March 21, 2024 • 14 mins
Could the dismantling of a crucial clean air act provision be the latest chess move in a hidden war against the environment? This episode exposes Representative Scott Perry's attempt to undermine the EPA through the Energy Sovereignty Act, a proposal to eliminate Section 115 of the Clean Air Act—a move that could spell disaster for our national emission reduction targets. I, Jesse White, pull back the curtain on Perry's political charade, revealing how his environmental policies fall woefully short of what's needed for sustainable planetary stewardship. It's a deep dive into the rhetoric versus the reality of fighting climate change within the political arena of Pennsylvania's 10th congressional district.
Forget the flashy headlines—let's talk about the silent but deadly legislative maneuvers that show where a politician's true allegiances lie. Scott Perry's career may be laden with sensationalism, but it's his inadequate environmental policies that pose a far more insidious threat to our ecological future. As I take you through the implications of Perry's Energy Sovereignty Act, I also offer a sardonic nod to the so-called economic 'benefits' such legislation might promise. Tune in for a candid, no-holds-barred analysis of the actions that could shape our environmental destiny.
Learn more about the Keystone Reckoning Project at www.keystonereckoning.com
Check out our previous episodes and subscribe to the podcast at https://keystonereckoning.buzzsprout.com/.
Follow the Keystone Reckoning Project on social media:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
YouTube
LinkedIn
Questions? Comments? Ideas for a future episode? Email us at info@keystonereckoning.com
Support us by donating to The Keystone Reckoning Project political action committee, and also check out our partner True Blue Gear for some sweet progressive t-shirts and swag!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
My congressman is just the absolute worst in so
many ways, but let's just talkabout one of them.
Good afternoon and welcome tothe Keystone Recording Podcast.
I'm your host, jesse White.
It is Thursday, march 21, 2024.
So my congressman is ScottPerry.
I live here in Pennsylvania's10th congressional district at
Central PA, and Scott Perry ismy congressman.
(00:24):
I actually served with ScottPerry in the State House where
he was the chair of theEnvironmental Committee, which
is relevant to what we're goingto be talking about today.
But you may know him from oneof his greatest hits, which is
working to engineer a violentcoup to overthrow the government
on January 6.
So and we all know there's alot more to come out about that
he has fought very hard to keephis text messages and
(00:46):
communications from that timeclassified and under wraps.
I think that as the Trumptrials on these issues, those
issues come forward, I thinkwe're going to hear a lot more
about Scott Perry.
Scott Perry needs to go.
He can be beaten and I thinkthe strategy to beat him, the
(01:06):
conventional wisdom to beat himin a lot of ways, is extremely
fundamentally flawed and it goesto a bigger problem that
Democrats have in these kinds ofdistricts.
But that's a discussion foranother day.
Instead of looking at thepolitical monster that is Scott
Perry, let's look at the truepolicy monster that is Scott
Perry.
So Scott Perry put out a tweetyesterday saying it's time to
(01:31):
empower states to meet the needsand interests of their own
citizens rather than the whimsof EPA bureaucrats, joined by
there's like five other guysthere, including Rep Andy Big.
So you know we've gone to crazytown.
I've just introduced the EnergySovereignty Act to stop federal
bureaucrats from executingenvironmental power grabs at the
(01:51):
behest of those outside ournation.
Sounds pretty serious, right,and he even got like a great
graphic.
It says, like the EnergySovereignty Act, stop EPA
bureaucrats.
And then, like the EPA logowith like the little ghost
buster circle, slash through it.
I mean, like some intern in hisoffice really went above and
beyond on the on the Photoshopor Microsoft Paint or whatever
(02:12):
the hell it is.
They used to do this.
But anyway, let's talk aboutthe bill itself.
So says the Energy SovereigntyAct, and this is now from his
web, perry's website.
The Energy Sovereignty Act willprotect the autonomy of the
states over their own energysectors by ensuring that
unelected, unaccountable EPAbureaucrats cannot seize control
over vital industries under theguise of emission reductions.
(02:35):
The Constitution clearlyreserves its power for the
states.
This bill repeals Act 115 ofthe Clean Air Act, which allows
the executive branch to mandateemission reductions in all
states to a level determinedacceptable by EPA bureaucrats.
And it goes on and on, buthere's the long and short of it.
This guy is so beholden to thefossil fuel industry that he's
(02:59):
willing to take big chunks ofthe Clean Air Act and just roll
him out the window, like thebill itself is great.
The bill literally is just likerepeal the following.
Yeah, it's one of the one pagedeals.
It's like repeal the followingand it's section 115 of the
Clean Air Act.
So I thought it'd be worthlooking at what is section 115
of the Clean Air Act and whydoes it matter and why should we
(03:22):
care about it.
So I went to a few differentlegitimate sources to get some
information, one of them beingthe Brookings Institute, and it
talks about section 115providing a mechanism for
emission reductions, with theresponsibility resting with the
(03:46):
states.
The EPA would likely conduct anational rulemaking to establish
a framework of emission targets, deadlines and compliance
mechanisms that states wouldthen need to convert into
implementation plans.
And the thing that'sinteresting about section 115 is
it's never being used reallyfor emission reductions.
It's like one of those sectionsin the Clean Air Act that's
(04:08):
there.
It's never really been had itsmuscles flexed in this specific
way and it's looking like nowit's a way that actually could
be used to mandate emissionreduction, because what it
allows the EPA to do, it givesthem these, these kind of robust
tools to go in and say, okay,if there is a situation where
(04:30):
there is, there is aninternational impact on
greenhouse gases and emissionsthat the EPA can then regulate
domestically.
So that's where, when he'stalking about like we're being
beholden to foreign countries,blah, blah, blah, it's basically
saying you know, we all live onone planet and just because
(04:52):
what we do within our borders,because it very much impacts
what happens within your bordersand if we are going to be a
responsible global citizen and,god forbid, maybe even a global
leader as the leading producerof these emissions, maybe, just
maybe, we should lead by example.
So it gives the EPA the abilityto use that as a kind of a way
(05:12):
in, and then what it allows themto do is come up with a
national reduction target andthen it gets a portion among the
states so they can.
One way they can approach it isto take each state's emissions
from section 115 regulatedsources, and then provide a
uniform reduction targetcorresponding to the national
(05:33):
target.
And there obviously is a lotmore to it, right?
But what it's saying is itgives flexibility, like that's
the key.
It gives flexibility to be ableto address climate change.
That's what it is in a nutshell.
So, of course, scott Perry feelsthat that's something that just
needs to go away.
Right, because we need to notlet bureaucrat unelected
(05:57):
bureaucrats, you know getinvolved and do whatever.
Now let's move beyond the factthat a regulatory agency like
the EPA is has its leadershipappointed by the executive
branch.
So you know, that's likebasically saying you can't let
staffers do anything becausethey're not the actual elected
official.
If that were the case, thatmeans Scott Perry would have to
(06:20):
sit down and make his ownhorrible graphics Over the EPA
logo for his ridiculouslegislation.
So I don't think he has thetime or the technical
wherewithal to be able to dothat.
So the unelected bureaucratstuff is just ridiculous.
I mean, that's what aregulatory agency is by default,
you know, and it's funny thatwhenever he was the chair of the
(06:40):
Environmental Committee in thestate house under Governor
Corbett and they were in Corbettwas letting his DEP Department
of Environmental Protection runrampant, letting the fracking
industry do whatever they could,whatever the hell they wanted.
And I know because I was thereand had a front receipt and
helped expose some of thatcorruption in the New York Times
(07:00):
and Wall Street Journal andplaces like that.
I mean, it wasn't just, it wascollusion, it was corruption, it
was criminal what they weredoing.
It's funny that when thathappened, scott Perry had no
problem hiding behind aregulatory agency there, right,
like he was all for it.
So when the regulatory agencydoes or doesn't do what he wants
, it's fine.
When it's trying to, you know,save the planet and do what it's
(07:22):
designed to do protect theenvironment Suddenly it's
bureaucratic overreach, right?
Absolutely absurd.
One of the other things that'sinteresting about this and I
think it kind of takes a lot ofthe factual wind out of the
sales of his argument is thatyou know, a lot of this is a
throwing a bone to the frackingindustry, right, like that's
(07:42):
just.
You know, come on, that's wherehis brain buttered, that's
where he's making his money, andthere is no industry that likes
to cry and complain and selfvictimize themselves more than
the energy industry,particularly the fracking
industry.
They have turned it into anabsolute art form.
(08:03):
Right, it's the combination offear tactics and poros and you
know the the drill a well, bringa soldier home signs which are
like real things in Western PA.
They're real, those are yardsigns drill a well, bring a
soldier home.
That whole narrative, likethey've really perfected that.
But one of the things that'sinteresting is and this is where
(08:23):
I think it really twist the alot of these republicans up and
not is that because of the waythe economy has evolved and
market forces you know thethings that they typically love
it has actually solved a lot ofthese problems?
Right, it is actually made.
It's kind of made some of theactions by the EPA kind of
(08:45):
defunct in previous Previousenforcement actions.
So in a way, the system is kindof working the way it's
supposed to in some regards.
However, that still requiresthe EPA to have those tools in
their toolbox to be able to,like you know, do their job.
Scott Perry wants to just doaway with that.
Yeah, that's just obviously abridge too far for him, and it's
(09:07):
interesting to get you an ideaof how real this is in terms of
the ability to use this.
There was actually a SupremeCourt case and I'm scrolling
through here to try to find it,but there was actually a Supreme
Court case just recently thatallowed it was in 2022.
(09:30):
The Supreme Court US SupremeCourt issued a long-awaited
ruling in West Virginia versusthe EPA and that case dealt with
the government's ability toregulate carbon emissions from
power plants.
And you know it's the USSupreme Court, even back in 2022
doesn't really have the bestrecord for For progressive
(09:51):
Causes or even like common sensecauses.
They're kind of you know, in inthe bag and they, to the shock
of environmental advocateseverywhere, issued a narrow but
consequential opinion that onlyruled out one specific mechanism
for slashing carbon emissionsand that was generation shifting
.
And that was one of Somethingthat first came about from the
(10:13):
Obama administration and it wassomething that the following
prices of natural gas renewablesactually changed the way the
enter country's energy mix went.
Anyhow met the clean powerplants target a decade ahead of
schedule and was kind of Mademove, kind of didn't matter.
So that was struck down by thecourt, but the six member
majority six not five ruled thatthe EPA's proposed use in that
(10:38):
instance, overstepped itsauthority of the Clean Air Act.
However, this ruling Did notaddress or eliminate any other
carbon cutting approaches in theClean Air Act, unlike, you know
, the ruling in Dobbs where theyoverturn Roe v Wade you know it
was kind of this far-reaching,you know, symbolic thing or you
(10:59):
know comprehensive, you knowkind of ban.
This actually explicitly leftroom For the EPA to use these
other pieces of the Clean AirAct, specifically section like
section 115, to be able toaddress the issue of climate
change and through globalemission.
So that is really, you know, togive you an idea of just how
(11:21):
far removed from the mainstreamthought process this bill is.
From Scott Perry that this issomething you know, despite all
his cries of Unconstitutionalpower grabs and you know all
that kind of stuff, which is,you know the fact that he is
trying to Use the Constitutionas a basis for anything is just,
(11:43):
you know, sad, laughable,pathetic.
Take your pick, but he's justagain, I hope you're sitting
down, don't wreck your car he'sjust dramatically wrong,
factually wrong in what he'strying to accomplish.
You know, this is just a a.
Hey, look at me.
Energy industry.
I'm your guy.
(12:03):
By the way, I've got afundraiser on Tuesday, come and
bring your checkbook.
You know it's ridiculous, it'sso far removed from the
mainstream.
It's just a typical crying andcomplaining.
And I don't know as a parent,as you know, in America's
American with a microtom ofCommon sense, like I, kind of
let the planet to still be herein a little while.
(12:24):
You know, maybe not ScottPerry's version of it, but I
think for you know, having theplanet remain sustainable
probably isn't the worst policyobjective in the world and you
know the Scott Perry's of theworld just simply do not care.
So just one little nugget ofwhat will be many nuggets about
Scott Perry and our fellowcongressional representatives
(12:46):
here in Pennsylvania.
That is just absolute garbage.
And you know we have to keep aneye on these things because,
despite all the big ticket stuffabout a guy like Scott Perry
you know the Fomentinginsurrection and those sorts of
things these other bills, theseother things Actually matter
because they're a good blueprintof where our elected officials
(13:07):
are, what they're doing and howthey're thinking, or, in the
case of Scott Perry, how they'renot thinking.
And the only good thing aboutyou know he talks about the
economic benefit of this bill.
You know I do have to agreewith him on that, because
designing ridiculous legislationlike this does require those
really cool graphics and that'sdefinitely keeping an intern or
(13:29):
somebody you know employed, andI think that, if nothing else,
so damn the planet, but let'skeep those graphics flowing.
Thanks, scott Perry.
This has been the Keystonemarketing podcast.
I'm Jesse white.
Let's do it again tomorrow.
Thanks,
My congressman is just the absolute worst in so
many ways, but let's just talkabout one of them.
Good afternoon and welcome tothe Keystone Recording Podcast.
I'm your host, jesse White.
It is Thursday, march 21, 2024.
So my congressman is ScottPerry.
I live here in Pennsylvania's10th congressional district at
Central PA, and Scott Perry ismy congressman.
(00:24):
I actually served with ScottPerry in the State House where
he was the chair of theEnvironmental Committee, which
is relevant to what we're goingto be talking about today.
But you may know him from oneof his greatest hits, which is
working to engineer a violentcoup to overthrow the government
on January 6.
So and we all know there's alot more to come out about that
he has fought very hard to keephis text messages and
(00:46):
communications from that timeclassified and under wraps.
I think that as the Trumptrials on these issues, those
issues come forward, I thinkwe're going to hear a lot more
about Scott Perry.
Scott Perry needs to go.
He can be beaten and I thinkthe strategy to beat him, the
(01:06):
conventional wisdom to beat himin a lot of ways, is extremely
fundamentally flawed and it goesto a bigger problem that
Democrats have in these kinds ofdistricts.
But that's a discussion foranother day.
Instead of looking at thepolitical monster that is Scott
Perry, let's look at the truepolicy monster that is Scott
Perry.
So Scott Perry put out a tweetyesterday saying it's time to
(01:31):
empower states to meet the needsand interests of their own
citizens rather than the whimsof EPA bureaucrats, joined by
there's like five other guysthere, including Rep Andy Big.
So you know we've gone to crazytown.
I've just introduced the EnergySovereignty Act to stop federal
bureaucrats from executingenvironmental power grabs at the
(01:51):
behest of those outside ournation.
Sounds pretty serious, right,and he even got like a great
graphic.
It says, like the EnergySovereignty Act, stop EPA
bureaucrats.
And then, like the EPA logowith like the little ghost
buster circle, slash through it.
I mean, like some intern in hisoffice really went above and
beyond on the on the Photoshopor Microsoft Paint or whatever
(02:12):
the hell it is.
They used to do this.
But anyway, let's talk aboutthe bill itself.
So says the Energy SovereigntyAct, and this is now from his
web, perry's website.
The Energy Sovereignty Act willprotect the autonomy of the
states over their own energysectors by ensuring that
unelected, unaccountable EPAbureaucrats cannot seize control
over vital industries under theguise of emission reductions.
(02:35):
The Constitution clearlyreserves its power for the
states.
This bill repeals Act 115 ofthe Clean Air Act, which allows
the executive branch to mandateemission reductions in all
states to a level determinedacceptable by EPA bureaucrats.
And it goes on and on, buthere's the long and short of it.
This guy is so beholden to thefossil fuel industry that he's
(02:59):
willing to take big chunks ofthe Clean Air Act and just roll
him out the window, like thebill itself is great.
The bill literally is just likerepeal the following.
Yeah, it's one of the one pagedeals.
It's like repeal the followingand it's section 115 of the
Clean Air Act.
So I thought it'd be worthlooking at what is section 115
of the Clean Air Act and whydoes it matter and why should we
(03:22):
care about it.
So I went to a few differentlegitimate sources to get some
information, one of them beingthe Brookings Institute, and it
talks about section 115providing a mechanism for
emission reductions, with theresponsibility resting with the
(03:46):
states.
The EPA would likely conduct anational rulemaking to establish
a framework of emission targets, deadlines and compliance
mechanisms that states wouldthen need to convert into
implementation plans.
And the thing that'sinteresting about section 115 is
it's never being used reallyfor emission reductions.
It's like one of those sectionsin the Clean Air Act that's
(04:08):
there.
It's never really been had itsmuscles flexed in this specific
way and it's looking like nowit's a way that actually could
be used to mandate emissionreduction, because what it
allows the EPA to do, it givesthem these, these kind of robust
tools to go in and say, okay,if there is a situation where
(04:30):
there is, there is aninternational impact on
greenhouse gases and emissionsthat the EPA can then regulate
domestically.
So that's where, when he'stalking about like we're being
beholden to foreign countries,blah, blah, blah, it's basically
saying you know, we all live onone planet and just because
(04:52):
what we do within our borders,because it very much impacts
what happens within your bordersand if we are going to be a
responsible global citizen and,god forbid, maybe even a global
leader as the leading producerof these emissions, maybe, just
maybe, we should lead by example.
So it gives the EPA the abilityto use that as a kind of a way
(05:12):
in, and then what it allows themto do is come up with a
national reduction target andthen it gets a portion among the
states so they can.
One way they can approach it isto take each state's emissions
from section 115 regulatedsources, and then provide a
uniform reduction targetcorresponding to the national
(05:33):
target.
And there obviously is a lotmore to it, right?
But what it's saying is itgives flexibility, like that's
the key.
It gives flexibility to be ableto address climate change.
That's what it is in a nutshell.
So, of course, scott Perry feelsthat that's something that just
needs to go away.
Right, because we need to notlet bureaucrat unelected
(05:57):
bureaucrats, you know getinvolved and do whatever.
Now let's move beyond the factthat a regulatory agency like
the EPA is has its leadershipappointed by the executive
branch.
So you know, that's likebasically saying you can't let
staffers do anything becausethey're not the actual elected
official.
If that were the case, thatmeans Scott Perry would have to
(06:20):
sit down and make his ownhorrible graphics Over the EPA
logo for his ridiculouslegislation.
So I don't think he has thetime or the technical
wherewithal to be able to dothat.
So the unelected bureaucratstuff is just ridiculous.
I mean, that's what aregulatory agency is by default,
you know, and it's funny thatwhenever he was the chair of the
(06:40):
Environmental Committee in thestate house under Governor
Corbett and they were in Corbettwas letting his DEP Department
of Environmental Protection runrampant, letting the fracking
industry do whatever they could,whatever the hell they wanted.
And I know because I was thereand had a front receipt and
helped expose some of thatcorruption in the New York Times
(07:00):
and Wall Street Journal andplaces like that.
I mean, it wasn't just, it wascollusion, it was corruption, it
was criminal what they weredoing.
It's funny that when thathappened, scott Perry had no
problem hiding behind aregulatory agency there, right,
like he was all for it.
So when the regulatory agencydoes or doesn't do what he wants
, it's fine.
When it's trying to, you know,save the planet and do what it's
(07:22):
designed to do protect theenvironment Suddenly it's
bureaucratic overreach, right?
Absolutely absurd.
One of the other things that'sinteresting about this and I
think it kind of takes a lot ofthe factual wind out of the
sales of his argument is thatyou know, a lot of this is a
throwing a bone to the frackingindustry, right, like that's
(07:42):
just.
You know, come on, that's wherehis brain buttered, that's
where he's making his money, andthere is no industry that likes
to cry and complain and selfvictimize themselves more than
the energy industry,particularly the fracking
industry.
They have turned it into anabsolute art form.
(08:03):
Right, it's the combination offear tactics and poros and you
know the the drill a well, bringa soldier home signs which are
like real things in Western PA.
They're real, those are yardsigns drill a well, bring a
soldier home.
That whole narrative, likethey've really perfected that.
But one of the things that'sinteresting is and this is where
(08:23):
I think it really twist the alot of these republicans up and
not is that because of the waythe economy has evolved and
market forces you know thethings that they typically love
it has actually solved a lot ofthese problems?
Right, it is actually made.
It's kind of made some of theactions by the EPA kind of
(08:45):
defunct in previous Previousenforcement actions.
So in a way, the system is kindof working the way it's
supposed to in some regards.
However, that still requiresthe EPA to have those tools in
their toolbox to be able to,like you know, do their job.
Scott Perry wants to just doaway with that.
Yeah, that's just obviously abridge too far for him, and it's
(09:07):
interesting to get you an ideaof how real this is in terms of
the ability to use this.
There was actually a SupremeCourt case and I'm scrolling
through here to try to find it,but there was actually a Supreme
Court case just recently thatallowed it was in 2022.
(09:30):
The Supreme Court US SupremeCourt issued a long-awaited
ruling in West Virginia versusthe EPA and that case dealt with
the government's ability toregulate carbon emissions from
power plants.
And you know it's the USSupreme Court, even back in 2022
doesn't really have the bestrecord for For progressive
(09:51):
Causes or even like common sensecauses.
They're kind of you know, in inthe bag and they, to the shock
of environmental advocateseverywhere, issued a narrow but
consequential opinion that onlyruled out one specific mechanism
for slashing carbon emissionsand that was generation shifting
.
And that was one of Somethingthat first came about from the
(10:13):
Obama administration and it wassomething that the following
prices of natural gas renewablesactually changed the way the
enter country's energy mix went.
Anyhow met the clean powerplants target a decade ahead of
schedule and was kind of Mademove, kind of didn't matter.
So that was struck down by thecourt, but the six member
majority six not five ruled thatthe EPA's proposed use in that
(10:38):
instance, overstepped itsauthority of the Clean Air Act.
However, this ruling Did notaddress or eliminate any other
carbon cutting approaches in theClean Air Act, unlike, you know
, the ruling in Dobbs where theyoverturn Roe v Wade you know it
was kind of this far-reaching,you know, symbolic thing or you
(10:59):
know comprehensive, you knowkind of ban.
This actually explicitly leftroom For the EPA to use these
other pieces of the Clean AirAct, specifically section like
section 115, to be able toaddress the issue of climate
change and through globalemission.
So that is really, you know, togive you an idea of just how
(11:21):
far removed from the mainstreamthought process this bill is.
From Scott Perry that this issomething you know, despite all
his cries of Unconstitutionalpower grabs and you know all
that kind of stuff, which is,you know the fact that he is
trying to Use the Constitutionas a basis for anything is just,
(11:43):
you know, sad, laughable,pathetic.
Take your pick, but he's justagain, I hope you're sitting
down, don't wreck your car he'sjust dramatically wrong,
factually wrong in what he'strying to accomplish.
You know, this is just a a.
Hey, look at me.
Energy industry.
I'm your guy.
(12:03):
By the way, I've got afundraiser on Tuesday, come and
bring your checkbook.
You know it's ridiculous, it'sso far removed from the
mainstream.
It's just a typical crying andcomplaining.
And I don't know as a parent,as you know, in America's
American with a microtom ofCommon sense, like I, kind of
let the planet to still be herein a little while.
(12:24):
You know, maybe not ScottPerry's version of it, but I
think for you know, having theplanet remain sustainable
probably isn't the worst policyobjective in the world and you
know the Scott Perry's of theworld just simply do not care.
So just one little nugget ofwhat will be many nuggets about
Scott Perry and our fellowcongressional representatives
(12:46):
here in Pennsylvania.
That is just absolute garbage.
And you know we have to keep aneye on these things because,
despite all the big ticket stuffabout a guy like Scott Perry
you know the Fomentinginsurrection and those sorts of
things these other bills, theseother things Actually matter
because they're a good blueprintof where our elected officials
(13:07):
are, what they're doing and howthey're thinking, or, in the
case of Scott Perry, how they'renot thinking.
And the only good thing aboutyou know he talks about the
economic benefit of this bill.
You know I do have to agreewith him on that, because
designing ridiculous legislationlike this does require those
really cool graphics and that'sdefinitely keeping an intern or
(13:29):
somebody you know employed, andI think that, if nothing else,
so damn the planet, but let'skeep those graphics flowing.
Thanks, scott Perry.
This has been the Keystonemarketing podcast.
I'm Jesse white.
Let's do it again tomorrow.
Thanks,
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
NFL Daily with Gregg Rosenthal
Gregg Rosenthal and a rotating crew of elite NFL Media co-hosts, including Patrick Claybon, Colleen Wolfe, Steve Wyche, Nick Shook and Jourdan Rodrigue of The Athletic get you caught up daily on all the NFL news and analysis you need to be smarter and funnier than your friends.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.