The Rod and Greg Show: Presidential Debate Preview with Senator Mike Lee; Gun Safety Classes in Utah Schools

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The intrigue for me tonight is will the moderators or
somehow will Donald Trump get her to state her positions?
You're laughing at you now, we know, we know the
moderators are going to let her off the hook. But
as Trump, he got away in which he can get
her to say what she said in the past.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
She can't afford to. So what I think she's going
to do. I don't think. I think her whatever number
of votes and whatever their internal polling is showing it,
she she has such a frail coalition held together that
she really can't afford to give you a real solid
opinion or position. She's going to be vague. But that
leaves the door wide open. That is, that is a

(00:42):
that is a the CounterPunch that that Donald Trump can
can deliver, and that moment is to define her. If
she won't, he will. And I'm i'm I've got I've
got the articles in our show notes right here. They
are not she wants to say she's a tough prosecutor
from San Francisco. I don't surprised, folks if you hear
some of the decisions she made when she was a

(01:04):
prosecutor in San Francisco. And it isn't a pretty story. Yeah,
so she doesn't want to talk about what she is
or what she's done. I think that the former president's
coming prepared to explain.

Speaker 1 (01:14):
And I think I you know, there are a lot
of people who were very critical of him after the
debate with Biden, saying he was off his game or whatever,
and he got away with it because most of the
attention was focused on Joe Biden at the time. I
honestly thought Donald Trump did just fine in that debate
with Biden, and I think if he can maintain it's cool,
which I think he will tonight, I think he'll do

(01:36):
just fine. But you know what the media is going
to say, as long as she doesn't step on a bomb,
they'll all praise her as well.

Speaker 3 (01:42):
What a great debate.

Speaker 2 (01:43):
So I think, you know, as excited as we all are, folks.
I'm even though, and I talk about this maybe too much,
the betting markets to polymarket, but seventy five percent money,
the smart money's all that the media is going to
anoint Kamala Harris the victor in this debate. Seventy five
percent is the odds on she's going to be declared
the winner and that isn't on the issues or if

(02:05):
the debate happens, it's just the way they're going to go.
But that said, every single every single poll, everything that
you see by way of back then, Joe Biden's approval rating,
or what or what people think of Kamla right now,
and I'm looking at numbers that even that New York
Times SIENA poll that does not it's the We've never

(02:25):
seen a race this close in September since the sixties.
Maybe this is in spite of a media that can't stop,
you know, fawning over the Democrat. This is in spite
of them calling him a racist and having an eight
point lead with Latino voters. It's all, you know, convicting him,
trying him, indicting him, convicting him, and in spite of that,

(02:46):
he's ahead. So I don't care what the media says
about how phenomenally well she's done and how presidential she is.
For those that watch, I think that that will be
the true measure of this debate. I'm not expecting to
hear the media. I'm just waiting to see if, just
like the convention, there was no bump. She saw no
bump after the convention or.

Speaker 3 (03:06):
If she did, it went away rapidly.

Speaker 2 (03:08):
Yes, and we'll see what happens here. So I love
this these scenarios. Rod, I used to manage a fighter,
a pro fighter, young fighter, just start right. Yeah, And
we knew we were the opponent. Okay, we get called
by ESPN two for fight Night. We know that we're
going into New York City and that we are we
are unless he knocks them out, We're gonna lose on

(03:29):
the card. We just kind of know it. But these
are good opportunities to really get out there and get
exposure and to have a good fight. And ESPN loves
competitive fights. We were on the undercard, so we didn't
go in there thinking we're gonna win for sure, but
we got to draw one time on national TV. And
so I just think in this Donald Trump is what

(03:49):
you would call him the boxing the opponent. He is
the opponent. Kamala Harris is the star that's supposed to
win in this bout.

Speaker 4 (03:57):
Yea.

Speaker 3 (03:57):
But let's see what the people think it's going to
be interesting.

Speaker 1 (04:00):
Well, it is the Rod and Greg show here on
Utah's Talk, right, He'll one oh five nine can Terrass,
Roderiquet along with and we have got a jam packed show. Well,
you know, everybody is weighing in with their advice as
to what they should do tonight. I mean, it's kind
of getting sickening. But we've got a few sound bites
audio soundbites that will play for you with thoughts on
what Trump and what Harris should be doing tonight. The

(04:22):
funny thing is, wait, do you hear that? Guess what
has now re entered the picture as an issue in
this campaign? What Donald Trump's age?

Speaker 5 (04:31):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (04:32):
His age?

Speaker 2 (04:32):
Is ageism? Or is that a legitimate issue?

Speaker 1 (04:35):
Apparently the New York Times, because it's in the New
York Times, everybody thinks it's legitlemen, So we'll get into that.
But this debate takes place tonight after what I think
greg is an explosive report, really actual journalism taking place
on CNN last night where they exposed Kamala Harris's extremely

(04:57):
progressive views on a number of issues.

Speaker 2 (04:59):
The the answers to these questions and the acl you scared.
I don't know if they'll even surprise us really, but
it is really the coverage of it a and be
the reaction from the host of CNN to this information.
I've not seen this kind of treatment of a democrat
on CNN before, so it's it's worth having a listen, so.

Speaker 1 (05:20):
You'll want to stay with us on that. Also a
little bit later on, Ned Ryan will join us Ned,
of course with the CEO of American Majority with American
Great and it's always great to have Ned on the show.
There is a Utah representative who wants to put gun
safety in schools. I love it, I like the idea.
I'm with you on that. Mike Lee will join us
a little bit later on in the show tonight. So
we've got a lot to get to and we hope

(05:40):
you stay with us. We get you ready for the
debate as you head home tonight.

Speaker 3 (05:45):
Again.

Speaker 1 (05:45):
Live coverage right here on Talk Radio one oh five
nine can earists begins at seven o'clock tonight. Countdown is on, Baby,
we can tell you're giddy. You're giddy? All right, all right,
let's get into some of our audio sound bites. A
lot of people weighing in as to what the former
president should do and what Kamala Harris should do, So
let's let you listen in on a few of those.

(06:05):
First of all, this is Scott Jennings Scott Jennings, who
I think is a Republican strategist and does a great
job on CNN and defending Republican and conservative causes and
former President Trump. This is what he said on CNN
today about what is going to take place and what
Donald Trump should do during the debate tonight.

Speaker 6 (06:23):
And I would just advise him to answer all questions
going back to one core issue. If you want change,
I am the change. If you want change on the economy,
I am the change. If you want change on the border,
I am the change. And she's out here to change.
The only change she is is changing all of her
positions in a craven effort to try to make you
think she's not some kind of radical liberal. So I
wouldn't take the bait from a question. I wouldn't take

(06:44):
the bait from her. I would just bring it all
back to one core issue. This is how he wins.
People are not happy with the current administration. She is
in the current administration. She represents a continuation of the same.
So anything that you do that gets off that track
is really a lost minute or I lost ten minutes,
or however long it takes you to do it. So
my advice is stick with change and you'll be all right.

Speaker 1 (07:06):
And I think he's spot on, because let's see, since
two thousand and eight, Greg, we've had four years of
Republican leadership in the White House, the other what twelve
sixteen years whatever led by Democrats.

Speaker 3 (07:18):
So who is the agent of change? Now?

Speaker 1 (07:20):
She is claiming she is, she's looking at a new
way forward. It is change in her opinion. But that
New York Times Siena College poll over the weekend showed
now they viewed Donald Trump as the agent of change,
not Kamala Harris.

Speaker 2 (07:35):
Fifty five percent of the respondents said that she is
a reflection of the Biden administration, which would be an
accurate one given that she's been the vice president. So
she is not the agent of change. And over sixty
six percent of those same people saying they were looking
for change, sixty something percent saying they want to change,
fifty five percent saying she is not.

Speaker 1 (07:52):
In Yeah, yeah, but all people. Now, here's Chuck Todd
from MSNBC and NBC. He's way in as to what
mister Trump should do tonight.

Speaker 7 (08:03):
If he goes after her in the ways he went
after Hillary Clinton. And I'll tell you know Hillary Clinton. Look,
she was a very polarizing figure in twenty sixteen and
and and in some ways the public why they did,
I don't know, sort of accepted his harsh attacks on
her in a way that I don't think he uses

(08:23):
those same techniques on Kamala Harris. I think they're likely
to boomerang badly in his direction.

Speaker 3 (08:29):
So that's that's what I think.

Speaker 7 (08:31):
His inability to not go on the attack in a
personal way against her, his inability to sort of restrain
himself on those things, is what I think is his
biggest risk here, which is where Look, I'm going to
assume there is a second debate, but if there's not,
it'll be because he could he was he couldn't help himself.

Speaker 3 (08:51):
On the person. I think he'll help himself on the personal.

Speaker 1 (08:54):
You know, he's I mean, you know there there what
Chuck Todd is saying, We hope he gets personal.

Speaker 3 (09:01):
That's what they're hoping.

Speaker 2 (09:02):
Yeah, I'm surprised that I hoped. I let me give
you some Trump some advice. You swear words, I mean,
you know what, you know, give her the middle finger.
I mean, why isn't he just saying that? Because that's
what he means. Now we in the five o'clock hour,
after we do the interview with Mike Lee, I really
want to get down into some of the strategies of
this of debates and what debates really mean in the
presidential campaign seasons, at least historically, because when Chuck Todd says,

(09:24):
I assume there's going to be two, there's a story
behind that. Kamala Harris needs another debate after this because
she knows she's behind.

Speaker 3 (09:32):
I don't think she goes for one.

Speaker 4 (09:34):
We'll go.

Speaker 2 (09:35):
Yeah, we'll see how tonight goes.

Speaker 3 (09:36):
I think she goes for one.

Speaker 2 (09:37):
I look forward to having this discussion because I'm telling
you there is some pretty solid data behind these debates,
how the polls move, who's in the catbird seat, and
why you would want another debate or not. And if
she wants another debate, it's because she's losing.

Speaker 1 (09:52):
Yeah, that's for sure. All Right, We've got a lot
to get to today. We invite you to stay with
us as you'll work your way home this afternoon and
you get ready for the debate. What was a pull
out today, says eighty three percent of likely voters. We'll
tune into that debate tonight. I hope that's the case. Yeah,
you know, I really do hope that's the case.

Speaker 2 (10:10):
I'm Wall has set herself up in that she's not
spoken about issues and nothing informal. This is really where
people think they're going to hear her for the first time.

Speaker 1 (10:18):
Yeah, we'll have to wait and say, all right, more
to come here on the Rod and Greg Show and
Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine, Kate and r
Let's get some thoughts on this and a brand new
book that our next guest has put out, Ned Ryan.
He has founder and CEO of American Majority. He's got
a brand new book out as well, called American Leviathan.
And we'll get into that with Ned here in just
a minute. Ned, how are you and welcome to the

(10:39):
Rod and Greg Show. Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 8 (10:41):
Ned, Yeah, no, absolutely good to be with you guys.
And uh yeah, I've got a few thoughts about that.

Speaker 3 (10:46):
I was gonna ask you, Dad, where are you going
with this tonight?

Speaker 9 (10:49):
Ded?

Speaker 3 (10:50):
What do you think he's gonna have the first Let's
go there first.

Speaker 8 (10:53):
Yeah, So, I think there's a couple of things. First
of all, I think the muted Mike's work in Trump's favor. Yes,
obviously she can't have you know, excuse me, I'm talking.
But more importantly, I think he just has to stand
there and let her talk.

Speaker 10 (11:05):
I mean, the nation's leading purveyor.

Speaker 8 (11:07):
Of word solids is going to be hard for her
for ninety minutes to convince the American people that she's
not a total incompetence who should never.

Speaker 10 (11:16):
Be allowed in your power. And the other thing.

Speaker 8 (11:19):
Though, that he needs to prosecute when he has the
mic and is speaking at the same time, let people
know that the disaster of the Biden administration, she is
fully part of that.

Speaker 10 (11:30):
In fact, I would argue probably making a lot more
of the decisions since Biden's.

Speaker 8 (11:34):
Obviously cognitively incapable of doing so. So I think there's
going to be a couple of things that will work
in his favor. But most importantly, he just has to
stand there silently and let her spend and spend and
spend and demonstrate to the American people she doesn't really
know what she's talking about.

Speaker 2 (11:48):
Ned there was an article in The New York Post
today that said that because Kamala Harris has really gone
back to her tough prosecutor days of San Francisco. There
are Trump campaign consultants or advisors that are saying he's
going back to San Francisco in her days as a
prosecutor there, and he's going to actually articulate her record

(12:09):
from her time as a prosecutor in San Francisco all
the way up to being vice president. Do you think
that's wiser? Is he going back too far?

Speaker 8 (12:18):
I think he can demonstrate and hopefully will be pretty
concise on that, that she is not left behind her
far left California roots. She's actually weak on crime. She
is a product of the far left San Francisco. But
then I think he needs to really focus on the
last three and a half years, the Biden economy, the
Biden disaster, the Southern Porter, all of these things, I

(12:41):
mean literally on every issue, the complete and total disaster
that has been for this country, of which she is
fully part of. And the other thing I hope that
he makes a point of is the conspiracy of silence.
Joe Biden was cognitively impaired, probably for most of the
last three and a half years. Guess who was in
the middle of that conspiracy of silence?

Speaker 1 (12:59):
Kamala Harris true, good point. How does he you know,
she is, without a doubt, not only the queen of
the word salad, but now has become the queen of
the flip flop from plastic straws to EV's how did
he go?

Speaker 3 (13:12):
How did he go? After? On those issues, ned, I think.

Speaker 8 (13:16):
What he needs to do is basically the most honest
version of Kamala Harris, which is actually pretty hard to define,
is when she first announced she was running for the
White House in January of twenty nineteen, and he needs
to tell the American people where she stands on the
Green New Deal and all these other far left issues
that she has when she was very honest about where

(13:37):
she stood on all of those issues and just highlighted
the American people, if left to her own devices, when
she is being honest, which isn't very often, she has
very far left, far left of the American mainstream.

Speaker 2 (13:50):
So we could go on. So when you come to
Salt Lake City for your book tour and you're signing
new copies of American Leviathan, Okay, you need to come
to the in Greg show and we can have you
in studio and we can just geek out on this
stuff because you you absolutely are dialed in and I
think what you're saying is absolutely the case. But let's
talk about your book, American Leviath. And you've got some

(14:12):
great endorsements from people like Jesse Kelly, and you've got
Pete heg Seth from Fox and Friends. There's just Dan Bongino,
Sebastian Gorka. This book. My personal experience, ned was. I
grew up back east. We took a trip to Washington,
d C. In the seventh grade to kind of learn
about Washington as I look later in life as an

(14:35):
adult in my forties, thirties, forties and now I'm fifty,
the growth of that town without a single industry inside
that town, in other words, the class A offices where
they produce nothing. As an adult knowing what that town
looked like, you know, in the eighties, it's scary. It's
really scary. And I think that's what your book is

(14:55):
talking about.

Speaker 10 (14:57):
No, it really is.

Speaker 8 (14:57):
I mean, first of all, I want to have a
conversation with the American people about the deeply unconstitutional. I
would argue un American administrative state that was put in
place about one hundred years ago, just over one hundred
years ago, that has nothing to do with the Constitution Republic.

Speaker 10 (15:13):
In fact, the progressive.

Speaker 8 (15:15):
Status like Woodrow Wilson and others that founded the Progressive
movement in the administrative state. Their entire goal was to
get the political and moral authority of the US Constitution,
to destroy the separation of powers and to consolidate power
into an administrative state, while separating that administrative state, filled
with unelected bureaucrats from political accountability, to let them do

(15:38):
the true governing of this country. And they really viewed
the state as salvation. So when people go why is
government continuing to grow and grow and grow? And the
progressive thinking, it's, well, if the state of salvation, why
would you ever limit salvation?

Speaker 10 (15:52):
So it continues to grow and grow and grow.

Speaker 8 (15:54):
And I call it an America Leviathan because it is
this voracious, ever growing bea that I think is consuming
the American economic freedom, to the liberties, to the point
of if we don't have a conversation about this, it's
going to eventually crush the American people.

Speaker 1 (16:10):
Ned has it gotten to the point that it's too
big to do anything about anymore, or is there still
a chance to do something about it.

Speaker 8 (16:16):
It depends on if you can put a powerful executive
into the White House in January of twenty twenty five.
Let's just say perhaps Donald J. Trump, Because the argument
I make to the people in this book is the
administrative state primarily resides in the executive branch. A powerful
executive who has the political courage and the will and
determination can actually, over the course of four years, dismantle

(16:39):
and devolve and deconstruct the administrative state.

Speaker 10 (16:42):
My last chapter of the book is really about all
the ideas.

Speaker 8 (16:45):
That a powerful executive, even if Congress does not have
the political courage to do so, can actually take the
fight to the administrative state and say we're not going
to do this anymore.

Speaker 10 (16:52):
We're not going to have this governing system.

Speaker 8 (16:55):
We're actually going to restore constitution, republic, the balance, proper
balance of power, separation of powers between into three branches,
and get us back to a republic and power a
government of buying for the people.

Speaker 2 (17:06):
So look, question or can I grip? So look, I mean,
I'm going to wrap it up, and I just want
to ask you this.

Speaker 11 (17:15):
Greed.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
It all seems like it's a greed play to me.
And I think one of the reasons why Trump is
refreshing is that he doesn't need the power, he doesn't
need the money. How do you overcome that? That seems
to be biblical to me?

Speaker 3 (17:27):
You know, the.

Speaker 2 (17:28):
Filthy luker is there. Even if you get a good
executive branch for four years, can you really overcome it?

Speaker 10 (17:36):
It depends.

Speaker 8 (17:36):
So I've made the argument, haven't been in DC for
twenty five years. Two of the most important positions that
he's going to have to choose wisely if and win.
He wins transition personnel to make sure all the personnel
are right coming in to the administration.

Speaker 10 (17:49):
And he's got a nail ppo.

Speaker 8 (17:51):
The head of the Presidential Personnel Office has to be
the right person to then appoint the right people to
the various departments and agencies that are on the same
book that realize we have to devolve this administrative state.
So I would encourage people go grab a copy. You
can go to Amazon pre order. It comes out next Tuesday,
Constitution Day. But I would encourage people read it. I
try to make it as brief and concise and as

(18:12):
interesting as possible so people can understand. Really, I think
the Constitutional Republic bit of an illusion. We've got to
address the administrative state if we want to get back
to the Republic.

Speaker 1 (18:21):
Name endo that Ned is always great to have you
on the show. Good luck with the book. Thank you
for your time today.

Speaker 10 (18:25):
Ned, absolutely thanks guys.

Speaker 1 (18:28):
All right, that's Nat Ryan, founder and CEO of American Majority.
He's got the brand new book out called American Leviathan
More coming up with Rod and Greg on Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine. Knrs. Well, you know there
used to be years ago any Ray was sharing with
me several times over the years the story about there
used to be gun clubs in school. As a matter

(18:48):
of fact, I think at the school he went to
that a shooting range and he could bring his twenty
two and you know, learn about gun safety. But all
of a sudden they've gone away. But now sounds like
a lawmaker wants to bring it back.

Speaker 2 (18:59):
And thank goodness joining us on the program. Incredible state
lawmaker Representative rex Ship for rex Ship from Iron County.
Good friend, represent Ship, thank you for joining us on
the program.

Speaker 12 (19:11):
Well, thank you having for having me Rod, Greg, appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (19:14):
Now you have a great bill. This is gun safety
in schools. This isn't the first crack at this bill.
You ran one before it didn't pass, but I think
it's so timely representative that you're running this bill, and
so why don't you tell our listeners a little bit about,
you know, why you're running it and what you'd like
this bill to do. In this pilot program you're proposing, well, well.

Speaker 12 (19:37):
You may modify it somewhat from what we did before.
The Originally the design three years ago when I ran
it was to have a pilot program in high schools.
Those schools and school boards that chose to do it
be a voluntary program, could run a gun safety class

(19:59):
or and however they needed to do. We were proposing
them to be able to receive a half of an
elective credit by having a program. We had to get
some curriculum put together, and the NRA has indicated that
there's per curriculum out there that we can put together.
But in light of this recent accidental shooting this eight

(20:23):
year old boy, makes me feel like we really need
to expand that and even have some sort of curriculum
that age appropriate and maybe even into elementary schools to
allow these kids to understand that, hey, if you see
a friend you know has a gun with him, what

(20:46):
to do about it? To report it? Or if you
find again how to safely handle it, to take care
of it, because a lot of these kids anymore. I mean,
I grew up handling guns from the time I was old,
have to walk almost you know, on the farm and
ranch I lived on. But I don't think there's a
lot of that anymore, and so I think it's important

(21:08):
that we do this to help our kids to stay safe.
It's about skums, safety and protecting our kids.

Speaker 1 (21:17):
How would this benefit people here in the state of Utah.
I understand where you're going with this, but how do
you think this would benefit people? You know, kids in schools,
mom and dads who may be concerned about gun issues.
How would this benefit people in this state in your opinion? Representative?

Speaker 12 (21:34):
Well, in my opinion, if you're educated on how to
handle a firearm, hey, you never you know, one of
the first rules is you never point the barrel at
you or anybody else, and keep your finger off the
trigger and on safety. Keep it on safety. There's accidents

(21:54):
that happen, there's issues that happen with shootings in schools.
If kids are made aware of issues and they know
of a situation that comes up, somebody's they got something
in their backpack they shouldn't and it could report it.
I mean, that would be an important part of it
in the curriculum, I believe. But it's just like anything else.

(22:18):
You need to be educated on it as what to do.
And if you have never handled a firearm and know
what to do, it can be a problem, can be
an accident, just like what we've witnessed here recently in Utah.

Speaker 2 (22:31):
So here's what I'm thinking. We've been shared statistics we
have been shared with us. Over three hundred million guns
are owned by Americans in the United States. As much
as the leftists would love to just create laws that
would make all these three hundred million plus guns disappear,
the idea and the fact that guns exist and they
are in homes and they are in our communities, is

(22:53):
that just a fact of life and it's not going away.
Going upstream and educating students so that they're familiar with guns,
they understand they can handle them without fear and safely.
What is the criticism that you would hear representative for
an approach like that, knowing that we have guns, knowing
that they're not going away, Who would tell you that

(23:14):
this is a bad idea to educate kids and help
them understand how to safely handle a firearm.

Speaker 12 (23:22):
Well, honestly, I don't think there's very many that would
say that that's a bad thing. That there are a
few out there that feel like if the guns there,
it's going to shoot you. And we need we know
that guns don't kill people. People kill people with guns.
And the fact is that there was not a lot
of opposition. This original bill went through the House pretty slick.

(23:46):
I had twenty four co sponsors on the bill, and
it got to the Senate and it died in committee
of the Senate and.

Speaker 3 (23:59):
Dang Senate, you know, annoying.

Speaker 12 (24:03):
So we love them, but sometimes we get a difficult time,
we run into a roadblock. Sometimes you know, we need
to educate them too.

Speaker 13 (24:10):
I guess, oh yeah, Craig, Well, well yeah, you mentioned
Representative you're going to tweak it a little bit, but
you are going ahead and trying to get through through
the legislative process this year.

Speaker 3 (24:22):
Am I reading that right? That's correct?

Speaker 12 (24:26):
Yep, there's a bill file opened, and certainly there are
going to be some changes, but it's got the same
idea to educate our kids, because hey, people can buy
a guns, go buy again at twenty one years old,
do a background second, buy again. They ought to know
how to handle one to a degree and to high school.

(24:47):
Part of this, the idea was also to offer to
have a hunter safety as part of it, because everybody
that wants to go hunting has to have a hunter
safety a certificate, and we could do that at that
level as well. I think it would be a good
thing for our citizens.

Speaker 1 (25:07):
Representative great chatting with you. Thank you for a few
minutes of your time here on the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 12 (25:12):
Okay, nice to visit with you.

Speaker 4 (25:14):
Call any time, Happy to visit with you.

Speaker 2 (25:15):
All right, thank you, Representative.

Speaker 1 (25:17):
Representative Rex Shoop talking about this, this idea right here
on Utah's Talk Rady on want oh five nine can alright,
we take a few phone calls on this.

Speaker 10 (25:24):
I can look here.

Speaker 3 (25:25):
What the public things? What do you think?

Speaker 4 (25:27):
You know?

Speaker 1 (25:27):
I'm for it. I'm with you now. Representative Ship mentioned
that he grew up in the country on a farm
and he was always comfortable around guns. You know, they
were part of his fan. My wife's same thing. I mean,
her brothers and her dad, they hunted. There were guns
in the house all the time. She never been bothered
by you having a gun in the home. She understands
it because she.

Speaker 2 (25:47):
Grew up with it, and I, on the other hand,
was not. I didn't grow up either way, and I'm
familiar with them now. Am fine, I'll tell you a
funny story. I know we got to go a break,
but I do want to hear from callers, colors, what
do you think about this idea represented ship. It's a
bill that didn't pass last year, so I know he's
under selling. There's going to be some pushback if it
died in a Senate committee. I just want to know
what say you. Eight eight eight five seven zero eight

(26:08):
zero one zero is the number to call. Tell us
what you think. Random story though. Talking to Donald Trump Junior.
He grew up in New York City. He and his
brother Eric have a passion for guns. They competitively shoot
at target shooting and it's a competition.

Speaker 3 (26:25):
That was what they learned that in school.

Speaker 2 (26:26):
When they went to a school, they had this and
they both got into it. And so you might have
young people that have a passion for, or a liking
or towards guns and safety all that they wouldn't even
know it if they've never been around them. I think
this is a great way to get upstream.

Speaker 1 (26:40):
Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero, or
on your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey, Ron,
we want to open up the phones to you and
see what you have to say about this. Eight eight
eight five seven eight zero one zero or on your
cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey Rod,
let's go to the phones. We begin in Lindon with
Randall tonight here on the rod In Greg Show. Are
you thanks for joining us?

Speaker 4 (27:03):
Very good?

Speaker 14 (27:03):
Hey, I just I just wanted to know.

Speaker 15 (27:05):
Let you know that.

Speaker 14 (27:07):
When I went to Junior High in Salt Lake years ago, okay,
we had NRA days. Oh well, everybody could bring their
baby guns in twenty two to school and then after
school we had classes on safety and how to take
care of them. They were very strict about you never
pointed that gun at anyone. Your guns had to be

(27:30):
completely you know, empty, do not have any efnition.

Speaker 16 (27:35):
But it was really fun those days.

Speaker 14 (27:37):
That's when all the kids were walking up and down
the halls carrying their rifles.

Speaker 3 (27:41):
I remember that, Randall.

Speaker 2 (27:43):
Those were the good old days. Randall, thank you, thanks
for the story. Let's go now to Tom and Grantsville, Tom,
Welcome to the program.

Speaker 17 (27:51):
What say you, sir, Hi Rod?

Speaker 4 (27:55):
I know it's not Rod, but no, I want to
say is when I was in high school, junior high,
we had it was offered us gun safety in North Dakota.
And I was born in sixty two, so I ended
up with think my gun safety numbers like six hundred
and forty seven in that state.

Speaker 3 (28:15):
Wow.

Speaker 4 (28:16):
But it was just it was just something that you
could do if you wanted to, and everybody wanted to
because everybody hunted. Yeah, yeah, you know at that time
I got it. And then later I think they changed
the date to when you can be older, younger and
don't need it. But you know, it was a great course.
They taught us everything about guns.

Speaker 1 (28:34):
Yeah, And I think if more and more people learned
about guns, Greg, they wouldn't be as nervous around guns
and are afraid of guns.

Speaker 3 (28:42):
In my opinion.

Speaker 1 (28:43):
Let's go to Shane in Salt Lake City. Shane wants
to weigh on on this tonight. Shane, Welcome to the
Rotten Greg Show.

Speaker 4 (28:49):
Hello, gentlemen.

Speaker 18 (28:50):
I would like to comment that I think it would
be so good for children to understand what a gun is.

Speaker 10 (28:56):
It's in er.

Speaker 19 (28:56):
Unless it's in the hands of an individual and that
individual has been taught the right procedures, that.

Speaker 3 (29:04):
Gun is no longer a danger.

Speaker 10 (29:06):
It is not a threat.

Speaker 19 (29:07):
And my second comment would be, I hope we don't
end up calling this hunter safety because the Second.

Speaker 12 (29:13):
Amendment does not have anything to do with hunting.

Speaker 3 (29:15):
Yeah, that's everything to do with our right, Yep, that's true,
that's true. All right, thank you. All right.

Speaker 1 (29:20):
We've got a lot more calls coming in on this,
and if you want to weigh in eight eight eight
five seven eight zero one zero triple eight five seven
eight zero one zero or on your cell phone dial
pound two fifty and say hey rod we'll take a break.
We'll get you a cup out on the news. Those
of you calling in, if you hang on, we'll get
to your comments coming up. We'll push our interview with
Mike Leap back a little bit so we can get
to some of your phone calls again. Eight eight eight

(29:42):
five seven oh eight zero one zero or on your
cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey rod Well.
Also remember we'll get more into the debate tonight. I mean,
CNN dropped a bombshell of a report last night about
some of Kamala Harrison's responses to an acl you survey
back in twenty nineteen, and it will give you an

(30:03):
idea where her mind did sometimes when it comes to
the socially progressive issues that she wants to deal with
in this country. Now, she says she's moderated. Bernie Sanders says, well,
you know, she's moderated just to get votes. But you know,
if she is elected, will she go back to a
very progressive way. CNN exposed some very interesting issues about
Kamala Harris last night.

Speaker 3 (30:24):
We'll get into that.

Speaker 1 (30:25):
Mike Lee will join us, but we want to get
to more of your phone calls on this gun safety
program in schools. So if you hang on, we'll get
your news update and then we'll get to your phone
calls right here on the Rod and Gregg Show in
Utah's Talk radio one oh five. Die canterest I hear
the Trump plane is nicer than Air Force one.

Speaker 3 (30:42):
Yeah, I wouldn't that surprise you. It wouldn't.

Speaker 2 (30:45):
It wouldn't surprise you. It doesn't have all the you know,
the defense mechanisms. I would imagine air forcefight.

Speaker 1 (30:51):
I think it was Steve Moore who told me years
ago when he was elected president, says, well, I'm kind
of stepping down. I have to go on a one
and not the Trump plane.

Speaker 2 (30:59):
Everybody said Trump's in it for the glory. This guy's
got a lot of good things going. I got a
lot of perks in the life. He doesn't need any
of this.

Speaker 1 (31:05):
Yeah, he doesn't. All right, Before we go to Mike Lee.
Before the break, we were talking with state Representative Ship
about his gun safety program. Wanted to get people's reaction
to it, and we had a lot of interest in it.
So we've carried it over and take a few more
calls before we talk with Utah Center Mike Leaf. So
let's go right back to the phones, Wes's and Caysville
and waiting patiently to weigh in on this. Wes, how

(31:26):
are you welcome to the Rod and Greg show.

Speaker 4 (31:30):
Good Ron, thanks for thinking to Carl.

Speaker 20 (31:32):
So, my thought on this is, you know, you think
about the military service members. The first thing that they're taught,
or one of the first things they're taught in basic
training is how to panel a weapon properly and range
safety and all that other jazz. So I think it's
important if you're like I mean, per capita, we have

(31:53):
more guns than anywhere else in the world. Right, yes,
so's it's more likely that at least I don't know
one and two homes have a weapon. So teaching kids
how to respect those weapons and to use them properly
and to and to you know, keep keep them safe,
you know, teach them the safety part of it, uh
is really important.

Speaker 2 (32:13):
So yeah, these are great examples. I couldn't agree more
and that's why I love our listeners. Let's go to
Eric in West Haven, h Thank you for joining us
on the program. What say you Gun safety for kids
in schools?

Speaker 21 (32:30):
So my thing growing up is my dad always told
me that the only you're only scared of something to
tell you learn how to use it or how to
keep yourself safe. So why not teach kids that they're
most formidable ages on how to be safe around something

(32:50):
that is, you know, like the kid that just died
of he recently, Like, why not have that installed in
them early? So it's just it's not something to be scared,
but it's something to know more about and be able
to keep themselves safe as well as their family and
their friends. I think having guns safety in the school

(33:10):
would be an awesome thing. And I would be the
first one to find my kid up for something like that.

Speaker 1 (33:15):
So all right, Eric, I agree. I think a lot
of parents would to teach their children to respect the
gun and understand how the gun works and gun safety
I think would be terrific. Dan in an Oorum tonight
here on the Running Greg Show.

Speaker 3 (33:29):
Dan, how are you? Thanks for joining us?

Speaker 16 (33:34):
Great?

Speaker 17 (33:34):
Thank you for taking my call.

Speaker 15 (33:36):
Hey, I just wanted to throw this. How about the
state of Minnesota join with the National School Trap Shooting Association.
Last year they had over two thousand kids at the
state finals. Two thousand kids with guns. Never had an
accident in the association's history. So that's where this could

(33:59):
go if we wanted to. I think there's only two
high school trap clubs in the state of Utah, and
uh could be more, should be more. It's a great sport.

Speaker 2 (34:12):
And that's in Minnesota. Do you say, Dan, Don you said?

Speaker 14 (34:14):
Dan?

Speaker 10 (34:15):
You said Minnesota, Minnesota.

Speaker 16 (34:16):
They've been involved for years, for years, They've had these
high school and junior high they have kids ten to
eleven years old in these trap clubs.

Speaker 3 (34:27):
Wow, in the land of the Governor Wall who knew?

Speaker 1 (34:30):
Yeah, Yes, Timmy Walls in charge of that thing.

Speaker 2 (34:35):
You must hate that. Actually, he must be trying to
get rid of it. Hey, let's go, oh, this is here,
we got we got folks, be really, we got a leftist.
Here comes the leftist, ready to just hammer well the
pro gun, anti gun.

Speaker 1 (34:45):
Anti gun gun, here go ahead, opposition anti gun now
on the radio show.

Speaker 11 (34:55):
O kidding, I'm just here to demonized guns, you know.
And you know, we've got appreciate representative ships, representative ships
leadership on this because he's been trying to eat you
know that the Senate, Bless their hearts. Anyway, Uh, we'll
get it through. We'll get it through this year. But
you know, I remember years and years and years ago,

(35:16):
shows how long I've been lobbying up there, that we
tried this same thing with just some basic, simple, neutral,
not pro gun, not anti gun legislation. And I remember
in the committee hearing, Uia got up and said that
this was nothing more than Joe Cammell with a gun
comparing you know, you know, trying to trying to you know,

(35:36):
influence cigarettes and guns and that, and and it was
as neutral as could be. And so I got up
and I said, you know, I can't believe this this,
This is coming from an education association where I always
thought education is always.

Speaker 10 (35:49):
Better than ignorance.

Speaker 11 (35:51):
So anyway, they said they didn't have the time to
devote to you know, an assembly or even you know
any time. This is We're literally talking a three or
four minute presentation. I'm really that serious. Is about how
simple it is now I would be modified for younger
grades and then modified up for higher grades.

Speaker 2 (36:09):
Sure, and Clark, I asked this a representation ship, and
I think he was a little gracious when he said
it didn't really pass a Senate. He didn't give any reasons.
But you you shared a little bit with the Teachers'
Union saying this is Joe Campbell with a gun. But really,
what would be the opposition understanding that guns are? That
we have guns as a country. It's a it's our
right to bear arms, and we have them. There's over
three hundred million guns in this country. You're not getting

(36:29):
rid of them coming up stream and making sure even
the target shooting, even just being able to use it
during gym class as a as a class. What are
what are the straight faced arguments on Capitol Hill? And
you tell that you're hearing against something like this.

Speaker 11 (36:44):
Well, they won't be honest.

Speaker 14 (36:44):
They're never going to be honest.

Speaker 4 (36:46):
Greg.

Speaker 21 (36:47):
They don't like.

Speaker 11 (36:48):
Guns, they don't they want to demonize guns. They do
not want to normalize guns. Even though even in the
metro area, which has the lowest thing, you're going to
find a firearm in over half of the homes. And
so let's, you know, by all means, let's put our
head in the sand and never teach, you know, even
if we don't know how to teach guns, we're never
gonna let anybody else teach, you know, our kids about firearms,

(37:08):
because they'll never obviously never encounter one.

Speaker 3 (37:11):
Yeah, never, never never.

Speaker 1 (37:13):
Clark, Great, appreciate you weighing in of close of course,
Clark composition. I was going to Radio Utah every Saturday
afternoon here on talk radio. Want oh five nine can
the rest? Let's try and get in a couple more college.
Let's go with Tom on I fifteen tonight here on
the Roden Greg Show. Hi, Tom, how are you?

Speaker 16 (37:29):
Hey?

Speaker 22 (37:29):
Guys, how you doing?

Speaker 3 (37:30):
We're doing well? Thank you.

Speaker 22 (37:32):
Just had a quick yeah, just just an observation. I'm
blaming a lot of the reason why kids are so
anti uh No, nobody knows what they're doing with them.
And I blame a lot of it on the schools
because I've got a fiance that with a nine year

(37:52):
old grandson. I bought him a little red Rider because
I mean I had one in the seventies.

Speaker 4 (37:59):
You know.

Speaker 22 (38:00):
We took him at Campen and he wouldn't even touch it.
He was scared of it because of what they've been
indoctrinated into.

Speaker 17 (38:07):
Believe in.

Speaker 2 (38:08):
Wow wow, that discouraging again to learn the hard way.
If they don't learn the right way, Let's go to
Jeremy and Saratoga Springs. Jeremy, thank you for joining the program.
Thank you for calling in.

Speaker 17 (38:20):
Oh, thank you really quickly. I know we're kind of
clothing this comment or this part of the your show
with regards to kids having the opportunity to learn about
guns to totally for it. I think I'd like to
see the involvement of the parents too. I suspect that
somewhere in what's being proposed. But I think they're so

(38:41):
integral and understanding guns as well. And we've had such
a long time where guns we're villainized that I suspect,
you know, we got twenty year old, thirty year olds
who have children that would also benefit from learning about it.

Speaker 4 (38:54):
Personal opinion.

Speaker 1 (38:54):
Yeah, that's a terrific idea A mom and dad involved
in that as well. Let's go to Johnny and are John,
I should say in Murray tonight here on the rodden
great show.

Speaker 3 (39:02):
Hi John, how are you.

Speaker 22 (39:05):
All right?

Speaker 10 (39:06):
I'm doing good.

Speaker 3 (39:07):
Go ahead with your thoughts.

Speaker 9 (39:08):
I just wanted to I just wanted to add a
comment that me and my sisters we were raised shooting guns.
My sisters were still scared of guns into their adult life.
A couple of years ago they took a safety course
that was about.

Speaker 4 (39:25):
A week long.

Speaker 9 (39:26):
It was rather expensive, but it was very in depth.
And now they're not scared of guns anymore, and some
of them actually carry. So I think education concerning guns
is definitely a step in the right direction.

Speaker 1 (39:41):
That sure is, John. I appreciate your phone call on that.
Let's get one more caller in before we break.

Speaker 2 (39:45):
Okay, let's go Kelly from Kysville. Kelly, thank you for
calling into the program.

Speaker 21 (39:49):
What say you?

Speaker 23 (39:51):
Oh, I'm glad to be able to have the chance.
Thank you for taking my call. I I used to
be you know, there were a couple of things in
common with a all of these mass shootings. Number one,
there was a gun. And you know, we can't solve
mass shootings by regulating guns anymore than we can solve
drunk driver accidents by taking away my car.

Speaker 3 (40:14):
Yeah.

Speaker 10 (40:15):
True, but let's take that off the table.

Speaker 23 (40:17):
The other thing was, all of these mass shooters are nuts. Yeah,
you know it's now today. There are still two things
that have in common. Take guns out of the picture.
All the shooters are nuts. Number two, the cops seem
to know who they are.

Speaker 1 (40:32):
Yeah, yeah, isn't that interesting, Kelly, You're right, I mean
even the latest shooting. Apparently the kid's mom warmed the
school earlier that day.

Speaker 3 (40:44):
Earlier that day.

Speaker 1 (40:45):
Interesting, Interesting, Tubby, Well, we'll see how this issue goes
up with this up.

Speaker 2 (40:49):
I don't know Ship is listening on the iHeartMedia app
everywhere available everywhere, But I hope he was because I
love audience support from our smartest audiyy.

Speaker 1 (41:00):
Yeah all right, all right, more coming up here on
the Rod and Gregg Show in Utah's Talk Radio one
on five nine can arrest.

Speaker 2 (41:05):
But it is fight night. It is time, folks for
the glove. They're going to get ready to get ready
to rumble. And as excited as I am. I hope
everybody listening understands that the ABC, especially where the last
report that came out, our study showed that Kamala Harris
was enjoying one hundred percent positive news coverage ninety three

(41:27):
percent negative news coverage of Donald Trump. So don't expect
this to be like the CNN debate where someone sent
the memo to go after Biden and they did. They
will say that she has won and this has been
a clear victory, and Trump lied the entire time. All
that said, all of Trump's victories or electoral success or

(41:47):
polling success has come in spite of their best efforts
to tell you otherwise. So I still think there's a
big moment for America coming tonight.

Speaker 1 (41:56):
Well, let's get Utah Sunder Mike Lee on the show
with us on our any our News, make a line
to weigh in on this. Mike, what's your take on
the debate tonight?

Speaker 19 (42:03):
This one may surpass that one in its impact because
it is the only major event that the public will
have to learn something about Kamala Harris between now and
the election. As of right now, there are no other
debates scheduled, and to my knowledge, there are a few,
if any, public appearances for Kamala Harris between now and then,

(42:27):
so it'll be a chance for the voters to learn
a few things, hopefully, but Kamala Harris's plan for I
don't know, open border policies that she's been championing and
defending for years, abortion on demand, health care for illegal aliens,
including but not limited to, general reassignment surgery, Green New

(42:48):
Deal policies, and support for endless wars, all these things
at the expense of American taxpayers. Trust's job or a
part of this debate is going to be to make
the election a reference them on the Biden Harras policies,
and so I think it's going to be a target
rich environment for President Trump to identify areas in which

(43:09):
Kamala Harris has and still does embrace policies that are
harmful to Americans.

Speaker 2 (43:15):
You know, Senator there seems to be and I'm in
this camp, just conventional wisdom that the media will declare
Kamala Harris the win or without regard to what actually
happens on the debate stage. They will just say she's phenomenal,
she showed her substance, her humanity, and Trump lied the
entire time that a lot of people just expect that
to be the narrative from the regime media afterwards. I

(43:37):
guess my question is, and this is just observational on
your part, do you think that people like they have
on other issues, will they see through that and actually
see because I don't think she has a single issue
she can really stand on for fear of alienating any
base she may have, so I don't think she's going
to be very high on specifics or issues. Will the
American people see the debate for what it really is

(43:59):
or will the media have some influence on the public
perception of who wins and loses.

Speaker 19 (44:06):
Look, there are certain number of voters out there who,
regardless of what they hear tonight, are going to be
all in about Kamala Trump's arrangement syndrome as such that
some people, no matter what happens, no matter how wide
the gulf between their debate performances is, are still going
to come out saying Kamalak clearly came out as the winner.

(44:26):
But there's another segment of voters who haven't made up
their minds, And for those voters, I think this will
make a big difference I don't think the mainstream news
media is going to be of any help in terms
of speaking objectively on this. But I do think the
truth will come out because this is a debate, and
being a debate, it's on some level unscripted, and that's

(44:47):
why it's a good opportunity for people to see this.

Speaker 1 (44:49):
Mike, how did Donald Trump tonight get her to be
more specific on certain policies? Because I don't think the media,
I don't think ABC is going to push her when
they ask your questions about some of our very progressive policies.
So how does the former president get to her and
get her to be more specific as to what she
actually believes.

Speaker 19 (45:08):
I'd love it if he worked to drop specific references
to specific policies or bills that she pushed as a
United States senator, or policies that she's defended in her
current role as Vice President of the United States. I'd
love it, for example, if he pushed her on the
fact that she was his Senate sponsor of the Green

(45:29):
New Deal package, or that she was the sponsor of
legislation I believe called the Do No Harm Act that
is an open upfront to religious freedom. By trying to
prompt government retaliation against religious institutions that have unconventional views

(45:52):
on one or more issues. I'd love it if she
had to answer questions specifically about policies that she her
self has embraced for years in the past. And I
think Donald Trump can do a lot of that. Even
though it's it's generally not within a candidate's prerogative to
ask another candidate a question.

Speaker 17 (46:12):
He can raise them.

Speaker 19 (46:12):
You can plant them as flaids and see how she responds.

Speaker 2 (46:15):
Okay, let's have some fun proposition bets.

Speaker 3 (46:18):
Okay.

Speaker 2 (46:19):
I remember at the National Convention, a certain highly placed
and highly knowledgeable insider told me that there was a bet,
a little friendly wager that the President John Jay Trump
would not say Biden's name in his acceptance speech. And
there was an over under or there was a bet
if you do or don't, And there was a wager

(46:41):
with the with a former president with someone and he
at the very end he couldn't help it. He said,
I said President Biden's name once, so the other person
won that wager. Are there any of those type of
proposition bets tonight at this kid, this debate that you
would be pretty Let.

Speaker 19 (46:58):
Me see if I can start one now you mentioned
I haven't even thought of it.

Speaker 3 (47:02):
There really ought to be.

Speaker 19 (47:05):
We could count on, yes, that we would love to
mix it into this. In fact, we probably ought to
send them a challenge word now that you mentioned it.

Speaker 2 (47:14):
Greg, Yes, we've done this, Senator. We've had a challenge
word before. So yes, I think so. I have one
more question, but I'll let you know the God Okay,
here's this is off. This isn't about the debate. This
is about the the budget and the the continuing the
government after September thirtieth. I think that the Republicans, in
my opinion, are in a very very strong position in

(47:35):
the House and Senate to insist that you're the bill
that you that you've advanced, and the bill that you support,
the one that prohibits the same act that prohibits illegal
aliens from voting in our elections become federal law, and
that is being argued to be in the spending bill.
But you have some conservatives in the House that say, well,
that's just that's just a pageantry, or that's just theater

(47:59):
to get more poor, more spending, and we're driving this
country off a cliff. I'm not voting for any of it.
Remember in Princess brid when there were the two goblets
and the guy had to pick which one. He's like, now,
you think I'm going to pick that one, So I'm
going to pick this one. But you thought I was
going to pick that one, So I'll pick this. Are
the Democrats really interested in not passing a budget and
stopping the government if that, if that Save Act is

(48:21):
in there, or are they using that to get Republicans
to vote to spend more money in a supplemental bill?

Speaker 3 (48:28):
What say you?

Speaker 2 (48:30):
Yeah?

Speaker 19 (48:30):
Look, I think they would have a really difficult time
course came to shoves and if tomorrow they're scheduled to
vote at four point thirty pm Eastern time tomorrow on
the short term Continuing Resolution that would keep the government
funded at current levels through March of twenty twenty five,

(48:51):
and then attached to that is my bill, but to
Save Act, which would help ensure that only Americans vote
in US elections. And look, Speaker Johnson agrees with me
on this and is a push. We've been pushing this forward.
We've got to make sure that we've got enough Republicans
who are willing to vote for it. It's going to

(49:12):
be closed because there are a few who are wavering
on them. But if we actually got that passed, even
though President Biden has expressed opposition to it, and so
has Majority Leader Schumer, I'd like to actually see them
make that argument. I don't know how they could make
that argument. We so badly want to be able to

(49:33):
rely on non citizen voting in November that we're willing
to not fund the government over it. Because if the
House passes this, I predict that the House, we'll say, Okay,
we've done our job. We'll go on home, pass this,
and we'll call it a day. It's one thing for
them to say we don't need the Save Act, we
don't like the Save Act, or we think it would
cause this or that problem, which it wouldn't. But it's

(49:55):
quite another thing to say, no, we're not going to
fund the government if that's attached to it. I don't
think they can actually do it. I think there's a
chance that this gets passed in the House. We could
win this thing, but at the end of the day,
there isn't a valid argument against the SABA. Americans agree
on this by overwhelming margins. We're talking like four if people,

(50:16):
if not more who say only US citizens should be
able to vote in federal elections, and there is currently
a federal law that acknowledges that. The problem is that
law has become almost impossible to enforce due to a
number of circumstances, including a Supreme Court ruling that misinterpreted
part of federal law of.

Speaker 4 (50:38):
Seen years ago.

Speaker 19 (50:39):
The save as would fix that and just say, when
you register to vote in a federal election, you've got
to be able to show some proof that you were
a US citizen. What you have to do, By the way,
every single time you start a new job and you
fill out an I nine to four.

Speaker 3 (50:54):
You've done Sentder Mike Lee, what a novel idea? Sure
you're a citizen before you vote in a federal lay?

Speaker 2 (50:58):
Yeah, put a bow on it. I think that's just
that's just absolutely the way it ought to be. Is
that let them up, let them let the other side
argue why that isn't doesn't make all the sense in
the world.

Speaker 1 (51:07):
That's common sense, isn't it. Yes, seems to be as well.
A center more coming up on Rod and Greg.

Speaker 2 (51:14):
According to Trump's advisors, there's going to be a little
discussion about that, Yeah, and whether she was tough or
not well.

Speaker 1 (51:22):
The Harris campaign is having to deal with an interesting
story that CNN aired last night. It was on The
Aaron Burnett Show. And what they basically did was go
back and look at a I guess it was a
survey or something that she've pilled out back in twenty nineteen,
and it asked a number of questions about where she
stands on immigration and on drugs. Let's do a portion

(51:42):
of what they found out.

Speaker 24 (51:43):
Yeah, and this was a questionnaire that she filled out
for the e CLU. And then I want to walk
our viewers through a little bit of what she said.
Let's just take immigration and look at what she said here.
She said on immigration, she made this open ended pledge
to end immigrant attention. She said she supported payer funded
gender transition surgeries for detained migrants.

Speaker 5 (52:03):
She also said she pair funded gender transition surgeries for
detainment chained My actually.

Speaker 24 (52:08):
Said she she wrote both wrote and answered in the
affirmative when she was asked this, and she said she
also supported it for federal prisoners.

Speaker 15 (52:17):
Now.

Speaker 24 (52:17):
She also pledged to slash immigration detention by fifty percent,
close all family and private facilities, and decrease funding for
ice and then the end and ice detainers with local
law enforcement.

Speaker 1 (52:30):
Now, the argument that was mentioned was this was during
the primary leading up to the twenty twenty campaign, and
she was trying to go farther left than Bernie Sanders.
So that's why she answered the ACOU questionnaire the way
she did.

Speaker 2 (52:44):
But then she has to say why she felt so
strongly five years ago, and she doesn't. Now have you
ever heard a CNN host flabbergasted before?

Speaker 3 (52:54):
I've never heard them? Really, what did you just say?
How can you not be when you've got.

Speaker 2 (53:00):
Can surgeries for illegal aliens use.

Speaker 1 (53:02):
The American taxpayer to pay for transition surgeries for illegal immigrants?

Speaker 3 (53:09):
Yeah, and you can't explain that? No, no, no no.

Speaker 1 (53:12):
She was also asked in this survey about the legalization
of drugs.

Speaker 11 (53:16):
What else you know did you find?

Speaker 24 (53:19):
Well, let's also let's take a look at her answer
here on drugs. She got asked about. You know, this
is the question from the a c LU was, since
drug use is better addressed as a public health issue
through treatment and other programming, will you support the decriminalization
at the federal level of all drug possession for personal use?
And Harris answers yes, Now, What would that mean? Will

(53:40):
it mean the federal all all drug possession. That's not
just marijuana, which she alluded to in her answer to
this question, but it also would.

Speaker 21 (53:47):
Mean drug.

Speaker 3 (53:50):
Cocaine, things like that. Yeah, so she would make fentanyl legal.

Speaker 2 (53:55):
According to this is where you can't You should not
get away with saying whatever you think is you know,
you know, the flavor of the month, and not have
to explain why you believed that enough to put that
on the questionnaire as a serious candidate for president five
years ago, and you do not believe it today. Walk
through it, Walk through, Walk people through how you have changed,

(54:17):
because all she has said is that her values are
exactly the same. Well, what values brought you to let
Fenton al be legal? Or transgender surgeries for illegal aliens
and no more detention by the way of those that
illegally enter our country. If your values are the same,
how'd you get there? And how are you wherever you
are right now? Walk us through that?

Speaker 1 (54:36):
Yeah, Well, like you pointed out the reaction from Aaron
Burnett on CNN, she supports that. So here you have
a woman who wants to be president of the United States.
She wants to cut ice funding she wants you, the
American taxpayer, to pay for transition surgery for illegal immigrants,

(54:56):
and she wants to do away with it. She wants
to make fence and all legal unbelievable.

Speaker 2 (55:01):
And look everything that the Trump that the Biden Harris
administration did upon election basically did open those borders wide open.
And everything you're seeing in Aurora, Colorado and in Springfield, Massachusetts,
housecats rest in peace, and ducks and geese run for
your lives.

Speaker 3 (55:19):
That's all.

Speaker 2 (55:19):
It all goes back to them and what they've done,
and the consequences are being felt in real time right now.

Speaker 3 (55:25):
Boy, they sure are all right.

Speaker 1 (55:26):
Moore coming up with Rod and Greg on Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine K and rs.

Speaker 3 (55:31):
Well, this just in.

Speaker 2 (55:33):
Four time Super Bowl champion Hall of Fame linebacker Jack Lambert,
who is not one to be known for his political opinions.
I've never heard of it ever today posted this election
November fifth, twenty twenty four, vote for America Being Great
Again hashtag DJT so Jack Lambert is now all in

(55:55):
with Donald Trump. It's over. Put a stick a fork
in it. Pa is now just gone into the Trump call.

Speaker 4 (56:01):
Um.

Speaker 2 (56:02):
Uh yeah yeah. Steeler uh, Steeler. He's like one of
the greatest Steelers. That linebacker corp. That's steel curtaineth.

Speaker 9 (56:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (56:11):
Man, he didn't have those teeth and he just looked
like he just looked as mean as he played. He
was just a phenomenal player. Four time Super Bowl. I
learned the sport of football watching this. Just slobber knocker tackles,
just just I would literally put eleven linebackers on both
sides of the ball and football offense defense. I love linebackers.
Jack Ham was another great one anyway. Yeah, Jack Lambert

(56:34):
just came out and said, hey, make America great again.
There's people already complaining about NBC's coverage and everyone else
are already starting to explain how she's gonna win or
it has to win, whatever they're doing. It's just it's
it's already off putting.

Speaker 1 (56:48):
Just so you know, well, you know what, the the
legacy media does not want Donald Trump to win.

Speaker 3 (56:56):
No, that is so that is so obvious.

Speaker 1 (56:58):
They their level best, and they are going to build
her up as much as they possibly can what you
call it. The other day he came up the vapor
theory or the vapor world.

Speaker 3 (57:09):
Oh it was.

Speaker 2 (57:09):
Vapor it was, was it vapor marketing? Where you vapor
marketing where you where you uh, you talk about a product,
you get all this interest for it, and that interest
is what actually pays or justifies actually creating it.

Speaker 3 (57:20):
So it's not real. It's not real.

Speaker 2 (57:22):
You show them something that could be, but you get
you market it like it's all real. The demand comes
and then that gives you the justification actually put something
on the table. And so yeah, I think it's like
vapor marketing.

Speaker 1 (57:34):
Yeah, yeah, I thought, and I think that's exactly what
they're doing.

Speaker 10 (57:37):
Greg.

Speaker 1 (57:37):
It's it's vapor marketing right now. Well, of course, live
coverage coming up here in just about fifty five minutes
from Philadelphia have the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris.
An interesting petition is now underway. You know, this unusual
because of where it's coming from. Apparently there are professors
at colleges around the country that are now signing you

(58:00):
titian to rally behind Donald Trump.

Speaker 3 (58:02):
That kind of strange in.

Speaker 2 (58:05):
An impure academia style. It's not like they're falling over
themselves excited, but they're saying, you know what, we're not
actually leftists and we actually aren't for the centralization of
government and power. We don't think that's that's you know, right,
we're a classical liberal or a libertarian, and so they're
they're they're trying to create a diversity of thought. Imagine
that in higher ed higher education having a diversity of thought, well.

Speaker 3 (58:27):
That'd be amazing.

Speaker 4 (58:28):
Well.

Speaker 1 (58:28):
Joining us on our Newsmaker line to talk more about
it right now is Professor Daniel Klein. He is a
professor of economics at George Mason University. He, along with
another colleague, started this effort. Professor, thanks for joining us.
Let's talk about finding the conservative voice on college campuses
right now.

Speaker 5 (58:44):
It's a position that's rarely heard from professors. Most professors
favored Democrats over Republicans. We think this is a very
important decision to make. Well, g are democrats better than Republicans?
Are Republicans better than Democrats? And for us to have
a good conversation, we first need to know where we disagree,

(59:06):
that we disagree and who to talk to and then engage.
So we're putting ourselves out there, I suppose you could say,
but also we want to normalize saying out loud that
we think the Republican is better than the Democrat. And
then we do not think Trump is an exception to that,
so we include the presidential race of course. So those

(59:29):
are some of the reasons, just trying to like maintain
frankness and openness and normalness about saying these things how loud.

Speaker 2 (59:39):
I give you a lot of credit because I would
compare academia like I don't know, Nazi occupied Paris, you know,
And I like you got to wink and nod and
kind of give yourself the give each other the high
sign that you might agree on something. It seems so
far left. How is it that as you're doing this
petition and you're and I love the goals or to

(01:00:00):
normalize the voices that can actually occur and have a
diversity of thought on campus.

Speaker 3 (01:00:05):
I love it.

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
I love having a more amicable atmosphere for students. I
have two kids, one that's graduated with a degree at
university of University and one that's in his third year.
Having a better atmosphere where these ideas can be batted around,
I think is critical to higher education. But how are
you received by your colleagues who where you are certainly

(01:00:27):
in a I would call a micro minority of political
sentiment or philosophy. How are you being received by your colleagues.

Speaker 5 (01:00:36):
I'm not in any regular contact with a lot of
my colleagues who would disagree with me. We tend to
kind of separate ourselves, right, and so I wouldn't even
really put this notice, you know, put this initiative in
front of them, or bring it up among colleagues who
generally agree.

Speaker 10 (01:00:55):
With me, or lean the way I lean.

Speaker 5 (01:00:58):
It's varied, but some but there's a lack of engagement
even there, because I think a lot of people are
reluctant to say.

Speaker 10 (01:01:06):
It out loud, and and they don't.

Speaker 5 (01:01:09):
Really necessarily like I don't know, kind of like facing
up to them, not maybe having the backbone to say
it out loud, if you know what I mean.

Speaker 1 (01:01:19):
Why are they reluctant to get engaged in a conversation
with others who may oppose them? I mean, is it
that difficult on campuses around the country? Do you think, professor,
to have an open honest discussion about issues and whether
you agree or disagree with them, Is it that difficult
to do?

Speaker 5 (01:01:33):
At this point, It's definitely very difficult to have an
open honest discussion, even to just air you know that
you that you're going.

Speaker 10 (01:01:43):
To vote for Trump.

Speaker 5 (01:01:45):
I would say that that can can be a cause
for concern, Like some people would feel intimidated or worry
about things as a result of like saying that out loud.

Speaker 10 (01:01:58):
Yes, yeah, go ahead, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:02:01):
I just don't know where where in academy there is
there's not enough examples of where the centralization of power
of a government has worked out well for everyday people.
I don't think that there's a lot there. I love
some of the comments of your colleagues, Langbert. I believe
that said. I'm a philosophical liberal or libertarian who believes that,
in Throw's words, the government government is best, which governs least.

(01:02:24):
I would think that that just cannot be anathema to
the academic world. But how are these students going to
hear you if it's if it's kind of kind of
siloed like this and you don't really engage, how does
how do how will students feel the amicable atmosphere or
know that there's a battle of ideas and that they
can have differing opinions if the professors aren't really engaging

(01:02:47):
with each other in terms of these uh, the these worldviews.

Speaker 5 (01:02:52):
I think they have to find out about it through
like you guys, that is, through the discourse outside of
the campus, and then like that will maybe point them
back to somebody who happens to be on their campus,
someone sympathetic, and then they might check that person out,
look the person up.

Speaker 10 (01:03:13):
I think that's kind of what it's come to.

Speaker 5 (01:03:15):
I mean, I am engaged in certain things on my campus,
but even the things I'm engaged in, I don't want
to make those two political, and I don't want to
I don't, you know, push this kind of thing with students,
you know, that wouldn't be Yeah, I mean, I'm open
about about my physicians. I believe that it's good to

(01:03:35):
disclose where you're coming from with students. I don't really
think that's anti science or anti scholarship at all. I think,
in fact, in a way it's good scholarship because it
alerts your reader of what to look for in terms
of your own biases.

Speaker 4 (01:03:49):
Right.

Speaker 5 (01:03:52):
But so, yeah, it's very difficult. Academia is definitely a
weird place and is very dominantly left wing, without question.

Speaker 1 (01:04:02):
Professor, I understand you started this about in August, maybe
a little bit earlier than that, and the response seems
to be growing. Are you surprised by that?

Speaker 5 (01:04:12):
I'm not so surprised. We really haven't gotten it much
off the ground, But in the last week or two
that College Fix article helped, and that was actually reproduced
I think yesterday by zero Hedge. Yeah yeah, And I
don't know who read zero heads.

Speaker 10 (01:04:31):
I mean, they have a lot of readers.

Speaker 5 (01:04:32):
But they're all over the world, I think. So it's
kind of hard to get the word out. It's hard
to blast email people. I don't really want to blast
email people, and it's hard to do nowadays anyway.

Speaker 21 (01:04:48):
Stuff just goes to spam boxes anyway.

Speaker 10 (01:04:51):
So it's really good if we can get the just.

Speaker 5 (01:04:53):
I think most the vast majority of people who might
be inclined to actually sign this, I don't know about
it yet.

Speaker 2 (01:05:01):
You know, I went to when I went to university
early nineties here in Utah at Brigham Young University, the
pendulum was the other way. Those that were more liberal
really there wasn't enough room for their thought. I had
my friends that I went to school with. Their sister
was an associate professor. We had some incredible debates where

(01:05:22):
I lived about like the Clarence Thomas confirmation and Anita
Hill and I found myself learning more, getting my beliefs
really challenged in a significant way. So I say I
share that to say, the diversity of thought or the
battle of ideas, it amounts to censorship if you can't

(01:05:43):
have it. How can these students and institutions of higher
learning really understand that there are really good debates to
be had on these fronts, the ones that you bring up.
I mean, I just don't understand how we've got to
a place where we can't have speakers come to campus
that might challenge people's worldview. Is that just is that

(01:06:05):
the trend that you see that's just going to continue
to go and grow, or are we gonna see the
pendulum swing back and start getting some good debates going
again in our universities.

Speaker 5 (01:06:14):
I think it's possible for students to take initiative and
produce events, platform their own events, make their own events
where things like that happen. I do think that that
is possible. On the other hand, in terms of the
faculty that is not going to get any less left wing.

(01:06:36):
I mean, it's kind of like hitting the ceiling where
it can't even be more. But you should just expect
it to continue to be rock solid left and never
to improve.

Speaker 10 (01:06:47):
I would say.

Speaker 1 (01:06:49):
On our Newsmaker line that is Professor Daniel Klein, professor
economics at George Mason University, trying to organize Greg. I
think this is interesting, trying to organize professors on various
campuses around the country to say they support Donald Trump.
You made a point at the end of this where
it says students can put together debates, but we as

(01:07:09):
professors can't.

Speaker 3 (01:07:10):
Why not there might be a fertile.

Speaker 2 (01:07:13):
Ground for everyone to debate every side of every issue.
You should be assigned the position you don't subscribe to
and have to learn it to take that position on.
I mean, I just don't even understand how institutions of
higher learning cannot have student debate on foreign policy, domestic policy, anything, philosophy,
you name it. We should be able to debate it.

(01:07:35):
You hear about Aurora, Colorado and the Venezuelan gangs that
are taking over these apartment complexes, and how the Democrats
are trying to deny that this isn't happening, but it's
twenty twenty four. You can't deny it.

Speaker 15 (01:07:46):
Now.

Speaker 2 (01:07:46):
You have the issues with the Haitians and Ohio and
a small town of Springfield, these small towns in Utah. Yeah,
Harriman in Jeremy population of sixty thousand, at least ten
percent of that population's equivalent of Venezuelan and living in
apartment complexes in Harriman, which is a suburb here in
Salt Lake City.

Speaker 1 (01:08:04):
There's a story out there today, Greg that I think
is the venz Whalens have now taken out or have
taken over a hotel in l Paso.

Speaker 2 (01:08:11):
That is correct.

Speaker 1 (01:08:12):
I saw that, is it, Benze. I can't remember which
nationality it was, but they've taken over a hotel in
L Passo.

Speaker 2 (01:08:19):
So here's here's what's breaking this afternoon, which is interesting.
There's been some some this, there's some investigative reporting that's
been going on, and they're they're pushing this out now
as quickly as they can. This is how this is
all working. The Biden Harris administration in twenty twenty one
began to flood local governments with cash, tons of cash
out the COVID cash. Cities that would receive that money

(01:08:39):
would then funnel that to left wing NGOs. NGOs are
non governmental organizations. You used to see these in like
Africa and you know in these third world countries. Well,
now we got all these NGOs running around here in
the United States. Those NGOs contract with landlords and everybody
takes a cut. This is happening everywhere in the United States,

(01:09:01):
in every state at taxpayers expense. So there is so
in real time. While we have a debate tonight, some
of the consequences that this administration made and that Kamala
Harris made early in their administration are really being felt
in the worst of ways in communities throughout this country
right now in the fall of twenty four And so

(01:09:22):
I hope that this kind of investigative journalism and the
discussion about it can point back to where it all started,
because it did. It started with the money that that
administration started sending out in the billions to states in
twenty one.

Speaker 1 (01:09:36):
You know, it's interesting there are some in the media
today who are criticizing those of us who have raged
questions about what's going on in Ohio, you know, saying,
oh me, they would you know, oh well, they aren't
taking domesticated animals and eating them, didn't. We have a
picture yesterday of a guy walking down the street with
two was a geese, Yes that he had one in
each hand walking down the street. Where do you get those?

Speaker 2 (01:09:58):
And Era pointed out, you know you could those. You
go out and parking lot here, those geese on their
way Migraine.

Speaker 17 (01:10:03):
Where they're going.

Speaker 2 (01:10:03):
They land around here?

Speaker 3 (01:10:04):
Yeah, they land around here.

Speaker 2 (01:10:06):
Those ducks in the park and the geese and then
the domesticated dogs and cats. That is real. They cannot
tell you it's not because it's happening. It's sad and
it's real.

Speaker 1 (01:10:17):
Now What is real though, Greg a town of fifty
eight thousand absorbing what is eighteen to twenty thousand, eighteen
patient refugees. The impact is having on education, The impact
is having on healthcare, The impact is having on city services.
You cannot deny that. No, And here we have the
Biden Harris administration figuring out a way to bring in

(01:10:38):
all these unskilled workers who do not speak English into
this community. And this community is going What on earth
is going on? And what's scary about it?

Speaker 4 (01:10:46):
Greg?

Speaker 1 (01:10:47):
It can happen in any community here in the United States.

Speaker 2 (01:10:50):
Well, we're seeing it here in our state, and uti
we're seeing it in areas that you would never expect it,
like a suburban Salt Lake County, Harriman. You're seeing it
all over it and but these stories are emerging right now.
And it's not because it's some you know, conservative conspiracy.
It's the it's the unintended consequences, or maybe it's intended,

(01:11:11):
but there it's it's happened, the actions live. This is
happening to our country in real time, right curious it
sure is?

Speaker 3 (01:11:17):
All right?

Speaker 1 (01:11:18):
Moore coming up with Rod and Greg and Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine canters.

Speaker 2 (01:11:22):
Oh, I'm getting jittery now, I'm sorry. I came into
the show just just so cocked, running confident. Now I'm
starting to get a little butterflies something and.

Speaker 1 (01:11:30):
No, uh oh, well, let's talk about Republican voters right now.
My next guest, his name is Jesse Walker. He is
a book editor at reasons dot com world. An interesting
article about Republican voters are in fact they get are
they getting more socially liberal under Donald Trump? And Jesse
is joining us on our news maker line right now. Jesse,

(01:11:52):
give us the reasoning behind why you think Republican voters
are getting socially more liberal under Donald Trump.

Speaker 18 (01:11:58):
Well, the important thing is said this is about public opinion.
It's not about public officials, it's not about public policy.
Whether someone likes or doesn't like what Donald Trump's doing
doesn't enter into it. It just has to do with
how public opinion looks. And in fact, although what people
point to when they say, look, the parties are getting

(01:12:20):
more divergent on and they will look at some of
these questions about racial issues, civil rights issues, and they'll
show Democrats moving much further to the left. What they
often don't the show is that Republicans are also moving
towards the left, just not as fast a rate, and
so the gap gets wider, but they're both actually moving

(01:12:40):
in the same direction.

Speaker 2 (01:12:42):
You know, Jesse, in your article, there's a point that
you made where the way the question has been asked
in polls was maybe producing reactions where even minorities were
answering them in ways that the way the questions asked
could be considered a racist answer, and they had to
kind of rethink how they were going to approach these
questions to kind of get to people's true sentiments. Could

(01:13:03):
it be the case that Republicans and Democrats haven't been
outside the fringe groups? Maybe not racist per se, but
maybe categorized as racist if say, Republicans opposed illegal immigration
at the border, which for a while there the narrative
was you only opposed that because you were racist. So
the way we ask these questions and get better at

(01:13:24):
asking them is that what might be changing other than
the attitudes of Republicans and Democrats.

Speaker 18 (01:13:31):
Well, I should say the immigration questions are separate from this.
I mean there's a republic opinion in that in case,
actually Democrats have that in more conservative recently.

Speaker 10 (01:13:39):
I saw that, Yeah, right, yep, yeah.

Speaker 18 (01:13:41):
But it is certainly the case that people and you know,
social scientists will devise these scales and that they used
to classify people like how they fall on. I mean,
there are all sorts of things, like there's one called
conspiracy ideation, which is supposed to be how prone you
are to conspiracy theories. I mean, all sorts of stuff.
And there's one that was called the racial resentment scale.

(01:14:04):
And the problem with it was that, as you said,
you know, when they gave these tests African Americans, a
fair number were showing up as racially resentment, were unresentful
and not resentful towards whites, you know, I mean it
would be the questions that if they were resentful towards
other blacks, which didn't really make sense in terms of
how to interpret the answers. But what I've what I

(01:14:25):
decided and looking at this is that although I think
calling that racial resentment or symbolic racism or these other
terms that you're thrown around is a problem and I
think misrepresents people, the people who give the the answers
that are supposed to be not racist answers, it's pretty
safe to say that those folks are getting more racially liberal,

(01:14:49):
and that is where there has been movement on the
Republican side. Obviously not everybody, but you know, to get
more racially liberal, even as defined by this scale that
it is supposed to me measuring, you know, the racial
thoughts that people will not say aloud, Jesse.

Speaker 1 (01:15:05):
Is it fair to say then that there are Conservatives
or Republicans who are becoming maybe more accepting of the
racial issues that we have in this country and maybe
even issues on same sex marriage that we've you know,
that conservatives have become a little more accepting.

Speaker 18 (01:15:21):
Oh yeah, absolutely, I mean, I mean, certainly on same
sex marriage. The numbers that that overwhelmingly it's come down
somewhat in the last couple of years, which I think
is because of some of these culture wars around other
LGBT issues. But it's not just same sex marriage. I
didn't have room for it in New York story because
you know, there's like a hard ceiling of how many

(01:15:42):
words you've got, but there's also you know, a whole
numbers that have to do, which is whether you think
same sex relations are morally wrong or acceptable. And they
showed similar numbers going up and then coming down a
bit in the last couple of years. So I think basically,
as I mean, when I was a kid, you know,

(01:16:03):
it was sort of like whispered about that somebody.

Speaker 21 (01:16:05):
Was gay, and you know what they were getting up
to do.

Speaker 18 (01:16:07):
Nowadays, even if your religion says it's not okay, there's
a good chance you know someone at works who's married
to another guy or something like that, and it seems
like a perfectly fine person. And I think that affects
how people you know, approach these issues.

Speaker 2 (01:16:22):
So here's my dilemma. Because I grew up in Pittsburgh,
I've had a lot of friends of different race, color, creed,
and so I just have a life experience where I've not,
but my mother was a single mother, so I grew
up in a very poor area. There's an interesting observation
that you have in here where you talk about people
attributing racial disparities to structural barriers or to individual failings.

(01:16:43):
And the way I read that is that if you
grew up in a very poor area, have a single parent,
there's not a lot. There's a lot of structural barriers period,
without regard to color that you may face, socioeconomic status
being you know, being the prevailing challenge, and those communities
versus individual failings. As I've read that to mean the pigment,

(01:17:04):
pigment of the of your skin, the color of your skin.
When we see when we see policies that are specifically
for people that are black without regard to the structural
barriers that they've experienced, is that to me, that's more
racial than to look at a structural barrier that might
be impacting people of which might be predominantly black, but
you might have people of that are white and other

(01:17:26):
races that in that structural barrier or that community. I
guess my question is is it more racial to say
that someone that's black needs to have more consideration and
more maybe the dei, the inclusion, the the the whether
you call it the affirmative action purely on the color

(01:17:48):
of the skin, or are the structural barriers maybe a
more broader way of looking at the challenges people face.

Speaker 18 (01:17:54):
Yeah, well, I mean, someone I think is to be
clear when when I use to phrase individual failings, that's
when people talking about someone who's not getting ahead because
they're not working as hard.

Speaker 3 (01:18:02):
And that's okay.

Speaker 4 (01:18:04):
So it's more about sort.

Speaker 18 (01:18:05):
Of like on the you know, there's kind of more
moral or questions, and I think almost everybody understands that
there's a mix that a lot of people face structural
barriers and some people don't work hard, you know, and
that's and that's true of people have many different racial categories.
So you know, it kind of it's really not an
either or I think in most people's minds. But you

(01:18:27):
are getting at something which I think is a real phenomenon.
I mean, well, there obviously are some things that you know,
black people have had to put up with that white
people have not had to put up with. There's also
some things across you know, across the color line and
are more about class. And it is true that some
affirmative action programs ultimately end up helping the people who

(01:18:50):
are already the best positioned in the racial minorities. You know,
someone who's already coming from a middle class background at
the expense of you know, lower income people that are
not and I mean not just white but also Asian
off there groups. So that is a way that a
lot of those programs end up not doing what they
were supposed to do.

Speaker 1 (01:19:09):
On our newsmaker line, Jesse Walker, he is a editor
at Reason dot com, talking about GOP voters more socially
liberal under Donald Trump. You agree or disagree with that?
I no, I think the word is more accepting.

Speaker 2 (01:19:23):
Yeah, it's it's it's liberal. It's just it's I mean, yeah,
I don't. I don't find it all. In fact, do
you remember when Obama was president, every time you disagreed
with him, you're accused of being a raid ration. I'm
just going to tell you that the word's been thrown
around too loosely and attributed to Republicans too often. I
don't think that we're a more liberal, uh you know,
party or people right now at all?

Speaker 1 (01:19:45):
All right, mare coming up some final thoughts here on
the Roden Gregg Show, before we take you to the
presidential debate in Philadelphia as a candidate, give us a
sense of what candidates are going through just a few
minutes before the debate begins.

Speaker 3 (01:19:58):
What are you going through?

Speaker 2 (01:19:59):
I think the What's the thing I can compare to
is it was a prime time at KUTV. So we're
going to the studios. You've got it's your You're coming
in with your campaign crew. They get a green room
in there. You're trying to stay loose. You've gone through
a lot of preparation. You've been in a campaign, so
you know these issues already. For me, I always wanted
a debate. That was something that I wanted more of.

(01:20:20):
But but the problem is I could, I could get
down the deep grass too much, and I had to
keep things on a broader level to communicate broader messages
than I was than I tended to do. So my
campaign manager said to me, because you can't bring any
notes just like this debate tonight, so you have a
notepad and a pen waiting for you when you get
there on the podium. I took three just three ideas,

(01:20:43):
like swing thoughts, three ideas that whatever I was asked,
I needed to land on these thoughts that I wanted
to leave the voters, the listeners, the viewers of this
debate to I need to leave them with this impression.
So I wrote those down early when I got to
the podium what those three things were that I could
frame any answer or towards what we knew that people
wanted to hear more of, or that was really moving

(01:21:04):
people's votes. So there's some strategy to that. But I
think right now the key for both these candidates is
they got to stay loose. They gotta they gotta be
they just can't. They just got to try to be themselves.
I think authenticity comes through the most, and I think
that's what people watch for. I think they look for
if you're a robot. Remember Marco Rubio was an incredible
orator as a stat senator, he was a robot and

(01:21:28):
said people picked up on that and that's why he
didn't see so much success. So I just I just
think you've got to keep your personality who you are.
And but just and again, for a guy like Trump,
he's got such a stellar record and she's got such
a nightmare of a record that you just have to
contrast and compare and and really not let her bait

(01:21:48):
him into being more personal and getting more indignant into.

Speaker 3 (01:21:52):
The policy could be fun on the differences.

Speaker 2 (01:21:56):
I mean when he said that that Biden, I don't
know what he just said, and I don't think he
does either. Yeah, that's fine to me. I thought for him. However,
whatever quick he comes up with tonight, I think that's
Donald Trump and we expect that. And so I just think, look,
he assessed of a solid performance. Because debates, really, as
much as candids would love to know it, they don't
move them. Let the needle as much as you'd like.

Speaker 1 (01:22:17):
Maybe a point, maybe point unless someone really bombs you
could maybe move that way. All right, Well, like I said,
we're just a few minutes away from the presidential debate,
wrapping up things. We'll be back tomorrow with complete analysis.
We'll call on a number of great local experts to
give us an idea as to what came out of
this debate. Tonight live coverage coming up next, Head up,

(01:22:38):
shoulders back, May God bless you and your family.

Speaker 3 (01:22:40):
Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 1 (01:22:42):
The presidential debate Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is next.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Rod Arquette Show News

Popular Podcasts

1. Stuff You Should Know

2. Dateline NBC

3. Crime Junkie

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The Rod and Greg Show: Presidential Debate Preview with Senator Mike Lee; Gun Safety Classes in Utah Schools

Episode Transcript

Rod Arquette Show News .css-1q01m3q{margin:0 0 -2px 0;}

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}1. Stuff You Should Know

2. Dateline NBC

3. Crime Junkie

All Episodes