Absurd Truth: Military Heroes Reinstated Over COVID

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth welcomes back former service members who were wrongly forced to leave the military over COVID vaccines. Meanwhile, Trump floats a $5,000 “baby bonus” for new mothers to reverse declining birth rates. Dana explains why this is wealth redistribution.

Thank you for supporting our sponsors that make The Dana Show possible…

Ground News
https://Groundnews.com/DANA
Get 40% off the unlimited access Vantage plan.

Home Title Lock
https://hometitlelock.com/dana
Protect your home! Get a FREE title history report + 14 days of coverage with code DANA. Check out the Million Dollar TripleLock—terms apply.

Relief Factor
https://relieffactor.com
Turn the clock back on pain with Relief Factor. Get their 3-week Relief Factor Quick Start for only $19.95 today! 

Goldco
https://DanaLikesGold.com 
My personal gold company - get your GoldCo 2025 Gold & Silver Kit. PLUS, you could qualify for up to 10% in BONUS silver

Byrna
https://byrna.com/dana
Don’t leave yourself or your loved ones without options. Visit Byrna.com/Dana receive 10% off 

Patriot Mobile
https://patriotmobile.com/Dana
Dana’s personal cell phone provider is Patriot Mobile. Get a FREE MONTH of service code DANA

HumanN
https://humann.com
Support your metabolism and healthy blood sugar levels with Superberine by HumanN. Find it now at your local Sam’s Club next to SuperBeets Heart Chews.  

Tax Network USA
https://TNUSA.com/DANA
Don’t let the IRS’s aggressive tactics control your life; empower yourself with Tax Network USA’s support.  Reach a USA-based agent @ 1(800) 958-1000 - Don’t fight the IRS alone.

KelTec
https://KelTecWeapons.com
Keltec Innovation & Performance at its best

All Family Pharmacy
https://AllFamilyPharmacy.com/Dana
Code Dana10 for 10% off your entire order

Subscribe today and stay in the loop on all things news with The Dana Show. 
Follow us here for more daily clips, updates, and commentary:

Youtube
Facebook
Instagram
X
More Info

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Dana Lashes of sur Truth podcast sponsored by Celtech.

Speaker 2 (00:05):
It's his laugh mission to make bad decisions. It's time
for Florida man. Now.

Speaker 3 (00:18):
This guy seems kind of polite to the cops in
a weird way. A Florida man was caught on video
offering the cops of vodka spritzer during his car chase.
The man allegedly robbed a convenience store, led police in pursuit, crashed,
and then wrapped it by asking the police if they
had fun. It was on April nineteenth and the Spring

(00:41):
Lake Market in Seabring, Florida, a store had been robbed.
They called the police. They identified the suspect as thirty
nine year old Richard Christopher Smith of Miami, and he
walked out with several items from the store, including alcoholic
beverge O's and when the police arrived, they saw him
in his black Chrysler pacifica minivan dry in circles around

(01:01):
the store. The driver then took off grand theft. No.
He took off, spotted the authorities and then began to chase.
It lasted several miles. Not during the pursuit, a deputy
parked on the road ahead of the driver can be
heard on body camera footage yelling for Smith to stop,
but the suspect drove on by holding a can of
what authorities say was a vodka spritzer out of the

(01:22):
driver's side while yelling quote, I was just going to
give y all a drink, that's it. Then the police
reported they had to use spike strips to flatten the
tires in the minivan, and then he tried to ram
two patrol vehicles. He finally came to a halt after
crashing into one. They totally tasted him because he didn't
get on the ground, and then while he was handcuffed,
he to ask the officers, you guys had fun though,

(01:43):
right he's being held one hundred and twenty thousand dollars bond.
I mean he gave him a vodka spritzer and he
asked them if they had fun. Came Kane and I
are a little divided on this story. So a Florida
man was caught on camera pinning down an eleven year
old girl that he thought was egging his house. He said,
the Hillsboro County Sheriff said he you can't. I mean,
he legit tackled her. He thought that she was egging

(02:05):
his home.

Speaker 2 (02:06):
All right, now tell everyone your position.

Speaker 3 (02:08):
Forty three year old Marris moved to Okay, King's like,
that's crazy that he tackled her. If a kid was
egging my house, I would beat that kid's ass. Yes,
I would tackle them and beat them in front of
their parents, and then I beat their parents.

Speaker 4 (02:22):
You're a girl, you can tackle another girl.

Speaker 3 (02:24):
I would tackle a boy too.

Speaker 2 (02:26):
Yeah, you're a girl, you could tackle them.

Speaker 3 (02:28):
So your point is that a man can't do this
because it's a man that's sexist.

Speaker 2 (02:32):
Yes.

Speaker 4 (02:33):
No, a man who is clearly one hundred and fifty
pounds above her is literally physically tackling her about eggs. Well,
let's get real here.

Speaker 3 (02:44):
I think he should have confirmed that it was her
before he did it. That's his mistake.

Speaker 2 (02:48):
Is that really where the mistake is?

Speaker 3 (02:49):
Yes, that was a mistake. Mistakes should have because if
she was egging his house, I'd be like, get it really.

Speaker 2 (02:54):
His only mistake?

Speaker 3 (02:55):
Yes, it's his mistake.

Speaker 2 (02:56):
So the tackling of the girl is Yes.

Speaker 3 (02:58):
He shouldn't have tackled her until he confirmed there's some mistakes. Now, No, No,
he should have confirmed it first before he tackled her.

Speaker 4 (03:04):
Okay, so wait a minute. He shouldn't be tackling her
in any way, shape or form because of eggs.

Speaker 3 (03:13):
I'm old school. I'm going to beat your kids with
whatever thing I have and tackle them, I believe. Look,
if you don't discipline your kids, I sure as hell will.
I don't agree with I would expect society to do
the same. If one of my kids are out wild,
in which they never would, I expect somebody to slap
them with her.

Speaker 2 (03:29):
There's another coin. Then think about this. What if it's your.

Speaker 3 (03:33):
I just explained it. No, But if my daughter was
egg in someone's house, seat her ass, yes, that's right.
If I didn't, if I do it before I do,
because she ain't walk in after, he.

Speaker 2 (03:45):
Didn't confirm that she actually did it. He just suspected
she did.

Speaker 3 (03:49):
This is my whole mantra for misbehaving kids for life, set.

Speaker 2 (03:56):
For the radio audience. Flip flop.

Speaker 3 (04:01):
That's the only way to deal with them.

Speaker 4 (04:03):
But if it's my daughter and it wasn't confirmed she
did it in yeah.

Speaker 3 (04:06):
I wouldn't attack a kid if I didn't. If I
was like, well, I'm not sure, but it could be you.
Now you confirm at first.

Speaker 4 (04:13):
If somebody wrongfully tackled your daughter, which was my question,
what would you do?

Speaker 3 (04:18):
Well, I'd be like, well, what was she doing? Why?

Speaker 2 (04:21):
Why?

Speaker 3 (04:21):
Why did you? I mean, if she was on your
she was on his property. I'm not saying, Look, I'm
not defending the guy. I'm saying he should have confirmed
it first, because but I also feel like we live
in a society where you can take a knife into
a tent and stab somebody to death, and hey, it's okay,
justice for that guy, you know. I'm like, where does
it end.

Speaker 4 (04:41):
I'm just saying, if you're going to say that I
hate old people, it sounds like you're defending this guy.
And that's where I was coming from. So you're defending
a No, he's.

Speaker 3 (04:48):
Forty three year old, but he's older. Yeah, but it
was in Tampa. He uh, he's a parking enforcement specialist
and they said, oh no, he should have done this.
You know, it's unacceptable. What gets me though, is there
was a woman recording it who just heard get it.
All she did was go get off her, get off her.
If I was a woman and I thought that there

(05:10):
was a child being manhandled by an adult and they
needed help, I'm not going to stand there and record it.
I'm gonna pop you. That's the thing. Like he is
damn lucky that there was nobody there that thought he
was trying to kidnap this girl, because he'd be dead.
He'd be dead. You got you cannot just oh man,
there's so many variables here, but yeah, spare the rotten,

(05:32):
spoiled child. That's exactly what happens. Exactly what happens. You
gotta be careful some of this stuff. A man dives
into a lake to save a wounded eagle. This guy
needs to be getting a medal from Potis. He saved
a life of an eagle that fell into his a lake,
into his backyard. The bird was injured during a fight
with another eagle. The eagles stable has a long road
to recovery at the Wildlife Center of Southwest Florida. Oh

(05:54):
my gosh, right, super, that's the most symbolic story I've
ever heard of my life. Of our partners that help
bring you the program, it's our friends over at Keltech,
the PR fifty seven chambered in five seven, one of
the newest This is such a great this is a
must have. Now. I've encouraged people before to go and
get things like you know, the the KSG, which I
also think is a must have, but you absolutely must

(06:17):
have the PR fifty seven rotary barrel pistol. First off,
it's forty percent lighter than the next lightest five to seven.
It's slimmer, it's lighter, And how do they do that?
They have an innovative rotary barrel. But they also have
a unique top loading design that replaces traditional magazines with
stripper clips. That creates a slimmer carry profile. And you
got a twenty plus one capacity, super low recoil. I mean,

(06:39):
it's just like butter perfect for everyday carry. Like I
could actually legitimately conceal carry this this five to seven.
I can't with others, but I could. Thus the MSRP
only three ninety nine. It is an absolute winner. It's
the first of its kind. Caltech PR fifty seven rotary
barrel Pistol chambered in five seven. Visit kel Tech Weapons
dot com to learn more innovation performance, Celtech k e

(07:00):
Ltec Weapons dot com. Tell them Dana. Sn't you.

Speaker 5 (07:06):
Not able to catch all three hours of the Dana Show?
Subscribe to the full podcast and get news and laughs
delivered in short, easy to digest episodes ideal for your
busy lifestyle on YouTube, Apple or wherever you get your podcast.

Speaker 1 (07:21):
We're Russell welcoming back former service members who were wrongly
forced to leave the military. More than eighty seven hundred
service members were involuntarily separated for not taking an experimental
COVID nineteen vaccine. Others were more informally pushed out or
decided to get out. We are welcoming actively back.

Speaker 3 (07:44):
Those warriors of conscience. Amen, We've set letters out, we're
seeking them out.

Speaker 2 (07:49):
We want them back.

Speaker 1 (07:50):
They never should have been forced come back quickly.

Speaker 3 (07:55):
Personal and Readiness Department.

Speaker 1 (07:56):
Is working in real time to make that process more
and more efficient.

Speaker 2 (08:00):
More and more direct every single day.

Speaker 3 (08:03):
Good. They should, they should be and they should they
should get back, pay back everything absolutely because that was
insane what they did, absolutely insane. What what blows my mind?
And I brought this up. I mentioned this before. We
sat down with uh Army General and Futures Command and
they were talking about recruitment. Now it's sex sectf Hegseth
by the way, just then speaking about welcoming back those

(08:25):
soldiers that were shoved out because of the RONA jab requirements.
But I remember saying something to the effect of, well,
maybe you know, we wouldn't have such a problem with
recruitment if people you know, didn't hadn't seen military members
being forced out because they wouldn't get an experimental injection
that wasn't even a therapeutic, much less a vaccine, and

(08:49):
that was just allowed to happen. It's asinine. So yeah,
they're owed a lot. Welcome back to the program, Dana
lash with you at the bottom of this second. Already
it's weird. I almost said first that I'm so I
am happy to see that, but now we've got to
get other things situated. I this this fall out, over this,
this these Pentagon leaks, it enrages me. As I said yesterday,

(09:12):
you know, these people are in these positions. They serve
the You serve the office, you serve the position, You
serve the land. You don't serve a politician. You do
your duty, and your duty is not to divide and
create fodder that can destabilize national security and contribute to

(09:37):
a reduction in people who seek to serve. And I
he's got it cut out for him. I hear from
people all the time that they think that you know
these changes can be made instantaneously, and that just because
Trump is in the White House and hag Seth is
now where he is, that everything in the DD in
Pentagon is going to change. It's not. It's a fight

(09:58):
because you have to remember how these people have been
generationally entrenched. It would be great if you could just
do it with one appointment or one election cycle, but
that's unfortunately not how it operates. It's not how it works.
It takes a long time to get these people out
because they they're entrenched. They were they got these positions
because they were appointed, they weren't elected, and they stay

(10:21):
there and then they make themselves indispensable because they know
how everything works, and they count on you to let
them know how everything works so they can get everything done.
By the way. That's why I one of the big
reasons I opposed term limits. I think term limits are unconstitutional.
I grew with the Founders and the Federalist papers on this,
particularly Hamilton even Adams. They wrote that one of the

(10:45):
things you have to be aware of is if you
have constantly changing you're well, you're removing the vote from
the person. Voters are the term limit your vote is
the term limit because people, the people that I have
seen who argue the most for term limits are people
who've never canvas for a politician in their lives, phone bank, one,
door to door, nothing, nothing. They don't kind of be honest,

(11:06):
these people don't do anything at all whatsoever to get votes,
and as a result, they just want to farm out
to the government for term limits. That they want to
farm out their duty to the government for term limits.
Nothing good ever happens when you decide to juttison individual
civic responsibility and give it to the government. You never

(11:27):
get it back. But to that point, the bureaucratic class
is empowered. When you have term limits like that, you
have those people that get entrenched, the lobbyists, and they
we have a problem with lobbyists writing our laws. Now,
what do you think it's going to be like when
those people are always there and you just have a

(11:47):
revolving door of people every few years that come in
because of term limits. Some lawmakers I want to stay there,
like Thomas Massey. I want him to stay there for
as long as he wants to stay there, right. I
think he's a great a great example. Ran Paul. I
want Ran Paul to stay there as long as Rand
Paul wants to stay there. Some others. You know, people
vote for Nancy Pelosi, you know they they I think

(12:13):
her district is so left they're insane. She's the needles
and feces district. That's literally her district. Of course they
vote for her because the rich, the super rich people
that live out there, they're not bothered by all this
stuff that bothers every other everyday people, you know, they're
not bothered by any of that stuff. So I but
I agree with what the founders had said in terms of,

(12:35):
you know, empowering this bureaucratic class. It's it is a danger,
and this is one of the things that you have
to worry about within the d O D. And he's
got a fight on his hands. That's one of the
I just I'm it appalls me that people run to
the press instead of taking care of things behind doors.

(12:55):
It's first off, it's it's not New Testament. Uh, it's chaos,
and it's designed to inflict pain and inadvertently inflicts pain
the greatest amongst on the voters. Really. Gold prices have
surged over forty percent since January twenty twenty four, consistently
reaching new highs. According to Goldman Sachs Research, the upward

(13:15):
trend is expected to persist due to strong demand from
central banks. It's stuff like this that's made me take
action and why I've bought precious medals like gold and silver.
I partnered with a great company that makes it super
easy to buy, easy, transparent and simple. And that company
is gold Co. They're a huge supporter of this show
and they're the best at what they do. And right

(13:36):
now you can get a free twenty twenty five gold
and silver kit jam packed with critical information about buying
precious medals. It was a huge help, not just for me,
but to all of you. If you do this and
for my audience, you could also qualify for up to
a ten percent instant match in bonus silver. It's a
really great deal, so don't miss out. Visit Dana likes
Goold dot com to learn more. That's Dana likes gold

(13:58):
dot com.

Speaker 4 (13:59):
And now all of the news you would probably miss
it's time for Danta's Quick five.

Speaker 3 (14:05):
Well boy, here come the economic headlines. But you knew
this was going to happen. This was something that was
going to happen. Nearly half of Americans, though, have given
up on saving money. Sixty seven percent feel that they
are behind on their savings goals. Nearly half don't believe
that they're ever going to reach their targets. Sixty three
percent of people with savings accounts have withdrawn money since

(14:25):
the beginning of twenty twenty five for unexpected expenses, that's
the top one. That's forty eight percent every day necessities.
Younger generations are more satisfied with their banks, but yet
they're they're more willing to switch. Which is interesting. That
is your bank is like a very that's a very
personal thing. More and more people here's a big o
flash and war. Now this is true. You can still

(14:46):
think that this is the best way to go with
things in terms of securing long term economic stability. That
you can still think that that's the way to go.
But the reality right now, longer hail hair nails at home,
fewer facials, the economic warning signs are flashing at the salon.
Salon owners say that they are seeing a huge shift

(15:08):
in their clients spending and they think it's what is
ahead for a wider economy. Uh, I've heard this. I
have a friend who is a stylist and I have
heard this that people not only they're also changing what
they're buying. So instead of buying like maybe the more
like expensive moisturizer, men are like what you mean you
just don't, you know, wop off the water off your

(15:29):
face and call it a day. No, I know, but
like instead of the expensive moisturizer and things like that,
they're actually they're they're they're buying like the cheaper stuff.
And we're seeing it with hair. We're also seeing it
with other services like women get I think women get
their nails done for women because men don't care, do
you mean, unless they're really long and they look you know, like,
you know, like ridiculous. I don't think that they care.

(15:51):
Women get it. Women get it for women. But they're
also seeing that as well. They said that they're taking
longer between their visits. Pre bookings are down. This is
something that's bound saying. We knew it was coming though.
The FDA has suspended milk quality tests amid workforce cuts,
but they're going to be mad over on pasteurized milk

(16:11):
at at health food stores that operate like a Sam's. Really,
Food and Drug Administration is suspending a quality control program
for testing a fluid milk and other dairy products. They
say that's the reduced capacity is because of well, they
said that they're running low on people and it's in
their Food Safety and Nutrition division. It was an internal

(16:33):
email that Reuters saw and they said there was a
termination of twenty I don't think you need a million
employees to do this. I'm sorry, you don't need like
thirty thousand employees at the Department of Health and Human
Services to do all this. They're trying to say, Trump
is Oh my gosh, can you believe it? Trump is
going to kill us all with poisoned milk?

Speaker 2 (16:52):
Is this the same entity that gave us red dye forty?

Speaker 3 (16:55):
Yeah, exact. You know what, it's so funny that you
mentioned that, Yes, just making sure and all of the
other fun colors. Well, you know, if they're that's it's true.
They also say cigarettes are safe. Yeah, just FYI. So
they said that. Oh, here's the here's the kicker. Here's
what Reiter says. By the way, guys, the suspension is
another disruption of the nation's food saved programs. Matt because

(17:17):
of Trump's effort to shrink the federal workforce. Matt Matt
Oh my gosh, yeah, oh so bad. You know what there.
I just think that if you if you still have
thousands and thousands of employees and you can't do this
stuff anyway, something's wrong with how you're structured. Got to
say it. Uh, The top producer in sixty Minutes quits

(17:39):
saying that he lost independence. Is anybody at all surprised
about any of those No, no one's surprised. They said
that they're facing a lot of pressure and their corporate
ownership at Paramount, the parent company of CBS. They've entered
what they call a period of turmoil. Bill Owens, who
was the executive producer of sixty Minutes, said that he's
going to resign from this long running program because he's

(18:00):
lost his journalistic independence. Like nobody, we never believe that
you had it anyway. Stop. And he said that they
face mounting pressure from both the President, who sued for
ten billion and include and then also its own corporate
ownership at Paramount. I think it has more to do
with Paramount than it has to do with Trump, and they're.

Speaker 2 (18:19):
Just but his independence costs him money.

Speaker 3 (18:22):
Let's be real for real, No one believes that they're
independent over there, Come on, it's sixteen minutes. It's CBS.
Nobody believes us. Oh, there's going to be a cosmic
smiley face in the sky in Arizona. What if it's frowning?
Is that bad? Luck? Is that bad? The crescent moon
is going to allie with aligned with Venus and Saturn.
Excuse me to form an emoji like grin. It's actually

(18:44):
a sweet little smile. It was visible over Bangkok a
couple of years ago. Now it's going to be visible
over Arizona. They'll believe they'll be able to see it
on Friday morning, and it's going to be like a
kind of a like a lopsided moon and two stars,
and there's supposed to look like a smiley face. Don't
think that it means. It means God is pleased with you.

(19:06):
He's watching you right now. He saw what you did. No,
still low, but they can you can go and and
it'll be in it. But I guess like only in
certain parts obviously of the United States. You're gonna be
able to see it in Arizona and maybe New Mexico.
Let's see. Oh yeah, and sixty minutes. That's going for

(19:27):
sale too. This also, let's see thirty one. So here's
a poll. I saw this and I had a couple
of people send this to me, a couple of people
who were terriff angry, and they're saying Americans are souring
on the handle end of the economy and thirty seven
percent approved. Now, hold up, hold up. They were talking
about specifically long the way that they the way that

(19:49):
they posed the question to these respondents was about the
golden age of America, including tariffs or not, and the
having that be a long term like an established price.
And the people did not approve of that, but they're
twisting it. Of course, we have a lot more on
the way. Stick with us. Potus had tweeted, well, not tweeted.
He was mulling over. And I've heard this before with
people in a circle on now. Like I said, I

(20:12):
I think that the deregulation is good. I should have
to sit a hundre and lay out all the things
that I like so I can say one thing that
I disagree with. I mean, we're all adults here, right,
we can all handle it. So this is speculation, and
it might just be the team brainstorming and then you know,
kind of testing the waters a little bit by suggesting

(20:34):
that they're going to have this New York postas Trump
Mull's five thousand dollars baby bonus for moms in bid
to reverse declining birth rates. Well, we have that. We
have that right now. It's called welfare. We You don't
need to give people money to spur breeding. If you

(20:58):
reduce the tax burd if you reduce government spending, if
you deregulate, you're you're gonna see this happen organically to
where you're not gonna have to give people five thousand dollars. Now,
they were saying this five thousand dollars selection or this

(21:23):
this choice for this. They were saying that this is
you know, it's it's five thousand dollars for people considering
starting you know, people are going to start a family,
and it's to help I guess with like first year,
you know whatever. And some of the responses that I
saw to this were, oh, that's great. I guess you
just don't want to end childhood poverty with by giving
somebody five thousand dollars. And I'm like, what where do

(21:45):
you come from that you think five thousand dollars is
going to end childhood poverty? Like it's five thousand dollars.
It may seem like over the span of it's not
as much as what this will cost. Let's put it
like that. Now Again, they're just I get it that
they're just kind of like brainstorming. But I don't want
this to take root because it is it's welfare. We

(22:08):
have welfare. We've had welfare for years. Kane, how well
is welfare worked out?

Speaker 4 (22:15):
Yeah, seems like it's gotten bigger, which is a problem
because there is no point in time until we actually
do the policies that he's talking about, which is, you know,
allowing these businesses to compete, lowering prices, more jobs, people
are less reliant. Until that happens, we're not going to

(22:35):
see a decrease in those sucking from the teeth of
government as opposed to contributing to the teat.

Speaker 3 (22:41):
Yeah, I guess contributing to the teeth. Look, we created
an extra teat. Look at that. It's good. Why do
the people think that five thousand dollars, Oh my gosh,
it's ending childhood poverty? What five thousand dollars to have
a baby. I'm set for life. Five thousand dollars. I
never have to work again. I got five thousand. Hold what,
let's go to the casino five thousand. Seriously, it's wealth redistribution.

(23:07):
Here's where I'm gonna get real. Mean, this is absolute
wealth redistribution. I don't know who presented this idea to him,
but they're communists and should be jettison from the jettisoned
from his Privy Council. So why do I say it's
welfare redistribution? Well, because it is. You guys know how
much everybody pays in taxes. So this is just the

(23:28):
latest available data from the IRS. The latest available collected
data as of yesterday was from twenty twenty two. The
top one percent pay five hundred and sixty one thousand,
five hundred and twenty three dollars annually. The average for
all taxpayers. Now hold up because it gets real crazy here.
The average for all taxpayers is thirteen thousand, eight hundred

(23:51):
and ninety The bottom fifty percent of all taxpayers, the
bottom fifty percent pay an average of eight hundred and
twenty two dollars. Now, why do I say this as
well redistribution? Why are we talking about giving money to

(24:14):
people who did not even pay that much into the system.
You're taking other people's tax dollars that they earned, and
you're giving it to them. This literally is indistinguishable from
anything Barack Obama has ever proposed. That's what it is.
It's true. You either believe in big government or you don't.

(24:35):
There is no gray area. We're not going to do
a little end that. Just like there's no a little pregnant, right,
or someone might be a little bit of a dude. No,
you either have a weness or you don't. You either
are pregnant or you're not. There's no a little bit
of anything in this. It's black and white. Fifty percent
of Americans on average eight hundred and twenty two dollars.

(24:56):
So where's the where's the other four thousand coming from?
Because it's not them. You're giving people's money away that
they didn't earn. Can I share with you a story.
I'm not caffeinated enough today. Let me share with the story.
It's one of my favorite stories ever and it has

(25:18):
to do with Davy Crockett, not Jasmin Crockett. Heaven forbid,
I don't want to give anybody, not Jasmine Crockett. And
this there was a book that's written about him, and
it's a great book. It's called The Life of Colonel
Davey Crockett, and it came out like in a long
time ago, and I think they redid it again in
the seventies. Davy Crockett in this. In this some say

(25:40):
it's lore, some say it's a true story. Edward Ellis,
the guy who wrote it, says it was a true story.
In the House and David Crockett was a was in
the House of Representatives. One day in the House of Representatives,
they were they had a bill that was taken up,
and it was a proposal to appropriate money for the

(26:03):
benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Right,
all these people were coming up, and they were making
these grandiose speeches, and the Speaker of the House was
getting ready to put the question, when Davy Crockett arose
and said that he has as much as respected as
he has for the memory of the deceased, and as

(26:26):
much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if the
suffering there be. He says, we must not permit our
respect for the dead, or our sympathy for a part
of the living, to lead us into an act of injustice.
To balance to the balance of the living. He says,
I will not go into an argument to prove that
Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an
active charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. He says.

(26:49):
We have the right as individuals to give away as
much of our own money as we please and charity.
But members of Congress have no right to appropriate a
dollar of public money when appeals have been made to
us on the ground that a debt is owed to
the deceased. And they said, mister Speaker, the deceased lived
long after the close of the war. He was in

(27:09):
office to the day of his death, and I've never
heard that the government was in debt to him. And
he says, every man in this house knows it's not
a debt. And we cannot, with the grossest corruption, appropriate
this money as a payment of a debt. We have
not this semblance of authority to appropriate it as charity.
Mister Speaker, Now we can give as much of our
own money as we please. And he says, I am
the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for

(27:33):
this bill, but I will give one week's pay to
the object. And if every member of Congress will do
the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.
Davy Crockett took his seat, nobody said a word. The
bill was put to passage, and instead of passing unanimously
as it was supposed to and it would have without

(27:55):
his speech, it only got a couple of votes. And
lost asked why he did this, and he said that
he was thinking about the election, or he was thinking
about the summer before the election. And he said that
they were on the Capitol with some members of Congress
and they saw a fire over in Georgetown and they

(28:16):
ran over there and were helping people, and then they
appropriated all this money and they were sending it over there.
And then while he was out one day, he says
he was taking papers from Washington and going to the
backwoods of his home and he was on the way
to his house when he passed a farmer in his
field and they had words. The farmer did not appreciate

(28:39):
what Davy Crockett has done. David Crockett was telling him.
He's like, I can I get your vote for the
next election. The farmer said, no, I can't vote for you.
I can't vote for you because of what you did.
And he was talking about the act of appropriating all
this money in Congress and handing it out to people,
as you know, really charity. And he said he made

(29:00):
the point that Crockett noted in his speech that if
some of these people in the halls of Congress would
deprive themselves of but one week, you would have more
than enough to be able to cover charitable requests without
taking it from the taxpay. He says, because you see,
it's not yours to give. And he really made him think.
Davy Crockett apologized to him and he said that I

(29:24):
will never promise him I'm never going to vote for
anything like that again. And he appreciated the farmer. He
was humble. David Crockett was humble, and he appreciated the
farmer correcting him on this, and he said, if I
can have your vote, I won't make a liar out
of you. And then some months later, this was the

(29:45):
speech he gave on the floor of the House. That
still is true here it is not yours to give.
It's a welfare scheme. People always cite hungry, well hungary.
Their birthrate fell. They did this exact same thing in
Hungary where they paid people to have kids. The birthrate

(30:06):
fluctuated and went up a tenth of a point, and
then it fell from one point five to five to
one point thirty eight while they were doing all of this.
In every country this has ever been implemented, it has
never solved the problem. If Republicans want to kill the
Republican Party, they'll do this. No good person of good

(30:29):
moral heart or character should ever support something like this, because,
as Davy Crockett said, it's not yours to give.

Speaker 1 (30:36):
Thanks for tuning in to today's edition of Dana Lash's
Absurd Truth podcast.

Speaker 4 (30:39):
If you haven't already, made sure to hit that subscribe
button on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.