seat. It
(41:14):
just doesn't happen.
Speaker 2 (41:15):
In Wisconsin. There have been cases, however, of a.
Speaker 3 (41:18):
Challenge you're running more than once for the position and
winning it the second time or the third time around.
More importantly, my concern is that we have another contentious,
divisive Republican primary. The Democrats police themselves. They have avoided
these contentious primaries, so A you don't have the candidates
(41:40):
ripping one another and providing all this foddy that can
be used against them in a general election. And b
they're not wasting their money. We saw the problem in
twenty twenty two with the Republicans in which Rebecca Clayfish
and Kim Michael spent a fortune trying to knock the
other one out of the primary. Well, that's all money
that couldn't be spent therefore by Michael's in the general
election and second late there were very very hard feelings
(42:03):
and the party did not unite and while I blamed
the Clayfish people for that, I've also said that if
Clayfish won, I think that Michaels' supporters, which was kind
of the Tommy Thompson.
Speaker 2 (42:13):
Wing of the party, they wouldn't be united behind Clayfish.
Speaker 3 (42:17):
Neither side was able to put their egos aside for
the good of the state of Wisconsin. And I fear
that the same thing is going to happen again if
Michaels does run. There has to be a way, I
think of convincing Tiffany to get.
Speaker 2 (42:33):
Out of the race or vice versa.
Speaker 3 (42:38):
I think in this instance, Republican leaders need to settle
upon a candidate who's going to be supported by the
majority of them, or you're on this suicide mission again
in which the Democrat. Now there is some indication that
Democrats might have their own fight. I think the path
is being paved pretty clearly for Sarah Rodriguez to win.
Others disagree with me. David Crowley, the Milwaukee County Executive,
(42:59):
is run as are about six lefties of Madison. But
I think Sarah Rodriguez is going to be the anointed one.
Crawley being African American and being the city from the
city of Milwaukee. Maybe that gives him a chance. I'm
skeptical of that. I think it's Democrats are going to
have when they see the polls. Whoever is behind it,
(43:20):
June's going to drop out of the race, the same
thing that they did with Mandela Barnes Senate race back
in twenty twenty two as well. In any event, there
is this potential here for more Republicans to get into
the race, and there could be somebody that isn't Michael's.
It isn't Tiffany still jumping into.
Speaker 2 (43:35):
This thing next.
Speaker 3 (43:39):
This story has gotten scant coverage in the media, but
I'm going to cover it.
Speaker 2 (43:44):
The treasurer of.
Speaker 3 (43:45):
The Republican Party of Wisconsin has resigned, and she's resigning
by taking a shot at the leadership of the party.
And the leadership of the party is Brian Shimming. Her
name is Kelly Rue.
Speaker 2 (43:56):
Are you age? I'm going to read it.
Speaker 3 (44:00):
I am writing to formally resign my position as Treasurer
of the Republican Party of Wisconsin, effective immediately. After careful consideration,
I have concluded that I can no longer meaningfully contribute
to our party's executive leadership team under the current circumstances.
The absence of a strategic plan, defined objectives and measurable outcomes,
(44:21):
as well as budgetary issues, have created an environment in
which progress is difficult to assess and nearly impossible to achieve.
As the saying goes, what gets measured gets done. Unfortunately,
without metrics or accountability, it is unclear what we are
working toward or what our capacity is to achieve our objective. Now,
(44:44):
let me interject, she wants definable metrics. In other words,
we're going to raise X amount of dollars in twenty
twenty five or in twenty twenty six, we're going to
win the governorship and keep the state to keep the
State Center and keep the State Assembly.
Speaker 2 (45:00):
Other Wards, a.
Speaker 3 (45:01):
Measurement and if it isn't achieved, you dump the people
that are in charge. That would be a metric on
an accountability, she's saying, they don't have any. And if
you don't have any, it's because the people in charge
don't want to be accountable if they fail.
Speaker 2 (45:15):
That's her point that she's making here.
Speaker 3 (45:17):
Continuing moreover, the internal dynamics of our PW's Publican Party
of Wisconsin, particularly the dysfunctional leadership I think that's cruly
a shot at shimming. Have made attempts at collaboration increasingly
unproductive and discouraging. The Lack of transparency, direction, and respect
for different perspectives or even basic board oversight has fostered
(45:40):
a culture that is not only ineffective but also absurd.
I love my country, my state, and my community. That
is why I volunteered my time in the first place.
It pains me that the Republican Party of Wisconsin continues
to repeat the same mistakes time and again. Well, Kelly,
join my club. I've been drawing attention to this for
(46:03):
about ten years. The dysfunction in the Republican Party of Wisconsin,
the misdirection of funds, the fact that the party is
run by a click of Madison types, the fact that
they will not get that party headquarters out of Madison
and get it into a part of the state of
(46:24):
Wisconsin where actual Republicans live.
Speaker 2 (46:28):
On and on.
Speaker 3 (46:31):
There is no grassroots organization of the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
There's no attempt to raise any money for it. There's
no accountability toward anyone. There was zero attempt by the
Republican leadership of the state to stop Dan Kelly from
losing another state Supreme Court seat. They're not any good
at any of these things, and they've been tuned up
(46:53):
by the majority of Republican voters, and they've lost sense
of what their mission is. Their mission is grassroots organizing, fundraising,
and get out of the vote. It is not sitting on
your fat butt in an office in Madison hanging out
with all your lefty buddies who work across the street
at the Capitol. Anyway, back to Kelly Rue's piece, recent
(47:13):
election results in Wisconsin are clear. If URPW does not
drastically change its approach to everything leadership, fundraising, messaging, organizing,
addressing issues that Wisconsin I's care about, then it will
plan no role in deciding our state's future as a Conservative.
This greatly disappoints me, but it is clear that the
required change is not likely to come from rpw's current leadership.
(47:34):
I appreciate the opportunity to have served with our PW
over the past decade. My sincere hope is that those
who remain in positions of authority will institute the critical
changes that must be made to our party. Regards Kelly Rue,
that's her resignation letter is treasurer of the Republican Party
of Wisconsin. In the meantime, the story in js online
today that I think is a week behind, but it's
(47:56):
in there. It's by Laurence Andrea, who has been reporting
on the internal fight between Turning Point. That's the organization
founded by Charlie Kirk and the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
Turning Point is doing all the things the Republican Party isn't. A.
It's attracting tons of volunteers, B, it has a huge
budget in his paid staff. C. It's organizing in the grassroots. D.
(48:20):
It's walking up to human beings and persuading them to
vote and telling them which way to vote. All the
things the Democrats have been doing forever and ever and
ever that the Republicans are incapable of doing. In the process,
Turning Point has been trying to get its people in
charge of a number of the local chapters of the
Republican Party, and the Republican Party leadership doesn't like it.
(48:41):
But the story goes on and dissects the current relationship here.
The Milwaukee County Republican Party has been I'll saying, kind
of taken over by Turning Point. Hilario DeLeon, who is
the chair of the Republican Party of Milwaukee County, is
in fact a volunteer for Turning Point, and he's been
critical of the statewide organization, and he's becoming one of
(49:02):
the Turning Point people that is criticizing or at least
raising questions about the poor priorities of the Republican Party
of the state of Wisconsin. The story says that a
lot of state Republicans think that, well, Turning Point's good
at working with young people, but they can't do this,
that and the other thing. In Turning Points, you keep
its focus on converting young people to vote for Republicans. Well,
(49:24):
that should be their focus, but I think the Turning
Point has ambitions of being larger than that. And I
think that the Charlie Kirk ideology, and hopefully it will
carry through now that he's no longer with us, in
which you have to meet people change their minds, and
the likeliest person whose mind can be changed as a
younger person because they don't have thirty or forty years
of buying into this leftist clap trap, is the way
(49:50):
to succeed. I have tried for several years to get
pressure to change the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
Speaker 2 (49:58):
I have not succeeded.
Speaker 3 (50:00):
However, the donor base has voted with its checkbooks. They're
giving money to individual candidates, and they're giving money to
independent political organizations, but they're not giving money to the
state Republican Party because they don't believe it is being
well spent. The twenty six election is fast approaching. I
think that the state Supreme Court race next spring is
(50:21):
a long shot at best. We now do have a candidate,
Maria Lazarre is running. She's running against another left wing,
lunatic judge from Madison, Chris Taylor. Our side has shown
no ability to win these state Supreme Court elections. The
governor's election of the state legislative elections are in the
fall of next year twenty six, and those are critical,
(50:42):
and those are ones in which the Republicans I think
of a clear chance of winning because the Democrats have
gone nuts, and in a state like Wisconsin, Democrats running
for statewide office do not want to run well having
to defend the policies of Mandani AOC, Bernie Sanders, and
those other left wing cooks that have alienated the majority
(51:04):
of the people in regular Old America, including regular world Wisconsin,
which creates this opening, but the opening is again.
Speaker 2 (51:12):
Going to be missed.
Speaker 3 (51:15):
There are two things critical in winning elections. A you
have to get all of your people, not most of them,
all of your people to vote, and B you have
to raise money. The Democrats have mastered this in part
they have way more billionaires than our side has. Just truth,
the whole tech thing, the mass vast majority of them
(51:38):
are lefties, the sorrows thing. They've got all of that,
and they've taken advantage of mailan voting and all of
these other changes in voting rules to get almost all
of their people to vote in almost all of the
elections that we have. In the meantime, it is not
hunky doryan Democratville. Let's start with the optics of No
(52:03):
Kings Clay Travis, half of Clay and Buck. It's about
forty seconds here. He was on Jesse Watts showing I'm
gonna quote him. I could play the cut here, but
Paul begged me not to give him any additional work,
So I'm just gonna read what it is that he
had to say that that's not true. It's short enough
that I'm just gonna read what Clay said. The party,
(52:30):
the Democrats. The party has lost touch with mainstream America,
particularly younger generations, and risks becoming a relic of the past.
The Democrats emphasis on identity politics, elite driven policies, and
performative activism. Let me pause, what does that mean? Performative activity?
That means just dressing up.
Speaker 2 (52:48):
And showing up.
Speaker 3 (52:48):
And the whole point of holding your rally is look
at me with my pink and blue hair and women
with the hairy arm pitts say, you know, running around
with your trans signs.
Speaker 2 (52:58):
And it's performative. That's the term for.
Speaker 3 (53:00):
Back to Clay's common and performative activism has alienated working
class voters and independence. As social media amplifies these moments, KeyPoint.
See everybody saw these no Kings things because a they're
videoing themselves and be Conservatives.
Speaker 2 (53:17):
Are videoing all of them.
Speaker 3 (53:19):
As social media amplifies these moments, the viral cryps of
cringeworthy protests, the party's image suffers further. With Trump back
in the White House, Republicans are capitalizing on the moment,
portraying themselves as the party of strength, freedom and fun.
I think that's a very good analysis. In the meantime,
(53:43):
this piece it appeared in The Hill. The Hill is
a website that covers Congress. It's not a conservative site.
They are quoting without not by name, without attribution, moderate
Democrats in the Congress who say that they want to
(54:05):
vote to end the shutdown, but they're terrified of doing so.
We know who they're terrified of. Again, this is being
reported on the Hill, and I'm going to read here.
Speaker 2 (54:15):
A brief portion of the report.
Speaker 3 (54:17):
People are going to get hammered if they vote for
the House pass bill to reopen the government and keep
it funded through November twenty first, said one Democratic senator
who requested anonymity. Centri Senators are fearful of breaking with
leaders while party activists are planning the anti Trump rallies.
Democratic strategists say the main driver of the political fear
(54:39):
within the Democratic caucus is online fundraising, which is largely
driven by social media. In other words, they're fearful of this.
A Democrat who votes for the House bill to end
the shutdown will be targeted with opposition. Somebody's going to
run against them in a primary, and that primary opponent
will raise a f fortune nationally online from these lefties
(55:03):
who don't want anything other than socialists Mamdanni types AOCS
in the Congress. So you have Democrats, who, I think
now that nol Kings is over, want to reopen the government,
but they're terrified of the left wing LUNs that are
driving their party. There's an editorial that appeared yesterday in
(55:26):
the Wall Street Journal Mamdani and the Democrats. First of all,
ma'm Donni's gonna win. He's got to be the mayor
of New York, which is a terrible thing for this country.
But some Republicans think it might be good for the
Republicans in twenty six because the crisis in New York
will be immediate and it will be a walking advertisement
to voters all over America to not vote for these
(55:47):
Democrats in twenty six. That's the backdrop the editorial for
the Wall Street Journal. Democrats have a problem, and we
don't mean Donald Trump. The arguably bigger danger is the
socialist insurgency building in their own party, and the latest
test of their resistance is candidate Zoraon Mumdani and New
York City's mayor race. Republicans might want to hold off
(56:08):
on the gloating the thirty three year old Mamdani is
leading in the race, having won the Democratic primary as
a proud member of the Democratic Socialists of America. Andrew Cuomo,
who lost in the primary, is running as an independent
and has has closed the polling gap since Mayor Eric
Adams left the race, but it remains in double digits.
The story then goes on and discusses the radicalism of
(56:29):
Mundani and how while it may play among some younger
voters and may get him elected in an overwhelmingly liberal
city like America, is the kind of thing that has
driven mainstream middle Americans who may have leaned Democratic in
the past away from the party. I'll point out there's
(56:51):
almost nothing in this type of socialism for African Americans,
and there isn't much for a lot of Latinos, those
are primarily working clas last parts of the American economy
and the voter base. You see very little support for, say,
the trans movement in the African American communities, and when
you see the focus on these kinds of niche elitist issues,
(57:16):
it's created this opening for Trump and the Republicans to
go after them, and the farther the Democrats move themselves
to the left in cities like New York, the easier
it is for someone running for, say, governor of Wisconsin,
to link the Democrat in their state.
Speaker 2 (57:36):
To that crowd.
Speaker 3 (57:39):
When we come back after the break, I'm going to
explain something to you, and it's something that includes a
story that at least has some negative connotations for Milwaukee.
This is the Mark Belling podcast. This is the Mark
Belling podcast. Story in the Wall Street Journal, most and
Cores says it's going to cut about nine percent of
(58:02):
its America's workforce. America's means not just the United States,
our hemisphere, nine percent, Molsencore's owns Miller, et cetera. Many
of the jobs that are going to be eliminated are
salaried positions as opposed to production line people. The story
goes into all of the reasons that it's going on.
They want to focus on their growth areas of their
(58:24):
business and perhaps orphan off the stuff that isn't growing,
et cetera.
Speaker 2 (58:29):
But the bigger backdrop to this is.
Speaker 3 (58:33):
Beer consumption in America is declining, and in fact, last
year there was a decline in overall alcohol consumption. This
is something that if you go back twenty or twenty
five years, you just would not have predicted it. In fact,
in fact, one of the the alcohol industry has always
been thought to be kind of recession proof. No matter
(58:57):
what the economy is, people are going to drink, and
as the population grows, there's more potential drinkers. The drinking
in the American culture were just linked that it was
the ultimate slow growth industry. Never have great, huge growth
because most Americans already drink. So how do you create
Do you have fifteen percent growth?
Speaker 2 (59:16):
You can't.
Speaker 3 (59:17):
But the slow and steady growth just seem to be
an inevitability. So what's going on here? Well, I know
what's going on in pulse are the same thing. There's
so many people that are using pot in its various
forms and pills that they're getting their buzz that way
rather than from alcohol. This creates I suppose the argument
(59:41):
of what's better or what's worse, And my answer has
always man, it depends. If you become addicted to alcohol,
your life can become a mess. Drunk driving, ruining your life,
behavioral changes, becoming a terrible employ all of the stuff,
you know, being a mean person. Among the ramifications of
(01:00:07):
alcohol is and particularly if you're the kind of drunk
whose personality changes for the worst after drinking. On the
other hand, the overwhelming majority of people who drink do
so in a benign fashion, and I think only a
tiny fraction of people who drink ever become addicted. To me,
(01:00:27):
it's just obvious that marijuana is far more addictive than
alcohol is most people who drink alcohol, other than those
who I think have an addiction problem. You know, okay,
you're not going to drink this We go, okay, fine,
I won't drink that week. They can somehow survive that.
When you tell a pot head that they can't use
pot in a given week, they'll freak out. Now, imagine
(01:00:49):
if it's something stronger than that, if it's the meth
and the phenotol and everything else. The next part, all
this stuff costs money. Whatever money you're spending on pot,
whatever money you're spending on fetanola, that everybody you're spending
on meth is money that you can't spend.
Speaker 2 (01:01:02):
A Miller lite. As the drugs have become.
Speaker 3 (01:01:07):
More pervasive, and in particular, as the pot has become legalized.
And don't think for a moment that legalization of pot
doesn't increase use.
Speaker 2 (01:01:15):
Of course it does.
Speaker 3 (01:01:17):
There are people who did not use pot because they
didn't want to be busted and go to jail and
lose their reputation and so on. But once it becomes legal,
that stigma's gone. Secondly, when pot was illegal, you'd have
to buy it from people on the street and all
of that stuff. Walking into a dispensary and doing something
that's perfectly legal eliminates that stigma. So I think that's
(01:01:39):
the simple explanation for what's going on with the alcohol industry.
Whether or not it's good or bad, it is I
think undeniably.
Speaker 2 (01:01:48):
What's happening. One of these years, I'll get out of
this whole Kradom thing. Do you know about this? Yeah,
I see one of these years.
Speaker 3 (01:01:58):
It's one of those topics that if I ever have
a show in which I can't think of anything to do,
it's a good one to be able to do. But
I never have any of those days where I can't
think of anything to do. You like, see it at
gas stations and you'll see that if the place sell,
here's the rule on it. If the place sell, it
sells it it will always be in huge letters on
the window there's nobody that sells it that doesn't have
it all over their thing, because apparently there are people
(01:02:21):
that seek it out and look.
Speaker 2 (01:02:23):
To buy it.
Speaker 3 (01:02:25):
I just I should like tease it and say I'm
going to do it in a future podcast and get
people to listen every day for the next thirty seven years,
hoping that that'll be the that I actually bring up the.
Speaker 2 (01:02:39):
Why are you thinking that this You don't even know
what it does for you. I just hear.
Speaker 3 (01:02:49):
I believe it is kratum. I should look that up
before I just give that out there. I've ever used it.
I just heard people say, and I see the signs
and gas stations. It's in the area of quasi illgality.
You know, if something isn't specifically illegal, that means it's legal.
The same thing with like the designer pot that they've
come up with, and that's not what that is. But
(01:03:10):
for example, you didn't if you don't read a law
that says that fake pot isn't illegal, that means it's legal.
You have to say a specific thing. So people, it's
the same thing with the you know, the steroids in
sports and so on. You beat all of these steroids,
well then somebody in a lab in vins a new
type of steroid that isn't on the specified list and
you use it until you go ahead and you Paul says,
(01:03:31):
the thc celser's are the big things in the verbs. Yes,
they probably put a big sign on the window saying
that that is what they have in there. Then too,
that's when you could tell that there's a demand for something.
As I say, that was my whole thing on the
create on that you put in a big sign on
the E sign on the window. Paul would like to
discuss this with other people. So if any of you
are further interested in further exploring this, Paul has a
(01:03:53):
high level of curiosity, and you can contact Cam and
I'm sure he'd be happy to engage.
Speaker 2 (01:03:58):
On you at.
Speaker 3 (01:04:02):
Great length. See, some people are just into explore. They're
experimenting and all of that stuff.
Speaker 2 (01:04:11):
That's their whole thing. Do you know what I want
to experiment in? Nothing, whatever it is I already do.
That's enough stuff for me to do.
Speaker 3 (01:04:18):
I don't want to try anything new in any area
of life.
Speaker 2 (01:04:21):
Bye.
Speaker 1 (01:04:24):
The Mark Belling podcast is a production of iHeartRadio Podcasts,
production and engineering by Paul Crownforest The Mark Belling podcast
is presented by you Line for quality shipping and industrial supplies.
You Line has everything in stock. Visit you line dot com.
Listen to all of Mark's podcasts, always available on the
iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your
(01:04:47):
favorite podcasts.
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
CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist
It’s 1996 in rural North Carolina, and an oddball crew makes history when they pull off America’s third largest cash heist. But it’s all downhill from there. Join host Johnny Knoxville as he unspools a wild and woolly tale about a group of regular ‘ol folks who risked it all for a chance at a better life. CrimeLess: Hillbilly Heist answers the question: what would you do with 17.3 million dollars? The answer includes diamond rings, mansions, velvet Elvis paintings, plus a run for the border, murder-for-hire-plots, and FBI busts.