Rod Arquette Show: "Weird" is New Word for Dems to Describe Republicans; Kamala's Extreme Policies on Electric Vehicles

Rod Arquette Show Daily Rundown – Monday, July 29, 2024

4:20 pm: Thomas Catenacci, a reporter with the Washington Free Beacon, joins Rod for a conversation about his coverage of Kamala Harris’ plan to be more aggressive than Biden when it comes to electric vehicle mandates.

4:38 pm: Steven Greenhut, Western Region Director for the R Street Institute joins the show to discuss his piece on the roots of J.D. Vance’s odd political thinking.

6:05 pm: Ilya Shapiro, Director of Constitutional Studies and a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute joins the program to discuss Joe Biden’s recently released plan to reform the Supreme Court.

6:20 pm: Terry Schilling, President of the American Principles Project, joins the program for a conversation about the group’s efforts to get out the word about the extreme left policies of Kamala Harris.

6:38 pm: Shaka Mitchell, a Senior Fellow at the American Federation for Children joins Rod to discuss the latest on the Utah Education Association’s lawsuit against the state over the recently passed school choice law.

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
I like weird people. And apparentlythe Democrats are now using the word weird
to go after Donald Trump and JD. Vance and anybody who supports them.
I mean, what a strategy ofthis is. Let's just call them all
weird and if we keep on callingthem weird up to an election day,
who wants to elect a weird presidentor a weird vice president, or a

(00:23):
weird senator or a weird member ofCongress. Who wants to do that?
So the Democrats are thinking, youknow, if we just call them all
weird, nobody wants to vote foranybody who's weird. Really, I mean,
apparently everything else they've tried hasn't stuck, So apparently they think if they
call Republicans all weird, that maystick come election day. One to just

(00:47):
Bizarro Approaches says, how are you, everybuddy, Hello, Utah, Welcome
to the rod Arcutcho on this Mondayafternoon. I hope you had a fantastic
weekend. Our family took a quicktrip up to lab of Hot Springs up
there in southeast Idaho and went tothe pool and enjoyed that little community up
there. We just had a ball. That's a nice area up there.

(01:07):
Yes it does get crowded, andyes it is Idaho, but Idaho.
My wife from Idaho. They're finepeople up there, and we had a
really enjoyable time and we hope youdid as well. And boy on the
weeks just keep on rolling and itjust gets busier and busier and busier.
There's more to talk about today.Joe Biden All Politics today out proposing major
changes to the US Supreme Court.We're going to examine that a little bit

(01:30):
later on. Of course, we'lldo a lot of examination of Kamala Harrison's
various policies. You know, herapproach to EV's electric vehicles is much more
aggressive, if you can believe that, than even Joe Biden. So we'll
get into that. We'll talk aboutwhat's going on with JD. Vans.

(01:51):
The course is a lot you knowNew York Times article over the weekend about
JD. Van's and all the tweetshe sent out years ago. We'll get
into that. As I mentioned,Donald or Joe Biden today unveiled a new
plan to reform the Supreme Court.It's not going anywhere, but you know
they're going to use it as acampaign issue. That's what they do.

(02:12):
And a little bit later on,we're going to talk about the latest on
the lawsuit against the State of Utahby the Utah Education Association on the school
choice program here in the state ofUtah. It begins this fall. The
response and the people who applied reallyblew people away. I mean, there
are a lot of parents out therewho want school choice in this state and

(02:34):
they showed up. And we'll getinto that as well. So we've got
a lot to get to today.And yes, we are going to talk
about whatever happened at the Olympics.You want to talk about weird? Okay.
The Democrats today are out there embracingwhat happened. Even Joe Biden called
the opening ceremonies absolutely fantastic, youknow, And they're embracing what happened in

(02:57):
the Olympics, especially in the openingceremonies. Now, you know what's sad
in my opinion about all of thisis that demonstration about whatever it was,
and I'm still thinking that was alittle weird. Is taking away a little
bit from the performance of the athletes. These athletes are you know, how
much attention let's be honest, howmuch attention do you pay to swimming events

(03:23):
throughout the year, probably very little, if any, right, but when
it comes to the Olympics, we'regoing to see some of the premier athletes
in that pool if you haven't alreadyseen them. What about gymnastics, I
mean, no, they have avery successful program on gymnastics up at the
University of Utah and a lot ofpeople show up. They packed the place

(03:43):
every time the EU gymnasts are performingand are competing. But really, how
much time do you spend throughout youryear paying attention to gymnastics? But now
we are because there's some amazing again, amazing athletes both on the men and
women's side when it comes to gymnastics. So that's my concern about the Olympics

(04:04):
is that it's distracting a little bitbecause all we're talking about today and we
have been for a couple of days, is what happened during the opening ceremonies
and not talking about the achievements ofthese athletes because they are they are absolutely
amazing. I mean, how manyof you a watch or go to a
track and field event, But wepay attention to it come Olympics time.

(04:25):
So hopefully we'll get into that andget your thoughts on that, because a
lot of people are condemning this.The French are going, oh, we're
sorry, we didn't mean to offendanybody. Really you think that? How
are you? Everybody? Welcome tothe rod ar Qutchew on this Monday afternoon.
If you want to be a partof the program eight eight eight five
seven eight zero one zero triple eightfive seven eight zero one zero, or

(04:48):
on your cell phone, you cancontact us and enjoy the conversation today here
on the rod ar Kencho. Allyou do is have to dial pound two
fifty and say, hey, runall right. As I mentioned, the
the word of the political moment rightnow here in America seems to be the
word weird. It may have beenunprecedented that Joe Biden dropped out of the

(05:14):
twenty twenty four presidential race about onehundred days from the election, but that
isn't what the Democrats and Republicans aresparring over. They're sparring over the weird,
the word weird. Kamala Harris usedit. Several Democrats are already using
it. You know, the Democratsalways get these talking points memos out to
everybody, and this is what youshould be saying, and if you look

(05:38):
at the media, I've seen someaudio and video montage, a montage of
audio and video of every Democrat outthere over the weekend, must got the
latest word. Here's how we're goingto attract Republicans. We're just going to
call them weird. Never heard thatin a political campaign, but apparently they

(05:59):
think that the people on the conservativeside, like myself and like many of
you out there, are just weird. And if we're called weird, people
will start looking at us like we'reweird. You know, I don't and
I don't know. Now this mustbe this's how it works. And I
think many of you know this.But if you don't, let me shed

(06:21):
some light on you. Whenever theycome up. You know, everybody is
looking at right now on the Republicanside, how do we define Kamala Harris?
How do we define her? Becausethere's a lot out there to go
after, but how do you defineKamala Harris? And I think the Republicans
are still trying to figure out away. There is an article we'll talk

(06:43):
about this a little bit later onin the show today about common sense.
If we simply talk about common senseand the approach to her record. I
mean, that will do a lot, but everybody. So as far as
the Democrats are concerned, over thepast couple of days, they must have
gone out and done some appolling onthe word weird, and apparently the word

(07:10):
weird must have rang true with alot of people out there. That's why
Democrats are now calling Republicans weird.That's the moment of the that's the lesson
of the day is you know,Republicans like Donald Trump, Jade Vance and
the other Republican out there, you'rejust a bunch of weirdos. And apparently,

(07:30):
the like I said, the Democratsthink that that is the way to
go. Now Republicans are responding tothis. They've weighed in on the weird
comments, posting a video of KamalaHarris introducing herself with her pronouns that's a
little weird. Florida Republican Matt Gatesalso shared a video on x of Wall's

(07:54):
calling Republican nominees weird, with acaption, the Party of gender blockers and
drag shows for kids is calling usweird. It's a pretty good point.
I mean, just think of whathappened to the Olympics. The opening ceremony.
That's a little weird. But theDemocrats are singing its high praises today,
so weird. You know, justthink about that weird, you know,

(08:16):
a little bit later on we'll getinto this as well, because I
just think it's funny that the Democrats. Let's see, they've called this extremist.
They've gone after Republicans, is beinga threat to democracy. They've gone
after Donald Trump with you know,legal warfare out there, so law fair.
So apparently none of that is working. So they've come up with a

(08:39):
fantastic idea of calling conservatives weird.We'll see how that flies, all right.
When we come back, we'll talkabout the mandates, the ev mandates
that Kamala Harris would like to imposeon all of us if she is elected
president of the United States. Greatto be with you on this Monday afternoon.
If you want to be a partof the program eight eight eight five
seven eight or a one zero eightyeight eight five seven eight zero one zero,

(09:03):
or on your cell phone, allyou do is have to dial pound
two fifty and say hey Ron.Over the past several days, will continue
to do this right up until theelection day to point out to you some
of the extreme positions that the presumptiveDemocratic nominee for the White House, Kamala
Harris has. We've talked about thefact that she she wants open borders,

(09:24):
she wants to defund the police,she wants higher taxes, and she's a
big, big supporter of the NewGreen Deal. Well, what about her
mandate? What is her position onelectric vehicles? Of course that's a favorite
issue for the climate crazies out there, and her are her stands and what
she would like to do more aggressive? The name Joe Biden's well joining us

(09:48):
on our newsmaker line he wrote aboutthis today is Thomas kat Natchi. He
is a reporter at the Washington FreeBeacon. Thomas, how are you,
and welcome to the rod Ar Quenthew, thanks for joining us. I'm good.
Thank you so much for having me, Thomas. How extreme is she
when it comes to evs? Well, very extreme, And I think that
this is one of the key issues, especially broadly on energy, that voters

(10:09):
really have to consider when they're kindof assessing this brand new candidate that's been
thrust upon them. And so wedecided to take a look at her.
Twenty twenty positions. Of course,as your listeners will remember, she ran
in twenty twenty for the Democratic ticket, and a big part of her agenda
her platform then was not just climate, but this really rapid transition to evs,

(10:33):
and so she backed kind of publiclya fifty percent mandate, so fifty
percent of all light duty electric vehiclesor light duty passenger vehicles would have to
be electric vehicles by twenty thirty andone hundred percent by twenty thirty five.
That easily put her in the ranksof even among all of those progressives running,

(10:54):
as you'll remember, it put herin the ranks of the most progressive.
And she also backed as Senator theZero Mission Vehicle Act, which by
twenty twenty seven would have mandated fortythree percent of all passenger car purchases are
electric by that day. That meansby twenty twenty six, because model year

(11:16):
twenty twenty seven cars are of coursemanufacturing in twenty twenty six, so we're
talking two years from now. Underher preferred policy, a wopping forty three
percent of all vehicles bought by consumerswould be electric. And just to give
you a little bit of perspective,right now, the latest numbers show that

(11:37):
around nine percent of all passenger carsin this country are electric, All new
passenger car purchases are electric, andso that is within two years under Kamala
Harris's plan, we would need torapidly, rapidly, you know, scale
up electric vehicle purchase is and ofcourse electric vehicle production and all the different

(12:03):
facets of electric vehicle production including rawmineral production in mining. So there's just
the whole slate of issues that itunlocks. But it gives you a sense
of really how how far left sheis on this particular issue. Thomas,
say, she ever explained how wewould reach those goals that she set forth
on EVS? I mean, doesshe have a plan to do it,

(12:24):
like take all our cars away andmake us drive EVS? I mean,
what's the plan behind all of this? Thomas? Oh, of course not.
And that's what's so frustrating for someonelike myself who covers this issue is
there's no explanation. There's you know, you would think that there would be
a comprehensive if a candidate were tocome forward and say, we need forty
three percent of all passenger car purchaseswithin two years need to be electric.

(12:50):
Vehicles. You would think that therewould be a whole slate of policies that
comes after that. Right, whereare we going to import the copper?
Where are we going to import thelithium for the batteries? So many raw
materials are needed for electric vehicle production. Where are the you know, assembly
plants going to be located, becausethere's very few of those in the US.

(13:11):
But all she really puts forward,and all she has put forward is
this sort of number, this thistarget and mandate, and then she always
coincides it with well, we're alsogoing to produce cleaner electricity as well,
and so so for the electric vehiclesthat are bought, they're going to be

(13:31):
fueled by solar and wind. Andthen you know there's kind of those platitudes
of all of this is going tobe manufactured here in the US, so
we're you know, clean energy transitionequals domestic manufacturing jobs. And so there's
a lot of platitudes, very littlespecifics, and I know, I wish
I could come on here and detailthose specifics for you then we can get

(13:54):
into more of a nuanced policy discussion. But you know, for someone like
Kamala Herricks, she never she nevereven even attempts to do that. I
want to pick up on another storyI saw you write for their Free Beacon
about her love of busses. Weall know how much Kamala Harris loves buses,
but she she talked about and talkedextensively about a five billion dollar electric

(14:15):
school bus program. And right nowit's only produced sixty buses. Is that
right, Thomas, That's right,and that's according to the EPA's own data.
So this is a program that wasa provision of the Infrastructure and Investment
Jobs Acts twenty twenty, which isalso known as the you know, bipartisan

(14:37):
Infrastructure Law, even though very fewRepublicans even voted for it, regardless of
what you want to call it,it included this so called clean bus program
through the EPA, and Kamala Harrishas really taken that program under her wing,
and billions of dollars have been announcedfor this program. And I decided,
you know what, I'm just goingto take a look at their own
data see see the progress of this. It's been years since this program was

(15:03):
created, and what we found wasreally really dismal results and it's upsetting even
people you know who want an electricvehicle and an electric bus transition. They're
saying that it's just not meeting thestandards of this administration has promised. So
it really is I think a blackeye for Harrison her legacy, given that

(15:28):
of the very few responsibilities Joe Bidengave to his vice president, this was
one of them. Even this shehas really failed to deliver. Boy,
it sounds like she has. AllRight, hey, Thomas, thank you
for a few minutes of your time. Love to get you back on the
show. And again, keep upthe good work. Thank you, thank
you so much. All right onour newsmaker line. That's Thomas Cantonacci.

(15:48):
He is a reporter at the WashingtonFree Beacon talking about the EV proposals that
Kamala Harris is putting out there,much more aggressive than those of even Joe
Biden. And remember this, thisschool bus program, a clean school bus
program. She talked about five billiondollars going toward that. Well, three
years later, three years they producedsixty buses, and there are some school

(16:12):
districts that bought them and have turnedthem back, saying they don't operate well
in the cold weather. And aroundand around and on the school bus we
go all right more coming up righthere on the Rodrica Show and Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine knrs.Listen and you'll know jd Vance. I
mean, he spent the weeks welteringin the spotlight after his past quotes calling

(16:33):
democratic ladies or leaders a bunch ofchildless cat ladies that went viral, and
then of course the story in theNew York Times yesterday about some of the
text messages that he was sending toa friend about law enforcement and about the
former president has really put him inthe spotlight. My next guest is Stephen
green Huts. Stephen is a Westernregion director at the R Street Institute.

(16:55):
He joining us on He's joining uson our newsmaker line right now. He
talked, he writes about unt theroots of jd Vance's odd political thinking,
even though I think Democrats today wouldcall it weird political thinking. Let's bring
Steven onto the show and get histhoughts on this. Steven, how are
you welcome back to the rod arKeNH Yeah, thanks for having me.
What about jd Vance? You wroteabout him, You wrote about what the

(17:18):
headline said, the roots of hisodd political thinking? What do you mean
by that? Yeah? Well,it's interesting he wrote back in was the
twenty fifteen. For sixteen he wroteHillbilly Elegy, which was a pretty compelling,
nuanced, intelligent book. My wife, who's actually from Appalachia, really
was moved by it. Abby.It talked about how poor people often self

(17:42):
sabotage, and it was it raiseda lot of issues about what it means
to escape some of your you know, some of the cultural barriers that hold
you back. And now, youknow, he morphed into, you know,
the politician that he became as USsenator from Ohio, and it seems
like a lot of what he's beensaying on a campaign trail when he's running

(18:04):
for Senate it was contradicts, youknow, the book because he's kind of
talking about, you know, howother people are keeping keeping poor Appalachian residents
down and the elites and all this. And I was just trying to wrestle
with, you know, just wrestlewith the roots of his thinking and bottom

(18:25):
line, he comes out of thiskind of national conservative, economic populist world,
kind of what we used to calla paleo conservative, and it's much
different. I'm more of a Reaganconservative, classical liberal. But it confused
a lot of readers. The classicalliberal does not mean modern liberal. It's
the term for Goldwater Republican, ReaganRepublican, what our founders call themselves,

(18:48):
that believes in free markets and finewith controlling the border. But it basically
has an open attitude towards immigration.And he's the opposite of that. He's
he's calling for, you know,vast restrictions on immigration, restrictions on trade.
Uh is you know, so alot of the policies that he he

(19:11):
focuses on are come from that kindof old school conservatism, more focused on
cultural issues than economic issues. AndI just was trying to I was just
wrestling through, uh, you know, where where it came from. And
one statement that he made, youknow, the Republican National Convention, really
jumped out of me and others too. Is here here he basically he said

(19:33):
America is not just an idea togroup of people with a shared history and
a common future. And that's uh, that's a dividing line between the old
right and and and more more ofthe classical liberals. We do believe America
is an idea, or at leasta large degree an idea, and people
should be able to come here andpursue their dreams. And it doesn't matter

(19:55):
where you were, your your uh, you know, your ancestors were.
And as long as this is aplace, it's a special place. And
I think a lot of these nationalconservatives, uh, you know, take
that that older view that no,we're just we're a country based of a
specific people and that's why we haveto keep reduce immigration and so on and
so forth. And I was justtaking issue and it's totally focused on policy

(20:19):
and viewpoint, not the politics ofit. There's been a lot of yeah,
you said, weird politics going on. I'm not focused on any of
that, just focused on kind ofthe thinking and the philosophy and Trump and
and and his populist MAGA movement isin many ways of movement away from you
know, the whole Reagan view.And we've talked about this before. I'm

(20:41):
definitely on the side of the Reagan. His his growing up and how you
know, everything he went through inlife. How do you see that impacting
where he stands today. Well,a lot of what he wrote about was
his family. Yeah, his familyactually grew up in Ohio and you know,
went off to an Ivy League school, and and uh, you know,

(21:03):
actually married a daughter of immigrants,and he's he is, his life
is in many ways they you know, I think an American dream success story,
right, it's great. And Idon't I don't mind that jd Vance
at all. I like that.I just wish you would come to the
conclusions I think he should about howwe just need to make the American dream

(21:25):
available to everyone. You know,And as I in this column, I
talked about my wife's background coming froma poor family and sixty kids and the
dad died early, blah blah blah. You know, but uh, they've
all done well, and they've allall the girls have done well. They've
all escaped some of the some ofthe you know, difficulties of their of
their impoverished background. And I likethat message. You know, I always

(21:49):
liked the Reagan shit shiny city ona hill message right where where where people
can come from, wherever they comefrom. I mean, I live in
an area where lots of immigrants fromall over the world, and the success
stories more in the heart and I'dlike to see more of that than more
of a discussion about sending people home. That's you know, that's my take

(22:11):
on it all right, Stephen,what we always enjoy your take. We
appreciate you being on the show.Thank you and enjoy the rest of the
day. Yeah, thanks so much. All right, Stephen green Hut Western
Region manager or director, I shouldsay for the R. Street Institute joining
us here on the rod Or KentSho and Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine k n rs. Still alot to come now. The media cannot

(22:33):
stop, you know, just slobberingover themselves about the candidacy of Kamala Harris.
As a matter of fact, youknow, you have magazines at articles
all week. Nobody is challenging herexcept those of us in conservative radio and
on Fox News about her record.Well, how long is this honeymoon period
going to last? New Hampshire GovernorChris Nunu, appearing on ABC's This Week

(22:57):
with Coinker Martha Radnits, answered thatquestion. Here's what he had to say.
Well, this is the honeymoon,right, I mean, this is
the honeymoon period. If you will, the courage to push him off the
ballot. Vice President Harris is inthere. The media is fawning, everyone's
excited. It's a whole new race. That's all very true, and that's
going to last for about thirty days. There's no question I think the Democrats

(23:17):
can take that momentum into the convention. The first poll I believe that will
actually matter if I may, isthe Wednesday after Labor Day, right,
So you're gonna have this thirty dayhoneymoon period. Things will settle. Folks
will get back, talk to theirfamily and friends, come off a summer
vacation, put their kids in school, all that sort of stuff, and
then they'll start really thinking about whatthis race really means. Chris Nunu on

(23:37):
ABC's This Week Now. Julian Epstein, a former Chief council for the House
Judiciary Committee, was also on theSunday morning talk shows. He talked about
what Kamala Harris and the challenges thatshe faces in the Rust Belt as he
took a look at the numbers.Well, Fox News does an excellent poll,
but you really have to do anaverage of the polls. If you

(23:59):
do an average of the polls,Donald Trump is still ahead by about one
to two points in the national election, and he's still ahead in most battleground
states according to about five of theseven most recent polls. So what we've
seen is that the race has returnedto the pre debate norm where it has
been stuck all year. The onechange that you are seeing, you know,

(24:22):
you have to really look at thecross tabs in the polls as well,
and cross tabs is a fancy wayfor your viewers of saying you look
at the demographic breakdown of what's inthe polls. The significant change that we're
seeing is that Kamala Harris seems tobe attracting more young voters that were leaving
the Democratic Party and more black votersthat we're also leaving the Democratic Party under
Biden. That's good for her.On the other hand, older voters and

(24:48):
working class voters seem to be movingtowards Trump. That's bad news for her.
The reason that's bad news for heris because most voters in the Midwest
states, the Ross Belt Swings Pennsylvania, Michigan, and wassconsin are older,
in working class, older and workingclass, and those are the type of
voters that will go for Donald Trump. Kamala Harris I don't know how she

(25:10):
appeals to the rust belt, simplybecause first of all, she wants EV's
and we were talking a little bitearlier with Thomas Katinacci about the fact that
she is very aggressive in her policytoward eliminating combustible engines cars driven by combustible
engines and instead replacing them with electricvehicles. Now, I don't know how

(25:32):
people in Detroit want to go alongwith that, especially when the American people
are telling automakers. Right now,you talk with local dealers here in Utah,
they can't give the things away.People simply do not want them.
Now, I'm not opposed to EV'sIf someone wants an electric vehicle and they
fine with them, if they wantto pay that kind of money, if
they think they'll save money by nothaving to use gas and willing to go

(25:56):
through the challenges EV's phase, that'sup to them. I have no problem
with that whatsoever. But forcing theAmerican people to do something Americans. I
will say this every day on thisradio station if I need to Americans.
The American people do not like tobe told what to do. This country

(26:18):
is founded on the basis of freedom, life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness. And we can pursueany path that brings us happiness as long
as as long as it is withinthe law. But here you have Kamala
Harris and the government telling you youhave to drive an evy if you like
it or not, and the Americanpeople simply are not going to put up

(26:42):
with that. And that's one ofthe I think of the issues you have
to ask yourself when you go intothe voting booth in November. Do you
want the government to tell you whatto do or do you want to live
your life the way you want to. Let's talk about weird. How many
of you actually watched the opening ceremoniesat the Summer Olympics in Paris over the

(27:04):
weekend. I mean I watched someof it, and I'll be honest,
some of it was really weird.I mean really people hanging on poles and
swinging back and forth, and thatthat that ghost rider whoever that you know,
it looks like Darth Vader on ahorse. Not sure what that was.
But the one that is attracting mostof the attention, of course,

(27:27):
is the absurd and offensive opening ceremonyat the Olympics, which involved a parody
of the Last Supper, which,by the way, the folks in the
view said, well, really itwas about the last Summer. It was
about Olympic gods. Really that thatdepiction of the Last Supper with transsexuals,

(27:48):
drag queens, exposed testicles, anda fat, blue painted semi glad man
apparently intended to represent dioceses the theGreek god of Wine diocese. Really,
folks, I mean, that iswhat we've come down to. I mean,
you know, I'm not a hugefan of the Olympics. I do

(28:11):
like to watch him occasionally when theydo come around. Excited that they're coming
back to us Salt Lake City intwenty thirty four. That's exciting. But
you know, you watch that thing, and you said you compare the two,
the depiction from the Summer Olympics inParis with a depiction of da Vinci's
The Last Supper. Now, Ibring that up for a couple of reasons.

(28:34):
Let me give you a little background. My father, many many years
ago spent an entire summer doing apainting by the numbers of the Last Summer.
He's very, very proud of this, and I'm not even sure where
to send it up. Both myparents are deceased. Hopefully one of my
brothers or sisters have it. Buthe was so proud of that painting.

(28:56):
Is a strong Catholic and painting thattook all summer long, very tedious,
very minute work. But you know, the Last Supper is very important to
him and important to Catholics around theworld and to Christians around the world.
So what do we get? Weget the now Paris is you know the

(29:17):
French. You can say, areweird? Okay, you want to talk
about weird, you can talk aboutthe French. They have a rich cultural
heritage and there could have been somuch more they could have done, but
instead they decided to go the weirdroute. I mean the best one ever,
I think was in London. Whatwas that four years ago when Daniel
Craig as James Bond and the Queenjumped out of a helicopter into the opening

(29:41):
ceremonies. I mean, that wasa classic, remember that one? That
was that was fun? This Youjust went, what are they doing here?
You couldn't quite understand that. Butyou know, the biggest sin it
was it was not blasphemy, Itwas that it stunk on ice as much

(30:03):
as efforts do. I mean,this was just bad. Now the American
media is trying to spin the uproaras coming from a few right wing religious
nuts. The truth is, thereare a lot of people who are offended,
not just in America, but youhave backlash in France, in Italy,
in Britain and elsewhere. Now AmericanCatholic Bishop Robert Baron, he's a

(30:26):
very popular Catholic cultural commentator, heurged Christians to keep raising their voices against
what happened at the opening ceremonies,after the committee in charge of all of
this attempted to quell the outrage overthe anti Christian scene in the opening ceremony.
Here's what Bishop Baron had to sayabout the Olympic stunt. If people

(30:47):
have taken any offense, we're trulysorry. In other words, if you're
so simple minded and stupid to havebeen offended by this wonderful expression of French
culture, well you know, we'resorry about that. Christians were offended because
it was offensive and it was intendedto be offensive. So please don't patronize
us with this condescending remark about well, if you had any you know,

(31:11):
bad feelings, we're awfully sorry aboutthat. Again, if people think this
is somehow going to mollify people allover the Christian world who are outraged by
what happened, I would recommend thinkingagain, and a real apology would be
something like, this was a mistake, it should never have been done,
and we're sorry for it. Idon't think Christians should be modified. I

(31:32):
think we should keep raising our voices, keep on raising our voices and saying
something's wrong here. I mean,let's go back. I mean they must
have had rehearsals, right, Imean you would on any performance, you
know, and you have the Olympicorganizers going, we're sorry, it wasn't
intended to offend anybody, We're reallyreally sorry. Well, in the rehearsals

(31:56):
for this debacle, didn't someone inthat crew say, you know, that's
a little weird. Maybe we shouldn'tdo this, or maybe we should change
this somehow that it wouldn't be sothat it won't be offensive to the people
who enjoyed the Olympics. But Ithink today, unfortunately, and over the

(32:17):
weekend, you know, nobody's talkingabout the athletic performances that we've seen already.
I mean, Simone Biles is justabsolutely amazing as a gymnast. You
know, in some of those swimmers, how do they do that? But
where they're talking about this, Imean even even our own Governor Spencer Cox,
other state leaders today are pointing outand asking, you know, that

(32:39):
is not going to happen when theOlympics come here in twenty thirty four.
Sure do hope not, you know, but it was embarrassing and for people
there to say, we're sorry,we didn't mean to offend anybody. Give
me a break. That's exactly whatthey were trying to do. I means

(33:00):
is one of the least religious countriesin Europe today. You know, you
have these beautiful cathedrals like Notre Dameand all through the country they have these
beautiful cathedrals now and they've really becomemuseum pieces. Very few people to go
to Sunday mass and these cathedrals anymore. You talk to local people, they
don't go. You know, yougo yourself, and there may be one

(33:22):
hundred people, maybe two hundred atsome of these masses in these beautiful cathedrals,
but they don't go anymore. Ithas become a very secular country.
And for people to sit there,the organizers of this event and simply say,
well, we didn't mean to offendanybody. It wasn't our intention.

(33:43):
Give us a break, right,all right? I want to get your
reaction to this. If you areoffended by this eight eight eight five seven
eight zero one zero triple eight fiveseven eight zero one zero on your cell
phone eating dial pound two fifty andsimply say hey Ron the Olympics, of
course, the opening ceremonies got underwayFriday, certainly some controversy after the Last

(34:04):
Supper debacle, the latest effort todenigrate Western culture. I mean the question
is you know it is art okay, and I'll throw this out there.
Are we, being as Christians orof any faith, are we overreacting to
this because it is art okay andthere we've seen offensive art throughout the centuries,

(34:25):
and we've certainly had classic examples ofoffensive art against those people of faith
in this country. Are we overreactingto it? Or, as the Bishop
Robert Baron said, is time forChristians around the world to stand up and
say we've had it with this,quit trying to tear our religion down.

(34:49):
Eight eight eight five seven eight zeroone zero eight eight eight five seven o
eight zero one zero. Were youoffended by this or are we overreacting to
this? Did you see it?What did you think of it? I
just thought it it was weird tobegin with, to the phones we go
and let's talk with Lewis. Who'san eagle mountain tonight here on the ride
or canto Lewis, how are you? Thanks for joining us? Oh thanks
for taking my call? Wrong?Yeah, as arab a commentary, their

(35:14):
intention was not to offend this,so what was the intention then? What
was the goal? The objective tobring people to Jesus? What was it?
So? And also how come theydon't go ahead and do something similar
to a Muslim I dared them dothat? They will not do that.

(35:37):
They know it's offensive, so theymove pretty much pretty well. What the
consequences, what the reaction was wasgonna be judge and you, Joe,
don't go in there. Yeah yeah, well, Luise, thank you very
much for your comment. You know, you raised a very good point.
What if they had offended people ofthe Muslim faith? Do you think they

(35:59):
would have even dared try it?Why is it in this world in which
we live today? The Christian faithis fair game. It can be attacked
from every angle, from every issue. It can be attacked today, but
you can't You can't even draw acartoon of Mohammad having without having threats against

(36:24):
you put on your life by Muslimcountries. So why is it? In
one sense, you know, youcan you can make fun of, you
can attack, you can do whateveryou want against those of us who are
Christian. But if you tried somethinglike this against the Muslim faith, against

(36:47):
the Hindu religion, what do youthink would have happened there? I mean,
as you as you look at thisnow you realize what is going on
in this country. It is anattempt to simply denigrate the Western culture.
That's what it's all about. Theyjust want to tear down the norms that

(37:09):
many of us believe in. Youknow, France, at one time in
the history of the Catholic Church,the Roman Catholic Church was its strongest ally,
its strongest country, and you cansee that in the churches that were
built. If you've ever been toFrance, you can see the faith that

(37:35):
these people had. It was consideredone of the pillars of Roman Catholicism.
But nowadays it has become a secularcountry. And apparently in that country today
you can do whatever you want whenit comes to your Christian faith. It
has become a very secular religion.So what was it about this? I

(38:00):
mean they weren't you know, youknow who was it. There are a
number of people saying, well,they were, they were honoring the Olympic
gods and they didn't need to offendChristians. Give me a break, right
eight eight eight five seven eight zeroone zero triple eight five seven o eight
zero one zero or on your cellphone, dial pound two fifty and say

(38:20):
hey, Rod to the phones wego. Let's talk with Bobby in South
Jordan. Bobby, how are you? Thanks for joining us today, Thanks
for having me. I appreciate it. You're welcome. Yeah. So I
would just like to I would liketo challenge Christians or believers if they were
offended by what they witnessed on withthe Olympics, is to have them considered

(38:43):
like, what did Jesus do whenhe was being mocked on the Cross.
He didn't. He didn't condemn themor convict them or say they're going to
hell. He interceded for them andprayed for them on their own behalf.
So I would just want to encourageChristians and to mimic Jesus in that sense.
If we feel like he was beingmocked, why don't we pray for

(39:07):
those individuals on their behalf pray thatGod forgives them, just like Jesus did
with the other thief on the cross. And that's all I have to add.
Well, let me ask you this, Bobby, So are you saying
we should look at these people andnot condemn them or criticize them, but
say we forgive you. If youfeel it was a mistake, we forgive
you, and we still love youand we will pray for you. And

(39:29):
you think that is the Christian wayto to approach it, Yes, even
if it was intentional. Just likethe people who are mocking Jesus on the
cross, they were intentionally trying.They were intentionally mocking him. But what
do we see Jesus doing. Wesee Jesus asking the Father forgive them,

(39:50):
and I think we should demonstrate thatas well. Like I don't think we
need to defend God, we don'tneed to defend Jesus. We need to
demonstrate Jesus and we can do thatby seeing what he did on the cross.
He interceded, he asked for Godto forgive them. Would that would
that lead to an end of theattacks that you have on Christianity throughout the

(40:14):
world. Do you think, Bobby, if we if we forgave them and
acted, as you say, likeChrist did when he was on the cross.
Would it change things? I thinkno matter what. People will always
mock religion and beliefs no matter what. But the hope is is that they
come to know Jesus somehow, someway by us praying for them and asking

(40:37):
God to forgive him because they don'tknow what they're doing. Okay, all
right, Bobby never thought of thatinteresting angle. Maybe you've got some reaction
to it. Eight eight eight fiveseven eight zero one zero triple eight five
seven eight zero one zero, oron your cell phone dial pound two fifteen
and say, hey, Rod,back to the phones we go. Let's
do. Let's start with Walter inSalt Lake City tonight here on the rod

(40:58):
oar, can't you Robert Walter?Thank you for joining us. Oh yeah,
the calm that's the Christians have had, and that's I think is normal.
If it had been a mockery ofIslam, I think the Olympics would
have been shut down because of therioting throughout France and probably rioting throughout the

(41:23):
world. Yeah, there would havebeen lying. So you're saying they would
have reacted violently. We as Christiansshould act more in a loving way.
Oh yes, we did act,you know, in a very loving way
in comparison to what Islam would havereacted. Okay, all right, Walter,

(41:45):
thank you, and Highland Tony wantsto join the conversation tonight here on
the Rider account. Joe Tony,thanks for joining us. Thank you,
Rob. You know, I ama Christian, but I grew up in
the Muslim family and in a Muslimcountry. My entire family on my side
are Muslims. And I think wemissed the point when we start comparing.

(42:08):
You know, Muslims have done this. This is something that's been going on
in Europe. It's a war againstGod, against religion. Doesn't matter whether
you're a Christian or you're a Muslim, you know, it doesn't matter.
And I mean how many years they'vebeen burning the Quran in you know,

(42:28):
in Europe in different countries, orhave depicted Muhammad in you know, injerogatory
ways. Yes, people get benthas a shape. Maybe as Christians we
should get be bent has a shape. Not in a violent way, but
we should continue to voice our youknow, raise our voices that this is
not acceptable. But to just saythat, hey, Muslims would have been

(42:49):
as you know, Muslims were notbehind. This has nothing to do with
Islam, has nothing to do withMuslims. They're not the bad guys here
that you're comparing ourselves to. Isthat these are a bunch of you know,
godless people who just don't care aboutreligion and don't care about God.
And I think that's what we needto keep in mind. It's a war
against faith, it's a war againstGod, and that's what it is.

(43:13):
Yeah, boy, right on,Tony, you're right. It's good versus
evil. And if you don't thinkthere's evil in the world, just look
at what happened at the Olympics duringthe opening ceremonies Friday night. It is
a good versus evil world and that'swhat we have to realize. All right,
more of your calls and comments comingup right here on The rod Ar
Kent Show and Utah's Talk Radio oneoh five nine k n RS live everywhere

(43:35):
on the iHeart Radio app. Aswe begin this half hour the rod or
Can Show, Let's talk with jl in Draper tonight on The rod our
Can Show. Jay l Thanks forjoining us, Hi, Brod, this
is j We talked before and yeah, I got advertise in your station before
with American loans. Yeah, anyway, Yeah, I think the sad part
about it is that the LBG COQcommunity wants to be a accepted They want

(44:00):
to be you know, not betreated different, and they do something like
this and then they go back manysteps as we try to accept their ideas.
When they do something like this,it offends so many people. And
if I were part of that community, I would be offended. I would
have to say, hey, that'swrong, because it makes it makes them

(44:22):
look bad, you know, youknow, Jail, that's an interesting point.
Well, the interesting point that youmake here, Jail is they want
acceptance, yet they do things likethis that offends people. How do they
expect to be accepted when they're constantlyoffending what we believe in exactly exactly,
And that's the sad part about it. I know people who are gay and

(44:45):
have different ideas than we do,and they're good people and everything, but
you know, when they offend uslike that, it's like what happened?
You know, we don't want toaccept them. So very difficult. All
right, all right, jay Eel, thank you appreciate your com let's go
to Chris in Springville tonight on theright. Oar, catch you hi,
Chris, how are you hi?Rod done a great job. By the

(45:07):
way, this is the direct resultof socialism, So this can be explained
economically. The money that is usedto support such abominations in the case of
the Olympics is forcibly confiscated through themonopoly of government force. It's not voluntary.
I don't contribute my money voluntarily tothe Olympics. Of the taxpayer of

(45:29):
one of the countries that's involved atthe Olympics, I am forced to support
it. And when you take awayagency, you always get bad results because
somebody makes decisions in your behalf withmoney that they are forcibly confiscated from people
like you and me who are taxpayers. So that's my comment. Yeah,
I'm not going to disagree with thatone, Chris. I think you're spot

(45:50):
on with that one as well.Let me share with you a couple of
things. This is the reaction fromsome of the officials in France about what
happened with the opening ceremonies. Theorganizing's committee president was asked about understanding the
if in fact he understood the offendedreaction from other parts of the world.

(46:13):
Here's what he had to say.He wanted that. He said that France
wanted to send a message as strongas possible about French culture. He went
on to say, we imagined aceremony to show our values and principles,
adding we actually had to take intoaccount the International Committee having said that it's

(46:34):
the French ceremony for the French GamesParis twenty twenty four. So we trusted
our artistic director. We trusted himand his team. Another official said this,
We wanted to include everyone, hesaid. We have the right to
love whom we want. We havethe right not to be worship worshippers.
We have a lot of rights inFrance, and this is what I wanted

(46:57):
to convey, these values that areimportant to us. So quite frankly,
I'm not sure why people were offendedby this or your calls in comments coming
up here on the rod Ar KentShow, by the way eight eight eight
five seven oh eight zero one zeroeighty eight eight five seven eight zero one
zero, or on your cell phonedial pound two to fifteen and say hey
Ron. As a result of whathappened on Friday night, there's at least

(47:22):
one sponsor who has withdrawn from thetwenty twenty four Olympic Games see Spire.
That's the telecommunications and technology company basedin Mississippi announced over the weekend that it
was pulling advertising from the Olympics.After the opening ceremony featured a scene of
the Last Summer with drag queens playingthe role of Jesus and his apostles.

(47:44):
So at least somebody says, I'mgonna talk with my money and I'm taking
my money elsewhere. All right,more of your calls and comments coming up.
Eight eight eight five seven eight zeroone zero triple eight five seven oh
eight zero one zero, or onyour cell phone. All you do is
have to dial pound two to fiftyand say, hey, Rod, we're
right now. We're talking about theevents of the opening ceremony, the portrayal

(48:04):
of the Last Supper, mocking Christians. Back to the phones as we go,
Let's go to Leighton and hear whatBrandon has to say to Night here
on the Rod Arc. Can't youhi, Brandon? How are you hi?
Rod? Thanks for taking my call. I like listening to your show.
Thank you, and what I doI usually agree with most of what
you talk about. I didn't watchthe opening ceremonies, but when I heard

(48:28):
about it and saw some of thedepictions, I wondered, what, you
know, what's going on? Andthen I also heard that they were depicting
this Greek festival and I'm really notsure what they intended to do, And
it could have been on purpose,that they just wanted to get clicks and
use it as a clickbait. ButI also thought it reminded me of and
you know this name Salmon Rusty whenhe depicted Muhammed and his cartoon drawings,

(48:52):
and how offended the Western world got. You know, how dare the Muslims?
You know, need to chill out, you know, don't take such
offense. Who cares if they drawMohammed and the cartoon or whatnot. So
my my reaction is, who cares? Turn the other cheek. That's what
a Christian would do. So Ithink Christians could set an example. I

(49:14):
just you know, you know,just just turning the other cheek and letting
it go. And maybe maybe youremember that. Yeah, but Brandon,
you've got to admit that's really hardto do when you see something like this,
right, that's hard to do.MM For me. No, that's

(49:34):
the world we live in. Yeah, all right, you're a better Christian
than I. Be hard for meto turn the other cheek. Let's go
to Jeff and Riverton tonight here onthe rod Or Kentchi. Hi Jeff,
Thanks Kam with Colrad. How youdoing. I'm doing well, Thank you,
Jeff. What are your thoughts onthis? Aden? So, I
worked for the Olympic Committee and thatwas one hundred percent meant to be harmful

(49:59):
to Christians today they want to dous, then, there's no way that
went through all the organizations, throughthe approval permits. They all knew about
it. Everybody in the program knewabout it. The IOC knew about it.
So, you know, the oldsaying, don't peep in my ear
and tell me it's hot rain.That was meant to be offensive, and
that's fine. They have that right. But at the same time, I'm
not going to watch the Olympics now, really love more power to them.

(50:23):
Let them. I'm not gonna boid. I'm just not going to watch them.
I'm not going to support them.If they're going to do that,
I want the athletes to compete likecrazy. I love the Olympics. It's
my favorite ping pong shingernized swimming.I will watch those because they are secretized
diving. They're awesome. But ifthey're going to do that, then I
have to send them my message tosay I can't support you in that.

(50:44):
That's all move forward how you want, but that's gonna be my choice,
and that is your choice. Jeff, thank you very much. And by
the way, I did watch alittle bit of that synchronized diving. Wow,
how do they do that? Eighteight eight five seven eight zero one
zero on your cell phone? TheI'll pound two fifty and say, hey,
Rod, back to the phones withyou all last ark with Robert Tonight
joining the rotter. I can't schit from Sandy Hi Robert Hi. Rod,

(51:07):
you know I watched it. Ihonestly didn't catch that as much as
I did. There was a scenewith two people in the library with a
woman, and it was very obviousthat they were they were promoting polyamorsm because
all the two the two men andthe woman go upstairs start kind of getting
it down and they go in aroom and close the door and I and

(51:28):
I'm watching this and I'm like whyin the world, and the Olympic ceremony
are they putting that on? Andthe thing is that, I know the
previous gentlemen said, we can justignore it, but like my next door
neighbor has a sister that's in theevent, and the entire family is sitting
around watching this, So you don'texpect to have to cover your kid's eyes

(51:49):
while you're watching an Olympic ceremony andthat's not supposed to be a part of
it. That's that was my objectionto. If you want to do that,
fine, then put some sort ofparental advisory or some sort of war
on before you put this stuff ontothe TV. You know what, Robert
I had completely forgotten about the libraryscene, But that's exactly what was taking
place. Wasn't that Robert I hadcompletely forgotten about that? Well, there

(52:14):
was, you know, the partabout the last Supper kind of slipped past
me until I heard about it.I was like, oh, yeah,
yeah, But the scene in thelibrary was so blatantly obvious what they were
portraying. Absolutely yeah, no,I'd forget completely forgotten about the library scene.
But he's absolutely right. It wasa threesome, folks. Let me
tell you that's what they were that'swhat they were working on in the library

(52:35):
in France, you know. Andit's sad. You know, we had
a college a second ago, Ithink his name was Jeff, talking about
that he's going to boycott the Olympics, just because he was so offended by
all of this, you know.And it is sad because like he brought
up watching ping pong, watching synchronizeddiving. I love to watch the swimming,
the gymnastics. The basketball is funto watch. The track and field

(52:58):
events are fun to watch. Whatthese athletes can do. It's pretty amazing
what they can do. And hopefullythat won't distract from really what the Olympics
is all about. Let's go toKay in Syracuse tonight on the rod ar
can'tch Okay, how are you?Thanks for joining us. I'm fine,
Rob, How are you doing.I'm doing well, Thank you. Yeah.

(53:20):
I just have a comment. I'veheard a lot talking about turning the
other cheek, and I think that'sreally our job to turn the other cheek
of someone to fans us. Yet, God himself says he won't be mobbed,
and I think we need to standup for him and at least let
people know that that did hurt.This is this is someone that we Rivera's
as our Lord and savior, andI just don't think I appreciate it,

(53:44):
and I don't think I'll be watching. Not that that's going to matter a
whole lot to the world. Itdon't matter to me. Yeah, all
right, kay, thank you.You know, it's a real question.
I mean, how do you howdo you turn the other cheek but stand
up for what you believe in?And I think that's what that's what people
struggle with. You know, wewant to stand up for what we believe
in, but we also want toact Those of us who believe in Christianity

(54:07):
want to act christ Like. Sohow are you able to balance both of
them? It is a I thinkit's a challenge. It's challenge for me.
I think it's a very natural thingas well. It's a challenge for
other people as well, standing upand basically saying, look, this is
what we believe in. We're offendedby this, we hope it doesn't happen

(54:29):
again. But then you have tothen bring in We forgive you, and
we're praying for you, and we'resorry that you don't you know, that's
your choice not to believe in Christ. That is really up to you.
Let's get in one more call beforethe I don't think we'll be able to
make it, won't be able toget it in time, So we appreciate
your thoughts on this Tonight. We'llsee where this goes and we'll watch it

(54:52):
closely. But remember the Olympics isabout sports and about these tremendous athletes.
Right now, we want to talkabout the latest political step being made by
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in Austin. Today, the president formally unveiled his
plan to overhaul the US Supreme Courtwith a clear eye on limiting former President

(55:14):
Donald Trump's powers should he succeed.You know, Biden took this unusual step
on unveiling his major planned policy stepsin a newspaper op ed in the Washington
Post this morning, and then heflew to Texas to talk about him and
there are a number of key issueshere that he would like to do well.

(55:34):
Joining us on our newsmaker line nowto get a reaction to it is
Ilia Shapiro. Illi is the directorof Constitutional Studies there at the Manhattan Institute.
Ilia, always great to have youon the show. Let's talk about
this proposal and the series of reformsthat Joe Biden and Kamala Harris would like
to impose on the US Supreme Court? Political? Political? Political? Isn't

(55:58):
that what it's all about? Iliapolitics? I think that's right. I
mean, for one thing, theseproposals are are dead in arrival in Congress.
For another, the one that kindof has the most bipartisan support,
the most support among the American people. Term limits would require a constitutional amendment,
and there's complications and how you wouldwork it out. So it's you

(56:20):
know, the current justices are grandfatheredin or I don't know what, it's
a solution overall in search of aproblem. The Justices adopted their own new
ethics code earlier this year, andyou know, there's no credible allegation of
quid prococ corruption or anything else.So this is, you know, they're

(56:42):
trying to make a play ahead ofthe election. I think, yeah,
of all the proposal that he's makingtoday is the term limits, maybe the
most popular that may have a bitof a chance it is the most popular,
and and the fact that it wouldincrease popular confidence in the court to
avoid kind of random vacancies or morbidhealth watches over occagenary injustices, these sorts

(57:07):
of things. That's the strongest argumentfor it. It wouldn't actually change the
operation of the courty. To kindof play reverse game theory and imagine if
we'd had ternal limits for the lastfifty years, the ideological balance of the
court wouldn't be all that difference.Nor would it lower necessarily the average age
of the justices, because all ofa sudden, people in their sixties would

(57:29):
be considered again. But yeah,that's the most popular one. It would
take a constitutional amendment, though,because the Constitution says that federal judges,
including the justices, serve in timesof good behavior, meaning unless they're impeached,
they can't be downgraded. And youcan't just say, okay, we'll
keep paying your salary, but you'renot going to have the same job.

(57:49):
That doesn't work. What is thethinking you behind the fact that justices there
are no term limits on the SupremeCourt right now, they serve until they
die or they just to quit.I mean, what is the thinking behind
that? What value does that bringto the court to have people serve until
you know they're done. It's independence, judicial independence, So they're not beholden

(58:14):
to finding whatever their next job mightbe, whether it's with a law firm
or who knows where after their service. It's making sure that you know they
they can only be removed if theycommit an impeachable offense, and some federal
judges in our history have been impeached. No justices. There's one chase that

(58:37):
came close in the Andrew Johnson years. I think he was one boat away
from being convicted and removed by theSenate. But judicial independence is the idea
just so they're not you know,they have a lifetime appointment and they should
be free from political or business pressure. What changed with Joe Biden, Because
for years he was an advocate againstany changes on the court. What changed

(59:00):
to you? Thank Youllia. Well, it's a little more nuanced than that.
He's been against court packing, meaningchanging the size of the court adding
justices for political motives. Ironically,he and Bernie Sanders were the only candidates
on the Democratic side in the twentytwenty primaries that that we're against court packing.

(59:23):
Possibly the only thing on which Iagree with Senator Sanders. But you
know this, he's tried to characterizeas something other than than packing or expanding
the court, which I think isright, although it depends on how exactly
the termal moments would work. Ifthe termal moments went into effect today,
would that mean that, you know, the two oldest justices who happened to

(59:44):
be Thomas and Alito, would theyhave to retire right away? I don't
know how the legislative package would bewould be formed, but assuming it's not
so brazen, assuming it's just whatwould apply going forward, you know,
it's it's it's more nuanced, butbut at the end of the day,
it's it's trying to play on thisnarrative that a lot of left wing activists

(01:00:07):
had that the that the court isis not normal and it's doing things that
are improper, when really I thinkthis all comes down to those on the
left, understandably not being happy withthe direction of the Court, including major
decisions in recent years on abortion andaffirmative action and guns and now presidential immunity,
and so this is this just anotherexample of the of the Democrats saying,

(01:00:30):
look at if we go if wedon't get our way on the court,
either we're going to take our balland go home or change the rules.
Isn't that a class. This isjust another classic example of that,
isn't idelia I think so? Imean when you when you if you want
to put it down to brown text, the uh, it's it's a it's
a threat, you know, likeuh, like Chuck Schumer, the majority

(01:00:52):
leader, uh said ahead of anabortion case a few years ago and threatened
Cavanaugh and and Gorfich with the youknow, if they don't rule the right
way, they're going to reap thewhirlwind that sort of thing. And then
of course, after the draft ofthe Dobbs opinion that overturned Row leaked,
there was someone who went out andwanted to kill Justice Kavanaughs. So these

(01:01:15):
are these are certainly dangerous things.That's along the line of, you know,
showing concerning handwringing over the legitimacy ofthe Supreme Court when it's attacks from
the same people on the Court thatare that are clouding the Court's reputation in
the first place. Once say Bidengot everything he wanted, right now he
gets what he wants, how wouldthat change the court? Do you think
he'llia? Well, again, itwould depend on how the term limit provision

(01:01:40):
would actually go into effect. Ifif the next term the president gets to
a point someone in their first andthird year, you know, whether that's
Harris or or Trump. That meansthey would I suppose, get to replace
either the oldest justices or you know, way that the court would would temporarily
spanned until the current members retire andit settles down into a nine justice court.

(01:02:07):
It would mean that every presidential electionwould be a guarantee that that the
winner of it would get to apoint two justices who would each serve for
eighteen years in staggered fashion. Thatway, as far as the Ethics Code
is concerned, this is also unconstitutionalin the sense that you would have lower
court judges sitting in judgment quite literallyover Supreme Court justices who are supposed to

(01:02:31):
be there superiors, and mandating recusalsin certain cases potentially or I don't know,
issuing fines. I don't know.Again, the specifics of the code
are in doubt. It's unclear whatsuch a code would add that the current
prohibition on all sorts of things anddisclosure requirements, what that wouldn't do.

(01:02:53):
And then the reversal of the presidentialimmunity. I mean this is, you
know, proposals to change the Constitutionbecause a particular the outcome of one particular
case, uh, that someone doesn'tlike that. That that happens from time
to time, that happened to citizensUnited, That's happened to many cases and
in our history. Again, Idon't think that's that's going anywhere. But

(01:03:14):
the thing is even the most popularof these, the term limits. If
you could figure out how the howthe transition would work, you know,
past your grandfather in the current justicesor or however that would work. It
would take a constitutional amendment. Andif we had a supermajority in Congress by
partisan by definition supermajority that that supportedthat sort of thing, then probably we

(01:03:37):
wouldn't have a Supreme Court uh wrappedin controversy in the first place. So
it's kind of a chicken in theeggich on our Newsmaker line, Ilia Shapiro,
thank you, director of Constitutional Studiesof the man Hattan Institute, talking
about the proposed reforms that Joe Bidenwould like to see take place, and
Kamala Harris I should say on theUS Supreme Court. More the run,

(01:03:59):
arch you coming up on Utah's TalkRadio one oh five to nine knrs.
We've talked a lot about the variousextreme positions that Kamala Harris has on all
kinds of issues. You name it, crime, the border, the economy,
taxes, the environment. Well,there's another extreme issue that she has
as well. This is about transgender, transgenderism, and parental light rights.

(01:04:27):
Joining us on our newsmaker line totalk more about that is our next guest.
His name is Terry Shilling. Terryis the president of the American Principles
Project. Terry, thank you verymuch for joining us. You organization is
launching a huge eighteen million dollar adcampaign pointing out Kamala Harris's extreme positions on
transgenderism and parental rights. How extremeis she? Kamala Harris is probably the

(01:04:54):
most anti family, anti American candidatefor president that we've had in ever,
and I don't say that lightly.This is someone that, as Attorney General
of California, helps secure the firstever taxpayer funded gender transition for a convicted
murderer. She literally gave this guyparole in order for him to get the

(01:05:16):
gender transition and paid for it withtax dollars. Meanwhile, her Department of
Justice, under President Biden, hasput a seventy five year old woman in
jail for two years for praying atan abortion clinic. Right, this is
someone that looks at our children notas belonging to each parent, but as

(01:05:38):
looking at them belonging to her.Right. And there's video clips of her
talking about these are all our children, They're not just your children as parents.
She's extreme and she supports the genderagenda, the race agenda in our
schools. It's tough to it.I'd be easier to tell you the pro
family things she does, which isnothing. I mean, help, how

(01:06:00):
far do you have to go backto see when she started this? Has
she always been like this on theseissues? Terry, Well, she started
her career as district attorney in SanFrancisco and I we're still digging into that
record. But her agenda as AttorneyGeneral of California, that gender transition story.
But for the convicted murderer that shegot a taxpayer front agenda transition for

(01:06:23):
that was in twenty fifteen. Sheapproved that, right, that was nine
years ago. But on top ofthat, you know citing, you know
the case of Daniel de Lighten,who uncovered the fact that Planned Parenthood was
selling abortive babies body parts for profitsinstead of going after Planned parenthood for committing
serious felonies and crimes. She insteadwent after the journalists uncovered that right.

(01:06:45):
So she has an assorted agenda,assorted worldview, and we really can't risk
having her in the White House.Terry, what are some of the stands
that she has taken on parental rightsand which of those stands really concern you
more than My biggest concern with Kamalais that she supports Gavin Newsom's most recent

(01:07:06):
law in California that would eliminate parentalrights when it comes to their child's gender
right. This law is so extremethat it forbids the schools from disclosing any
information about how a child is identifying. At schools in California, they'll take
custody away from parents, and weactually have a long list of parents that

(01:07:28):
have lost custody simply for opposing givingtheir child it's under eighteen. By the
way, a gender transition, Imean, we used to call these sex
change procedures, but that apparently isconsumer fraud because you can't change someone's sex.
But she's so extreme that not onlydoes she support sex changes for minors,
she supports taking away parental rights forparents. That oppose the stuff.

(01:07:48):
That's probably the most concerning thing forme. What does this eighteen million dollar
investment your making now in this battleagainst Kamala Harra's look like, what are
you exactly trying to do? Terry? Well, we're targeting the seven million
most persuadable voters in the seven swingstates that we need to win this year.
There are three Senate races that we'reconcerned about, Ohio, Pennsylvania,

(01:08:11):
and Montana. But then there's thecore four states that we need to win
the presidential race, which is Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, and of course
North Carolina. We're going to makesure that every swing voter in these states
that cares about the American family,We're going to make sure that these voters
know just how extreme and radical andharmful Kamala Harris's agenda will be for their

(01:08:33):
families. Terry, there, youknow, they're an ongoing effort now by
the media to all of a suddenpaint her as you know, this glowing
new rising star in the Democratic Partyand for the American people, she's someone
who will lead the country in anew direction. Do people in those states
know exactly how radical and extreme somewhereere stands on when it comes to the

(01:08:55):
issues you're talking about, Terry.The worst part about having a national media
apparatus that is so in the tankfor Kamala Harrison, so in the tank
against President Trump, is that there'sa lot of pressure on groups like mine
American Principals Project to get the wordout if we don't make sure. The
reason why we're spending eighteen million dollarsin this election is because it's it falls

(01:09:19):
on us. People aren't going tolearn about Kamala's agenda to confuse our children
about gender, to make them moreracist and think about race and schools.
They're not going to know that Kamalawants to take away principal rights to protect
their children from this transgender industry.That's four and a half billion dollars a
year, by the way, unlessAmerican Principles Projects spends eighteen million dollars making

(01:09:42):
sure that these voters know that ourwork is cut out for us. But
we're up for the challenge. Finalquestion, and before I let you go,
I would imagine you are well awareof the controversy surrounding the opening ceremonies
at the Olympics and the depiction ofthe Last Supper. What do you make
of that? Terry disgusting in myopinion, What are your thoughts? We
know that Christianity is the enemy ofthe evil ones, right, and that's

(01:10:05):
why they want to mock it andridicule it. That mockery of the Last
Supper, which is one of themost important events in all of human history,
is predictable. And this isn't thefirst time that progressive woke mind virus
infected people have tried to mock Jesusor the Last Supper, and it won't

(01:10:26):
be the last. But it reallytells us who's on the side of good
and who's on the side of theevil one. And it's it's absolutely disgusting.
And unfortunately, people like me can'tcan't wash the Olympics because we can't
trust the people that are putting onthese shows to put content in front of
our children that's safe to consume.On our newsmaker line, Terry Shilling,
president of the American Principles Project,talking about Kamala Harris's extreme positions on parental

(01:10:53):
lights and transgenderism. Mare coming upright here on the rod Arck Can't Show
and Utah's Talk Radio one off KNRS, the Utah Education Association has now filed
suit against the state from it takingplace. Well one organization is calling on
attorneys for the governor and the AttorneyGeneral, Sean ray Is to seek a

(01:11:14):
dismissal of that lawsuit. Joining uson our Newsmaker line right now is Shaka
Mitchell, Senior fellow at the AmericanFederation for Children. Shaka, thank you
very much for joining us tonight.What about this lawsuit and what about your
organization, shakas, But the AmericanFederation for Children, we are a nonprofit
organization whose goal is to make surethat every child in the country, regardless

(01:11:35):
of family income, regardless of geography, has the ability to go to a
school, to be in an educationalsetting that meets his or her needs.
And we think that's the right forevery child in the country. And so
that's really our aim and we wantto see it happen in Utah. Why
did your federation decide to get involvedin this lawsuit concerning school choice here in

(01:11:59):
the state of Utah. Why didyou want to get involved? Yeah,
well, we like to say thatthat you know, we're the voice for
school choice and if you think aboutthis lawsuit. This lawsuit was initiated by
the Utah Teachers Union the Utah EducationAssociation, and so that's the lobbyists for
the teachers union. Well, wholobbies on behalf of the students, And

(01:12:23):
so we want to step in andsay, you know what, we're proud
to help speak for parents and studentsthat need more education opportunities. So that's
what we're doing. There seems tobe a growing trend towards school choice,
not only here in Utah but aroundthe country. Are you seeing that as
well? Absolutely? I mean inthe past few years alone, I think

(01:12:45):
we've seen over ten states, youknow, inact laws similar to Utah's to
the Utah Fits All program, whichis called an Education Savings account. And
I think parents are just saying,hey, in some cases, the conventional
public school that my kids attending,it's just not working. So what are
my other options? And I thinktaxpayers care about this too. What about

(01:13:10):
the Utah Fits All program? Asyou've studied this, what do you like
about it? And why do youthink is a great choice for kids and
their parents? Sure, I thinkthere's a lot to like about the program.
Really, So the program allows parents, you know, who live in
Utah. Any parent can apply forthis program and if you're one of this
year, it's about ten thousand studentswho will receive the scholarship. You can

(01:13:33):
receive about eight thousand dollars for thatyear per pupil, and you can use
it for the education that you choose, So that might be at a private
school, it might be for somehomeschool activities, it might be for the
curriculum things, right, So it'snot just tuition, it's really a range
of things. And I think parentsare used to that sort of flexibility and

(01:13:56):
customization in life now, but thechoolsystem, the public school system has not
kept up with modern times, andso parents really love this. Something like
twenty seven thousand students applied for thein the first year for this program,
so I think there's really a lotof demand for it in Utah. There's
always the argument from the teachers thatit will take money away from public education,

(01:14:18):
and that's not the intent. Theyshouldn't be happening. But weren't protection
built into the Utah program to protectthat public financing? Yeah, protections were
built in, but also to giveyou a sense for how ridiculous this claim
is. Ron So the program wouldmaximum right now cross about eighty two million

(01:14:39):
dollars. And now you know,for you and me, that'd be a
lot. Somebody put eighty two milliondollars in my checking account, that'd be
a whole lot of money. RightBut the education budget in Utah is seven
point seven billion dollars, So whatthat works out to, you know,
the Olympics are about to start.If you think about that big number that
the whole education budget stretching out overa mile, this program is only about

(01:15:03):
fifty feet fifty feet of a mileif they drop in the bucket. So
this idea that this is going tobankrupt the public school system is just ridiculous
on its face, and that's whywe think the case should be dismissed.
Were you surprised about the interest inthis program? As you said they I
think they're allowed eighty two eighty fivehundred more than ten thousand wanted to get

(01:15:25):
involved in this. Does that surpriseyou at all? Shaka? You know,
I say yes and no. Onthe one hand, when I talked
to families, you just you canfeel the interest, right, so I
kind of knew it was there,But it was definitely surprising that I mean,
this is a first year program,a new program, So even when
there's a really cool program like this, it usually takes a few years to

(01:15:47):
ramp up and to get started.You know, people don't know about it,
but I'll tell you what. Parentsin Utah were really on the ball.
And like I said, you hadtwenty seven thousand students apply for just
the first year, so that's goingto keep growing and growing. You always
hear complaints about school choice, andI know you've worked in several states about

(01:16:09):
the school program. What is thenumber one criticism that you always hear about
a school choice program and how doyou respond to that? Shaka? Yeah,
the number one criticism that we hear. Frankly, it comes from groups
like what you have in Utah,the Utah Education Association, and they say
that it's going to take money frompublic schools. And what I would say

(01:16:33):
is, when we're talking about education, if we're talking about money before we're
talking about students, then we're talkingabout the wrong thing. If you care
about money more than you do students, then your priorities are out of whack.
What we really care about at AmericanFederation for Children is making sure that
students are getting an education. Thatmeets their needs, then we can make

(01:16:56):
the dollars work. Are you optimistic, Shaka the lawsuit here in the state
of Utah will be tossed out?And if so, why Uh? I
am? I am pretty optimistic,I mean cautiously optimistic. I'm a lawyer,
so I never want to I neverwant to place bets onwhat a court
will do. But I think ourside has the stronger legal argument, and

(01:17:16):
I think if you look to otherstates, other states have routinely sided with
parents in these in these cases.So I'm really hopeful. I think this
program is just going to continue togrow and grow. Seaca Mitchell with the
American Federation for Children talking about Utah, the school choice program and the lawsuit
against it by the UEA more comingup. I'm gonna run our Kent Show

(01:17:38):
and talk radio one oh five ninecannerus. Here's proof that the entire Democratic
media complex outsources their brains. Dod n C talking point writers listen to
this. Some of what is runningme are saying, let's just plain weird.
These guys are just weird. That'swhere they are. As weird and

(01:18:00):
creepy as Jadi Vance. A superweird idea from Jady Vance. Yeah,
it's not. I mean, it'squite weird, just playing weird, just
playing weird, just playing weird.That stuff is weird. They come across
weird and then they start being weird. Yeah they're weird. Thing ain't really
weird. It's such a weird opening. Trump and his weirdo running mate are
weird, deeply and profoundly weird.They are weird. These Republicans just being

(01:18:24):
weird. It's just weird. It'sreally weird. Aupolican weirdness goes even deeper.
She said, a lot of thingsthat are weird, weird style that
he brings, weird policy. It'sjust sort with the weird thing because it
is a thing plain weird. Whatwas weird was just talking about diet mountain
dew. Who drinks diet mountain dew? Who ever seen the guy laugh?

(01:18:45):
That seems very weird to me thatan adult can go through six and a
half years of being in the publiceye if he has laughed, it's at
someone, not with someone. Thatthat is weird behavior, weird and cultish.
These are weird people. On theother side, kind of doubled down
on his weird ideas is probably generoussimply weird. These guys are just plain
weird. Vance as weird, youknow, as the campus said weird.

(01:19:05):
It really is just plain weird,Jaday Vance, plain weird. I mean
you read it weird. It iskind of weird. We're not afraid of
weird people. The other side,they're just weird. Why are you being
so weird? Vance has done somethingmore extreme or weird. No matter what
kind of weird stuff they keep saying. Trump and Vance are just weird.
In addition, grendous of Boston.That's the weird part. That's the most

(01:19:28):
engaging form. He addressed as mybeautiful Christians, which was super weird weird
tech pro jd. Vance he's aweird Josh JD. Evans an easy and
sort of weird. Frankly, forlack of a better word, that he's
weird, plastic remarks that aren't evenfunny, and he kind of shows that
he can't really deliver one liner.So sam weird is the word here.

(01:19:48):
Uh. In terms of initial impressionsfrom Vance, it's the American public.
Is that hilarious or what I mean? That's two to what to two minutes
of Democrats throughout yesterday and today thatis the new Democratic talking point to the
media machine out there, describing Republicansis weird. And you know, obviously

(01:20:13):
that was their goal, and theirgoal is now to describe people who believe
in the values that made this countrywhat it is today. The values of
community, the values of family,the values of safe streets, the values
of an opportunity. But those ideasare weird, apparently, because Joe Biden

(01:20:35):
says that, and now Kamala Harrisis saying that, and the Democrats,
you know, they've called they've calledus extreme nut jobs. What else do
they call? This? Can't thinkof it right off the top, But
so the new word of the day. If someone comes up to you and
says, hey, you know what, you're weird? Good and say thank
you. I love that. Ilove I love weird people. I think

(01:20:57):
they're they're funny and they're creative Abit no so, but weirdness is in
now, folks,