February 16, 2025 • 48 mins
In This Episode: Back to the Glory Days of New Mexico Politics: Mark takes us back to 1997, when New Mexico boasted one of the best congressional representations in the country. Even the Clinton Administration we had to cut government waste back then! He contrasts that golden era with today’s feckless leadership, which shows neither the ability nor the desire to rescue us from ballooning debt and excessive government spending that could lead to catastrophe.
The Economic Breakdown & DOGE’s Game-Changing Potential: We reveal why the current economic situation is worse than you think and how DOGE could play a pivotal role in pulling the US out of a spiraling debt crisis. Mark explains why Trump’s strategy in challenging waste, fraud, and abuse is likely to get the green light in court—and why it matters now more than ever.
Media Bias & Fading Accountability: Once, the media fearlessly questioned our leaders and exposed their lies. Today, however, they’ve become willing PR agents for those in power, making government accountability even more difficult to achieve. Trump’s Resurgence & Poll Numbers: We analyze a new ABC poll that shows Trump’s numbers are surging. Discover which key voting bloc is driving his comeback—and why his opponents seem stuck in the 20% zone.
JD Vance Takes on Europe: JD Vance heads to Germany and tells European leaders, in no uncertain terms, to stop crushing free speech and religious expression. Watch as he delivers some of the most powerful highlights that have European insiders reeling. The Fentanyl Bill Fiasco in New Mexico: Krysty breaks down a controversial bill in the New Mexico State Legislature that would have increased penalties for fentanyl use and sale. Find out who voted against it—and why their decision could have dire consequences for the state’s fight against one of its deadliest epidemics.
Epic US vs. Canada Ice Battle: Finally, we cap off the episode with an epic showdown where sports and politics collide—witness how the US came out on top against Canada on the ice, blending athletic prowess with patriotic spirit!
#news #breakingnews #politicalpodcast #doge #musk #trump #albuquerque #newmexico #governmentwaste #taxdollars #hocky #merica https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/
Website: https://www.nodoubtaboutitpodcast.com/
Twitter: @nodoubtpodcast
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NoDoubtAboutItPod/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/markronchettinm/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ%3D%3D
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
You and I are told increasingly we have to choose
between a left or right.
Well, I'd like to suggest thereis no such thing as a left or
right.
There's only an up or down.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
This is the no Doubt About it.
Podcast.
No doubt about it Now yourhosts Christy and Mark Runcady.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
Wildfire.
You got a lot of verbiage.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
I do.
Speaker 4 (00:28):
Yeah, you got smoky.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Yeah, prevent wildfires.
I'll tell you something.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
You're like a walking billboard right now.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
I'm telling you right now the reason I got smoky on.
Yeah, because I was in themountains over the past few days
.
Yes, we have no snowpack, wehave none.
Okay, we have no snowpack, wehave none.
I mean, I was up at 11,000 feet.
There's maybe six inches ofsnow.
Speaker 4 (00:46):
Yeah, that's so great , but what is it again?
The La Nina.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
It's the La Nina.
There's no doubt.
Speaker 4 (00:50):
We knew it was going to be a bad year, so it's going
to come later.
It's going to come later.
Hopefully we'll do a littlebetter later.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
I do appreciate the guess, but I will also say that
even in a La Nina year, youwould expect a little more than
what we've gotten, and we had awinter storm warning over the
past few days and you looked, alot of model data showed foot,
foot and a half two feet of snowas a potential.
Nobody got that.
Nobody got that in the Sangrede Cristo mountains.
Now we've got some San Juanmountain snow like that and some
(01:16):
Shuska snow like that, but, butdefinitely not most areas.
We are in a crisis situation.
I got smoky going.
We need some more storms,there's no question, and I'm
hoping you're right.
I'm hoping in March and Aprilwe'll get late snow which will
push back fire season.
If we don't, this will be abrutal fire season.
There will be restrictionsright out of the chute.
This is really scary up therebecause, honestly, as sun angles
(01:39):
increase over the next coupleof weeks which they've already
been doing any snow you getmelts off quicker and quicker
and quicker.
So it's not like getting snowin December holds.
Getting snow in March doesn'thold as long.
So I just I'm concerned for it.
Speaker 4 (01:51):
I didn't mean to break out into weather at the
beginning I mean, my goodnessgracious, I was just, but it's
good.
It's good for us to be aware Iam wearing a ski sweater in
hopes that it actually will cooldown enough.
I like what you're going wejust got back from Dallas and it
was freezing in Dallas.
I could see my breath in Dallas.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
So that it was colder there, I think than here,
Absolutely, and, a matter offact, this week's going to be
very cold throughout most of thecountry, but the Northern
mountains are going to damn upthat cold air and we're not
going to be particularly coldhere and a good portion of
central and Western New Mexicowon't be cold.
Now, if you're up in Claytonplaces like that it's going to
be really cold this week andyou're going to hear about the
rest of the nation pretty muchfrom the Rockies eastward being
(02:28):
super cold.
But we're not going to be thatcold and we're definitely not
looking super wet, at least inthe near term, here.
So pray for rain and snow.
We need it.
Speaker 4 (02:35):
Okay.
So before we dive in, I'm goingto let you give us a brief
recap, really quickly, of whatwe're expecting on a show,
because you've packed it onceagain.
We're going to try to do thisin under an hour.
That's always our goal.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Yes.
Speaker 4 (02:46):
Although I did run into a lady in the airport and
she said I think you guys shouldjust talk for longer because
you have so much information.
Speaker 6 (02:52):
I'm like.
Speaker 4 (02:53):
Mark will kill me if I talk any longer so.
I can't.
I got to speed this up, Anyway,what I wanted to be get a
bigger reach, which I thought,oh, that's great, me too.
And they said how can we helpyou guys?
And so I wanted us to drop thismessage.
If you like our podcast and youwant to help us expand so we can
get a larger reach, there's acouple of things you can do.
(03:14):
First, sign up for our email.
You can do that on our website,which is um, no doubt about it
Podcastcom.
This is our website.
On here you can go down and youcan just click the button that
says sign up for our emails.
That's one way you can help usout.
Number two, you can simplysubscribe on our YouTube channel
.
If you're watching on YouTuberight now, hit that subscribe
button.
That does really help us.
It's free.
(03:34):
If you're listening on Apple orSpotify, go to our YouTube
channel to do that.
And then, finally, tell yourfriends about us.
Spread the word that way uslike, spread the word that way.
Tell everybody you know aboutus on social.
And I guess the last one wouldbe if you want to donate to the
cause, because that's how wefund this podcast is for
donations, and so that'd begreat, and you can make those
donations on our website as well.
So just want to hit that now.
Give us a recap, give us alittle rundown of what we're
(03:56):
doing here today.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Yeah, today we're going to start with something
that started to bug me lastnight.
I was just sitting around and Iwas looking at where we are in
this country and this is goingto be a little bit of a time
warp.
I want to go back to 1997 andto tell you a little bit about
where we were as a country in1997 and where we were as a
state in our representation, andwhere we are now and the
(04:17):
challenges that we face, becauseI think we face catastrophic
challenges really, that we'reheading toward catastrophic
problems with people that areunserious, unfortunately, and so
we need to be aware of that andto know what we're doing here.
So I want to talk a little bitabout that.
We're going to talk aboutwhat's going on in the White
House and what's happening withhow quickly things are moving JD
(04:39):
Vance's trip to Germany, whichwas interesting because it
talked about free speech, and Iwant to touch on that just a
little bit, and then we're goingto talk about some local stuff
at the end.
Legislative session's stillgoing.
There's an ad out pushing backon one of the bills in front of
the legislature right now a billgoing after law-abiding
citizens instead of going aftercriminals.
And then there's something youwant to talk about with a
(05:00):
fentanyl bill, which isunimaginable, but it's happened.
Speaker 4 (05:03):
Right, we're going to talk about all of that, and
then we have some fun kind ofpatriotic ending.
Oh, it's patriotic, it's alittle like if you ever saw the
movie miracle back in the day,it might bring a little bit of
miracle back to your life.
So we'll close with that.
Speaker 3 (05:18):
Oh, that was versus the Russians and this is versus
the Canadians.
Speaker 4 (05:20):
I understand, but I just am thinking it's hockey,
it's America, come on, it'ssimilar.
And then Ella's going to joinus at the end, real quickly, and
we're going to talk about ourteen conference that we just got
back from, yeah, from Dallas.
Okay, okay, let's start then.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
All right, I want to take you back to 1997.
Good year Because I started tolook at it, there was a special
election in 1997, in the stateof New Mexico that undoubtedly,
I think, was one of the best inthe country.
Ok, now, I don't say this in apartisan way, because these are
people of both parties, but ifyou look at our three House
(05:51):
members and our two Senatemembers, it's undeniable that
the state of New Mexico in 1997had very competent people on
both sides of the aisle going toWashington to try to get
something done.
Now, you may not have alwaysagreed with them.
You may not have liked BillRichardson, or you may not have
liked Jeff Bingaman or you know,or Pete Domenici, whatever, it
doesn't matter.
That's not my point.
My point is competence here.
(06:12):
So you go back in the NorthernDistrict, which is District 3,
right, you had Bill Richardson,was our congressional leader.
Now he went on to obviously begovernor.
He went on to do a lot ofdifferent things.
All right.
So you can say a lot of thingsabout Bill Richardson, there's
no question, but you can't saythat he was a lightweight that
he didn't know what he was doing.
Right, ok, heather Wilson.
She had been elected in aspecial election in Albuquerque
(06:36):
and Heather Wilson was a greatcongressperson.
Ok, she served for eight years.
She ended up running for Senate, didn't end up winning, but she
did end up running the AirForce.
She, I think, is still down inUTEP right now running that.
She's a very competent personand excellent.
Okay, joe Skeen was CD2.
(06:57):
Joe Skeen knew a ton aboutagricultural issues.
He was a man of consequence, heheld that seat for a long, long
time and, whether, again, youlike Joe Skeen or not, he was
really good.
And then, of course, we had oursenators.
We had Pete Domenici and we hadJeff Bingaman one a Republican,
domenici and a Democrat inBingaman.
This was a roster of excellent,excellent congressional
(07:20):
representation people that Ithink you could feel like, hey
look, I may not agree with them,but I respect them and I think
that was a lineup.
Okay.
And then I started to thinkabout you know, where were we in
1997?
Where was our leadership in thecountry?
How did we view government?
How did we view a governmentthat now has has spiraled and
(07:40):
become so big, right, out ofcontrol, right, and so which
Doge is showing?
Speaker 4 (07:45):
us which Doge is showing absolutely Blazing red
lights?
Yes, absolutely.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
But how different was it in 1997?
Again the same time we had thisrepresentation in Congress.
I want you to start.
This is a clip from Al Gore,and then we're going to jump to
2011 with Barack Obama.
Listen to the way they talkabout government.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
This report tells us how to cut waste, cut red tape,
streamline the bureaucracy,change procurement rules, change
the personnel rules and createa government that works better
and costs less.
Speaker 9 (08:24):
I've read it and where it says the president
should, the president will Amongthe 800 recommendations
eliminating 12% of the federalworkforce, merging some
government agencies like the FBI, the DEA and the Bureau of
Alcohol, tobacco and Firearms,closing hundreds of government
offices outside Washington.
From the day I took office, oneof the commitments that I made
to the American people was thatwe would do a better job here in
(08:45):
Washington in rooting outwasteful spending.
We thought that it was entirelyappropriate for our governments
and our agencies to try to rootout waste, large and small, in
a systematic way.
It means cutting some programsthat I think are worthy but we
may not be able to afford rightnow.
(09:06):
A lot of the action is inCongress and legislative, but in
the meantime, we don't need towait for Congress in order to do
something about wastefulspending that's out there.
We haven't seen as much actionout of Congress as we'd like,
and that's why we launched, onour own initiative, the campaign
to cut waste, and we're goingto keep on finding every
(09:27):
possible way that we can do that, even if Congress is not active
.
Okay, there you go.
Speaker 3 (09:33):
All right, so so this isn't like.
Speaker 4 (09:35):
This isn't new for Trump.
Like this, which you know, Ithink we see a lot of our state
leaders firing up getting mad atTrump about some of this
cutting of the waste or lookinginto cutting waste, and they're
like whoa, whoa, whoa.
You don't have the rights, youdon't have the.
You know you can't hire Elon todo this.
What are you doing?
You're out of step with theconstitution.
That's even rich.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Absolutely true, and I want to relay a story that
Heather Wilson told me back in,I think, 2014.
I was thinking about runningfor the house and didn't end up
running, but I called her and wehad a discussion and she said
something really interestingduring that phone call.
She said well, first of all,she told me about how difficult
it is to raise money, and youhave to be ready to do that.
Speaker 7 (10:13):
But number two beyond that which we've learned.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
but beyond that, she said there are two types of
people that get elected toCongress.
There are workhorses and thereare show horses.
And she goes.
You need to be a workhorse ifyou're going to do it, and she
goes.
But there are plenty of showhorses.
And I'll tell you what she wasabsolutely right, I fear.
Now in the state of New Mexicowe have five show horses.
(10:36):
We have five people who aremore interested in the politics
than the policy.
We have people that are moreinterested in a political fight
than solving problems and I fearthat even if they did want to
solve the problems, theycouldn't.
They couldn't if they tried.
You have Melanie Stansbury inCD1.
You have Teresa LedgerFernandez, cd3, gay Vasquez in
(10:58):
CD2.
These are people who areunfortunately showing right now
and some of the things they'resaying, which we'll go over that
they're just not serious.
Our senators are not people ofweight and seriousness that are
up for the challenge of what weare facing.
I fear, unfortunately and it isreally, really evident as you
(11:19):
go forward here and you look atwhere we are with Doge, which is
exactly what you mentioned thereaction to Doge, the reaction
to cutting out waste, fraud andabuse.
And Melanie Stansbury is agreat example.
You're looking at her righthere.
Okay, she's been one of theleading people that is
gaslighting and doing everythingshe can to make sure that we
(11:40):
don't have an accountablegovernment, and that scares me
to death because of where we'reheaded economically.
And so I think something youpointed out when we were talking
about some of her comments shewent out and stood in front of
the EPA, the ultimate show horsemove.
She goes in front of the EPAand the question is what does
(12:01):
she say?
Does she say a reasoned?
Look, we have to cut out waste,fraud and abuse, but we also
have to make sure we protect thepeople of this country.
Does she say that?
Speaker 4 (12:10):
No, she actually said something that I can't believe.
I just can't believe sheactually said it.
I'm going to let her say itbecause I don't ever want to get
caught on film saying what shesaid.
So let's just roll her realquick and you can decide.
So let's just roll her realquick and you can decide.
Do you think this was aneducated?
Speaker 10 (12:29):
thing to say when it came to the EPA.
I don't think there is anyonein America that wants to wake up
tomorrow and find out that theyhave to boil their water
because the EPA's workforce hasbeen escorted out of the
building.
So we're here to make sure thatthat doesn't happen and we
provide appropriate oversight.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
OK.
Speaker 4 (12:45):
Boiling our water.
It's getting so bad we'relooking into cutting wasteful
spending that you're going tohave to boil your own water.
I mean, when I first saw that,I was like she's got to be
kidding, right, like she andpeople have to.
And this is, I think, whatbothers me about this is that
she gets up there, shegrandstands with her microphone,
says ridiculously inaccurate,gaslighting, fearful,
(13:07):
fear-mongering comments andthere's a group of people that
actually believe her.
And I'm just thinking don'tgive her a microphone unless she
has any sort of common senseand ability to speak on
something which she keepsshowing over and over and over
that she does not.
Speaker 3 (13:24):
Well beyond giving her a microphone.
I mean she just doesn't servethe people that she's elected to
serve.
I mean, this is just sopatently untrue.
Does she believe this?
Speaker 7 (13:35):
I know, no, I don't believe.
She must know that now.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Please, I mean, give me a break If you cut part of
the.
Remember, go back to thatClinton clip Right.
They talked about cutting 12%of the federal workforce.
They talked about combiningdifferent federal bureaucracies
together.
They talked about all thisstuff that needs to be done, and
, again, it doesn't necessarilymean less funding.
She's talked about educationtoo, which we'll get to some of
her more ridiculous comments.
We're going to get to more ofher ridiculous comments, okay,
(13:59):
but that show horse move rightWas so above and beyond reality
that it just shows we havepeople serving who are not up to
the task, who are not seriousand who are not doing anything.
So we are in financial straits,okay, we're closing in on $40
trillion in debt and we're aboutto explain why that's going to
(14:20):
become an even bigger deal herein a second.
Okay, but back in 1997, we hada better team, we had problems
that weren't as bad as they arenow and we address them more
seriously Now.
Did they get everything done?
Absolutely not, and bothparties are to blame for the
massive amount of spendingthat's happened in Washington.
But we had better peopletackling smaller problems.
(14:42):
So that's two problems.
Number three but we had betterpeople tackling smaller problems
.
So that's two problems.
Number three we had a media in1997 that if you walked in and
said ridiculous things, theywould say wait a minute, that's
not true.
Or they would push back andgive both sides of a story.
Well, let's go to KRQE where wegot a story from them that is
(15:03):
one of the worst I've ever seenfrom someone Someone who did not
bother at all to tell bothsides of any story.
She absolutely went out and shegave Melanie Stansbury the
field to say whatever she wanted.
Not only did she not push back,she reinforced everything and
(15:25):
then made a ridiculous tag atthe end of the story that was
incredibly biased.
This is why people are sofrustrated, because we don't
have anyone trying to holdpeople to account when we
continue to head for a cliff andwhen we try to pull back and
save money and we try to holdour government officials
accountable or take thebureaucracy and shrink it down,
(15:48):
the response from media,especially kids who don't know
what they're doing, is thatthey're waving the pom poms and
they have no clue.
I mean, we should beembarrassed that this ever hit
the air, and so I want to playyou this story.
And I don't know this personfrom a whole.
I don't know who she is, nevermet her, but come on.
Speaker 4 (16:09):
Well, even if she doesn't know everything about
this, my concern is that youused to at least when I was in
the news you had to run yourstory by your news director or
whoever was in charge your maineditor your producer.
And they would verify the factsfor the story.
Yeah, I don't think if somebodylooked at this and still gave
this the green light, thenthat's on them as well.
But it's just, it's so.
I mean, just listening to this,you're like that's not true.
(16:32):
That's also not true.
Speaker 3 (16:34):
That's also not true.
And again, Stansbury can saythe most ridiculous thing she
wants to say.
Speaker 4 (16:37):
Right, but then you need to have the reporter come
back and either get the otherside of it or to push back on
Stansbury and say, actually,though you know that's actually
not true, or where are you, whyare you saying that?
Or even yeah, no, no, no,you're right, you're totally
right.
It's like ask the secondquestion or the third question
(16:58):
of this of her.
Speaker 10 (16:58):
Don't just let her run at the mouth and then you're
right the tag.
So I've talked enough, let'sshow the story, and then we can
come back and talk about it.
Yeah, yeah, okay, yeah,absolutely, goodicans, that's
New Mexico.
Speaker 5 (17:12):
Representative Melanie Stansberry, who says
she's worried the Department ofEducation will soon lose major
federal funding.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
That's not been proposed, by the way.
After Elon Musk and Dogeannounced they plan to make cuts
.
Speaker 5 (17:23):
Pause, it really quickly.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
I just want to take a quick pause there because we
will definitely dive into theDepartment of Education
potential cut there in a furtherepisode.
But I did want to say againthis is misleading because yes,
if the Department of Educationgets cut, the money, the federal
money grants pensions,everything just comes to the
states.
Ok, it's still the schoolsstill get it, the people still
(17:46):
get it here in the state.
It's just not federally.
There's not a big operation, abig government operation
controlling it.
Speaker 10 (17:53):
so saying that that money would be cut and taken
away from students and schoolsis a lie yeah, okay, keep going
department our schools arealready struggling to meet the
needs of our kids and if you gotfunding for these schools,
where are kids gonna go?
Again totally disingenuousfunding is really funding's not
at risk?
Speaker 5 (18:14):
Stansberry says those cuts would have major
consequences to public schoolsand tribal education, but that's
not her only concerns.
She also says she's worriedabout federal employee firings.
Speaker 10 (18:25):
They set into motion a series of federal funding
freezes that caused absolutechaos for the state of New
Mexico.
Countless nonprofits, the stateMedicaid system, clinics Stop
right there.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
That's just not happened.
No, okay.
And then again she says thesethings like any cut cannot
happen.
We're $40 trillion in debt.
I'm sorry, wake up and grow up.
You are sending our kids over acliff.
Speaker 10 (18:51):
We're all shut down.
Our universities are stillreporting that they're locked
out of their grant systems.
Speaker 5 (18:56):
Her concern is also with the state's national labs
and military bases.
Speaker 10 (19:00):
This is threatening the security of our families and
communities.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
Okay, hold on right there.
There has not been a single cut.
There's not been a single cutto defense spending, not at all.
Okay, now should we look atdefense and if there's things
that need to be cut causethere's waste, fraud and abuse,
heck, yes.
Speaker 4 (19:16):
Which Trump has actually said that he's going to
look into.
Like he has said, we're goingto look at the Pentagon, we're
going to look at defensespending.
So, yes, that's on the docket.
None of it's happened, so she'sjust like oh we're not only
that, it hasn't security.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
It's absolutely ridiculous.
Speaker 5 (19:34):
It's just not true.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Okay, keep going.
Speaker 5 (19:36):
Thinking member of the Doge subcommittee,
stansberry, says she'll fightback against any funding cuts
and federal firings.
Speaker 10 (19:43):
Our strategy is really three parts.
One is take it to court.
A lot of these executive ordersand actions directly violate
the law.
Speaker 5 (19:52):
President Donald Trump created Doge, with Musk at
its helm, with a directive toshrink the federal government by
firing workers, cuttingprograms and slashing federal
programs.
All part of his quote SaveAmerica agenda.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
That is the tag.
That is horrendous too.
I mean, that is not what Dogedoes, that is propaganda.
That is awful.
Speaker 4 (20:13):
Well, I'm wondering where she got the tag
information, cause usually, likewhen I was a reporter and you
had to add a tag at the end,sometimes you were just like,
okay, for more information, youcan go to their website for more
information, you can do this.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
Whatever, where'd she get that information and write
that tag from Stansberry'speople, cause that's what it
sounds like I don't know and itjust is, but it is absolutely
not even even the most harshassessment of Doge.
That is not what it was for.
Okay, it is absolutely.
Hold people accountable, and Iget it in DC, when they actually
want you to be responsible foryour budget instead of coming
(20:45):
back to, americans are stillgetting crushed by inflation for
more money.
Why don't you guys tighten upyour house, right, but?
But this girl goes and saysthis stuff and runs a story that
just absolutely isn't true.
So this gets back to my overallpoint, which was we had better
people with a smaller challengeand we had a media that cared
(21:05):
enough to at least address theissues and try to give people
the information instead of thisstuff now, and that's what
scares me.
And then you see what we'reheaded for.
Speaker 4 (21:15):
Well, and I do think that's why we're seeing such an
uptick with alternative media, Imean we are seeing the podcast
world just boom.
You see shows like Megyn Kelly,Ruthless.
I mean a commentary magazine.
There's a ton of them out therethat people watch and listen to
to get their news.
Now, because of stuff like that, Because you sit there and you
watch that and if you don't knowenough about what's going, on
oh, you're like oh my gosh, howcould we possibly do this?
Speaker 3 (21:37):
So it's very frightening.
Speaker 4 (21:39):
I feel like it's a disservice to voters and to your
viewers.
Speaker 3 (21:43):
Just do your job.
Speaker 4 (21:44):
The incompetence Well , ask the question, Run it by
somebody else and say is thisreally what Doge is about?
Speaker 3 (21:51):
Doge is about.
Is this really what they said?
Well, and again, if Sandsburywants to say those ridiculous
things, then you turn back andsay there have been no cuts here
.
Or you say critics would say ordo this, it's crazy.
I know this is crazy, krqe, butyou know what you should do Get
a second source, get somebodyon the other side who says, no,
that's not what's happening,they're not doing that.
Okay.
So the reason all of this kindof infuriated me was because you
(22:15):
look at the problems that we'rein in the next six to nine
months and I don't think enoughof this has been talked about.
And you talked about the MeganKelly podcast and who she had on
on Friday, and we want to takea little piece of that for you
to hear, but we want you to kindof lay the groundwork on this.
Speaker 4 (22:29):
Right, Okay.
So on Friday she had a coupleof guests on from the all in
podcast.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Right.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
And really what was a little frightening about this
was saying you know, trump wassaying there's going to be some
pain up up front, more thanlikely.
Like there's not going to besome, we have a.
We're potentially looking atdoing a massive refinance of our
, of our national debt.
Is that the fairest way ofputting that?
I mean, that's basically whatthey're kind of talking about a
little bit.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Yeah, yeah.
Well, a third of it, roughly aquarter to a third but soon it
has to happen with it.
Well, we'll let them explain ithere.
So Chamath Palihapitiya okay Isone of the guys who hosts it on
the all in podcast.
So he was on Megyn Kelly and heexplained it.
It's a couple minutes long, butI think it's super smart and
it'll help you understand theposition we're in and it and it
(23:19):
shows you how ridiculous peoplelike Melanie Stansbury are when
they go and they gaslighteverybody when you see the
problems that we're facing.
So I want you to listen toChamath here and just listen to
what he has to say about thisfrom the Megyn Kelly podcast.
Speaker 11 (23:28):
Last couple of years , the Biden administration, and
specifically Biden and Yellen,did one thing that I hope no
government afterwards ever does,which is they were effectively
speculating on rates, and whatthey did was you know, the
Treasury's job is to finance thegovernment right.
Their job is to go into thebond market, sell bonds, use
(23:50):
that money and redirect it toHHS, to Social Security, to
defense, wherever they financedit with all of this short-term
paper and part of it was theybelieved that inflation would be
in check and interest rates inthe future would fall.
So, whatever happened, we wouldbe able to go back into the
(24:10):
markets and borrow later forcheaper.
It turned out that was anenormously incorrect assumption
and they should not have madethat decision.
So today, what Trump and Besanthave to do is extremely
difficult.
They have about $10 trillion socall it 25%, 30% of our total
debt.
We have to refinance in thenext six to nine months, and
(24:35):
we're doing it against abackdrop where now inflation is
ticking back up and rates areticking back up.
So why is that important?
It's important because now, allof a sudden, like what does
this budget bill look like andwhat can we actually accomplish?
There's the Senate version,which is super light, and it
says let's just deal with bordersecurity and military.
And then there's what sort ofTrump has asked for, which is
(24:57):
the House version, which is this, quote unquote one big,
beautiful bill.
The problem is those two thingsare on a collision course, and
the big bill may be a little bittoo early in the sense that, to
exactly your point, we don'tknow how bad the situation is.
And if Besant goes into themarket and gets clubbed over the
head and now all of a sudden wehave $10 trillion that we have
(25:18):
to borrow at five or 5.5%, Ithink it's gonna be really bad
for the US economy, In whichcase there will be no choice
except to make very deep cuts ina broad-based way.
So we almost need to buy sometime and figure out how bad the
situation is, which is why weneed the air cover to sort of
see how much Doge uncovers,because that'll make the problem
(25:40):
less at the end of the day,right, Because cutting that
stuff will mean that's fewerfixed programs we have to cut.
So that's kind of where we are.
So I think it's in a very we're, in a delicate 60 to 90 day
period, I think.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
OK, now knowing that, and then you look at
Stansberry's comments and yourealize how irresponsible they
are, the position that we are inwhich both parties put us in
with the debt.
Speaker 7 (26:07):
But there's no question.
Speaker 3 (26:08):
What happened recently with Biden sent this
thing out of control, ok, andTrump has a lot on his plate to
deal with here and it's going tobe a problem because again, we
are starting to see inflation goback up.
And it's just like your home.
I mean.
Imagine if I went to you and Isaid we got to refinance our
house and it's going to be,instead of we're at three point
five percent, it's going to besix.
It's just the same thingshappening with the federal
(26:28):
government and we have peoplethat are complaining that we're
trying to take out the waste,fraud and abuse, much less the
fact that we're going to have tocut things.
So we have to have seriouspeople who actually want to fix
things and get this country backon the right footing.
And I'm not saying they allrely, they all lie in one party,
but but if you will stand up,and it's just because Trump
(26:48):
supports it, I hate it and I'mgoing to fight for every single
bloated federal program we have.
We're beyond that, yeah, we'reway beyond that.
Speaker 4 (26:58):
Well, I think, even like, obviously, I didn't agree
with a lot of Obama policiesright, there was a lot of them I
didn't agree with but even himsaying listen, there's aid
programs that we want to be ableto fund, but we can't afford
them right now, so we have tocut back.
It is no different than whenyou're in a family and, of
course, your kids are like well,I want to go on vacation and I
want new clothes.
Well, we all do.
(27:23):
We all want to go out torestaurants all the time.
Right, this would be great ifwe could all do that all the
time.
But when your family budgetgets tighter, you can't.
It's, it's irresponsible tohave our leaders up there being
just just gaslighting and makingthe situation.
She talks Stansberry, uses theword chaos.
That's what she's creating bygoing out there with her
(27:45):
megaphone microphones in frontof all these buildings and
having these pressers where shesays ridiculous things.
Speaker 3 (27:50):
I might argue she doesn't create chaos because
it's so ludicrous.
People roll their eyes and goshe's not serious.
She's not a serious person.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
But I don't think enough people in the state of
New Mexico understand that.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
That's my concern here, especially when your media
treats it like a pom-pomsession, right, I mean?
Speaker 4 (28:04):
obviously the reporter is even snowed, right,
so she gets snowed and then shejust spreads that out like
wildfire.
I don't know, I just it bothersme.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
But just take his comments though, which were wise
and smart, and saying, okay, wehave a real problem here and do
we have the people with thehorsepower and the general will
to be A honest and then Bresolute in fixing these
problems?
And I don't think we do.
Speaker 4 (28:30):
And I think the other thing that's always interesting
to me about this is the factthat, since Trump's not going to
run again right there's a lotof talk about, while he likes to
be liked, he doesn't need toget reelected.
So he's going to make some hardcalls and they're going to be
painful, and he's kind of sayingthat he's like I'd like to not
have it be painful, but thingshave to change with our budget.
Like it has to change or we'rejust driving our country right
(28:51):
off a cliff, right.
So I mean, but his numbers areup, his approval numbers are
looking really good.
Speaker 3 (28:56):
He's moving very quickly here and again we've
talked about this on this showhe's moving quickly on the 80-20
issues, right, the issues thatmost Americans agree on, and
those numbers actually work.
This was from ABC today.
It's a Marquette poll actually.
It said the governmentrecognition that there are two
sexes 63 percent support that.
Deporting people here illegally60 percent support that and, by
(29:17):
the way, that's not justcriminals.
Speaker 4 (29:20):
I know they do.
They believe it.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Yeah, expanding oil and gas production 60 percent
and declare an emergency at theborder 59 percent.
So those numbers are big.
Now the question is you knowyou're seeing Trump move very,
very quickly here and he isdoing something that I think is
very interesting, and ScottJennings talked about it on CNN.
Speaker 6 (29:36):
Momentum begets momentum.
Trump created tremendouspolitical momentum for this kind
of change by winning thenational popular vote and a real
mandate in the ElectoralCollege.
He extended the momentum byhaving a really good transition
and, of course, his first threeplus weeks in office.
He's continued that, and somomentum begets momentum and the
polling is pretty clear theAmerican people like what he's
(29:57):
doing.
There was some focus groupreports in Axios this morning.
Swing state voters in Arizonawere saying, yeah, we like the
idea of cutting the federalgovernment, we like the idea of
what Trump is doing and we'rewilling to give him some space
to do it.
So the reason you move fast isbecause you have a mandate to
move fast and because it's thefulfillment of campaign promises
(30:18):
.
I think in Washington it's alltoo common to talk big during a
campaign, get into office,things slow down, things get on
the back burner and then fouryears later you say, well, gosh,
sorry, we never got around tothat.
That's obviously not what Trumpand Musk are doing this time
and I think the American peoplequite like a politician who's
willing to keep their promiseson day one instead of putting
them off until, well, it's toolate.
Speaker 3 (30:38):
No, it's super smart point, I think, because that's
the one thing he's done in ourlifetimes.
I'm not sure we've ever seensomeone keep their promises.
Speaker 4 (30:45):
whether you like every single promise or not, he
is ticking them off which is whyI think it's so comical when
you see, like our state leaderssaying people didn't vote for
this, people voted for lowerprices and lower gas prices, and
I'm like, no, we actually votedfor waste to be found out.
We knew about this plan.
He talked openly about thisplan.
He even talked about it in hisfirst term in office.
(31:07):
So when we have state leadersthat say ridiculous things like
that, I'm like no peopleactually were paying attention
to him during the campaign.
Listen to what he said and theyvoted for him.
And he's doing it.
So I just you know the, thefighting him on every step, the
you know the lawfare against himon every single thing he's
trying to do.
I it's, it's annoying and it'sstarting to you know it.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
Just, it just drove, it feels like it drones on and
on it may, but at the same time,if you're Trump and you're
continually pushing these thingswhere you're on the right side
of the issue, okay, keep going,but the problem we're running
into is our problems arebecoming bigger than a lot of
these little ancillary fightsthat I think end up people just
kind of saying give me a break.
Speaker 4 (31:46):
Right on the social issues.
Okay, so JD Vance, our guy,great public speaker.
I love this guy.
He goes out to Munich at asecurity conference.
Speaker 3 (31:55):
Yeah, it's a big deal .
The Munich Security Conference,yes, and he is there and he's
kind of talking.
Speaker 4 (31:59):
He kind of lets it rip about free speech and maybe
how the Germans aren't doingsuch a good job.
It's not just the Germans.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
Yeah, I mean all over Europe right.
Yeah, so the first clip, Ithink, is more of a broad side
of the whole thing.
Let's listen to that.
Speaker 8 (32:13):
A lot about what you need to defend yourselves from,
and of course, that's important,but what has seemed a little
bit less clear to me andcertainly, I think, to many of
the citizens of Europe, is whatexactly it is that you're
defending yourselves for.
What is the positive visionthat animates this shared
(32:33):
security compact that we allbelieve is so important?
And I believe deeply that thereis no security if you are
afraid of the voices, theopinions and the conscience that
guide your very own people.
Europe faces many challenges,but the crisis this continent
faces right now, the crisis Ibelieve we all face together, is
(32:57):
one of our own making.
If you're running in fear ofyour own voters, there is
nothing America can do for you.
Nor, for that matter, is thereanything that you can do for the
American people who elected meand I.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
President Trump is why he finished OK.
So his broader point is you'rescared of your own people.
You don't want them speakingout, and so it's interesting and
I started to think what'sspecific examples is he talking
about?
And he, he brought the receipts.
Speaker 4 (33:27):
OK.
Speaker 8 (33:29):
Concerningly I look to our very dear friends, the
United Kingdom, where thebackslide away from conscience
rights has placed the basicliberties of religious Britons
in particular, in the crosshairs.
A little over two years ago,the British government charged
Adam Smith Connor, a 51-year-oldphysiotherapist and an army
veteran, with the heinous crimeof standing 50 meters from an
(33:53):
abortion clinic and silentlypraying for three minutes.
Meters from an abortion clinicand silently praying for three
minutes, not obstructing anyone,not interacting with anyone,
just silently praying on his own.
After British law enforcementspotted him and demanded to know
what he was praying for, adamreplied simply it was on behalf
of the unborn son.
He and his former girlfriendhad aborted years before.
(34:16):
Now.
The officers were not moved.
Adam was found guilty ofbreaking the government's new
buffer zones law, whichcriminalizes silent prayer and
other actions that couldinfluence a person's decision
within 200 meters of an abortionfacility.
He was sentenced to paythousands of pounds in legal
costs to the prosecution.
(34:37):
He was sentenced to paythousands of pounds in legal
costs to the prosecution.
Now I wish I could say thatthis was a fluke, a one-off
crazy example of a badly writtenlaw being enacted against a
single person.
But no, this last October, justa few months ago, the Scottish
(34:57):
government began distributingletters to citizens whose houses
lay within so-called safeaccess zones, warning them that
even private prayer within theirown homes may amount to
breaking the law.
Jeez Okay.
Speaker 4 (35:04):
I mean, that's just so scary, it's terrifying.
I mean anybody, and givenAmerica has a lot of freedoms
that other countries don't have,but you don't necessarily think
of Scotland or the UK as one ofthose countries that would come
down on prayer would come downon any religious freedom that
you would have that doesn'timpose on other people praying
inside of your own home.
Speaker 6 (35:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (35:24):
That's going to be now against the law.
Be careful.
I mean, I know that if you're abeliever at all or you read
scripture at all, it's.
We're definitely warned aboutthis time coming, but it is uh,
it's just not what you ever wantto see, and I think walking
into the Munich SecurityConference and letting them have
it with both barrels to saywhat are you doing?
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Stop going down this road of trying to police.
Speech is the right thing to do.
And he was backed up.
We won't play it tonight ortoday but he was backed up by
Marco Rubio, the secretary ofstate, who said, look, they
needed to hear this.
And so these are the sort ofthings that need to happen.
So we'll go into local here ina second, but it just is one of
those moments that that you lookat and go.
(36:02):
You know we're in a world andwe're in a really tumultuous
time, in a time where where Ithink it's super important to
make sure that that you'repaying attention to where your
country stands and standing up,and again, we don't all agree on
everything.
Heck, I don't know what youpray for at night.
You know what I mean, no matterwhere you are.
But you should have the rightto do it, and you should have
(36:22):
the right to do it on a publicstreet corner.
Right you know, I mean, andthese sorts of things can go
downhill very, very quickly, andI think it's important that
America takes a lead on theworld stage and says don't do
this.
Okay, well, we've got somelocal stuff.
Speaker 4 (36:35):
I want to talk about HB 136, which was killed in
committee earlier this past week.
I I followed John Block.
He's one of our state reps.
He writes opinion posts.
That's where I pulled thisstory from, and I also saw it
shared on Twitter.
So I wanted us to talk about it, even though it's been killed.
It's frustrating to see why itwas killed, because I do think
when we talk about crime bills,this is something that aligns
(36:57):
with people who want to fight oncrime.
So let's just take a look atthis really quickly, what it
says here.
It says on Friday, new MexicoDemocrat leaders in the state
house, government elections andIndian affairs committee voted
against a measure sponsored byand I get this it was sponsored
by a Democrat representative,charlotte Little of Albuquerque,
to mandate quote increasedsentencing for individuals
convicted of traffickingcontrolled substances under blah
(37:18):
.
Quote increased sentencing forindividuals convicted of
trafficking controlledsubstances under blah, blah,
blah when the offense involvesfentanyl.
Ok, and it goes on to say theDemocrats in the committee voted
against the legislation, wererepresentatives.
These are the people that saidno to this.
The Democrats in the committeevoted against the legislation,
with reps Joanne Ferrari thelegislation, with reps Joanne
(37:41):
Ferreri, angelica Rubio, lizThompson and Andrea Romero
opposing the measures.
Although Romero was absent fromthe last bill's vote, both
votes in the committee killedthe bills, with reps John Block
and Stephanie Lord votingagainst tabling the life-saving
legislation.
Now this is what wasinteresting to me.
Ferreri claimed that sincefentanyl, which is rarely
prescribed, is technically alegal substance and it should
not be included.
Rubio claimed and according toJohn Block wrongly claimed that
(38:06):
since a drug addict whobreastfeeds her baby could be
charged under HB 136, shecouldn't support the legislation
.
Speaker 3 (38:14):
Yeah, I mean this is the kind of stuff that tougher
fentanyl law legislation.
Yeah, I mean this is the kindof stuff that tougher fentanyl
law.
Now, everybody was, you know,waving pom poms that that they
pass something to do with crimehere, which again, good, pass
whatever you can.
But this is the sort of thingthat when we talk about not
being serious about reallyaddressing crime, it's something
like this where it's like, ifwe cannot stiffen, you know,
penalties against people usingfentanyl or people selling
(38:36):
fentanyl, it's.
I just think it's maddening towatch.
Speaker 4 (38:40):
Cause if you're going to find like one weird thing,
like one off track thing thatcould potentially happen down
the road and you can't pass abill that actually impacts
something that I mean fentanylis a major deal here.
The one thing I didn't get totell you really fast was it says
that, according to a statistic,your deal here.
The one thing I didn't get totell you really fast is it says
that, according to statistics,65% of drug deaths in our state
(39:00):
are due to fentanyl.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
Yeah, it's an absolute crisis.
Speaker 4 (39:03):
So the fact that we're not making tougher laws on
people that are offenders, thatuse that drug or sell that drug
, I don't understand it.
It made no sense to me, so Iwanted to make sure we just
shined a little light on thatRight.
Speaker 3 (39:14):
Another bill that I think is of concern and this
gets dovetails to your point,which is, address the things
that are hurting New Mexicansand don't go after law abiding
citizens there's Senate Bill 279, which is getting a lot of play
online.
A lot of people are talkingabout it and we're even seeing
ads about Senate Bill 279.
Speaker 4 (39:33):
Yeah, there is a defend.
New Mexico has put out thisbrand new ad that's really going
after this bill.
Specifically, it's attackingthis bill to show people like,
hey, wake up, because this billis not going to be good for law
abiding citizens, who happen tobe law abiding gun owners.
So let's take a look at this ad.
Speaker 7 (39:48):
Crime is way up, but the number of criminals behind
bars is down 20 percent.
It's catch and release.
Lawmakers still refuse to gettough on criminals.
Instead, they want to ban gunsfor law-abiding citizens, called
one of the most extreme guncontrol bills in the country,
banning the most popularsporting rifles, handguns
(40:09):
favored by women, even somehunting rifles.
Contact your legislator.
Speaker 3 (40:13):
Go after criminals, not law-abiding citizens Paid
for by Defend New Mexico, and Ithink the objection to this bill
is because they're and thisgets into how guns fire and
gas-operated guns.
But basically there are allsorts of gas-operated guns that
would be banned and we'retalking about, in some cases,
small firearms that women usefor self-defense some hunting
(40:35):
rifles, some sporting rifles.
This is the kind of thing thatthey go tackle and then you
realize wait a minute, why arewe not, you know, passing laws
that are going after people thatare that are actually breaking
our laws?
No criminal is going to careabout a gun law, they don't care
.
So let's address that insteadof going after people who do
care and who do follow the law.
Speaker 4 (40:56):
Right, it just seems like again like it's, it's like
a, it's like something shinyover here, like we're going to
pass this bill over here.
We're talking about this billover here that we can say it's
fighting crime yeah, it's brightand shiny and we just say the
word crime bill and hopefullyvoters don't pay enough
attention to that.
That's really what I Let meshow you this, it's politics
over policy again again, again,again.
(41:17):
It's just so.
It's crazy.
Ok, let's end on a couple ofgood stories.
Speaker 3 (41:20):
OK, all right.
So when I thought was prettyfunny.
So the US and Canada werefacing off in the four nations
hockey, ok, and it's basicallythe United States, canada,
finland and Sweden.
Ok, and all four countries playbest two records, go in and
play in the final.
Four countries play best tworecords, go in and play in the
final.
Okay, so already this thing hasturned pretty funny.
All right, so they're inMontreal on Saturday night, the
(41:43):
United States versus Canada, andyou know all the the fight back
and forth about Canada becomingthe 51st state.
Canada not thrilled with that,apparently.
So I want you to listen to whathappens when they play our
national anthem, cause theCanadians boo us.
And then, literally within fiveseconds of the start of the
(42:03):
game, all of a sudden, canadaand the US, we have three
separate fights, three guysfighting it out, just fisticuffs
, and then the game goes off.
So just watch this.
Okay, right, as the game starts, here we go boom, I mean, they
(42:25):
just drop gloves immediately,right, and so, with three
different fights, I would argue,the united states comes out on
top.
You know three.
Okay, all right.
And then all of a sudden,canada takes a 1-0 lead.
Canada takes a 1-0 lead, andthen we even it right here Boom,
1-1.
Okay, now, this is notequivalent to you know, the
(42:46):
miracle on ice, but still it waspretty cool.
So it's 1-1.
Here comes the US, comes down2-1 right there, and then we add
an empty netter and beat Canadathree to one after they booed
our national anthem.
So now what's going to end uphappening here?
Most likely is here's the emptynetter.
What's likely to happen here iswe play, I think, sweden coming
(43:08):
up here in a day.
It won't matter, cause we'vealready won our first two games.
We beat Finland, we beat Canada, so we're in the final.
Okay, canada's probably goingto advance to the final and
we're going to play again onThursday night.
Speaker 7 (43:24):
So now it's so funny that like the United States and
Canada's turned into like this.
Speaker 3 (43:25):
I mean so we'll see what happens, but it was pretty
funny to watch.
And you see the, you know youget booed in the national anthem
.
Also, these guys are, you know,throwing blows and then we end
up winning the game.
We'll see what happens onThursday night.
You know Canada is going tocome back for revenge, but you
want to talk about compelling.
You're going to see an audienceon that Thursday night game.
If it's the United Statesversus Canada, which I think it
will be, it's going to be amassive audience.
(43:46):
I mean, people are going towatch.
Speaker 4 (43:47):
Well, there's so much tension.
I mean clearly, I mean hockeyis known for fighting.
I mean you know it's known forlike it's half boxing.
No, it's not.
Yes, it is no stop, yes, it isanyway.
So, um, but when tensions arethat fierce and the game hasn't
even started yet we're gonnastart punching.
Speaker 3 (44:03):
I'm sorry, that's boxing guy oh, those were at the
beginning.
Speaker 4 (44:06):
Yeah, they're not even like they haven't even hit
the puck yet and they'rethrowing blows.
Speaker 3 (44:10):
But agree, but usually that does not happen in
international competition rightso, like in the olympics, you're
not fighting.
You know, know, likeeverybody's not fighting, it's
only in the NHL.
But what's so funny is like,literally they dropped the puck.
It's like, okay, here we go,and they knew it.
Like the second it was going tostart.
It's like it's time to fight,and it was.
I mean, I don't know.
I found it to be endlesslyhilarious.
(44:38):
Mainly it's funny.
It's a little bit of adiversion, so not bad, all right
.
Speaker 4 (44:42):
Speaking of diversion , I took Ella and some of her
buddies and we went to Dallasthis past weekend.
We went last year for theTherefore Conference it's a teen
, all girls conference,christian conference really
inspiring leaders that come inand share messages, kind of of
encouragement, and just dealingwith cultural issues.
Sadie Robinson was there.
(45:03):
She's from the duck duckdynasty and Ella.
Any words, I will let Ellaspeak as well, as we're punching
on the show.
Speaker 3 (45:10):
Yeah, it was good, it was really fun and there was a
lot of really good speakers.
I don't know what duck dynastyis, but she was a really good
speaker.
Speaker 4 (45:18):
Yeah, she really talked about family marriage.
Yeah, they're a biz.
Speaker 3 (45:22):
They basically make duck.
They make like duck call.
Speaker 4 (45:25):
Yeah, and they did a show about it.
Speaker 3 (45:26):
Stuff that you would call ducks with so you can hunt.
You basically try to attractducks with a duck call.
And it's a very unique family,a lot of characters, and they
make these little basically duckcalls where you blow into them
and they make a sound like aduck and the duck's like oh, I'm
going to go down here, and then, boom, you shoot them.
Speaker 4 (45:41):
And she did announce they're bringing that show back.
So she talked about that at theconference.
But she talked about faith,family, those kinds of things.
We had a lot of other speakers.
Jackie Hill Perry spoke andthen you can see here they did a
little dance party.
Tons of confetti came down.
Speaker 5 (45:53):
That was so fun.
That part was really fun.
Speaker 4 (45:55):
It was really fun.
They had a great worship bandout of Passion Church out of
Atlanta, just really compellingspeakers.
It was a two-day conference.
I would highly recommend itAgain.
It's called Therefore and ithappens usually February or
March, and it just took place inDallas.
Speaker 3 (46:12):
Really cool Times like this, too, to reiterate
faith and the importance of it,and people standing up and
saying keep moving forward withChrist as your North Star and
everything that you do,especially for girls that age.
That was awesome when you tookthem.
Speaker 4 (46:27):
Oh, and we learned so much too.
Even as the moms, we sit in theback, we sit all in the back
with all the leaders.
Speaker 7 (46:33):
Right.
Speaker 4 (46:33):
And then all the kids are in the front and I just
think it's just one of thoseevents that we can't mimic it as
parents, youth groups can'tmimic it.
You can't get that manycompelling.
These are women speakers thatspeak to adult conferences and
they pack them in this two daything and they really can speak
to these kids in a way that youknow is rare Sometimes.
They really can get at theirlevel.
(46:53):
And, and Ella, you had some biginfluencer.
Ella was really excited aboutmeeting some influencer there.
She ran right up to her to talkto her.
Speaker 3 (47:00):
Yeah, there's this girl named Lacey Abercrombie
that I followed on Instagram forlike five years and I saw her
walking around.
I was like I have to go say hito her.
So I went and said hi, and tooka picture and she was actually
really nice, very nice.
She was really cool, very cool.
Speaker 4 (47:19):
It was.
It was great, so I highlyrecommend it.
If you have teenage daughters,look at it.
Therefore, they also do allthese ministries now globally.
They do global ones, and if youcan't make it to Dallas, they
have virtual conferences so youcan join in virtually as well.
So just keep that in your backpocket, look it up.
Therefore, the number four Ijust I.
I think they're a really goodorganization, so I wanted to
give them a little plug, yeahabsolutely Okay.
Speaker 3 (47:41):
Well, thanks for joining us.
I know at times this wasfrustrating, but tried to.
I don't know what's going on,but we'll just keep moving.
Speaker 4 (47:47):
Just keep moving.
You guys have a greatpresident's day weekend and we
will see you back here onThursday.
Speaker 2 (47:53):
You've been listening to the no Doubt About it
podcast.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
We know we had a blast.
Make sure to like, rate andreview.
We'll be back soon, but in themeantime you can find us on
Instagram and Facebook at noDoubt About it podcast.
Speaker 3 (48:10):
No doubt about it.
Speaker 2 (48:17):
The no Doubt About it podcast is a Choose Adventure
Media production.
See you next time on no DoubtAbout it.
Speaker 3 (48:21):
There is no doubt about it.
You and I are told increasingly we have to choose
between a left or right.
Well, I'd like to suggest thereis no such thing as a left or
right.
There's only an up or down.
Speaker 2 (00:12):
This is the no Doubt About it.
Podcast.
No doubt about it Now yourhosts Christy and Mark Runcady.
Speaker 4 (00:22):
Wildfire.
You got a lot of verbiage.
Speaker 3 (00:27):
I do.
Speaker 4 (00:28):
Yeah, you got smoky.
Speaker 3 (00:29):
Yeah, prevent wildfires.
I'll tell you something.
Speaker 4 (00:32):
You're like a walking billboard right now.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
I'm telling you right now the reason I got smoky on.
Yeah, because I was in themountains over the past few days
.
Yes, we have no snowpack, wehave none.
Okay, we have no snowpack, wehave none.
I mean, I was up at 11,000 feet.
There's maybe six inches ofsnow.
Speaker 4 (00:46):
Yeah, that's so great , but what is it again?
The La Nina.
Speaker 3 (00:49):
It's the La Nina.
There's no doubt.
Speaker 4 (00:50):
We knew it was going to be a bad year, so it's going
to come later.
It's going to come later.
Hopefully we'll do a littlebetter later.
Speaker 3 (00:55):
I do appreciate the guess, but I will also say that
even in a La Nina year, youwould expect a little more than
what we've gotten, and we had awinter storm warning over the
past few days and you looked, alot of model data showed foot,
foot and a half two feet of snowas a potential.
Nobody got that.
Nobody got that in the Sangrede Cristo mountains.
Now we've got some San Juanmountain snow like that and some
(01:16):
Shuska snow like that, but, butdefinitely not most areas.
We are in a crisis situation.
I got smoky going.
We need some more storms,there's no question, and I'm
hoping you're right.
I'm hoping in March and Aprilwe'll get late snow which will
push back fire season.
If we don't, this will be abrutal fire season.
There will be restrictionsright out of the chute.
This is really scary up therebecause, honestly, as sun angles
(01:39):
increase over the next coupleof weeks which they've already
been doing any snow you getmelts off quicker and quicker
and quicker.
So it's not like getting snowin December holds.
Getting snow in March doesn'thold as long.
So I just I'm concerned for it.
Speaker 4 (01:51):
I didn't mean to break out into weather at the
beginning I mean, my goodnessgracious, I was just, but it's
good.
It's good for us to be aware Iam wearing a ski sweater in
hopes that it actually will cooldown enough.
I like what you're going wejust got back from Dallas and it
was freezing in Dallas.
I could see my breath in Dallas.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
So that it was colder there, I think than here,
Absolutely, and, a matter offact, this week's going to be
very cold throughout most of thecountry, but the Northern
mountains are going to damn upthat cold air and we're not
going to be particularly coldhere and a good portion of
central and Western New Mexicowon't be cold.
Now, if you're up in Claytonplaces like that it's going to
be really cold this week andyou're going to hear about the
rest of the nation pretty muchfrom the Rockies eastward being
(02:28):
super cold.
But we're not going to be thatcold and we're definitely not
looking super wet, at least inthe near term, here.
So pray for rain and snow.
We need it.
Speaker 4 (02:35):
Okay.
So before we dive in, I'm goingto let you give us a brief
recap, really quickly, of whatwe're expecting on a show,
because you've packed it onceagain.
We're going to try to do thisin under an hour.
That's always our goal.
Speaker 3 (02:45):
Yes.
Speaker 4 (02:46):
Although I did run into a lady in the airport and
she said I think you guys shouldjust talk for longer because
you have so much information.
Speaker 6 (02:52):
I'm like.
Speaker 4 (02:53):
Mark will kill me if I talk any longer so.
I can't.
I got to speed this up, Anyway,what I wanted to be get a
bigger reach, which I thought,oh, that's great, me too.
And they said how can we helpyou guys?
And so I wanted us to drop thismessage.
If you like our podcast and youwant to help us expand so we can
get a larger reach, there's acouple of things you can do.
(03:14):
First, sign up for our email.
You can do that on our website,which is um, no doubt about it
Podcastcom.
This is our website.
On here you can go down and youcan just click the button that
says sign up for our emails.
That's one way you can help usout.
Number two, you can simplysubscribe on our YouTube channel
.
If you're watching on YouTuberight now, hit that subscribe
button.
That does really help us.
It's free.
(03:34):
If you're listening on Apple orSpotify, go to our YouTube
channel to do that.
And then, finally, tell yourfriends about us.
Spread the word that way uslike, spread the word that way.
Tell everybody you know aboutus on social.
And I guess the last one wouldbe if you want to donate to the
cause, because that's how wefund this podcast is for
donations, and so that'd begreat, and you can make those
donations on our website as well.
So just want to hit that now.
Give us a recap, give us alittle rundown of what we're
(03:56):
doing here today.
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Yeah, today we're going to start with something
that started to bug me lastnight.
I was just sitting around and Iwas looking at where we are in
this country and this is goingto be a little bit of a time
warp.
I want to go back to 1997 andto tell you a little bit about
where we were as a country in1997 and where we were as a
state in our representation, andwhere we are now and the
(04:17):
challenges that we face, becauseI think we face catastrophic
challenges really, that we'reheading toward catastrophic
problems with people that areunserious, unfortunately, and so
we need to be aware of that andto know what we're doing here.
So I want to talk a little bitabout that.
We're going to talk aboutwhat's going on in the White
House and what's happening withhow quickly things are moving JD
(04:39):
Vance's trip to Germany, whichwas interesting because it
talked about free speech, and Iwant to touch on that just a
little bit, and then we're goingto talk about some local stuff
at the end.
Legislative session's stillgoing.
There's an ad out pushing backon one of the bills in front of
the legislature right now a billgoing after law-abiding
citizens instead of going aftercriminals.
And then there's something youwant to talk about with a
(05:00):
fentanyl bill, which isunimaginable, but it's happened.
Speaker 4 (05:03):
Right, we're going to talk about all of that, and
then we have some fun kind ofpatriotic ending.
Oh, it's patriotic, it's alittle like if you ever saw the
movie miracle back in the day,it might bring a little bit of
miracle back to your life.
So we'll close with that.
Speaker 3 (05:18):
Oh, that was versus the Russians and this is versus
the Canadians.
Speaker 4 (05:20):
I understand, but I just am thinking it's hockey,
it's America, come on, it'ssimilar.
And then Ella's going to joinus at the end, real quickly, and
we're going to talk about ourteen conference that we just got
back from, yeah, from Dallas.
Okay, okay, let's start then.
Speaker 3 (05:31):
All right, I want to take you back to 1997.
Good year Because I started tolook at it, there was a special
election in 1997, in the stateof New Mexico that undoubtedly,
I think, was one of the best inthe country.
Ok, now, I don't say this in apartisan way, because these are
people of both parties, but ifyou look at our three House
(05:51):
members and our two Senatemembers, it's undeniable that
the state of New Mexico in 1997had very competent people on
both sides of the aisle going toWashington to try to get
something done.
Now, you may not have alwaysagreed with them.
You may not have liked BillRichardson, or you may not have
liked Jeff Bingaman or you know,or Pete Domenici, whatever, it
doesn't matter.
That's not my point.
My point is competence here.
(06:12):
So you go back in the NorthernDistrict, which is District 3,
right, you had Bill Richardson,was our congressional leader.
Now he went on to obviously begovernor.
He went on to do a lot ofdifferent things.
All right.
So you can say a lot of thingsabout Bill Richardson, there's
no question, but you can't saythat he was a lightweight that
he didn't know what he was doing.
Right, ok, heather Wilson.
She had been elected in aspecial election in Albuquerque
(06:36):
and Heather Wilson was a greatcongressperson.
Ok, she served for eight years.
She ended up running for Senate, didn't end up winning, but she
did end up running the AirForce.
She, I think, is still down inUTEP right now running that.
She's a very competent personand excellent.
Okay, joe Skeen was CD2.
(06:57):
Joe Skeen knew a ton aboutagricultural issues.
He was a man of consequence, heheld that seat for a long, long
time and, whether, again, youlike Joe Skeen or not, he was
really good.
And then, of course, we had oursenators.
We had Pete Domenici and we hadJeff Bingaman one a Republican,
domenici and a Democrat inBingaman.
This was a roster of excellent,excellent congressional
(07:20):
representation people that Ithink you could feel like, hey
look, I may not agree with them,but I respect them and I think
that was a lineup.
Okay.
And then I started to thinkabout you know, where were we in
1997?
Where was our leadership in thecountry?
How did we view government?
How did we view a governmentthat now has has spiraled and
(07:40):
become so big, right, out ofcontrol, right, and so which
Doge is showing?
Speaker 4 (07:45):
us which Doge is showing absolutely Blazing red
lights?
Yes, absolutely.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
But how different was it in 1997?
Again the same time we had thisrepresentation in Congress.
I want you to start.
This is a clip from Al Gore,and then we're going to jump to
2011 with Barack Obama.
Listen to the way they talkabout government.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
This report tells us how to cut waste, cut red tape,
streamline the bureaucracy,change procurement rules, change
the personnel rules and createa government that works better
and costs less.
Speaker 9 (08:24):
I've read it and where it says the president
should, the president will Amongthe 800 recommendations
eliminating 12% of the federalworkforce, merging some
government agencies like the FBI, the DEA and the Bureau of
Alcohol, tobacco and Firearms,closing hundreds of government
offices outside Washington.
From the day I took office, oneof the commitments that I made
to the American people was thatwe would do a better job here in
(08:45):
Washington in rooting outwasteful spending.
We thought that it was entirelyappropriate for our governments
and our agencies to try to rootout waste, large and small, in
a systematic way.
It means cutting some programsthat I think are worthy but we
may not be able to afford rightnow.
(09:06):
A lot of the action is inCongress and legislative, but in
the meantime, we don't need towait for Congress in order to do
something about wastefulspending that's out there.
We haven't seen as much actionout of Congress as we'd like,
and that's why we launched, onour own initiative, the campaign
to cut waste, and we're goingto keep on finding every
(09:27):
possible way that we can do that, even if Congress is not active
.
Okay, there you go.
Speaker 3 (09:33):
All right, so so this isn't like.
Speaker 4 (09:35):
This isn't new for Trump.
Like this, which you know, Ithink we see a lot of our state
leaders firing up getting mad atTrump about some of this
cutting of the waste or lookinginto cutting waste, and they're
like whoa, whoa, whoa.
You don't have the rights, youdon't have the.
You know you can't hire Elon todo this.
What are you doing?
You're out of step with theconstitution.
That's even rich.
Speaker 3 (09:55):
Absolutely true, and I want to relay a story that
Heather Wilson told me back in,I think, 2014.
I was thinking about runningfor the house and didn't end up
running, but I called her and wehad a discussion and she said
something really interestingduring that phone call.
She said well, first of all,she told me about how difficult
it is to raise money, and youhave to be ready to do that.
Speaker 7 (10:13):
But number two beyond that which we've learned.
Speaker 3 (10:16):
but beyond that, she said there are two types of
people that get elected toCongress.
There are workhorses and thereare show horses.
And she goes.
You need to be a workhorse ifyou're going to do it, and she
goes.
But there are plenty of showhorses.
And I'll tell you what she wasabsolutely right, I fear.
Now in the state of New Mexicowe have five show horses.
(10:36):
We have five people who aremore interested in the politics
than the policy.
We have people that are moreinterested in a political fight
than solving problems and I fearthat even if they did want to
solve the problems, theycouldn't.
They couldn't if they tried.
You have Melanie Stansbury inCD1.
You have Teresa LedgerFernandez, cd3, gay Vasquez in
(10:58):
CD2.
These are people who areunfortunately showing right now
and some of the things they'resaying, which we'll go over that
they're just not serious.
Our senators are not people ofweight and seriousness that are
up for the challenge of what weare facing.
I fear, unfortunately and it isreally, really evident as you
(11:19):
go forward here and you look atwhere we are with Doge, which is
exactly what you mentioned thereaction to Doge, the reaction
to cutting out waste, fraud andabuse.
And Melanie Stansbury is agreat example.
You're looking at her righthere.
Okay, she's been one of theleading people that is
gaslighting and doing everythingshe can to make sure that we
(11:40):
don't have an accountablegovernment, and that scares me
to death because of where we'reheaded economically.
And so I think something youpointed out when we were talking
about some of her comments shewent out and stood in front of
the EPA, the ultimate show horsemove.
She goes in front of the EPAand the question is what does
(12:01):
she say?
Does she say a reasoned?
Look, we have to cut out waste,fraud and abuse, but we also
have to make sure we protect thepeople of this country.
Does she say that?
Speaker 4 (12:10):
No, she actually said something that I can't believe.
I just can't believe sheactually said it.
I'm going to let her say itbecause I don't ever want to get
caught on film saying what shesaid.
So let's just roll her realquick and you can decide.
So let's just roll her realquick and you can decide.
Do you think this was aneducated?
Speaker 10 (12:29):
thing to say when it came to the EPA.
I don't think there is anyonein America that wants to wake up
tomorrow and find out that theyhave to boil their water
because the EPA's workforce hasbeen escorted out of the
building.
So we're here to make sure thatthat doesn't happen and we
provide appropriate oversight.
Speaker 3 (12:44):
OK.
Speaker 4 (12:45):
Boiling our water.
It's getting so bad we'relooking into cutting wasteful
spending that you're going tohave to boil your own water.
I mean, when I first saw that,I was like she's got to be
kidding, right, like she andpeople have to.
And this is, I think, whatbothers me about this is that
she gets up there, shegrandstands with her microphone,
says ridiculously inaccurate,gaslighting, fearful,
(13:07):
fear-mongering comments andthere's a group of people that
actually believe her.
And I'm just thinking don'tgive her a microphone unless she
has any sort of common senseand ability to speak on
something which she keepsshowing over and over and over
that she does not.
Speaker 3 (13:24):
Well beyond giving her a microphone.
I mean she just doesn't servethe people that she's elected to
serve.
I mean, this is just sopatently untrue.
Does she believe this?
Speaker 7 (13:35):
I know, no, I don't believe.
She must know that now.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
Please, I mean, give me a break If you cut part of
the.
Remember, go back to thatClinton clip Right.
They talked about cutting 12%of the federal workforce.
They talked about combiningdifferent federal bureaucracies
together.
They talked about all thisstuff that needs to be done, and
, again, it doesn't necessarilymean less funding.
She's talked about educationtoo, which we'll get to some of
her more ridiculous comments.
We're going to get to more ofher ridiculous comments, okay,
(13:59):
but that show horse move rightWas so above and beyond reality
that it just shows we havepeople serving who are not up to
the task, who are not seriousand who are not doing anything.
So we are in financial straits,okay, we're closing in on $40
trillion in debt and we're aboutto explain why that's going to
(14:20):
become an even bigger deal herein a second.
Okay, but back in 1997, we hada better team, we had problems
that weren't as bad as they arenow and we address them more
seriously Now.
Did they get everything done?
Absolutely not, and bothparties are to blame for the
massive amount of spendingthat's happened in Washington.
But we had better peopletackling smaller problems.
(14:42):
So that's two problems.
Number three but we had betterpeople tackling smaller problems
.
So that's two problems.
Number three we had a media in1997 that if you walked in and
said ridiculous things, theywould say wait a minute, that's
not true.
Or they would push back andgive both sides of a story.
Well, let's go to KRQE where wegot a story from them that is
(15:03):
one of the worst I've ever seenfrom someone Someone who did not
bother at all to tell bothsides of any story.
She absolutely went out and shegave Melanie Stansbury the
field to say whatever she wanted.
Not only did she not push back,she reinforced everything and
(15:25):
then made a ridiculous tag atthe end of the story that was
incredibly biased.
This is why people are sofrustrated, because we don't
have anyone trying to holdpeople to account when we
continue to head for a cliff andwhen we try to pull back and
save money and we try to holdour government officials
accountable or take thebureaucracy and shrink it down,
(15:48):
the response from media,especially kids who don't know
what they're doing, is thatthey're waving the pom poms and
they have no clue.
I mean, we should beembarrassed that this ever hit
the air, and so I want to playyou this story.
And I don't know this personfrom a whole.
I don't know who she is, nevermet her, but come on.
Speaker 4 (16:09):
Well, even if she doesn't know everything about
this, my concern is that youused to at least when I was in
the news you had to run yourstory by your news director or
whoever was in charge your maineditor your producer.
And they would verify the factsfor the story.
Yeah, I don't think if somebodylooked at this and still gave
this the green light, thenthat's on them as well.
But it's just, it's so.
I mean, just listening to this,you're like that's not true.
(16:32):
That's also not true.
Speaker 3 (16:34):
That's also not true.
And again, Stansbury can saythe most ridiculous thing she
wants to say.
Speaker 4 (16:37):
Right, but then you need to have the reporter come
back and either get the otherside of it or to push back on
Stansbury and say, actually,though you know that's actually
not true, or where are you, whyare you saying that?
Or even yeah, no, no, no,you're right, you're totally
right.
It's like ask the secondquestion or the third question
(16:58):
of this of her.
Speaker 10 (16:58):
Don't just let her run at the mouth and then you're
right the tag.
So I've talked enough, let'sshow the story, and then we can
come back and talk about it.
Yeah, yeah, okay, yeah,absolutely, goodicans, that's
New Mexico.
Speaker 5 (17:12):
Representative Melanie Stansberry, who says
she's worried the Department ofEducation will soon lose major
federal funding.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
That's not been proposed, by the way.
After Elon Musk and Dogeannounced they plan to make cuts
.
Speaker 5 (17:23):
Pause, it really quickly.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
I just want to take a quick pause there because we
will definitely dive into theDepartment of Education
potential cut there in a furtherepisode.
But I did want to say againthis is misleading because yes,
if the Department of Educationgets cut, the money, the federal
money grants pensions,everything just comes to the
states.
Ok, it's still the schoolsstill get it, the people still
(17:46):
get it here in the state.
It's just not federally.
There's not a big operation, abig government operation
controlling it.
Speaker 10 (17:53):
so saying that that money would be cut and taken
away from students and schoolsis a lie yeah, okay, keep going
department our schools arealready struggling to meet the
needs of our kids and if you gotfunding for these schools,
where are kids gonna go?
Again totally disingenuousfunding is really funding's not
at risk?
Speaker 5 (18:14):
Stansberry says those cuts would have major
consequences to public schoolsand tribal education, but that's
not her only concerns.
She also says she's worriedabout federal employee firings.
Speaker 10 (18:25):
They set into motion a series of federal funding
freezes that caused absolutechaos for the state of New
Mexico.
Countless nonprofits, the stateMedicaid system, clinics Stop
right there.
Speaker 3 (18:36):
That's just not happened.
No, okay.
And then again she says thesethings like any cut cannot
happen.
We're $40 trillion in debt.
I'm sorry, wake up and grow up.
You are sending our kids over acliff.
Speaker 10 (18:51):
We're all shut down.
Our universities are stillreporting that they're locked
out of their grant systems.
Speaker 5 (18:56):
Her concern is also with the state's national labs
and military bases.
Speaker 10 (19:00):
This is threatening the security of our families and
communities.
Speaker 3 (19:03):
Okay, hold on right there.
There has not been a single cut.
There's not been a single cutto defense spending, not at all.
Okay, now should we look atdefense and if there's things
that need to be cut causethere's waste, fraud and abuse,
heck, yes.
Speaker 4 (19:16):
Which Trump has actually said that he's going to
look into.
Like he has said, we're goingto look at the Pentagon, we're
going to look at defensespending.
So, yes, that's on the docket.
None of it's happened, so she'sjust like oh we're not only
that, it hasn't security.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
It's absolutely ridiculous.
Speaker 5 (19:34):
It's just not true.
Speaker 3 (19:34):
Okay, keep going.
Speaker 5 (19:36):
Thinking member of the Doge subcommittee,
stansberry, says she'll fightback against any funding cuts
and federal firings.
Speaker 10 (19:43):
Our strategy is really three parts.
One is take it to court.
A lot of these executive ordersand actions directly violate
the law.
Speaker 5 (19:52):
President Donald Trump created Doge, with Musk at
its helm, with a directive toshrink the federal government by
firing workers, cuttingprograms and slashing federal
programs.
All part of his quote SaveAmerica agenda.
Speaker 3 (20:05):
That is the tag.
That is horrendous too.
I mean, that is not what Dogedoes, that is propaganda.
That is awful.
Speaker 4 (20:13):
Well, I'm wondering where she got the tag
information, cause usually, likewhen I was a reporter and you
had to add a tag at the end,sometimes you were just like,
okay, for more information, youcan go to their website for more
information, you can do this.
Speaker 3 (20:23):
Whatever, where'd she get that information and write
that tag from Stansberry'speople, cause that's what it
sounds like I don't know and itjust is, but it is absolutely
not even even the most harshassessment of Doge.
That is not what it was for.
Okay, it is absolutely.
Hold people accountable, and Iget it in DC, when they actually
want you to be responsible foryour budget instead of coming
(20:45):
back to, americans are stillgetting crushed by inflation for
more money.
Why don't you guys tighten upyour house, right, but?
But this girl goes and saysthis stuff and runs a story that
just absolutely isn't true.
So this gets back to my overallpoint, which was we had better
people with a smaller challengeand we had a media that cared
(21:05):
enough to at least address theissues and try to give people
the information instead of thisstuff now, and that's what
scares me.
And then you see what we'reheaded for.
Speaker 4 (21:15):
Well, and I do think that's why we're seeing such an
uptick with alternative media, Imean we are seeing the podcast
world just boom.
You see shows like Megyn Kelly,Ruthless.
I mean a commentary magazine.
There's a ton of them out therethat people watch and listen to
to get their news.
Now, because of stuff like that, Because you sit there and you
watch that and if you don't knowenough about what's going, on
oh, you're like oh my gosh, howcould we possibly do this?
Speaker 3 (21:37):
So it's very frightening.
Speaker 4 (21:39):
I feel like it's a disservice to voters and to your
viewers.
Speaker 3 (21:43):
Just do your job.
Speaker 4 (21:44):
The incompetence Well , ask the question, Run it by
somebody else and say is thisreally what Doge is about?
Speaker 3 (21:51):
Doge is about.
Is this really what they said?
Well, and again, if Sandsburywants to say those ridiculous
things, then you turn back andsay there have been no cuts here
.
Or you say critics would say ordo this, it's crazy.
I know this is crazy, krqe, butyou know what you should do Get
a second source, get somebodyon the other side who says, no,
that's not what's happening,they're not doing that.
Okay.
So the reason all of this kindof infuriated me was because you
(22:15):
look at the problems that we'rein in the next six to nine
months and I don't think enoughof this has been talked about.
And you talked about the MeganKelly podcast and who she had on
on Friday, and we want to takea little piece of that for you
to hear, but we want you to kindof lay the groundwork on this.
Speaker 4 (22:29):
Right, Okay.
So on Friday she had a coupleof guests on from the all in
podcast.
Speaker 3 (22:33):
Right.
Speaker 4 (22:34):
And really what was a little frightening about this
was saying you know, trump wassaying there's going to be some
pain up up front, more thanlikely.
Like there's not going to besome, we have a.
We're potentially looking atdoing a massive refinance of our
, of our national debt.
Is that the fairest way ofputting that?
I mean, that's basically whatthey're kind of talking about a
little bit.
Speaker 3 (22:50):
Yeah, yeah.
Well, a third of it, roughly aquarter to a third but soon it
has to happen with it.
Well, we'll let them explain ithere.
So Chamath Palihapitiya okay Isone of the guys who hosts it on
the all in podcast.
So he was on Megyn Kelly and heexplained it.
It's a couple minutes long, butI think it's super smart and
it'll help you understand theposition we're in and it and it
(23:19):
shows you how ridiculous peoplelike Melanie Stansbury are when
they go and they gaslighteverybody when you see the
problems that we're facing.
So I want you to listen toChamath here and just listen to
what he has to say about thisfrom the Megyn Kelly podcast.
Speaker 11 (23:28):
Last couple of years , the Biden administration, and
specifically Biden and Yellen,did one thing that I hope no
government afterwards ever does,which is they were effectively
speculating on rates, and whatthey did was you know, the
Treasury's job is to finance thegovernment right.
Their job is to go into thebond market, sell bonds, use
(23:50):
that money and redirect it toHHS, to Social Security, to
defense, wherever they financedit with all of this short-term
paper and part of it was theybelieved that inflation would be
in check and interest rates inthe future would fall.
So, whatever happened, we wouldbe able to go back into the
(24:10):
markets and borrow later forcheaper.
It turned out that was anenormously incorrect assumption
and they should not have madethat decision.
So today, what Trump and Besanthave to do is extremely
difficult.
They have about $10 trillion socall it 25%, 30% of our total
debt.
We have to refinance in thenext six to nine months, and
(24:35):
we're doing it against abackdrop where now inflation is
ticking back up and rates areticking back up.
So why is that important?
It's important because now, allof a sudden, like what does
this budget bill look like andwhat can we actually accomplish?
There's the Senate version,which is super light, and it
says let's just deal with bordersecurity and military.
And then there's what sort ofTrump has asked for, which is
(24:57):
the House version, which is this, quote unquote one big,
beautiful bill.
The problem is those two thingsare on a collision course, and
the big bill may be a little bittoo early in the sense that, to
exactly your point, we don'tknow how bad the situation is.
And if Besant goes into themarket and gets clubbed over the
head and now all of a sudden wehave $10 trillion that we have
(25:18):
to borrow at five or 5.5%, Ithink it's gonna be really bad
for the US economy, In whichcase there will be no choice
except to make very deep cuts ina broad-based way.
So we almost need to buy sometime and figure out how bad the
situation is, which is why weneed the air cover to sort of
see how much Doge uncovers,because that'll make the problem
(25:40):
less at the end of the day,right, Because cutting that
stuff will mean that's fewerfixed programs we have to cut.
So that's kind of where we are.
So I think it's in a very we're, in a delicate 60 to 90 day
period, I think.
Speaker 3 (25:51):
OK, now knowing that, and then you look at
Stansberry's comments and yourealize how irresponsible they
are, the position that we are inwhich both parties put us in
with the debt.
Speaker 7 (26:07):
But there's no question.
Speaker 3 (26:08):
What happened recently with Biden sent this
thing out of control, ok, andTrump has a lot on his plate to
deal with here and it's going tobe a problem because again, we
are starting to see inflation goback up.
And it's just like your home.
I mean.
Imagine if I went to you and Isaid we got to refinance our
house and it's going to be,instead of we're at three point
five percent, it's going to besix.
It's just the same thingshappening with the federal
(26:28):
government and we have peoplethat are complaining that we're
trying to take out the waste,fraud and abuse, much less the
fact that we're going to have tocut things.
So we have to have seriouspeople who actually want to fix
things and get this country backon the right footing.
And I'm not saying they allrely, they all lie in one party,
but but if you will stand up,and it's just because Trump
(26:48):
supports it, I hate it and I'mgoing to fight for every single
bloated federal program we have.
We're beyond that, yeah, we'reway beyond that.
Speaker 4 (26:58):
Well, I think, even like, obviously, I didn't agree
with a lot of Obama policiesright, there was a lot of them I
didn't agree with but even himsaying listen, there's aid
programs that we want to be ableto fund, but we can't afford
them right now, so we have tocut back.
It is no different than whenyou're in a family and, of
course, your kids are like well,I want to go on vacation and I
want new clothes.
Well, we all do.
(27:23):
We all want to go out torestaurants all the time.
Right, this would be great ifwe could all do that all the
time.
But when your family budgetgets tighter, you can't.
It's, it's irresponsible tohave our leaders up there being
just just gaslighting and makingthe situation.
She talks Stansberry, uses theword chaos.
That's what she's creating bygoing out there with her
(27:45):
megaphone microphones in frontof all these buildings and
having these pressers where shesays ridiculous things.
Speaker 3 (27:50):
I might argue she doesn't create chaos because
it's so ludicrous.
People roll their eyes and goshe's not serious.
She's not a serious person.
Speaker 4 (27:57):
But I don't think enough people in the state of
New Mexico understand that.
Speaker 3 (28:01):
That's my concern here, especially when your media
treats it like a pom-pomsession, right, I mean?
Speaker 4 (28:04):
obviously the reporter is even snowed, right,
so she gets snowed and then shejust spreads that out like
wildfire.
I don't know, I just it bothersme.
Speaker 3 (28:13):
But just take his comments though, which were wise
and smart, and saying, okay, wehave a real problem here and do
we have the people with thehorsepower and the general will
to be A honest and then Bresolute in fixing these
problems?
And I don't think we do.
Speaker 4 (28:30):
And I think the other thing that's always interesting
to me about this is the factthat, since Trump's not going to
run again right there's a lotof talk about, while he likes to
be liked, he doesn't need toget reelected.
So he's going to make some hardcalls and they're going to be
painful, and he's kind of sayingthat he's like I'd like to not
have it be painful, but thingshave to change with our budget.
Like it has to change or we'rejust driving our country right
(28:51):
off a cliff, right.
So I mean, but his numbers areup, his approval numbers are
looking really good.
Speaker 3 (28:56):
He's moving very quickly here and again we've
talked about this on this showhe's moving quickly on the 80-20
issues, right, the issues thatmost Americans agree on, and
those numbers actually work.
This was from ABC today.
It's a Marquette poll actually.
It said the governmentrecognition that there are two
sexes 63 percent support that.
Deporting people here illegally60 percent support that and, by
(29:17):
the way, that's not justcriminals.
Speaker 4 (29:20):
I know they do.
They believe it.
Speaker 3 (29:21):
Yeah, expanding oil and gas production 60 percent
and declare an emergency at theborder 59 percent.
So those numbers are big.
Now the question is you knowyou're seeing Trump move very,
very quickly here and he isdoing something that I think is
very interesting, and ScottJennings talked about it on CNN.
Speaker 6 (29:36):
Momentum begets momentum.
Trump created tremendouspolitical momentum for this kind
of change by winning thenational popular vote and a real
mandate in the ElectoralCollege.
He extended the momentum byhaving a really good transition
and, of course, his first threeplus weeks in office.
He's continued that, and somomentum begets momentum and the
polling is pretty clear theAmerican people like what he's
(29:57):
doing.
There was some focus groupreports in Axios this morning.
Swing state voters in Arizonawere saying, yeah, we like the
idea of cutting the federalgovernment, we like the idea of
what Trump is doing and we'rewilling to give him some space
to do it.
So the reason you move fast isbecause you have a mandate to
move fast and because it's thefulfillment of campaign promises
(30:18):
.
I think in Washington it's alltoo common to talk big during a
campaign, get into office,things slow down, things get on
the back burner and then fouryears later you say, well, gosh,
sorry, we never got around tothat.
That's obviously not what Trumpand Musk are doing this time
and I think the American peoplequite like a politician who's
willing to keep their promiseson day one instead of putting
them off until, well, it's toolate.
Speaker 3 (30:38):
No, it's super smart point, I think, because that's
the one thing he's done in ourlifetimes.
I'm not sure we've ever seensomeone keep their promises.
Speaker 4 (30:45):
whether you like every single promise or not, he
is ticking them off which is whyI think it's so comical when
you see, like our state leaderssaying people didn't vote for
this, people voted for lowerprices and lower gas prices, and
I'm like, no, we actually votedfor waste to be found out.
We knew about this plan.
He talked openly about thisplan.
He even talked about it in hisfirst term in office.
(31:07):
So when we have state leadersthat say ridiculous things like
that, I'm like no peopleactually were paying attention
to him during the campaign.
Listen to what he said and theyvoted for him.
And he's doing it.
So I just you know the, thefighting him on every step, the
you know the lawfare against himon every single thing he's
trying to do.
I it's, it's annoying and it'sstarting to you know it.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
Just, it just drove, it feels like it drones on and
on it may, but at the same time,if you're Trump and you're
continually pushing these thingswhere you're on the right side
of the issue, okay, keep going,but the problem we're running
into is our problems arebecoming bigger than a lot of
these little ancillary fightsthat I think end up people just
kind of saying give me a break.
Speaker 4 (31:46):
Right on the social issues.
Okay, so JD Vance, our guy,great public speaker.
I love this guy.
He goes out to Munich at asecurity conference.
Speaker 3 (31:55):
Yeah, it's a big deal .
The Munich Security Conference,yes, and he is there and he's
kind of talking.
Speaker 4 (31:59):
He kind of lets it rip about free speech and maybe
how the Germans aren't doingsuch a good job.
It's not just the Germans.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
Yeah, I mean all over Europe right.
Yeah, so the first clip, Ithink, is more of a broad side
of the whole thing.
Let's listen to that.
Speaker 8 (32:13):
A lot about what you need to defend yourselves from,
and of course, that's important,but what has seemed a little
bit less clear to me andcertainly, I think, to many of
the citizens of Europe, is whatexactly it is that you're
defending yourselves for.
What is the positive visionthat animates this shared
(32:33):
security compact that we allbelieve is so important?
And I believe deeply that thereis no security if you are
afraid of the voices, theopinions and the conscience that
guide your very own people.
Europe faces many challenges,but the crisis this continent
faces right now, the crisis Ibelieve we all face together, is
(32:57):
one of our own making.
If you're running in fear ofyour own voters, there is
nothing America can do for you.
Nor, for that matter, is thereanything that you can do for the
American people who elected meand I.
Speaker 3 (33:13):
President Trump is why he finished OK.
So his broader point is you'rescared of your own people.
You don't want them speakingout, and so it's interesting and
I started to think what'sspecific examples is he talking
about?
And he, he brought the receipts.
Speaker 4 (33:27):
OK.
Speaker 8 (33:29):
Concerningly I look to our very dear friends, the
United Kingdom, where thebackslide away from conscience
rights has placed the basicliberties of religious Britons
in particular, in the crosshairs.
A little over two years ago,the British government charged
Adam Smith Connor, a 51-year-oldphysiotherapist and an army
veteran, with the heinous crimeof standing 50 meters from an
(33:53):
abortion clinic and silentlypraying for three minutes.
Meters from an abortion clinicand silently praying for three
minutes, not obstructing anyone,not interacting with anyone,
just silently praying on his own.
After British law enforcementspotted him and demanded to know
what he was praying for, adamreplied simply it was on behalf
of the unborn son.
He and his former girlfriendhad aborted years before.
(34:16):
Now.
The officers were not moved.
Adam was found guilty ofbreaking the government's new
buffer zones law, whichcriminalizes silent prayer and
other actions that couldinfluence a person's decision
within 200 meters of an abortionfacility.
He was sentenced to paythousands of pounds in legal
costs to the prosecution.
(34:37):
He was sentenced to paythousands of pounds in legal
costs to the prosecution.
Now I wish I could say thatthis was a fluke, a one-off
crazy example of a badly writtenlaw being enacted against a
single person.
But no, this last October, justa few months ago, the Scottish
(34:57):
government began distributingletters to citizens whose houses
lay within so-called safeaccess zones, warning them that
even private prayer within theirown homes may amount to
breaking the law.
Jeez Okay.
Speaker 4 (35:04):
I mean, that's just so scary, it's terrifying.
I mean anybody, and givenAmerica has a lot of freedoms
that other countries don't have,but you don't necessarily think
of Scotland or the UK as one ofthose countries that would come
down on prayer would come downon any religious freedom that
you would have that doesn'timpose on other people praying
inside of your own home.
Speaker 6 (35:24):
Yeah.
Speaker 4 (35:24):
That's going to be now against the law.
Be careful.
I mean, I know that if you're abeliever at all or you read
scripture at all, it's.
We're definitely warned aboutthis time coming, but it is uh,
it's just not what you ever wantto see, and I think walking
into the Munich SecurityConference and letting them have
it with both barrels to saywhat are you doing?
Speaker 3 (35:41):
Stop going down this road of trying to police.
Speech is the right thing to do.
And he was backed up.
We won't play it tonight ortoday but he was backed up by
Marco Rubio, the secretary ofstate, who said, look, they
needed to hear this.
And so these are the sort ofthings that need to happen.
So we'll go into local here ina second, but it just is one of
those moments that that you lookat and go.
(36:02):
You know we're in a world andwe're in a really tumultuous
time, in a time where where Ithink it's super important to
make sure that that you'repaying attention to where your
country stands and standing up,and again, we don't all agree on
everything.
Heck, I don't know what youpray for at night.
You know what I mean, no matterwhere you are.
But you should have the rightto do it, and you should have
(36:22):
the right to do it on a publicstreet corner.
Right you know, I mean, andthese sorts of things can go
downhill very, very quickly, andI think it's important that
America takes a lead on theworld stage and says don't do
this.
Okay, well, we've got somelocal stuff.
Speaker 4 (36:35):
I want to talk about HB 136, which was killed in
committee earlier this past week.
I I followed John Block.
He's one of our state reps.
He writes opinion posts.
That's where I pulled thisstory from, and I also saw it
shared on Twitter.
So I wanted us to talk about it, even though it's been killed.
It's frustrating to see why itwas killed, because I do think
when we talk about crime bills,this is something that aligns
(36:57):
with people who want to fight oncrime.
So let's just take a look atthis really quickly, what it
says here.
It says on Friday, new MexicoDemocrat leaders in the state
house, government elections andIndian affairs committee voted
against a measure sponsored byand I get this it was sponsored
by a Democrat representative,charlotte Little of Albuquerque,
to mandate quote increasedsentencing for individuals
convicted of traffickingcontrolled substances under blah
(37:18):
.
Quote increased sentencing forindividuals convicted of
trafficking controlledsubstances under blah, blah,
blah when the offense involvesfentanyl.
Ok, and it goes on to say theDemocrats in the committee voted
against the legislation, wererepresentatives.
These are the people that saidno to this.
The Democrats in the committeevoted against the legislation,
with reps Joanne Ferrari thelegislation, with reps Joanne
(37:41):
Ferreri, angelica Rubio, lizThompson and Andrea Romero
opposing the measures.
Although Romero was absent fromthe last bill's vote, both
votes in the committee killedthe bills, with reps John Block
and Stephanie Lord votingagainst tabling the life-saving
legislation.
Now this is what wasinteresting to me.
Ferreri claimed that sincefentanyl, which is rarely
prescribed, is technically alegal substance and it should
not be included.
Rubio claimed and according toJohn Block wrongly claimed that
(38:06):
since a drug addict whobreastfeeds her baby could be
charged under HB 136, shecouldn't support the legislation
.
Speaker 3 (38:14):
Yeah, I mean this is the kind of stuff that tougher
fentanyl law legislation.
Yeah, I mean this is the kindof stuff that tougher fentanyl
law.
Now, everybody was, you know,waving pom poms that that they
pass something to do with crimehere, which again, good, pass
whatever you can.
But this is the sort of thingthat when we talk about not
being serious about reallyaddressing crime, it's something
like this where it's like, ifwe cannot stiffen, you know,
penalties against people usingfentanyl or people selling
(38:36):
fentanyl, it's.
I just think it's maddening towatch.
Speaker 4 (38:40):
Cause if you're going to find like one weird thing,
like one off track thing thatcould potentially happen down
the road and you can't pass abill that actually impacts
something that I mean fentanylis a major deal here.
The one thing I didn't get totell you really fast was it says
that, according to a statistic,your deal here.
The one thing I didn't get totell you really fast is it says
that, according to statistics,65% of drug deaths in our state
(39:00):
are due to fentanyl.
Speaker 3 (39:01):
Yeah, it's an absolute crisis.
Speaker 4 (39:03):
So the fact that we're not making tougher laws on
people that are offenders, thatuse that drug or sell that drug
, I don't understand it.
It made no sense to me, so Iwanted to make sure we just
shined a little light on thatRight.
Speaker 3 (39:14):
Another bill that I think is of concern and this
gets dovetails to your point,which is, address the things
that are hurting New Mexicansand don't go after law abiding
citizens there's Senate Bill 279, which is getting a lot of play
online.
A lot of people are talkingabout it and we're even seeing
ads about Senate Bill 279.
Speaker 4 (39:33):
Yeah, there is a defend.
New Mexico has put out thisbrand new ad that's really going
after this bill.
Specifically, it's attackingthis bill to show people like,
hey, wake up, because this billis not going to be good for law
abiding citizens, who happen tobe law abiding gun owners.
So let's take a look at this ad.
Speaker 7 (39:48):
Crime is way up, but the number of criminals behind
bars is down 20 percent.
It's catch and release.
Lawmakers still refuse to gettough on criminals.
Instead, they want to ban gunsfor law-abiding citizens, called
one of the most extreme guncontrol bills in the country,
banning the most popularsporting rifles, handguns
(40:09):
favored by women, even somehunting rifles.
Contact your legislator.
Speaker 3 (40:13):
Go after criminals, not law-abiding citizens Paid
for by Defend New Mexico, and Ithink the objection to this bill
is because they're and thisgets into how guns fire and
gas-operated guns.
But basically there are allsorts of gas-operated guns that
would be banned and we'retalking about, in some cases,
small firearms that women usefor self-defense some hunting
(40:35):
rifles, some sporting rifles.
This is the kind of thing thatthey go tackle and then you
realize wait a minute, why arewe not, you know, passing laws
that are going after people thatare that are actually breaking
our laws?
No criminal is going to careabout a gun law, they don't care
.
So let's address that insteadof going after people who do
care and who do follow the law.
Speaker 4 (40:56):
Right, it just seems like again like it's, it's like
a, it's like something shinyover here, like we're going to
pass this bill over here.
We're talking about this billover here that we can say it's
fighting crime yeah, it's brightand shiny and we just say the
word crime bill and hopefullyvoters don't pay enough
attention to that.
That's really what I Let meshow you this, it's politics
over policy again again, again,again.
(41:17):
It's just so.
It's crazy.
Ok, let's end on a couple ofgood stories.
Speaker 3 (41:20):
OK, all right.
So when I thought was prettyfunny.
So the US and Canada werefacing off in the four nations
hockey, ok, and it's basicallythe United States, canada,
finland and Sweden.
Ok, and all four countries playbest two records, go in and
play in the final.
Four countries play best tworecords, go in and play in the
final.
Okay, so already this thing hasturned pretty funny.
All right, so they're inMontreal on Saturday night, the
(41:43):
United States versus Canada, andyou know all the the fight back
and forth about Canada becomingthe 51st state.
Canada not thrilled with that,apparently.
So I want you to listen to whathappens when they play our
national anthem, cause theCanadians boo us.
And then, literally within fiveseconds of the start of the
(42:03):
game, all of a sudden, canadaand the US, we have three
separate fights, three guysfighting it out, just fisticuffs
, and then the game goes off.
So just watch this.
Okay, right, as the game starts, here we go boom, I mean, they
(42:25):
just drop gloves immediately,right, and so, with three
different fights, I would argue,the united states comes out on
top.
You know three.
Okay, all right.
And then all of a sudden,canada takes a 1-0 lead.
Canada takes a 1-0 lead, andthen we even it right here Boom,
1-1.
Okay, now, this is notequivalent to you know, the
(42:46):
miracle on ice, but still it waspretty cool.
So it's 1-1.
Here comes the US, comes down2-1 right there, and then we add
an empty netter and beat Canadathree to one after they booed
our national anthem.
So now what's going to end uphappening here?
Most likely is here's the emptynetter.
What's likely to happen here iswe play, I think, sweden coming
(43:08):
up here in a day.
It won't matter, cause we'vealready won our first two games.
We beat Finland, we beat Canada, so we're in the final.
Okay, canada's probably goingto advance to the final and
we're going to play again onThursday night.
Speaker 7 (43:24):
So now it's so funny that like the United States and
Canada's turned into like this.
Speaker 3 (43:25):
I mean so we'll see what happens, but it was pretty
funny to watch.
And you see the, you know youget booed in the national anthem
.
Also, these guys are, you know,throwing blows and then we end
up winning the game.
We'll see what happens onThursday night.
You know Canada is going tocome back for revenge, but you
want to talk about compelling.
You're going to see an audienceon that Thursday night game.
If it's the United Statesversus Canada, which I think it
will be, it's going to be amassive audience.
(43:46):
I mean, people are going towatch.
Speaker 4 (43:47):
Well, there's so much tension.
I mean clearly, I mean hockeyis known for fighting.
I mean you know it's known forlike it's half boxing.
No, it's not.
Yes, it is no stop, yes, it isanyway.
So, um, but when tensions arethat fierce and the game hasn't
even started yet we're gonnastart punching.
Speaker 3 (44:03):
I'm sorry, that's boxing guy oh, those were at the
beginning.
Speaker 4 (44:06):
Yeah, they're not even like they haven't even hit
the puck yet and they'rethrowing blows.
Speaker 3 (44:10):
But agree, but usually that does not happen in
international competition rightso, like in the olympics, you're
not fighting.
You know, know, likeeverybody's not fighting, it's
only in the NHL.
But what's so funny is like,literally they dropped the puck.
It's like, okay, here we go,and they knew it.
Like the second it was going tostart.
It's like it's time to fight,and it was.
I mean, I don't know.
I found it to be endlesslyhilarious.
(44:38):
Mainly it's funny.
It's a little bit of adiversion, so not bad, all right
.
Speaker 4 (44:42):
Speaking of diversion , I took Ella and some of her
buddies and we went to Dallasthis past weekend.
We went last year for theTherefore Conference it's a teen
, all girls conference,christian conference really
inspiring leaders that come inand share messages, kind of of
encouragement, and just dealingwith cultural issues.
Sadie Robinson was there.
(45:03):
She's from the duck duckdynasty and Ella.
Any words, I will let Ellaspeak as well, as we're punching
on the show.
Speaker 3 (45:10):
Yeah, it was good, it was really fun and there was a
lot of really good speakers.
I don't know what duck dynastyis, but she was a really good
speaker.
Speaker 4 (45:18):
Yeah, she really talked about family marriage.
Yeah, they're a biz.
Speaker 3 (45:22):
They basically make duck.
They make like duck call.
Speaker 4 (45:25):
Yeah, and they did a show about it.
Speaker 3 (45:26):
Stuff that you would call ducks with so you can hunt.
You basically try to attractducks with a duck call.
And it's a very unique family,a lot of characters, and they
make these little basically duckcalls where you blow into them
and they make a sound like aduck and the duck's like oh, I'm
going to go down here, and then, boom, you shoot them.
Speaker 4 (45:41):
And she did announce they're bringing that show back.
So she talked about that at theconference.
But she talked about faith,family, those kinds of things.
We had a lot of other speakers.
Jackie Hill Perry spoke andthen you can see here they did a
little dance party.
Tons of confetti came down.
Speaker 5 (45:53):
That was so fun.
That part was really fun.
Speaker 4 (45:55):
It was really fun.
They had a great worship bandout of Passion Church out of
Atlanta, just really compellingspeakers.
It was a two-day conference.
I would highly recommend itAgain.
It's called Therefore and ithappens usually February or
March, and it just took place inDallas.
Speaker 3 (46:12):
Really cool Times like this, too, to reiterate
faith and the importance of it,and people standing up and
saying keep moving forward withChrist as your North Star and
everything that you do,especially for girls that age.
That was awesome when you tookthem.
Speaker 4 (46:27):
Oh, and we learned so much too.
Even as the moms, we sit in theback, we sit all in the back
with all the leaders.
Speaker 7 (46:33):
Right.
Speaker 4 (46:33):
And then all the kids are in the front and I just
think it's just one of thoseevents that we can't mimic it as
parents, youth groups can'tmimic it.
You can't get that manycompelling.
These are women speakers thatspeak to adult conferences and
they pack them in this two daything and they really can speak
to these kids in a way that youknow is rare Sometimes.
They really can get at theirlevel.
(46:53):
And, and Ella, you had some biginfluencer.
Ella was really excited aboutmeeting some influencer there.
She ran right up to her to talkto her.
Speaker 3 (47:00):
Yeah, there's this girl named Lacey Abercrombie
that I followed on Instagram forlike five years and I saw her
walking around.
I was like I have to go say hito her.
So I went and said hi, and tooka picture and she was actually
really nice, very nice.
She was really cool, very cool.
Speaker 4 (47:19):
It was.
It was great, so I highlyrecommend it.
If you have teenage daughters,look at it.
Therefore, they also do allthese ministries now globally.
They do global ones, and if youcan't make it to Dallas, they
have virtual conferences so youcan join in virtually as well.
So just keep that in your backpocket, look it up.
Therefore, the number four Ijust I.
I think they're a really goodorganization, so I wanted to
give them a little plug, yeahabsolutely Okay.
Speaker 3 (47:41):
Well, thanks for joining us.
I know at times this wasfrustrating, but tried to.
I don't know what's going on,but we'll just keep moving.
Speaker 4 (47:47):
Just keep moving.
You guys have a greatpresident's day weekend and we
will see you back here onThursday.
Speaker 2 (47:53):
You've been listening to the no Doubt About it
podcast.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
We know we had a blast.
Make sure to like, rate andreview.
We'll be back soon, but in themeantime you can find us on
Instagram and Facebook at noDoubt About it podcast.
Speaker 3 (48:10):
No doubt about it.
Speaker 2 (48:17):
The no Doubt About it podcast is a Choose Adventure
Media production.
See you next time on no DoubtAbout it.
Speaker 3 (48:21):
There is no doubt about it.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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!