Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:05):
Hey, everybody. How are you doing and welcome
to another episode of the John Reilly project.
It's
episode number 336
of this podcast. You know, this is A
podcast all about our ina rights of life
liberty and the pursuit of happiness,
you know, tomorrow is independence day, check proliferation
of independence.
(00:25):
So this is a great time to be
an American and to celebrate really what I
believe are the the moral footing of what
makes America special, and that are that is
individual rights and our right to our own
life. And so thanks for joining me on
the pie cast on the live stream. You
know, if you have thoughts or comments, just
let me know. You can drop your take
(00:46):
in the live chat on Facebook or on
Youtube.
How are you doing? You hope you're all
surviving out there.
I have a bunch of things in store
for you today? We're gonna start local.
I've got some comments about what's going on
around here in Pow about the term limit
initiative in Pow.
We have some comments
about Pow voices, which is
(01:08):
group that is largely trying to,
stop development, slow down development,
stop the lifetime fitness for facility. We're gonna
talk a little bit about Pow voices.
And just some of the general reactions in
the community to all of that.
And then I wanna widen the scope. We'll
talk a little bit about general kind of
(01:28):
national news. I wanna talk about the presidential
debate between Biden and Trump and the react
shit and the fallout, and, you know, this
has all been swirling for the past week.
I've got a bunch of thoughts and opinions
on that.
And then, I'm gonna brief touch on a
few of the supreme Court cases and give
me my opinion. If you're interested in that,
I'm certainly interested in your opinion. So let
(01:49):
me know. And
and then what I like to do is
just share with you
really some independence day memories, which is kinda
goes back to my childhood, things that I
remembered on the fourth of July.
And so I encourage you to share your
stories about independence day as well. So If
you have any thoughts or comments, you wanna
(02:09):
get involved in the conversation, just type your
comments in the live chat on Facebook or
around on Youtube,
and we'll get you involved. Okay. So
start and local,
then we're... We're gonna talk about Pow, then
we're gonna talk about national issues and then
we'll talk about independence say.
Okay. Let's let's kick it off and let's
talk a little bit about the Pow term
(02:30):
limit initiative.
And, I just wanna bring people up to
speed on this particular issue. You know, we
had talked about the term limited issue. That
Tony Blaine would was putting forward, and this
initiative has now have been suspended. You know,
he he thinks that he's not gonna be
able to get enough signatures. And in fact,
like I told you, I'm on his text
(02:51):
messaging list, which is an interesting list of
get involved in because
his messages are so personal. It makes you
think like he's just talking to you, but
he's really talking to everybody. But Tony Blaine
said on June 20 third,
stop signatures. We're not gonna make the 4000
signature deadline by July t.
(03:12):
I'm going to ref file now to restart
the 6 month clock in September, and we'll
get 4000
signatures and put it on the 20 26
ballot.
Interesting.
So
Tony Blamed is still gonna run for office.
And I think he's running in
district too if I recall.
(03:32):
And he's gonna be running against Jared Wilson,
who was another kind of
outspoken Highway guy who played a role in
the last election, part of the
deputy Sheriff
Association, and he was on the
Jared Wilson was Chair, the budget review committee.
He's a pretty interesting guy. A lot of
people had a lot of problems with a
(03:53):
lot of the the packs and the money
in politics In Pow, and and he's gonna
be running against Tony Blaine. And Tony Blaine
of course announced his candidacy
before the 20 22 election. That's how far
ahead of the curve he was,
and
My understanding is is that he is in
the reserves, and he is serving
(04:15):
on a right now, and he's not here
locally. So he had to get
someone else to file his candidate papers for
his district 2 election
But if he's not here, then he's obviously
not gathering a lot of signatures for the
Pow term limits initiative. And so it turns
out they're not gonna have enough. And in
this...
It's disappointing. I mean, I'd like to see
(04:36):
term limits. I think, you know, a lot
of times the incumbents get in office particularly
in local elections, and they're there for, like,
not just years, sometimes decades.
And and I always like to see some
fresh blood. I hope this thing gets resurrected.
If Tony is successful and wins his election
that'll help him probably
(04:57):
bring this initiative more towards the front of
the list on things that are being discussed
in Pow.
And we... And we're are gonna break down
all these elections as we get closer.
Into the election season. You know, generally speaking,
our local elections start to get hot and
heavy, like, around Labor Day,
and go in through, you know, the mid
to end of October. Usually, by then everyone
(05:19):
is voted with their mail votes. So So
the term limit campaign has been suspended. So
let me know what you think of that?
Do you do you like term limits? Do
you think term limits are a good idea
or maybe they're a bad idea because we
get to vote, and we can always out...
We can always kick out and incumbent. And
maybe our regular voting process
is good enough for term limits. Let me
(05:41):
know your thoughts and opinions.
Okay. I wanna now switch a little bit
to another local topic. Again and I wanna
talk a little bit about the... The Pow
Voices Facebook group.
And this is kind of a
an expansion on what Chris Cruz has done
with her South and North Pow votes group.
You know, it's kind of a community leaders
(06:01):
and and they're there... This Pow voice is
piece is really trying to address
the tremendous amount of development that's going on
in Pow that has so many people upset.
Whether it's the development on Pow Road or
it's the development at the farm in Pow
or it's development along twin peaks. There's been
a lot of housing construction,
(06:22):
and a lot of people are angry about
it. They don't wanna see any more of
it. They want Powell to be like it
was in 19 72.
And so we're seeing more kind of heated
propaganda
coming out from a lot of anti growth
people, anti housing anti development.
You know, really upset with the Pow lifetime
(06:42):
fitness project.
And
and
as a Z, we saw on the... In
the Pal voices group. Chris Cruz
explaining the history of prop f f and
Pal. You know, which goes back to the
late 19 eighties
when our, quote founding fathers of Pow, Bob
Emery and and and the whole group there
(07:02):
back in the eighties had wanted to prevent
Pow from becoming, like another Claire mod or
another Mir mesa. And so they had put
forward a ballot initiative to make certain portions
of Pow
that you couldn't change the zoning just by
the city council
voting on it. You know, in order to
change zoning laws in Pow, they wanted
(07:23):
the people to weigh in.
And as a result, you know, this has
caused a lot of issues in Pow. There's
been a lot of development that hasn't occurred
in North Powell because that's where a lot
of this zoning was applied for prop f
f. And then, of course, on Pow Road
in other places, Prop f didn't apply, which
I thought was odd. Do you think it
would apply to the whole city.
(07:45):
But at any rate, just bringing on prop
F f and where you can build, where
you can't build property rights, etcetera, was a,
kinda broken down by Chris Cruise. So I
just kinda felt it was necessary to to
say again, what I think is really an
important issue, and you'll see it on the
screen. I commented that zoning laws like prop
(08:05):
F f,
which prevent development and are pervasive throughout the
state
are why we have a housing crisis,
And in my opinion, this is very true
because N have been
resisting development and this has been going on
for a long time. Like for decades in
California,
particularly in the last 2 decades, where there's
(08:26):
been resistance to housing, and we've seen housing
prices go through the roof. Not just for
purchasing real estate, but also for rentals.
And it's because there's not enough inventory. And
I I think sometimes people just don't understand
it, But we got a response here from
from Eric Well, who's 1 of the leaders
of the Pow voices group, and he said,
(08:46):
John,
I would think that homes being used for
the single, highest source of investment and income,
thereby up rents and mortgage beyond people's means
and often by investors only looking to make
money. I is why we have a housing
crisis or at least in the top 2
(09:06):
or 3 reasons.
Now,
I... You know, this is what you see
a lot in a lot of issues that
are going on in society where
people
are in denial about market forces and supply
and demand, and the behavior of what people
do in an economy. Here again
(09:26):
blame the rich.
Blame the investors,
blame greedy people.
Okay. I wanna break this down because this
is important to understand.
Our
property owners jacking up the price of their
house. Yeah. What because the market Is You
know, you can get a lot more for
your house now than you did 10 years
ago, 5 years ago. Even even 3 years
(09:48):
ago.
And at the same time, rental prices are
such Sky High. San Diego is 1 of
the most expensive cities to live in the
world
because of our housing crisis, prices are just
insane.
The reason is is because when you go
looking to buy a house,
there are very few available for sale.
(10:09):
When you go to rent an apartment or
rent a house, it's not like you have
a selection of 20 or 30 of them
in a particular community.
There are very few available.
So it's natural for property owners and landlords
to
you know, they they set their prices based
on the market conditions. Just like if you
are gonna try to sell your house.
(10:32):
You're gonna try to maximize
the price that you get for that house.
And if it turns into a bidding war
amongst buyers as a seller, you're gonna say,
okay, great. Because that's what the market condition
is.
But it seems that for some reason people
lose sight of that. They just think it's
just greed greed greed when in fact,
(10:52):
people that are property owners today are gonna
maximize
the sale of their house.
The thing is is that when there is
not enough inventory on the market. And real
estate agents will tell you us. When there's
not enough listings available on the market, you
get
10 or 20,
you know, potential buyers all bidding on that
(11:13):
1 property because they're so few available. That's
why they get in a bidding war. That's
why homes are selling
above asking price. And the same dynamic exists
with rentals.
So, you know, is is it because, you
know, as Eric said,
that
homes are being used as the single highest
(11:33):
source of investment.
Well, first of all, that's been true for
a long time.
But we haven't seen prices radically increased and
except like in the past, probably 10 to
20 years. Right?
But
homes of Ben people's major nest egg in
for middle class Americans going back decades. Going
back to when I was a kid and
before that.
(11:55):
Have investors own property in the past. Yeah.
Do they own more property now. Yeah. You
know, I looked it up,
apparently,
25 percent of properties in San Diego or
owned by investors. Property that seemed really high
to me. I don't know if that's 25
percent of the recent purchases or 25 percent
of all property. It's gotta be the recent.
(12:17):
But you might have to ask yourself a
question. Why are investors getting involved in real
estate. Well, the reason is is because the
return on investment is so great. But Investors
love this because the prices are going up
up up. The value of the property is
increasing. If they're renting it out, they can
get more for the rent.
Investors are benefiting
(12:37):
from the N
regulation laws like prop f, like, you know,
some of the other initiatives that are being
discussed in other cities.
When government officials and authorities
restrict the amount of development that can can
occur, some existing property owners in enjoy the
fruits of all of that. We're the ones
that enjoy, you know, skyrocketing prices,
(12:59):
And so investors
are just getting on the bandwagon.
You know? And the system is rigged for
them, what particularly when
government
restricts development,
and thus limits supply.
So
in my opinion, yeah, our investors, plan a
role here in the housing crisis in San
Diego, Yeah.
(13:19):
Our our people have a lot of money
of their own money tied up in their
homes? Yeah.
But if there was a lot more
inventory, a lot more
competition in the market.
Then you're gonna put more... How should I
say more power in the hands of the
of the real estate buyer or of the
the renter
(13:40):
When they have a wide range of choices
to select from, then those
landlords, those property owners are going to have
to adjust their price to meet market conditions.
So if you go back and look at
the source of the river on how we
ended up here.
It's because there's been so much resistance
to housing development
(14:01):
in Pow in San Diego throughout California,
And frankly, in a lot of parts around
America.
So it it it's just funny how this
myth
seems to continue to be pervasive.
You know, that it's it's greed, it's rich
people, it's investors, but no, It's just the
market conditions. And if you were a landlord,
if you were a property owner, I'll bet
(14:23):
you any money that you would want to
get maximum value for your property.
So we'll see how this all thing continues.
You know, the Pow lifetime fitness project
is gonna go before the Pow City Council
on July sixteenth,
and we're gonna hear from
our our city council members. I don't know
if city officials are gonna offer their recommendation
(14:43):
on that particular project, but we're gonna find
out more about that soon.
You know, I'm generally a
I'm in favor of the lifetime fitness in
the farm in Pow for a number of
reasons. Number 1,
In my opinion, property owner should be able
to build on their land.
Their property,
(15:04):
their choice.
At the same time, I think it looks
like a pretty nice facility with a lot
of amenities and services that are interesting to
me and my family. And we've commented on
that. And I think it's also gonna be
a nice upgrade.
So I'm generally in favor of it, but
it's probably gonna have to go to a
vote. We're gonna see a vote on this
at some point. That's assuming the City Council
(15:25):
in Pow,
you know, takes the
recommendations and then does their due diligence, but
they're likely not gonna just... Rubber stamp it
and approve it. They're gonna put it out
to the voters.
And then we're gonna find out. My hunch
is is that even though measure p, you
know, passed in 20 20.
My hunch is, this is gonna fail
(15:47):
because
the voters
are
upset because they voted on 1 plan and
now the, you know, Kevin Mc wants to
change the plan.
I think voters
in general, are just upset about all the
development going on in Pow. And this is
their 1 opportunity where they can say no.
So we'll see. I mean, I think the
(16:09):
the burden is gonna be on lifetime to
make a compelling case.
It's definitely gonna be a high end
of fitness facility that does... It's not gonna
be like, a 24 hour fitness with really
low subscription prices.
This is gonna cater to wealthy people.
And
those wealthy people aren't gonna be the only
(16:29):
ones voting on it. They're we're gonna have
people all over the city voting on whether
or not this facility should go in. In
North Pow. Tell me when you think of
this, drop your comment in the live chat
on Facebook on Youtube or on x
and then and, by the way, I'm still
getting hate from a lot of people here
in my hometown, you know, kind of
(16:50):
expressing what I believe is a a righteous
position. You know, I talk about how this
podcast is all about are ina rights of
life liberty and the to happiness.
Your life is yours. You know, this is
the fourth of July. You know, when this
is a great time to talk about this.
Your life is yours, to In my opinion,
your body is yours. That's why I support
(17:11):
a woman's right to choose. And I think
your property is yours to build on. As
long as you're not harming other people.
You know, if we're just building housing,
we're building a fitness facility. You're building a
grocery store.
Those are things that property owners should be
able to decide for themselves. So,
let me know your thoughts on that. But,
you know, there's still there's still a lot
(17:32):
of people that just are upset when I
express my thoughts and opinions.
But, you know, when I created this podcast
a number of years ago,
I knew that I was gonna get pushback
from people that didn't like me, didn't agree
with me, but that's okay.
I'm trying to create a platform for a
community forum. I'm trying to create a discussion,
(17:54):
and we're gonna sometimes agree and sometimes disagree
and we're gonna hear it out. And and
I think that's a healthy thing for our
our our city for our community, and I
hope you feel the same.
Okay.
Alright. So,
before we get
to...
I wanna talk about the debates,
and what's going on with Trump and Biden.
(18:16):
We're gonna talk about independence day.
But I do wanna just give a quick
shout out.
For pow store dot com. I mean, if
you're interested in a Pow gear, go to
pow store dot com, and there we've got
t shirts, puzzles, coffee mugs, a lot of
other Pow swag, all celebrating our, quote, city
in the country. So if you like to
(18:36):
check it go to pow store dot com
and use the promo code Pow 20 to
get 20 percent off.
Okay. So now let's
Let's take a look at and I I
gotta talk about this debate. Did you see
it? Did you see the debate last week?
I think it was on Thursday.
This
was a train wreck of epic proportions.
(18:59):
You know,
we knew going into this debate that it
was gonna be different. There wasn't gonna be
a live audience that Trump was gonna feed
off of. Apparently, they were gonna cut off
microphones, so it couldn't be a shouting match
of people talking over each other.
And at first, I thought, okay. This could
be interesting. This might end up being a
real discussion.
And then they they come out on stage
(19:21):
and was wondering if Biden and Trump were
gonna shake hands, and of course, they didn't.
They went right to their podium.
And we got started with this, and at
In the first, like, moment or 2, I
was thinking to myself. Hey, this is actually
working out pretty good. You know, Trump seemed
sort of well behaved and and maybe there'll
be a substantive ish discussion of the issues.
(19:41):
Well, then all hell broke loose.
And you you've... If you've been watching the
media, you know the story. I mean, first
of all, Trump was just lying out his
ass. Just
saying 1 thing after another that wasn't a
true just a flurry of lies that would
have been difficult for anybody to be able
to shoot down
(20:02):
individually 1 at a time.
And then me meanwhile Joe Biden, 81 years
old is up there,
losing his train of thought.
Looking confused,
looking stunned, looking out of place and looking
frankly
incompetent to be president in the United States.
And I'm watching this whole thing, and
why I had a glimmer of hope in
(20:24):
the beginning. This debate quickly turned into a
train wreck. And for me, I was watching
it almost
for entertainment reasons, You know?
Because
we it it was just such
insanity, such the opposite of what we really
need in our in our our our nation
right now. I mean, Trump was saying bs
(20:46):
like, oh, Biden wants to increase your taxes
by 4 times,
which isn't true at all. I mean, frankly,
the guy that wants to jack up prices
radically is Trump with his tariffs.
And then Trump was saying, oh, the Democrats,
they wanna be able to have abortions
after a child is born,
which is just a flat out lie. And
(21:07):
so Trump was long lying and he left
lying right 1 after another. And then meanwhile
Biden
was too weak too incompetent too frail
to shoot down those lies effectively.
And Trump noticed this. And
meanwhile, the the the moderators
weren't addressing this. They weren't fact checking. They
(21:28):
weren't pushing back and that was part of
the rules
that Trump and biden and agreed to.
So Trump is getting away with lying. And
so what does he do? He starts lying
even more and amplifying the lies and just
doubling down on the lies.
And then meanwhile, Biden is on the other
side of the stage, bumbling, fumbling,
trying to get out of coherent message.
(21:50):
And there were a few moments where it
was downright scary. Like, you didn't know if
Joe Biden is capable of being the president
of the United States. The, you know, the
so called, quote, leader of the free world,
a guy with his finger on the nuclear
bombs, you know, the a guy that has
tremendous power in America.
And
(22:11):
after this debate, oh my God. Like, I'd
be the the debate itself, you gotta say,
who 1 who lost. Well, Biden clearly lost.
I mean, he was like a deer in
the headlights, he looked pale. He looked really
bad.
And he couldn't speak coherent
in many portions of the debate, especially in
the beginning.
But Trump, while he looked
(22:34):
like a leader looked confident,
he was lying so much he was being
a con man. I Trump normally always is.
So
you're come out of the scene and Like,
who won
Well,
they were both disasters. And, you know, going
into that debate, I did a preview of
the debate last week.
And I said, we need more than these
(22:56):
2 choices.
We need 3 and 4 choices on the
debate stage.
And sure enough, we got 2 choices and
they're 2 really bad choices. And people say
what, You gotta pick between the lesser of
evils.
Do you want evil in red or evil
in blue? Do you want the immoral candidate
from the Republican party or the 1 from
(23:17):
the Democratic party?
And
is this
what it all comes down to America? These
are our 2 best options
for president the United States, you gotta be
kidding me.
Now,
I'm no supporter of R.
But
Rf should have been on that stage
(23:39):
just to offer a third point of view.
And and, yeah, there's a lot of problems
with Rf.
But he could at least speak clearly even
with this voice impediment. He he even he
has different perspectives this perspectives on issues, and
I think the conversation would have been a
lot different.
And there are other candidates are also running
(23:59):
for this, But, you know, they when they
did this debate, they did it purposely
to block all the competition.
You know, they they said that Rf couldn't
be in the debate because he hadn't qualified
on enough ballots to get 270
electoral votes.
But meanwhile, Biden and Trump aren't on any
(24:20):
ballots.
Neither 1 of them is qualified for the
ballot because neither 1 of them is the
nominee of their party.
They they said Rf couldn't be in the
debates because he wasn't ranking high enough in
the polls, but many of those polls left
r k out of the question.
They would just ask, who do you support
Trump or Biden. They wouldn't even ask R
is 1 of the options
(24:41):
And then Rf doesn't get enough
traction in the polls because they rigged the
system.
And I was just the whole time thinking,
okay.
I... I'm a political nerd, so I'm kind
of into it. This is turning into a
train wreck. This is turning into something crazy,
and the whole time I'm thinking there's gotta
be more than 2 choices.
I mean, you go everywhere in America. We
(25:03):
have unlimited choices of what to wear, where
to live, you know, how to live our
life and our hobbies. And when we go
shopping, it's unlimited choices in almost every category,
except president of the United States when we're
forced to get 2 turkeys.
And, boy was that debate ugly?
Then, what happened after that? Well, I was
(25:24):
watching Cnn,
and, you know, they had their big panel.
There were like, 9 people up there.
And Van Jones was,
1 of those panel who
did he... Was he on president Obama's staff
or president of Biden staff. I think he
was on Obama's staff.
And he's a regular on cnn. And he's
clearly a democrat, not a hardcore lefty, more
(25:45):
of a centrist democrat.
And Van Jones said
that Biden is not capable of being president
and the Democrats need to consider a new
candidate.
And I walked to myself, well, that's something
pretty bold to say, you know, it's like,
he was just speaking top of mind.
But once you break the ice on that
particular issue, it just starts building, and it's
(26:06):
still building.
Should Biden be the candidate from the Democrats.
And we're still hearing this in the media
today a week later.
We're seeing it in the White House press
conferences where
Biden press secretary is just getting hammered about
his confidence,
his ability to lead whether he's gonna stay
(26:26):
in in the race We're seeing comments now
from the Democratic National committee on what the
process might be to replace him.
We
what do you think
is he gonna be replaced?
Now,
I am
shocked that the Democrats are sticking with buying
on this.
(26:47):
Because Democrats are rightfully saying
that we are facing an election that is
extremely threatening
to the core principles of America.
Electing Donald Trump is dangerous for America.
This is a guy that is above the
law wants to rule, you know, for
(27:07):
retribution has wants to eliminate parts of the
constitution, wants the rules a dictator on day
1. He said that.
And there's a whole million other reasons why
Trump is a very
immoral
improper candidate for America.
So when
when Democrats are facing a Republican
(27:30):
challenger
who is as scary as threatening as dangerous
as Donald Trump.
Why in the hell are they rolling out
Joe Biden who's 81 years old,
who stumbles and bum
who got, you know, tongue tied and couldn't
express, you know, his thoughts during the debate
who trips and falls and who was clearly
(27:51):
showing decline.
You know, say what you will about Joe
Biden and his career, etcetera, But, you know,
should he be president in the United States.
Should he have
some would say the hardest job in the
world.
Does have the mental capacity, the acuity to
stamina to do that job
(28:12):
regardless of how you feel about his policies.
And to me, the answer is clearly no.
So now there's a lot of of people
are saying, well, I might have been on
the fence, but there's no way I can
vote for Biden, so I'm gonna now vote
for Trump. And what would would we see
we're seeing Trump rise in the polls.
Even though he lied out of his ass
in that debate because all the attention is
(28:34):
going to Biden
and his capabilities.
I
I mean, I am just stunned that the
Democrats
are so strongly sticking with. Now,
given the fact that the media is still
pushing this narrative,
still questioning what's the president is doing,
still challenging, you know, his his confidence? Why
(28:54):
isn't he in a press conference? Why isn't
he demonstrating
his his
you know, mental capabilities
showing how sharp he is. You know, we
hear the stories. Oh, and closed doors and
we've been in meetings though, man, Biden is
a sharpest guy in the room. Got lots
of energy and but we didn't see that
in the debate,
makes me even wonder if really that's what
(29:15):
we're seeing behind closed doors.
Other people say, well, you know, it really
doesn't matter because Joe Biden surrounds himself with
a lot of really smart people, a lot
of experts, people that we can count on.
You know, Trump surrounds himself with crooks and
liars and a bunch of guys that we
don't like.
Okay. But even if you're surrounding your yourself
(29:35):
with really good smart people,
as president, you have to make the big
decision.
You have to be the the the the
number 1.
You have to be able
to make the tough call.
And
I'm not sure, Joe Biden has the ability
to do that anymore.
So so now what do they do?
(29:56):
You know, if
if they decide to run someone else? Whether
it's vice president Harris or
it's someone else. I mean, we can come
up with any number of names.
If they admitted that president Biden was is
not gonna run for a reelection. Well, then,
does he have the mental capacity to be
(30:17):
president in the United States
from now until January of next year, you
know, up until inauguration day for the next
president.
So I think if the Democrats admit that
he's not capable of running for president for
another term. I don't think you can make
the argument he should be president now.
Which then leads us back to Kamala Harris.
(30:40):
Some people are saying say, hey, Kamala Harris,
maybe not narrative, a former prosecutor going up
against Trump.
But Kamala Harris is not a candidate of
strength.
I mean, she was chosen for that job,
largely to check a few boxes
in
in the in the world of demographics and
(31:01):
underrepresented categories.
Come on. And come kamala Harris has a
legitimate track record or legitimate history
as a
prosecutor as an attorney general as a senator.
But let's be real. I mean, she is
not the sharpest tool in the kitchen.
She is,
you know, a vice president, but as president,
(31:24):
I think a lot of people would be
very concerned.
So now I'm wondering what are the Democrats
gonna do?
IIIII...
My hunch is is that
this this narrative in the media is gonna
keep going and keep building and at some
point,
they're gonna have to make a tough call.
(31:44):
And asked biden to step down. I mean,
imagine if they stuck with Biden,
and they lost to Trump.
I mean, that would be a disaster of
epic proportions. Even though there are a lot
of very capable democrats that could step in
and probably clean Trump's clock. I remember, Amy
K shah and the Democratic debates in 20
20 she... I thought she did a really
(32:04):
good job.
There were other democratic candidates in those debates
that I thought, you know,
are certainly competent mentally to do it, whether
or not I agree with their policies.
But even some of my thought showed
reasonable
amounts of
intelligence and and
and thoughtful.
(32:26):
But I don't think we're gonna get that
with president Biden. And I meanwhile, President Trump.
I mean,
this guy is a con man. He's a
liar, a scammer,
and, I mean, and... It's shocking the Republicans
are sticking with him. And meanwhile, now we're
seeing more reports coming out that you know,
of Trump with with Epstein over at Lolita
(32:47):
Island, hooking up with underage girls.
We're seeing more receipts of this
and still the evangelical
are sticking with Trump.
This is a guy
that is violated probably every 1 of the
10 commandments. And they're sticking with Trump. I
mean, it's hilarious. It's ridiculous. It's nonsense.
(33:09):
Republicans
said they wanted to put
dignity back into the White House when they
elected George W bush in 2000,
because, you know,
president Bill Clinton was a disgrace, and he
was in immoral.
The whole Mon Le Fair yada yada, but
that That small potatoes compared to everything that
Trump is involved in and yet the evangelical
(33:30):
are sticking with Trump,
and they pray for him.
What in the hell is going on here?
How did we get reduced to this? Tell
me your thoughts. I mean, I, in my
opinion, it is
outright
immoral
for the Democrats to stick with Biden, considering
how dangerous Trump is.
(33:51):
And it's outright immoral that the Republicans are
sticking with Trump,
given that he is lying and scamming people,
And you see a lot of other politicians
kinda jumping on board with him, like like
Berg, the the
governor from North Dakota.
Like like, Marco Rubio, like like Ted Cruz,
(34:12):
guys that Trump has shredded has talked down
to
has obliterated in debates.
Now these guys are sucking up to to
Trump and get in line hoping to be
his vice president,
and just they're will fully in
denial of all of his lies. And meanwhile,
the democrats are will fully in denial of
(34:34):
Biden capability
and mental acuity
and stamina to be president.
This is insane
for
the strongest nation on the planet?
How in the hell do we end up
with us?
This is just blows my mind. The whole
thing just completely blows my mind. So let
me know your thoughts and comments. Is there
(34:54):
gonna be another debate they they're supposed to
be another debate, but who knows who's gonna
be there.
Like I said, I I think Rf should
have been on that debate stage. I think
there are other candidates, you know, the nominee
from some of the other parties, like the
libertarian party, the green party. If they have
qualified on enough ballots, to mathematically get 2
70, then I think they deserve to be
(35:15):
on that debate stage.
America, the land of unlimited choices, the land
of diversity,
and we get 2
Total turd
being offered to us as president the in
United States.
So tell me when you think about the
debate?
Okay.
(35:35):
What are we gonna do next? I'm... I
wanna talk a little bit about,
some of the supreme court cases,
and then we're gonna chat a little bit
about
independence day, and some of my thoughts and
memories of independence day, and I look forward
to sharing yours. And then we're gonna open
up the San diego community form. We got
some social media comments that we're gonna respond
to. Okay. Let's talk about the Supreme Court.
(35:58):
And
this has probably been...
I mean, this whole week it's been insane.
How it? I mean, the past 7 to
10 days. If it wasn't all these different
supreme course cases, it was the debate and
whether Biden was gonna stick in the election
and all these different things.
So let's talk about some of these cases.
Now the the first 1, the 1 that
(36:19):
has gotten probably the most attention
is the
presidential immunity.
The
Supreme Court ruled
that a president
has immunity, which means that they can break
the law with no consequences
as long as they are doing as an
official act.
(36:40):
If they're acting as a private individual, they
are still held accountable to the law. But
if they president in the United States, they
can break the law and suffer no penalty.
What do you think of this?
This
to me is the most anti American,
sentiment that I've seen from the court in
a long long time. I mean, in in
fact, you know, even Ali and gorsuch and,
(37:05):
kavanaugh, a lot of those guys when they
were being interviewed
in the
senate hearings for the Judicial nomination.
Many of those those
Supreme Court justices said then during their interview
process that nobody is above the law. That
we are all held equal to the law.
And now once they're in... In their supreme
(37:27):
court position
they are now saying no. A president can
be like a king. A president can
can
unilaterally make decisions, and it doesn't matter if
they kill people,
or they harm people or they violate the
law. If it's part of their job as
president,
then that's acceptable.
Now,
(37:47):
they voted 6 3, the court is stacked
with with conservatives that that Trump put in,
And now we're bearing the fruits list. Now
the supreme Court,
a lot of these cases are... Again, it's
like a mixed bag. They're that I really
like and some that I don't.
This is 1 that I really don't like.
(38:08):
I mean, the whole idea
of
some of of, you know, the the the
notion of having our own ina rights of
life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The implication there is that we have equal
rights all of us are equal, You know?
It it says that in the pre am
of the declaration of independence, all men are
created equal. And what that really means is
(38:29):
is that we're all equal in the eyes
of the law.
Some might say we're all equal in the
eyes of God.
Which essentially means that those god given rights,
life liberty and the pursuit of happiness
are for everybody,
But what we're seeing now is that the
supreme court says that a president in the
United States can violate someone else's right to
(38:51):
their life.
Their liberty and their pursuit of happiness
just because they're president.
And
this isn't... I mean, this is obviously scary
assuming a Trump presidency but this sort of
thing been going on for a long time.
I mean, we we've seen president Obama,
dropped drone bombs and he killed innocent people.
He bombed a,
(39:13):
doctors without borders facility in Afghanistan. He jerome
bombed a wedding,
Some of these were American citizens
that were...
They were attempting to hold accountable the law.
Every 1 of them deserves h corpus rights.
But instead, the president just had them killed
in the Middle East, Obama did that.
(39:36):
And so we're seeing this sort of thing
playing out that presidents are above the law.
It's not just a recent thing. It's not
just a Trump thing,
but it's a thing that's been going on
for a while, but is that right? Should
a president have immunity?
If
this is supposed to be a nation of
the people by the people for the people.
(39:59):
The person that's
acting his president isn't supposed to be a
king, isn't supposed to be a dictator. There
are representative of the people who are meant
to protect and defend the constitution of the
United States Well,
how and the hell can they I do
that by having by being above the law.
So this I thought was horrible.
(40:20):
It also invites the question about immunity. There
was a lot of discussion about this back
in 20 20
during all the George Floyd cases
about police immunity and qualified immunity for cops.
Should police
have immunity. Should police be able to get
away, with breaking the law, if it's in
the course of their regular duties of their
(40:40):
job.
This was a controversial point
particularly when it it pertain to George Floyd
and whether that policeman that, you know, basically
suffocated them on the middle of the street,
whether
that... He should have been tried for murder
or not. But in a lot of cases,
some of these cops are immune to being
charged for murder. In some cases, you know,
(41:02):
that that veil is pierced
where they can sometimes hold police accountable.
But again, it goes to the fact is
who should be above the law, and are
we all equal before the law?
So this was a big problem?
From the supreme court is granting immunity the
President the United States because who who can
(41:23):
say what's an official act
What's official What's unofficial? It becomes subjective.
And as a result, you're gonna end up
having this whole thing spend and warp you're
gonna have all... Alternative facts and lies driving
all of this.
Okay. The other topic that I think the
Supreme Court did worth me mention is the
chevron case.
(41:44):
I know does this have any
connection to Chevron on the oil company, it
must. I I don't know.
But the story is is that
in 19 84,
the Supreme Court ruled
that
judges
aren't capable of being experts in all these
different categories of the economy and society.
(42:06):
And that it... They were deferring a lot
of their they're
deferring a lot of the decision making to
experts in the regulatory state. You know, in
the Epa or in in in the Security
Exchange Commission, all of those alphabet
agencies that all reports to the president all
in the executive branch They basically said, you
(42:27):
know, with Congress writes a law that's kind
of vague,
then we're gonna let these regulators, these experts,
these Phds and scientists.
Be that they'll let them be the ones
that can define it more specifically.
Now,
on the surface that might sound reasonable. Right?
You know, how who are these judges? How
(42:49):
does a judge know how many poll there
are in any... You know, cubic volume, cubic
meter of of space and what's the right
number of particulate to measure pollution. You know,
judges aren't gonna know that the experts know
that?
And no 1 can be an expert in
everything, You know, the Supreme Court. They they
know the law, but they're not gonna be
an expert in science. And they're not gonna
(43:09):
be an expert in health. Not gonna be
an expert on finance and other parts of
the economy.
So it sort of sounds right. Okay? But...
So what it... What happens since 19 84.
We've seen
the executive branch grow and grow and grow.
More and more people. Bigger and bigger
agencies giving the president of the United States
(43:30):
more and more power.
And as a result, now, we have
these una elected bureau that work in these
alphabet agencies that are making laws that are
making rules.
Interestingly,
they're making rules that govern their own behavior.
(43:50):
It's like a conflict of interest. Because remember,
it used to be that the congress legislative
branch would write the law.
The executive branch
would enforce the law.
And if the law ever needed interpreting, that's
what the judicial branch was for.
But now the judicial branch is basically kick
that can,
(44:11):
partly to the executive branch to let them
interpret the law.
So the executive branch can define all the
rules about the scope of the executive branch
own authority.
Is that right? This is like,
it's... The the previous Chevron case in my
opinion distorted the balances of power.
Provoking it kind of puts it back to
(44:32):
the to the to the right, you know,
3 c branches of government. I think that's
a good thing.
But it makes you wonder, like,
a lot of these individuals that are in
the regulatory state, they're not accountable. They're appointed
by politicians.
Some have political leaning 1 way or the
other.
(44:53):
I mean,
you might think it's a great idea to
have x experts in the executive ranch make
all these decisions. But maybe only if it's
your team that's the that's running the nation.
That's the president of the United States, I
mean, can you imagine
Democrats really excited if if Trump and his
con... And people with alternative facts and lies
(45:16):
were the ones that we're making these rules.
I I would hope not.
And I would hope not. So
how did this whole thing come about? Apparently?
There were some fishermen,
and they... Were being told by the 1
of the regulatory
agencies, I don't know, phishing game, 1 of
them
that said, well, in order for you to
(45:36):
go fit. You have to bring a federal
regulator onto your boat, and you have to
pay them 700 dollars a day to monitor
what you fish.
And they were saying, what the hell is
this? This is an abuse of power. This
is nonsense.
You know, you can inspect my fish when
I come off the boat, but I shouldn't
have to pay you 700 dollars a day.
Just so you can monitor me and tell
me what I can and cannot do.
(45:58):
And so that's the the case that was
brought forward.
But there's been a lot of other things.
Like, especially during Covid, We saw so many
decree by the regulatory state. A great example.
Was the
eviction moratorium
during Covid.
We saw regulators who claimed they were trying
to control the disease and this... Spread of
(46:20):
the disease, and they took that
circumstance and said, well, now we're gonna let
people stay in their apartments even if they
don't pay the rent.
And, you know, the landlord... Maybe we'll be
able to give them some
relief in a Ppp loan or something. But,
you know,
they don't have control of this. They can't
(46:41):
avail
their tenants. Even though the lease might be
over, or they're a month to month, maybe
they're a bad tenant, a tenant not paying
their bills.
Now the landlord has no ability to manage
their own property. Was this something that Congress
voted on?
No. No. It wasn't. It was done by
administrators done by regulators,
and this is an example of how the
(47:03):
administrator state has grown and grown.
You know, kinda reminds me also of... You
remember Ben Sas.
Ben Sas used to be the...
Republican
senator from Nebraska. I think he's now president
in the University of Florida.
And I remember he said,
He back when I was a kid,
I used to watch cartoons on Saturday morning,
(47:25):
and they had school house rock, you know?
And it was... I'm just a bill. I
remember, you know, all those things we learned
when we were younger from, you, speaking to
people that are, you know, my age, Gen
x.
And
and and we learned that the way a
bill
is is processed. You know? It's it's it's
submitted in Congress and As go through committee
(47:46):
and they vote on it. And then the
president signs off on it. And if it
requires interpretation, it goes to the judges to
the Supreme Court, we we
we knew back then that you know, back
in the day,
the con congress was
the
politically
electrified branch of government.
That's where there was debate, vigorous debate on
(48:09):
the house floor. This is where there were
elections, a lot more frequently.
You know, the legislative branch was the highly
politicized branch.
And then it used to be that
the executive branch had,
a, you know, a very modest amount of
power. They had limited power.
And then the judicial branch was almost like
(48:30):
something that you know, most people didn't really
think about. Unless there was a really big
important case.
But now everything's changed.
Congress has ab advocated a lot of their
authority, and they just let the president make
decisions to using executive orders in using the
administrative state. So the legislative branch has become
weaker.
(48:50):
The executive branch since the eighties has become
bigger and stronger, and now the most elect...
By politicized branch and the government is the
supreme court.
We're seeing it now, and we saw it
with the nominations by that have been going
back probably going back as far back as
bo in the... In the late eighties.
So it's crazy how everything is shifted,
(49:12):
and how the original design of way America's
government was supposed to be set up is
completely warp, completely distorted.
And that's leading us to why we are
where we are. And now
now the the progressive wanna, you know, stack
the court. They wanna... Make the court bigger
rather than 9 justices. They want 13 or
(49:33):
they want 17,
so they can put more progressive on the
court.
But then what's gonna happen is that at
some point then the republicans are gonna put
more conservatives on the court. And it's the
same
volley that's gonna be going back and forth
forever.
But, yeah, some of these cases are are
consequential. There's 1 other case that
(49:54):
from the supreme Court that actually has a
big impact here locally and it had to
do with the homelessness.
And basically, as Supreme Court said that cities
can make their own decisions.
On whether or not they want to arrest
the homeless or move the homeless,
that sort of thing.
And a lot of people were really upset.
(50:14):
Like, oh, my god. You know, where are
these people gonna go? What can they do?
The homeless have nowhere to go. And now
this evil supreme court, is saying being homeless
is illegal and they're gonna throw you in
jail for.
But it's hard. I mean, homelessness is a
very complicated problem.
And And
(50:37):
homeless people, you know,
there needs to be a place for them
to go.
And I think that's 1 of the rightful
things that government can do is to create
zones where people can camp overnight.
I mean, it's horrible that we have so
much homelessness in the first place. This goes
back to the housing crisis in California that
I commented on earlier.
(50:57):
That's the main reason we have homelessness is
because housing has become too expensive,
and they can no longer afford to pay
the bill.
And then they become homeless.
You know, are there other factors, you know,
mental,
you know, mental health or
drugs or alcohol. Yeah. Those all play a
role, But the main reason is that housing
(51:20):
is too expensive they can't afford it, and
they become homeless, and they begin living out
of their car.
Or they live in a tan or they
live somewhere else.
We could solve this problem because you don't
hear much about homelessness
where housing inexpensive. You don't hear about a
huge homelessness crisis in Mississippi,
or in Missouri
(51:41):
or in other states where you don't have
insane housing prices.
But in California, we do, and that's why
we have so many homeless people.
So this kind of opens the door up
for a lot of cities, and I read
an article recently that that Es
is now going to be able to have
the power now
to forcibly remove homelessness
(52:02):
from it parts of their city.
In some cases to arrest them. Now,
It's awful. When homeless people are arrested, we
don't wanna see that, and some people will
say that's in inhumane.
But at the same time, we can't just
have homeless people,
you know, out on the streets.
We can't have... Anarchy.
(52:23):
So
I would hope that, local cities now would
be able to create a zone
where
overnight camping is allowed.
That also gives Law enforcement the ability to
keep an eye on it in a particularly
central location if resources need to be brought
in to help a homelessness, then you have
a central location for that. And then you
(52:45):
have a lot less r raf
of homelessness
scattered about
you know, in some cases interfering with people's
businesses and other cases interfering with people's homes.
And you can have a little bit more
order to this. And frankly, it'd be a
lot safer.
For the homeless. If there was a zone.
Now the city of San Diego has set
up parts of the ab Ba park for
(53:06):
homelessness.
I think it's great. And I mean, you
know, it sucks that there's homeless in the
first place, and there's a lot of things
that need to... We need to do to
to resolve that.
But right now, there's a homeless problem that
needs to be addressed.
Is Es diet now gonna arrest people? Put
them in jail? I don't know. That's not
gonna solve the problem.
What's Pow gonna do. Right now Pow? I
(53:28):
don't think has a homeless shelter.
I don't know if they've had... If they've
removed anyone from from homelessness Pow? I know
they have the authority to do it. But
could they set up a place like in
forcibly
You know, if you go back to good
and ranch back there in, the Ci Valley
area of Pow, there's a big open space.
(53:49):
You know, there's a lot of places like
that where they could set up
a zone
that's open for the homeless. What do you
think of that?
To make camping legal.
And I think that would be a good
short term solution to this. But the supreme
Court has
allowed that to occur. What do you think
of that? Is that good? Is that bad?
(54:11):
So we got this flurry of of announcements,
and it usually comes us time of the
year. But the presidential immunity 1 was the
1 that drove everyone off the edge of
a cliff, rightfully so, time especially seeing what
Trump has been saying about his candidacy and
his plans once he's elected. He said straight
up,
I'm gonna be a dictator on day 1.
(54:32):
And he doesn't back down from it at
all.
Mean, is that the kind of guy we
want his president and do we wanna supreme
court that's gonna look the other way and
give him immunity.
That's dangerous. Very dangerous.
Okay.
That's a supreme Court has
implications here locally. I think this is interesting.
(54:53):
The chevron case, by the way, I I
am I am generally speaking in... Favor of
what the Supreme Court did.
So I hey I don't like their immunity
decision. I do like the Chevron decision the
homeless decision is a mixed reaction, but I
think in the end, I think they made
the right call.
But
what Scot did to overturn Roe wade, was
(55:14):
d horrible, was awful. And there's been a
lot of other cases where this supreme court
has made terrible decisions. Largely due, it's more
conservative leaning now.
And it's nuts. It's absolutely nuts. Because what
you have is the court going out there
and actively violating people's individual rights or allowing
the violation of individual rights to be legal.
(55:37):
Now, I'm hopeful that with chevron case, you
know,
passing. We're gonna begin to see a scaling
down
of the regulatory
state.
I'm not gonna say the deep state. That's
the Magna conspiracy theorists. But I'm gonna say
there is a regulatory state that has grown
and grown and has gotten more and more
power
and is enacted and created rules on its
(55:59):
own.
Unilaterally.
To the point now where,
you know,
we we could be committing also... Of your
illegal acts accent not even realize it because
there are so many rules that have been
set up by so many experts
that frankly, you wondered do these rules really
need to exist. Parts and a so called
free nation.
(56:21):
And by the way,
if we go back, you know, as we...
Seems we are. We're gonna go back to
the original premise of the 3 c branches
of government where the courts are the ones
that interpret the rules
but the courts bring in experts as part
of that process.
So it's not like you're gonna have a
bunch of,
(56:42):
you know, religious people and robes making decisions
unilaterally. I mean, they're gonna be bringing in
experts in a lot of these cases as
well.
Now how they're gonna rule. I mean, we
can we can have a conversation about that.
But I think it's good that the executive
branch become too powerful.
And frankly, I think that's why politics has
become so divisive
(57:03):
with people in our communities and around the
nation. Is because
politicians, particularly the president of United States has
so
much
power
to affect people's lives
to to
make businesses a success or a failure
to make your life
(57:23):
hell or heaven.
They have so much power to manipulate society
to rig it for their friends and their
donors,
that that's the reason why we have so
many problems.
So the the relaxing of a lot of
this power of the executive branch and restoring
(57:43):
more power to into judicial, and frankly, telling
the legislative branch Congress to do their damn
job and put power back in their in
their in their position would be helpful. But,
of course,
representatives and senators, they ab advocate. They don't
wanna make tough decisions. They don't wanna have
to vote on difficult bills.
And they never have to open debate. When's
the last time you saw open debate
(58:05):
on the house floor and in a in
a healthy and vigorous amendment process.
They never do that. They negotiate these things
and back deals. They bring them forward. They'd
only bring it forward until they know they've
got the votes. And every 1 of those
senators and and representatives are be given, like,
a 22000
page document that they gotta read in 24
(58:25):
hours and vote on it.
And their... Else they care about is getting
reelected
and holding on to their power.
And
if they can avoid having to make a
tough call. If they can avoid having to
vote on a controversial bill and just say,
well, let the president
he has the though he has a pen
and a phone as a president Obama said,
(58:47):
let them make the decision. And what do
you think of that?
What are your thoughts?
Okay. So that's
the supreme Court norman, the Supreme Court issues.
I this been a huge news. I you
said tell me what you think.
We've talked about the Supreme Court issues. We've
talked about the presidential debates and the and
(59:08):
the problems of both Trump and Biden
We've even talked a little bit about Pow
voices and, the Pow term limits initiatives. So
if you have any thoughts or comments on
any of those issues.
Just type him in the live chat on,
Facebook or on Youtube, and we'll get you
involved in the San diego community form.
Okay.
(59:28):
I now wanna talk about independence day.
And
this...
In my opinion,
the fourth of July is is has become
my favorite holiday.
You know, a lot people have Christmas is
their favorite holidays. Some people love Halloween.
But for me, independence day has, I've always
(59:48):
have sort of the most warm fuzzy memories
of this. And the more that I understood
about,
the founding
values of America are ina rights of life
liberty in the pursuit of happiness. This notion
that we're all equal under the law. These
American values are what makes America great, and
these were were were initially declared in the
(01:00:10):
declaration of independence on 07/04/1776.
Today is 07/03/2024.
And you know, we're getting near our 200
and fiftieth anniversary Is that amazing. Gonna be
just in 2 years.
So I wanted to share just some thoughts
about independence day and what I remember as
a kid and it's Maybe what do you
(01:00:31):
remember about independence say or are you still
really enjoy about it. So
starting out, I remember as a kid, I
was raised up in the Bay area? And
city called Bur games. Kinda near the San
Francisco airport.
And I remember back in the day,
we actually... You know, we would get fireworks
from the red Devil fireworks stand. And they
had a number of these, like, in our
(01:00:51):
city. There were like, 2 or 3 of
them, there were in some shopping areas, and
it was like a pop up stand
and they would sell fireworks. And I remember
as a kid. We get on our bicycle,
and we would just go look at the
fireworks. We had no money. We were like,
oh, that looks cool. Looks cool. I wish
we should get that 1 or tell my
mom or dad to get that 1. And
then, of course, we ended bringing them out,
and
(01:01:12):
we'd open up the kit. That And, you
know, as a little kid, we couldn't touch
it. We were sitting in a chair in
the back, watching. And I'm remember my family
and other neighbors,
would light the fireworks
in the middle of the street.
And we had folding chairs either on our
sidewalks or in some cases on the edge
of the street,
And we all enjoyed together on our city
(01:01:33):
block. And they were like these cones that
would... You know, they probably shoot 2 or
3 feet in the air with some sparkle
and
oh and and that sort of thing. And
and that was
what I knew
of the holidays,
of of independence day. And I remember getting
a little older, and I had cousins
that had a cabin along the Russian river
(01:01:55):
near Gu.
And I remember they going there as a
kid, and I think they had fireworks
celebrations that might have been in the city
that were shot into the sky.
And that was a big deal because I
had never really seen that. And because for
me, fireworks were, like, really low
altitude. They were, like, you know, no taller
than... A 5 or 6 foot man. You
(01:02:15):
know, they were real small, low to the
ground.
Then I remember as a kid,
going to Utah to Ke Utah, and and
spending a summer out there with my step
father's parents,
and Utah didn't allow fireworks, which I thought
was amazing.
And because... And this is act back in
(01:02:36):
the seventies.
And back then, they didn't have fireworks because
they were afraid of fires.
But what they did allow were sparkle.
And caps. Remember caps that we would put
him in the cap gun. It was like,
this red strip. That had had little circles
with a bit of gunpowder on there. I
I assume it was gunpowder.
And remember we used to use a cap
(01:02:57):
gun and we would shoot them. And then
they would they we would be able to
tear those cap strips into individuals, and we
had these things that look like bombs
that we could put a cap strip in
and we throw it in the air, and
it would land on its head,
and then it would let out a big
bang and Sometimes we put 2 or 3
sliver of of paper each with its own
(01:03:17):
gunpowder to make the bomb bigger.
I remember as we got older and more
brave, we would take the whole role
from the caps
and then put it on the ground and
then take a hammer. And hit it.
Just to create a big boom.
And just some of the stupid foolish things
we did as kids. But it was interesting
to meet it in Salt Lake City,
(01:03:39):
in ke, which was a suburb basal assault.
Like, the state you couldn't do fireworks.
And
Then I remember
getting closer to a teenager. Maybe I'm 11
or 12,
and you... Start to see other kids in
the neighborhood and they have fire crackers? And
you're like, oh, where'd did you get those
fire crackers? And then they would get bottle
(01:04:01):
rockets or M eighties, and you'd find out
that this is whole
underground economy
of people buying and sell illegal fireworks
and I was just amazed by it. I
was like, you can't go to the red
devils sand that's, you know, the little pop
up place that's on the street corner that's
selling fireworks.
I you had to... You you got these
(01:04:22):
these things. And I was like, where they
getting them from and people were saying, oh,
yeah. You know, I know a guy who
knows a guy and you know, it it's
like, you you would buy them from people
and you find out ways to get them
and some people had connections and other people
didn't, and it sounded... Scary because it was
all illegal and all black market,
but it was us.
(01:04:43):
Then I remember being 12 years old.
And that was 17 76. And I wait.
I was 11 years old in 17 76.
Remember that, that was the bi.
That was a big deal in America. That
was our 200 year anniversary. So July fourth
on the bi centennial was a big thing.
Remember we had those bi quarters.
(01:05:03):
And there's was a lot of other kind
of, you know, happy birthday America stuff throughout
19 76, and that was pretty cool,
especially on the fourth of July.
Then I'm I'm a little older, and
I'm 16.
And then this is when I found out,
like, Oh, I'm gonna try to buy some
of these Eagle fireworks.
(01:05:24):
And so I lived in Be game, which
is about, like, 20 miles or so south
of San Francisco. And everyone said, oh, yeah.
Gotta go to Chinatown, and that's where you
can buy the fireworks.
And I was thinking to myself. Okay.
And so I went with 1 of my
friends and we went up there. I just
kinda wanted to see what this is about
and maybe try to buy some,
(01:05:44):
and it was funny. It was... You know,
you're walking around in Chinatown in San Francisco.
And first of all,
Chinatown in San Francisco is amazing. I mean,
you know, it's...
It's legit. I mean, it's it's it's like
people from the old country that are there,
and the shops are very
ethnic. You know? They... Because they they're they're
(01:06:07):
like, the food stores,
you know, the clothing stores are all
traditional Chinese goods that are being sold, and
you would see, like, chickens like hanging, You
know, things that you would normally never see
at an American grocery store you'd see things
in the Chinese grocery stores that were different.
So for me, as a 12 year old.
I was like, wow. This is amazing. And
(01:06:27):
so I'm walking around in Chinatown, and, of
course,
I'm like, 16
year old kid, and I stand out, like,
a sore thumb. I mean, I'm like this
white kid from the suburbs walking around kind
of looking loss looking confused in Chinatown attempt.
And sure enough, I get hit up by
lots of different people, and they come up
to me and they say fire cracker,
(01:06:48):
fire cracker, you know? And and it was
almost like when you're in Las Vegas, and
you're walking on the street and people are
sending trying to give you those cards for
the girls to call that sort of thing.
It was like you were just getting hammered
by people, all asking. You want fire. You
want fireworks.
And finally, I said yeah, to 1 of
them,
and they brought me into this back alley,
(01:07:11):
and they say, what do you want? And
I'm like, I don't know. I mean, what
can I get? And he says, well, about
this this or that. And I said, okay.
I'll have 2 of these, 3 of those
and 1 of those, whatever. Was kind of
a small order.
And I gave him the money and he
left.
So here I am. I'm in San Francisco
with my buddy.
I don't know anyone.
I just gave my money to some guy
(01:07:31):
I don't know in a back alley, and
he just disappeared.
I mean, I... Who knows? Somebody, did I
get ripped off? He gonna come back? You
know, I don't know. And I know what
I'm doing is illegal.
And then sure enough, he shows up with
a grocery bag, full stuff. I... And it
was awesome. You and he... Everything he promised,
he delivered on. And he made money and
(01:07:53):
I got fireworks and we were happy. It
was a trade,
we was win win,
and III was say... And I grand, I
didn't go by the crazy stuff. I didn't
buy M eighties. I was just mostly interested
in the fire crackers.
I like the bottle rockets. Remember those where
you'd be able to put them in a
7 up bottle and shoot them up into
the air.
And then
(01:08:14):
There was other ones they called them jumping
jacks,
and they were like fire crackers,
but they would spin and fly.
And those could be a bit... Yeah to
make sure you were real careful on where
you
lit those because those could get away from
you. And caused some problems. But those... That's
what we got. And
I I remember coming back, and I was
(01:08:34):
like,
everyone was like, oh my god. Where did
you get that and told him the whole
story. And I never went back and did
it again. It was something. And then by
the way, then, I came down at college.
Came down here to Cs and people in
San Diego have been doing the same thing,
but rather than going to Chinatown. They go
to Tijuana, and they're earn buy the same...
Basically the same stuff.
So it's just funny how in every community,
(01:08:56):
there
is access to a lot of these black
markets.
And then I remember,
being here at Uc,
and
going to La jolla Cove to watch the
fireworks.
And
this was interesting because, you know, my friends
were were all from Southern California because they
(01:09:17):
were students with me in college.
Some... From San Diego and they say, oh,
yeah, We're gonna go and watch the fireworks,
and it was a big thing that everyone
would go
to a spot and watch fireworks and I
thought to myself... Well, When I was growing
up, we just had lawn chairs and we
were just lighting on these red devil fireworks
in our street.
I've never thought of this as a big
event. Where everyone goes, and it becomes a
(01:09:38):
big deal and sure enough, that's what it
was, You know, and everyone's standing around going,
oh and off,
it was La jolla Cove thing, and that
was like, okay This is different
in Southern California than how I was raised.
And then I remember
probably by my... Yeah, The summer after my
sophomore year in college,
I was living in Pacific Beach,
(01:09:59):
and then someone turned me onto to the
idea of Katz Sessions Park. Maybe you were
been up there.
Kate Sessions Park is like on the side
of Mount Soul had. And from there, you
can get a view of the fireworks at
the Pacific Beach pier, the Ocean Beach pier,
from Sea world,
I think from old town, you could see
it. And maybe
(01:10:20):
from Qualcomm stadium.
And
all these fireworks work shows were synchronized
to the same
music track that was being played on KKYXY.
And I thought, oh, is really cool.
And by the way, Kate Sessions Park was
a really neat park. I had been up
there before for some events, some activity.
(01:10:40):
And it's like this...
Park. It's like on the slope of the
mount solo ad and so it's a natural
amp theater to watch the fireworks, and this
this was really a neat thing, and a
So that became my go to place for
fireworks for a while.
Then
then I'm a parent.
And I have my kids and, you know,
(01:11:01):
my kids played sports. And so we would
go
to baseball tournaments or soft ball tournaments or
we go to Pod ray games and there
was always fireworks or something like that going
on depending on the event and where we
were. But again,
fireworks were not something it was amateur were
doing. They were always done by professionals.
(01:11:22):
They were always done, you know, safely.
They were always mindful of not starting fires
because they want a bunch of yahoo
individual people using them.
And I just kinda got used to that
as the thing. And so, you know, I
had no desire to go back and get
any of the illegal fireworks or anything like
that anymore.
Especially with the fire danger in Southern California,
(01:11:43):
but it just was very different than when
I was a kid.
Then,
I live in Pow, and we moved to
Pow in 96, and then in o 7,
we moved into our current home in Pow.
And from our backyard,
we can see...
We, we're on the north side of the
big twin peaks hill.
(01:12:03):
And so from our backyard, we can... Sort
of see over the top of the twin
peaks hill in the direction of Rancho Bernardo
High school.
And when we moved here in o 7,
the fireworks in the Rancho Bernardo high, we
could see clear as a bell because they
would shoot up high enough where they went
over the top of the hill.
(01:12:23):
And we were able to get a really
nice
fireworks show from our backyard. And so I
would bring my radio out there, and we
would play kick Cfm, and we would watch
the fireworks, and that was a big deal
for a few years.
But then
because of safety reasons, legit reasons, they started
lowering and lowering the height
(01:12:45):
of the fireworks at Rancho Bernardo high school,
till it got to the point where I
couldn't see him at all.
Now, I'm lucky if I see a couple
of glimmer of light to shoot up high
enough over the hill.
Usually,
I'm just getting the ambient light from when
they they explode and pop. And I still
get a little bit of the ambient light
from Pow High. But that's much further away.
(01:13:07):
And so it's it's really... You can't really
see those at all.
But it changed. It's funny how it always
changed
our perception of it. Then get this. This
was incredible.
Then
this was like, maybe around
I don't know, 20
14 ish.
Our family went,
(01:13:28):
hooked up with another family friends of ours.
And we got a house boat
in flaming gorge Wyoming.
Actually, flaming gorge is this reservoir that's on
the border
the reservoir spans the border of Wyoming in
Utah.
And some friends of minds had gone there
on a fishing trip a long time ago,
and they rave about and said it was
so awesome.
(01:13:48):
And we kinda had a hank to do
a a house boat trip.
And so we went there.
And we piled the kids in the Honda
Odyssey, and we drove from San Diego all
the way up there.
And our friends in Northern California did the
same, and we met out there. But what
was amazing is that once we crossed the
youth, top border into Wyoming, Like, almost immediately,
(01:14:09):
we started seeing signs for fireworks.
And there were stores,
that were jam packed of nothing but fireworks
in Wyoming.
And it was like
I was going back to my days going
into Chinatown, but rather than doing a deal
in a back Alley, I was doing my
deal in a legitimate
retail store
(01:14:30):
that had shelves and shelves and shelves of
every possible fire you could ever imagine.
And I couldn't it believe it. And I
was trying to tell my kids, this is
incredible
and
I don't know if they really understood it,
you know, within the context of everything I
grew up as his kid. But it was
mind blowing just that. And we ended up
buying some fireworks there, so then we were
(01:14:50):
on flaming gore. I ended up shooting some
of them, and we had some fun with
them, and it was done safely.
See but that was something. And then we
had some leftover fireworks
that we didn't use, and I just had
packed them in a bag
and brought them back. And I... Then I
was here in Pow, and I had some
fireworks.
I didn't know what to do with them.
I was like, well,
(01:15:11):
what do Do? I don't wanna give them
away because then
Someone's gonna probably use them and cause a
problem. I don't... I certainly don't wanna light
them anywhere near my home.
So I ended
every once in a while, I have to
go into the Pow business park where there
is a
hazardous waste,
placed where I go drop off old cans
(01:15:32):
of paint and that sort of thing. I
remember I brought them there. And I remember
I I gave them to 1 of the
employees. I think they're all City of Pow
employees.
And I said, hey. I've also got these
fireworks and
you guys take them. And I remember their
eyes lit up. So I'm pretty sure
that somebody
enjoyed those fireworks. They weren't just disposed of
(01:15:54):
in a safe and sane method.
So
Unbelievable? Isn't it? I mean, what are your
memories of of a independence day of the
fourth of July?
Know, like I said, I...
It's become my favorite holiday.
I... I've got good summer vibes from it.
Especially as a kid growing up and even
as an adult,
(01:16:14):
I generally like summer more than any of
the other,
any of the other seasons.
I like the fact that it's America's birthday,
which I think makes it special.
And and the all the American tie ins,
like baseball and independence day and fireworks, You
know, those... A lot of these things are
(01:16:34):
linked together. Things that I love. I'm a
huge baseball guy,
sports in general. And so
people would often say what's your favorite holiday
and it's usually it's Halloween or Christmas,
some people say thanksgiving. But for me, it's
been fourth of July.
And then what's interesting is that when I
started up this podcast,
You know, in the beginning, we were just
(01:16:56):
interviewing political candidates here in our local community
in Pow.
And And then I... After our election season
was going on I decided. I'm gonna talk
about a lot of other things. And and
I kinda landed on this notion of life
liberty and the pursuit of happiness being
biden the kind of the the themes, the
the kind of the,
it's the right word. The, the higher purpose
(01:17:18):
of what this podcast is about. And I'm
really glad I did.
And we're we're all... You know, I mean,
and and now it's the fourth of July
or the day before. And so it kinda
makes sense. And Yuri Ebola on the live
stream says, back of my youth had to
go to T to buy fireworks, and then
then smuggle them back into the United States.
Yeah. A lot of people in San Diego
seem to do back in the day. And
(01:17:40):
I'm, you know, and I go down at
Avenue revolution, and I remember doing that when
I was in college. And that was... A
that was wild. And, yeah, there were fireworks
there as well.
But what are your memories of independence day?
I mean, for you, was it, like, backyard,
barbecue
kind of a vibe?
Was it fireworks, whether at your house or
at some public
(01:18:01):
location,
Were you traveling on the fourth of July
or did you go to an event like
a ball game? Or
did you go to Kate Sessions Park or
do you ever go to la jolla or
to the any of the pier?
Did you go to Old town or sea
World? I mean, how did you spend
your independent say holidays? I'm curious to know.
Yours
Okay.
(01:18:21):
Alright. So,
the last thing I wanna do before I
get into the San Diego community form. And
again, I welcome your thoughts and comments. If
you got something to say,
type it in the live chat on Facebook
on Or on Youtube, and I'll get involved.
I was originally
going to read
the declaration of independence.
(01:18:43):
The whole thing. And you went granted. It's
not that long.
But
I thought, That might be kind boring. So
I I decided to
just share a few excerpts.
From the declaration of independence, knowing that tomorrow
is the fourth of July.
When the declaration of independence was made official.
(01:19:04):
You know, apparently, it was written on and
approved by July second, I think, but they
didn't get all the final approvals until the
fourth.
But the key 1, the 1 that was
the... Is the pre am. We... You know
many of us memorized the pre am
of the declaration of independence when we were
children.
But to me, this is a core
American
(01:19:25):
moral code.
That I think is perfect. It's dead on.
And I I kinda wanna read the pre
am. I wanna break it down. So
we hold these truths to be self evident
that all men are created equal that they
are endowed by their creator with certain una
(01:19:45):
rights that among these are life liberty and
the pursuit of happiness.
So think about that. I mean, let's brits
break this down. So we hold these truths
to be self evident. I mean, it means
they're obvious. These are truths
that exist
before,
government was created.
(01:20:07):
And
the fact that all men are created equal.
Now what does that mean?
All created equal. Does it mean that we
all should have equal outcomes? No. Does it
mean we all should make the equal amount
of money? No. Does it mean we all
should have
equal access to different things in society? None,
not really?
(01:20:29):
In fact, in a country that values liberty,
we're gonna have a lot of inequality.
You know you hear a lot about this
where, you know, we have too much inequality,
wealth inequality, income inequality.
All these other versions of,
inequality or in equity.
But in a nation where people are allowed
(01:20:49):
to live their lives and pursue their careers
pursue their happiness live their life to the
coin of their own values
there's gonna be different outcomes.
Some people are gonna be pilots. Some people
are gonna be teachers. Some people are gonna
be artists.
Some people could throw a fast ball 98
miles an hour.
Some people
wanna be a stay at home, mom.
(01:21:12):
Some people
don't wanna be a stay at home, mom
and and women that wanna pursue a very
vigorous career and and they wanna be able
to
have all the power and success and opportunities,
any man would.
But in a in nation
of that values freedom,
inequality
is a feature.
(01:21:33):
Not a bug.
However,
there are some categories where equality is necessary,
and that's what's happened. They declare here, in
the declaration of independence that all men are
created equal.
Now, what does that mean?
Hey, first of all, all men, they really
mean all humans. Okay? Let's... It's not male
versus female or
(01:21:55):
trans or anything. They really mean all humans.
You know, just like when Neil Armstrong said
1 small step for man, 1 step for
man... Large chef for mankind, whatever he said.
You he's referring to humankind.
So all men are created equal means all
humans are created equal. Now, what does that
mean created equal?
(01:22:15):
It means that we're we all have equal
rights.
We all have
equal liberties. We all have
equality
under the law.
We're gonna all pursue our life in a
lots of different ways
but we should be treated equally
(01:22:36):
by the government. In this case you have
the declaration of independence creating America.
We should have equality under the law.
And I think that is a huge
philosophical idea that was groundbreaking
in 17 76.
And today in 20 20 24,
(01:22:58):
is still a groundbreaking
idea
because
people don't want equal rights for others,
They want women to be oppressed. They want
immigrants to be oppressed. They don't want people
coming here from certain countries.
They don't want people having access to this
or to buy that. It... Everyone wants to
restrict someone else and prevent them from living
(01:23:19):
their life and pursuing their own values.
That's a problem.
But in America, we should I be quality
under the law. That's what makes this scot
decision. Giving presidents partial immunity
so egregious
because it violates what America supposed to be
about in the first place,
(01:23:40):
that were created equal.
But no. In this case, the president
is above the law according to Scot. That's
wrong that's immoral
that's unethical. That's anti American.
Going further in the pre am of the
declaration of independence.
(01:24:01):
That these truths are to be self evident
that they are endowed
by their creator.
Okay. Now,
to some people, your creator is God.
Other people think you're creating, maybe you're not
religious, but
maybe you think of nature as being
what created you? You know, humans in nature,
(01:24:23):
the name we can pro create and
But essentially, it means that we have these
these truths that are self evident, These ina
rights,
those are
by default built into us as humans.
We don't... Government didn't invent the right.
You know, some would say they're god given
(01:24:45):
rights. III
wouldn't say that. I would just say it's
obvious by looking at nature that we all
have a right to our own life.
You We're all trying to survive and succeed
and pursue our values and we all have
a right
to live our own life.
And
this is something that is ina. Can't be
(01:25:07):
taken away because it... It's the default setting.
That we are in charge of ourselves that
we own ourselves.
So that among these are are, certain
rights that among these are life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness.
Our right to our own life,
(01:25:28):
That means we make decisions
about our own life. Our life is ours.
Our body
is ours.
Your body, your choice
applies with abortion it applies with vaccine mandates
the same way. Your body, your choice, your
life. You have an ina but right to
you to your life. You have an enabled
(01:25:49):
right to liberty, which means you can make
choices.
In a free society, you should be able
to make choices, you should be able to
buy and sell and cooperate
with others.
And you should be able to live your
life based on your own values, your own
convictions, your own beliefs,
you should be able to pursue your own
happiness.
(01:26:10):
This again, a groundbreaking
philosophical idea.
That I think the founding fathers of America
got dead on,
perfect.
Well, maybe with the exception of the created
by their creator because
that's a debatable point.
But the fact that we each own our
own life is a huge deal because prior
(01:26:31):
to America, people were subjects of kings.
People lived under dictators. People were,
prior lived under the the rule of a
lord in a feudal society.
People didn't have a right to their own
life.
They were some version of a slave
(01:26:52):
They weren't allowed
to own property or they weren't allowed to
do a lot of things in society by
decree of a king.
By some authority. And here in America, they're
saying no, everyone has a right to their
own life in America,
and
This is a nation is of the people
by the people for the people. This is
a huge experiment,
(01:27:13):
A huge
groundbreaking
idea.
In the course of human civilization. It's what
truly in my opinion makes America great.
Never mind the fact
that our Republican and democratic friends are trying
to find ways all the time to violate
our rights to our own life, Liberty and
the pursuit happiness.
(01:27:34):
Now the founders while they did get the
philosophy right,
the implementation of it has been checkered, has
been problematic, and we still...
Are not fully implemented. You know? I mean,
there were contradiction right out of the gate.
There there were slavery in America and 17
76
Thomas Jefferson, I think wrote
this portion of the declaration and independence, which
(01:27:56):
by the way, was inspired by philosophers like
John Lock and others. Goes wall way back
to Aristotle.
Those ideas
that he rightfully wrote in the declaration independence.
He himself, Thomas Jefferson was a viola because
he himself owned slaves.
Some people will say that the fact that
(01:28:16):
our founding fathers own slaves
makes them,
we should cancel them. That that
that the founding fathers and and the values
they expressed in the founding of America, therefore,
are immoral flawed wrong
because they were slave owners. Well, some of
them were, but not all of them. But
I would contend that they got it right
(01:28:37):
philosophically.
Now over time,
slavery was abolished thankfully. Over time, women got
the right to vote. Over time, we've had
rights for
Lgbtq. We you know, we we have women
have a right to choose on their own
body until recently, the scot has removed it
from from
removed Ro way, which I thought was ab
(01:28:59):
was awful.
Basically,
preventing a woman from a right to her
own life,
And we still have a lot of work
to do.
Some people say we need
women's rights. We need
Lgbtq rights, What we really need is equal
rights. We need rights that we're all we
all have.
(01:29:20):
We all should have equal rights. No 1
having more rights than another person.
And so sometimes I think people get caught
up in the idea that we need black
rights and Hispanic rights and women's rights and
Christian rights. And to the point where we
get so
d up, so parse
So fractional
(01:29:41):
that we lose sight of the fact that
really,
we should just all have the same rights.
Are
enable rights of life liberty in the pursuit
of happiness for all of us
equally.
There's still work to be done. I I
know the Epa... Not sorry, that Epa The
equal rights amendment, the E.
(01:30:01):
I thought there were parts of that were
actually quite good, and I don't think they
ever passed that as a constitutional amendment.
That just something I think should be re
explored.
Because
we all deserve equal rights. And if we
can create a constitutional amendment that will reinforce
that. I think that's... That can only be
good.
(01:30:21):
I'd have to go back and read the
detail of the the pros proposed Ra. But
I know they were rallying back in the
seventies.
To make that a constitutional amendment, It didn't
quite get enough. But I think it might
be something worthy of of pursuing in the
future.
What do you think?
Now there's a few other things I wanna
mention here because they they
conflict with what's going on in the real
world today. Because if you read the declaration
(01:30:42):
of independence after the pre am and
establishing our ina rights and consent to the
governed and all that.
Then they go into a list of issues
where they were angry with King Georgia third,
and they were calling him out for this
and that, and and all using that as
the basis to declare independence.
(01:31:02):
And basically say f george king George. But
there are a couple of here that I
think are worthy of mentioning because they're relevant
today. 1 of them is,
objections to the king. He has refused to
sent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary
for the public good.
Essentially saying that the king ignored laws. The
thought he was above the law.
(01:31:25):
And what do we have here in America?
The same thing.
We have a presidential candidate in Trump that
is a viola of the law that doesn't
think the law applies to him. And and
thinks that he deserves immunity while at the
same time declaring himself law and order president,
insane.
(01:31:46):
The very reasons that America was fighting against
England
250
years ago,
We still have that problem today amongst the
American leaders that think they're above the law.
1 of the other objections to the king.
He has endeavor to prevent the population of
these states for that purpose of obstructing the
(01:32:07):
laws of natural of foreigners.
Refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations
hit and raising the conditions of the new
appropriation of the land. So
The king was preventing people from coming to
America from I integrating here.
Sounds familiar. Right? I mean, we got president
Trump building the beautiful wall,
(01:32:29):
and then we had Biden
expanding the wall.
We have
Republicans that are demanding a stop to illegal
immigrant
immigration. And now we have a democratic president
and has taken exec of order anti democratic
executive order to put further restrictions on immigration,
and to set quotas, get on the number
(01:32:50):
of people that they will allow from any
given country.
Border walls,
immigration restrictions is the exact opposite
of our ina rights of life liberty and
the pursuit of happiness.
Keep in mind that those rights don't just
apply to Americans
They don't just apply to white men.
They apply to everyone.
(01:33:12):
That's why some people say they're god created
rights.
That's why all men are created equal.
People lose sight of this that immigrants have
a right to their own life too.
But people wanna prevent them from coming in,
building walls or restricting and, they wanna have
mass deportation. All that is anti American, anti,
(01:33:34):
independence state values.
And in fact, they called out the king
of England for that very same reason.
Further, 1 of the objections to the king
was for cutting off our trade with all
parts of the world.
Does that sound familiar? We have president Trump
that has the tariffs and the trade wars,
(01:33:54):
and then we have Biden doing trade wars
as well. You just jacked up tariffs in
a lot of other categories more than Trump.
Biden has a 100 percent tariff on Chinese
electric vehicles.
And tariffs make products more expensive.
In some cases they ban imported products entirely.
(01:34:16):
Baby formula is a great example of that.
They won't let imported baby formula or the
only in limited quantities let baby formula n
from European nations that have very good regulations
to make sure that it's safe and clean
and good for kids to eat.
But they limit it today.
(01:34:36):
And that's why we had a baby formula
crisis a few years ago, and it got
so bad that president Biden had use the
military to air if baby formula back into
America.
So restrictions in trade
the American revolutionaries were angry with King George,
and yet we're having the same problem now.
(01:34:56):
We should in a free society
that
that
reinforces our enabled rights of life liberty and
the pursuit of happiness, we should have free
trade.
Buyers and sellers should be able to trade
with 1 another.
Without restrictions without tariffs without
border walls,
(01:35:17):
It's amazing that these we still have this
problem. We we are certain forces in America
that wanna go in the opposite direction of
freedom. And it's not just 1 party. It's
both parties.
In some cases, 1 party is worse and
other case, the other party is worse.
Then further goes on objections from the king,
for imposing taxes on us without our consent.
(01:35:39):
Well guess who did that.
Both president Trump and President Biden used their
executive orders to increase tariffs.
That wasn't passed by congress. It didn't go
through a democratic process.
The president of the United States unilaterally use
executive orders to increase taxes on tariffs.
And who pays taxes on tariffs,
(01:35:59):
Americans do.
Not the Chinese,
not the Vietnamese,
Not the Koreans or the Japanese or the
Mexicans,
tariffs or taxes on American consumers.
And especially their taxes that are not by
a democratic process.
They are done by
(01:36:20):
to decree with a pen and a phone
by an executive order by a president
without consent from the people.
That was 1 of the objections of the
King George of England in 17 76, it's
still a problem day in America.
And then finally,
He has excited
(01:36:40):
domestic ins
amongst us.
So
the founding fathers of America were angry at
King George
because King George was sending sending ins
into America,
to cause trouble
and try to take down
this effort for independence.
(01:37:01):
Sound familiar,
January sixth anyone where we have ins
that is being fueled by Donald Trump that
leads to people invading our capital,
and trying to essentially overturn an election by
threatening to kill the vice president of the
United States
So it's crazy to see this. When you
read the declaration of independence
(01:37:24):
and see how
the things that Americans
250 years ago were rightfully upset with from
England from their king,
are problems that we're still seeing today from
authoritarian leaders in America
that want to be king.
What do you think of that?
(01:37:45):
You know, are in ina rights of life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That's a that's a flag I will stand
on all day every day.
That doesn't mean necessarily that I approve of
your decisions.
I... Or approve of the way you choose
to live your life for the choices you
make or your version of happiness,
(01:38:06):
but I will protect your right to do
that, particularly if you don't harm anyone else
or violate anyone else's rights
in the process.
That should be what America is all about,
that we all have equal rights to our
own life.
And I think if people understood that,
then we wouldn't have a housing credit in
San Diego because then people would be able
(01:38:27):
to build on their own land because it's
their own life, their own property and they're
building on it. But instead, we have N
b's that are telling other people that you
don't have a right to your own liberty,
we the people have the right to over
overrule
your ability to develop your own property. Have
Some people wonder why I'm so outspoken on
property rights. This is why.
(01:38:49):
Because we have a right to our own
life liberty and pursuit of happiness and right
to prop is an extension
of our right to our own life.
Because we use our property
as a means
of property generating
income or generating resources to live a good
life.
What are your thoughts on that? Let me
(01:39:10):
know in the comments,
on Facebook Or on Youtube.
Okay. We're at an hour 39.
I'm gonna now go to the San Diego
community forum.
And
what I like to do is to respond
to to some social media comments. I think
this makes good fodder for the podcast.
And so let's go here and we're gonna
start with.
(01:39:30):
Joel,
responding to my
video or by short video about pay your
fair share. Remember, this is the 1 where
Joe Biden and and Kamala Harris and Bernie
Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are saying the rich
need to pay their. Fair share the court
corporations need to pay their fair share, but
they never define it.
(01:39:51):
It's this un undeniable thing that they use
as a political weapon.
And when you try to ask people, well,
what is my fair share? What is Elon
Musk's fair share?
No 1 can... Specify it. Everyone's got a
different opinion.
So to me, it's the most irrational of
all political arguments. And I... It's definitely worthy
(01:40:11):
of challenging, and that's what I did in
that video. Well, Joel said wrote back, and
he said, well, when Reagan took office,
The wealthy and corporations paid around 70 percent
in taxes.
By the time he left office, they paid
around 29 percent. K. Now, hold that thought.
After I read this, I'm gonna explain that
that's not true, and I'm gonna show you
(01:40:32):
why.
A Joel goes on to say, read that
that again. Okay. I'm gonna read it again.
When Reagan took office, the Wealthy
corporations paid around 70 percent in taxes by
the time he left off that they paid
around 29 percent. Read that again. During his
second term, banks merge, their commercial and private
banking systems, as thus making it easier for
(01:40:53):
the wealthy and corporations to shift assets in
ways to hide their actual net values.
K. That didn't happen under a rate. And
that happened under Clinton, but I digress. With
stock buy backs becoming the rage towards compensation
packages, top execs acquired... Non taxable incomes on
the corporations increase their holding values.
Hence capital gains, capital gains is where the
(01:41:14):
top earners and quotes, earners
can be and should be taxed. 35 percent
flat after 10000000 from total accrued earnings would
put an end to the abuse.
Then again, outlaw stock buy backs to do
the same what is musk done earn a
56000000000
dollar compensation package.
Okay. So there's is a lot in there.
(01:41:34):
Right? Okay. First of all, we know
you've heard all the...
You must have heard all the rhetoric. It
the rich need to pay shit... Their fair
share. Their brits don't pay any taxes or
getting away with it. We you know, my
secretary pays it's a warm buffet. My secretary
pays higher taxes than a billionaire.
That's a bunch of crap too.
(01:41:56):
Now,
do some billionaires pay a lower percentage
of their income in taxes than his secretary
does. Yeah. That... That's that's that could be
true in some cases.
But
still, billionaires pay a ton in total dollars.
And frankly, the fact that different people pay
(01:42:17):
different rates is an example of how the
whole income tax system is screwed in the
first place.
It's the exact opposite of equality under the
law.
It's inequality under the law by design,
not just with different rates for different people,
but different
deductions and withholding and shelters for different people
in different
industries in different circumstances.
(01:42:39):
The exact opposite of any inequality before the
law.
But let's go back to this point. When
Reagan took office, the wealthy corporations paid around
70 percent in taxes
By the time he left, they paid around
29 percent. Okay. Let's break that down.
If you look at the highest
marginal tax rate.
(01:43:00):
That's true.
Okay? Which means that, you know,
the the, you know, we have a progressive
income tax code and
Each chunk of money you earn has a
different tax rate. Typically, the more you earn,
the higher your percentage tax rate is.
And remember, back in the days of Eisenhower,
the highest tax bracket, I think got as
(01:43:21):
high as 92 percent, which is just
insane. That's like,
almost perfect theft.
But they never paid 92 percent on all
their income. It was just only on...
That portion that was above
some big number, above 2000000 or whatever it
was back in the 19 fifties.
(01:43:41):
Now,
when Reagan became president, there were already some
tax cuts that were implemented by Kennedy,
and perhaps by some of the other presidents
in the sixties and seventies. To the point
where the highest marginal tax rate when when
Reagan was present was 70 percent.
But
no 1 paid 70 percent.
(01:44:02):
First of all, that only applied at the
highest
portion of your taxes based on the marginal
tax system.
But at the same time, there were so
many deductions and so many loopholes and so
many tax shelters that no 1 paid that
amount.
That the net amount was way less than
that. So what was the net amount? Well
here I have chart? I wanna share with
(01:44:23):
you.
So
This shows what the effective
tax rate is on the top 1 percent
of households.
Going back in history.
Now this is whatever the marginal tax rates
were,
minus all the deductions and then net net...
What's their percentage in tax. And you can
(01:44:45):
see in the 19 fifties,
people paid about 42...
This is the top 1 percent.
Overall,
paid about 42 percent of their income and
taxes.
And as we see, we get into the
19 eighties,
and they were paying,
you know, in the thirties, Maybe not as
(01:45:05):
high as 42, but in the 30 percent
range,
And then in the late eighties, it got
lower. It got into the lower 30 percent,
like between 30 and 35.
But then,
eventually, Reagan started increasing taxes again on the
rich. You know, he cut him, and then
he raised them again, but
(01:45:26):
net. He cut them more. But the point
is is that no 1 was being taxed
70 percent.
No 1 was being taxed 92 percent back
when
Reagan was present or when Eisenhower was present.
Because of all the loopholes and all the
exceptions and all the different rules for different
people and picking winners and losers that's built
(01:45:47):
into the Irs tax code.
So
this is a trope that keeps getting rolled
out all the time. Oh, the rich used
to pay 92 percent in the 19 fifties.
And back then, we only had needed 1
income and we... And we were able to
support a family of 4 and it wasn't
on a problem. But
and that was because the rich paid their
(01:46:08):
fair share, 92 percent. No. They didn't pay
92 percent. They didn't pay 70 percent.
But Reagan did cut taxes.
And then he says during his second term,
banks merged
their commercial and private banking systems.
Thus making it easier for the wealthy corporations
shift assets in ways to hide their actual
net values. Well,
(01:46:32):
that was... What was the name of that
bill that was...
Glass... I think it was glass steel that
was in the 19 nineties where there was
a law that said,
commercial banks,
and,
investment banks
had to be separate.
You know, a commercial bank was where we
would go to Bank of America or Wells
(01:46:53):
Fargo or a savings alone or whatever it
was, where we would have checking accounts and
savings accounts and maybe a home mortgage that
sort of thing.
And then there was investment banking that really
catered to, like, these acquisitions and mergers and
was a much
bigger deal in the world of Wall Street.
And those were meant to be separate, like
(01:47:15):
1 bank like Wells Fargo couldn't be in
both. They couldn't be doing commercial banking
and investment banking.
Glass S was rep peeled. I think in
97,
when president was president Bill Clinton.
And some people say that that's the reason
why we had the great recession 11 years
later in 2008.
(01:47:36):
But what's an interesting fact about that is
even back in the nineties,
there was
almost no banks that we're doing both.
Most banks were in 1 category or another.
I mean, bear S,
Jpmorgan,
What's the other 1 Goldman Sachs? I mean,
they were all
(01:47:57):
investment banks. And they didn't monkey around with
commercial banking.
And then meanwhile, there were commercial banks
like a B and a Wells Fargo and
that sort of thing that didn't really do
investment banking.
Now there was 1 exception,
you know, Washington mutual, but not it wasn't
an exception. But Washington Mutual is an example
(01:48:17):
of a company or of a bank that
was a,
excuse me, a commercial bank
that went went under. But they weren't doing
investment banking in in the, great recession.
The only 1 I can think of,
I'm a bank that did both was Citi
bank.
(01:48:38):
And Citi bank
failed over and over again and kept getting
built out over and over again. And that
was the 1 exception to the rule.
Okay. So is that the reason why the
or richer? I don't think it is.
And he goes on to say with start...
Sock buy backs becoming the rage, Yada yada.
I remember back
(01:48:58):
in
the great recession in the t of it,
corporations,
were sitting on large stockpile piles of cash.
And they were afraid to invest in their
companies because the economy was so screwed up.
And so they just sat on that money.
And people were criticizing, especially our friends on
the left,
were criticizing
corporations from from sitting on all that money,
(01:49:20):
all that cash.
Well, when companies are buying their stock back,
what are they doing?
First of all, they're liquid eating all that
cash.
They're buying the stock back.
Okay? And who's getting all that money? Both
the people that own the stock, Okay? And
those could be, you know, mutual funds and
(01:49:42):
and Wall Street companies that, you know, are
traders,
but it could be you or me.
That might happen to have, some of that
on our 04:01 k on our pension or
maybe we own stocks individually.
So when companies are doing stock buy. It's
not some
nefarious scheme. I mean, what they're doing is
they're making a bet on themselves.
(01:50:02):
By buying the stock. Now,
by buying the stock, they're also taking a
lot of
stock out of circulation to try to artificially
increase the value of their stock. And using
that as a way to help pay off
executives.
But that's their mission as a business. They
have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder earnings.
(01:50:23):
And high stock prices is what the corporation
exists for
in the first place.
So again, so many of these distortion. And
then finally, he says at the bottom Like,
what is must done earn a 56000000000 dollar
compensation package. Well,
the board and and the shareholders at Tesla
agreed to that.
They said if you got our stock price
(01:50:45):
above a certain level,
you will make this amount of money
and the stock price got above that level.
So what did he do to earn it?
He did it by increasing the value of
the company. He did exactly what a corporation
should be doing. That's not.
That in itself is
basics of capitalism.
(01:51:07):
Now I will say this that the value
of Tesla
is
artificially enhanced
because they get so much damn corporate welfare
in the form of subsidies either for the
purchase of Evs, which may a c, we
own 2.
Or in the subsidies for so solar, may
a couple, we have solar.
(01:51:27):
And,
or in the case of, you know, the
buying and selling of carbon credits, which is
the the biggest source of profit for Tesla.
But see, that's all rent seeking. That's all
manipulating the way the government works to maximize
shareholder value, which is a rigged to economy,
which is the exact opposite of a free
economy.
And you know which 1 I support.
(01:51:49):
Okay. Let's move on. Let's go on to
this next topic
economy Also about my fair share comment. This
1 was from Chris Rock.
And he says, you know the answer you
are looking for doesn't exist.
Because fair is subjective. You also know that
politics is mostly rhetoric, and the fair share
argument is quite compelling as you probably have
(01:52:09):
discovered
since you don't address the actual issue behind
the argument.
Instead you want fair to be defined for
you and anything other than that, exact definition
isn't enough.
The problem is that Rich do not pay
enough, and sometimes they don't pay at all.
Okay. Well,
if we're gonna have an objective
set of loss.
(01:52:30):
If we're gonna talk using reason and rationality,
we have to have def def terms.
And if you're gonna say someone needs to
pay their fair share, you need to explain
to me what that is
and why it's fair and why it's their
share.
So, yeah. Of course, it's not defined. It's
(01:52:52):
it's become subjective,
and that's how
politicians are using subject
to twist the arms of people
because they know if they use objective criteria,
which we should do as rational individuals
then they know they get exposed
because what they want when you look at
the data and look at the numbers is
(01:53:14):
they want different people to pay different amounts,
different rates, different percentages,
different
carve outs, and withholding and tax shelters for
different people and different special interests,
and they call that fair share. What do
you think?
I think you can make an argument
maybe,
(01:53:35):
that a flat tax is a fair share
that everyone pay the same percentage with no
deductions, not even home mortgage deduction.
But still, is that really fair
that they're making you pay
to subsidize
corporations and to bail them out
that they're making you pay to build a
(01:53:56):
big beautiful border wall that you disagree with?
Is that fair
I think we can argue that as well.
The whole fair share concept, I I just
is so ripe for attack, and you can
count on me for keep coming after it.
And finally, in the San diego community forum,
I got 1 more comment.
This is from Sean,
(01:54:17):
and we were talking about... President Trump and
has planned to eliminate
income tax and replace it with tariffs.
In in this case, radically increased tariffs.
And Sean goes on to say, tariffs are
just a sales tax. I'm all for it.
Tariffs hit your spending. Now you're earning, bring
them on.
(01:54:39):
Okay.
Our tariffs a sales tax,
sorta,
Right? I mean, they are applied to goods
that are the people pay when you buy
the good.
The difference is is that
tariffs are only applied
for political reasons to protect certain industries. That's
(01:54:59):
why Biden has a 100 percent tariff on
electric vehicles from China because he wants to
protect American companies and their high prices
But he doesn't have a hundred percent tariff
on other things.
So it's winners and losers, different industries, different
people, different products. All with different rates, and
(01:55:19):
then some central planner, you know, some expert
in the in the executive branch, some regulators,
the 1 that ends up to siding
what that rate should be.
In a totally un
fashion.
So tariffs aren't a sales tax. I mean,
at least a sales tax
with some exceptions is applied equally. I mean,
(01:55:41):
there are obviously some products and things you...
There are
that are
immune to use immunity again that are immune
from a sales tax.
And tariffs do hit your spending, which is
good. Now do you believe that if but
like, first of all, this is a trial
balloon by Trump. Something that he threw out
there,
seeing if we get any traction.
(01:56:01):
First of all, do you believe him?
The guy's a Con man, there's no way
he's gonna do this. But even if there
was a proposal.
To replace the income tax and instead radically
generate a ramp up tariffs. And you assume
the tariffs are increased so high to the
point that that's what funds our entire federal
government.
(01:56:21):
And people will say, well, that's the way
we used to do it before 19 13
before we had a federal income tax. Well,
you know, back then,
the federal government
was about 2 or 3 percent of the
national Gdp. And now it's like 40 percent.
So in order to fund
the federal government entirely with tariffs, we would
be paying huge prices.
(01:56:43):
On some goods but not others.
You know? And central planners would be the
ones picking the winners and losers deciding which
products have which tariffs and of which level,
And so we would be impacted in equally
based on that. The opposite of equality under
the law.
Now the fact that
there's a tax associated with spending rather than
(01:57:03):
earning. I think
it's better to tax. Spending than earning in
my opinion. But still, to do it this
way,
would be outrageous,
And on top of it, I don't believe
they'd ever do it. Even if they ever
radically increased tariffs
to fund the federal government, there is no
way they're gonna rep appeal the income tax.
(01:57:25):
We would get stuck with both.
And then there would be further distortion in
the economy
and and further problems.
Just So tell me what you think.
Okay.
Hour and 57 minutes, and we're kinda holding
a pretty solid
Live stream audience. Thanks for all of you
(01:57:46):
that are watching or listening on the live
stream on Facebook extra Youtube. I'll be posting
this to all the popular podcast
forms later today.
You can get that wherever you get your
podcast podcasts, Apple, Spotify, etcetera, plus, of course
on Youtube, and then I will be breaking
this into some segment since sharing those videos
with you as well.
But I encourage your thoughts in comments. If
(01:58:07):
you wanna learn more, you can go to
my website, john riley project dot com
if you would like to be a guest.
I welcome guests here to have a civil
conversation on the issues, you may agree with
me or disagree with me. But if you
wanna talk about it in a live... A
live stream podcast, let me know, go to
my website john reilly project dot com or
just send me an email to john at.
(01:58:29):
John Reilly project dot com.
And, you know, is an open invitation for
any political candidate. Were you're running for City
council, school board
dog catcher, President of the United States,
governor,
mayor of San Diego, whatever it is. If
you're running for political office,
and you wanna have a long form interview,
(01:58:49):
contact me.
And we'll sit down for an hour or
2 hours and we'll go through your whole
campaign platform. We'll talk it all through.
And, you know, for candidates, you're lucky if
you can get a 15 second blip in
the Tv news. You're lucky if you can
get a 1 or 2 sentences and the
local new paper,
here you'll be able to speak unfiltered
(01:59:11):
and answer questions, not just from me, but
from our live audience.
So if you're a a political candidate, you
know, the local political season is about to
really start getting going.
Just reach out to me at my website
john reilly project dot com and we'll get
you involved.
Okay, Friends.
This concludes this... Episode of the John Reilly
project, episode number 336.
(01:59:34):
I'm on my way to a thousand. I've
got about
it's 660
or so more to go. So thanks again
for being with me. Have a great day
out there and for life Liberty and the
pursuit happiness.
This is John Reilly. Be well out there.
If you enjoyed today's show, do me a
favor.
Subscribe and then share it with a friend
(01:59:54):
or leave a rating and review on Apple
podcasts.
Let's continue the conversation on social media.
Go to connect with johnny dot com to
get links to our social media content,
audio podcast platforms
and to sign up for our mailing list.
To be a guest, read my blog or
(02:00:16):
get more information, please visit John Riley P
check dot com to get started.