The Rod and Greg Show: Why Matt Gaetz is Perfect for DOJ; Rising Autism in America

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Great Talk Radio lined up for you today. Good afternoon, everybody.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
I'm Rod Arquette, I'm citizen Greg Hughes.

Speaker 1 (00:05):
Gonna be a lot of fun today. Greg, We've got
all kinds of things. He went on, It's been a
crazy week. We thought last week was crazy. The craziness
continued this week.

Speaker 2 (00:13):
Well, my fourth of July slash Christmas Morning just continues.

Speaker 3 (00:18):
Done.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
It's been going on every day, every day. I have
a clip that I never thought I could play on
this show that is probably I don't know that it's
going to get better than what I'm going to play,
because this, to me is the pinnacle for me. This
is beyond anything I could ever hope, anything I could
have ever imagined would be said in this post election cycle.

Speaker 1 (00:40):
And anyway, Yeah, well I'm excited like you are, but
now I want to see them get the job done,
don't you. Well, yeah, let's celebrate, but now go get
the job done.

Speaker 2 (00:51):
I'm with you all the way. And look, we talked
about this yesterday. The list of things that Donald Trump
and his administration was able to accomplish in his first
term when he came in there kind of of you know,
it didn't he didn't even know what he was up against,
and still all of the good things he was able
to accomplish with him knowing it now and with that team,
that dream team he's putting together as an administration. I

(01:11):
just do have very high hopes and I actually think
that we'll see some great movement now. The media be
prepared everything he does, and he is going to describe
as the end of time. Everything is going to be
the worst.

Speaker 1 (01:22):
You've ever seen?

Speaker 2 (01:22):
Have you ever thought?

Speaker 1 (01:23):
Thank you?

Speaker 2 (01:23):
They will misrepresent, they will They will say every cut
to every agency and department is the sky literally falling
down around us. They will say that. But I fear not.

Speaker 1 (01:33):
Get ready, folks, Well, we've got a great show lined
up today. John Daniel Davidson from The Federalist will join us.
He talks about Matt and Matt Gates being the wrecking
ball that the DOJ needs right now. Doctor Leonard Sacksvielle
join us. He wrote an article in the New York
Post about a new study on autism and he has
some theories on that, and we'll get into that as well.

(01:54):
Thank Rod and Greg. Gets Friday, we open up the
phones to you in the five o'clock hour and let
you join us in whatever conversation you'd like to have
with us. So a busy, busy day coming up here
on the Rod in great show eight eight eight five
seven O eight zero one zero eight eight eight five
seven O age zero one zero, or on your cell phone,
I'll pound two fifty and simply say, hey, Rod, quite
a party down in Florida. Last night, Marlo was America.

(02:18):
We had to tell him, well, we have the show.

Speaker 2 (02:20):
I mean they want us to m see it. I said, hey,
you know, you got to book us a little in advance.
We're in such high demand. That's right.

Speaker 1 (02:29):
Awkward.

Speaker 2 (02:30):
Hate to tell them though, but.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
Yeah, yeah, but Rocky showed up last.

Speaker 2 (02:33):
Night Sylvester Stallone. Now let me just tell you something.
If I grew up on Sylvester Stallone. He won an
Academy Award for Rocky the First One in nineteen seventy
six Best Picture, Amazing and and it just got better
from there. I watch with my kids Rocky four against
Ivan Drago every fourth of July. It's it's you have
to watch it. I just love it. I just love

(02:55):
I love the Rambos, I love, I just love. And
now he's doing this new show on on Hulu. We no,
it's on Herman King.

Speaker 1 (03:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (03:02):
I love that show too. Everything Rocky I love. By
the way, I went to the Boxing Hall of Fame
back in eight or ten or twenty ten. He was
inducted into the Boxing International Boxing Hall of Fame with
Mike Tyson that year. Oh so I got to hear
from both of those guys. Well, he had something to
say last night at the gala. I play it for
our listeners. I hope everybody's sitting down and you might

(03:25):
want to record this because this is something you may
want to quote the rest of your born days, as
I'm going to do.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
Ready Ready with.

Speaker 3 (03:32):
George Washington defended his country. He had no idea that
he was going to change the world, because without him,
you could imagine what the world would look like. Guess
what we got, the second George Washington.

Speaker 1 (03:46):
Congratulaes second George Washington.

Speaker 2 (03:52):
That's right. He also before that said he's a mythical figures,
he loves mythology, and that this guy did things that
nobody thought he could ever do a figure and that
he's a second George Washington. And he's a guy that
wasn't on the Trump train in sixteen. I don't think
he was on it in twenty but man, he saw
what he saw. Deny it.

Speaker 1 (04:09):
Well, someone who is not changing the world, and we're
glad of it is Far Left View host Whoopy Goldburg.
This story is crazy. She was busted today for spreading
a hoax to engender sympathy, a sympathy for herself following
the president's victory last week. Now. On Wednesday's episode of
The View, Goldberg and her co host Sonny Houston and

(04:32):
the other co host celebrated Whoopee's sixty ninth birthday with
cupcakes from a bakery, which Whoopy said were her mother's favorite.
But what should have been harmless fun took an ugly
turn when Goldberg alleged her order was rejected by the
bakery because of politics.

Speaker 4 (04:50):
Place that made.

Speaker 5 (04:51):
These refused to make them for me.

Speaker 4 (04:55):
Oh really, yes, no, no, no, oh, let me explain.

Speaker 1 (05:01):
Let me explain.

Speaker 5 (05:04):
They said that their ovens had gone down, all kinds
of stuff, but folks went and got them anyway, which
is why I'm not telling you.

Speaker 1 (05:12):
Who made them.

Speaker 5 (05:13):
But it's not camping because I'm a woman. But perhaps
they did not like my politics.

Speaker 1 (05:18):
Yes, well, that's totally false. And the owner of the bakery.
It came out today is in Staten Island, and the
bakery owner came out and said, we had a boiler
broke down and that's why you weren't able to get
the bakery goods that you wanted. Here's the local council
representative there in Staten Island talking about what happened. And
just a.

Speaker 6 (05:37):
Little background for those who know. They had a boiler. Again,
it's been here one hundred and forty five years. They
had a boiler that was sixty or seventy years old
and the first week in November, guess what it went
on the French. They had to be replaced. And the
reputation of Ultimate is impeccable. So rather than commit to
something they couldn't guarantee, they say we can't do it.
And the person who besmirched and defamed them took that

(06:00):
as an insult to her.

Speaker 1 (06:02):
Well, get over it. I love that.

Speaker 2 (06:05):
Now the question is over. I asked you this because
I wasn't sure because she didn't name the bakery. Well,
I was listening. And the reason that that bankery is
the one that was understood to be the one is
that the type of pastry they ordered. If you google it.
There's only one bakery that provides that particular pastry, and
it's this family owned business of over one hundred years,
and that this family, the woman of this family that

(06:27):
spoke that, you know, they get up three in the
morning and they've been doing this their whole lives, generation
after generation. And people knew who it was when Whoopy
Goldberg made this accusation, and so they just wanted to
clear the record that they didn't They weren't worried at
all about her politics or anything like that. It was
a genuine problem with their boiler.

Speaker 1 (06:46):
Yeah, And they were saying, look, they get up at
two three o'clock in the morning to make donuts, to
make all those delicious pastries. They do this and they
don't care greg about politics. So for Whoopy to accuse
them of being political for not having a pastry ready,
even though the boiler is broken down, they can't. She
had to make it political.

Speaker 2 (07:04):
And why I'm glad we're talking about this is because
other people wanted to make sure that the record was
set straight. And the reason the record needed to be
made straight is it because when she's on that show,
they have a big audience of some sort and she made.
She disparaged them and said that they that they made
she made her whoop, you made herself a victim. But
but it was going it was going to have an

(07:25):
impact or did have an impact on this in this
small business. And so I think setting the record straight
uh does two things. One, it lets all of us
know that they were unfairly maligned, and maybe if we
want to go help them and they're online, we could
buy something. But I'm sure that their local customers appreciate
knowing the truth. But second, how badly can the view
continue to look? I thought they hit the lowest of

(07:46):
low levels after the election when they told everyone to
not go to their families Thanksgiving dinners. And they've just
been absolutely acting out in these tantrums and here you go,
they go to attack this small business in Staten Island.
It's every time I think the view is just well,
it's already unwatchable for me. But you've hit the lowest
of blows. Now they can they they completely redeem themselves

(08:08):
and go lower. They just change them. They prove me
wrong and they go worse.

Speaker 1 (08:12):
Well, the crazy part about this, the view is under
ABC News. It's part of the ABC News to division.
So why isn't somebody in the news division, like you know,
one of the top Bostons over there, say you know,
you need to back it down. But we had that
story the other day that the view is looking for
more balance. But then ABC News comes out, which oversees

(08:32):
the views, says where looking for anybody? We're happy with
a team that we have. Well, yeah, and oh, by
the way, by the way, the name of the bakery,
if you'd like to order something is Holterman's Bakery. That's
h O L T E R M A N N postrophe.
Ask Holdman's Bakery Holderman's Bakery in Staten Island. If you

(08:53):
will like to go order something, support the fuss, I
might go home and do it. Well, let me tell
you what a few of the pastries I saw online. Look, yeah,
all right, mare coming up on the Roden greg Show
and Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine, Kay, and
are as we forgot to play something? Shall we play
it now?

Speaker 2 (09:08):
Yes? I'm on all you old school I'm on you
eighties nineties.

Speaker 1 (09:18):
Should you explain what pop?

Speaker 2 (09:20):
This is Nintendo's sit Down, This is Nintendo's Mike Tyson's
punch Out. Have you played this as a kid. I
did this is back when you know the game is
still like a video game, all pixelated, but they had
Mike Tyson and you have the different characters, and so
it's another Mike Tyson punch out night tonight.

Speaker 1 (09:39):
It is taking.

Speaker 2 (09:43):
It's like a YouTuber. I don't know you're some influencer,
but look, Jake Paul. He's he's had a number of bouts.
I would say he's a slightly better than average fighter,
which would normally tell you he has no shot against
Iron Mike Tyson. But Mike Tyson's fifty eight. Uh, this
is Paul, this logan Paul Kidd. He's twenty nine. And
that's what makes it interesting, that age gap. But I

(10:04):
hope Mike Tyson wins and prevails because he's had too
historic of a career and is too great of a
heavyweight champ to lose to this young guy. But this
kid's he's getting he's he's a promoter. I mean he's
making he's making forty mil just to get in and
he's handing Mike twenty mil.

Speaker 1 (10:21):
Wait a minute, Mike, Mike is.

Speaker 2 (10:23):
The B side of this of this fight. Really, yeah,
if you can believe it, Yeah, so he's making forty
Mike Tyson's making twenty mil. But you know they've I
just I want to see it's on Netflix tonight. Yes
it is, and there's some other fights too, but I
want to see Mike Tyson win. I will be very
sad for him if he doesn't. But you know, it's
it's almost like this where I heard him say he

(10:43):
has to risk being embarrassed. That really motivates him to
make sure he's not. So let's let's see what happens tonight.

Speaker 1 (10:49):
All right, Well, there's going to be a fight, speaking
of fights in Congress in the coming weeks as they
debate the appointees, the nominees for President Donald Trump to
serve on his cabinet. One that's there is to be
a tussle, and we're talking about the nomination of Matt
Gates as the Attorney General for this great country of ours.
Joining us on our newsmaker line to talk more about
it is John Daniel Davidson, Senior correspondent at The Federalist.

(11:13):
Always great to have John on the show. John, thanks
for joining us in your opinion, John, what does this
nomination of first of all, Pete Haigsath mean and to
the military.

Speaker 7 (11:23):
I think Trump is sending a signal that the Department
of Justice in his second term is not going to
be used as a political weapon to undermine his own presidency.
And that's a very clear message from him. Look, in
his first term, he had an attorney general who turned
the department over to Robert Muller for a year's long

(11:45):
investigation that hamstrung and undercut Trump's agenda and his effectiveness
in office. What he's saying here is that's not going
to happen again. The Department of Justice is corrupt, and
I want a loyalist to go in there and clean
it out and make sure that it is not used
against me.

Speaker 2 (12:06):
So will this need to be a recess appointment or
will this go through a Senate vetting and confirmation process?
Do you think?

Speaker 7 (12:17):
I don't know the inside baseball on that, and I'm
hesitant to make a prediction. I know the Wall Street
Journal was reporting that something like two dozen Senators have
indicated that they don't support the nomination. I don't know
what the administration's path forward is going to be, whether
recess appointment or rather just leaning on these members and saying, look,

(12:41):
Trump just won in a landslide election, he has a
mandate from the American people to go in and reform
these corrupt departments and agencies and to pick the people
to do it. And so, you know, if the new
Senate Majority Leader, John Soon wants to come out of
the gate first thing as new majority leader and obstruct

(13:04):
Trump's agenda and obstruct his nominees, then he should understand
that there's going to be an electoral price to pay
for that. You know, the sense of the American people,
and certainly of Republican voters, is not on the side
of these pencil necked institutional establishment guys in Congress who

(13:27):
are not on board with the MAGA agenda.

Speaker 1 (13:29):
John, how big of a wrecking ball will Matt Gates
need to get after the dog? How big of a
wrecking ball will he need.

Speaker 7 (13:37):
A bigger one than he has? It's you know, fixing
the DOJ is something that is beyond the ability of
an Attorney general to do. But certainly if it has
effect of causing a lot of career DOJ people to
resign and get the heck out of there, that'll be
a good start. But look, this is an agency, together
with or department. I should say, together with the FBI,

(14:01):
that are among the most destructive and corrupt government agencies
that we have had in the history of our country.
The DOJ under Biden became totally politicized, totally weaponized. They
undercut not only the civil rights and constitutional rights of

(14:22):
ordinary law abiding Americans, but they ran what amounted to
a coup plotting operation during Trump's first term. And so
we can't have that. It's sort of like, we either
fix this or we lose the republic. So I think
that extreme measures are not uncalled for in the situation.

Speaker 2 (14:42):
So I agree, And I actually the more I see
the swamp and the regime media lose their minds, the
more comfortable I get with mackay Says as the nominee,
because I do think it takes something like that a
disruptor of the highest order. My question, I guess, is
with Matt Gates, particularly having this ethics House Ethics complaint

(15:04):
that would have been released today if he was still
a member. I've heard that Speaker Johnson's not going to
make that public or it's not going to be public.
Does is he the wrecking ball that will be best
suited to do what President Trump needs to be done
in DJ or does this become a bigger distraction than
Trump needs as he begins this next term.

Speaker 7 (15:25):
Well, the media would of course like to make it
a distraction. They would like to make it about this
unreleased House ethics report, or the year and a half
long Justice Department investigation into Gates that resulted in no charges,
the purpose of which was to ruin his reputation. I'm
sure the media would like to make it about that.

(15:46):
But whether or not he's the right person for the job,
I for one, am not going to be lectured to
about sexual morality by a bunch of degenerates in Washington,
DC who has suddenly decided to clutch their phurls and
run for the fainting couches when they hear about sexual impropriety.

Speaker 8 (16:03):
Give me a break.

Speaker 7 (16:05):
That is not something I'm concerned about.

Speaker 1 (16:08):
Joe, let me ask you. He was a surprise pick.
Were you surprised when you heard his name?

Speaker 2 (16:12):
John?

Speaker 7 (16:14):
On the one hand, I was, on the other hand,
when you look back at his record in Congress before
the DOJ announced their investor sham investigation into him in
twenty twenty one, he was one of the more effective
voices at pushing back against the deep state at calling
out the abuses of the Justice Department against the January

(16:36):
sixth defendants, for example, calling out the Russia Gate collusion hoax,
questioning open ended funding for Ukraine. You know, he was
part of a relatively small group of Republican congressmen that
I think will will you know, be shown to be
on the right side of a lot of these issues,

(16:56):
and so in that sense, it's not surprising he is
an effective communicator. I'm not going to vouch for, nor
do I care about his personal sexual morality or habits.
If we started caring about what Washington creatures did on
their private time in the nation's capital, then I think
a whole lot of people would be disqualified from positions

(17:18):
of public office. So that's not the issue. The media
is going to try to make it about that issue,
and I think that the Trump administration has to resist that.

Speaker 2 (17:27):
You know, I love your take. I do think that
Merrick Garland has made the taking the bar to about
curb hot height. Okay, so I think you're right. You
can't do worse. And what we've endured and what we've
lived through the last four years. The pearl clutching Clinton supporters.
Also is a great thought in my mind in terms
of how you've pointed out the hypocrisy from the left.
So I guess. I guess at the end of the day,

(17:50):
you think that whether it's either through a recess appointment
or even does majority leaders soon really want us block
Trump's appointments right out the gate. You sound bullish that
we will have Matt Yates as our attorney general. I
don't want to put words in your mouth, but it
sounds like that's where you think this is going. Halprin does.

Speaker 7 (18:08):
By the way, I think it could go that direction.
You know, I don't purport to be some kind of
a Washington insider, but I think that pressure could be
brought to bear on members of Congress to say, hey,
you need to get on board or get out of
the way. We just had a national election. Trump got

(18:31):
seventy five million plus votes, He won the electoral College,
he won the popular vote. You know, Republicans gained control
and kept control both houses of Congress. There is a
mandate here, and I think that a full court press
on these guys might change their tune. You know, we
still have this class of Republicans in Washington that's worried

(18:54):
about what the New York Times and MSNBC say about them,
and those people have to understand that they need to
either get on board with the manga agenda or get
out of the way because their time is done. Is done.

Speaker 1 (19:06):
Yeah, I think it is done, Greg, And I think
John makes a very good point in John, thanks for
joining us, makes a very good point. Those who do
not want to get on board, You're done, get out
of the way, even on the Republican side, Greg, just
get out of the way.

Speaker 2 (19:18):
Yeah, we just there is no we are not in
a spirit of oh, let's get along, let's do this it.
Look they didn't get along. We've got the majority. We've
got a mandate from the people. Actually, Donald Trump does
everybody else. You just wrote his coattails. So watch your leader,
and you know, an active rule like.

Speaker 1 (19:34):
A majority, like the majority. Well, coming up on the
Rotting Greg Show, we found this fascinating article in the
New York Post today about autism, the fact that it
is soaring, a real concern about that. Joining us on
our Newsmaker line to talk about it is doctor Leonard Sachs.
He wrote the article about why autism is soaring? Doctor,
thanks for joining us this afternoon. You looked at a

(19:56):
new study out on autism. What are some of the
key highlights of disturb you?

Speaker 9 (20:00):
So the Journal of the American Medical Association, you know,
perhaps the most prestigious journal in the United States. The
researchers found that the rate of autism among children five
to eight years of age tripled, tripled in just eleven
years time, between twenty eleven twenty twenty two. Tripled. That's

(20:25):
that's crazy, Okay, a diagnosis doesn't triple in tenure in
one in one decade, in eleven years time. Why did
this happen? The researchers offered no suggestion as to why
it happened. But when you go to the American Academy
Pediatric's website or you talk to the you know, the
official leaders at the leading medical schools, they say, well,

(20:51):
it's it's improved awareness and advocacy. And also they will
acknowledge there there's some significant changes in the diagnostic criteria,
a simplification of the diagnostic criteria in twenty thirteen. So
improved awareness and advocacy and simplified diagnosis. No, I'm not

(21:17):
really buying it. Okay, yeah, maybe a little bit, but
that's not the whole story. And look, it's a complicated story,
and there's a lot of things going on, and autism
is a spectrum. And yeah, there are some kids who
are profoundly disabled and can barely talk and can barely function.
And I'm not talking about those kids, but they're missing

(21:41):
they're missing a big part of the picture which I
see as a family doctor, and they're not talking about it.
And that's what my article is about. So let me
tell you what I'm talking about. So I want you
to imagine an eight year old kid who is rude,
he is annoying, he talks back, he spits, he bites,

(22:03):
And what would have happened with this kid twenty years ago?
Twenty years ago, the teacher would have said, look, this
is totally unacceptable. Mom, you got to sit down with
your son and explain to him what is required in
a classroom. You don't bite, you don't spit, you don't
talk back. Now, imagine the same kid today, same classroom,

(22:27):
same boy, same behavior. What I have observed as a
family doctor in the Trench's firsthand is that it is
now very common for a teacher, counselor school principal to
say something like, your son seems to have a deficit
in what we call social emotional reciprocity. Have you thought

(22:48):
of having him evaluated? He may be on the autism spectrum.
And you take him to the psychologist or the child psychiatrist,
and sure enough, he meets the criteria and he gets
diagnosed as being on the autism spectrum. And I just

(23:10):
don't buy it. I do not buy it. This is
this kid doesn't really have autism. He's just a snatty
kid whose parents have no idea what to do as parents.
So I wrote this book called The Collapse of Parenting,
And that's a big part. That's a very good example
of what I mean by the collapse of parenting. Parents

(23:31):
who have no understanding, or they do have an understanding,
but they don't know what to do. They are uncomfortable
exercising authority, and they feel helpless. And so a big
part of the book is to empower that parent, to
give them the courage to do their job, to transform

(23:51):
that snotty kid into a gentleman. You can do this,
I've seen it done. But what discourages me about the
United States is that the leading pediatricians at the leading
medical schools are not talking about this. They don't get it.
They are medicalizing misbehavior. I talk about the medicalization of misbehavior.

(24:12):
What's the difference between saying your son is rude and
saying your son may meet criteria for being on the
autism spectrum. It's a big difference. If I say your
son is rude, then the burden of responsibility is on you,
is on you, the parent, to step up to teach
your son what's required. If I say your son may
meet criteria for being on the autism spectrum, then the

(24:35):
burden of responsibility shifts away from the parents to me,
to the prescribing physician, where it should not be. A
burden of responsibility should be on the parent and on
the kid.

Speaker 2 (24:48):
So hure, I'm tracking what you're saying. And here in
Utah a number of years ago, I would say that
when you mentioned twenty years ago that diagnosis was ADHD
and they were trying to say that the parents should
medicate their children because they were misbehaving and it was
easier to have docile children in class. And so there
was a law we passed here in the state of
Utah that did not allow educators to recommend to parents'

(25:11):
medical to go seek medical attention. But my question about
about autism is that the spectrum can be different. Where
you have the severely autistic, but there's a lot of
others that are on that spectrum where it's not just
misbehavior by itself. Which are you tracking as a doctor,
the peanut allergies, the different food allergies that we have

(25:32):
that I mean, there are tables now in cafeterias in
schools for kids that have certain allergies that didn't exist
in the past. Could it be that a lot of
autism not what you're talking about. I think is real
in terms of the misbehavior and things and how people
try to define that away from the parenting. But when
we talk about autism, I do think it's growing in
terms of young men. But I also see the allergies

(25:54):
and the other things that are happening that are debilitating
our young people. Is there something to that. Is there
something in our food or something in our environment that
is leading to some of these things that we didn't
see in the past.

Speaker 9 (26:06):
Well, in my article, I did link to two scholarly
articles that have shown a link between environmental toxins and
the increasing rate of autism. So I do think that
there is, well, I don't think. I know that there
is compelling scholarly research linking various energindstructors and environmental toxins

(26:29):
to the increasing rate of autism, but not a tripling
in ten years. This is a crazy increase in eleven
years time to see going from ten to thirty in

(26:55):
eleven years time among five to eight year olds, and
also increases in older kids, not quite to the extent
that we're seeing in the young age group. And again,
as a family doctor, I'm seeing firsthand how that seven
year old, that eight year old who twenty years ago,
that failure to comply with social norms would have been

(27:18):
recognized as as as poor as being due to poor parenting. Now,
as a result of this societal collapse of parenting is
now being blamed on autism, and the responsibility has shifted
away from parents to and is now being put on

(27:39):
the prescribing physician.

Speaker 2 (27:40):
So, doctor, let me ask you, I find this really fascinating.
So back old school teachers or people trying to say
that your kid needs to be met, you know, given
medicine or given I like your medicalization and misbehavior. It
was it was hyperactivity ADHD. And you heard and it
was riddling back in the day. Maybe it's adderall today.
What kind of medicine or what kind of prescription drugs

(28:03):
are they recommending for children that they diagnose with autism?

Speaker 9 (28:07):
Okay, so there don't we don't have an FDA approved medication.
I can tell you, however, from my first hand experience,
that the child who's having tantrums in the classroom is
often being prescribed antipsychotics like risperdal, zaprexa, and and these
medications are prescribed much more widely in the United States

(28:29):
than there are in other countries, many times more likely
Risperdal's I prexiss serraquel. And incidentally, your previous point about
ADHD is still very much in play, and I still
see kids who are being prescribed after all Ybance concert

(28:50):
of meditate for kids who are not paying attention. And again,
one strength of my background is I'm not only a
medical doctor, I'm also PhD psychologist, So I'm very comfortable
evaluating these kids. And very often you find this kid
doesn't really have ADHD. He just hates school. Yeah, he's
not paying attention. That teach was absolutely right, he's not

(29:12):
paying attention. But the reason he's not paying attentions because
he hates school and he's bored out of his mind.

Speaker 1 (29:17):
Doctor Lendard Sacks joining us on our Any Hour Newsmaker line.

Speaker 2 (29:21):
Here we go, Tyson punch out. Well, you know there
is a character named Paul in there too, with Blondie too.
It looks like this might have meant to be, so
I'm hoping he just does a punch out.

Speaker 1 (29:32):
I was just watching on social media. They had a
brief real about thirty seconds of Tyson's top ten knockouts.
He doesn't throw a long punch's very compact, but boy
when he hits Wow.

Speaker 2 (29:46):
Yeah, his his it's all power, It's all all It's
the torque in his body and the way he moves
his head and then goes angles around the fighter.

Speaker 1 (29:54):
He'll just come around them.

Speaker 2 (29:56):
It's it is he's he's There's a reason Iron Mike
was one of the greatest waight champions of the world. Now,
but yeah, we'll see what a fifty eight year old
versus a twenty nine year old. How that what kind
of equalizer that becomes?

Speaker 1 (30:08):
I don't understand how logan is it? Logan Paul? Is
that the same is getting forty million and Mike Tyson's
only getting twenty. Yeah, he had all this that seems
upside doubt.

Speaker 2 (30:16):
He's had a bunch of fights that he's been able
to get a lot of a lot of attention to.
So he's kind of the guy that's been putting it
all together and he will. He called out he wanted
to fight Mike Tyson. Who wouldn't. I mean, if you
think you could be even a fifty eight year old
Mike Tyson, if you could beat him, it's it's coming
on the bucket list moment. I guess they keep having
these wig ins and stuff, and I know some of
this is hyped up on purpose to get people to

(30:37):
watch that Mike Tyson open hands slaps him and it
must hurt so bad if he knows that's coming. I
don't even know how he could stand there because that
would hurt.

Speaker 1 (30:47):
Well. They had video today of them doing the final workouts,
and you know what Logan Paul had on his head?
What a fake chicken?

Speaker 10 (30:56):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (30:56):
Oh, you know they're they're going at it there. And
that's the name of the game, is it. When it's
boxing a big match, you just hype it up.

Speaker 2 (31:03):
Yeah, But I don't think it was Logan. It might
have been the other Paul that fought Floyd Mayweather, which
at a much lighter weight, and Floyd made quick work
as he did he did it wasn't much of a fight.

Speaker 1 (31:13):
All right, we want to get the phones open to you,
but a couple of audio sound bities. We'd like you here.
First of all, speaking of athletes, Charles Barkley always entertaining. Charles. Now,
remember before the election, you know, he came out he's
an independent, but he came out in favor of voting
for Kamala Harrison. He went after I think blacks of
America for voting for Donald Trump, as I recall. But

(31:35):
now after the election, well, Charles has kind of changed
his tune. It's not a contest in my eyes.

Speaker 10 (31:41):
Well, I want all seventy five and seventy one million
to be successful at all Americas. He's the president of
the United States that I wish him nothing but the best.

Speaker 1 (31:52):
But we lost.

Speaker 10 (31:55):
And I just want to say this to the Democrats,
which I'm an independent who voted them Democratic two minutes favor,
shut the up.

Speaker 1 (32:06):
When you win, you get to say what you want to.
When you lose, you need to shut the hell up.
Just shut up, Charles in his own unique way, just
shut up. I love it quick. You're complaining, LA does
he does?

Speaker 11 (32:21):
Now.

Speaker 1 (32:22):
There are a lot of those in the legacy media
right now very concerned about Donald Trump, and he's putting
the finishing touches on his economic team. One that is
getting a lot of attention along with Matt Gads is
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. The head out H H. S
Well Scott Jennings, who I have really grown to love
on CNN decided to take on the naysayers and listen

(32:44):
to this exchange between with Scott Jennings on CNN yesterday,
is a nut the fact. Okay, so that's different than
what you just said.

Speaker 12 (32:52):
You just said he doesn't possess the requisite made a
gerial experience. But then we get to the real issue here,
which is you want to insult the man, which is
your to do because you oppose them in the election.
But are raising the issues that he has been raising
and and I think.

Speaker 1 (33:08):
There are appropriate questions to raise. I don't know whether
he can be confirmed or not.

Speaker 12 (33:11):
The vaccine stuff at the table is obviously going to
be the flashpoint of this hearing.

Speaker 1 (33:15):
But I'll tell you one thing.

Speaker 12 (33:18):
This whole issue of the CDC and these public health agencies. Look,
public trust and the health regime in this country is
as low as it's everybody because of COVID, right, because
of school closures, because.

Speaker 1 (33:30):
Of mask man aids, because this country.

Speaker 12 (33:34):
But let me just figure because this country was drugged
through a bunch of condescending and heavy handed mandates that
all turned out to be garbage, and that's why it's low.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
And the questions are val Scott, Yeah, heat spot on.
I mean, you know, the trust in the medical community
at an all time low because of COVID. Great, but
why yeah, but why why? See they can't figure it
out as if you. I mean, the mask mandates, the
social the social distance and seen mandates, the vaccine mandates,
and we're now finding they didn't make a world of difference.

Speaker 2 (34:05):
Do you remember when they said that the masks didn't
make a difference before they said they did? Yeah, yeah,
I asked the doctor once in the middle of all that,
why why was everyone saying that these masks weren't going
to make a difference? And then they were well, we
should have been more honest. We were just trying to
keep the supplies from not being exhausted by people buying them. Well,
it's actually the first story was the true story. The

(34:26):
masks it does. It didn't make a difference like they
tried to tell you that it did. It's just bizarre.
It was a terrible time in American history. You found
out that people can become sheeple real fast and do
things and be taking their rights away and just go
along with it. I guess, but I don't know if
America could live through something like that.

Speaker 1 (34:43):
To me's gonna ask you, do you ever do you
ever think will be sheeples again?

Speaker 2 (34:46):
I hope not, I at least this generalate like you
know how we forget after a while. But you talk
about if we if we're talking about Maddie from Provo
and her yet her age, they're not doing that twice.
She's onto this. She's a young person who told us
that that COVID has been burned into their brain and
what they experienced. And I agree, all.

Speaker 1 (35:05):
Right, it's time to take your phone calls. Let's see
we talked to this week about uh, let's see the
mass deportations. Yes, we talked about if you're a member
of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints.
You're on the wrong side of history. You're you're you're
on the wrong side of justice, the American way and
the Gospel. That's something like that. I mean so, and

(35:27):
we talked about a lot of other things. This is
time for you, you know, I'd like to know how
people feel Apartment of Ed. We talked about the Department
of Education. Get ready to the Department of Education. I'd
like to know how people feel after the first week
of Donald Trump and all, you know, the speed and
the selections that he's making to head up his team
because he's very loyal. People who are loyal, loyal to

(35:48):
him are being rewarded.

Speaker 10 (35:49):
You know.

Speaker 1 (35:49):
He'll be interesting to see what Doug Bergram does with
Interior and is he going to be in there and
help us fight against us A couple.

Speaker 2 (35:56):
Of ass we'd we'd like to restore the work that
Donald Trump did in his first term here in Utah
and restore it in back that Bearsiers National Monument that
Obama created and that Biden expanded out. You know, you're
going to go to the calls because you're going to
continue to shadow ban my story that I've been trying
to share with our listeners about Peanut the Squirrel.

Speaker 1 (36:13):
Okay, share your story.

Speaker 2 (36:14):
Well, I know what content.

Speaker 1 (36:16):
I am trying to become more compassion it's.

Speaker 2 (36:19):
Still timely this story of which you have shadow banned
me and not let me share with them. Pean at
the squirrel in New York, in the state of New
York has been an online internet sensation because they domesticated
this poor little squirrel. They nursed it back to health
and everybody. They get a million views online. Everything's going crazy.
And then somebody calls New York I don't know the

(36:40):
who was it, the animal Control. They raid the house
like with a swat team and go and they take
this squirrel and they handcuffed the owners of the home.
And while at the same time in that state they're
letting illegals and gangs from Venezuela run rough shot over
everybody and crimes, going to shoplifting everything. They go out. Well,
guess what today I just saw in the news. Guess

(37:02):
who talked about Peanut the squirrel. No Justice Neil Gorsic. Okay,
so while you don't want to talk about him, Justice
Neil Gorsich gave a shout out to the furry social
media star who was euthanized by the New York State officials.
In his keynote speech at the Federalist Society's annual dinner

(37:23):
last night.

Speaker 1 (37:24):
Well, I am looking in my soul. I am looking
deep into my soul and see if I need to
repent about not caring about what was the name peanut?

Speaker 2 (37:33):
Peanut? This why don't you remember his name? His name
was Peanut. He was very key, and he says, this
is a quint. This is just government overreaches. Just again,
the government over each doesn't know where to stop. You're
gonna go out there and take this poor couple's squirrel.

Speaker 1 (37:48):
Let's go to the phones. There may be other weighty
issues out there as well. Eight eight your voice, judge
five seven eight zero one zero on your cell phone
and dial pound two fifty and say, hey, Rod, let's
go right to the phones. And we talked with Ryan
on the freeway tonight listening to the Rod and Greg Show. Ryan,
how are you welcome to thank Rod and Greg AND's Friday.

Speaker 8 (38:12):
Very good. Thank you. I'm calling in because I wanted
to make a comment on you know, somebody saying that
the members of the Church of USUS Christ the Latter
day Saints who are pro immigration law are bad. I
just I think that's fully out of place. And I'm
speaking from experience. I actually served a mission as Spanish

(38:35):
speaking mission State Side and Iowa for the Church of
Christ Latter day Saints, and a lot of we met
a lot of people that are farm workers, some legal,
some not. Most people are good, but you know, I
had experiences with meeting two drug trafficking families. One of

(38:58):
one of the people we ran into as well, literally
told us, uh, please shut the doors behind you, you know,
when we went in to teach them and we asked
some wine. He says, well, I'm in the Mexican mafia
and I'm come here to die, and they could be
busting to that door any moment to kill me. Yeah,
you know, I wanted to be from his family, and

(39:19):
so those we didn't have a lot of those experiences,
but I mean, the worst some and it's like I
don't want people.

Speaker 7 (39:26):
Like that here.

Speaker 8 (39:29):
They need to be vetted. I mean, there's a lot
of good people just by virtue of coming here legally
or good people to give them opportunity to get squared
away with the wall. I'll add to that as well
that when they're not, you know, in line with a lot,
it really makes it heart for family. And it's better
that they do come here legally, like like ron o'dregen said,

(39:51):
if we have to have walls, they should have doors
in them. We need a we need a vetting process.

Speaker 1 (39:56):
Yeah, you're right, you're right, Ryan, thank you, And you've
said all the time, we know, not nice big wall,
but with a big wide door, tall.

Speaker 2 (40:03):
Wall on a wide gate and you get that gate,
you make it work. Just like the landscaper caller yesterday.
There's a landscaper. He goes through this arduous process, inexpensive,
but he's trying to do it the right way. It
works a lot of times. But the one year when
they start in September, he didn't get his the workers
legally able to come across to the end of July
for a landscaping job. Thinks of the house, a little
last of your season's gone by, that that's a.

Speaker 1 (40:23):
Little late, all right. Your calls phones are wide open
as you work your way home to talk about anything
that is on your mind. What do you think of
Donald Trump's team that he's putting together. Maybe you have
some thoughts on that as well, right here on the
Rod and Greg Show and Utah's Talk Radio one oh
five nine knrs.

Speaker 2 (40:40):
Welcome to the show, Todd, Welcome to the Rod and
Greg Show. I'm a bit, you know, dishovel. Yeah, yeah,
we'll get them focused, Dodd. You just hang with us.
We'll get them focused here in a minute, go ahead, Dodd.
Okay you there?

Speaker 1 (40:57):
Are you there? Todd?

Speaker 13 (40:59):
Yeah, I'm here.

Speaker 1 (41:00):
Okay, go ahead, yeah, go ahead, Doud.

Speaker 9 (41:03):
So.

Speaker 14 (41:04):
I just well, first time listener and her first time
I'm nervous. Hey, I've got an elderly I've got an
elderly aunt who's the last of the family on both sides,
and her husband is dominion, and she's been ast alive

(41:24):
and she's recently gone in for some very serious heart
issues and surgeries. And my twin sister and I are
on her DNR. So she now no longer wants to
talk or see us because we voted for Trump. And
I also would like your advice. I have a son
who is gay, gay married, and he put out a

(41:48):
social media post about if we voted for Trump and
the family, he no longer consider his family. So I
just want to see what you've got.

Speaker 1 (42:00):
I think of this. Wow. Wow. I you know, first,
first of all, on the side of your son, nothing
overcomes love, and I think you just have to continue
to love your son as best as you possibly can.
There may be some times where things may be very

(42:20):
uncomfortable for you, but I think he's your son and
I think you have to love him. And the same
with your Is it your mother that is really ill
Todd to your mother and mother or an aunt? Yeah,
I think the same. I think the same thing applies
on both sides. Yeah, I think the same thing applies.

Speaker 7 (42:40):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (42:40):
You know, put love first and seek understanding. As Steven R.
Covey Uh said many years ago in his a very
popular book Seven Habits of Highly Effective Effective people seek
to understand first and then to be understood. And I
think you just have to listen to hard to Todd.

Speaker 2 (42:56):
I'll tell you this that you are entitled to the
same love. I mean. I I just think that when people,
when you're family, you're going to respect each other. You're
going to have differences of opinion. If you ever met
anyone in life where you where every opinion you had
were mirrored in those that were in your family, that
wouldn't be real. That's not a real scenario. So hopefully
that that respect. And if you've got a son that's young,

(43:18):
maybe he's not seen it that way, but it's a
two way street. I think they respect you. Your kids
need to respect you, and you love your kids and
you're going to be there for them, and that should
transcend all the politics. It really shore. I appreciate the
questions because I are not alone. You're not alone in this.
This is actually something that the other side is really
fomenting and really pushing out there. They're pushing, they're actually
encouraging this kind of division within our family.

Speaker 1 (43:40):
Yeah, they sure are. Todd, good luck to you, thank
you for calling into the road. And Greg Show, let's
go to Will in Draper tonight. Will, how are you?
Thanks for joining us tonight.

Speaker 4 (43:50):
I'm good.

Speaker 15 (43:51):
I had a quick kind of question because I haven't
heard anybody really discussed this point. When Republicans took the
House and the House, Senate and White House in twenty sixteen,
when Trump was like the first time they had full
control everything and then squandered it for two years. Yep,
nder Mitch McConnell and the leadership at the time Paul
Marpha going to be any different. How is it going

(44:13):
to be any different this go around with John Thune
now in charge. I don't see if it's going to
make any difference.

Speaker 1 (44:20):
You know what will? I think they're going to be
a real challenge for John Thune. I think my opinion
on this is that with these various selections he's made.
I think, first of all, these are people who are
very loyal to Donald Trump. That's what he didn't have
the first time. You know, he looked inside the Beltway
instead of looking outside. So he's got people who are
behind him much more so this time then last time.

(44:43):
And I think it's going to be a real test
for John Thune. I think he's testing the will of
the Senate and House to go along with what he
wants to do. That's going to be real telling. And
you're right, keep your eye on John Thune. He's come
out and he said he will support what the President
wants to do. We'll just have to wait and see.
But I think it will be different this time.

Speaker 2 (45:02):
Ye'll thoughts great, Yeah, and well, I'll tell you one
of the differences. And I've gone back and looked at
the articles after the news reports after Trump won and sixteen,
which shocked everyone the belt Way. Everybody was shocked by that.
They didn't see it coming. Trump did not. Paul Ryan
was the speaker back then. He has Mike Johnson Speaker
of the House now and they work together during the campaign,

(45:22):
had a much closer relationship throughout that process. And I
think that back then nobody wanted to even get They
couldn't get, They couldn't schedule stars or people to perform
at the inauguration because there was this stigma attached to
Donald Trump in twenty sixteen going into twenty seventeen, when
you get the kind of mandate that he's had, when
you've had the successful term of a presidency that he

(45:43):
had and he's not really left the national stage, I
think that the mood of this country is different. I
think they engage in a campaign of addition, and for
those in Congress who don't want to work with Donald Trump,
I think the consequences of their elections are going to
be felt much more today than back back in twenty
seventeen and eighteen when you saw them squander those great opportunities.

(46:06):
That's what at least I'm hoping. I'm hoping that there's
a I know that Mike Speaker Johnson is a better
version than Paul Ryan. Soon we'll see, we got to see,
you got to see what happens. But it can't be
worse than McConnell, that's for sure.

Speaker 1 (46:17):
All Right, more of your calls and comments coming up
on Thank Rod and Greg Getz Friday right here on
Utah's Talk Rady O one O five nine ky nrs.
Caroline Levitt and you and you and I were talking
about her age. What is she twenty seven.

Speaker 2 (46:30):
Twenty seven years old? Was she born ninety ninety seven,
nineteen ninety seven August of nineteen ninety seven. Yeah, so
gen Zer one of the first to be in a administration.
And look, that's that speaks to this young generation that
that that Trump is has the support of electorally. We've

(46:53):
seen this and is not it's not a one off thing.
I think he really thinks and knows and it's very
wise that the younger generation is going to get more
involved as they should, and he wants to help lead that.
You don't need a bunch of old people tell him
what's what. Let the young Caroline Levett do it. She
seems to know what she's doing. Look, she's been working
on the campaign. She was actually an assistant press secretary

(47:14):
during his first term and also wrote speeches for the president.
So she's been around. She actually ran for Congress in
New Hampshire and took on an incumbent Democrat almost one,
which would have made her the first female gen z
or in Congress. But so she's Look, she's she is
a she's a doer.

Speaker 1 (47:31):
When was she born in ninety seven?

Speaker 2 (47:33):
Ninety seven? Yes, okay, I know I just got done
saying we're not judging her for being young, we're just old.

Speaker 1 (47:40):
But then we're trying to figure out how old we
were when she was born. Yeah, when you for, she's a.

Speaker 2 (47:48):
Very attractive lady. Any Ray's going I just said that.
You know, he's going to that press corps. He's upping
his producer game. He's going to make sure every one
of those presh White House press corps, you know, press
conce we get all connections.

Speaker 1 (48:01):
We could get him a press pass to get into
one of those like that is you know what I
find interesting? Greg. And it's been what a little bit
less than two weeks since Trump won, right, Yes, and
you're still getting here's David Brooks. Okay, yeah, you left
New York Times article. Today, he writes a weekly column
for New York Times. This is the headline of the story,

(48:22):
why we got it so wrong?

Speaker 2 (48:25):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (48:26):
They they can't figure it out.

Speaker 2 (48:29):
Does he say, why did we did the American people
get it wrong?

Speaker 1 (48:33):
Them? He got it wrong and the Democratic Party got
it wrong.

Speaker 2 (48:36):
We know that, but they don't know why. They don't understand.
I don't want them to either. Just make let them
think it's all our fault. Just ye, just take all
of America, say that everybody in America is too stupid
to see how smart they are, and just run with that.
I want them to run with that now, because I
think it's gone wonders for us that they have done
that so far. So just keep doing it. Just keep

(48:57):
telling us all how we're we have it so good.
We're just too dumb to know how good we have
it economically, our public safety is fine. We just are
racist if we think otherwise. You just keep saying that,
and we'll just keep winning. That's a true.

Speaker 10 (49:10):
Well.

Speaker 1 (49:11):
I think his whole and I haven't read the entire column,
I've scanned through it, but I think I think what
is happening. Is he is saying the the the Democrats
and the moderate Republicans, which I would consider him to
be if you want to call him, that they are
so off on social issues that that's one of the

(49:33):
reasons they were rejected. I would agree. I mean, you know,
there there are common sense, fair minded Americans do not
like the idea of a boy in a girl's bathroom.

Speaker 2 (49:45):
It's the economy, and it's that. Okay, well, it's the economy,
immigration slash public safety. But then it's this, it's this
woke agenda that nobody can really put a beat on.
I mean, this is this was the quintessential Emperor has
no clothes. We were shamed, or not me or you,
but many were shamed into not being able to express
their disapproval, certainly within the Democrat ranks. And it turns

(50:09):
out everyone's saying it. Now, we hate this, This isn't
what we are, this isn't who we are. Now even
members of Congress are doing it and getting beat up
for it too.

Speaker 1 (50:16):
By the way, there were two Democrats that came out
against the party's stand on transgenderism, and they are being
attacked like crazy. Donald Trump the final weeks of the campaign.
You know, the one spot that they ran over and
over and over again was that spot with with Kamalis saying, yeah,
we'll let taxpayers pay for transend research.

Speaker 2 (50:35):
They were running that in Pennsylvania.

Speaker 1 (50:36):
Ran it again and again and again, and it worked.

Speaker 2 (50:40):
You know what. I look this morning and it looked
like AOC had dropped her pronouns.

Speaker 1 (50:45):
From her protra Oh I hear that. Yeah, And I.

Speaker 2 (50:47):
Don't know if that's still the case, but I'm gonna
look and see.

Speaker 1 (50:50):
But didn't she say today, even Greg, that she's willing
to sit down and listen to people who have different
views so they can come up with it. I mean,
what did she say today? Was something along those lines?

Speaker 2 (51:00):
Well, yeah, oh yeah, she wants to, Well, she wanted
to know because in her her congressional district Trump Trump
won her congressional district. And she's saying, if you voted
for Trump, but then you voted for me, because she
wanted to. I'd love to hear from you why you
voted for Trump and then voted for me. I'd like
to hear why. And some of the reasons that she's
giving is that people felt like he understood them and

(51:21):
it wasn't and and and she was actually pointing to
the we've talked about on the show, the big business
merged with big government. And and then they said, well,
let's see Lelon Muskus with Trump. How can they think
that almost every billionaire on this planet's with the left,
all of them, all of them you talk to, that's
the billionaire class. He's all by himself. She even calls

(51:41):
herself a US congresswoman. She used to be a member
of Congress and a representative. Now she's a congress woman.

Speaker 1 (51:51):
All right, it is thank rodin Greg It's Friday phone
number to call if you want to join us a
D eight eight five seven eight zero one zero. Back
to the phones as we go. Let's hear what Lane
in Cottonwood Heights has to say tonight here on talk
Radio one zero five nine Canaurs. Hey, Lane, how are
you welcome to the show.

Speaker 13 (52:08):
I'm great, Thanks for taking my call. Listen all I
think you guys kind of have it wrong about all
these women that wanted to shave their heads divorce their husbands.
I think it's actually a good thing that we don't
pass those genes along. It's goin to natural elections and secondly,
and secondly, I think the Democrats have really handed us

(52:30):
the twenty twenty eight election platform because they are doubling
down on all of their accusations about what a terrible
guy Trump is and he's none of those things. And
so what's going to happen. We're going to be able
to once again show that they're a bunch of lyned
stacks of sheep.

Speaker 8 (52:49):
Did go ahead?

Speaker 1 (52:50):
Well, you know, you know, hey, you know what, Lane,
I thank you Lane for your coming. I like I've
said this before, Greg, I don't think no matter what
the Democrats do in the next four years, they are
not going to be able to change America's perception that
they are a far left party and completely out of
touch with the American people. It is so ingrained in

(53:13):
what seventy five, seventy six million Americans now that they've
got a tough task ahead.

Speaker 2 (53:18):
Well, their unwillingness to do it is. That's surrounding the point.
When Bill Clinton was president and they lost the Congress
to the Republicans in midterm. His first midterm, he he
pivoted hard to the right. He put he passed New
Gingrich's welfare reform. He said the Arab big government is over.
He balanced the budget, he went hard, he went right.
He could see where the nation was going, and he

(53:41):
was the president and he wasn't going to let his
party get left behind. There isn't I don't see that
leader or that voice in that amongst the Democrats right now.

Speaker 1 (53:48):
Josh Shapiro, that guy, he could be Baby Basher out
of Kentucky.

Speaker 2 (53:54):
They could. But you know what, here's the thing in this,
because they've always been this big tent. I don't think
their big tent's going to go for Shapiro. I think
there's still and those pro terrorists, pro Hamas Terris that
are never going to support him. I think even Andy uh.
And the more the more to the center they go,
the more the leftists are going to not be tolerant

(54:14):
of it. And they're that tent is. They don't have
the same sheet music they used to have. They are
far more uh just dug in on their positions. And
that's what's making it hard for Democrats to lead because
they have too many people from too many different perspectives
that used to just all coalesce around we hate the
Republican that's not working now.

Speaker 7 (54:33):
Well.

Speaker 1 (54:33):
I saw an article today and maybe we'll be able
to get this. Uh. The author of this column on
I can't remember who wrote it on the show on Monday,
but he says, what the Democrats need another Bill Clinton? Yeah, well,
I don't know. I don't know if a centrist Bill
Clinton could survive in today's Democratic party.

Speaker 2 (54:53):
We used to call them blue dog Democrats. Aryel Miller
was the governor of Georgia and he was a blue
dog Democrat.

Speaker 1 (54:58):
Our own Congressman Jim Matthison yep from the state of Utah.
He was considered a blue blue dog Democrat. Good mega now, nope,
not make it now? All right, more your calls and
comments coming up. It is Thank rodin Greg is Friday
eighty eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero,
or on your cell phone that'll pound two to fifty
and say, hey, Roth, let's.

Speaker 2 (55:16):
Go to Scott on I fifteen. Scott, thank you for
holding and welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 16 (55:23):
Thank you, gentlemen. It's good to good to listen to
you again. Just just a couple of things. You know,
our president. It's been a good ten days or so,
hasn't it.

Speaker 1 (55:32):
Yeah, sure, heaven we're loving it, man.

Speaker 16 (55:36):
Boy, You and me both. Hey this I just was
thinking about. You know, we've got one hundred and fiftieth
anniversary of this great country coming up in a few years.
Wouldn't it be nice if President Trump could give us
back the government that our founding fathers thought of for us.

Speaker 2 (55:51):
I'm for that.

Speaker 1 (55:52):
I'm all in, you know, Scott, you know, yeah, go ahead.
Then I've got a thought. Go ahead, Scott.

Speaker 16 (55:58):
Well, I was just say sure, but I apologize for
stepping on your tongue.

Speaker 11 (56:02):
There.

Speaker 16 (56:03):
The one thought that I had that might help us
along that what if we were to work with our
congressmen and our centers to get them to propose a
bill that said no bill could be longer than the Constitution.
You think that might help us have bills that we
could Actually, you could create a country in five thousand words,
write a bill.

Speaker 2 (56:21):
Yeah, that is actually a really good point. You can
carry a country in five thousand words, or a government.
Here's the thing they ought to do. What the state
legislature does Utah State legislature. And it's a single subject.
You get a single subject. You don't get to have
a phone book with eight thousand different topics. So we
one single subject legislation. It has to be on that subject.
You cannot go all over the map. I think single

(56:42):
subject would do a lot right now, now, I was there,
when I got there.

Speaker 1 (56:47):
I just want single subject. So one one issue, one issue.
It can That's the what you can't omnibus bills.

Speaker 2 (56:53):
You cannot do that single subject And I'm telling you
that keeps you honest. I mean, you know the subject
of the bill. They open up that section of the
code and then you go into that section of the code,
or it might be a couple codes, but it's single subject. Yeah,
that's the way to do it.

Speaker 1 (57:04):
We had talked about this before the vote was taken
their last Tuesday, and we brought this up a couple
of times, Greg, you know, like Scott just said, in
a couple of years will mark the two hundred and
fiftieth anniversary of this great country of ours. We were
so afraid if Kamala Harris would have been in charge
of all this, we will feel so much better.

Speaker 2 (57:23):
With Donald it would have felt more like a funeral
than a celebration of our two hundred and fifty years
as a democratically elected republic. But no, with Trump, it's
going to be a phenomenal deal. It's going to be fun.
I think he's already organized, had already said that state there.

Speaker 1 (57:36):
Yeah, yeah, you know what as well as you're thinking
about this, it'll be interesting to see how big our
government is two years from now when we hit that
July for it. We'll see if Elon and Vivek can
do the job they've been given. All right, let's see.
I don't know if we'll have more time for call.
Maybe not. I know he raised trying to clear him

(57:57):
right now. We'll see if we can get to him
before the break. But uh, coming up, Greg, as you
and I talked about it is going to be a
discussion about ranked choice voting. And it was on the
ballot what the I think it was in eight states? Yeah,
and it just didn't make.

Speaker 2 (58:10):
It, Idaho, Arizona, all over what kindahole think? I don't know. Well,
they didn't vote for they failed.

Speaker 1 (58:16):
No, I think it did. I think it did fail.
You're absolutely right.

Speaker 2 (58:19):
So, but you know we have it here in Utah,
Sandy City, other places. So a few municipalities were allowed
to try it. Yeah, and I don't I don't it
still works out? Well, Yeah, you need to you need
a supercomputer and you're not one person, one votes.

Speaker 1 (58:33):
Why do we have it at the state GOP convention?

Speaker 2 (58:37):
To make it faster? So that they really didn't so
you're not round after round deliates leave. That's why they
were doing it. I don't know. It still went twelve
hours this last time, the state convention ever, unbelievably long.

Speaker 1 (58:49):
That's a challenge for four years from now keep those
conventions shorter. Yes, please please? All right? Hour number three
other Rod and Greg show coming your way. We're going
to talk about ranked choice voting and on our listen
back Friday segments. Democrats are in deep, deep trouble. We'll
talk about that, and we'll talk about liberal moms who
are freaking out over the election and the impact that's

(59:10):
having done. Yo, kids, take it easy, other kids, mom.
All right, our number three on its way to stay
with us. Well, you and I agree on this one.
I just think rank choice voting is a horrible idea.
I think it's complicated. Why can't you make up your

(59:31):
mind and just select one candidate?

Speaker 2 (59:33):
Voodoo is what it is. It's voodoos. You don't know
how you beck first, second, third, fourth choice, and then
you have a computer. You know that that tells you
what you thought, and tells me everyone thought. You can't
one person, one vote, you can't follow the ballots. It's
a nightmare.

Speaker 6 (59:46):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (59:46):
Well, there were several states during this past election that
considered ranked choice voting, including our neighbor to the north
and we're talking about Idaho. But most of those ideas
apparently went down in flames. Let's find out exactly what happened.
Joining us on our Newsmaker line right now is Jason Snead,
executive director of the Honest Elections Project. Jason, thanks for
joining us tonight. How did it work its way out

(01:00:08):
during this election a little more than a week ago, Jason,
how did rank choice voting do well?

Speaker 17 (01:00:13):
This was an incredible election cycle. Not only did you
see Donald Trump win the election and Republicans get a mandate,
you saw by even greater margins in many of the
swing states, ballot measures that were supposed to bring rank
choice voting to our states go down in flames. And
I think what you're seeing across the country is an

(01:00:33):
outright rejection of rank choice voting. And we're talking about
very diverse sets of states here. You know, you had
six states where groups were pushing ranked choice voting as
disparate as Idaho and Arizona, and yet across them all
in battleground states, in red states, in blue states, voters
rejected ranked choice voting by overwhelming margins.

Speaker 2 (01:00:54):
What would you attribute that to.

Speaker 17 (01:00:57):
Well, I think that what voters are saying, and really
have been saying for years for people that have been
paying attention, is that they want elections that are simple,
that are straightforward. They want it to be easy to
vote but hard to cheat, and they want results quickly,
and they want confidence in their elections. And I mean
the pitch for rank choice voting when you listen to
donors and when you listen to activists, it takes at

(01:01:18):
least five minutes simply to explain the process. It's so
complicated it turns our elections into a black box. It
is one hundred and eighty degrees away from what the
average American voter wants in their election system. And I
mean the proof is in the pudding here. The groups
that were pushing rank choice voting spent one hundred million
dollars this year to try to bring it to more

(01:01:41):
states in our country, and they lost in every single state.
And to put a little extra salt in that wound.
They're still counting votes in Alaska. Alaska has ranked choice voting.
It looks like they're going to repeal it after just
two years using this convoluted system.

Speaker 1 (01:01:57):
Jason, from the groups that support this, what is there
are you? What are they telling voters out there why
it is a better method of selecting someone to afford
political office? I mean, what's their number one claim?

Speaker 17 (01:02:11):
Well, they say that it's a way to improve democracy
by encouraging politicians to reach across the aisle. And of course,
the whole kind of shtick here is that with rank
choice voting, they say it it only delivers consensus candidates
to public office, and they say that's going to improve
the process. I'm not sure, based on the places that

(01:02:31):
have used ranked choice voting that that has actually come
to fruition. In fact, Oakland, California, uses rank choice voting.
Their current mayor won two years ago after nine rounds
of elimination with this system. Supposedly she was the best
pick and the consensus pick, and yet a couple of
weeks ago Oakland voters just recalled her from office overwhelmingly.

(01:02:53):
So I'm not sure that ranked choice voting's track record
for delivering better candidates or consensus candidates actually holds up
to any particular scrutiny. But that's what they say. And again,
I think when you actually put it to voters, voters
realize that ranked choice voting is a gimmick that's really
designed to push politics to the left. And they really
don't think that liberal billionaires should be spending one hundred

(01:03:15):
million dollars to buy a new election system for themselves.
They thankfully said, our elections are not for sale.

Speaker 2 (01:03:21):
So here's what even if I took them at their
word that they had some high minded reason for why
they'd like to do it, because I agree with you,
I think it's just to lurch to the left. But
one person, one vote. I don't understand how once you
get into this ranked choice voting algorithm or however they
do it, it takes long time to explain. Let's say

(01:03:41):
you have a close election, there's nothing to recount. I
don't even know how a recount would occur. I think
there's that issue I have where I don't know how
you can simply follow the paper ballots or the trail
of how someone votes and then count those up. When
you're doing it by first and second and third choice.
And then Andrew Yang, who ran for mayor in New
York City's found you know, because he's smart, he saw

(01:04:03):
something wrong in those numbers. Turned out there were some
sample ballots and their rank choice voting pool that they
began with that anyone other than Andrew Yang would have
never spotted to know otherwise, which highlights to me, this
doesn't seem to be a transparent chain of custody election process.
Is that right? Or if I've convoluted it too much?

Speaker 17 (01:04:24):
No, no, no, that's one hundred percent right. In fact, just
last year in Oakland, California, they actually screwed up the results.
They certified the wrong winner in a local race, and
it took it was two months and an audit before
the mistake was even caught, and then another two months
and a lawsuit before it could be corrected. So, you know,

(01:04:46):
you've got a system which is so complicated that it
makes it harder to vote for for people that are
going to actually cast a ballot. Right, the ballots are longer,
it takes more time to actually cast that vote, So
that means it's harder process. It's a more complicated process,
and it's also a more complicated process to run and
administer an election, and it's so difficult that mistakes can

(01:05:07):
be made and not even the people running the election
can catch them. So, you know, not every election is
going to have someone like an Andrew Yank there that's
able to detect it, or even possibly it may not
be a mistake that is discernible without actually going in
and doing those audits, which are made vastly more complicated
because of rank choice voting. You know, these are the
second order effects of this change that the proponents never

(01:05:31):
want to talk about. They never want to talk about
the complexity. They never want to talk about what the
voting experience is actually like. They don't want to talk
about the cost. You know, Idaho had one of these measures,
and the Secretary of State said, we will have to
buy all new voting machines in order to run this system,
and that could cost forty million dollars just to purchase.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
Those new machines.

Speaker 17 (01:05:50):
So they don't really want to talk about these second
order consequences.

Speaker 1 (01:05:54):
So Jason, help me understand this. We have some states
like Arizona, like California, even here in Utah that are
very slow in countying the numbers, and we're going to
put in a system that slows the town even more.
Makes sense for that for me, if you would, if
you would.

Speaker 17 (01:06:08):
Jason, well, you know again, I think that the average
American voter once results on election night or as close
to it as possible, And it is inarguable in places
that use rank choice voting that they consistently report results
behind everybody else. You know, I live in the state
of Virginia. The first city, really the county that used

(01:06:31):
at Arlington County reported their results three days after every
other jurisdiction in Virginia last year. And you see right
now they're still bringing in votes in Alaska where they
use rank choice voting. Maine has a congressional election where
they still don't know the winner because they actually have
to aggregate all of the balance into a single spot
that had to bring them into a single location so

(01:06:53):
that they can run the rank choice voting computations. So
it unquestionably slows the process down. And they're are as
you said, a lot of places that are already struggling
to count votes in any kind of timely fashion. Maricopa County,
Arizona's one of them. And yet you saw millions of
dollars being spent trying to bring rank choice voting to
that state too, So it makes it not only harder

(01:07:14):
to vote, it also makes us wait weeks.

Speaker 1 (01:07:16):
And guess what when you.

Speaker 17 (01:07:17):
Have, you know, fifteen or twenty candidate races and you've
had to rank eighty or ninety people and you have
to wait two weeks to get the results, good luck
even remembering who you voted for in second, third, or
fourth place and figuring out who your vote actually counted for.

Speaker 1 (01:07:30):
On our Nunsmaker line. Jason Snead, executive director of the
Honest Elections Project, and I kind of like the idea
that people are they just don't want it. Yeah, how
does sound like? Yeah, Hallelia. There are some municipalities in
the state that do it, don't they.

Speaker 2 (01:07:43):
Yeah, Sandy City did it. There's some others, I think
in Utah County, but Sandy City had to have even
a recount. But there's nothing to count, like I asked
in the interview, like you can't. It's not like you're
seeing balanced it's not one person, one vote. So it's
and now, as it's been described, gaint the litigation, it
takes a longer time to figure out what went wrong.
People might not even know if something went wrong.

Speaker 1 (01:08:02):
So hopefully you'll just die a slow death and we'll
be rid of this idea of rank choice voting.

Speaker 2 (01:08:08):
You're here, Yeah, all.

Speaker 1 (01:08:09):
Right, more to come on the rod In Grag Show
when we come back. The latest on the Gates nomination
right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine Canterists.

Speaker 2 (01:08:17):
You know what comes after Thanksgiving?

Speaker 1 (01:08:18):
Well, Christmas? Yes?

Speaker 2 (01:08:19):
And then that's now? Are you telling me you're a
scrooge to the hot and you do not like that
Christmas order? It is all work, it's all aggravation. It's
all work. There's nothing.

Speaker 1 (01:08:31):
I always thought you were kind of a positive guy.

Speaker 2 (01:08:33):
I'm very positive, but this one until after you're a kid,
the game is up. Okay, when you're a kid, there's
everything to love about Christmas as soon as you get
on the other side of that ledger. Oh no, no, no,
it's all work.

Speaker 8 (01:08:44):
Wow.

Speaker 2 (01:08:45):
You know taxes are due at the end of January,
end of November. I mean, you just got all this
stuff coming up.

Speaker 1 (01:08:51):
You'll you'll live well, You'll be here with me every day.
I'll lift your your Debbie Downer attitude.

Speaker 2 (01:08:56):
Playing any of your You know Christmas.

Speaker 1 (01:09:00):
Ray Ray will go along with that, all right, boy.
Big news of the week, of course, is Donald Trump
is just rolling through his various cabinets appointment. The big
surprise of the week was Matt Gates being numbed. I think,
along with Jay RFK, those two were the biggest surprises. Yeah,
you aren't he but he had pledged to make him
part of his team, so you may be right on that.

(01:09:20):
But what about the Matt Gates nomination to be Attorney General.
Let's get the latest, don it. Joining us right now
on our newsmaker line is Kitlyn Richardson. She is a
courts reporter with the Daily Color. She's joining us, Caitlyn,
give us the latest on the Matt Gates nomination. What
are you hearing?

Speaker 7 (01:09:34):
Well?

Speaker 18 (01:09:34):
First of all, thanks for having me on. I think
this was a choice that nobody anticipated. This was a
little bit out of a left field, but it makes
it does make somewhat sense for President Trump. Matt Gates
is an outsider, he's a disruptor, and I think what
we're seeing is loyalty is a top criterion some of
his picks. Again, it's very surprising to a lot of people.

(01:09:56):
And there's many questions that remain to be answered, one
of them being whether or not you will be able
to be confirmed by the Senate. Some other ones surrounding
the ethics report that there was supposed to be a
vote on Friday for being released. So there's there's many
things that will remain to be seeing going forward. But

(01:10:18):
this is certainly an interesting choice and it does indicate
some some things about how the direction of the department
going forward, what Trump's priorities are.

Speaker 2 (01:10:29):
Caitlan, you know, there's there was a lot of discussion
about recess appointments that would be made, and I think
that in the Sun and Cornine and and Scott Race
that that this issue came up, and all the candidates
for the Senate majority leader to their colleagues said that
they would support Trump, his his his mandate, his vision,

(01:10:51):
but also recess appointments. That was that's a that's a
vague policy approach until you hear some of the names.
Do you think that Matt Gates, because that's it's a
two year appointment if it's done through a recess, do
you think that Matt Gates could be appointed Attorney General
through a recess appointment?

Speaker 4 (01:11:10):
I think it's.

Speaker 18 (01:11:10):
Something we're just going to have to wait and see
on how this plays out. I've been told that, you
know this, Trump probably wouldn't appoint him without knowing soon
is on board. But I've heard other things as well that,
you know, maybe this is just to draw attention away
from other nominees. Obviously, if he does have a confirmation hearing,

(01:11:32):
this will be pretty contentious, and it might it might
draw attention away from some of the other nominees that
were also unexpected. So I think we're going to have
to just wait and see how this all plays out.

Speaker 1 (01:11:45):
Caitlin, what kind of a statement do you think Donald
Trump is making with a selection of Matt Gates as
a nominee for the Attorney General. What kind of statement
do you think Donald Trump is making with us this selection.

Speaker 18 (01:11:58):
Some of the issue is that those closer to him
have made clear he will be focusing on with this
Department of Justice is countering lawfare and censorship, taking strong
stands on the border, and pardoning January sixth defendants. And
if you look at those kind of priorities, I think
that the President is concerned that there might be career

(01:12:21):
staff that will try to undermine him, and I think
that he wants someone who's loyal and who will is
not afraid to disrupt the status quo in this top
position of the DOJ, So I don't think maybe he
sees that and represent the gates and that could be
why he made this choice. And I think again, as

(01:12:45):
this plays out, we're probably gonna be more clarity. But
right now, that's what.

Speaker 4 (01:12:51):
Of hearing.

Speaker 2 (01:12:53):
So let's talk about judicial appointments. So who do you
see on the horizon in terms of the Supreme Court
and even just a judiciary generally. You note in your
article that there might not be as many vacancies as
some presidents have come to be able to appoint. But
what do you see on the landscape of our judiciary
for President Trump, president elect Trump.

Speaker 18 (01:13:15):
That's a very interesting question and something that it would
be good to keep a close eye on right now,
especially during the lame Deff session, that Democrats try to
push through some of President Biden's final nominees and get
those confirmed. Whether or not those are confirmed will determine
how many seats President Trump starts with at the beginning

(01:13:37):
of his term. So if they're able to confirm more
of those nominees, I mean will start with less, but regardless,
he's going to start with less than he did in
his first term, so it's possible more will open up
down the line, But that is something to watch. As
far as what kind of nominees he will pick. I
think he's again looking for people who are strong, willing

(01:14:00):
to stand.

Speaker 4 (01:14:01):
Up to criticism.

Speaker 18 (01:14:03):
I've been told by many wheel exports that a good
place to start looking is at his Appellate Court nominees
from the last term. Those people have had years now
of rulings and a record track record to look back on,
and I think he's it's a good bet that he
might if there's opening us on the Supreme Court, potentially those.

Speaker 7 (01:14:27):
Of these strong candidates, Caitlin.

Speaker 1 (01:14:29):
Are the Democrats right now in a mad rush to
get some of these judicial vacancies filled before Donald Trump
takes over? Are they trying to push as many of
these through as they possibly can before January twentieth.

Speaker 18 (01:14:41):
That does seem to be the priority they've already had,
I want to believe confirmed, and they're going to keep
pushing that through again. That's Trump has expressed strongly to
leadership that and should be trying to stop these denominees

(01:15:03):
from being confirmed, and as I mentioned before, that if
they are stopped, that'll open up more seats for him
to appoint once he takes office.

Speaker 2 (01:15:13):
So I've heard a funny Well, I think it's a
rude plan, and that is that Justice Sonya Soda mayor
on a lead, gets out of here so that they
have one more they have an appointment to make to
the Supreme Court or Biden would do. Is that just
political pageantry or do you think there's merit to that idea? Well,
not merit, but viability to that.

Speaker 18 (01:15:34):
I don't think there's much viability to that. I think
that's Democrats coming to terms the fact that in a
few months we're going to have a new administration with
new priorities, and they'll be able to put their own
people on the bench if those seats open up. Cinemator
has expressed, I believe he's reported recently that she does

(01:15:55):
not intend to retire, and adding on to that is
be extremely difficult and the very short time that they
have to be able to confirm someone else.

Speaker 1 (01:16:06):
On our newsmaker line, Caitlin Richardson, she is with the
Daily Caller. She's a court reporter there talking about Matt
Gates and how Donald Trump could have a major impact this.
I think the longer term impact, how Trump could affect
the judiciary in the future. I mean all these judicial appointments, Greg,
he could have a major impact.

Speaker 2 (01:16:22):
He can. And I think the Harry Reid rule that
lowered the from sixty down to fifty one obviously plays
in the favor of the Republican president as it does
a Democrat. But this is a time where I think
a lot can get accomplished. So hope there's a lot
of opportunities to nominate. And I like what she said
about because he did this back in his first term.
There's a lot of people judges he nominated that now

(01:16:44):
have a record that he could see if given a
chance for the Supreme Court to move up.

Speaker 1 (01:16:48):
We'll see what happens, all right, Moore, coming up, final
hour of the Rod and Greg Show with you on
this Friday evening.

Speaker 2 (01:16:54):
We've been here, We've got the listeners. You just don't
know about us. Well, yeah, we'll see.

Speaker 1 (01:16:58):
The view is looking for conservative voices. I saw an
interview last night with the owner of the La Times.
He's looking for conservative voices to put on his editorial board.
We should just let him know, hey, we're available.

Speaker 2 (01:17:08):
Or they should just come make their best offer and
maybe we can squeeze them in to our program scheduling.
Maybe we can help them out a little bit.

Speaker 1 (01:17:15):
Yeah, exactly what we need for sure. All right, time
now for our Listen Back Friday segments. We do this
every Friday, final half hour of the show. We play
back and let you listen to a couple of the
more interesting interviews that we've done in the past week.
And we do a lot of them each and every week.
So let's continue right now with our Listen Back Friday segment.
John Hinderocker, really sharp thinker, I think at power line

(01:17:35):
dot Com, I think you and I would agree that
the Democratic Party has some challenges right now, would you
say that.

Speaker 2 (01:17:42):
Yes, they're they're just they're they're looking at the west
to see the sunrise and looking at the east to
see it's set. They just don't understand. They're so confused,
their compasses off there. They just don't know up from down.
They don't know anything. They're just run around it. They're
running into each other, run into walls.

Speaker 1 (01:17:57):
Yeah, they are.

Speaker 2 (01:17:58):
Well.

Speaker 1 (01:17:59):
Earlier this week, we spoke with John Hinderocker about the Democrats,
And we began by asking John first of all, how
deep of trouble does he think the Democrats are in
right now?

Speaker 11 (01:18:08):
Well, I think it's pretty deep. You know, this election
obviously was very disappointed the Democrats, and it's easy to
explain why Trump won. I mean, the Democrats had this
fiasco of Joe Biden being senile, unable to run. They
had to switch it and switch in Kamala Harris at
the last moment, and she turned out to be a

(01:18:29):
pretty lousy candidate, and she got a lot of abuse for,
among other things, not being willing or able even to
say what her position was on various issues. And so
she was described by one commentator as the no comment candidate,
which we've probably never seen before in the history of

(01:18:51):
presidential politics. So it's not hard to understand why the
Democrats lost this election. But the point that I made
in the post that you're talking about there is that
the Democrats' problems go a lot deeper than Joe Biden's
dementia and Kamala Harris's skills as a politician. The real

(01:19:12):
problem the Democrats have is they got to figure out
what they stand for, What is the platform on which
future Democratic candidates are going to be able to run,
And that's a very hard question to answer. The one
policy issue that Kamala Harris was always happy to talk

(01:19:34):
about and that other Democrats are always happy to talk
about is abortion. And so we know that going forward,
the Democratic Party is the party of abortion. But when
you get beyond that issue, and I talk about this
in some detail in my post, it is very hard
to say what today's Democratic Party stands for.

Speaker 2 (01:19:56):
So here's my question. I love this topic because I
the no call meant candidate I was saying throughout, we
were saying throughout this election that the reason that she's
painted into such a corner is that her coalition of
voters was so frail, meaning that if she did have
a comment and she took a hard position, she would
be alienating many of the party. If she takes a
position in Pennsylvania that could lose her Michigan and vice versa.

(01:20:20):
The Democrats always prided themselves in having a big tent,
and I've even seen times when their policies conflicted. Get
rid of the combustible engines and the long haul truckers
all on the same side, because the enemy of their
enemy was their friend. You didn't see that this time.
You're seeing these this big tent fragment in terms of
they're not tolerant of issues or people in that tent

(01:20:40):
that might have issues that are different than theirs. Going forward,
does that continue to fragment and do they have to
come up with actual policies or can they fall back
to this Republicans are bad and everything and just be
critics of the Republicans trying to get votes again.

Speaker 11 (01:20:55):
Well, that's a great question, and I think the answer
is that they can't, for air ever run on not
being Republicans.

Speaker 2 (01:21:03):
Right, they have some kind.

Speaker 11 (01:21:06):
Of an identity that appeals to the voters.

Speaker 9 (01:21:08):
I think we.

Speaker 11 (01:21:09):
Saw that in spades in the twenty twenty four election.
And one of the problems they're going to have. I
don't write about this in my post, but it's worth
mentioning here. They ran against Donald Trump on the theory
that he's a fascist, that he's Hitler and he's a Nazi. Well,
and that didn't work for a lot of reasons. But
for one thing, it didn't work because Trump's already been

(01:21:30):
the president for four years. Obviously, he wasn't Hitler, he
wasn't the Nazi and so on. He's now about to
be the president for four more years, and again it's
going to be blindingly obvious that he's not Hitler, he's
not a Nazi, he's not a fascist. And so, you know,
going forward, I think it's going to be very difficult
for them to trot out those same old insults and

(01:21:52):
think they're going to fly. But if you look at
what historically the Democratic Party has has stood for even
in recent years, I think it's getting very difficult. So
for example, just a few years ago, the real energy
in the Democratic Party was among socialists, some of their
seemingly up and coming young House members AOC people like

(01:22:15):
that were members of the Democratic Socialists of America. Bernie Sanders,
of course, the grand old man of socialism. But the
bloom is off that rose. I mean, nobody around the
world takes socialism seriously as an ideology. It's a failed
ideology that is being rejected, has been rejected everywhere. And

(01:22:37):
in fact, the best demographic, the core demographic for the
contemporary Democratic Party is voters earning more than two hundred
thousand dollars a year. Well, it's very difficult, you know,
to come out as a socialist party. If your core
voters are people making more than two hundred grand, right, that's.

Speaker 14 (01:23:00):
Not going to work.

Speaker 11 (01:23:00):
So what are the Democrats going to do become the
party of tax cuts? I don't think so. So you
look at issue after issue energy for example, you know,
they tell us, oh, we got to be net zero,
we got to be all win, all solar, no coal,
no natural gas, you got to have this big energy transition,
We got to have electric vehicles. But they can't come

(01:23:22):
out and say the truth, which is that they want
gasoline to be so expensive that we can't afford to
buy it. Every once in a while, the Democrat, like
Barack Obama's energy secretary, will actually come out and say that,
but he tends not to last very long in his
job because Americans vote vote for expensive gas, they won't

(01:23:44):
vote for expensive electricity. And so we see this ridiculous
situation where the Democrats do everything they can to suppress
the production of oil and gas, but then when election
season comes around, they release millions and millions of barrels
from the Strategic Petroleum Fund, which of course is not

(01:24:05):
what it's for to try to bring down the price
of gasoline. So they are enmeshed in a hopeless contradiction,
and they can't really run on what they believe, which
is that we Americans live too well and need to
reduce our standard of living.

Speaker 1 (01:24:23):
Yeah, John, I think it's fair to say that the
Democratic Party now has the label of being the party
of the coastal elites. They used to be the party
of the people, the working class Americans. Can they get
that label back? Genre? Have things got to drastically change,
and I don't see it happening overnight. How do they
get it back? If they can, well.

Speaker 11 (01:24:43):
I don't think they can get it back. You know,
these are fundamental shifts in how the public perceives the parties,
and the public has come to view the Republicans as
the party of the working man and the Democrats is
the party of the you know, coastal elites, as you said,
and so forth, and those kinds of perceptions you can't

(01:25:03):
change on a dime. You know, you can't come up
with a new campaign slogan and think that it's going
to change how people see you. So I would say
that they can't. They can't bring about that kind of
a change unless they're willing to go back to square one.
And start coming out in favor of some very different policies.

Speaker 1 (01:25:22):
On our Newsmaker Line and part of our Listen Back
Friday segments, John Hinderocker with Power Line talking about the
Democrats are in deep, deep trouble and it's going to
take them a while. I think Greg to figure it out.

Speaker 2 (01:25:32):
Just breaks my heart. Yeah, it just breaks my heart.

Speaker 1 (01:25:37):
All right, More not the Rotten Greg Show coming up
on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine can arrests.
Then you'll have the storage this week where you've got
these liberal psychiatrists telling liberals to stay away from their
Trump supporting friends. You know, don't associate with them, even
if they're in your family this holiday season. Don't associate. Yeah, yeah,

(01:25:58):
that's a real unity message. The other message that we
heard this week was about how liberal moms who voted
for Harris hated Donald Trump are kind of going ballistic
and it's impacting their children. Can you believe that poor kids? Well,
we had a chance to talk with Bethany Mandel, a
journalist and author, about that, and we began by asking her,

(01:26:18):
first of all, what are these parents actually doing to
scare their children?

Speaker 4 (01:26:22):
This is one of the most popular columns that I've
ever written met. You know, I kept hearing from people
after I wrote it. Oh my god, Here's a screenshot
that I saw in this mommy group. This is someone's
Facebook status, this is what someone posted on Instagram.

Speaker 11 (01:26:37):
And the.

Speaker 4 (01:26:39):
You know, bottom line background on all of them is
these moms have absolutely lost at post Trump. There was
one mother, actually two mothers who said on national television,
they talked about their preteen daughters. I'm talking ten eleven, twelve,
that they were scared about being able to obtain an abortion. Yes, wow,

(01:27:01):
why So the the hypothesis that I have, and the
piece is, you know, you're you're talking about how devastating
President Trump's reelection was for your child, But your child
is devastated because of your parenting choices, because you have
amped them up and scared them so much that you

(01:27:22):
have made them into these like anxious, nervous wrecks about
President Trump. But they don't remember the last time he
was president. All of these fears and if they did,
maybe they would be better off. But all of these
fears are manifesting because you have sowed those seeds. So
it's it's just been really disturbing as a parent seeing

(01:27:45):
you know, every every Facebook group under the sun just
deluged by posts about people saying their kids are terrified
and upset and crying and everything, because you know why
they are, and it's because their parents have made them
that's the need.

Speaker 1 (01:28:00):
Did we create the same atmosphere of fear with COVID
because I always felt we scared children during COVID as well.
Are we doing this yet again as a result of
what happened last Tuesday night?

Speaker 14 (01:28:10):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (01:28:10):
Absolutely, it's all performative, you know, inflicting all of this
stuff on kids, with COVID, with climate change, with gun control.
Every time one of these left wing activist topics come up,
it's because parents have made their kids anxious. My kids
have no fear about guns in public places. My kids

(01:28:31):
have no fear about climate change because I'm not putting it,
I'm not instilling it in them. For some reason, these
parents have decided that their children's fear is a weapon
that they should they should be wielding in their fight
against you know, you name it, Trump, climate change, guns, whatever,
and all they're doing is victimizing their own children.

Speaker 2 (01:28:53):
We had a young caller, a young voter right before
on election day call into our show and tell us
why she was voting for Trump and White many young
people her age were going to do the same, And
she talked about COVID and about how their freedoms and
their high school years were taken from them. You point
out accurately that if you were really outraged as a parent,
it would be what happened to their children and their
educational experience or not getting an education. But it doesn't

(01:29:15):
seem to be this. You were in your column that
this isn't just narcissism from this parents these parents, it
could even be deeper than that.

Speaker 4 (01:29:23):
Yeah, So I for the column. I spoke to one therapist,
and then I heard from two others after I had
published that they had seen a lot of these parents
who were coming into not the kids who were coming
into the office, saying they were anxious and again these
are kids younger than teenage years, and they had observed
over the course of their treating the child that the

(01:29:45):
parent had some real mental health issues, that it was
not necessarily performative emotionality on the part of these parents,
and they were basically it was kind of like a
munch housing situation. They were instilling all of this fear
and anxiety into their child through their own mental health

(01:30:07):
struggles which were very significant. And you know, I'm just
I'm so disturbed because our job as parents is to
raise kids healthy and that includes their mental health. And
for some reason, these parents don't appreciate that their mental health,
you know, matters as much as their physical health, and
these parents should recognize that because they have struggles with

(01:30:27):
mental health.

Speaker 8 (01:30:28):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:30:29):
Joining us on our Newsmaker line right now is Bethany Mandel. Bethany,
you talk about the influence of parents, do you fear,
maybe in a different sort of way, that the same
thing could be happening in their classrooms. There may be
some teachers who are instilling this fear into them because
of their concern about Donald Trump. Could you see the
same thing happening in the classroom.

Speaker 4 (01:30:49):
One hundred percent. We're seeing, you know, I'm against having
phones in schools. I think it's bad for kids to
have cell phones. But but we're seeing law of clandestinely
filmed videos taken by high school students of their teachers
just losing their minds. And I'm hearing it from parents
of elementary school cage kids who come home and say,

(01:31:11):
my teacher said this my teacher said why, And they're
confirming it with the parents of other kids in the class.
And you know, we're teachers are talking about it from
kindergarten all the way through twelfth grade. You know, the
dangers of Donald Trump, how we're all going to be
less safe, and you know, proposing essay topics based on
like what would you do to fight the resistance in

(01:31:33):
twenty twenty four. All of those things have been happening
over the course of the last you know, ten fifteen years.
I wrote literally an entire book about it called Stolen Youth, Yes,
with Carol Markowitz. But I mean, they are using our
children as foot soldiers, and in order to do that,
they have to indoctrinate them.

Speaker 2 (01:31:51):
So here's my question, my last question, and that is,
you know, we've seen this now play out. When twenty
sixteen happened and the election happened in Donald Trump, there
were so many people that are told he's a racist,
and there were no words left in terms of how
bad of a human being he was. And then people
discovered over the course of time he wasn't all that
they were told he was, and they felt betrayed, they

(01:32:12):
felt lied to.

Speaker 3 (01:32:12):
You.

Speaker 2 (01:32:13):
That's why I believe you're seeing so much inro You've
seeing these inroads in the minority class, Hispanics and Blacks,
and you're seeing it in urban areas. You're seeing it
with young voters. You're seeing it in every demographic, Bethany,
do we have that kind of hope for these young
ones of ours that they're going to realize at some
point what they were told and all of this built
up anxiety it's not as advertised, and that they're going

(01:32:34):
to be okay. Do we have that chance with this
young generation? Do you think?

Speaker 4 (01:32:38):
I mean, I think I think we do. We're we're
going to see President Trump doing a lot of winning.
We're already seeing it thus far with all of his
cabinet picks. I just saw Marco Rubio might be on
tap for Secretary Sase, on tap for the un like that.
It's going to be an amazing four years by the
looks of it. And you know, after COVID, I know
so many middle school and high schools and ethan elementary

(01:33:00):
school age kids who were so worked up with fear
about COVID and then they got it, and then they
got it again, and then their mom got it, and
then their Grandma got it and everybody was fine for
the most part. It's you know, it's not a virus
that takes out the vast, vast majority of people. It's
a bad cold bordering on mild, you know, flu for
most people. And so I saw a lot of young

(01:33:22):
people be really red pilled about what they were put
through with COVID, and you referenced it earlier with that
young voter that called into your show. I think we're
going to see the same thing when President Trump's you know,
when this term goes well, they're going to think, hmm,
what else am I being lied to about? Because I
was I used to be liberal, and I remember getting
red pilled on abortion and you know, it's not a

(01:33:44):
clump of cells, and on Israel, like, oh, they're not
colonized or violent, you know, barbarians. When you get red
pilled on one thing, it makes you think, what else
am I being lied to about?

Speaker 1 (01:33:53):
Bethany Mandel, journalist author, talking about the post election and
how liberal moms are not Okay. My guess is you're
headed to a TV tonight to see Mike Tyson fight.

Speaker 2 (01:34:03):
I am now, look, man, he's fifty eight years old,
he is one of the greatest heavyweight champs in the world.
I don't want to see him lose to a twenty
nine year old YouTuber. The kids are better than average fighter,
so he's not a bum, but he's not anything close
to the Mike Tyson that we knew. But I don't
know what a twenty nine year old versus a fifty
eight year old looks like. But I am cheering for

(01:34:23):
Iron Mike. I am. I really want to see him
from did.

Speaker 1 (01:34:26):
You see how he looked at that weight in yesterday? Man?
The guy is muscled up, he's been that way.

Speaker 2 (01:34:33):
He is, and he's got a really good fighting style
that's that's close to the body, and it just rips
that body apart. And I just hope we see that Mike.
It looks in the sparring videos and the training, it
looks like that's who we get. So I hope fifty
eight year old Mike carries a day.

Speaker 1 (01:34:47):
And it's on Netflix, So if you have Netflix, you'll
see you'll see the fight tonight, right And I have nothing,
and so I yes.

Speaker 2 (01:34:52):
Alright, I will be watching.

Speaker 1 (01:34:53):
All right, Well, that doesn't for us this week here
on the Rodden. Great show. Always great to be with you,
head up, shoulders back. May God bless you and your
family and this great country of ours. Mister Hughes, have
a good weekend. We'll see you on Monday.

Speaker 2 (01:35:06):
We'll see you Monday, sir, and.

Speaker 1 (01:35:07):
We'll see all our great listeners. Talking to you Monday
at four. Thanks for joining us.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

The Joe Rogan Experience

Dateline NBC

.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: Why Matt Gaetz is Perfect for DOJ; Rising Autism in America

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;}Stuff You Should Know

The Joe Rogan Experience

Dateline NBC

All Episodes