9-16-24 - 8am - Pushing the Extremes and Mail In Voting Rights

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Michael, this is Grouper seven three nine six and Louisville, Kentucky.
I seem to remember when Governor Palin was on the
ticket as vice president, she said something about targeting some
seats and the left lost their minds. It seems to
me like with all this rhetoric about Trump being Hitler
and doing all this, that the people on the left
are clearly unhinged. And it seems to me, if we
were going to have any sort of common sense gun

(00:21):
reform laws in this country, maybe we should just start
taking people voter. I did because these people are unhinged.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Yeah, they are unhinged. And I think that.

Speaker 3 (00:35):
I I you know, I wish you may not think.

Speaker 2 (00:39):
I think about things.

Speaker 3 (00:41):
I think about things a lot, and I think social media,
I think the cabal. I think as progressives have gotten
more and more successful in moving the lurching the country
further and further leftward, closer and clark closer to Marxism.

(01:01):
I spoke to Caldera's Independence Institute on Saturday, and one
of the things that I mentioned the audio. I forget
how the question came up, but I said, one of
the things that we need to do, and I told
the story that I've told you before about how my
friend Andy Lester had always winced when I had described

(01:22):
Kamala Harris as a Marxist until I played that sound
bite of her running in twenty nineteen and twenty twenty
in which she wanted she thought that we should and
I think this is the same as her opportunity economy,
where we all end up in the same place, and
that Andy had called me in like, holy cal you know,
I've been wincing every time you referred to her as

(01:44):
a Marxist until I heard that, and then I was like,
holy cow, she is a Marxist. And so I think
as they have lurched further and further leftward and become
much more open about what their objectives are, you and
I are back harder and harder, trying to trying to
get us off this highway to hell we're on. I

(02:11):
don't be shocked, but I listened to a podcast yesterday.

Speaker 2 (02:19):
That was Glenn Beck.

Speaker 3 (02:22):
I know, I know, I'm just every once in a while,
you know of Broken Clocks twice, right, But I listened
to Beck because he was interviewing Alex Jones, and I

(02:44):
have to confess that as I was listening, and I
was doing a bunch of other stuff, so I was
kind of half assed listening. And then you know, Back
talks to Alex Jones about the Sandy Hook case and
you know, the bazillions of dollars at the judgment they
have against him.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
He asked me, is about nine to eleven? And Alex goes.

Speaker 3 (03:04):
Off on this, you know, these conspiracy theories about nine
to eleven, And as I'm listening to it, I'm fascinated
by how Alex Jones is able to, at one point
in whatever the line of questioning might be, or whatever
the topic might be, set forth his what I consider

(03:28):
to be off the wall conspiracy theory about say nine
to eleven, yet in the same breath also say, but
that's not to say that our government did something deliberate
or that the government was involved with it.

Speaker 2 (03:41):
Well wait a minute, just two seconds before you were
telling me that the government.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
Was involved in it, and you know that that there
was this conspiracy, then you're trying to back off from it.
So I'm just it's like watching a tennis match. I'm
just going back and forth, back and forth, and I'm
really getting tired of it, and I'm excuse me, and
in fact, I do turn it off because I just
I just can't take it anymore. And for those of

(04:05):
you that look, you shouldn't be listening to bet because
you'd be listening to me right now. But those of
you might listen to him this podcasts, maybe he says
this more often than not.

Speaker 2 (04:16):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (04:17):
I just heard him say this yesterday on a podcast
you recorded or that he played on Saturday, and that
was that this election could represent the final off ramp
that we have. And I'll give credit. I'll give that
credit that you know, I talk about this highway to Hell,
this highway to Marxism, and that we're speeding down at

(04:39):
you know, the speed limits seventy five miles an hour,
and we're doing one hundred and fifty miles an hour
down this highway to Marxism. And I thought Beck's description
of this election being the last off ramp to this
road to mart Marxism was actually pretty good and I
and I kind of I like, so once again riding,

(05:03):
I give I give that credit to that. But I
think that's what the combination of all of that stuff,
including the Democrats absolute insistence that they turn us into
some sort of European socialist style state is what's caused
us to react so viscerally against everything that the Democrats

(05:25):
stand for. It's why somebody like John F. Kennedy, not
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. But John F. Kennedy JFK. We
look at him now through the lens of what we're
living through right now and say, holy cow, what we
wouldn't give for another JFK. Somebody to believe in cutting

(05:47):
taxes as a way to grow the economy. And while
he may have, and certainly Bybi Kennedy Junior's father, Robert F.
Kennedy was a big, big civil rights advocate, and you know,
and all of that souf, which is fine. I mean,
all of that's fine. And they also believed in, you know,

(06:08):
growing government. Government could be you know, always help people
live a better life. And I'm thinking, you know, really,
governmently doesn't help people live better lives, particularly this iteration
of the government. So all of that keeps pushing us
to these extremes. And I firmly believe, having having served

(06:33):
in government at those high levels, that you can't be man,
be pamb but you can't be pablem. You can't be Okay,
we'll give you six inches if you'll give us two inches.
It doesn't work. You don't win that way. And we've
now reached the rubber bands being stretched and we're gonna
it's gonna snap at some point. And I do believe

(06:56):
that Trump is such a off rind to steal that
from Beck is such an off ramp to the Democrats.
He the Marxists that they've got to do everything they
can to stop him. Dragon pointed out to me during

(07:18):
the break that reference to King Jeffries talking about shortly
after the latest assassination attempt talking about how Donald Trump
and extreme maga Republicans, Well, just think about that, extreme
maga Republicans. They have successfully taken the term, at least

(07:40):
for their audience. They've taken the term maga and turned
it into a It has a dressive connotation. Maga is
equivalent of extremists. And what we're espousing really is only
extreme in the sense that we're trying to pull from
the precipice that the Democrats have us at. That's the

(08:05):
extremism we're trying to pull back from going off the
edge of the cliff. Well, if that's extremism, then that's extremism.
And if that's getting the last exit ant, that's the
last exit ramp.

Speaker 2 (08:21):
But I think.

Speaker 3 (08:24):
Trump he's certainly not the perfect candidate. He's certainly not
a perfect human being who is There's certain things about
him that I just absolutely do not like. But I
do see him as an off ramp. And that's why
I wholeheartedly, full throat at supporting He successfully defeated every

(08:50):
other candidate in on our side, at least fair elections,
in a fair process. And he did so because I
think many Americans see that if we don't get onto
the off rent, that it may be decades or longer

(09:11):
before we ever recover the country. Now I'm of two
minds about recovering the country. One republican. Republics do die,
but republics can be resurrected, and we've seen that EBB
and flow throughout world history. But this is the first

(09:33):
time and the longest time that a republic designed on
the basis of self governance has lasted. And so those
on the left who don't like self governance but would
rather dictate to you how you should live your life,
then they must be they must be stopped. But we

(09:57):
don't advocate assassinated. And when I call Kamala Harris marxist,
I've got evidence to back up that she indeed. Is
that not just her biography, but her political philosophy. The
things that she has done and everything that they do

(10:22):
is designed to take away your choice. The party that
says they're of choice is the party that's trying to
limit your choice. I'll give you an example. She know
these little pithy Michael Brown minutes that I do over
on freedom every day. Well, today's an example of what
I mean by taking away your choice. There's a Denver

(10:42):
City councilman by the name of Paul Cashman. Name brings
a bell by. I can't pimble anything in particular that
pisses me off about him, But he's a Denver City counselman,
so I'm sure he's done a lot of things to
piss me off.

Speaker 2 (10:54):
But this does.

Speaker 3 (10:57):
He wants more affordable housing in Denver. Well, who doesn't
want more affordable housing? Everybody wants more affordable housing, right, Well,
what if?

Speaker 2 (11:05):
What does that mean? What makes what makes housing affordable?

Speaker 3 (11:10):
Well, construction costs, the cost of ownership, the cost of maintenance, utilities,
your you know, the cost of your money that you
borrow to purchase a property. All those things go into
into a into an affordability index, and right now things
aren't very affordable. Well, guess what he's doing. He and

(11:31):
some other members of the Denver City Council bringing forth
an ordinance that would green light building buffers. I remember
we're talking about affordable housing. He wants more affordable housing
in Denver. So they're proposing a city ordinance that would
create buffers between proposed new gas stations. He claims in

(11:56):
an article that was over on I think on the
Colorado Sun, is that there are too many gas stations
in Denver. Why he cites that along Colorado Boulevard just
north of the twenty five, why they are just like
seventeen gas stations within a mile. I don't know whether
that's correct or not, but there are a lot of
gas stations along Colorado Boulevard, to which I say, so

(12:19):
what they're all succeeding? There used to be like three
gas stations over here on this intersection intersection near the studio.
So what a person who owns property wants to put
that property to its best highest use, to maximize the

(12:43):
value of that property, and if that's a gas station,
if they want to lease that property to you know,
Circle K or seven to eleven or Shell or anybody else,
because that's the highest value they can get for the property,
they had to have the right to do that, and
then the marketplace will determine whether or not that many

(13:05):
gas stations can be is sustainable on four corners of
an intersection. But do you think the city council can
better decide what the highest best use of that property
is that a private property owner wants to use the
property for no But again go back to the context

(13:29):
of they want more affordable housing. Well, here's what it
would do in order to get It's so stupid, it's funny.
The rules parently underdraft would bar any new gas stations
that are closer than a quarter mile from an existing

(13:51):
gas station. How's that going to improve affordable housing?

Speaker 2 (13:57):
My god? What freedom else would you take away?

Speaker 3 (14:01):
Or it has to be there must be a quarter
mile buffer between a gas station and an existing light
rail station.

Speaker 2 (14:11):
What does that do? What? Oh?

Speaker 3 (14:15):
Well, I know what the understated effect is trying to
push more people onto light rail because light rail is
a big gas failure. Or this a gas station can
only be three hundred feet to the nearest residence. Three
hundred feet not very far. How many people want to

(14:36):
have their house three hundred feet from a gas station?
Not too many people. But if that's what somebody wanted
to do, or if they limit that, how does that
improve affordable housing? How does that increase the amount of
affordable housing?

Speaker 2 (14:49):
It doesn't.

Speaker 3 (14:52):
Because instead of a gas station, how about we put
a McDonald's, I'm sorry, a McDonald's. How about we put
a Wendy's. We put a Chick fil A? How about
we put oh, I don't know, how we put a
migrant shelter. How About we build uh, you know, a
cheap ass motel and then lease it back to the
federal government or state government or to some NGO at

(15:15):
some outrageous amount. That's what I might want to do,
is just give me a piece of property. I'll build
a really crappy piece of uh you know, like a
ten story hotel on it, and then I'll lease it
back to state, local, or federal government at ten times
what the market value is, and I'll make a boatload
of money and I'll just walk away from it. Let
the Venezuelan games take it over. But this is a

(15:38):
This is an example of how what they want to
do on the left is all about minimizing, decreasing, or
eliminating your choices to somehow, in some unicorn land bring
about more affordable housing.

Speaker 2 (15:59):
It's just so we were faced with this.

Speaker 3 (16:06):
Ongoing effort by the progressive left to limit people's choices
in order to advance their objectives. And their objectives are well,
speaking of unicorns, they might as well be unicorns. The
objectives are never going to be met by the means

(16:26):
by which they're trying to meet those objectives.

Speaker 2 (16:29):
It's utter insanity. And so we drift further and further
apart as a country.

Speaker 3 (16:35):
Two diametrically opposed views of what the country should look like.
Is it a constitutional republic in which we self govern
and we we exercise our individual liberty and our individual freedom.
We seek out our own self satisfaction. We pursue our

(17:01):
own dreams. For those only the dreams that we can
pursue that the government tells we can pursue. So they
go after speech, they go after private property, They limit
all these choices.

Speaker 2 (17:13):
Hey, Mike, I've got an idea.

Speaker 4 (17:15):
Lower interest rates bring down the cost of materials, and
less in government restrictions on building.

Speaker 2 (17:22):
That will create more housing.

Speaker 3 (17:25):
And lower energy costs. You lower energy costs, you start
lowering the cost of everything. So a little bit of
good news there. There, There is some good news out there.
It may not seem like a lot, but I'll take

(17:47):
anything that I can get anytime I can get. Pennsylvania
is probably going to be the swing state. And Uha
Zito had an article on the New York Post and
I listened to her talked about this article the other
day about Erie County, Pennsylvania, and now Erie County is

(18:10):
a bell weather for how Pennsylvania may go. Erie County
was once home to I think GE and GE had
something like thirty eight thousand employees. That's now down to
I think I think she's said, I don't have that
story in front of me, but we went from thirty

(18:33):
eight thousand to something like eight thousand. While that's devastating
to a small county like that, on the other hand,
there has been an upteak in Republican registrations. Four hundred

(18:53):
new Republican registrants. Now that's still slightly below the number
of Democrats total Democrats in the county, but their trend
line is they're getting more and more Republicans and more
Democrats are switching from Democrat to Republican. So it's a
combination of new Republican voters and people are switching from

(19:13):
Democrats Republican. So it could be that as goes Erie County,
so goes the entire state of Pennsylvania. Were there some
other good news in Pennsylvania. On Friday, the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court ruled that mail in balance must include a proper
date on the return envelope in order to be valid.

(19:37):
Now that can affect.

Speaker 2 (19:38):
Thousands of voters in November.

Speaker 3 (19:43):
That decision vacated an earlier route ruling from August thirtieth
by the Commonwealth Court, which had found that Pennsylvania's dating
requirement was unconstitutional and violated voters' rights. Without going into
the details of the decision, saying that was unconstitutional, think

(20:08):
about this, so you have to do you want to
do either a mail in ballot or an absentee ballot,
and the rules say that it must be postmarked by
a certain date to give enough time whatever that general
time might be, for the ballot to reach the poll

(20:29):
workers so they can count the ballot and not have
to wait a week or two for the you know,
or that it's postmarked the day before, or it's not
postmarked at all, or whatever. How could that possibly be unconstitutional?
Because if I show up on November six, the day

(20:50):
after the election, and say, ah, you know what, I
wasn't feeling too well on Tuesday, November five, In fact,
I had a little bit of a hangover side. I
can I vote now? No, of course you can't. Well
why wouldn't the same standard apply prior to election day?
If you want an absentee ballot or a mail in

(21:12):
ballot to be counted, like in Colorado, we'll get, you know,
we get all this stupid all mail in ballots and
on there we'll say, you know, you must mail by
a certain date, and then all the news local news
channels will cover. You know, today's the last day to
mail your ballot. After day you got to drop it
off at a ballot box or take it to the
polling place or whatever. But there's a deadline. How could

(21:35):
that possibly be unconstitutional?

Speaker 2 (21:38):
Now?

Speaker 3 (21:39):
The Court's ruling was based on jurisdictional grounds, which determined
that the Commonwealth Court didn't have subject matter jurisdiction because
of the failure to name the county boards of election
of all sixty seven counties.

Speaker 2 (21:52):
Now just set that technicality aside for a moment.

Speaker 3 (21:57):
The American Civil Liberties Union Public Interest Law Center brought
the original suit on behalf of a bunch of leftist
voting rights groups improperly named voting rights groups. You see,
they believe in voting rights that you can just vote
any time, anywhere, and anybody can vote any time anywhere.

Speaker 2 (22:16):
You don't even have to be a US citizen, just
anybody gets to vote.

Speaker 3 (22:19):
Your presence in your presence in the state helps your
president in Pennsylvania you can go, but anywhere you went
to Nebraska.

Speaker 2 (22:27):
That's how radical they are.

Speaker 3 (22:31):
They argued that the requirement for a date, which was
imposed by Acts seventy seven States mailed in voting law
that was done back in twenty twenty, back during COVID,
violated the free, the free and Equal Elections clause of.

Speaker 2 (22:48):
The Pennsylvania Constitution.

Speaker 3 (22:49):
Now that clause mandates that elections must be free and equal,
with no power allowed to interfere with the right to vote. Previously,
a Commonwealth Court panel a group of judges had agreed
with the plainness ruling that rejecting property caste but undated

(23:09):
ballots would infringe on the fundamental right to vote. Judge Kysler,
writing for the Majority, emphasized that such a refusal was
legally unjustifiable. Non compliance could lead to the rejection of
thousands of ballots, as witnessed during the April primary, where
about I think just under five thousand ballots were rejected

(23:35):
over dating issues dated issues. The chairman of the Republican
Republican National Committee, Mike Whatly, hailed the decision as crucial
for election integrity in Pennsylvania. We've lost all semblance of

(23:56):
rationality when it comes to voting. Everybody clamored for mail
in ballots in Colorado, and I know Polis and Democrats
would argue that mail in ballots in Colorado had proved
to be successful. But mail in ballots, I think take

(24:17):
away from the collective idea that we as a nation
are gathering together on a particular date to go cast
our ballots in an active civic virtue, In an active
of civic duty, you don't have it. I think you
do have a duty to vote, unless you're voting the
wrong way. Then I don't think you should go.

Speaker 2 (24:38):
Vote at all.

Speaker 3 (24:40):
Where we would gather together on a date certain and
for a twelve hour period. Even employers being required to
give you time to go vote, either before work, during work,
or after work, to give you plenty of time to
go vote, and most states required that one you were
in line, if you were in line at seven pm,

(25:04):
say in Colorado cut off time. If you were in line,
then you were allowed they would they would cut the
line off, but as long as you were in line,
you could still vote. Well, that just became in the
age of smartphones, in the age of instagratification, that just
came became too much trouble. So mail in ballots became

(25:26):
the topic dzure, Oh my gosh, mail embows. That's the
that's gonna save that's gonna save democracy. Trump's trying to
run democracy. Mail emboust to save democracy. Well, if you're
gonna have mail in ballots, why shouldn't you use again
using Colorados the example, why shouldn't you have a rule
that says if it's not dated postmarked by a certain date,

(25:48):
it's not gonna be counted. Because there's no guarantee that's
going to show up. And if your ballot shows up,
even even if I see. My argument is, even if
it's dated, whatever the date might be, let's just say
it's November one, just to randomly pick a date ou
our butts. So November one is the cutoff date, and

(26:10):
election day is November five, And if the election closes
at seven pm, if your ballot doesn't show up in
the elections office until November six or seven, I just
say you're sol you're just totally as out of look,

(26:31):
because voting is a civic obligation, a civic duty, and
you ought to make some effort to make certain that
you comply with the rules and the regulations and that
you do everything that is humanly possible to make certain
that your ballot's going to be there in time so
that on election day it can be counted and then

(26:54):
included in the tally so that come, oh, I don't know,
maybe about eight or nine o'clock at night, we might
actually have some results. So this decision in Pennsylvania is
good news. It's not a panacea. It's not going to
solve everything, but it's at least a good indication that, hey,

(27:17):
there's some effort in Pennsylvania to get away from One
more example of what the pandemic did which is up
end and pretty much say, oh, you know what case
Sarah sarrah uh, you just you get a ballot by
any means necessary. However you can get a ballot. You

(27:39):
can cast that ballot however you want to. And if
you're a day late and a dollar short, doesn't matter.
We're still going to count the ballot. Oh, by the way,
if you're not a citizen, that just makes any difference either.
Think of all the ways you have to show an
ID to do anything. You're talking about housing you want
to get you call American Financing, They're going to want
to see some ID. I have show ID. Oh I

(28:01):
left my credit card at the restaurant the other day.
Had to show an ID to get my credit card back.
I wanted to yell, you racist pig, don't you know
who I am giving my credit card back. I'll be
right back.

Speaker 5 (28:13):
Good morning, Michael. I'm thinking about your talk this morning
about the hate in the political rhetoric. To me, it's
pretty simple. The right is known for Christianity and religion
and right wing zealots. The left is known for self
indulgence and bautry. You know, look at what's going on.

(28:33):
With the trans and those type of things. So does
that have anything to do with it?

Speaker 2 (28:40):
Morals are off, Yeah, the whole question.

Speaker 3 (28:44):
Morality is pretty evident between the two parties. Also, there's
a little bit of fact checking going on, which kind
of surprises me. This occurred over the weekend. Know whether
Kamala Harris is just stupid, oblivious, or both, but her

(29:08):
statement that quote there is not one member of the
United States military who is in active duty in a
combat zone, in any war zone around the world, kind
of reminds us of Joe Biden's absolutely enraging claim in
the in that earlier debate that no troops had died
under his administration, despite the thirteen US service members that

(29:32):
had died because of his incompetence and her incompetence because
she was the last person in the room. Remember that
were killed during the box surrender to the Taliban.

Speaker 6 (29:42):
We killing people in Afghanistan, and he didn't do anything
about that. When he was president, we still found ourselves
in a position where you had a notion that we
were this safe country. The truth is, I'm the only
president this century that doesn't have any this decade, any
troops dying anywhere in the.

Speaker 3 (30:01):
World, like, really no troops anywhere in the world. That's interesting.
I guess we shouldn't be surprised he forgot him.

Speaker 2 (30:10):
Well, he was busy checking his way.

Speaker 3 (30:11):
I was just getting say, because remember you got to
busy checking his watch, so he forgot, he forgot where
he was and how long you had been there. But
remember Kamala Harris said she was the last person in
the room during the.

Speaker 2 (30:25):
Planning of that withdrawal.

Speaker 3 (30:27):
So I think ABC News is a little panic stricken
that that it might be getting too late to try
to salvage a few tattered remnants of any credibility they
they might have after hosting that debate last week. Massachusetts
move Back Governor Maury Healy probably never had any credibility

(30:50):
to begin with. But she is fun to kind of laughing.

Speaker 7 (30:54):
I want to ask you about her comments about the
military's during the debate. This about the US military.

Speaker 2 (31:05):
Let's listen.

Speaker 8 (31:07):
As of today, there is not one member of the
United States military who is in active duty in a
combat zone in any war zone around the world, the
first time this century.

Speaker 7 (31:20):
Our thought checkers found that to be false, and I
have a lot of exployment.

Speaker 3 (31:24):
Their checkers found that to be false. Did you hear
anything about that during the debate, Dragon, I didn't either.

Speaker 7 (31:32):
Experience in that area as well. There are currently nine
hundred US military personnel in Syria, twenty five hundred US
troops in Iraq, all have been under regular threat from
drones and missiles for months. We also have action in
the Red Sea. We also every single day the Navy
Seals Delta Forces special operators can be part of any

(31:54):
sort of deadly raid. So why would she make that claim?

Speaker 2 (32:00):
Why would you not call her out during the debate.

Speaker 3 (32:02):
Why do you wait until yesterday to do anything and
you decide to do it, you know, during your ABC's
on the news show.

Speaker 4 (32:12):
I think what's important here, Martha, is that Kamala Harris,
in contrast to Donald Trump, demonstrated herself to be commander
in chief.

Speaker 2 (32:21):
We are in a week commander in chief of what.
She doesn't know where her troops.

Speaker 4 (32:25):
Are world where there are all sorts of conflicts, and
it's all the more reason we need somebody who's serious
and who supports the military. And just remember, governor.

Speaker 7 (32:35):
Governor, excuse me, but she said, there is not one
member of the United States military who is an active duty.

Speaker 2 (32:41):
In a combat zone.

Speaker 7 (32:42):
That is not true. You say she demonstrated her ability
to listen to her.

Speaker 2 (32:48):
She's so adamant she was wrong.

Speaker 3 (32:51):
Well, why didn't they say that that last last Tuesday night.

Speaker 2 (32:55):
Why not? Why now