March 13, 2026 • 35 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- Iran leader "disfigured" & the Straits of Hormuz
- Brain freezing
- Americans think other Americans suck & reporting on Iran
- Bitter partisanship
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
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, Joe Getty, Armstrong and Gatty.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Enough he.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
I'll start, as we often do here at the Department
of War, with the bottom line up front for the
world to hear and the press to actually admit that
the United States is decimating the radical Iranian regimes military
in a way the world has never seen before. Never
before has a modern capable military which Iran used to
(00:45):
have been so quickly destroyed and made combat ineffective, devastated.
We said it would not be a fair fight, and
it has not been.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
That is all true. However, it doesn't really have anything
to do with the issue of the day. Was just
the whole strait of Hormuze situation. Anyway, We'll get to
that in the second. This is getting a lot of attention.
As Pete hegsit. The Secretary of War describes the current
Supreme Leader.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
We know the new so called not so Supreme Leader
is wounded and likely disfigured. He put out of statement yesterday,
a weak one actually, but there was no voice and
there was no video.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
It was a written statement. He called for unity.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Apparently, killing tens of thousands of protesters is his kind
of unity. Iran has plenty of cameras and plenty of
voice recorders. Why a written statement. I think you know why?
His father dead. He's scared, he's injured, he's on the run,
and he lacks legitimacy.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
It's a mess for them who's in charge. Iran may
not even know we blew off his beer. I told
you disfigured beardless. So I think that's baiting the guy. Hmm, like,
show your face before we get into the substance of it.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Does Pete hags Eth not sound to you like a
guy who's ready to fight you right now?
Speaker 1 (02:21):
Yeah? He does sound like that.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
I mean like if a reporter took a run at him,
there wouldn't be that half second of oh my god,
what's happening.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
No, he'd be cocked and ready. Let No, he'd be thinking,
finally I wanted to fight somebody, That's right. That's why
the Colin Jost portrayal of him is that way. When
they comes out all right, listen up, dip whats Yeah.
I love virtually everything he says, though, Yeah, I think so. Uh.
(02:51):
The strikes of the substance, the straight of horror mooze situation.
He was asked about that. All the chatter now is
did you prepare for this properly? And he was asked
that and answered, yeah, right.
Speaker 4 (03:00):
Here, yeh sugar, you have said that the US midal
jay is essentially aerial superiority, naval supiority over Iran.
Speaker 1 (03:07):
Yet we're not escorting ships in the Strait of wour Youth.
Why how did you not.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Plan for this?
Speaker 3 (03:13):
We plan for it, We recognize it because ultimately we
want to do it sequentially in a way that makes
the most sense for what we want to achieve and
ensure that we're sending the right signals to the world
when we do so. So when Chris Wright speaks or
we speak, it's based on a full assessment of what
we're up against, what we want to say to the world,
(03:34):
how that we want them to see and understand the conflict.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
So go ahead, well, I was going to say.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Kim Strassel wrote a brilliant column for The Journal this morning,
Trump's energy triumph, and he writes, she writes, the democratic
media complex, which we just heard right there, seems determined
to get everything wrong. About Iran, though few efforts compare
with this week's work to tag the Trump administration with
the global energy crisis. Not only is this uninformed and overdone,
(04:02):
the sudden concern over energy security comes about three years
too late. And she points out that Trump and his
drill baby drilling, and we gotta be self reliant and
have domestic production. Fredy, oh, yeah, that is absolutely made
this situation. I can't put a percentage on it, but
much much, much less damaging than it could have been.
(04:25):
And to hear the Democratic media saying we've got to
have oil flowing.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
It's so important that oil flows, and Trump's not doing
a good enough job, I mean, is just hilarious. But
I thought this was really interesting for Mark Alpern's newsletter
today because he has sources in the White House that are,
you know, in favor of this action and close to
the president. So here's what he writes. In its initial days,
the public story of the conflict with Iran was one
(04:50):
of force momentum success. The briefing stress to what had
been hit, what had been degraded, what had been decapitated,
Naval assets, damaged, command and control, disrupted, missile capacity, diminish
villains eliminated on paper and in early headlines, it looked
like a campaign moving with confidence and purpose. But in
the last few days, based on my reporting and conversations
(05:11):
with people in and around the administration, including some who
support the mission, I have developed real doubts about where
this thing stands. He said. Let me be careful here,
because this is the kind of subject where people hear
what they want to hear. I'm not saying the original
objective is foolish. I'm not saying the mission cannot still succeed.
I'm certainly not saying that to question the execution of
(05:32):
a war effort is somehow to root against the United
States or its military. That is not serious thinking. It
is not patriotic thinking either. He goes on to talk
about Walter Cronkite famously, you know, questioning the war at Vietnam,
and Lyndon Johnson, President at the time, saying if I've
lost Walter Krunkite, have lost America, and Mark Helprin says,
I am not Walter Cronkite. But right now, the biggest
(05:55):
problem is not abstract. It has a named the Strait
of Hormuze. If the United States and allies cannot reopen
that waterway to commercial shipping, then much else about the
effort becomes secondary, maybe at least somewhat useless. Doubts have
grown over whether or not they had prepared properly, or
(06:16):
that they have a plan to deal with this. The
pre war cogitation is that thinking fancy words for thinking fancy.
The pre war cogitation by Team Trump about the Strait
and how to keep it open seems at best to
have been insufficiently planned for, and a failure to open
the Strait in a fortnight or so that'd be two weeks,
many analysts and sources say, could lead to world oil
(06:37):
prices rising to two hundred dollars a barrel, which would
likely create catastrophic consequences worldwide. I like a lot of
what he said. One more thing and then they go
perfect deleted. The question being asked now, including by allies
of the administration inside the Beltway, is how the United
States could enter a conflict of this magnitude without a
(06:59):
more fully developed answer on two obvious fronts, hormus and drones.
Hm yew the drones thing? Is there on earth a
satisfying answer to that question? I have no idea that's the.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Great military challenge of our time. That seems a little unfair,
the Hormuz thing. Maybe they didn't really have a plan,
or maybe it's just going to take a while to
execute the plan. But I know this, most thinkers didn't
think the Iranians would mine the Strait of Hormuz or
(07:36):
Straits of Hormuz if you prefer, because it's so critical
to their own oil exporting they wouldn't want to make
that a war zone. But now that they have, I
guess the US is thinking about taking that carg Island,
which is enormously important to their oil industry and exports
and everything else and revenue, because we've got to get
(07:59):
a hold of that and shut that down now, right. Yeah, Yeah,
it's a hell of a problem the.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
Whole they didn't have a plan. They didn't have a plan.
We're in the middle of a war. It may be
just and look, I know always in favor of the
Trump administration guy, but it seems to me the time
for that analysis is maybe down the road. Well, if
we have to do now is a question, Well, if
this reporting is true, is reporting is people inside the
(08:27):
White House who are supporting of this mission are saying,
did we not have a plan for this? Oh? Boy,
so that's what he's reporting, right, Okay, fair enough. So
I wonder just to end here, no matter how supportive
you are of the president, President Trump, no matter how
(08:48):
legitimate you believe the aims of this conflict to be,
there is reason for concern, not panic, not despair, but
concern based on what people are saying inside the White House.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
The more I think about it, if you were to
pre launching the attack to list just like three threats
or levers that Aron has closing the strace, so horror
moves would be on that list of three, you wouldn't
have to go five deep or ten deep.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
It's right there at the time, possible that they completely
thought of it and thought, ah, we just got to
hope we hit them so hard that they can't cause problems.
I guess either way. I mean, you still might come
down to either way. Tomorrow at two o'clock, the Supreme
Leader and forty of his cabinet are going to be
up above ground, and we know exactly where we either
(09:34):
hit him or we don't. Excellent reminder. Yeah, and it
might just be that. But this looks like a stick,
but a problem. This looks like a problem, like a
real problem. How we get that open back up again?
Speaker 2 (09:47):
The other factor that may well be at work here,
And I don't know if Halpern's been talking about this
at all, but is uh. I still don't think Trump,
maybe until recently, gets religious fanaticism. He thought the usual
levers applied in the usual ways violence, you know, such sanctions, whatever,
would get the usual results that he's gotten from, say Venezuela.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
He thinks everyone's a businessman. Yeah, yeah, that's a good
way to put it. I don't think he gets that.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
No, No, they will watch their entire country and every
person in it burn a fiery death before.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
They give into the Great Satan. And they themselves are
willing to die, which because then they'll be at Allah's
side with all the virgins, which I don't think he
can wrap his head around either.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
So many virgens. He got to like learn all their names.
I mean that just seems respectful.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
Anybody around, anybody here with a little experience, huh, Yeah,
can just say, have you know, like how about forty
virgins and thirty two galzu who know what they're doing?
Forty five year olds have been around the block, Come
on here, got the skills?
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Yeah, anyway, I'm not a.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
Scholar. You're not a scholar. I'm not an expert on
the Koran. No hi karama. These are weird times.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Well well, well, on a lighter note, Bigfoot is rampaging
across Ohio. I've been digging into those details.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
And seems legit to me, and I want to get
to this later because there are some interesting philosophical discussions
that have around it. If they actually have figured out
how to freeze brains and then thaw them back out,
what does that flipping mean going forward? Horrifying zombie apocalypse?
(11:42):
I think, or certainly, you know, preserving your your brain
for a future where maybe they could put it in
a body that the future doesn't want my brain. The
present hardly does. There's always that. Okay, we got lots
(12:04):
on the way. Stay here.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
Benito Mussolini's granddaughter will compete on Celebrity Big Brother in Italy.
Is the weirdest combo of Dictator's descendant reality competition since
Survivor was won by Brenda Hitler.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
Obvious punchline. So but okay, the word is crepo preservation.
I guess that's the official term. For freezing a brain
and bringing it back alive, and it's never been possible
till now, and that when you freeze a brain it
destroys the cells and you can't thought out and have
(12:44):
it still work. But they figured out a way to
freeze the cells in such a way that it doesn't
destroy them. And they sliced up brain tissue from mice
and have frozen them for a week or so and
then thought them back out. The freezing and the throwing
have to be very careful and still gotten a brain
activity that could happen. So they haven't done it with
(13:08):
a full brain yet. But that's well, Covin said, where
am I? What's happening to me? Same day, different cheese?
You know?
Speaker 2 (13:18):
Yeah, how about the length of time because you can
get freezer burn.
Speaker 1 (13:23):
But obviously this opens the door if they can perfect
this to all kinds of wonders where someone could have
a terrible disease, freeze the brain, get to the point
that we can cure the disease, and then you know,
you reanimate your brain. But we'd have you'd have to
put in a body though in that case, because we
still haven't perfected the brain transplant. So what good does
(13:46):
it do to to bring it? To freeze a brain
outside of a body, bring it back alive? And now
you're what a guy who lives in a jar? According
to the fifties sci fi movies, Yes, yeah, and you
can speak and stuff like that. You can speak I
don't know, and command people to kill, as I recall
from some movie I watched as a kid, boy that
gets into some serious thinking about human nature. If I
(14:10):
am h I don't want to I don't want to
make this dark. But like if I if i'm if
I lose the ability to do anything, speak or move
my body at all, and I'm just a brain? Do
I want to live like that? Well, that's what you'd
be in a jar.
Speaker 2 (14:26):
Could I like to do crossword puzzles and stuff like that?
Surely elon musk and you're gonna do crossword puzzles all day,
every day for the rest of eternity. Well, it's just
a forsss for the rest of eternity. I mean, you'd
have like one man, right, it'd just be a long later. Yeah, yeah, yeah, No,
I'd watched TV. I'd watched golf. I think boy, I
watched it. I wish I could play golf, but I
don't have a body. I keep forgetting.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
I'd watch TV. I don't know. I would read books.
I just don't know if there's any point of being
just a brain. How are you going to hold these books?
You don't need to go to the library get the book. Well,
that's right. I have no eyeballs, you surely well, and
(15:11):
I have no ears. Wait a minute, Wait a minute,
wait a minute. Well that's what I'm saying. Unless they
perfect all those other things, who would just want consciousness,
can't see here, feel do anything. But I'm alive. No, No,
that's that's a horrifying nightmare. Yes, it is a horrifying nightmare.
It limits you, that's the understatement in the air. That
(15:32):
is the subtle joke of the day, Michael Ashelo's subtle
comment of the day. It limits you.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
Well, for those who are fans of science, I find
this super super interesting.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
The problem. And they've always talked about this as various
rich people or ballplayers or whatever, we're gonna get their
heads frozen. That when you freeze tissue, crystals form.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Yeah, And as the water freezes, the crystals expand, they
puncture membranes disrupt the intricate network of neurons ultimately destroy
the connections that make the brain what the brain is.
But this team of neurologists in Germany circumiting the problem
by using a technique known as vitrification, which cools tissue
so rapidly that it prevents ice crystals from forming at all.
(16:23):
Instead of crystallizing, the liquid inside and around the cells
transform into an amorphous glass like state, preserving the tissue
structure with all molecular motion effectively halted.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
I think I read the whole article, though I don't
think it ever got to the next step that we've
just been discussing. Okay, So even if you can take
a brain, freeze it, and thought back out and it
still functions, you got a long way to go before
you've accomplished anything. In my mind, you've got to be
able to put one thousand miles. We gotta start. You
gotta put it in a body.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
Well, right, But there's no point in doing the other
stuff until you can figure out you can preserve a brain.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
So this is the first step, an important first step.
I need eyes and on something that I can't imagine. Yeah, yeah,
but anybody's brain's been formed, frozen in the past. Ted Williams,
the baseball player Frozen's brain Walt Disney that they didn't
freeze it in the right way, so they're out of luck.
They're just frozen brains that won't ever work. So yeah,
they're all messed up, too bad, Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
After several delays, the US Space Agency NASA has set
new dates for the launch of its Artemis two Moon mission.
Liftoff is now set for April first, with six alternate dates.
It will be the first crude lunar trip since the
Apollo missions fifty years ago. The ten day crude mission
would loop around the Moon. The rocket has had problems
(17:41):
with various fuel leaks, but on Thursday, officials finished a
two day flight readiness review, an evaluation of whether the spacecraft, rocket,
and ground systems are prepared for launch.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
That's exciting. I heard.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I think it was on ABC that NASA somebody said
there's about a one in thirty chants of crew loss.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
I'm on that crew. I'm thinking, whoa, whoa, what wait?
What wow?
Speaker 2 (18:06):
And can we call it a mission without a mission
with crew instead of a crude mission?
Speaker 1 (18:12):
Because I hear crude mission.
Speaker 2 (18:13):
I think there's gonna be a lot of swearing and
breaking wind or something like that, the crude mission to
the Moon, or if we're gonna paint graffiti on it,
or it's a hand hewn wooden spaceship exactly right, right,
So this didn't get near as much attention as I
think it should have. Pew did a giant worldwide poll
(18:37):
with tens of thousands of people asked in surveys a
variety of questions, and one particular thing stood out. America
uniquely among countries in the world, and by a lot,
don't trust or have good feelings about they're fellow citizens.
(19:00):
A majority of Americans said people in their country have
bad morals and ethics.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Only country whereas a majority and if you want to
compare it to other countries, for instance, in other countries
such as Canada, ninety two percent of Canadians feel that
the other people they live with have good morals and ethics.
Ninety two percent say it's good. In America, it's fifty
three percent bad. In Mexico, eighty three percent of people
(19:27):
in Mexico thinking o other people in this country are good.
People in Britain eighty two percent. In Germany three quarters
Israel seventy percent. We are the only country that is
upside down and by a lot. What the hell is
that all about? Boy howdy? I mean, part of it
is diversity, because if you don't have a shared set
(19:51):
of what is good morals, you don't have a shared
answer to that question, then how in the world would
you say, well, he has completely different morals than me,
but he appears to stick to them. No, that's not
the way people function. I don't know if that theory
that's part of it. I don't know if that theory
fits in with this or not. The view in the
(20:12):
United States is influenced by partisan divides. Sixty percent of
Democrats and Democratic leaning independence rated fellow Americans morals is
bad compared to forty six percent of Republican and Republican leaners. Okay,
so it's too high among Republicans, but it's significantly higher
among Democrats to think the rest of their country is
(20:33):
immoral and lacks ethics. Oh my gosh. That's probably the
primary explainer, although I'm sticking to my immigration thing too.
Is a part explanation.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
It's what we've been talking about a fair amount lately,
which is conservatives think most lefties are misguided.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
They're just wrong.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Their policies aren't as good as they think they are,
whereas the left thinks conservatives are evil baby eating monsters.
Speaker 1 (21:04):
That's got to be a significant factor. I'm reminded of
this great quote. Who said this? I should have jotted
down who said it? I think it was Matt Tayibi.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
Political disagreement is increasingly treated as a serious moral offense
rather than a simple difference of opinion. When you see
the world that way, punishing someone for holding different views
becomes a moral good.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Political polarization among the strongest anywhere in the world. In
the United States, over seventy percent of Americans say conflicts
between political parties are strong or very strong. They are correct.
I would be with that seventy percent, But that is
we are an outlier in terms of that also, which
probably fits in with the other number pretty well. Shouldn't
it be a cause for concern that we stand out
(21:48):
in so many ways in America? We are exceptional America
also in the fact that we think the people we
live with suck. I mean, and like Canada, practically nobody
thinks they're fellow Canadians. The suck the same way to
all these other countries. That's a problem, and then one
more thing to throw in, very low trust in government.
(22:10):
The US also stands out for extremely low institutional trust
compared to other countries. Only twenty two percent of Americans
say they trust the federal government most of the time.
Are always I don't think I do. I'm in the majority.
But by the way, it's nine percent of Democrats in
twenty six percent of Republicans. I assume if you did
(22:31):
this pull during Joe Biden's presidency, those numbers would flip.
This is dramatically lower historically than numbers for instance, in
the fifties and sixties, eighty percent of people trusted their
government most or most of the time. Are always eighty percent.
Now that was probably misplaced, but a number of twenty
(22:52):
two percent is incredibly low.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
I think it's all a measure of how far left
the left has swung in this country. The bulk of
the left, you know, the pig in the python. If
you're looking at a chart of political beliefs, it's just
the parties or the two philosophies used to.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Be so close.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
There was so much overlap, and a few things over
here on the right, a few things over there on
the left that was not overlap. But now the bulk
of certainly the energy and the Democratic Party is way
way left. And so as you switch parties what they do,
I'm sorry, when you switch parties that are in power,
what they're doing is so foreign or hostile to you
(23:32):
you can't support it, I guess.
Speaker 1 (23:34):
But culturally, can you turn that around? Has this ever
happened before in the Roman Empire? Did the majority of
people think, Man, everybody in this empire sucks. It's not
happened in other countries. We're the only country in the
world is like this the majority. So I don't know
what you say about that. Yeah, that's bad, it's unhealthy.
(23:57):
Certainly I would say, hey, on that topic.
Speaker 2 (23:59):
There are a couple of things to uh expand the
discussion to one I think is going to have to
come next segment. But, uh, Barack Obama is a rotten,
rotten human being. I've never been a fan. You're a
pretent pretentious college lecturer think all things. All the world
is a you know, think tank, and you can just
(24:19):
you know, bore people into complying with your brilliance. Anyway,
Obama's going to come in for a kicking in a
few minutes. But uh, do you know the name David
boys b o I e s famous, famous attorney. Two
of his most three most famous cases were unquestionably left
(24:40):
or Democratic.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
He was Al Gore's lawyer in Bush Vigor and he
uh represented the plaintiff in the case that invalidated the
ban on same sex marriage in California.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
And he's at all sorts of super heavyweight clients. But anyway,
he's he's definitely a Democrat. But he wrote hell of
a good piece.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
It's entitled Partisanship on Iran is Dangerous for America. Trump
is doing the right thing for the US, and we
Democrats should judge the war on its merits good for him.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
He opens with every past president since Bill Clinton Republican,
a Democrat alike, has declared that Iran could not be
permitted to develop nuclear weapon.
Speaker 1 (25:19):
I know, not one acted to prevent it. I know
there's several examples of that, but stating over and over
again one thing, it is certainly true. And how many
presidents say this, Iran will not be allowed to get
a nuclear weapon and everybody cheers, but you don't do
anything to enforce that. Yeah, Trump finally does, and you
(25:40):
kill him for it, he writes.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Every president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran's role in
terrorism against American citizens, interests, and allies.
Speaker 1 (25:48):
No one acted to stop it. Instead, each president left
his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more
complicated threat to address. Last June, President Trump undertook a
limited military operation does to interrupt the development of nuclear
weapons and discourage them from continuing blah blah blah. In
the face of Iran's refusal to come around, he began
(26:09):
the current military campaign. I'm summarizing now back to the text.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
If he hadn't acted, his successor would have been left
with an even more dangerous choice than his predecessors left him.
Three or four years from now, the Uranian missiles now
hitting Iran's neighbors could be hitting Berlin or London, perhaps
even New York or Washington, perhaps with a nuclear device
or at least a dirty bomb. No sensible person wants
a war a president, at least of all. Wars destroy lives,
(26:32):
waste treasure, and are usually unpopular. But the widespread hostility
to this military action seems untethered to any serious discussion
of the merits.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
What is the alternative? He asks, Boy, that is exactly
what we've been saying. And I think reasonable people have
been saying, when I hear endlessly on all these other channels,
why are we doing this? They still haven't explained. Yes
they have. Every president has explained it for decades. We
can't let Ryan get a nuclear weapon, and they're the
(27:01):
weakest they've ever been, so let's stop them now.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
Obviously that's the end of the discussion. Well, Ran right,
it should be, But he asks, what is the alternative?
Obviously few are prepared to say it is simply to
permit religious mad men who swear death to America and
back up their threats with terrorism, just to hear nuclear
weapons and the capability to deliver them. The scope and
scale of Iron's response shows how much its military capabilities
have progressed and how dangerous it would have been to
(27:25):
permit them to increase further. For three decades, we've tried
everything that each president could think of. We'd try being nice,
talking tough, moral suasion, negotiated agreement, economic sanctions. None worked.
The problem is that there's only one language Iran's leaders understand,
and he goes on in that vein. But then he
points out, I also.
Speaker 1 (27:48):
Understand and deplore the fringes of both parties that apparently
hate Israel and Jews so much that they oppose any
action to neutralizer on Israel's enemies. What is harder to understand,
particularly troubling for our country, is opposition rooted simply an
antipathy toward Trump himself. We used to you know.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
And he goes into the history blah blah blah, and
then he goes into most important criticisms have historically been
based on policy differences over the military action at hand,
not knee jerk opposition to the president himself. Many Republicans
supported mister Clinton's military actions and President obama surge in Afghanistan.
Many Democrats supported George W. Bush's actions in Afghanistan, and
(28:28):
at least initially Iraq. More Republicans than Democrats probably supported
LBJ in Vietnam, et cetera. But this is just knee jerkism,
and he points out it's just terrible for the country.
Speaker 1 (28:40):
Yeah, I was listening to a podcast yesterday in which
they were discussing the fact that it sure seems like
they're rooting against us on a lot of these cable
news shows. Yeah, I would say so that they want
a negative result, that they would be gladdened by a
negative result. And you know, the following the whole bomba
of the school thing, they're really you could I feel
(29:02):
like you could tell they're really hoping we hit that school.
That's that turns out to be true. Yeah, they're really
excited about reporting it. I could hear it in their voices.
That's weird. You think any sane human being would have
a spirit of oh man, this is bad news, folks.
It looks like it was our missile. But no, their
(29:23):
tone was, oh, this is great. This is exactly what
I've been saying. The US is evil because that's what
they think and enjoy thinking it. For some reason, it
gives them comfort the crowd that it makes them feel
good to hate on America. So we feel.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
Enlightened and accepted by their peers for expressing hatred of
their own country.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
That's the long and short of it. Clearly, all right,
we got more on the way. Stay here.
Speaker 5 (29:51):
Chipotle is set tomorrow to offer customers with tattoos buy one,
get one free entrees from three to four pm. Well,
customers without tattoos will probably just oh somewhere nicer.
Speaker 1 (30:05):
Iran has stated their preconditions for a ceasefire. Oh so
they're pretty hilarious. Oh, but we'll get to those in
hour three.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
Also, one of Jerry Garcia's most famous guitars was auctioned
and they expected it to get one to two million dollars.
It went for eleven and a half million dollars. Which guitar,
the Tiger guitar. Okay, holl it wow? Eleven million?
Speaker 1 (30:36):
Yeah. You know, if you're a super grateful dead fan
who's got more money than you could possibly spend in
a lifetime, it'd be freaking cool to have.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
What would your networth have to be to suspend eleven
and a half million dollars on a guitar? Like I
would buy one of John Lennon's guitars or Paul McCartney's
Hoffner bass or something like that.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
If I had unlimited cash a tremendous amount, it'd have
to be eleven and a half million. You'd have to
have like two hundred and fifty million, wouldn't you got
at least? Yeah, you're gonna spend five to ten percent
of your net worth on a guitar. Huh, anyway, happy shopping. Oh,
I said, do you know what a drop is? It's
super hot in marketing these days. Everything's a drop. If
(31:13):
everything's a dropped, then nothing's a drop. We'll talk about
dropping tomorrow or the next hour. Rather, So back to
bitter partisanship and this, don't anybody freak out. We're going
to point out that Trump and the Republicans did something dumb, and.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
We're gonna point out that the Democrats are flaming hypocrites
of the highest order.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
So a little criticism for everybody.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
It's about the jerrymandering fight that the Republicans arguably the
mid census. Normally you wait to look the what do
you call it, disenial census, every ten year census to
do redistricting. Well, Trump was afraid of losing some house
somehow seats in Texas, and so he redistricted to kind
(31:54):
of beef up, you know.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
Our chances. The Republicans' dances are hanging out to the House.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
And of course the Democrats are taking their revenge by
further gerryman daring California and Virginia. And it is on
Virginia that we're going to cast our gaze for a minute.
And here's why the absolutely hilarious things being said and
the people who are saying them about the gerrymandering in Virginia.
(32:22):
The ballot language for the referendum, which is going to
be in April, asks if voters want to let the
legislature adopt a new House map to restore.
Speaker 1 (32:31):
Fairness, quote unquote, by which Democrats.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
Mean they'll be favored in four additional districts, pretty safe
looking districts, so they can take ten out of the
state's eleven seats to restore fairness. They're going to be
taking ten out of eleven seats in a state that
went forty six percent for Trump, so last year.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
Practically a fifty to fifty state when it comes to
the presidential election, and it's going to be almost entirely
ninety one to nine yes with the representation. And if
you haven't seen the way the lines are being drawn,
it's the most maybe the most egregious in the history
of germandering, which goes back to the founding of the
country right Indeed, and no one is talking about it,
(33:14):
by the way, You're still hear talk about Texas and
how outrageous it was they did what they did Barry
Obama has now endorsed the referendum because, of course he
is quote Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of
our democracy, but right now they are under threat, he
said in an online video.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
This amendment gives you the power to level the playing
field in the mid terms this fall. What a way
to characterize giving nine percent of Virginia seats to Republicans
when they won forty six percent of the presidential vote.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
The ironies abound.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
During his last State of the Union address, Obama said,
I think we've got to end the practice of drawing
our congressional districts so that politicians can.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
Pick their voters. Yes, not the other way around. Correct,
Let a bipartisan group do it. I agree with that.
Barack Obama an outfit like I don't know. The Virginia
Redistricting Commission in twenty twenty, two thirds of the voters
gave approval to a constitutional amendment to create the body,
which is split between Democrats and Republicans, lawmakers and citizens,
but it ended up deadlocked after the twenty twenty census,
(34:19):
a frequent problem with such commissions, so Virginia's current House
map was drawn by bipartisan experts under the state Supreme Court.
Watch blah blah blah.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
But now Obama calls for a gerrymandering exception in Virginia
rather than the principles he so long espoused. You wonder
why people turn off politics and politicians just go about
their lives. I mean, that is just, that's beyond hypocrisy.
That's just it's disgusting.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Race to the bottom. Yeah, I mean, it's punching us
in the general littles intellectually. It's an unforgivable attack. That's
quite a phrase. Is that the best you can come up?
It's punching us in and the genitals intellectually, Yes, utterly,
by anybody's standards, a horrible thing to do. We do
(35:08):
not have time for this kind of silliness. I agree.
What a piece of crap you Wow, that's rough. That's
part of an I apologize. We're checking on the Iran war.
There's some interesting doings. I hope you can join us
in our three
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong, Joe Getty, Armstrong and Gatty.
Speaker 2 (00:11):
Enough he.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
I'll start, as we often do here at the Department
of War, with the bottom line up front for the
world to hear and the press to actually admit that
the United States is decimating the radical Iranian regimes military
in a way the world has never seen before. Never
before has a modern capable military which Iran used to
(00:45):
have been so quickly destroyed and made combat ineffective, devastated.
We said it would not be a fair fight, and
it has not been.
Speaker 1 (00:55):
That is all true. However, it doesn't really have anything
to do with the issue of the day. Was just
the whole strait of Hormuze situation. Anyway, We'll get to
that in the second. This is getting a lot of attention.
As Pete hegsit. The Secretary of War describes the current
Supreme Leader.
Speaker 3 (01:15):
We know the new so called not so Supreme Leader
is wounded and likely disfigured. He put out of statement yesterday,
a weak one actually, but there was no voice and
there was no video.
Speaker 1 (01:29):
It was a written statement. He called for unity.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
Apparently, killing tens of thousands of protesters is his kind
of unity. Iran has plenty of cameras and plenty of
voice recorders. Why a written statement. I think you know why?
His father dead. He's scared, he's injured, he's on the run,
and he lacks legitimacy.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
It's a mess for them who's in charge. Iran may
not even know we blew off his beer. I told
you disfigured beardless. So I think that's baiting the guy. Hmm, like,
show your face before we get into the substance of it.
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Does Pete hags Eth not sound to you like a
guy who's ready to fight you right now?
Speaker 1 (02:21):
Yeah? He does sound like that.
Speaker 2 (02:22):
I mean like if a reporter took a run at him,
there wouldn't be that half second of oh my god,
what's happening.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
No, he'd be cocked and ready. Let No, he'd be thinking,
finally I wanted to fight somebody, That's right. That's why
the Colin Jost portrayal of him is that way. When
they comes out all right, listen up, dip whats Yeah.
I love virtually everything he says, though, Yeah, I think so. Uh.
(02:51):
The strikes of the substance, the straight of horror mooze situation.
He was asked about that. All the chatter now is
did you prepare for this properly? And he was asked
that and answered, yeah, right.
Speaker 4 (03:00):
Here, yeh sugar, you have said that the US midal
jay is essentially aerial superiority, naval supiority over Iran.
Speaker 1 (03:07):
Yet we're not escorting ships in the Strait of wour Youth.
Why how did you not.
Speaker 4 (03:12):
Plan for this?
Speaker 3 (03:13):
We plan for it, We recognize it because ultimately we
want to do it sequentially in a way that makes
the most sense for what we want to achieve and
ensure that we're sending the right signals to the world
when we do so. So when Chris Wright speaks or
we speak, it's based on a full assessment of what
we're up against, what we want to say to the world,
(03:34):
how that we want them to see and understand the conflict.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
So go ahead, well, I was going to say.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
Kim Strassel wrote a brilliant column for The Journal this morning,
Trump's energy triumph, and he writes, she writes, the democratic
media complex, which we just heard right there, seems determined
to get everything wrong. About Iran, though few efforts compare
with this week's work to tag the Trump administration with
the global energy crisis. Not only is this uninformed and overdone,
(04:02):
the sudden concern over energy security comes about three years
too late. And she points out that Trump and his
drill baby drilling, and we gotta be self reliant and
have domestic production. Fredy, oh, yeah, that is absolutely made
this situation. I can't put a percentage on it, but
much much, much less damaging than it could have been.
(04:25):
And to hear the Democratic media saying we've got to
have oil flowing.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
It's so important that oil flows, and Trump's not doing
a good enough job, I mean, is just hilarious. But
I thought this was really interesting for Mark Alpern's newsletter
today because he has sources in the White House that are,
you know, in favor of this action and close to
the president. So here's what he writes. In its initial days,
the public story of the conflict with Iran was one
(04:50):
of force momentum success. The briefing stress to what had
been hit, what had been degraded, what had been decapitated,
Naval assets, damaged, command and control, disrupted, missile capacity, diminish
villains eliminated on paper and in early headlines, it looked
like a campaign moving with confidence and purpose. But in
the last few days, based on my reporting and conversations
(05:11):
with people in and around the administration, including some who
support the mission, I have developed real doubts about where
this thing stands. He said. Let me be careful here,
because this is the kind of subject where people hear
what they want to hear. I'm not saying the original
objective is foolish. I'm not saying the mission cannot still succeed.
I'm certainly not saying that to question the execution of
(05:32):
a war effort is somehow to root against the United
States or its military. That is not serious thinking. It
is not patriotic thinking either. He goes on to talk
about Walter Cronkite famously, you know, questioning the war at Vietnam,
and Lyndon Johnson, President at the time, saying if I've
lost Walter Krunkite, have lost America, and Mark Helprin says,
I am not Walter Cronkite. But right now, the biggest
(05:55):
problem is not abstract. It has a named the Strait
of Hormuze. If the United States and allies cannot reopen
that waterway to commercial shipping, then much else about the
effort becomes secondary, maybe at least somewhat useless. Doubts have
grown over whether or not they had prepared properly, or
(06:16):
that they have a plan to deal with this. The
pre war cogitation is that thinking fancy words for thinking fancy.
The pre war cogitation by Team Trump about the Strait
and how to keep it open seems at best to
have been insufficiently planned for, and a failure to open
the Strait in a fortnight or so that'd be two weeks,
many analysts and sources say, could lead to world oil
(06:37):
prices rising to two hundred dollars a barrel, which would
likely create catastrophic consequences worldwide. I like a lot of
what he said. One more thing and then they go
perfect deleted. The question being asked now, including by allies
of the administration inside the Beltway, is how the United
States could enter a conflict of this magnitude without a
(06:59):
more fully developed answer on two obvious fronts, hormus and drones.
Hm yew the drones thing? Is there on earth a
satisfying answer to that question? I have no idea that's the.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Great military challenge of our time. That seems a little unfair,
the Hormuz thing. Maybe they didn't really have a plan,
or maybe it's just going to take a while to
execute the plan. But I know this, most thinkers didn't
think the Iranians would mine the Strait of Hormuz or
(07:36):
Straits of Hormuz if you prefer, because it's so critical
to their own oil exporting they wouldn't want to make
that a war zone. But now that they have, I
guess the US is thinking about taking that carg Island,
which is enormously important to their oil industry and exports
and everything else and revenue, because we've got to get
(07:59):
a hold of that and shut that down now, right. Yeah, Yeah,
it's a hell of a problem the.
Speaker 1 (08:06):
Whole they didn't have a plan. They didn't have a plan.
We're in the middle of a war. It may be
just and look, I know always in favor of the
Trump administration guy, but it seems to me the time
for that analysis is maybe down the road. Well, if
we have to do now is a question, Well, if
this reporting is true, is reporting is people inside the
(08:27):
White House who are supporting of this mission are saying,
did we not have a plan for this? Oh? Boy,
so that's what he's reporting, right, Okay, fair enough. So
I wonder just to end here, no matter how supportive
you are of the president, President Trump, no matter how
(08:48):
legitimate you believe the aims of this conflict to be,
there is reason for concern, not panic, not despair, but
concern based on what people are saying inside the White House.
Speaker 2 (08:58):
The more I think about it, if you were to
pre launching the attack to list just like three threats
or levers that Aron has closing the strace, so horror
moves would be on that list of three, you wouldn't
have to go five deep or ten deep.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
It's right there at the time, possible that they completely
thought of it and thought, ah, we just got to
hope we hit them so hard that they can't cause problems.
I guess either way. I mean, you still might come
down to either way. Tomorrow at two o'clock, the Supreme
Leader and forty of his cabinet are going to be
up above ground, and we know exactly where we either
(09:34):
hit him or we don't. Excellent reminder. Yeah, and it
might just be that. But this looks like a stick,
but a problem. This looks like a problem, like a
real problem. How we get that open back up again?
Speaker 2 (09:47):
The other factor that may well be at work here,
And I don't know if Halpern's been talking about this
at all, but is uh. I still don't think Trump,
maybe until recently, gets religious fanaticism. He thought the usual
levers applied in the usual ways violence, you know, such sanctions, whatever,
would get the usual results that he's gotten from, say Venezuela.
Speaker 1 (10:11):
He thinks everyone's a businessman. Yeah, yeah, that's a good
way to put it. I don't think he gets that.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
No, No, they will watch their entire country and every
person in it burn a fiery death before.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
They give into the Great Satan. And they themselves are
willing to die, which because then they'll be at Allah's
side with all the virgins, which I don't think he
can wrap his head around either.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
So many virgens. He got to like learn all their names.
I mean that just seems respectful.
Speaker 1 (10:40):
Anybody around, anybody here with a little experience, huh, Yeah,
can just say, have you know, like how about forty
virgins and thirty two galzu who know what they're doing?
Forty five year olds have been around the block, Come
on here, got the skills?
Speaker 2 (10:58):
Yeah, anyway, I'm not a.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
Scholar. You're not a scholar. I'm not an expert on
the Koran. No hi karama. These are weird times.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
Well well, well, on a lighter note, Bigfoot is rampaging
across Ohio. I've been digging into those details.
Speaker 1 (11:20):
And seems legit to me, and I want to get
to this later because there are some interesting philosophical discussions
that have around it. If they actually have figured out
how to freeze brains and then thaw them back out,
what does that flipping mean going forward? Horrifying zombie apocalypse?
(11:42):
I think, or certainly, you know, preserving your your brain
for a future where maybe they could put it in
a body that the future doesn't want my brain. The
present hardly does. There's always that. Okay, we got lots
(12:04):
on the way. Stay here.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
Benito Mussolini's granddaughter will compete on Celebrity Big Brother in Italy.
Is the weirdest combo of Dictator's descendant reality competition since
Survivor was won by Brenda Hitler.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
Obvious punchline. So but okay, the word is crepo preservation.
I guess that's the official term. For freezing a brain
and bringing it back alive, and it's never been possible
till now, and that when you freeze a brain it
destroys the cells and you can't thought out and have
(12:44):
it still work. But they figured out a way to
freeze the cells in such a way that it doesn't
destroy them. And they sliced up brain tissue from mice
and have frozen them for a week or so and
then thought them back out. The freezing and the throwing
have to be very careful and still gotten a brain
activity that could happen. So they haven't done it with
(13:08):
a full brain yet. But that's well, Covin said, where
am I? What's happening to me? Same day, different cheese?
You know?
Speaker 2 (13:18):
Yeah, how about the length of time because you can
get freezer burn.
Speaker 1 (13:23):
But obviously this opens the door if they can perfect
this to all kinds of wonders where someone could have
a terrible disease, freeze the brain, get to the point
that we can cure the disease, and then you know,
you reanimate your brain. But we'd have you'd have to
put in a body though in that case, because we
still haven't perfected the brain transplant. So what good does
(13:46):
it do to to bring it? To freeze a brain
outside of a body, bring it back alive? And now
you're what a guy who lives in a jar? According
to the fifties sci fi movies, Yes, yeah, and you
can speak and stuff like that. You can speak I
don't know, and command people to kill, as I recall
from some movie I watched as a kid, boy that
gets into some serious thinking about human nature. If I
(14:10):
am h I don't want to I don't want to
make this dark. But like if I if i'm if
I lose the ability to do anything, speak or move
my body at all, and I'm just a brain? Do
I want to live like that? Well, that's what you'd
be in a jar.
Speaker 2 (14:26):
Could I like to do crossword puzzles and stuff like that?
Surely elon musk and you're gonna do crossword puzzles all day,
every day for the rest of eternity. Well, it's just
a forsss for the rest of eternity. I mean, you'd
have like one man, right, it'd just be a long later. Yeah, yeah, yeah, No,
I'd watched TV. I'd watched golf. I think boy, I
watched it. I wish I could play golf, but I
don't have a body. I keep forgetting.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
I'd watch TV. I don't know. I would read books.
I just don't know if there's any point of being
just a brain. How are you going to hold these books?
You don't need to go to the library get the book. Well,
that's right. I have no eyeballs, you surely well, and
(15:11):
I have no ears. Wait a minute, Wait a minute,
wait a minute. Well that's what I'm saying. Unless they
perfect all those other things, who would just want consciousness,
can't see here, feel do anything. But I'm alive. No, No,
that's that's a horrifying nightmare. Yes, it is a horrifying nightmare.
It limits you, that's the understatement in the air. That
(15:32):
is the subtle joke of the day, Michael Ashelo's subtle
comment of the day. It limits you.
Speaker 2 (15:40):
Well, for those who are fans of science, I find
this super super interesting.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
The problem. And they've always talked about this as various
rich people or ballplayers or whatever, we're gonna get their
heads frozen. That when you freeze tissue, crystals form.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
Yeah, And as the water freezes, the crystals expand, they
puncture membranes disrupt the intricate network of neurons ultimately destroy
the connections that make the brain what the brain is.
But this team of neurologists in Germany circumiting the problem
by using a technique known as vitrification, which cools tissue
so rapidly that it prevents ice crystals from forming at all.
(16:23):
Instead of crystallizing, the liquid inside and around the cells
transform into an amorphous glass like state, preserving the tissue
structure with all molecular motion effectively halted.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
I think I read the whole article, though I don't
think it ever got to the next step that we've
just been discussing. Okay, So even if you can take
a brain, freeze it, and thought back out and it
still functions, you got a long way to go before
you've accomplished anything. In my mind, you've got to be
able to put one thousand miles. We gotta start. You
gotta put it in a body.
Speaker 2 (16:51):
Well, right, But there's no point in doing the other
stuff until you can figure out you can preserve a brain.
Speaker 1 (16:56):
So this is the first step, an important first step.
I need eyes and on something that I can't imagine. Yeah, yeah,
but anybody's brain's been formed, frozen in the past. Ted Williams,
the baseball player Frozen's brain Walt Disney that they didn't
freeze it in the right way, so they're out of luck.
They're just frozen brains that won't ever work. So yeah,
they're all messed up, too bad, Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
After several delays, the US Space Agency NASA has set
new dates for the launch of its Artemis two Moon mission.
Liftoff is now set for April first, with six alternate dates.
It will be the first crude lunar trip since the
Apollo missions fifty years ago. The ten day crude mission
would loop around the Moon. The rocket has had problems
(17:41):
with various fuel leaks, but on Thursday, officials finished a
two day flight readiness review, an evaluation of whether the spacecraft, rocket,
and ground systems are prepared for launch.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
That's exciting. I heard.
Speaker 2 (17:54):
I think it was on ABC that NASA somebody said
there's about a one in thirty chants of crew loss.
Speaker 1 (18:01):
I'm on that crew. I'm thinking, whoa, whoa, what wait?
What wow?
Speaker 2 (18:06):
And can we call it a mission without a mission
with crew instead of a crude mission?
Speaker 1 (18:12):
Because I hear crude mission.
Speaker 2 (18:13):
I think there's gonna be a lot of swearing and
breaking wind or something like that, the crude mission to
the Moon, or if we're gonna paint graffiti on it,
or it's a hand hewn wooden spaceship exactly right, right,
So this didn't get near as much attention as I
think it should have. Pew did a giant worldwide poll
(18:37):
with tens of thousands of people asked in surveys a
variety of questions, and one particular thing stood out. America
uniquely among countries in the world, and by a lot,
don't trust or have good feelings about they're fellow citizens.
(19:00):
A majority of Americans said people in their country have
bad morals and ethics.
Speaker 1 (19:04):
Only country whereas a majority and if you want to
compare it to other countries, for instance, in other countries
such as Canada, ninety two percent of Canadians feel that
the other people they live with have good morals and ethics.
Ninety two percent say it's good. In America, it's fifty
three percent bad. In Mexico, eighty three percent of people
(19:27):
in Mexico thinking o other people in this country are good.
People in Britain eighty two percent. In Germany three quarters
Israel seventy percent. We are the only country that is
upside down and by a lot. What the hell is
that all about? Boy howdy? I mean, part of it
is diversity, because if you don't have a shared set
(19:51):
of what is good morals, you don't have a shared
answer to that question, then how in the world would
you say, well, he has completely different morals than me,
but he appears to stick to them. No, that's not
the way people function. I don't know if that theory
that's part of it. I don't know if that theory
fits in with this or not. The view in the
(20:12):
United States is influenced by partisan divides. Sixty percent of
Democrats and Democratic leaning independence rated fellow Americans morals is
bad compared to forty six percent of Republican and Republican leaners. Okay,
so it's too high among Republicans, but it's significantly higher
among Democrats to think the rest of their country is
(20:33):
immoral and lacks ethics. Oh my gosh. That's probably the
primary explainer, although I'm sticking to my immigration thing too.
Is a part explanation.
Speaker 2 (20:43):
It's what we've been talking about a fair amount lately,
which is conservatives think most lefties are misguided.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
They're just wrong.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
Their policies aren't as good as they think they are,
whereas the left thinks conservatives are evil baby eating monsters.
Speaker 1 (21:04):
That's got to be a significant factor. I'm reminded of
this great quote. Who said this? I should have jotted
down who said it? I think it was Matt Tayibi.
Speaker 2 (21:12):
Political disagreement is increasingly treated as a serious moral offense
rather than a simple difference of opinion. When you see
the world that way, punishing someone for holding different views
becomes a moral good.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
Political polarization among the strongest anywhere in the world. In
the United States, over seventy percent of Americans say conflicts
between political parties are strong or very strong. They are correct.
I would be with that seventy percent, But that is
we are an outlier in terms of that also, which
probably fits in with the other number pretty well. Shouldn't
it be a cause for concern that we stand out
(21:48):
in so many ways in America? We are exceptional America
also in the fact that we think the people we
live with suck. I mean, and like Canada, practically nobody
thinks they're fellow Canadians. The suck the same way to
all these other countries. That's a problem, and then one
more thing to throw in, very low trust in government.
(22:10):
The US also stands out for extremely low institutional trust
compared to other countries. Only twenty two percent of Americans
say they trust the federal government most of the time.
Are always I don't think I do. I'm in the majority.
But by the way, it's nine percent of Democrats in
twenty six percent of Republicans. I assume if you did
(22:31):
this pull during Joe Biden's presidency, those numbers would flip.
This is dramatically lower historically than numbers for instance, in
the fifties and sixties, eighty percent of people trusted their
government most or most of the time. Are always eighty percent.
Now that was probably misplaced, but a number of twenty
(22:52):
two percent is incredibly low.
Speaker 2 (22:54):
I think it's all a measure of how far left
the left has swung in this country. The bulk of
the left, you know, the pig in the python. If
you're looking at a chart of political beliefs, it's just
the parties or the two philosophies used to.
Speaker 1 (23:11):
Be so close.
Speaker 2 (23:12):
There was so much overlap, and a few things over
here on the right, a few things over there on
the left that was not overlap. But now the bulk
of certainly the energy and the Democratic Party is way
way left. And so as you switch parties what they do,
I'm sorry, when you switch parties that are in power,
what they're doing is so foreign or hostile to you
(23:32):
you can't support it, I guess.
Speaker 1 (23:34):
But culturally, can you turn that around? Has this ever
happened before in the Roman Empire? Did the majority of
people think, Man, everybody in this empire sucks. It's not
happened in other countries. We're the only country in the
world is like this the majority. So I don't know
what you say about that. Yeah, that's bad, it's unhealthy.
(23:57):
Certainly I would say, hey, on that topic.
Speaker 2 (23:59):
There are a couple of things to uh expand the
discussion to one I think is going to have to
come next segment. But, uh, Barack Obama is a rotten,
rotten human being. I've never been a fan. You're a
pretent pretentious college lecturer think all things. All the world
is a you know, think tank, and you can just
(24:19):
you know, bore people into complying with your brilliance. Anyway,
Obama's going to come in for a kicking in a
few minutes. But uh, do you know the name David
boys b o I e s famous, famous attorney. Two
of his most three most famous cases were unquestionably left
(24:40):
or Democratic.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
He was Al Gore's lawyer in Bush Vigor and he
uh represented the plaintiff in the case that invalidated the
ban on same sex marriage in California.
Speaker 2 (24:55):
And he's at all sorts of super heavyweight clients. But anyway,
he's he's definitely a Democrat. But he wrote hell of
a good piece.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
It's entitled Partisanship on Iran is Dangerous for America. Trump
is doing the right thing for the US, and we
Democrats should judge the war on its merits good for him.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
He opens with every past president since Bill Clinton Republican,
a Democrat alike, has declared that Iran could not be
permitted to develop nuclear weapon.
Speaker 1 (25:19):
I know, not one acted to prevent it. I know
there's several examples of that, but stating over and over
again one thing, it is certainly true. And how many
presidents say this, Iran will not be allowed to get
a nuclear weapon and everybody cheers, but you don't do
anything to enforce that. Yeah, Trump finally does, and you
(25:40):
kill him for it, he writes.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Every president since Ronald Reagan has condemned Iran's role in
terrorism against American citizens, interests, and allies.
Speaker 1 (25:48):
No one acted to stop it. Instead, each president left
his successor with a more dangerous Iran and a more
complicated threat to address. Last June, President Trump undertook a
limited military operation does to interrupt the development of nuclear
weapons and discourage them from continuing blah blah blah. In
the face of Iran's refusal to come around, he began
(26:09):
the current military campaign. I'm summarizing now back to the text.
Speaker 2 (26:12):
If he hadn't acted, his successor would have been left
with an even more dangerous choice than his predecessors left him.
Three or four years from now, the Uranian missiles now
hitting Iran's neighbors could be hitting Berlin or London, perhaps
even New York or Washington, perhaps with a nuclear device
or at least a dirty bomb. No sensible person wants
a war a president, at least of all. Wars destroy lives,
(26:32):
waste treasure, and are usually unpopular. But the widespread hostility
to this military action seems untethered to any serious discussion
of the merits.
Speaker 1 (26:41):
What is the alternative? He asks, Boy, that is exactly
what we've been saying. And I think reasonable people have
been saying, when I hear endlessly on all these other channels,
why are we doing this? They still haven't explained. Yes
they have. Every president has explained it for decades. We
can't let Ryan get a nuclear weapon, and they're the
(27:01):
weakest they've ever been, so let's stop them now.
Speaker 2 (27:04):
Obviously that's the end of the discussion. Well, Ran right,
it should be, But he asks, what is the alternative?
Obviously few are prepared to say it is simply to
permit religious mad men who swear death to America and
back up their threats with terrorism, just to hear nuclear
weapons and the capability to deliver them. The scope and
scale of Iron's response shows how much its military capabilities
have progressed and how dangerous it would have been to
(27:25):
permit them to increase further. For three decades, we've tried
everything that each president could think of. We'd try being nice,
talking tough, moral suasion, negotiated agreement, economic sanctions. None worked.
The problem is that there's only one language Iran's leaders understand,
and he goes on in that vein. But then he
points out, I also.
Speaker 1 (27:48):
Understand and deplore the fringes of both parties that apparently
hate Israel and Jews so much that they oppose any
action to neutralizer on Israel's enemies. What is harder to understand,
particularly troubling for our country, is opposition rooted simply an
antipathy toward Trump himself. We used to you know.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
And he goes into the history blah blah blah, and
then he goes into most important criticisms have historically been
based on policy differences over the military action at hand,
not knee jerk opposition to the president himself. Many Republicans
supported mister Clinton's military actions and President obama surge in Afghanistan.
Many Democrats supported George W. Bush's actions in Afghanistan, and
(28:28):
at least initially Iraq. More Republicans than Democrats probably supported
LBJ in Vietnam, et cetera. But this is just knee jerkism,
and he points out it's just terrible for the country.
Speaker 1 (28:40):
Yeah, I was listening to a podcast yesterday in which
they were discussing the fact that it sure seems like
they're rooting against us on a lot of these cable
news shows. Yeah, I would say so that they want
a negative result, that they would be gladdened by a
negative result. And you know, the following the whole bomba
of the school thing, they're really you could I feel
(29:02):
like you could tell they're really hoping we hit that school.
That's that turns out to be true. Yeah, they're really
excited about reporting it. I could hear it in their voices.
That's weird. You think any sane human being would have
a spirit of oh man, this is bad news, folks.
It looks like it was our missile. But no, their
(29:23):
tone was, oh, this is great. This is exactly what
I've been saying. The US is evil because that's what
they think and enjoy thinking it. For some reason, it
gives them comfort the crowd that it makes them feel
good to hate on America. So we feel.
Speaker 2 (29:39):
Enlightened and accepted by their peers for expressing hatred of
their own country.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
That's the long and short of it. Clearly, all right,
we got more on the way. Stay here.
Speaker 5 (29:51):
Chipotle is set tomorrow to offer customers with tattoos buy one,
get one free entrees from three to four pm. Well,
customers without tattoos will probably just oh somewhere nicer.
Speaker 1 (30:05):
Iran has stated their preconditions for a ceasefire. Oh so
they're pretty hilarious. Oh, but we'll get to those in
hour three.
Speaker 2 (30:19):
Also, one of Jerry Garcia's most famous guitars was auctioned
and they expected it to get one to two million dollars.
It went for eleven and a half million dollars. Which guitar,
the Tiger guitar. Okay, holl it wow? Eleven million?
Speaker 1 (30:36):
Yeah. You know, if you're a super grateful dead fan
who's got more money than you could possibly spend in
a lifetime, it'd be freaking cool to have.
Speaker 2 (30:43):
What would your networth have to be to suspend eleven
and a half million dollars on a guitar? Like I
would buy one of John Lennon's guitars or Paul McCartney's
Hoffner bass or something like that.
Speaker 1 (30:52):
If I had unlimited cash a tremendous amount, it'd have
to be eleven and a half million. You'd have to
have like two hundred and fifty million, wouldn't you got
at least? Yeah, you're gonna spend five to ten percent
of your net worth on a guitar. Huh, anyway, happy shopping. Oh,
I said, do you know what a drop is? It's
super hot in marketing these days. Everything's a drop. If
(31:13):
everything's a dropped, then nothing's a drop. We'll talk about
dropping tomorrow or the next hour. Rather, So back to
bitter partisanship and this, don't anybody freak out. We're going
to point out that Trump and the Republicans did something dumb, and.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
We're gonna point out that the Democrats are flaming hypocrites
of the highest order.
Speaker 1 (31:32):
So a little criticism for everybody.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
It's about the jerrymandering fight that the Republicans arguably the
mid census. Normally you wait to look the what do
you call it, disenial census, every ten year census to
do redistricting. Well, Trump was afraid of losing some house
somehow seats in Texas, and so he redistricted to kind
(31:54):
of beef up, you know.
Speaker 1 (31:56):
Our chances. The Republicans' dances are hanging out to the House.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
And of course the Democrats are taking their revenge by
further gerryman daring California and Virginia. And it is on
Virginia that we're going to cast our gaze for a minute.
And here's why the absolutely hilarious things being said and
the people who are saying them about the gerrymandering in Virginia.
(32:22):
The ballot language for the referendum, which is going to
be in April, asks if voters want to let the
legislature adopt a new House map to restore.
Speaker 1 (32:31):
Fairness, quote unquote, by which Democrats.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
Mean they'll be favored in four additional districts, pretty safe
looking districts, so they can take ten out of the
state's eleven seats to restore fairness. They're going to be
taking ten out of eleven seats in a state that
went forty six percent for Trump, so last year.
Speaker 1 (32:53):
Practically a fifty to fifty state when it comes to
the presidential election, and it's going to be almost entirely
ninety one to nine yes with the representation. And if
you haven't seen the way the lines are being drawn,
it's the most maybe the most egregious in the history
of germandering, which goes back to the founding of the
country right Indeed, and no one is talking about it,
(33:14):
by the way, You're still hear talk about Texas and
how outrageous it was they did what they did Barry
Obama has now endorsed the referendum because, of course he
is quote Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of
our democracy, but right now they are under threat, he
said in an online video.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
This amendment gives you the power to level the playing
field in the mid terms this fall. What a way
to characterize giving nine percent of Virginia seats to Republicans
when they won forty six percent of the presidential vote.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
The ironies abound.
Speaker 2 (33:50):
During his last State of the Union address, Obama said,
I think we've got to end the practice of drawing
our congressional districts so that politicians can.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
Pick their voters. Yes, not the other way around. Correct,
Let a bipartisan group do it. I agree with that.
Barack Obama an outfit like I don't know. The Virginia
Redistricting Commission in twenty twenty, two thirds of the voters
gave approval to a constitutional amendment to create the body,
which is split between Democrats and Republicans, lawmakers and citizens,
but it ended up deadlocked after the twenty twenty census,
(34:19):
a frequent problem with such commissions, so Virginia's current House
map was drawn by bipartisan experts under the state Supreme Court.
Watch blah blah blah.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
But now Obama calls for a gerrymandering exception in Virginia
rather than the principles he so long espoused. You wonder
why people turn off politics and politicians just go about
their lives. I mean, that is just, that's beyond hypocrisy.
That's just it's disgusting.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Race to the bottom. Yeah, I mean, it's punching us
in the general littles intellectually. It's an unforgivable attack. That's
quite a phrase. Is that the best you can come up?
It's punching us in and the genitals intellectually, Yes, utterly,
by anybody's standards, a horrible thing to do. We do
(35:08):
not have time for this kind of silliness. I agree.
What a piece of crap you Wow, that's rough. That's
part of an I apologize. We're checking on the Iran war.
There's some interesting doings. I hope you can join us
in our three
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
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.