The Rod and Greg Show: Opposition to Utah Lawmakers Proposed Constitutional Amendment; What Voters in America Care About

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Do you think the American people are just sick of this? Greg, Well,
it's electioneering, Rod, Yeah, it really is. That's true. That's true.

Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'll tell you this. This is the one. If you
go back and you listen to Congressman Jamie Raskin in
a in a very unguarded moment, he called this shot.
He says, we are not going to see Trump if
he wins, because he is guilty of insurrection, and the
Constitution says that you cannot be seated. And there is
debate about that by the way of who that applies to,
but that is their my mentality. If they can get

(00:28):
control of the House, and a lot of people think
they can because Republicans hold a very slim margin, they
will not see him. That's their plan. And I think
what this also shows that the fact that they would
be this galling to go forward with this is that
they don't have faith in Kamala Harris to win this.
This is their I think this is their hell Mary right.

Speaker 1 (00:46):
Here, this is their uh, this is their last line
of defense. I would agree with you because you pointed
this out yesterday very observantly, which I can't believe you,
but you pointed out yesterday that you've got polsters like
axel Rod, like Harville, her saying, don't get too excited yet,
and you're you know, the theory is that they're looking at
poles that we don't see, correct, and those poles that

(01:08):
we don't see do not paint a pretty picture for
Kamala Harris. Now, today she announced she's going to sit
down and do an interview. She's not doing it alone,
which which I find very very interesting. She's going to
do it with Tim Walls, her VP nominating with dances.
She's being chaperone.

Speaker 3 (01:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:26):
Yeah, she's being chaperone, holding her hand so when she
falls into one of these word salads, he'll try and
figure out a way to get through them. But she's
going to be holding a sit down interview. I'm not
sure where it's coming up, but apparently the debate is
back on. So we got a lot going on today,
we do.

Speaker 2 (01:41):
And what's so funny is we've listened to her now
you clips. I listened for her answers and try to
get it for you folks so you can hear whatever
she's trying to say. And she literally repeats the question
and then takes one detail and describes it in finite
detail while her mind is racing for the answer question
what she's going to say, try to figure out what
to do. And so I think what Walls is there

(02:01):
to do is that he doesn't know. There's a report
this morning that he's not talking because he doesn't know
what her positions are either, and they don't want to
be contradicting each other. You'll put them together so he
can hear at least what she wants, or he can
start something and she can follow it up. It takes
two of them, literally to have an opinion. Yeah, how
many how many Democrat candidates for president does take to

(02:22):
have a policy position in twenty twenty four.

Speaker 1 (02:24):
Well, minimally two. Dana Perino on The Five on Fox News,
we were watching this as we were getting ready for
the show today. She said, if there is a little
bit of light between what Tim Walls thinks and what
Kamala Harra's thinks, the journalism, the journalists are hopefully going
to jump all over that because if there's a difference
in the policy, all of a sudden, she now has

(02:45):
a problem. And there was a story out today Greg
and I don't have it in front of me talking
about her campaign, and the headline was this thing is
a mess. I mean it is. And here's it's just
like her office's vice president, yeah said we're out of here.

Speaker 4 (03:01):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (03:01):
Most of the people already that were hired for were left,
and she's going to run this country.

Speaker 3 (03:07):
Come.

Speaker 2 (03:07):
So here's the scary part. It's not that Walls and
Kamala Harris are have any daylight between them on the issues,
because they are radical leftists. What Walls doesn't know is
how far she's willing to go and lie and mislead
and how much she's willing to appear to be moderated
versus where the two of them are naturally on an issue.

(03:27):
And that's where he doesn't know, and he's not going
to take the chance to go too far. I said yesterday,
she is so afraid to say I support fracking except
by surrogates in Pennsylvania because a lot of her base
will be furious by that answer. And Walls doesn't believe
he's against fracking too, So he doesn't know where she
was ready to depart from where they really believe to
fool the American people, and that being something that they're not,

(03:50):
so they have to do it.

Speaker 1 (03:51):
Together. Yeah, well, and we've got you know, I mentioned
this someone who we were talking to today. I think
you and I Greg, matter of fact, we should market
this to be real. That's here's a marketing I do.
You're ready for this?

Speaker 2 (04:02):
I'm ready.

Speaker 1 (04:02):
We get sandals, flip flop sands, and we call them
Kamala flip flops, and we market them to people. She
flipped again today on the border wall.

Speaker 2 (04:12):
I know, I mean, it's you know what.

Speaker 1 (04:15):
It's what is there a policy that she hasn't changed
her mind of.

Speaker 2 (04:18):
Look the fact that Axios is announcing she's going to
spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a border
wall after she called it Donald Trump's medieval vanity project,
and it's ridiculous that the terrorists would come over and
all that. It means she's not winning. It means she's losing.
She would not adopt this, I'm going to build a
wall if she's ahead. She wouldn't. That is the biggest tell, well,

(04:43):
amongst a bunch of tells happening last couple of days.
They are in trouble. They are in trouble as a campaign.

Speaker 1 (04:48):
Well, and the question is going to be how far
Greg can she drift out of her lane without the
lane protector going and get back into this lane before
some of her base start saying, what's going on here? Yes,
you know you promised us this. Now you are going
you aren't going to defund the police, you are going
to build the wall. You know you are what was

(05:10):
the one you aren't going to investigate price gauging or
galging know how to say the word. And those in
her lane who she promised, I will stay in this lane,
she's starting to drift.

Speaker 2 (05:22):
And what's amazing is that in twenty twenty four it
had always been the case that, you know, when you
had this big tent coalition of Democrats, they knew wink wink,
nod nod when the candidate, when Fetterman was running for
Senate and he was all sudden for fracking when he
wasn't before everybody says, well, he's got to beat the Republicans.
So let him say, you know, anything he wants. Don't
let him say he loves Ronald Reagan for all we care.

(05:44):
He has to win. What's different about this year is
that the extreme left, they are stubborn. So take himas
and the pro terrorist. You know, faction of the party,
which is the anti Semitic faction of the Democrat part
is so much larger than the media wants to let
you know. But it's not budging and it is not moving,

(06:05):
and it is not going to vote for her if
she is not checking publicly the boxes that they want
not wink and nod, they want to hear it. And
I think a lot of the leftists now they have
gotten so they've doubled down on this so many times,
they've kept digging. They don't even want to hear her
depart from their position out loud. And so she is
kind of stuck. She's stuck on a lot of issues. Abortion,

(06:29):
she she wants all of it, even you know, the
partial birth, which is sadly when a baby's born and
they still want to aboord and kill the baby. That's
not an abortion, that's in fantaside. She's stuck. She can't
get away from that. That's where she's ask.

Speaker 1 (06:41):
How would it be how would it be like or
like to be a candidate greg where you can't say, well,
you you know, there are certain things as a candidate
you personally can't say, right, you can't there's some things
you hold on, I lived it, But she is holding
back on almost everything because she is a radical San
Francisco leftist. But she can't show that to the American

(07:01):
people because the American people are going. You want to
do that, you are not going to be elected president. Yeah,
I should say I said I lived that. What I've
lived is is statistically impossible to make everybody happy. There
isn't a position or a policy position you'll take, or
a vote you'll make where everybody will universally love what
you've done. Flee and Queen Bee, I've made votes and
she's been mad at me. Wait, so you have to

(07:23):
take those chances. Well, what happens when you have such
a frail base or your number still isn't the number
you need to win. You can't afford one person to
be discouraged and not show up to vote for you.
You need everyone.

Speaker 2 (07:36):
You literally have to make everybody, everybody happy, And that
means that she has to be less specific because statistically,
you can't make everybody happy if you make if you
make your case, all.

Speaker 1 (07:46):
Right, we're going to talk about a lot about that today.
We're going to talk about the swamp. Are they going
to change if, in fact, Donald Trump has elected president
of the United States, and then Jeffrey Anderson will join us.
We'll talk about what voters really want a little bit
later on. There is a new controversy in Washington County
and we'll talk about that as well. So we've got
a lot to get too. Great to be with you

(08:06):
on this Tuesday afternoon here on the Rodding Gregg Show.

Speaker 2 (08:09):
I think the swamp is as these this indictment has
been announced. I think this is just another example of
the swamp rearing its ugly head yet again.

Speaker 1 (08:17):
Yeah, I really do well. Donald Trump went into the
White House in twenty seventeen promising to clean up the swamp.
He found it's a lot more difficult to do. He tried,
but this time I think he's a little bit better
organized if he gets back in there. But apparently the
swamp dwellers are saying it doesn't matter who wins the presidency,
they aren't going anywhere. Let's talk with Robert Spencer wrote
about this. He's the director of Jihad Watch. Robert, how

(08:40):
are you welcome back to the Rodding Gregg Show. Great
to have you on, Robert.

Speaker 5 (08:43):
Yeah, good to talk to you guys again.

Speaker 1 (08:45):
Thank you are They basically saying, try and move us,
because we aren't going anywhere when it comes to inside
the beltway.

Speaker 5 (08:51):
Robert, Yeah, that's exactly it. This was a survey that
was recently done of a lot of federal government bureaucrats
in Washington, and fifty four percent of them said they
would defy voters no matter who gets elected president. If
Trump gets elected president again, they're just going to do
what they want as they did before.

Speaker 2 (09:11):
In the same survey, fifty one percent of federal managers
believe that people have too much individual freedom. That's that's
who's I mean. It seems to be a tell some
a bureaucrat, a bureaucracy that large is it can can
Trump if he wins, can you even tackle something that
has that much of a culture to it that they

(09:33):
want to do whatever they want to do without regard
to the people.

Speaker 5 (09:37):
It's a very big question. It's very important. Really, it's
the it's going to be the defining question of the
next four years if he is elected, because if he
does not destroy it, then it is ultimately going to
destroy the country. And that's not an exaggeration to by
his degree, because we're talking about at this point an

(09:57):
entrenched group of absolutely unaccountable globalist socialist internationalists who are
going to force their agenda on the American people. They've
already been doing so for years. Obama is largely responsible
for this. He's the one who politicized the federal government
and the federal bureaucracy, and now we're seeing the.

Speaker 1 (10:16):
Fruits of that.

Speaker 5 (10:18):
Trump can only succeed in doing this if he has
a solid support of the American people behind him, and that,
of course is very much in question, no matter if,
even if he wins, and then you've got, of course,
the media on the other side. The odds are against it.
We have to be honest, but I would never count

(10:39):
him out. One thing that we've seen since twenty fifteen
is that Donald Trump is a very smart man, and
he might appear not to have a grasp on a situation,
and then he constantly surprises his enemies and his friends
in the same way. And I think he could do
it again in this case as well.

Speaker 1 (10:58):
Yeah, Robert, what do the swamp dwellers think about all
of us out in the handerlands? What do they think
about average Americans?

Speaker 5 (11:06):
They have total contempt for us. They think that we're idiots,
that we're a bunch of roobs, as wasn't it Obama
who sat clinging to their guns and religion.

Speaker 1 (11:15):
Yep.

Speaker 5 (11:16):
And so these are the people. See, these arrogant beltweight
bureaucrats think they know better than we do how society
ought to be ordered and how the United States ought
to be governed. And so it doesn't matter who we
vote for. They know better and they're going to run
things the way they see fit.

Speaker 2 (11:34):
You know, Robert, I'm having a conversation with my neighbor,
and look, we're not this isn't These aren't conversations of conspiracies,
and we're just not We just don't go there. But
my neighbor, I wandered out loud in our discussion. Would
this deep state? Will it even allow Trump to take office?
Is there something? Are there barriers in place that they

(11:55):
would put? Is there something that they would do to
even be under threat to lose the kind of power
they have right now? He worries out loud that he
wouldn't be seated if he were to win. Do you
worry about those things?

Speaker 5 (12:06):
Yeah, it's a very real possibility. And here again, we
can only hope that he's accounted for this and has
some plan in mind. But Congressman Jamie Raskin, who is
one of the worst of the far left coterie of
Democrat leaders in Washington, just said it straight out a
few weeks ago that if it comes to Trump winning

(12:29):
in November, then on January sixth, twenty twenty five, when
they count the votes, the electoral votes in Congress, four
years after the supposed insurrection of twenty twenty one, Raskin
was promising a real insurrection. He was saying that, no way,
we will not allow the votes for Trump to be
counted because he's an insurrectionist according to the Fourteenth Amendment.

(12:52):
The fourteenth Amendment is a post Civil War amendment to
the Constitution that was designed to keep former Confederates out
of the United States government, and even it was ignored,
there were plenty of former Confederates. Lucius Quinn of Cincinnatus
Lamar was a Supreme Court justice appointed by Grover Cleveland.
He was a former Confederate, and there were others all

(13:14):
through all levels of government, but it was on the
books that they had to be specifically approved on a
case by case basis and were forbidden from taking power,
taking any role as insurrectionists. Now, Trump did not lead
an insurrection. The whole thing was fictional. He said, proceed
peacefully and patriotically. Are we supposed to? Except that some

(13:37):
clown with Viking horns was going to overthrow the most
powerful government office. It's so stupid to start with. But
they're still running with it. And Raskin was threatening they
will disallow his votes on January sixth, twenty five if
they have to to keep him from taking office.

Speaker 1 (13:55):
Yeah, we played that audio sound bite and talked about
that quite a bit. Robert, always great having you on
the show. Thanks for a few minutes of your time today.

Speaker 5 (14:02):
A pleasure.

Speaker 1 (14:03):
Thank you all right on our newsmaker line that is
Robert Spencer. He is a director of the The g
hide Watch talking about the swamp. Greg, what a task?
I mean, would you want to be Donald Trump and
try to take on that swamp?

Speaker 2 (14:17):
No, it's amazing that those bureaucrats even answered that poll. Honestly,
I mean, because they knew. I mean, I don't know
where they thought those those answers were going to go.
But finding out how uninterested they are and the people
that they're supposedly therefore, it's disturbing.

Speaker 1 (14:32):
I think we're under seventy days now to election time.
I know, man, look and you know how we know
they've indicted Trump. There you go, there's your ti there's
the reason we looked at the polls. It's time for
another indictment. Yeah, we got to get another one going.
We got a gin this up and it just keeps
working against them. I mean, they just keep getting smacked
for doing it, and I think the American people will

(14:53):
yet again. The fatigue factor is unreal. Yeah, it is.
It is. Well, of course, there'll be a lot of
analysis between now and election today about what voters really
care about. Joining us on our Newsmaker line to talk
about that as Jeffrey Anderson, he is president of the
American Mainstreat Initiative. Always great to have Jeffrey on the show. Jeff,
let me ask you, will pull this question to you,

(15:14):
what do voters actually care about right now as we're
less than seventy days away from the election.

Speaker 6 (15:19):
Well, I think it's sort of the issues versus intangible's election.
It's sort of It's obviously been a strange election we've
seen so far, with all the twists and turns, and
I think one thing that'll be interesting going forward is
that almost all of the issues in the election, that
the key issues voters will be thinking about, I think
favor Donald Trump. But then there's the whole intangibles question

(15:39):
of how many independent voters are eager to show Joe
Biden while Joe Biden's already gone out the door basically
even though he's still president. But Biden and Trump the
door and are ready to move on to a new
era of American politics. So I think those are kind
of the offsetting considerations of potential swing voters.

Speaker 2 (15:57):
So you've tapped into a debate that Rod and I
are having on this program and have been having for
a number of days, where where I think these issues
are emotional. I think they're the groceries you pay the gas,
what you're paying at the gas tank, whether it's your
rent or your mortgage, or public safety, you name it.
And I don't know that those are cerebral issues or
luxury issues. Those are things you feel every day versus

(16:19):
someone who's, as you've pointed out in your article, has
never had a vote in a primary, has not had
their articulated single issue. So my question is this, are
those issues emotional enough that it's more of an emotional
decision than maybe a logical one. And can't we look
at the last election in twenty twenty, where where Donald
Trump received seventy four million votes, which is the highest

(16:40):
number we'd seen other than Biden's eighty one, but sixty
million was like your high mark before then? Is it
actually so? My two questions are are those issues that
are emotional that people will gravitate to the economy and
those things? And is he really unpopular? If you look
at how many votes he was able to receive in
twenty twenty, which was a record at time.

Speaker 6 (17:01):
Well, former President Trump's approval rating is somewhat underwater now,
and I think part of why he got so many
votes as there, just as you noted so many votes cast,
I wouldn't say he's hugely unpopular, but there's has always
been this cohort of swing voters who doesn't like Trump's
comportment or whatever. And so I think it's a very

(17:22):
interesting question and an open one whether the whether such
voters will care more about the personality or whatever of
former President Trump or about those bread and butter issues
of how hard it is to afford to buy anything
these days from groceries to houses, to whatever. I mean,
it's this administration is very unpopular and the public opinion

(17:44):
polling shows it. And part of why it's unpopular maybe
the number one reason, I think has been inflation, which
was worse than the first three years. I mean, this
administration is the worst inflation in the first three years
of a presidency a first time president in a one
hundred years, except for Jimmy Carter. Carter was the only
one worse on inflation. And Carter, of course got crushed,

(18:06):
but he was running the ins Torontal Reagan, which is
a little different story.

Speaker 1 (18:10):
Jeff, what do you make of I'm confused by some
of the polls out there, and you maybe as well.
And Greg and I have talked about this on a
national level. Kamala Harris is beating Donald Trump in some
polls like two or three points. I'm very much right.
But when you ask him about who would do a
better job on foreign policy, the economy, inflation, and the border,
Donald Trump comes out ahead on almost every one of

(18:31):
those issues. What do you make of the differences there?

Speaker 6 (18:34):
Well, I kind of highlights we're talking about, right, I
do think on foreign policy, the border, inflation, crime, Trump
has the advantage on these issues, and so if people
are thinking about those issues, I think it's going to
ultimately mean he will get elected as president again. If
they're thinking about other considerations, then the result.

Speaker 3 (18:54):
May go the other way.

Speaker 6 (18:56):
I think part of what's going to swing this to it,
at least to some extent, how much voters connect Kamala
Harris to the current administration, which may seem like sort
of a strange thing to even say, because of course
she's the vice president and has been throughout this term.
But as you saw at the Democratic Convention, they're sort
of trying to have it both ways. They've portrayed her

(19:17):
as being a key member of a highly successful presidency,
as the Democrats portray it, I don't think many swing
voters would agree, certainly not many conservatives. And they're also
at the same time pretending she's kind of dropped out
of the sky and we've known nothing about her, but
here she is, and she's new blood. And so I
don't know if voters will attach her more to the
Biden record or view her as just sort of hope

(19:40):
and change in the spirit of Obama.

Speaker 2 (19:42):
So this is another issue that we don't know the
answer to. But you're a thought leader. You're watching this closely.
There's a shy Trump vote out there, and everyone's talking
about Even James Carver will say, look, he under poles.
We know this, we have to account for that in sixteen.
I mean, he's doing better in the polls twenty four
than he was in sixteen and twenty and even in
twenty when he lost. You take forty to fifty thousand

(20:05):
votes over four states, they go differently and he wins
that election. Do you think that there is a shy
vote and he is underpolling today like he did in
sixteen or twenty, or do you think these polls are
closer to the sentiment that's happening in these nationally but
also in the swing states.

Speaker 6 (20:24):
Yeah, and there could be something of a shy vote.
I don't know. I don't I wouldn't want to be
banking on that if I were the Trump campaign. I
do think that he will do better in the seven
key swing states on average then he will nationally. That's
been the case the last couple of elections. By the
last two elections, it's been by something in the range

(20:44):
of three and a half points. He's done about three
and a half points better in terms of margin in
the key swing states than he's done nationally. I don't
know that it'll be quite as large as that this time,
but even if it was just a couple points, I
think one could say with pretty strong a degree of
confidence that Trump will do better in those key states
than he will nationally. So if it's a if it's

(21:05):
an even race nationally, then that's a good sign for Trump.
If he's even down a point or two, he's perhaps
in pretty good shape. Starts to be more like a
four or five point lead for Harris nationally than that
probably means a different.

Speaker 1 (21:20):
Story, Jeff. Final question for you, uh, I want to
go by Kamala Harris a pair of flip flop sandals,
because again today she's flopped again on the border wall.
Does that matter to voters when you have a candidate
out there who is changing her position on almost every
issue in this country right now, which he is basically doing.

Speaker 6 (21:41):
You know, I think it's been such a sea change
on the border under Biden Harris that I just don't
think anything they say can make a whole lot of
difference on that. It's sort of like inflation. Voters know
inflation has been terrible under this presidency, and they know
the border has been unlike anything they've ever seen. I mean,
the difference with Biden on the border. Biden Harris is
so pronounced that Obama was closer to Trump on the

(22:05):
border than Obama was to Biden. I mean, it's totally different.
People aren't even It's not even just people rushing across
the border. People are illegal. Aliens are just going to
the ports of entry, and they're saying, they're saying the
magic word asylum. And rather than following federal law, enforcing
federal law and detaining those folks until their claims are adjudicated,

(22:25):
which Biden's required to do under law, He's just letting
them into the country. And so you see this max
influx of illegal immigration unlike anything we've ever seen before.
You can't hide that. So I don't think I don't
think anything's gonna get fooled a whole lot based on
some SoundBite in the present day.

Speaker 1 (22:43):
When Jeff Anderson, he is president of the American Main
Streets Initiative, talking about what voters care about as we
head into the selection, I think it was spot on too.

Speaker 2 (22:52):
I do too. I think those are all variables that
are in play right now.

Speaker 1 (22:55):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, they are all right. A lot more
coming up right here on the Rod and Greg Show
in Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine. Kate and
are asked great to be with you. We've got a
lot to come, so we invite you to stay with us.
You hated this story, but I'm going to share it
with anybody.

Speaker 2 (23:08):
With not one weird. This is just weird when you.

Speaker 1 (23:12):
When you're a teenager, right guy, our gal, your hormones
are flying all over the place, right, Yeah, you just
don't want to talk about this. Well, apparently Hong Kong
has come up with a way to help teenagers in
that country fight sexual temptations.

Speaker 2 (23:30):
It's just so insane.

Speaker 1 (23:31):
You know what they want them to do? Play badminton?

Speaker 2 (23:35):
Just you know what I just want Kamala Harris to
put They should just make this a policy issue because
it makes about as much sense. Okay, I don't I
don't understand where badminton were.

Speaker 1 (23:44):
We always told to go take a cold.

Speaker 2 (23:45):
Angst and badminton. Well that's not real.

Speaker 1 (23:49):
That's what the folks in the Hong Kong believe.

Speaker 2 (23:51):
You guys, I don't know where you're getting your news
you got to I don't know where this is coming.

Speaker 1 (23:54):
You know where they came from New York Times.

Speaker 2 (23:56):
There you go, that's that's fake news.

Speaker 1 (23:59):
Yeah. We were talking an hour ago with Robert Spencer,
he is director of ge Hyde Watch, about the fact
that the swamp will do what it wants. It doesn't
care about who is elected president of the United States.
We're talking about the bureaucracy in this country. Well, who
are the two men who turned this bureaucracy into a nightmare?

(24:21):
Joining us on our Newsmaker line to talk more about that.
As our next guest, it is Richard c Lyons. He
is talking about this. He's joining us on our Newsmaker
line right now. He wrote a great article about this
in The Blade. Richard, how are you welcome to the
Rodden Greg Show. Thanks for joining us this afternoon, Richard.

Speaker 3 (24:38):
Oh, I'm doing great, guys. Great to be with you.

Speaker 1 (24:41):
Richard. Who are the two men who kind of created
this myth to begin with?

Speaker 7 (24:47):
Well, it goes back aways, It goes back one hundred
years to Woodrow Wilson, who was a very big fan
of what was the craze in Europe, which was the
ideal state theory, which is that the state has rights
that supersede individual rights. So Woodrow Wilson brought that into

(25:08):
America in the frame of the administrative state. One of
his acolytes, one of his disciples, was FDR who took
Woodrow Wilson's seed and grew it into this massive administrative
state that we know today that is now over four
hundred and thirty five agencies that create rules for us

(25:32):
that have the effect of laws. So that I don't
know that your listeners may know. But in twenty twenty three,
twenty seven pieces of legislation passed through the Congress and
through the Office of the President. At the same time,
the Federal Registry of Regulations posted ninety thousand pages of

(25:52):
new regulations, ninety thousand. So if you want to know
where the real power lies, it is not in our representatives,
whom we elect and who are answerable. It's in the
administrative states that are appointed and normally for a lifetime position.

Speaker 3 (26:11):
So it's a fixed bureaucracy we're dealing with.

Speaker 2 (26:14):
So, Richard, here's my question. You know, breaking news today
is that in another indictment, yet another indictment on Trump,
they're really really going after this insurrection. You know Banner
and retrying this case. I don't know that it could
be heard before November. I don't know if it gets
heard or you get at if it goes to a
jury before January. But I think they're pinning some hopes on.

(26:35):
I think the deep state, I would love to in
this bureau bureaucratic Lebathan that you describe, really can't imagine
Trump coming back and having and knowing what he knows.
Now how much how worried are you that this deep
state could prevent him even without the election, but just
could prevent him through court cases or convictions or just

(26:58):
simply not giving up their control role regardless of the election.
Does that weigh on your mind? Do you think that's
a possibility.

Speaker 7 (27:06):
It does, because I think it's true, guys that the
extent to which we as citizens, or Donald Trumps now
the nominee for the Republican Party, the peril we are
collectively in is the same peril that the administrative state
feels from Trump the possibility of.

Speaker 3 (27:26):
Him being president again.

Speaker 7 (27:28):
The only two presidents who have stood up to the
administrative state in our history in the last one hundred
years were Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. Otherwise, the Bushes
went along, just went along and grew the state however
they wanted to. The Democratic Party has grown this thing incrementally, guys.
And what they do is take power from Congress and

(27:51):
wealth of the budget and move it over into their
permanent government, which is the administrative state. So you have
not just the state, you have its face, which is
the Democratic Party, and then you have its shock troops,
with which are the media and all the agencies that
are investigated Tory or law enforcement agencies. So this is

(28:13):
a big monster we're dealing with, Richard.

Speaker 1 (28:16):
I've seen numbers out there when they talk about job numbers.
One sector of the economy that continues to grow is
the federal government federal employees. You see it all the time, Richard.
Has there ever been a time when the size of
the federal government has shrunk?

Speaker 7 (28:30):
Well, this is let's go back to Ronald Reagan, and
he had a man named David Brock who had a
Grand Design, as he called it, yah, And what they
wanted to do was reduce the size of government five
percent right across everything, So everything across the board of
the administrative state would reduce its number of employees or

(28:51):
budgets by five percent, and what they came out of
was a slowing in the growth of government by one
point five percent. So in the end it was like
throwing a deck chair off the Titanic and see.

Speaker 3 (29:04):
They will not abide being cut.

Speaker 7 (29:09):
Their success is greg Their idea of success is their
budget expanding. Their idea of success is more and more employees.
Their idea of success is the numbers of regulations they
can oppress the common citizen with that success to them.
So it's the inverse of capitalism, it's the inverse of

(29:31):
free enterprise.

Speaker 2 (29:32):
And you know they do it through the words they use.
So just and you just pointed out they slowed the
growth by one point five percent. So if I was
going to gain five pounds, I only gained three pounds.
Therefore I cut, I must have lost two pounds of weight.
That's the kind of wordsmithing that they do to kee. Yeah, yeah,
and so I guess ultimately, you know, we we love

(29:54):
to leave listeners. We have the grace listeners in the world, Richard,
with action items or what in the world do we
do in a moment like we're in in this presidential election,
seeing what we're seeing going on right now, how do
we combat it? I mean, I don't think the Deep
States all at deep. It looks pretty up above the
ground now.

Speaker 7 (30:12):
Oh it is, and they're not ashamed of it. And
when they talk about socialism, Greg, that is the manifestation,
that's the head of the snake. They've been hiding this
thing for years and saying, no, we're capitalists, we believe
in America, we believe in America's foundations. Just like Kamala
is now changing her entire ideas of that she had

(30:36):
three years ago or two years ago.

Speaker 3 (30:37):
She's now doing it to win the election. This is
what they've been doing for one hundred years. Yeah, and
it is.

Speaker 7 (30:44):
It's to my mind, it's it's contrary to what democracy
is supposed to be about. Democracy should have played out
in the following fashion. RFK should have been in the
primary process. Yes, he would have garnered the second highest
number votes. He would have been the presumptive nominee. Right now,

(31:05):
but who do we have? We have Kamala who's just
a face, and behind the face is socialism.

Speaker 1 (31:11):
Yeah yeah, final question for you, Richard, there's that old
song leader of the pack. Is there a leader of
the swamp that you can identify.

Speaker 2 (31:20):
They don't want to.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
They don't want you to know who they are. I
know it is Barack Obama.

Speaker 7 (31:29):
He has been in charge of the deep state guys,
even during the Trump presidency when he was having running
the FBI.

Speaker 3 (31:38):
Show about the Russia hoax. Uh.

Speaker 7 (31:40):
He has not been out of power in Washington since
he was elected. In my mind, he's always held power.

Speaker 1 (31:48):
All right, Richard, thank you, great interview. Appreciate your time, Richard.
Richard Lyons. He writes for the Blades, turning America into
a bureaucratic nightmare, and that's what we have right now
in this country, and Donald Trump pledging to do what
he can about it, even though I don't know if
it's going to go very far. All Right, We've got
a lot more to get to here. On the Rotten
Greg Show on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine

(32:10):
K and R as.

Speaker 2 (32:11):
Everything I say is fair, Every every opinion I hold.

Speaker 1 (32:15):
You don't. You don't have opinions, you just have yes.

Speaker 2 (32:17):
Actually, thank you for remembering. I don't have the luxury
of opinion. I just know, I just know it. Just hey,
remember when you thought Romney was gonna run again?

Speaker 1 (32:26):
What happened?

Speaker 2 (32:26):
I said, I just know he's not. I missed that one,
Biden one of the few that I've missed all you.
You said, Biden's in all the way, he's coming to
the US way. You said, no, I don't have the
luxury of opinion here, Rod, I just know you're just
not going to be there.

Speaker 1 (32:39):
Do you want to share your opinion or you are
fact that you know who's going to win in November?

Speaker 2 (32:43):
Donald J. Trump? Okay, now we'll see it.

Speaker 1 (32:45):
I like we have.

Speaker 2 (32:47):
We had a couple of king you can be I'm
not backtracking. I'm just saying that the deep state's got
a lot to lose here and we don't know how
crazy things are going to get. But you know that's
that's where the people are. I know for a fact
that Kamala Harris is not win this race as of
right now. I know she's behind the polls. It's why
she can't That's why she's vapor locked. She doesn't know
what to say because she can't afford to lose anyone,

(33:08):
because she doesn't have enough votes to win as it
is right now, how can she afford to take a
position to where she could alienate anyone? She can't so
I know he's winning right now, and I don't think
Timmy and Dana Bash on CNN is going to help
a bit.

Speaker 1 (33:24):
Yeah, we'll see, we'll see. That's why little Timmy is
coming with her on that interview with CNN on Thursday night. Now,
speaking of people who learned a few things over the
past couple of weeks, is our good friend Don Lemon. Yes,
Don Lemon, formerly with CNN. During the convention went to
the boardwalk. He went to a number of around the
country and he asked people about Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. Well,

(33:47):
he showed up on Jen Psacky's show on MSNBC last night.
This is what he shared with her about what he learned.

Speaker 6 (33:55):
Was there anything, What did they think about Harris?

Speaker 1 (33:57):
Did they have anything to say about her? They did have. Listen,
it depends on where you are.

Speaker 8 (34:03):
We went to a number of different battleground states in Pennsylvania, Ohio.
We were in Michigan, Indiana on our way obviously, Illinois
on our way to Chicago, And it sort of depended
on where you were.

Speaker 1 (34:15):
Pennsylvania as well.

Speaker 8 (34:17):
I shouldn't say Pennsylvania, say Philadelphia was a bit more liberal,
and the answers to the questions about her and him
were quite different. But for the most part, in Pittsburgh
or in the Jersey Shore, in Atlantic City, in Ohio especially,
many people did not know who she was, right, They

(34:37):
weren't familiar with her. So I think she has to
reintroduce herself to the public. But for him, I think
that they thought that he's better for the economy and
that again that he gave them, that he brought money
into the community, or that he was on black people's side.

Speaker 1 (34:53):
Wow. Wow, they did not know who she was.

Speaker 2 (34:57):
Yeah, and we've covered this for you, folks. We've taken
those little snippet where he's asking questions and he's even
trying to defend Kamala Harris, and they just didn't want
to have anything anything to do with it. And I
think he reported accurately. I'm surprised that he didn't, you know,
kind of hide his bad experiences. But you heard it
when it was happening last week, and then there he

(35:18):
was admitting it to Jen PISUCKI that people don't know
who she is. And I'm telling you that is I
just don't feel we've talked about it, even off the air.
I don't feel that she's presidential and that Tim Wallas
is a president. They don't feel like a presidential ticket.
They don't come across this way. I would tell you
that Hillary Clinton, while I don't agree with the word
she said, she's wicked, smart and wicked by way of smart,

(35:41):
but she came across as she could be presidential. And
so I can think of a number of candidates where
they won or lost, they did present themselves the American
people as presidential. This ticket does not to me. I
think it's incredibly underwhelming. Well, and here's the thing. They
have based as you well know, Greg and our listeners know,

(36:02):
running this campaign, and they aren't talking about their policies
because they don't have any. They aren't talking about the
issues that are very important to Americans. They're talking about
Donald Trump and their line. I want to let you
hear a comparison between Donald Trump back in May of
twenty twenty, as a matter of fact, words talking about
skyrocketing prescription drug services and then Kamala Harris talking about

(36:25):
that same issue just a couple of weeks ago, talk
about a shameless act on her part.

Speaker 9 (36:29):
Well, cap cost is just thirty five dollars a month
per type of insulin, and some plans may offer it free.
So for everybody that's getting ripped off and paying tremendous prices,
senior citizens is a tremendous saving.

Speaker 10 (36:48):
It is President Biden and I that took on big
pharma and finally capped the cost of insulin for our seniors.

Speaker 2 (36:55):
At thirty five dollars a month.

Speaker 10 (36:57):
But Donald Trump and his running may intend to get
rid of our thirty five dollars cap on insulin.

Speaker 1 (37:04):
Excuse me? Did you hear him say I want to
get rid of a cap on insulin? Greg Did you
hear any of that in his remarks?

Speaker 2 (37:11):
Weird? I did not. I heard the opposite. I heard it.
He was putting that in place and cheap. Yeah, she
says he didn't. She did, and he'd take it away,
which is not actually consistent with the truth.

Speaker 1 (37:24):
Yeah, go figure. Yeah, it's pretty amazing. All right, We've
got a lot to come now. When we come back,
we'll talk about one of the groups. We'll talk with
a representative from one of the groups supporting the ballot initiative,
very controversial issue. It will be on the ballot in November.
We've talked to a lawmakers very concerned about this. We'll
talk to somebody who actually supports this idea, and that's

(37:44):
coming up on the Rodden Greg Show in Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine. Canters, y'are hungry right now?
You need a quick dinner? You are? You know I
needn't get lunch either today I'm hungry as well. But
we've got a Papa Murphy's meal deal. It includes a
extra large New York style pizza calzone and made from
scratch five cheese bread. We will take caller number five

(38:05):
right now, Coller number five eight eight eight five seven
eight zero one zero eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero if you want a Papa Murphy's meal
deal from Papa Murphy's and Talk Radio one oh five
nine K and RF. All right, Well, an important issue
coming up in November for voters here in the state
of Utah concerns a ballot initiative. Of course, the Utah

(38:28):
Supreme Court ruled that basically, they told lawmakers don't touch it.
Once it's approved, you can't touch it anymore. And that
has raised alarm on the part of a lot of people,
including state lawmakers. But there are groups who support that
ruling and support the effort. One of them is Mormon
and Women for Ethical Government. And joining us right now
on the is their communications specialist Laura Lewis Ae. She's

(38:50):
joining us on the Rotten Gregg Show. Laura, thanks for
joining us since afternoon here on talk radio one oh
five nine knrs.

Speaker 11 (38:58):
Thanks for having me tonight, Laura.

Speaker 1 (38:59):
Let me ask you, Uh, this has often been described
as a grassroots effort. How much of a grassroots effort
is it? In fact?

Speaker 11 (39:08):
Absolutely? Mormon Women for Ethical Government. We are a cross
partisan group of women. We have thousands of women in
this members in the state of Utah. We have spent
hundreds of hours gathering signatures for proposition for we submitted maps.
We are very engaged citizens, critical thinkers. We want to

(39:34):
understand the legislative process and ensure ethical government, that we
have a system of checks and balances, a balance of power,
just like our founding fathers established. This is important to us.
We are definitely a grassroots majority Republican actually organization.

Speaker 3 (39:55):
Lord.

Speaker 2 (39:56):
So the headline says from I think the Solet Tribune
Better Boundaries launch, which is campaign against constitutional mement and
you're certainly you mentioned the Mormon Women for Ethical Government
is mentioned clearly, and there's lots of great quotes in there.
How close do you work with better boundaries on an
effort like this, uh, this initiative to encourage people not
to vote for the constitutional moment.

Speaker 11 (40:18):
Yeah, so we have, we are, we have we support
better boundaries in their in their effort for proposition for
we were very involved. Our members submitted maps for the
redistricting process to the Independent Redistricting Commission. We work, we

(40:39):
support their work that they were doing. We want, we
want citizens of Utah to be able to choose their
politicians and not the other way away around. And we
know that it's so important to have citizens involved and
be able to use our constitutionally enshrined right that is
in the Utah Constitution that we have the right to
reform our government. And one of the ways that we

(41:01):
can exercise that right is through the ballot initiative process,
which is really important to our democratic processes here in Utah.

Speaker 1 (41:09):
Well, let me ask you this. You know, there's criticism
directly directed all the time at Utah for being a
one party state run by Republicans, But if you look
at things, things here in Utah are going pretty well.
What is your criticism of a one party state.

Speaker 11 (41:27):
Absolutely no criticism of a one party state. Actually, so
our main concern with the way the legislature is handled
proposition for ballot initiative actually has has nothing to do
with partisanship. We, like I mentioned, we're cross partisanship. I

(41:48):
think our conservative membership, our Republican membership are very concerned
at the balance of power. And one of the things
I wanted to mention here is that legislators are are
saying that this what the the unanimous Supreme Court decision
ties their hands against amending or or changing uh referendums,

(42:14):
any ballid initiative. And I invite anyone listening to actually
read the Supreme Court opinions, which explicitly says in their
opinion that that their their opinion does not mean that
the legislature cannot amend a government government reform initiative at all. Rather,
legislator changes that facilitate or support the reform, or at

(42:35):
least do not impair the reform enacted by the people
would not implicate the people's right under the alter or
reform clause. So the legislature still has power to change.
This is an important part of their their their their duties,
their responsibilities as a legislature to to amend and to
change laws that are that are passed, and that there's

(42:58):
no exception there with that initiatives. And in fact, the
Supreme Court decision was very narrow in its scope, so
it's not talking about I think a lot of people
are getting upset, a lot of Republicans thinking, oh no,
this means we're going to become California and we're going
to be abortion, cannabis and all the things they're worried about.

(43:18):
And actually the Supreme Court decision is very narrow in scope.
It is only those ballid initiatives that deal with reforming government,
specifically like Proposition for Like and independent Redistricting Commission. And
even then the legislature has power to change the law
that is passed by the people as long as they
do so with a compelling interest. They have to give

(43:41):
a compelling reason for changing the law. That it's just
holding them a little bit of a check and balance here,
just like our founding fathers established how important that balance
of power in our democracy is. There's a little bit
of checks and balances.

Speaker 2 (43:55):
So Laura Bye way of full disclosure. I used to
be a lawmaker, So you know, I'm kind from the
perspective of having been a lawmaker, and I think you
bring up a very good point about how if a
legislative body, if a law is made by a general session,
or if it was a law passed by initiative, it
would become a statute. And there are statutes that the
legislative body can review for unintended consequences or they can amend.

(44:18):
I think the concern comes when we the term reforming government.
So the question becomes and I think this is where
the worry is. It is it could be, it could
be vague, it could if anything that is you run
as a bill could be looked to have touched or
be related to an initiative. You could see litigation or
this or this example. Because you mentioned medical cannabis, we

(44:39):
did have an initiative that qualified for the ballot, and
it did bring the legislative body and the authors of
the initiative together to a compromise, which I think shows
that there is a deference and a respect for the
initiative process by the legislature. But here's my question. In
medical in the medical cannabis initiative, and even in the
ultimate compromise that is a Schedule one narcotic, it's federally

(45:00):
against the law to have possession of Is it a
government reform for the State of Utah to part from
the federal government's federal law of marijuana cannabis being a
Schedule one narcotic and saying in the state of Utah
that is actually for medical purposes legal. Could that be
a government reform that our government has reformed itself away

(45:21):
from the federal code related to marijuana. I think that's
the worry is that this is a lot broader than
the way you've described being narrowly scoped.

Speaker 11 (45:32):
So so my understanding is that it would not pertain
to these reforms such as medical cannabis. That is actually
just the initiatives like proposition for that alter or from
the government. Now, I would say that if that is,
if the language is the concern by the legislature, they

(45:55):
should then pass an amendment to clarify what altering or
reforming the government means, rather than trying to create unlimited power,
no checks balances, or nullify essentially what the Supreme Court
decision lays down. And I think if you read the

(46:16):
text of the Supreme Court decision and invite everyone to
do so. It is very narrow in scope and it
is clear what they're pertaining.

Speaker 2 (46:26):
You've been very kind. I appreciate this description. I have
a final question. So, in an initiative process, especially if
we're going if if you think if it pertains to
reforming government, if you have a state wide it costs
a lot of money to have a state wide initiative
in a legislative branch. You're going to have a pro
and a con You're going to have people that read
the bill, You're going to have people that are forward
against it. There's going to be this debate. Who do

(46:47):
you imagine are the counterweights to state wide initiatives that
are very well funded? How do they Who is it
that you would expect to give the other side of
the story or be a or have that debate if
they don't concur with the initiative. Okay too, you have
a great question.

Speaker 11 (47:05):
I think two points there. One is that, first of all,
we have to understand that passing a ballot initiative in
the state of Utah is very difficult. You have to
get nearly eight percent of voters, three times the amount needed
in California, get the signatures in twenty six of the
twenty nine Senate district. We've only had seventy seven initiatives

(47:28):
passed since nineteen fifty four, So there's a very high
bar just to get on the ballot in the state
of Utah. So I think that's important to understand. Second,
it is in the example of proposition, for I think
give the how m weg we are very grassroots. We
have we had you know, like I said mentioned hundreds

(47:49):
of hours put into gathering signatures. We had for a
thousand people give public comments to the Utah Independent Resists
and Commission, two thousand map comments, five hundred and ninety
submissions for compute communities of interest.

Speaker 2 (48:05):
To who's the counterweight.

Speaker 11 (48:08):
And the counter right. Also, in addition, after all of
this has gone through and it was passed by half
a million Utah voters, then you have the legislature which
does have the power as as as as given provision
in the Utah Supreme Court decision that it can alter

(48:28):
or reform the initiative with a given compelling government interest
to do so. So there is still a counterweight. There
is still a legislature, There is still the judicial body
which sent in while We have the system of text
and balances in place, and I think that it is
very effective. As you can see, almost not even twenty

(48:48):
five percent of this initiative pass in the state of Utah.
Very high bar. You have all the Grand de government
set up. It does not take away the right of
the legislature to alter or amend or form valid initiatives.
It's given, so there's still a counterweek even after all
the process that's gone through in the valid initiative process.

Speaker 1 (49:06):
Laura, thank you. I know we'll be talking more about
this as we approach to the election. We appreciate your
time this afternoon. Thank you, Laura.

Speaker 2 (49:13):
Thank you.

Speaker 1 (49:14):
All right on our newsmaker line, that's Laura Lewis AE.
She has a communication and specialist with more armon Women
for Ethical Government. Now, before we talk about what happened
down in Washington County of this football game, you've got
a little more information you want to share with people
about the various groups behind this a better boundaries effort.

Speaker 2 (49:32):
Yes, and I appreciate Laura coming on the show, and
she represents the Mormon Women for Ethical Government very well.
Some of the issues I had really are directed more
towards better boundaries than her. So she's not really in
even a position to answer.

Speaker 1 (49:45):
She's just one of the groups groups.

Speaker 2 (49:48):
And again we like to I like, I love the take.
I think she was I think she she made her case. Well,
here's what I worry about, folks, And this is the
stuff that when I asked the question about who funds this,
who are going who are going to be your counterweights
if we're going to have because we do have a
new interpretation of our initiative law by the Supreme Court.
It's not that that the legislature wants to create some

(50:09):
new power. The way we have administered our initiatives and
they become law of the land. It becomes a statute
that you can whether it was passing a general session
or passed by the initiative. It can be addressed for
unattendant consequences and other things. But the Supreme Court has
now given these initiative citizen initiative laws a different status,
and that is new. That is a new interpretation. But

(50:31):
let me just tell you how in reference to the
initiative on better boundaries. Here in the last and this
is the last at least Utah elections data that we have,
you'll see the better boundaries even today, we'll say that
they are paid for by Utah's for Responsive Government that
used to be a pick a political issues committee and

(50:51):
they closed that down in back in twenty nineteen and
Catherine Cantor who's a powerful Democrat, or husband Josh cant
started an Alliance for a Better in Utah, which is
a Progress Now affiliate National Affiliates, which is all leidations.
When they when they filed their general election finance campaign
finance disclosure and it was for this to put this

(51:15):
on the ballot here were so they had a lot
of donations from a lot of even people from Utah.
About four thousand, seven hundred people in Utah had donated
small donations to their cause. But here's what you need
to know. Seventy two percent of their donations came from
out of state and eight donors alone were seventy percent
of utah In's for Responsive Government fundraisers. Who were those eight, well,

(51:39):
the Action Now Initiative, which is the Arnold Foundation or
Arnold LLC and Arnold Ventures Now which looked them up
there they're the ones that did all the catch and release.

Speaker 1 (51:50):
Bail reform and George like organization right.

Speaker 2 (51:54):
The ACLU Surprise, surprise, well over one hundred thousand dollars.
Campaign for Democracy. This is Gavin Newsom's own pack. They
gave one hundred thousand dollars to SEIU, which is the
United Healthcare Workers from California. One hundred thousand dollars, the
National Education Association, sixty thousand dollars represent US Massachusetts. It's

(52:14):
a they gave forty thousand dollars, and it's Hollywood liberals
and left leaning groups also. I love this one, the
Election Reformers Network in Maryland. It's part of the National
Democrat Institute and the Jimmy Carter Foundation. They gave four thousand,
so those eight donors made up sixty nine point one
seven So seventy percent of the donors for Utahns for

(52:37):
Responsive Government came from those leftist groups out of state.
My worry is, if you start this game, who is
the counterweight for those those you know, moneyed organizations with
really strong agendas that the citizenry of this state are
going to stand up and maybe counter read the initiative.
Make sure it's as advertised, this is this should initial

(53:00):
or nothing to sneeze at. I when we saw the
initiative for medical Cannabis. I was Speaker of the House
at the time. We sat down with the authors of
the initiative and came up with an agreement because they
qualified for the ballot, and why live or die by
the sword, Let's find an agreement. The legislature respects this
initiative process. But if you get into these initiatives that
you can't touch by legislator, by the legislative process as

(53:22):
you have up until now, these groups get in charge.

Speaker 1 (53:25):
I have a question for you on that because she
said something interesting and maybe you can explain it a
little bit more. She said, this ruling by the Supreme
Court is very, very narrow and it only deals with
reforming government. Yes, okay, other social issues wouldn't fall under
that umbrella, and lawmakers could make changes there. Is that true?

(53:46):
Or can you call almost any social agenda part of
a reform government?

Speaker 2 (53:51):
Yeah, if we had Medica, if we had Obamacare expansion,
are we reforming our government and changing how we're going
to fund this federal program? In other words, Rod very
the concern is that that that they may want that
to be a narrowly framed issue, but there's going to
be many, many people that will take these initiatives and

(54:12):
argue that this is reforming our state government and how
they how their laws work. And it can be argued
very broadly. And that's and that is what word. I
think this this question is not a paragraph from the legislature.
They're just trying to keep. You've had for one hundred
and thirty years an initiative law in the books that
that didn't really give it any any different status than

(54:32):
any law that's passed by way of general session or
by initiative. There is a legislative body that could look
at statutes and and amend them unintended consequences or even
fund and by way of prioritization. Once you have some
that are hands off, and then you have this argument, well,
is that government reform or not? I think it just
goes to the courts. And now you're given the judiciary,

(54:53):
the judicial branch far more power than it had, Yeah prior.

Speaker 1 (54:56):
To well, and I've mentioned this before, Greg, I think
this all goes back and she kind of alluded to
it a little bit that they want better representation in government, right, Yes,
you know what that means in this state. They want
more democrats?

Speaker 2 (55:09):
Yeah, yea, And those are the ones funding these initiatives,
and that's that's what this is all about.

Speaker 1 (55:14):
They want better Democratic representation in the Utah legislature for
some reason, they think that's going to make a better state.
They also, I contend Greg, they're looking for a secure
Democratic seat in Utah's congressional delegation. I think that's what
it comes down to. I think that's the driving force
behind all of this.

Speaker 2 (55:32):
But here's the deal. Just win elections. Go win your elections.
I mean, that's that's what they say.

Speaker 1 (55:36):
You can't because the boundaries are so much in favor
of Republicans, you can't win well.

Speaker 2 (55:42):
I think Ben McAdams election would say otherwise. I think
we've had we've had Mathis, and we've had Democrats that
have been elected, and so I think that they are
not happy that this state has not chosen Democrat candidates.
And this is a way through an initiative, Especially if
you can have a why would you ever go back
to the legislature to run a bill. If you could

(56:03):
pay enough money and carpet bomb the state with a
ten million dollar initiative effort that there's no counterweight to that.
The legislature could never even address for unattended consequences. Why
would you even try a bill. You'd never even go
to the legislative branch. You would just go and fund
as this as this as these groups, these eight groups
I mentioned did in the last effort, by the way,
that barely passed when it went on the ballot. If

(56:24):
you went by the counties and the districts that voted
against it versus the population that voted for it, there
were probably more Senate districts that vote whose constituents vote
against this and voted for it.

Speaker 1 (56:34):
You would know this better than I. But are most
of the Democratic representatives in state government right now, either
in the Senate or the House. Do most of them
come from Salt Lake City or Salt Lake County? Yes,
that's what I would.

Speaker 2 (56:45):
I think there's I think there's one maybe in Weaver
County right now, but that's that has changed over time.
And so you don't you have you there from Salt
Lake County?

Speaker 1 (56:54):
Yeah, surprise, surprise. Right, all right, we've got a lot
more to get to. We are going to be talking
about the controversy you down in Saint George and the
high school blackout effort. Yes, eight eight eight five seven
eight zero one zero, or on your cell phone dial
pound two fifteen and say hey, Rod, we'll give you
a chance to weigh in on that as we outline
what happened there. That's all coming up right here on

(57:14):
Rod and Greg and Talk Radio one oh five nine KNRS.
A little political news for you if you aren't aware
of this today, Kamala Harris has agreed to sit down
and do an interview. She'll do an interview with Dana
Bash from CNN, with Little Timmy by her side. That
will take place, I believe this Thursday. And then apparently
Trump and Kamala have agreed to do a debate September

(57:35):
tenth on ABC.

Speaker 2 (57:38):
Finally, I think she's getting hit. I think, like I said,
I think that it's I just you can only duck
for so long and then even the media starts to
have a hard time covering for her, and so I
think I think this was inevitable. So you know, I
love that she has to have her vice presidential running mate,
Little Timmy present with her, little to have a discussion
with the media, which you know.

Speaker 1 (57:58):
All right now, before we talk about this story in St. George,
we do have a caller here and I think they
are talking about the ballot initiative. Charlie is an Arum
tonight here on the Rotting Great Show. Hi Charlie, how
are you? Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 4 (58:10):
Hi Joen, I do have sorry to take you away
from the Washington County football game, but one thought that
I had as you guys were talking about this a
short while ago. The demographics in the state have changed
a lot since COVID, and I'm wondering if the timing
of this thing doesn't have something to do with trying
to get a wedge in the door for the Democratic Party,

(58:33):
because you have a lot of California Democrats that have
moved to the state, you know, in the last several years,
and they're just not liking the They want to take
the fast route rather than.

Speaker 3 (58:44):
The vote route.

Speaker 1 (58:45):
Yeah. Yeah, and the California.

Speaker 4 (58:47):
Answer, I guess the question is what do you guys
think about that? Yeah?

Speaker 2 (58:50):
I agree wholeheartedly. I think that again, I don't know
anyone that would go through the process of getting people
elected in a legislative branch trying to get a bill
passed through the House and and signed by the governor.
If you can carpet bomb ten million dollars or more
in an initiative that sounds great that no one's read
all the pages to and you don't have a counterweight
of a campaign to explain the other side of the story,

(59:11):
which every issue, I don't care, whatever it is, Everything
has two sides of the coin. But in initiatives, if
they're well funded and the other side's not, you only
get one side. That is where they'll all go. All
these Democrats in Utah will establish their government reform through
that process without having a counterweight to do it.

Speaker 1 (59:30):
Well, I have said this before and I agree. Yeah,
I call it, and you've agreed with me. Greg. We
have a moderate governor, yep. Right, we have one moderate,
if not left leaning US senator. And if John Curtis
is real liked it, I think or I'll like that.
I think it's fair to say John is a moderate.

Speaker 2 (59:48):
Yes, he's moderated. That tones it's depend on the county.
It's at Lake, he's moderate. In other counties, yeah, he's not.

Speaker 1 (59:55):
And then you have the congressional delegation, all would be
considered pretty strong conservatives. Yes, would you agree the one
thing they want to go after is the Utah State Legislature. Yes,
because I think it is the most conservative body here
in those state of Utah, and that's why they're doing it.

Speaker 2 (01:00:11):
And if you and if you're frustrated with that legislature,
which I by the way, when I'm sitting out here,
citizen Houston in the chief seats, I get frustrated.

Speaker 6 (01:00:17):
You really do.

Speaker 1 (01:00:17):
Sure we do.

Speaker 2 (01:00:18):
But if you are giving the you know, weakening the
power of our legislative branch, which is supposed to be
separate and equal, it inherently makes the executive branch and
the judiciary stronger than your legislative branch. I'm telling you
that's not going to play well. I mean, it's not
going to go well if that's how we let this go.
And this is this Supreme Court State Supreme Court decision

(01:00:40):
is a new interpretation. It's a new interpretation of the
initiative law, not not one that the legislature is proactively changing.
If anything, they're trying to go back to the one
hundred and thirty year practice of how that that initiative
has been administered.

Speaker 1 (01:00:52):
Yeah, all right, let's talk about Saint George for a
few minutes. We've got a story down there, another one
of these black faith stories. We had the instant happen.
Apparently Friday night Pineview High School down there in Saint
George' that's one of the newer schools. I mean, they're
growing so much down there's probably a new school every year.
But they had a football game they were hosting another school,
this one from Cedar City, and they had a blackout night.

(01:01:15):
It's very typical now. They encourage fans to wear black.
And you know the fact that these guys are the Panthers,
that does make a little sense, right, it does, Yes,
it makes sense. Right.

Speaker 2 (01:01:25):
Have you seen a panther like the black Panthers are?

Speaker 1 (01:01:27):
I think they're black? Yeah, I think they're black. Well,
two kids showed up and one of them had a
lot of his face painted in black, not all of it,
but the other one had all his face painted in black.
And there was one parent who apparently said, hey, what's
going on here? You know, this shouldn't be allowed in
the school. And they've expressed disappointment that this took place,

(01:01:48):
even the school district, and I think the school have
sided with the one parent. The question I have, Greg
is how many of these kids realize the debate over
black face?

Speaker 2 (01:01:59):
And I am this is no exaggeration. I say, zero, yeah, zero,
there's not what not. Those kids that did that, they
had not There wasn't a racist bone in their body
when they did it. They were look, I saw it.
They blurred out their faces, right, but their arms are
not painted black because it's like when the sun's out,
guns out. These these guys have they got their arms

(01:02:20):
hanging out there because they're teenage kids, right, but they
want to be black out, so they wear these like
sleeveless shirts and then they made their heads black. This
had no racial undertones overtones. It wasn't. And I'm so
fatigued with adults trying to turn us against each other.
You have to find offense. Do we not live in
a severe enough times in our schools and what they're

(01:02:42):
trying to do to our kids that these kids trying
to you know, going to their football game all wearing
all black as much black as they can, because that's
what a blackout is. To then find out that there's
a that it's racism, you know, just ugly racism rearing
its face. It's not true. This was this pole black
face by way of white entertainers painting their faces black

(01:03:04):
to entertain people. Was like from nineteen ten to nineteen fifty.
It was actually goes back way further than that, but
it was all the rage I guess the United States
around that time. These kids don't know what happened in
nineteen eighty, yeah, let alone what nineteen nineteen, twenty, nineteen thirty.

Speaker 3 (01:03:20):
Come on.

Speaker 1 (01:03:21):
Well, the issue that I have too, Greg is you
know people are going to say, well, they should know better.
They should have you know, they should have been taught
about this, they should understand this is offensive. I wonder
if they even dare teach it in schools anymore for
fear it would be considered racist.

Speaker 2 (01:03:36):
Yeah, you want to have a bunch of movies that
are black face to show them what you don't do anymore.
And here's the thing. How about the kid that was
the Washington Redskins kid that half his face was red
and half of it was all he was a Chiefs
fan and chief yeah, not Redskins, it was it was
the Kansas City Chiefs, and they only showed the black
side of that. And then they wanted to excoriate this
poor little kid who's there to celebrate his team. And

(01:03:58):
I think people are so h to this. I just
hope common sense just prevails. And whoever these parents are
that took offense, there's a saying, don't take offense or
the cows.

Speaker 1 (01:04:07):
Will get out.

Speaker 2 (01:04:08):
Okay, just never heard that don't take offense.

Speaker 1 (01:04:10):
Don't take offense and the cows will.

Speaker 2 (01:04:12):
Get the cows will get out. Just leave it alone.
There's there's enough that we need to We have to,
you know, rally around and fight for that's important, especially
the safety of our children. Heck, even the food is
rfk's pointing out, is something we got to protect our
kids from. So let's talk about those things and quit
trying to find these high school kids and demonize them
for no reason.

Speaker 1 (01:04:30):
Yeah, all right, more to come on the Rod and
Gregg Show right here on Utah's Talk radio one oh
five nine can Arrests. A poll put together by I
think this was the Death Red News and Hinckley Institute
of Politics. I believe just like yes, it was. The
poll shows that a majority of Utah voters say they
approve of Governor Spencer Cox's endorsement and former President Trump.

(01:04:54):
According to this new poll, well, the move surprised some
of Cox's closest allies. Poll found that his decision to
board the Trump train came as a welcome news to
fifty eight percent of registered voters. That's the same percentage
of voters who voted for Donald Trump in twenty twenty,
and we saw pictures of him and the former president
being chummy chummy at the Arlington National Cemetery yesterday.

Speaker 2 (01:05:18):
I think, and I think that percentage is higher than
his percentage in the primary that Cox.

Speaker 1 (01:05:22):
Scott, Yeah, I got fifty four percent of the present.

Speaker 2 (01:05:24):
So the TT percentage, you're on the right side, on
the right side when you're with Trump. Look, I I
know I've gotten beat up a little bit because I've said, look,
I think he's maga. I think if he wore the
hat make America great again, then we would know for sure.

Speaker 1 (01:05:39):
I think that would so he has to wear a hat.

Speaker 2 (01:05:41):
I think the photographic because you know, pictures never die.
You can change your tune all the time, right, but
if you have that hat on, whether you change or not,
that that picture would live forever.

Speaker 1 (01:05:49):
You should call him and suggest that have you thought
about that? You know, I obviously sent through the channels,
those secret channels that you have throughout government. Have used
one of those channel channels to get to the governor.

Speaker 2 (01:06:00):
I'm going to tell him that I think he should
know that if he wears that Maga hat, then I
think the questions, I think it's I think it's official.
He's he's with Trump all the way. And look, fifty
eight percent of Utahn's would think that that's the right thing.
Now here's what's interesting. Watch the governor's x feed or
Twitter feed, what everyone call it the pinging back of

(01:06:24):
anger that he is with Trump and and the people
that hate Donald Trump that are that dominate the comments
and his social media feed. It would lead one to
believe that you're not You don't have fifty eight percent
of Utah on your side. But that's but that universe
of people that's on that platform. Boy, they don't like

(01:06:44):
the fact that he's supporting Trump and joining him in
events and everything else.

Speaker 1 (01:06:50):
Speaking of not supporting Trump, did you see that story
about this list of former employees of George W. Bush, A,
Mitt Romney, and John McCain, And they are what about
one hundred and fifs my reading or is it that high?
All writing in support of Kamala Harris and against Donald Trump. Well,
they can't get it that that Trump derangement syndrome still

(01:07:11):
exists in so many people's heads.

Speaker 2 (01:07:13):
I just think their fingers and toes are webbed because
they've lived in that swamp so long they don't know.
I think that's uniparty written all over it.

Speaker 1 (01:07:21):
Yeah, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:07:22):
I just think it's like if you heard that Mitch
McConnell is trying to get the House to take out
the saving if they have to be yeah, that you
have to be a can't be can't be foreign, You
have to be a legal resident of this country, let
alone state to vote. And mitchrill Call is trying to
take that out because he's afraid that the Democrats won't
pass the spending bill if it's in there. Well, I

(01:07:44):
think that says a lot if they won't pass the
spending bill, and I think it's worth not spending to
have the Democrats say we want we don't support a
law that prohibits foreign nationals from voting in our election.

Speaker 1 (01:07:54):
Do you think any of the people who used to
work for Bush or McCain or Romney called any of
them the three and said we want to write a
letter here. Are you okay with it? Because by them
writing this letter and the three former presidents or presidential
candidates not saying don't do that is an indication to
me that they agree with their staffers and they think

(01:08:14):
we should vote for Kahlo.

Speaker 2 (01:08:15):
Harris one hundred percent.

Speaker 1 (01:08:16):
Remember, the rumor was during the convention, the final night
of the convention, that George Bush would show up at
the convention to adorse Kanala. There's also where that Matt
Romney was going to be there. Yeah, it's again that's
all the uniparty stuff. And I think what our earlier
guests in the program said, you had Ronald Reagan that
really fought the state, like the deep state and everything else.

(01:08:37):
And he was you know, the State Department didn't like him.
They didn't want him to call to call out Gorbachev,
to tear down the wall. They didn't like anything. He
really was someone that was trying to deliver.

Speaker 2 (01:08:47):
The power back to people. Yeah, and Trump's doing that
and everything in between. He said, you know, the Bushes
went along, they let it grow, They did it all,
and it crossed parties to the point where I do
think that one of the greatest tre actions to Donald
Trump and why he's popular is people feel he's authentically
on their side and not the establishment side. I did

(01:09:09):
not know the deep state was as deep. I didn't
know it was as insidious as it was until his administration.
I had no and I was a public servant. You'd
think i'd have picked up on it. I did not
know that that establishment, in that bureaucracy and that federal
government was capable and everyone at works in it were
capable of what they're doing to this country right now.

Speaker 1 (01:09:28):
Well, the guest we had on earlier, and Robert Alliance,
who wrote about the bureaucratic state, I think he mentioned
during the interview that of the twenty twenty four bills
that was passed by Congress, there was like nine thousand
pages or ninety thousand policies and pages about policy written
based out of those bills.

Speaker 3 (01:09:47):
Wow.

Speaker 2 (01:09:47):
Yeah, And look, we actually have that issue in Utah.
When I was in the legislature, we discovered that bills
and legislative intent could be worked around by administrative rules
that were set around the bills that were passed, and
so Utah created an administrative Rules committee where if those
issues come up where there seems to be a contradiction,
you can bring it to the legislature and they can

(01:10:08):
have the people from whatever whether whatever department in state
government it is that might have administrative rules that don't
really sync up with the with the bill, and have
them come and explain, and that that committee has been
used and that committee has had witnesses that had to
explain why those administrative rules don't look like the bill.
So we have in the state of Utah a pretty
good check to that. I don't know. I don't know

(01:10:31):
if you watch. Congress is too far lost to do
something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:10:34):
But I would I would be in favor. And this
may be what you were talking about the first week
or two weeks of a legislative session, and you may
have to extend it.

Speaker 2 (01:10:42):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:10:43):
I know you don't like that idea. I like it
would be that every department would need to show up
before some committee and justify their existence.

Speaker 2 (01:10:50):
Yeah, I call zero based budgets.

Speaker 1 (01:10:52):
I don't know if that's possible, Greg, but I think
that people would like see, yeah, this department is effective
at serving list customers, taxpayers, You stay, are you you don't.

Speaker 2 (01:11:03):
So legislay A fiscal analysts do a lot of that internally.
They asked they look at what was appropriated last year.
They asked for reports on how those appropriations have been spent,
how they've been used, how they've been utilized, if it
matches up with how they were prioritized. There's a lot
of that that goes on, but zero based budgeting would
take more weeks, and then you'd get away from the
citizen legislature where seven weeks or less is what you'd

(01:11:25):
like to spare. I do like the everyday people that serve.

Speaker 1 (01:11:27):
All right, morey coming up some final segment on the
Rowden greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one
O five nine k n rs. Don't you think people
need a breather occasionally?

Speaker 2 (01:11:37):
No, no breather.

Speaker 1 (01:11:39):
We're great whatsoever.

Speaker 2 (01:11:40):
We're here to win. We're we're in it to win it.

Speaker 1 (01:11:43):
We don't have time.

Speaker 2 (01:11:44):
Guess what what? Uh? Kamala Harris is going to going
to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for Labor Day. They have a big
Labor Day parade. She's bring an old sleepy Joe with
her because she is because what's going on in Pennsylvania.
The polls are stubborn, the last polls, even with her
convention everything, he's still this one percent ahead or Poles

(01:12:05):
and Trump does not bend. He bends, but he doesn't break.
He does. It's one percent. She can't get ahead of him.
They don't really like her all that much. They don't
know her. They don't like her. So she's bringing old
Joe because you know, Joe does have that kind of
that he can't appeal to the union everyday guy, or
has in the past. I don't know if he still does.
But this is when she's bringing him and him to

(01:12:26):
Labor Day parade in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. That's not a good sign.
That's another tell that she is in trouble in this
race because he's walking the parade, is he Heavens No.
They're gonna have like one of those popemobiles, you know,
like the dome over and he's gonna have his hand
that's stuck and it's gonna be waving like Bernie.

Speaker 1 (01:12:43):
Yeah weekend Anie, Yeah, Yeah, something set that up. By
the way, we have a little bit more information on
the interview with Kamala and Little Timmy Yes on CNN
on Thursday. Apparently it will be taped.

Speaker 2 (01:12:58):
Of course, it's.

Speaker 1 (01:12:59):
Gonna be be live. It will be taped. They'll be
taped earlier in the day. And do you trust the
editors at CNN to give you the straight and.

Speaker 2 (01:13:08):
The thing is that she's trying to get some she's
trying to get some credit for actually having an opinion,
being able to articulate it. The fact that they're taping it,
it takes that right away. I mean, it's I just
think everyone's just gonna roll. There's gonna be a collective
eye roll on a taped.

Speaker 1 (01:13:23):
Yeah, I would agree. I would agree. Now, this is
the story I wanted to share, But mister Hughes has
told me I can't control the microphone.

Speaker 2 (01:13:32):
You're the boss.

Speaker 1 (01:13:33):
You're ready, You're ready as we age. Would you agree
that her brain slow down? Mind, don't don't, don't you
dare look at me?

Speaker 2 (01:13:43):
Yeah, Well, my daughter Sophie told me that I'm gonna
get the bill. I'm getting slowly well harassed.

Speaker 1 (01:13:50):
You know, we forget things. We aren't as sharp as
we used to. We struggle to learn new things, right
like computers. Yes, okay, but there is an answer. Apparently
there is a German study out there. Leave it up
to the Germans to do this, a way to turn
back the clock on aging brains. Cannabis.

Speaker 2 (01:14:09):
It's a trap.

Speaker 1 (01:14:10):
It's so so if we all if we are us
older folks. If we just sat around the table and
smoked a little weed. You never know.

Speaker 2 (01:14:18):
You bring cheech and chong in here. Let me let
me have a chat with them. If they're if they're
you know, if they're young, and they got peter Pan
syndrome going, then I'll believe it.

Speaker 1 (01:14:26):
Well, they they tested mice. Why poor mice? I know
what could they do? Any mice get tested all the time.

Speaker 2 (01:14:34):
I don't know if you know this. We're not mice either,
so what even what it happens to mice? Why would
that happen?

Speaker 1 (01:14:38):
Found out their brains improved in learning, memory, and cognitive
flexibility when they gave the mice cannabis.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

Therapy Gecko

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Opposition to Utah Lawmakers Proposed Constitutional Amendment; What Voters in America Care About

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

Therapy Gecko

All Episodes