February 25, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 3 of A&G features...
- The Russia Ukraine war & making business not war
- Trumps approach to Russia
- Gender Bending Madness & a bathing spectacle
- Joe's trip to the doctor
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
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 (00:01):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong is Joe Getty Armstrong and
Jetty and he Armstrong and Eddy.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
So the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal has
a sad day for the US at the UN, the
Land of the Free votes with Russia on a Ukraine
war resolution. We brought that up with Tom mcclintalk last hour.
If you didn't get hear that, get the podcast Armstrong
and Getty on demand. But the resolution was basically calling,
you know, Russia the aggressor and that they need to
(00:44):
get out. And we didn't vote yes on that. We
voted with Russia and North Korean some other scumbag countries
on not wanting to call out Russia in that war.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
And as Tom mcclintact, the Congressman said, heal give plenty
of latitude to Trump to negotiate the way he sees
fit to try to end the war. It's fairly obviously
to me anyway, Trump trying to avoid any antagonizing the
people with whom he'll be negotiating, specifically Putin unnecessarily. I
(01:21):
think you can manipulate Putin through flattery or leaving out
criticism about as you successfully as you can negotiate with
a hungry mountain lion. It's just it's a useless effort.
But that's the way he does business well. But it's
a completely different thing. We're not negotiating on a house
or a car here.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
If I flatter some lying, cheating I know he's a
scumbag car salesman, but I flatter him.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
I know he's a jerk. I know him from around
the neighborhood.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
He's a bad guy, but I flatter him because I'm
trying to do a deal with him.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
That's one thing. There's no ultimate harm.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
There really, but telling the world as the most important
country on planet that no, there's nothing to criticize about
what Russia did here.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Is not good. Yeah, oh, I agree completely. You know that.
Speaker 3 (02:09):
I was just trying to, you know, express the Trump
point of view. That is one of my great criticisms
of Trump is he does not understand how the United
States and the way it behaves echoes through history like
a real estate deal doesn't. On the other hand, maybe
he does, according to his defenders, or in the case
(02:32):
of Jerry Baker, who is a great writer, happens to
work for the Wall Street Journal. Most of the time
he's trying to understand exactly what Trump's at And I
thought it was very interesting you even if you don't
agree with it. But first, as a bit of a
scene setter, here's a reporter grilling the president yesterday subsequent
(02:53):
to his meeting with Macrone, the pante wasted leader of France,
talking about you in Russia and European security. And I
actually I have a lot of sympathy with mccrone's point,
if you at least to some extent. But the Roll
forty one, Michael Lin will discuss a dictator.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
Would you use the same words for gold and cruising
the part.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
I don't use those words lightly. I think that we're
going to see how it all works out.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
Let's see what happens.
Speaker 4 (03:20):
I think we have a chance of a really good
settlement between various countries. And you know, you're talking about
Europe and you're talking about Ukraine as part of that
whole situation. The other side has a lot of support also,
so let's see how it all works.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
It might work out.
Speaker 4 (03:39):
Look, you can never make up lives. The one thing
you can, you can make up the money, but you
can't make up the lives. A lot of lives lost.
I think, probably a lot more lives than people are
talking about. It's been a rough war, but I think
we're close to getting itself.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
So you think Trump thinks that there's an advantage to
no calling Putin a dictator. Because he called Puttin a dictator,
he's less likely to do a deal.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
He's yes, he is doing what you described, more or less,
he's flattering all of the parties to the deal before
the negotiation, because it just does not do any good
to antagonize the person you're negotiating with.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
Generally, but as you keep pointing out, putting such a crocodile,
he's gonna do a deal if he thinks it's in
his best interest, and he's not going to do a
deal if he doesn't. The end, with no other extraneous
things mattering whatsoever.
Speaker 3 (04:34):
Right, exactly, he is no more throne to flattery nor
threat than a crocodile.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
Yeah, exactly, in my opinion.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
But Trump does business the way Trump does business another
explanation of and obviously he does throw the word lightly
around dictator, called Zelenski a dictator, even though he's clearly
not anyway.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
And if I was gonna, you know, back on the
side of giving Trump some credit, He's done a hell
of a lot more deals than practically anybody, and maybe he's.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Dealt with some really bad guys before, where you know.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Other people would have said, look, you can't flatter old
you know whatever mob boss or whoever he had to
deal with tried to get a hotel Bilt Matt turns
out he did.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
He feels like it helped him.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Yeah, yeah, I suppose. And this really gets into seven
dimensional chess. Maybe he wants Putin to think he thinks
he can flatter Putin. Ah, yeah, but I don't know. Anyway,
This is the really really important part. I'm gonna quote
Jerry Baker a bit here and there, as we discussed.
But Jerry's trying to figure out Trump's strategy, and I
(05:49):
think he may be onto something. Beneath Donald Trump's mendacious
that means dishonest contempt for Ukraine and its dictator, and
his cringing admiration for Russia and the genie in the Kremlin,
there seems to be a kernel of strategic reasoning.
Speaker 1 (06:03):
Okay, I read that opening.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
Partly to illustrate that Baker is no fan of what
Trump said recently, but he says he isn't wrong that
America has born the burdens of global leadership for far
too long undeniably truth. Look at NATO and their lack
of spending on defense. Just that's almost the only thing
you need to see. And he's not wrong that the
(06:26):
liberal order we have led is giving way to a
world in which the US must pursue a narrower definition
of the national interest, and that the age of spending
hundreds of billions of dollars to defend parts of the
world that are no longer essential to US security and
for nations that have the resources to defend themselves.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
That era is over. And what he says is this.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
Strengthens the impression that mister Trump may be leading the
US toward a return of a great power approach to
global strategy. Here's what that is if you're not familiar
with it. As he uppends a foreign policy, there's been
a lot of talk in diplomatic circles lately of.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
A new Yalta.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
That was the nineteen forty five conference on the Black
Sea where the leaders of the US, the UK, which
used to matter and the Soviet Union struck up a
deal to carve up the planet. This is your sphere
of influence. This is our sphere of influence. This is
your sphere of influence. We don't mess with yours. You
don't mess with ours, and we don't go to war. Now, Jack,
(07:32):
you have been talking about how what's his face?
Speaker 1 (07:37):
The great reporter puts out a newsletter.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
Mark alperson Mark Alpern has been describing lately how Washington
is a buzz with some sort of great bargain that
is allegedly being crafted behind the scenes that.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
Includes Greenland and Taiwan and Russia and Ukraine and a
whole bunch of stuff exactly as a way to make
business not war in the style of Yalta. Getting back
to Jerry Baker, mister Trump's apparent hunger for US territorial
expansion in Greenland, Panama, Gaza, even maybe even Canada, his
(08:17):
ambitions to tie foreign policy to the exploitation of economic resources,
his seeming acquiescence to Vladimir Putin's European ambitions, and similar
expressions of respect for Shijin Ping of China suggest a
hard edged foreign policy realism revolving around a new big
three powers, while another yalta.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
This is damned interesting. This is damned interesting.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
And you know, I don't want to get sucked into
giving Trump way too much credit for the sort of
thing that I don't think he's spent a lot of
his life thinking about. But it's possible that he and
smart people around him have decided we're into a new era. Now,
we're into an era much like you know, the Soviet
Union in the United States where you have to say
(09:04):
you get that side of the world, we get this
side of the world. You don't mess with us like
you were just talking about. It might be where we
are now. It's funny. It's easy.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
Even if you spend your life studying massive changes in
global dynamics, it's easy to think, well, massive changes are
in history books. Now we have stability and rules based
blah blah blah. There will never be as Fuki Yama
idiotically said, we're at the end of history. I mean,
(09:34):
how did you get those words to come out of
his mouth anyway?
Speaker 1 (09:38):
Ah, So, set aside.
Speaker 3 (09:40):
The moral indignation about the president's till to Moscow, take
a take at face value. There's potentially profound shift and
foreign policy. Then he gets into three potential implications, what
would this new world look like? I humbly submit that
we should break semi on time for once and give
(10:01):
plenty of time for those three main potential implications.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
Well, I'm fascinated by this idea. I know, I know.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
I have accused Trump many times of not being real
up on the historical significance of certain maneuvers and the
presidency and the rest of it.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
I do think he understands power, leverage and money though, true, Dad, huh, So,
we got a lot more on the way, including paying
off what that would look like.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
We'll do that next.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
And has anybody had increased luminosity from their silk pillow
case if you have? Our text line is four one
five two nine five KFTC.
Speaker 5 (10:52):
And finally, doctors are warning against a new viral TikTok
trend in which users are dropping heavy objects on their feet.
You know, at a certain point, we just have to
let evolution do its.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
Thing, as we've argued many times.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
And apparently TikTok's back is the thing everywhere and just
people are using it, and China continues to spy on
us and whatever.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
And propagandize our young people yeah, lovely. Speaking of China,
we've been discussing Jerry Baker's column in the Wall Street Journal.
He's talking about how Trump is showing a number of
signs of going toward moving toward a great power approach
to global strategy, not the rules based international order of
the last fifty seventy five years whatever, and the references.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
Maybe we're going for New Yalta conference.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
That's a nineteen forty five conference where the leaders of
the US, the UK, and the Soviet Union struck a
deal to carve up the planet back.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
In nineteen forty five.
Speaker 3 (11:47):
And there are rumors Mark Alpern we've discussed, says the
Washington's a buzz with talk of just such a giant agreement,
which might indeed include Greenland and Panama and Gazan, Canada,
who knows what, but almost certainly Taiwan, Which brings us
to Baker's analysis. If there is a move towards this
(12:10):
great power world and a New Yalta first, we can
look forward to territorial insecurity. In a Trumpian vision of
the world in which great power sees what they can,
we can expect a much more fluid, muscular approach to
international boundaries than the last half century's efforts at a
rules based system. And then of course he name checks Taiwan.
I've heard it said many times. If Taiwan goes, there
(12:32):
will be a global depression because of the acute need
for their advanced computer chips, mostly in some other technologies,
but mostly the chips. There's an argument to Trump's approach
to Russia. It represents a hardened approach to Taiwan, saying
that cutting Ukraine loose was necessary to enable Washington to
(12:53):
focus on China. But is this mister Trump's view? How
essential does he think of free taiwan Is? And it's
not clear? And then he talks about how Trump has
also spoken favorably of Shijin paying is a brilliant guy.
He controls one point four billion people with an iron fist.
Is he just trying to flatter him?
Speaker 1 (13:11):
Does he mean it?
Speaker 3 (13:11):
Nobody's quite sure. So territorial instability definitely would come down
the pike. Second, nuclear proliferation. The big difference between the
great power world of the past and that of today
is the thermonuclear bomb. If small nations can no longer
rely on large, powerful allies to protect them against predators,
they have one last option, the threat of nuclear annihilation
(13:34):
for any country that tries to invade them. Then he
goes through quite a list of countries that don't have
nuclear arms because they're under the US nuclear umbrella and
they are our allies, Germany, let's see Poland, Oh blah
bah bah. Who else does he mat well? Bunches of
countries and obviously Korea, Japan.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Obviously, the more countries that have NU clear weapons, more
likely that one gets used on purpose or by mistake
or whatever, or gets loose.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
Right, Yeah, absolutely, And then the third thing to look
for is geopolitical and economic realignments. If Europeans no longer
view America as a dependable ally, they will seek alternatives.
In the pre World War One era of Great European powers,
countries shifted allegiances fairly regularly. Britain could have signed up
with Germany rather than France and Russia. We may now
(14:28):
see that kind of hard, self interested realism among powers
replace attachment to sentimental ideas and values. You know, I
think he almost undersells the idea of the democracy, the
world banding together to defend freedom and free trade and democracy.
It's more than sentimental ideals. It certainly values.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
If Germany was willing to go all in on using
Russian gas until the invasion of Ukraine, they don't care
about Russia's value. I think history will look back on
Angela Merkel as a self important jackass who did all
the wrong things anyway to finish a Baker's piece here,
For all its frailties as a geopolitical force, Europe's economy
(15:13):
is many times the size of Russia's, and combined with
the UK's, it's on par with Americas. Europe as a
whole as an economy just about as big as ours.
It's already heavily dependent on China, and Europeans now see
closer ties with troubling implications for American interests. In as summary,
mister Trump may well like his new world's order, but
(15:35):
it will come at a steep price. Well, at least
sounded like the beginning of this article that he was
kind of presenting it as that there might not be
any other choice. Right.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
Well, I think he would probably put it, and we
ought to try to talk to Gerard Baker someday.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Fascinating guy.
Speaker 3 (15:56):
Anyway he might put it. It's not not clearly true
that the old choice will work. I think he would
say it can if we're super smart about it and
do it in the right way. But there are those
in the Trump orbit who say, hell, we get their
emails all the time, say no, the old world order
(16:18):
is broke. It's not going to work anymore.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
So we need to grab hold of the future and
change before it changes us. If there are still human
beings on the planet. A couple hundred years from now,
one of the big stories in history books will be
the rise of China and how it just changed the
world order.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
Yeah from the previous century.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Tom Cotton in his new book talks about how China's
military rises the fastest expansion and growth of a military
in world history.
Speaker 3 (16:49):
I think China's peak and decline is going to happen
within five years, maybe maybe ten. But they'll soon be
like Britain, a shrunken former power might be, you know,
after we're dead. And on Europe, the coddling of Europe
over the last fifty years one of the greatest mistakes
ever made.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Oh wow, that's some heavy, interesting stuff. We got a
lot more on the way. Stay with us, Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:18):
After a trans female basketball player missed her game.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
The team ended up.
Speaker 6 (17:22):
Losing by twenty six points, but on the bright side,
they didn't have to shower in their uniforms afterward.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
That's a good joke. I'm not sure I followed that well.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
What was confusing about it was that Guttfeld used a
trans girl and her talking about a dude, and I
think we needed more setup to that joke. He was
talking about a dominant basketball team whose dude couldn't play
one day and got hammered.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Apparently. Oh okay, a bit of missing context there, and I.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Should making the point that that player made a big difference.
Having having a dude on your team was a great benefit.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
I have a little more gender bending madness. If you're
in the mood for it, you know, why not? Michael,
do you have the theme ready?
Speaker 1 (18:14):
We don't? You know? No, no, this you know what.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Elon Musk is going to take a look at your
list of five things and he's.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Gonna cross it off. I've seen his list. It was
playing theme songs on time and.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Under bending madness.
Speaker 3 (18:42):
A couple of items worth mentioning. Riley Gains And if
you don't know Riley, she's the great college swimmer who
called out Hey, there's a full grown dude in the
locker room calling himself a woman, and I'm sick of
pen making me put up with it. God bless her
for her current anyway, she's been a leading light in
keeping men out of women's sports.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Well.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
The President signed in order to ban transgender athletes from
school sports, and the NCAA claim to have rewritten its
rules to comply. But now Riley and Texas Attorney General
Ken Paxton have gotten together to say the NCAA policy
has way too many loopholes to be meaningful. She says, quote,
this policy is about as clear as mud, and very
(19:27):
very much still allows men to compete on women's teams
and receive women's benefits, And she says we're watching to
see what they actually do. But critics of the NCAA's
changes claim that the new policy bases gender on birth
certificates or a doctor's certification, both of which can be
changed by compliance state officials or activist doctors. Sure, and
(19:50):
that does not comply with the Trump administration's definition, which
maintains that sex is immutable and binary.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Why can't they just go with if you got a penis, because.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
You can get your penis lopped off, then you have
still have male skeleton, lungs, bone, well, I said, skeleton
already muscles, et cetera. Anyway, so we're and this is
it's true of the DEI stuff, it's true of the
race based college admissions.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
They will not change.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
They will change the appearance of what they do to
try to fool you and still get away with their
nefarious radical schemes.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
Moving along, maybe you heard about this story. I thought
it was worth mentioning Columbine High School. Yes, that Columbine
High School news story recently that a female teacher was
sexually grooming a free female student and the administration knew
(20:51):
it and covered it up and allowed the girl to
change her status to homeless so she could legally move
out of her parents home and into the teacher home.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
Oh my god, they could be lovers. Wow, Holy crap.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
When the student's mom got w into this, she discovered
thousands of phone calls and texts between the teacher, who
had at minimum been making out with the student. When
the student's mom went to the principal to let them
know that a predator had been sexually grooming her daughter,
the principal responded and I quote Ms Kearnie takes interest
in helping kids.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Navigate their sexuality.
Speaker 3 (21:29):
But again, the administration, knowing that this girl had a
home and parents, helped her declare herself homeless so she
could move in with her teacher. The sexualization of children
in schools and trying to pry them away from the
families straight out of Marxism.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
Well, and an adult helping a child navigate their sexuality
is one hundred percent grooming.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I mean one percent is the definition of grooming. Yes,
it is absolutely true.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
And again, if you don't get this, I don't know
what to do except slap you upside the head any time,
any it would help me any time an adult says
and hey, let's not tell your parents about this. Something
awful is going on unless there is a clear and
(22:20):
documented history of abuse or something like that.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
Moving along, I just wanted to get this on.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
We have a link at Armstrong and gedddy dot com
under hot links. I'm ninety percent sure, he says, scrolling
to make sure it's true.
Speaker 1 (22:32):
Yes, what is Sage's Law?
Speaker 3 (22:35):
And this is a law that is got some momentum
in Virginia and people are becoming aware of it around
the country schools keeping secrets from parents open the door
to predators, I'm reading from their website. So do states
who call it abuse to raise girls as girls and
boys as boys and rip them from loving families to
(22:58):
affirm them in state custom and both led to this
person's sages trafficking.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
Her school affirmed her.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
As a boy when she was a confused adolescent afraid
of puberty, etc. We've talked about this and told her
to use the boy's bathroom, but kept her parents in
the dark. She was terribly bullied, assaulted in the boy's bathroom,
fled the threats, was caught, drugged and exploited by sex traffickers,
And when the FBI found Sage, a judge withheld her
from her parents over false claims of misgendering abuse and
(23:31):
ordered her into a boy's state home, where she was
raped and assaulted again. She fled and was caught again
for months of horrific abuse before.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
She was finally rescued.
Speaker 2 (23:46):
So it's very simple, no secret gender transition in schools.
And two, it's not abuse to raise a child according
to his or her biology. We've got their web page
at Armstrong and getty dot com under hot links it's
called Sage's Law.
Speaker 1 (24:03):
Read it, know it, love it.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
It's a brief but important gender bending madness updates. I've
noticed you have several segments that you do that have
theme music. I don't have one. I should really come
up with something that has theme music. I just Jack's
ramblings and then there's music.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
I don't know. It's hard to Alman brothers rambling Man.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
Maybe just I haven't read this whole thing. This is
in the Wall Street Journal today in the opinion section.
Mike Gallagher, who we like bring warriors back to the
US military recruitment campaign should frame services the ultimate test
of strength, courage, and leadership. Remember when Mike Lions told
us how well that worked as a recruitment tool. I
(24:49):
know that it worked on me. I very nearly joined
the military and talk to recruiters, I mean as down
the pipeline, and I don't even remember why I changed
my mind.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
But what was appealing to me about it was the
idea of.
Speaker 2 (25:04):
I wonder if I can do this. I think I
could do this, the challenge of it. And somehow we
got a realizing the best version of yourself.
Speaker 1 (25:11):
Yeah, somehow we got away.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
From that in our military recruiting, and then numbers have
plummeted over the years. Well they've they've gone back up
a lot under Trump. Anyway, he's writing a piece about
how we need to get back to, you know, push yourself,
test yourself, how good can you eat? Be all you
can be as a military recruiting thing, and I just
I love that. I think that's a great idea.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
And then I think it is too. He also I
read the piece and he mentions that.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
Enlistment.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
Enlistment seems to be very conditional on who's in the
White House in a way that's probably not super healthy.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
So no, not shouldn't be that. That's not good, right, Yeah,
Joe was off the other day.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
I assume you're attending the Maha Kummele like so many
other people around the world did. Oh yeah, try to
keep me away. I was unaware of this thing. It's
the biggest gathering that ever happens on planet Earth.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
Every however many years, they don't have it every year.
It's in India.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
It's a six week ritual bathing spectacle that is visible
from space. It's so large where everybody goes and bathes
in the river to cleanse themselves of their sins or
demons or something. I don't know.
Speaker 1 (26:27):
You'd have to read this. You can be troubled. Actually,
you know, read into it. I four hundred million people
attended this. Four hundred million. There's no close second to
gather make can Mecco look like a Little League game? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (26:45):
Well it certainly makes you know, whatever music festival you've
been to seem like nothing.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
I mean that's just stunning.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Four hundred million people over six weeks attended this and
it just wrapped up the other day. So if you
didn't make it, you'll have to go, say years from
now when they do it again.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
Yeah, keep in mind that they can hardly run the
thing without a trampling or two. Sometimes it's dozens of
people who get trampled.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
I would like to go just for the logistics of it.
I don't really need to bathe in that river. God,
dang it.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
That's gotta get a little gaming. There are secondhand bathwater
is bad enough. Four hundred million people all bathing in
the same river.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
It's people matter.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Well I don't know about that, but uh, what was
I gonna say? Oh, I just the logistics of it.
The food stands, the porta potties, the traffic.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
I can't even imagine how you put something like that together.
You're assuming there are porta potties. I was, do you
have knowledge that there are not? Well, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (27:48):
India is not known for its gleaming sophistication everywhere. There
are certainly amazing parts of India, but some of it's
a little bit primitive by American standard.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
Thank you, come again. Four hundred million people, even if
they have porta potties, they could get a.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
Little out of hand. I mean, if you've been to
a music festival, you know, go early in the day.
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Oh oh, I don't even want to think about that.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
It's so horrible.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
I almost screamed at an innocent young woman last night.
I'm fairly proud of myself that I did not. I
came as close as you can come without actually erupting
like an insane volcano. I will describe the circumstances in a.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Moment, okay, fantastic. Among other things. On the way, Hey Michael,
have we played number four yet? The Greg guttfeldt Joe.
I know we haven't play it for me? Would thanks so?
Speaker 6 (28:53):
Over the weekend, MSNBC canceled joy Read's TV show, and
according to the network, all of her wigs were quickly
released back into the wild.
Speaker 3 (29:07):
Here they go, a loving tribute to the moron joy
Read Next Hour stay with us if you can. If
you can't grab it via podcast, you should subscribe Armstrong
and Getty on demand some of her greatest hits through
the years.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
What a numskull. So here's the situation.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
We have insurance through our jobs, and as most insurance programs,
there are incentives. If you don't smoke, it costs less.
If you have a primary care physician, it costs less,
and you have to go to the primary care physician
and get a quote unquote physical or a preventative care
(29:48):
visit once a year. Now I have, as a guy
who's successfully dealing with high blood versus hypertension in HI
and stuff like that. I'm on the try not to
have a heart attack variety pack.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
I call, you know, the.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
Medications I take and I exercise, bab blah.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
It's going great.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
But so I see my doctor every six months and
do a rigorous, thorough preventing me from croaking visit, not
every year, every six months. The blood work, although we've
cut back on that to once a year because it's
always good. The blood work, PSA test even for prostate cancer,
(30:30):
blood pressure, just everything very thorough.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
But here's the problem. Well, I will tell you this.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
I checked and it said, no, you haven't had your
preventative care visits, so you're going to pay more for insurance.
And I said, no, I have. In fact, I do
it twice a year. Well, I got on the line because,
of course, the blanking website, you know what, I swore
I was gonna stay calm.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
I'm going to stay calm during this discussion. I can
do it. So the effing.
Speaker 3 (30:58):
Website, of course didn't. More so I got on the
phone t help us know where to.
Speaker 2 (31:02):
Direct the anger so we can ride along with you.
Are we angry at the insurance company.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
Or the like?
Speaker 3 (31:08):
I often say to my wife when she says, who
is that guy while we're watching a movie that's part
of the script writing, we're meant to wonder.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
I thought I would want to join in on the anger.
I just don't know how to direct it. Okay, there'll
be plenty jack plenty of anger. So anyway, so I
call and say, hey, it says I haven't had this
but I have. And the nice girl says, yeah, yeah,
you need to make an appointment for that. I said,
but I do that twice a year. It's incredibly thorough.
Blah blah blah, and she says, you know what probably happens.
(31:37):
I don't know that this is in your case, but
what happens is if you go for your physical, your
preventative care visit, whatever you want to call it, and
then at the end of it, you say to the
doctor and he says, is there anything else? And you say,
my knee hurts and he says, well, you should put
some ice on it. That will be coded as a
(31:57):
diagnosis and a treatment, so it's not coded as a
preventative care business. And I said, do you understand how
moronic that is?
Speaker 1 (32:10):
What you have just explained to me.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
That moment, that moment there, that's what I struggle with
the moment before you talked, is where when they say
something that is ludicrous and then stop right And that's
one who I.
Speaker 1 (32:24):
Had explodes like you just stopped.
Speaker 3 (32:26):
Like that makes sense and that bothers me and I
went zero to sixty man, zero to sixty.
Speaker 1 (32:33):
I raised my voice.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
I said, this is like the Soviet effing union. What
matters is not the medical care. What matters is checking
the box. So it doesn't matter if you do the
right thing or not, just check the box. You have
conceded in the conversation that I did the right things,
but because of the unchecked box, I've got to go
waste everybody's time and money to do it again.
Speaker 3 (32:59):
And then I said, but I understand, you don't make
the rules. You've been more than helpful. Thank you, goodbye,
and I hung up.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
And then she said, I wonder why I blood pressure.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
But here, here is the fundamental issue here, the idiotic
flaw in the system is so well known and so
easy to understand.
Speaker 1 (33:25):
Even the girl answer in the phone said, oh, yeah,
I know it happened.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Well, if it's that efing known, why has nobody fixed it?
How is there not some method by which I say, Well,
they may have coded it as put a little ice
on your knee if it hurts.
Speaker 1 (33:41):
It was a fault.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
You look at the you see the blood work, look
at it.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
Look look do you see the report of.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
The blood pressure which is rising as we speak. Well, sorry, no,
it was coded as this other thing. That's exactly what
kills socialism. Yeah, it becomes about the checking of the box,
not the doing of the act. So now what Thursday,
I'm gonna walk into my doctor's office.
Speaker 3 (34:09):
He's a terrific guy. Great doctor, I'm gonna say, doctor Jones.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
Not as real Dad.
Speaker 3 (34:15):
I said, if you want to walk in here, shake
my hand and leave.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
That's fine.
Speaker 3 (34:20):
I'm only here for one reason, and for God's sake,
don't ask me.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
If there's anything you, as a physician, can help me with.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
That's the one thing we must not do here. Wow.
Speaker 3 (34:34):
The alternative being go to the front office. And I've
actually tried this and argue with the nice lady who
types into the computer and codes it for billing, and
explain to her, no, no, don't code it like that. Well,
I'm sorry because the doctor said, put ice on your knee,
So we have to.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
I swear to God.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
That moment, when you get the inex inexplicable explained nation
and I'm supposed to just accept it drives me crazy.
It's like when I was trying to rent the car,
but I got there and they didn't have the car. Well,
if you book online, sometimes the car goes before you
get here, and then you just stop and I'm supposed
to just say, okay, no, no, you've described to me
the idiotic problem. I've already described that I need you
(35:17):
to describe the solution. If you miss a second, we
get the podcast Armstrong You Getty on the Man Armstrong
and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong is Joe Getty Armstrong and
Jetty and he Armstrong and Eddy.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
So the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal has
a sad day for the US at the UN, the
Land of the Free votes with Russia on a Ukraine
war resolution. We brought that up with Tom mcclintalk last hour.
If you didn't get hear that, get the podcast Armstrong
and Getty on demand. But the resolution was basically calling,
you know, Russia the aggressor and that they need to
(00:44):
get out. And we didn't vote yes on that. We
voted with Russia and North Korean some other scumbag countries
on not wanting to call out Russia in that war.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
And as Tom mcclintact, the Congressman said, heal give plenty
of latitude to Trump to negotiate the way he sees
fit to try to end the war. It's fairly obviously
to me anyway, Trump trying to avoid any antagonizing the
people with whom he'll be negotiating, specifically Putin unnecessarily. I
(01:21):
think you can manipulate Putin through flattery or leaving out
criticism about as you successfully as you can negotiate with
a hungry mountain lion. It's just it's a useless effort.
But that's the way he does business well. But it's
a completely different thing. We're not negotiating on a house
or a car here.
Speaker 2 (01:41):
If I flatter some lying, cheating I know he's a
scumbag car salesman, but I flatter him.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
I know he's a jerk. I know him from around
the neighborhood.
Speaker 2 (01:50):
He's a bad guy, but I flatter him because I'm
trying to do a deal with him.
Speaker 1 (01:54):
That's one thing. There's no ultimate harm.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
There really, but telling the world as the most important
country on planet that no, there's nothing to criticize about
what Russia did here.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Is not good. Yeah, oh, I agree completely. You know that.
Speaker 3 (02:09):
I was just trying to, you know, express the Trump
point of view. That is one of my great criticisms
of Trump is he does not understand how the United
States and the way it behaves echoes through history like
a real estate deal doesn't. On the other hand, maybe
he does, according to his defenders, or in the case
(02:32):
of Jerry Baker, who is a great writer, happens to
work for the Wall Street Journal. Most of the time
he's trying to understand exactly what Trump's at And I
thought it was very interesting you even if you don't
agree with it. But first, as a bit of a
scene setter, here's a reporter grilling the president yesterday subsequent
(02:53):
to his meeting with Macrone, the pante wasted leader of France,
talking about you in Russia and European security. And I
actually I have a lot of sympathy with mccrone's point,
if you at least to some extent. But the Roll
forty one, Michael Lin will discuss a dictator.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
Would you use the same words for gold and cruising
the part.
Speaker 4 (03:14):
I don't use those words lightly. I think that we're
going to see how it all works out.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
Let's see what happens.
Speaker 4 (03:20):
I think we have a chance of a really good
settlement between various countries. And you know, you're talking about
Europe and you're talking about Ukraine as part of that
whole situation. The other side has a lot of support also,
so let's see how it all works.
Speaker 1 (03:38):
It might work out.
Speaker 4 (03:39):
Look, you can never make up lives. The one thing
you can, you can make up the money, but you
can't make up the lives. A lot of lives lost.
I think, probably a lot more lives than people are
talking about. It's been a rough war, but I think
we're close to getting itself.
Speaker 2 (03:53):
So you think Trump thinks that there's an advantage to
no calling Putin a dictator. Because he called Puttin a dictator,
he's less likely to do a deal.
Speaker 3 (04:06):
He's yes, he is doing what you described, more or less,
he's flattering all of the parties to the deal before
the negotiation, because it just does not do any good
to antagonize the person you're negotiating with.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
Generally, but as you keep pointing out, putting such a crocodile,
he's gonna do a deal if he thinks it's in
his best interest, and he's not going to do a
deal if he doesn't. The end, with no other extraneous
things mattering whatsoever.
Speaker 3 (04:34):
Right, exactly, he is no more throne to flattery nor
threat than a crocodile.
Speaker 1 (04:38):
Yeah, exactly, in my opinion.
Speaker 3 (04:40):
But Trump does business the way Trump does business another
explanation of and obviously he does throw the word lightly
around dictator, called Zelenski a dictator, even though he's clearly
not anyway.
Speaker 2 (04:55):
And if I was gonna, you know, back on the
side of giving Trump some credit, He's done a hell
of a lot more deals than practically anybody, and maybe he's.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Dealt with some really bad guys before, where you know.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Other people would have said, look, you can't flatter old
you know whatever mob boss or whoever he had to
deal with tried to get a hotel Bilt Matt turns
out he did.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
He feels like it helped him.
Speaker 3 (05:23):
Yeah, yeah, I suppose. And this really gets into seven
dimensional chess. Maybe he wants Putin to think he thinks
he can flatter Putin. Ah, yeah, but I don't know. Anyway,
This is the really really important part. I'm gonna quote
Jerry Baker a bit here and there, as we discussed.
But Jerry's trying to figure out Trump's strategy, and I
(05:49):
think he may be onto something. Beneath Donald Trump's mendacious
that means dishonest contempt for Ukraine and its dictator, and
his cringing admiration for Russia and the genie in the Kremlin,
there seems to be a kernel of strategic reasoning.
Speaker 1 (06:03):
Okay, I read that opening.
Speaker 3 (06:05):
Partly to illustrate that Baker is no fan of what
Trump said recently, but he says he isn't wrong that
America has born the burdens of global leadership for far
too long undeniably truth. Look at NATO and their lack
of spending on defense. Just that's almost the only thing
you need to see. And he's not wrong that the
(06:26):
liberal order we have led is giving way to a
world in which the US must pursue a narrower definition
of the national interest, and that the age of spending
hundreds of billions of dollars to defend parts of the
world that are no longer essential to US security and
for nations that have the resources to defend themselves.
Speaker 1 (06:45):
That era is over. And what he says is this.
Speaker 3 (06:50):
Strengthens the impression that mister Trump may be leading the
US toward a return of a great power approach to
global strategy. Here's what that is if you're not familiar
with it. As he uppends a foreign policy, there's been
a lot of talk in diplomatic circles lately of.
Speaker 1 (07:06):
A new Yalta.
Speaker 3 (07:09):
That was the nineteen forty five conference on the Black
Sea where the leaders of the US, the UK, which
used to matter and the Soviet Union struck up a
deal to carve up the planet. This is your sphere
of influence. This is our sphere of influence. This is
your sphere of influence. We don't mess with yours. You
don't mess with ours, and we don't go to war. Now, Jack,
(07:32):
you have been talking about how what's his face?
Speaker 1 (07:37):
The great reporter puts out a newsletter.
Speaker 3 (07:40):
Mark alperson Mark Alpern has been describing lately how Washington
is a buzz with some sort of great bargain that
is allegedly being crafted behind the scenes that.
Speaker 2 (07:54):
Includes Greenland and Taiwan and Russia and Ukraine and a
whole bunch of stuff exactly as a way to make
business not war in the style of Yalta. Getting back
to Jerry Baker, mister Trump's apparent hunger for US territorial
expansion in Greenland, Panama, Gaza, even maybe even Canada, his
(08:17):
ambitions to tie foreign policy to the exploitation of economic resources,
his seeming acquiescence to Vladimir Putin's European ambitions, and similar
expressions of respect for Shijin Ping of China suggest a
hard edged foreign policy realism revolving around a new big
three powers, while another yalta.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
This is damned interesting. This is damned interesting.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
And you know, I don't want to get sucked into
giving Trump way too much credit for the sort of
thing that I don't think he's spent a lot of
his life thinking about. But it's possible that he and
smart people around him have decided we're into a new era. Now,
we're into an era much like you know, the Soviet
Union in the United States where you have to say
(09:04):
you get that side of the world, we get this
side of the world. You don't mess with us like
you were just talking about. It might be where we
are now. It's funny. It's easy.
Speaker 3 (09:13):
Even if you spend your life studying massive changes in
global dynamics, it's easy to think, well, massive changes are
in history books. Now we have stability and rules based
blah blah blah. There will never be as Fuki Yama
idiotically said, we're at the end of history. I mean,
(09:34):
how did you get those words to come out of
his mouth anyway?
Speaker 1 (09:38):
Ah, So, set aside.
Speaker 3 (09:40):
The moral indignation about the president's till to Moscow, take
a take at face value. There's potentially profound shift and
foreign policy. Then he gets into three potential implications, what
would this new world look like? I humbly submit that
we should break semi on time for once and give
(10:01):
plenty of time for those three main potential implications.
Speaker 1 (10:06):
Well, I'm fascinated by this idea. I know, I know.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
I have accused Trump many times of not being real
up on the historical significance of certain maneuvers and the
presidency and the rest of it.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
I do think he understands power, leverage and money though, true, Dad, huh, So,
we got a lot more on the way, including paying
off what that would look like.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
We'll do that next.
Speaker 2 (10:39):
And has anybody had increased luminosity from their silk pillow
case if you have? Our text line is four one
five two nine five KFTC.
Speaker 5 (10:52):
And finally, doctors are warning against a new viral TikTok
trend in which users are dropping heavy objects on their feet.
You know, at a certain point, we just have to
let evolution do its.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
Thing, as we've argued many times.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
And apparently TikTok's back is the thing everywhere and just
people are using it, and China continues to spy on
us and whatever.
Speaker 3 (11:14):
And propagandize our young people yeah, lovely. Speaking of China,
we've been discussing Jerry Baker's column in the Wall Street Journal.
He's talking about how Trump is showing a number of
signs of going toward moving toward a great power approach
to global strategy, not the rules based international order of
the last fifty seventy five years whatever, and the references.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
Maybe we're going for New Yalta conference.
Speaker 3 (11:39):
That's a nineteen forty five conference where the leaders of
the US, the UK, and the Soviet Union struck a
deal to carve up the planet back.
Speaker 1 (11:45):
In nineteen forty five.
Speaker 3 (11:47):
And there are rumors Mark Alpern we've discussed, says the
Washington's a buzz with talk of just such a giant agreement,
which might indeed include Greenland and Panama and Gazan, Canada,
who knows what, but almost certainly Taiwan, Which brings us
to Baker's analysis. If there is a move towards this
(12:10):
great power world and a New Yalta first, we can
look forward to territorial insecurity. In a Trumpian vision of
the world in which great power sees what they can,
we can expect a much more fluid, muscular approach to
international boundaries than the last half century's efforts at a
rules based system. And then of course he name checks Taiwan.
I've heard it said many times. If Taiwan goes, there
(12:32):
will be a global depression because of the acute need
for their advanced computer chips, mostly in some other technologies,
but mostly the chips. There's an argument to Trump's approach
to Russia. It represents a hardened approach to Taiwan, saying
that cutting Ukraine loose was necessary to enable Washington to
(12:53):
focus on China. But is this mister Trump's view? How
essential does he think of free taiwan Is? And it's
not clear? And then he talks about how Trump has
also spoken favorably of Shijin paying is a brilliant guy.
He controls one point four billion people with an iron fist.
Is he just trying to flatter him?
Speaker 1 (13:11):
Does he mean it?
Speaker 3 (13:11):
Nobody's quite sure. So territorial instability definitely would come down
the pike. Second, nuclear proliferation. The big difference between the
great power world of the past and that of today
is the thermonuclear bomb. If small nations can no longer
rely on large, powerful allies to protect them against predators,
they have one last option, the threat of nuclear annihilation
(13:34):
for any country that tries to invade them. Then he
goes through quite a list of countries that don't have
nuclear arms because they're under the US nuclear umbrella and
they are our allies, Germany, let's see Poland, Oh blah
bah bah. Who else does he mat well? Bunches of
countries and obviously Korea, Japan.
Speaker 2 (13:58):
Obviously, the more countries that have NU clear weapons, more
likely that one gets used on purpose or by mistake
or whatever, or gets loose.
Speaker 3 (14:07):
Right, Yeah, absolutely, And then the third thing to look
for is geopolitical and economic realignments. If Europeans no longer
view America as a dependable ally, they will seek alternatives.
In the pre World War One era of Great European powers,
countries shifted allegiances fairly regularly. Britain could have signed up
with Germany rather than France and Russia. We may now
(14:28):
see that kind of hard, self interested realism among powers
replace attachment to sentimental ideas and values. You know, I
think he almost undersells the idea of the democracy, the
world banding together to defend freedom and free trade and democracy.
It's more than sentimental ideals. It certainly values.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
If Germany was willing to go all in on using
Russian gas until the invasion of Ukraine, they don't care
about Russia's value. I think history will look back on
Angela Merkel as a self important jackass who did all
the wrong things anyway to finish a Baker's piece here,
For all its frailties as a geopolitical force, Europe's economy
(15:13):
is many times the size of Russia's, and combined with
the UK's, it's on par with Americas. Europe as a
whole as an economy just about as big as ours.
It's already heavily dependent on China, and Europeans now see
closer ties with troubling implications for American interests. In as summary,
mister Trump may well like his new world's order, but
(15:35):
it will come at a steep price. Well, at least
sounded like the beginning of this article that he was
kind of presenting it as that there might not be
any other choice. Right.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
Well, I think he would probably put it, and we
ought to try to talk to Gerard Baker someday.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Fascinating guy.
Speaker 3 (15:56):
Anyway he might put it. It's not not clearly true
that the old choice will work. I think he would
say it can if we're super smart about it and
do it in the right way. But there are those
in the Trump orbit who say, hell, we get their
emails all the time, say no, the old world order
(16:18):
is broke. It's not going to work anymore.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
So we need to grab hold of the future and
change before it changes us. If there are still human
beings on the planet. A couple hundred years from now,
one of the big stories in history books will be
the rise of China and how it just changed the
world order.
Speaker 1 (16:37):
Yeah from the previous century.
Speaker 2 (16:40):
Tom Cotton in his new book talks about how China's
military rises the fastest expansion and growth of a military
in world history.
Speaker 3 (16:49):
I think China's peak and decline is going to happen
within five years, maybe maybe ten. But they'll soon be
like Britain, a shrunken former power might be, you know,
after we're dead. And on Europe, the coddling of Europe
over the last fifty years one of the greatest mistakes
ever made.
Speaker 2 (17:09):
Oh wow, that's some heavy, interesting stuff. We got a
lot more on the way. Stay with us, Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:18):
After a trans female basketball player missed her game.
Speaker 1 (17:21):
The team ended up.
Speaker 6 (17:22):
Losing by twenty six points, but on the bright side,
they didn't have to shower in their uniforms afterward.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
That's a good joke. I'm not sure I followed that well.
Speaker 3 (17:38):
What was confusing about it was that Guttfeld used a
trans girl and her talking about a dude, and I
think we needed more setup to that joke. He was
talking about a dominant basketball team whose dude couldn't play
one day and got hammered.
Speaker 1 (17:58):
Apparently. Oh okay, a bit of missing context there, and I.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Should making the point that that player made a big difference.
Having having a dude on your team was a great benefit.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
I have a little more gender bending madness. If you're
in the mood for it, you know, why not? Michael,
do you have the theme ready?
Speaker 1 (18:14):
We don't? You know? No, no, this you know what.
Speaker 3 (18:19):
Elon Musk is going to take a look at your
list of five things and he's.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Gonna cross it off. I've seen his list. It was
playing theme songs on time and.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Under bending madness.
Speaker 3 (18:42):
A couple of items worth mentioning. Riley Gains And if
you don't know Riley, she's the great college swimmer who
called out Hey, there's a full grown dude in the
locker room calling himself a woman, and I'm sick of
pen making me put up with it. God bless her
for her current anyway, she's been a leading light in
keeping men out of women's sports.
Speaker 1 (19:05):
Well.
Speaker 3 (19:06):
The President signed in order to ban transgender athletes from
school sports, and the NCAA claim to have rewritten its
rules to comply. But now Riley and Texas Attorney General
Ken Paxton have gotten together to say the NCAA policy
has way too many loopholes to be meaningful. She says, quote,
this policy is about as clear as mud, and very
(19:27):
very much still allows men to compete on women's teams
and receive women's benefits, And she says we're watching to
see what they actually do. But critics of the NCAA's
changes claim that the new policy bases gender on birth
certificates or a doctor's certification, both of which can be
changed by compliance state officials or activist doctors. Sure, and
(19:50):
that does not comply with the Trump administration's definition, which
maintains that sex is immutable and binary.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
Why can't they just go with if you got a penis, because.
Speaker 3 (20:00):
You can get your penis lopped off, then you have
still have male skeleton, lungs, bone, well, I said, skeleton
already muscles, et cetera. Anyway, so we're and this is
it's true of the DEI stuff, it's true of the
race based college admissions.
Speaker 1 (20:21):
They will not change.
Speaker 2 (20:23):
They will change the appearance of what they do to
try to fool you and still get away with their
nefarious radical schemes.
Speaker 3 (20:30):
Moving along, maybe you heard about this story. I thought
it was worth mentioning Columbine High School. Yes, that Columbine
High School news story recently that a female teacher was
sexually grooming a free female student and the administration knew
(20:51):
it and covered it up and allowed the girl to
change her status to homeless so she could legally move
out of her parents home and into the teacher home.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
Oh my god, they could be lovers. Wow, Holy crap.
Speaker 3 (21:07):
When the student's mom got w into this, she discovered
thousands of phone calls and texts between the teacher, who
had at minimum been making out with the student. When
the student's mom went to the principal to let them
know that a predator had been sexually grooming her daughter,
the principal responded and I quote Ms Kearnie takes interest
in helping kids.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Navigate their sexuality.
Speaker 3 (21:29):
But again, the administration, knowing that this girl had a
home and parents, helped her declare herself homeless so she
could move in with her teacher. The sexualization of children
in schools and trying to pry them away from the
families straight out of Marxism.
Speaker 2 (21:46):
Well, and an adult helping a child navigate their sexuality
is one hundred percent grooming.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I mean one percent is the definition of grooming. Yes,
it is absolutely true.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
And again, if you don't get this, I don't know
what to do except slap you upside the head any time,
any it would help me any time an adult says
and hey, let's not tell your parents about this. Something
awful is going on unless there is a clear and
(22:20):
documented history of abuse or something like that.
Speaker 1 (22:22):
Moving along, I just wanted to get this on.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
We have a link at Armstrong and gedddy dot com
under hot links. I'm ninety percent sure, he says, scrolling
to make sure it's true.
Speaker 1 (22:32):
Yes, what is Sage's Law?
Speaker 3 (22:35):
And this is a law that is got some momentum
in Virginia and people are becoming aware of it around
the country schools keeping secrets from parents open the door
to predators, I'm reading from their website. So do states
who call it abuse to raise girls as girls and
boys as boys and rip them from loving families to
(22:58):
affirm them in state custom and both led to this
person's sages trafficking.
Speaker 1 (23:05):
Her school affirmed her.
Speaker 3 (23:07):
As a boy when she was a confused adolescent afraid
of puberty, etc. We've talked about this and told her
to use the boy's bathroom, but kept her parents in
the dark. She was terribly bullied, assaulted in the boy's bathroom,
fled the threats, was caught, drugged and exploited by sex traffickers,
And when the FBI found Sage, a judge withheld her
from her parents over false claims of misgendering abuse and
(23:31):
ordered her into a boy's state home, where she was
raped and assaulted again. She fled and was caught again
for months of horrific abuse before.
Speaker 1 (23:43):
She was finally rescued.
Speaker 2 (23:46):
So it's very simple, no secret gender transition in schools.
And two, it's not abuse to raise a child according
to his or her biology. We've got their web page
at Armstrong and getty dot com under hot links it's
called Sage's Law.
Speaker 1 (24:03):
Read it, know it, love it.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
It's a brief but important gender bending madness updates. I've
noticed you have several segments that you do that have
theme music. I don't have one. I should really come
up with something that has theme music. I just Jack's
ramblings and then there's music.
Speaker 1 (24:24):
I don't know. It's hard to Alman brothers rambling Man.
Speaker 2 (24:28):
Maybe just I haven't read this whole thing. This is
in the Wall Street Journal today in the opinion section.
Mike Gallagher, who we like bring warriors back to the
US military recruitment campaign should frame services the ultimate test
of strength, courage, and leadership. Remember when Mike Lions told
us how well that worked as a recruitment tool. I
(24:49):
know that it worked on me. I very nearly joined
the military and talk to recruiters, I mean as down
the pipeline, and I don't even remember why I changed
my mind.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
But what was appealing to me about it was the
idea of.
Speaker 2 (25:04):
I wonder if I can do this. I think I
could do this, the challenge of it. And somehow we
got a realizing the best version of yourself.
Speaker 1 (25:11):
Yeah, somehow we got away.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
From that in our military recruiting, and then numbers have
plummeted over the years. Well they've they've gone back up
a lot under Trump. Anyway, he's writing a piece about
how we need to get back to, you know, push yourself,
test yourself, how good can you eat? Be all you
can be as a military recruiting thing, and I just
I love that. I think that's a great idea.
Speaker 3 (25:30):
And then I think it is too. He also I
read the piece and he mentions that.
Speaker 1 (25:37):
Enlistment.
Speaker 3 (25:38):
Enlistment seems to be very conditional on who's in the
White House in a way that's probably not super healthy.
Speaker 1 (25:46):
So no, not shouldn't be that. That's not good, right, Yeah,
Joe was off the other day.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
I assume you're attending the Maha Kummele like so many
other people around the world did. Oh yeah, try to
keep me away. I was unaware of this thing. It's
the biggest gathering that ever happens on planet Earth.
Speaker 1 (26:10):
Every however many years, they don't have it every year.
It's in India.
Speaker 2 (26:16):
It's a six week ritual bathing spectacle that is visible
from space. It's so large where everybody goes and bathes
in the river to cleanse themselves of their sins or
demons or something. I don't know.
Speaker 1 (26:27):
You'd have to read this. You can be troubled. Actually,
you know, read into it. I four hundred million people
attended this. Four hundred million. There's no close second to
gather make can Mecco look like a Little League game? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (26:45):
Well it certainly makes you know, whatever music festival you've
been to seem like nothing.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
I mean that's just stunning.
Speaker 2 (26:53):
Four hundred million people over six weeks attended this and
it just wrapped up the other day. So if you
didn't make it, you'll have to go, say years from
now when they do it again.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
Yeah, keep in mind that they can hardly run the
thing without a trampling or two. Sometimes it's dozens of
people who get trampled.
Speaker 2 (27:10):
I would like to go just for the logistics of it.
I don't really need to bathe in that river. God,
dang it.
Speaker 3 (27:15):
That's gotta get a little gaming. There are secondhand bathwater
is bad enough. Four hundred million people all bathing in
the same river.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
It's people matter.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Well I don't know about that, but uh, what was
I gonna say? Oh, I just the logistics of it.
The food stands, the porta potties, the traffic.
Speaker 1 (27:36):
I can't even imagine how you put something like that together.
You're assuming there are porta potties. I was, do you
have knowledge that there are not? Well, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (27:48):
India is not known for its gleaming sophistication everywhere. There
are certainly amazing parts of India, but some of it's
a little bit primitive by American standard.
Speaker 1 (28:03):
Thank you, come again. Four hundred million people, even if
they have porta potties, they could get a.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
Little out of hand. I mean, if you've been to
a music festival, you know, go early in the day.
Speaker 3 (28:15):
Oh oh, I don't even want to think about that.
Speaker 1 (28:18):
It's so horrible.
Speaker 3 (28:21):
I almost screamed at an innocent young woman last night.
I'm fairly proud of myself that I did not. I
came as close as you can come without actually erupting
like an insane volcano. I will describe the circumstances in a.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
Moment, okay, fantastic. Among other things. On the way, Hey Michael,
have we played number four yet? The Greg guttfeldt Joe.
I know we haven't play it for me? Would thanks so?
Speaker 6 (28:53):
Over the weekend, MSNBC canceled joy Read's TV show, and
according to the network, all of her wigs were quickly
released back into the wild.
Speaker 3 (29:07):
Here they go, a loving tribute to the moron joy
Read Next Hour stay with us if you can. If
you can't grab it via podcast, you should subscribe Armstrong
and Getty on demand some of her greatest hits through
the years.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
What a numskull. So here's the situation.
Speaker 3 (29:27):
We have insurance through our jobs, and as most insurance programs,
there are incentives. If you don't smoke, it costs less.
If you have a primary care physician, it costs less,
and you have to go to the primary care physician
and get a quote unquote physical or a preventative care
(29:48):
visit once a year. Now I have, as a guy
who's successfully dealing with high blood versus hypertension in HI
and stuff like that. I'm on the try not to
have a heart attack variety pack.
Speaker 1 (30:03):
I call, you know, the.
Speaker 3 (30:04):
Medications I take and I exercise, bab blah.
Speaker 1 (30:06):
It's going great.
Speaker 2 (30:07):
But so I see my doctor every six months and
do a rigorous, thorough preventing me from croaking visit, not
every year, every six months. The blood work, although we've
cut back on that to once a year because it's
always good. The blood work, PSA test even for prostate cancer,
(30:30):
blood pressure, just everything very thorough.
Speaker 1 (30:34):
But here's the problem. Well, I will tell you this.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
I checked and it said, no, you haven't had your
preventative care visits, so you're going to pay more for insurance.
And I said, no, I have. In fact, I do
it twice a year. Well, I got on the line because,
of course, the blanking website, you know what, I swore
I was gonna stay calm.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
I'm going to stay calm during this discussion. I can
do it. So the effing.
Speaker 3 (30:58):
Website, of course didn't. More so I got on the
phone t help us know where to.
Speaker 2 (31:02):
Direct the anger so we can ride along with you.
Are we angry at the insurance company.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
Or the like?
Speaker 3 (31:08):
I often say to my wife when she says, who
is that guy while we're watching a movie that's part
of the script writing, we're meant to wonder.
Speaker 2 (31:16):
I thought I would want to join in on the anger.
I just don't know how to direct it. Okay, there'll
be plenty jack plenty of anger. So anyway, so I
call and say, hey, it says I haven't had this
but I have. And the nice girl says, yeah, yeah,
you need to make an appointment for that. I said,
but I do that twice a year. It's incredibly thorough.
Blah blah blah, and she says, you know what probably happens.
(31:37):
I don't know that this is in your case, but
what happens is if you go for your physical, your
preventative care visit, whatever you want to call it, and
then at the end of it, you say to the
doctor and he says, is there anything else? And you say,
my knee hurts and he says, well, you should put
some ice on it. That will be coded as a
(31:57):
diagnosis and a treatment, so it's not coded as a
preventative care business. And I said, do you understand how
moronic that is?
Speaker 1 (32:10):
What you have just explained to me.
Speaker 2 (32:12):
That moment, that moment there, that's what I struggle with
the moment before you talked, is where when they say
something that is ludicrous and then stop right And that's
one who I.
Speaker 1 (32:24):
Had explodes like you just stopped.
Speaker 3 (32:26):
Like that makes sense and that bothers me and I
went zero to sixty man, zero to sixty.
Speaker 1 (32:33):
I raised my voice.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
I said, this is like the Soviet effing union. What
matters is not the medical care. What matters is checking
the box. So it doesn't matter if you do the
right thing or not, just check the box. You have
conceded in the conversation that I did the right things,
but because of the unchecked box, I've got to go
waste everybody's time and money to do it again.
Speaker 3 (32:59):
And then I said, but I understand, you don't make
the rules. You've been more than helpful. Thank you, goodbye,
and I hung up.
Speaker 1 (33:09):
And then she said, I wonder why I blood pressure.
Speaker 2 (33:12):
But here, here is the fundamental issue here, the idiotic
flaw in the system is so well known and so
easy to understand.
Speaker 1 (33:25):
Even the girl answer in the phone said, oh, yeah,
I know it happened.
Speaker 2 (33:28):
Well, if it's that efing known, why has nobody fixed it?
How is there not some method by which I say, Well,
they may have coded it as put a little ice
on your knee if it hurts.
Speaker 1 (33:41):
It was a fault.
Speaker 2 (33:42):
You look at the you see the blood work, look
at it.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
Look look do you see the report of.
Speaker 2 (33:49):
The blood pressure which is rising as we speak. Well, sorry, no,
it was coded as this other thing. That's exactly what
kills socialism. Yeah, it becomes about the checking of the box,
not the doing of the act. So now what Thursday,
I'm gonna walk into my doctor's office.
Speaker 3 (34:09):
He's a terrific guy. Great doctor, I'm gonna say, doctor Jones.
Speaker 1 (34:13):
Not as real Dad.
Speaker 3 (34:15):
I said, if you want to walk in here, shake
my hand and leave.
Speaker 1 (34:19):
That's fine.
Speaker 3 (34:20):
I'm only here for one reason, and for God's sake,
don't ask me.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
If there's anything you, as a physician, can help me with.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
That's the one thing we must not do here. Wow.
Speaker 3 (34:34):
The alternative being go to the front office. And I've
actually tried this and argue with the nice lady who
types into the computer and codes it for billing, and
explain to her, no, no, don't code it like that. Well,
I'm sorry because the doctor said, put ice on your knee,
So we have to.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
I swear to God.
Speaker 2 (34:56):
That moment, when you get the inex inexplicable explained nation
and I'm supposed to just accept it drives me crazy.
It's like when I was trying to rent the car,
but I got there and they didn't have the car. Well,
if you book online, sometimes the car goes before you
get here, and then you just stop and I'm supposed
to just say, okay, no, no, you've described to me
the idiotic problem. I've already described that I need you
(35:17):
to describe the solution. If you miss a second, we
get the podcast Armstrong You Getty on the Man Armstrong
and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.