The Rod and Greg Show: Amos Guiora Live in Israel on the Ceasefire; Should Parents Ban Netflix

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
I hope there's no. I hope Queen b doesn't have
any projects for me because I don't. Well she did outside,
I can say the rain is the problem. That's what
I'll do.

Speaker 2 (00:07):
Do you know the weekend of projects? Does she think
she didn't? She doesn't.

Speaker 1 (00:11):
I just I'm not sure. Maybe she does, but I
haven't heard. Because I liked I love to watch the sports.

Speaker 3 (00:15):
There's a lot of.

Speaker 2 (00:16):
Sports, so she doesn't can.

Speaker 1 (00:17):
Yeah, as soon as college football started, it's really hard
to do other things.

Speaker 3 (00:21):
You know, it's all spoken for.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
H It does surprise me with you all right, We've
we've got a lot to get to on this uh,
on this Friday afternoon, a lot going on. Uh the administration.
Do not mess with Donald Trump. When he says he's
going to do something, he is going to do something.
We're learning that each and every day. He said, if
this thing goes on, we're going to lay off permanently

(00:47):
some federal employees. And guess what they started doing today
exactly that.

Speaker 3 (00:51):
Yep, and it's it.

Speaker 1 (00:53):
I was actually hoping we'd see the thinning of the
herd of the bureaucracy. Anyway, so I think this was appropriate.
Whether the Democrats held out longer than for a long
time or a short time. I was hoping this would
be a window of opportunity. But that said, it is
time for that to happen. And look, Speaker of the
House Mike Johnson said today that he is growing tired

(01:15):
of the Democrats because they're now saying they want to
open the government, but they're going to wait after the
No King's rally on the eighteen.

Speaker 2 (01:21):
Yeah, yeah, that's what I heard.

Speaker 1 (01:23):
Then after that, politically they would be more comfortable in
opening the government. And Speaker Mike Johnson says, you know,
you're harming this country its citizens over what that rally
in DC. It's really I mean, so he's a pretty
chill guy, that speaker and Mike Judsony's pretty quiet, but
he's got a little chippy yeah about that.

Speaker 2 (01:42):
Well, he's become a little more animated over the last
few days. He is so frustrated with this. And then
you have people like Schumer was a yesterday two days
ago said every day is getting better. Yeah for the Democrats.

Speaker 3 (01:53):
For the Democratic expense every day Americans.

Speaker 2 (01:55):
Yeah, it's not a game, folks. And I heard a rally,
so there's a big No King's rally again on the eighteenth.

Speaker 1 (02:01):
It'll be on the eighteenth of October. So they're not
going to So they're not gonna they're not going to
open it until after that's over. Wow, because they feel like, well,
that's the rumor, okay.

Speaker 2 (02:09):
And then if that's done, then do they come back said, Okay,
we've had our protests, let's cooperate.

Speaker 1 (02:14):
That's that's the word on the street that they will
once that's done. But now that we're all talking about it,
maybe they won't want to be shamed and show that
that's how they're going to do it. But I don't
think it does get better. They keep trying to point
to polls that say that the longer it's held out,
more the Republicans look bad for it.

Speaker 3 (02:29):
I I don't know. I don't know. I will have
to see, but I I don't.

Speaker 1 (02:33):
I think people are more aware of the Democrats role
of shutting this down. Uh and in a fashion that
they have criticized when Republicans looked to they didn't want
to spend more. Republicans are always consistent in terms of
not always but there they don't want to spend more,
and if they're if they're not, if they are not
signing a continued resolutions because they didn't want to spend more. Uh,
they want to the existing continue continuing resolution because they

(02:54):
don't want to spend more. So it's it's at least
the reasoning behind it's consistent. But the Democrats just attacked
Republicans successfully all always on these shutdowns. This time, I
think the American people are tracking that they this isn't
some you know, skinny budget. This isn't this is the
you know, the Biden budget, frankly, and we're just going

(03:15):
to do the continued resolution to keep negotiating and they'll
have nothing of it. So I don't think it's going
to help the Democrats. I really don't.

Speaker 2 (03:21):
Well, we're going we'll get into that and talk about that.
One area that will be affected. They could affect Utah
as the Internal Revenue Service and as you know, Greg,
they've got a big center up in Ogden and there
may be some people there will be affected by this. Uh,
these layoffs and these are riffs. It's called reduction enforced, folks.
That mean you ain't coming back.

Speaker 3 (03:39):
That's right now.

Speaker 1 (03:40):
We had a great caller that cautioned that if people
leave or they're let go. You might lose your or
people might leave on their own and the most the
most capable or employable would get out and you'd get
stuck with the dead wood. I don't want to see
that happen. We don't, but maybe the reduction enforce the
you know those that would let go of some, they're
going to let go of the dead wood.

Speaker 3 (03:58):
And keep the good ones.

Speaker 2 (03:59):
Well, we've got a great today. A little bit later
on Amos Giora. He is a University of Utah law
professor who spends half his time living in Israel. We
talked to him earlier today. Because of the time change,
we'll let you hear that interview because he really shed
some light. I'm thinking what the mood is in Israel
right now now that this ceasefire phase one is starting

(04:19):
to be implemented. We'll talk to him about that. We've
got a thank Rod and Greg gets Friday, and a
lot more coming your way. So stay with us if
you want to be a part of the program. Eight
eight eight five seven oh eight zero one zero eight
eight eight five to seven oh eight zero one zero
on your cell phone dial pound two to fifteen and
say hey, Rod, or you can leave us a talkback
message on our talk back client. All right, I do

(04:40):
want to start off this because it's a big weekend
for sports. Yes, a lot of football games going on. Basically,
by the way.

Speaker 1 (04:46):
I start at ten am if you're tracking the East
Coast games, so yes, you know.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
Do you know that game next week up at the
U against asu is or no? No, this weekend is
an eight fifteen start.

Speaker 1 (04:56):
You know, you might not remember, but we discussed this,
and this is the warm mil that you have to
refrain so that you're not so sweepy at eight pm.
I know that's past your bedtime, but you're just gonna
have to you know, well, at least don't drink the
warm milk.

Speaker 2 (05:10):
At least the game next week against the Universe by
you down in Provo is a. I think a six
fifteen start.

Speaker 3 (05:16):
Oh, that's actually better. I'm with you, to be honest.

Speaker 1 (05:19):
If I think eight o'clock eight pm kickoffs are ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (05:23):
Well, I thought you'd like to hear this. And for
all you sports fans out there who like my co host,
likes to couch potato it on a weekend.

Speaker 1 (05:31):
That's a pejorative. I like to just watch football. I
just leave it at that couch, not couch potato. Just
watch research shows. Research is showing now that wings, booze,
and heartbreak are the hidden cost of sports fandom.

Speaker 3 (05:45):
I'm not drinking a booze, I'm I am. I'm probably eating.

Speaker 2 (05:50):
Yeah, okay, Well apparently fandom's double edged sword being a
die hard sports fan.

Speaker 3 (05:56):
Yeah, you're gonna drink my portion.

Speaker 2 (05:58):
Being a die hard sports fan bilds belonging, boost happiness
and forges community, but it can quietly undermine physical health.

Speaker 1 (06:07):
Well that's you know, So it's it's work to be
a fan. All I heard you say is you know
you got to be on your game. You know you
can't let it get away from you.

Speaker 2 (06:14):
From beer soaked tailgates to couch bound viewing parties, fans
tend to eat and drink more unhealthy food, especially after
their teams lose.

Speaker 1 (06:25):
See, I don't track that. I don't know that I
that I eat more when my team loses. I think, So,
I don't know that I do that, but I do.
I probably do snack and eat while I'm watching. You
always know it's a bad sign when your TV says
are you still watching? And it just once has an
automatic turnoff. It just wants to turn off because it's
been on the same station for so long. It thinks
that it's you've left the room and you haven't. Right,

(06:51):
he's going to stress eat.

Speaker 2 (06:52):
Well, I guess because Mariners around tonight, right right, I'll
bear it up Jersey, Yeah, I think I'll be if
that's the case. If they if you people stressed after
their team loses, I guess I'll be ordering pizza at
like ten o'clock.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
He Ray's very optimistic about the Mariners tonight. You can
tell he's already preparing.

Speaker 2 (07:08):
This goes right along with the next point. Research shows
that fans often coping the anxiety, disappointment, and rival restress
through food and booze, linking fandom to emotional leading and
binge behaviors.

Speaker 3 (07:21):
That explains ute fans and regular.

Speaker 1 (07:25):
They all they're all so lit, they're all they I
thought they just drink because they were fish. They're just stressed,
but they're so scared.

Speaker 3 (07:31):
They're gonna lose.

Speaker 2 (07:32):
Huge fans are stressed. They don't drink after the game.
They drink way before, before, during the game, and after
the game.

Speaker 1 (07:39):
That's why whenever, why you played Utah on a night game,
I'm like, you know what, that's just more consumption in
those tailgates.

Speaker 3 (07:45):
It's just going to be even more uh rambunctious.

Speaker 2 (07:49):
So just be aware, all of you out there who
are going to enjoy the weekend watching football, just think
about the emotional and physical effects it takes on you.

Speaker 3 (07:59):
But don't be on to Don't be a support, don't
let you be a fan.

Speaker 2 (08:02):
Don't let's fan. All right, we've got a lot to
get to. It is the Friday edition of the Rotting
Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk Radio one O
five nine a n RS. Let's talk about violence rising,
violence against churches, Greg, and what does it really say
about freedom and faith anymore? This is a this is
a scary situation we're going through in this country.

Speaker 1 (08:24):
It is it's I think there's a there's I think
there's interests out there that are trying to foment fear
and violence. And you do get fear when you have violence.
And I think it's a I think it's an arrow.
Actually it's a bad analogy error in their quiver as
we're talking about violence.

Speaker 3 (08:38):
But it is a it is a tactic.

Speaker 1 (08:40):
I don't think it's and I don't think it's uh, spontaneous,
and I don't think it's both sides. I think one
side particularly uses this well.

Speaker 2 (08:47):
Joining us on our Newsmaker line he wrote about this
is Bill Duncan, director of the Center for Family and
Society at the Sutherland Institute. Bill, how are you welcome
to the show. Thanks for joining us this afternoon.

Speaker 4 (08:57):
Bill, thanks having me. Nice to talk to you both.

Speaker 2 (09:01):
Bill, what do you attribute this violence being directed towards
people of faith? What's behind it?

Speaker 4 (09:06):
Do you think, Well, there's there's probably lots of things
that I mean, each particular instance, some of them are
maybe politically motivated, where someone has ah some some cause
that they think that they're advancing by attacking churches. You know,
a lot of anti Semitic attacks have been that. Sometimes

(09:28):
there's a person who's you know, disturbed in some way
and then given the just general attitude or the climate
of violence we're in, I think that that doesn't help
and it pushes maybe that person to act in that way.
Whatever it is. There there is a lot of hatred

(09:50):
of focused on religious groups, and because of the climate
we're in, it seems like it turns more often than
it has in the past into actual violence.

Speaker 1 (10:01):
So there's a couple issues that you address in your
in your your column. I think that finding public policy
to address the violence, I think it's tough because I
think in open society, the right to assemble, it's some
of it's the cost of doing business. It's not something
that we like, certainly not the violence. But I don't
know what law per se that we could put in
place to protect the you know, congregations versus any other

(10:25):
type of assembly. But what what was most moving for
me in what you wrote is that how you address
violence and how you confront it. You actually learn at church,
whatever whatever faith that may be. And some of the
most powerful places that we can learn how to adjust
or to maybe shift our mindset would be in you know,
houses of faith. I think Erica Kirk is a good

(10:46):
example that I think those that raised funds for from
the for the person that attacked the widow and the
children of that the person that attacked the LDS church
in Michigan are good examples. Maybe elaborate on that with
our listeners. How do we how in this tough time
that we're in, what should we do in terms of
this violence, in this where you feel like you may
be singled out.

Speaker 4 (11:06):
That's a that's such a great question, and the examples
you gave were exactly right. It strikes me that part
of the answer is going to be that if we
if we respect religious and religious values and allow religion
to have a place in the public square, which is
a struggle for some people, you know, on on the
political spectrum. But if we allow that, we're going to

(11:28):
have messages that promote things like forgiveness, uh, nonviolence, understanding
of others. So so just allowing religion to play its
role without always trying to the second guess or secularize
our society would be would be a good initial part.
But I think I think what you point out is

(11:50):
even after these terrible things happen, religious groups are teaching
us powerful lessons. People who have a strong religious faith
are acting in ways that are good exa ample for
society generally. So we don't want to get you know,
I completely agreed with you. You agree with you that
we don't want to get in a place where we
have centuries at at at the synagogues and and uh,

(12:13):
you know, armed people outside of mosques because of fear.
That's not a good look. That's not what we're at
about as Americans. But there is a lot we could
do to react quickly and to condemn these kinds of violence,
and it needs to be bipartisan. That's that's been one

(12:33):
of the weaknesses, in my opinion, that we've seen, is
that you get one party often saying this is wrong,
this shouldn't happen. Another thing, well, this is wrong, and
we definitely can this butt. When you add that butt,
you're you've really undermined the condemnation. And so that kind
of thing needs to stop as well.

Speaker 2 (12:51):
Yeah, I'm with you on that one. I think Greg
would agree with me. It seems people of faith are are,
you know, trying to be united and speak out against this,
but there are some people who don't. I mean, you know,
the secular side of our population. You don't hear anything
from them. And I think that what is concerning, isn't it? Bill?

Speaker 4 (13:12):
It is? And again, you know, it's fine to it's
good to say, and we really appreciate them when people
say they condemn these actions. But if you give even
just a little bit of room on the idea that
well maybe there's some just here or maybe we can
understand it. That kind of thing is is that never
helps to make the situation much much worse because it

(13:33):
gives people who are maybe a little unbalanced or a
little too online a feeling that well, maybe you know,
they just have to say they condemn what we're doing.
But really it's it's potentially an appropriate reaction. It's never
an appropriate reaction, regardless of course of which side politically

(13:53):
or theologically you're on. So I think those kinds of
things could make a difference.

Speaker 5 (14:00):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (14:00):
But but but again, uh, like Greg said, I think
it's more important to kind of just recognize all the
good that religious organizations are doing and and play play
helped people understand that as much as we understand. Uh,
you know, the the more negative piece Bill.

Speaker 1 (14:18):
Are we seeing a religious revival at all? We hear,
I hear a commentary about this generation Z might be
looking uh, you know to a higher power more than
maybe generations before.

Speaker 3 (14:26):
Are you seeing anything like that?

Speaker 4 (14:29):
Yeah, there's definitely evidence of of that happening.

Speaker 6 (14:31):
You know.

Speaker 4 (14:32):
Of course, these things take time to develop and see
what it's going to look like. But there was a
while where, you know, all of the discussion was the
rise of the politically and affiliated and and this has
at some point recent last couple of years that seemed
to have kind of hit a plateau, and there wasn't
there wasn't sort of consistently rising. Obviously with the recent attacks,

(14:54):
it's somewhat anecdotal, but but there is there is some
evidence that people are being are are being motivated to
go to church and sort of connect to faith again.
And of course the memorial service for Charlie Kirk was
an example where people were not ashamed to express their
religious faith in that city. So those are I think

(15:14):
all good, good developments. And obviously I know that people,
people who care deep people who are deeply religious, will
will will want to encourage that to sort of stick,
not just to be a short term, you know, expression,
but in actual change in attitudes and actions.

Speaker 2 (15:36):
Bill, we can only hope. Thank you, Bill. We appreciate
your time and enjoying the weekend.

Speaker 4 (15:39):
Bill, you two, thanks so much for your all Right.

Speaker 2 (15:43):
Bill Duncan, he is with the Sutherland Institute here on
the Roden greg Show. And we've seen turnouts. I mean,
they have a big one last night. Glenn. Back up
in Montana, No North Dakota. I believe we've had Montana
up at Utah state, there are people who are wanting
something and hopefully they'll be able to find it correctly.

Speaker 1 (15:57):
I think the biggest contrast that we can spot is
back in a few number of years ago, Tim Tebow
would express his faith after a touchdown and he was
getting excoriated for it. And then if you saw that
Charlie Kirk memorial, you heard the speakers, These are cabinet
members and even our president speak about their faith and
about Christianity in ways I didn't think you'd ever hear

(16:19):
so publicly. It's spoken about so publicly.

Speaker 2 (16:21):
All Right, when we come back, we'll go to Israel
and get the mood of that country. With the ceasefire
in phase one taking place, that's coming up right here
on the Rod and Greg Show. It was interesting, Greg
to see on some video today of the thousands of
people who are marching back into the northern end of Gaza.
Now that this ceasefire is in place, we're all waiting
for the hostages to be released, but Israel has pulled back.

(16:45):
They've agreed to the ceasefire phase one of this. But
it is uplifting to see what could be. And I
heard Jack Keene on Fox today said it is the
beginning of the end of the war, and we hope
we get to the end.

Speaker 7 (16:58):
Of the war.

Speaker 3 (16:59):
Absolutely, it's yeah.

Speaker 1 (17:00):
I mean, there's no script for this because we've never
seen any kind of yeah, what looks like progress like
we're seeing. So it's it is all, you know, it's
anyone's guess how this is going to roll out.

Speaker 2 (17:10):
Well, we had a chance to talk with Aminskiura. He
is a University of View to a law professor who
spends half the year living in Israel. We had a
chance to talk to him earlier about that. Earlier about
the mood of the country today and what people are
feeling and seeing.

Speaker 6 (17:24):
I think it's complicated.

Speaker 4 (17:26):
We're all with baited revests.

Speaker 6 (17:29):
Waiting for the hostages to actually be released.

Speaker 4 (17:34):
Along with that.

Speaker 6 (17:36):
Today, which is nine and a half hours ago, the
ceasefire went into effect and idea of Israel Defense Forces
units withdrew from Gaza and there was you know, soldiers
singing and celebrating leaving. So that's positive. Tomorrow night we
will be at Hostage Square in Tel Aviv. Will the
hostages be released by then, I don't think so. Will

(17:58):
they be released Sunday? Monday? Tuesday? You know, as a parent.
The only thing you can think about is a parent
of someone held hostage. Who I know, do you look
at your cell phone every second? The answer, the cell
phone every second. It's the hope, expectation, and I also
have without fear of this whole thing going awry. On

(18:23):
the other hand, on the other hand, I think we're
allowing ourselves, in this extraordinarily complicated place where we live,
to maybe allow ourselves for the first time in two years,
to breathe. But then you immediately said, but wait, you
know there are still forty eight hostages and more than that,
or an addition to that, not or in addition to that,

(18:45):
there are nine hundred and fourteen families who've had their sons, brothers,
daughters killed as serving in the ideas, and that can't
be ignored. You know, the toll for us as Israelis
has been extraordinary, and obviously I well understand that the
obviously the price of civilian population in Gaza has also paid.

(19:08):
So I say, you know, hopeful, but baited breath and
maybe maybe maybe it's not an exaggeration to say allowing
ourselves maybe to take a breath for the first time
again nine and two years and three days it's been
horror show because we have people light on the radio.

(19:29):
Horror shows the all time under statement.

Speaker 1 (19:32):
You know, Amos, you have every right to be cautious
in your optimism. I never in my life did I
think I would see an images coming across my screen
of people in the Gaza strip in the streets celebrating
at the same time people on Hostage Square, which in
tell a people which I was unaware of. But seeing

(19:53):
that image celebrating simultaneously at the same time, it was,
it was.

Speaker 3 (19:58):
I just never thought I would see some thing like that.

Speaker 1 (20:01):
The imagery was wastriking point and so I but to
see that it was otherworldly to see because I never
thought i'd live a day to see something like that.
But I am also one to say, you know, because
I've never seen it, there's a reason for that. Also,
so this could fall apart any moment. I just wonder
in your caution, Uh is it?

Speaker 5 (20:22):
Is it?

Speaker 3 (20:24):
What odds would you put it? You think it's better
than not?

Speaker 1 (20:26):
I mean, I I again, I've seen things now that
I haven't seen before by way of image. But what
would you say are the odds of something like this?
Because I I don't want to get excited and then
see it go the way we've seen it always go.

Speaker 6 (20:40):
So I think probably the last time I bet was
in a football game when I was a sophomore in
college and knowing me, I probably lost. You are right there.
There were interviews with Gozas that we saw in Israel
Israel TV today and Gazza looks awful.

Speaker 7 (20:59):
You say yourself, you know the.

Speaker 6 (21:02):
Head of Hamas who organized the seventh of October sinwar,
who was killed in a target is killing? What there
was the thinking is this what he really planned? Did
they really think, for gods it to be destroyed? Did
he think for did he plan that Hamas would be
suffered greatly? Hamas has not been defeated. And I think
it's really important to emphasize that that Tanyao, we're going

(21:22):
on about victory, victory, victory, that's not true. We have
I don't buy into this. I don't have a sense
of victory at all, because what I have of facing
me hostage families and dead soldiers and their loved ones.
And I need to add, we have here waiting for
us a pretty significant PTSD issue. I don't know if

(21:44):
this will make sense to an American audience. Remember that
the idf IS is in essence of a small army,
a small standing army, and the main force are reservest
We've had reservists do four or five hundred days over
the past two years. We have a high divorce rate.
We have, you know, reservers who have family businesses that

(22:05):
have another words. Tank will go with tank. There's been
a spike in suicides, and obviously there are going to
be a real spike obviously in PTSD and and what
that will require. I'm not in the in the guessing game,
of the betting game. Never told you software year in
college two hundred years ago. I allow myself it's Friday night.

(22:29):
I allow myself to say when I go to sleep tonight,
I will tomorrow morning, you know, barring unexpected right, because
I checked the iPhone all the time. That tomorrow I
think hopefully we can go to Hostage Square. You will
stand there, on the one hand, celebrating the to b
return of the hostages, but there will also be extraordinary somberness. Again.

(22:54):
Nine hundred and fourteen soldiers killed hostages have been killed
over the capacity two years. All the people who were
killed at the at the music festival and the neighboring
you know, the what's called the Godza envelope that he
would seem all those people who were killed. So yes,
there's great relief with the hostages hopefully on their way home.
But coupled with that, there is extraordinary sonorous that add

(23:18):
to all that. If you watched I don't know if
it was on American TV. In yesterday's his old cabinet
government meeting, NETANH. How is flanked by Trump's son in
law Kushner, and Trump's and Roy Wickoff, and it's as
if could have been the making, but he's actually irrelevant.

Speaker 5 (23:39):
Trump.

Speaker 6 (23:40):
President Trump has marginalized him in a way that I've
never thought that would be possible, So much so that
if President Trump is but only coming here on Monday
speaking to the cresse of the Parliament, and the next
day in Cairo meeting a huge gathering of Muslim and
air country's leaders in essence planning the day after, the

(24:01):
only person seemingly not invited is nothing Now. And it's
as if Trump gave not to now his marching orders.
He said, this is what's going to happen. Yes, Kushner
and Wood Coffee paid under to now the obligatory war warts.
Thanks for a great effort, but I don't remember, and
I've been around the block. I don't want to call
any government government meeting with the leader, President and Prime

(24:25):
Minster flanked by envoys, if you will, of another sovereign
in essence giving sovereign d the marching orders. That was
a remarkable picture, in the same way that the White
House was. I don't remember the dates. Two weeks ago
released the picture of Trump holding the phone, and that's
now holding the receiver and apologizing to the leader of

(24:47):
Qatar for absolutely idiotic. He is early attacking on Katar.
It last month, two months ago. That's humiliating, and that's
also an important piece of this puzzle. As clearly President
Trump gave that the now marching orders, and Trump understands
that the now and allowed him to wiggle room whatsoever

(25:07):
under any condition.

Speaker 2 (25:09):
Amos Kiira, he is a law professor of the US,
spends half the year down in Israel. He lives there.
As a place there and interesting to take it. It
is complicated, but there for these people who are waiting
for their loved ones to be released, it has got
to be excruciating right now, knowing it could be any time.

Speaker 1 (25:28):
Yeah, and Amos shares some really important insight I think
in terms of the mood and the circumstances. Even the
two years that they've been fighting, it's taking its toll
on the people. I remember that country so small you
can't print the name Israel across it and stay inside
of it on a map. That's how small it is.
It is a so they're colonialists. They're not really good
at it, Okay, I mean it's tiny, nine million people.

Speaker 2 (25:50):
Yeah, all right, mar coming up the Rod and Greig
Show and Talk Radio one O five to nine kN
ars this disgusting cartoon that Pat Bagley did for the
Salt later be a reaction to it. We'll get your
reaction to that and talk about whatever you want, because
you think Rod and Greg is Friday. Greg. Also, we've
got some interesting news developing around China that we want
to get to as well. I do want to mention this,

(26:12):
and I remember years ago, me and my sons we
went down San Antonio for the Final Four, and that
was the year that Loyola University of Chicago made a
run to the Final four and they had the chaplain's sister,
Jean Delora Schmidt was there and everybody loved her. Right.
She passed away yesterday. Oh really one hundred and six
years old?

Speaker 3 (26:33):
Wow?

Speaker 1 (26:33):
Yeah, even that Final four was a long time ago,
in the nineties.

Speaker 2 (26:37):
I think one hundred and six years old. She died today.
She's a lot of fun.

Speaker 3 (26:42):
You two are like neck and neck, right.

Speaker 8 (26:45):
Okay, No, we got a long way to go. You
just have to dig it, don't you. You know anything
you can. We went down recently to Santonio for the
Final four. I think that might have been thirty plus years.

Speaker 2 (26:57):
Let's just say, you know, if you're kicking keeping score
all right? Pre coming up, thank routing Greg ands Bridy,
and we'll talk about this Tribune political cartoon stirring things up.
We'll explain coming up during the show today. Era made
us aware of this. He sent us the reposting of
a text message and it was from a man by

(27:19):
the name of Andrew Colvitt, who is with Turning Point USA.
I think he's up there pretty much in leading that organization.
Is he is?

Speaker 5 (27:27):
He?

Speaker 2 (27:28):
But he posted this, he said. Less than a month
remove from Charlie's assassination in Utah, the Salt Lake Tribune
published this cartoon entitle the Hole in the Head Gang,
depicting a wanted poster with elected officials from the state
with a red with red around their neck. So we

(27:48):
decided to do a loutle digging and found they have
actually pulled or changed Greg the title of that political cartoon.
Because let us set it up for you. It says
the Hole in the Head Gang wanted for failure to
honor their oath to protect and defend the Constitution from
the dictatorial whims of a malignant clown. And they have

(28:10):
indual individual drawings of Mike Lee, John Curtis, Blake Moore,
members of the congressional delegation, all of them looking like
a wanted poster. Now, the thing about that I think
has really ticked off everybody other than that to begin with,
is each of them has a red scarf around their neck.
Where was Charlie Kirk killed? Was killed by a bullet

(28:33):
that went into his neck and blood came streaming out.
And so apparently the Tribune didn't think it met up
to its standards, Greg, So they have republished this cartoon
now and it just says Utah Reps wanted no mention
of Hole in the Wall Gang. Now here a hole
in the Hole in the head gang.

Speaker 1 (28:51):
Which is so unbelievably either just hates tone, deaf or sick.

Speaker 3 (28:57):
Either way, it doesn't fly.

Speaker 2 (28:58):
The hole in the head game. Now here's the statement
from the Tribune in response to this. The headline on
this cartoon has been updated because the original did not
meet our standards for publication. We know words matter. We
try to be intentional about the words that we use,
and we regret this error. Then they go on to

(29:21):
say A pulis surprise finalist in the cartoonist category. Pat
Bagley has worked for the Salt Lake Tribune for more
than forty five years. He is one of roughly a
dozen cartoonists still working at a major metropolitan newspaper in
the US. Bagley started working at the Tribune shortly after
the graduation and has published more than six thousand cartoons

(29:44):
for the nonprofit newsroom. Now in response to that, Andrew
Covet said this, I couldn't care less how many years
this guy has been spewing his garbage via cartoons. Maybe
he too should be unemployed.

Speaker 1 (30:00):
He should he So this guy is just descended, And
I mean this isn't the first cartoon he's done that's
been sick or at best tasteless, are tone de at worse,
sick and deranged. And I'm telling you this, this guy
he hates Utah. He hates the citizenry of this state.
He certainly hates Republicans, even the way he drew each
of them. So the white members of our delegation, he

(30:21):
has them smiling and he has a look on their face.
But you would to see the way he drew Burgess
Owens like an angry black man. He's just his face
is completely contorted in a way that they're other members
that are on their wanted poster or not. The hole
in the head game unreal, the right around the neck unreal.
I find it again, I just find this guy. If
you hate this state so much and everything you draw

(30:43):
is meant to just attack in the in the most
sick way, way vile way, just stop. Go live somewhere else.
You know how many other there's forty nine other states
to go live in. There's somewhere else you can just
relieve yourself of all the anger that you got pent up,
that you got to put into these cartoons. They get worse.
I mean again, this isn't the first one. He's done
that has just been off the charts.

Speaker 2 (31:03):
Sydney label police once members of the KKK. Yes, but
this is this is way out of line on this
one because like you said, they're all with wanted posters.
They all have their telephone number to their office underneath.
Then they have the red scarf around the neck. What
do you think that means?

Speaker 3 (31:21):
Pat you know?

Speaker 1 (31:22):
And here's here's the other thing I want to say,
and that's that you know, it's all well and good
that the Tribune says, well, we changed the headline because
you know, we want to be intentional about our words.

Speaker 3 (31:31):
You published it already.

Speaker 1 (31:32):
It's still I'm still staring at online at least at
the version that you want to change.

Speaker 3 (31:37):
But you've already published it. It's too late.

Speaker 1 (31:40):
When when Charlie Kirk was assassinated that this this Tribune
editorial board, this is some of the things they said
in their editorial in response to that assassination. They said,
instead of disagreeing with our political rivals, we dehumanize them,
portray them as evil deserving the worst fate. Even if
basic human decency doesn't convince some of us, we should
face the fact that by violence of this kind, solves

(32:01):
nothing and convinces no one. Uh, you must not believe
any of that. If you would be able to print
that first version of that cartoon, if you meant a
single word I just read from your editorial.

Speaker 3 (32:14):
You wouldn't you wouldn't have printed that.

Speaker 1 (32:16):
And so you you are the extremists that you say
that the field has been left open to because you're
capable of looking at that and not immediately spotting why
that would be inappropriate and not something that you should
be publishing publicly. It's again, it's I think it's deranged.
I think he is too. Like I said, I kid
you not. I think the guy just eats mushrooms constantly.

(32:37):
I think he's out of his mind. Now do I
think he's mental?

Speaker 2 (32:39):
Well? I you know, and you just pointed out Greg.
You know they make this editorial on the day after
Charlie Kirk is shot and killed. They didn't believe a
word of it. Who on earth would let this cartoon
get on their website and their page? The hole in
the Head gang aimed at all members of our congressional delegation,
all wearing a red scarf around their necks. What do

(33:00):
you think that means?

Speaker 3 (33:02):
Yeah?

Speaker 1 (33:03):
Yeah, it's just there's just no there's no for all
their lip service to even even when they're saying, you know,
it's so hateful nationally, maybe local papers people should look
to their local papers more for more local news. You
used to be more hate than anyone. I honestly think
as bad as CNN and MSNBC or any of these
leftist regime media outlets are, I think most of them

(33:24):
would have spotted the indecency and the inappropriateness of that
cartoon and would not have published it. And that's that's
that's the national regime media would have not would have
looked at that and went, wow, no, give us another ver,
we're not doing this.

Speaker 3 (33:36):
Yeah, well not the Tribune.

Speaker 2 (33:37):
Yeah. Having worked in this business for a long long time,
every time you put a story up on television or
a newspaper story, there are editors that you go through
it and are checking word for word. They may be
asking you questions, have you got the facts right? Have
you got this information right? You're telling me that there
wasn't one editor whoever overseas political cartoons of the Tribune

(34:00):
didn't see this and go do we really want to
say that? Pat? Yeah, Okay, run it up the chain
all the way to the top to the Tribune and
their management team. Are we okay with this? Someone had
to sign off on this. Yeah, someone should be ashamed.

Speaker 1 (34:15):
They should and they should own it more than just
like saying we're sorry and then just listing his resume
as if it's something to brag about.

Speaker 2 (34:22):
Who cares?

Speaker 1 (34:22):
Forty something years you're due for a pink slip. You're
a dude to get out, Yeah, and not put your
vile stuff into into our minds or in where we
can see it.

Speaker 3 (34:31):
It's just your We get it.

Speaker 7 (34:32):
Pat.

Speaker 1 (34:33):
You hate everyone, Yeah, you hate everyone in the state.
You just you got a micro minority of leftists that
love your stuff, But most of this state are nothing
but offended and disgusted by what you what you draw.

Speaker 2 (34:43):
Yeah, and if you think you're funny, Pat, maybe you
should dig a little a bit deeper and sing that
think that's funny because there's no humor in that, and
how offensive that is to people who supported Charlie Kirk
And actually, and I only saw it once when he
was shot and killed, didn't want to again many too,
but looking at that and reminding everybody how he was

(35:06):
shot and killed in the neck with blood spewing out
of his body, and you put every one of these
congressional members with a red scarf around their neck. What
do you think that wanted?

Speaker 3 (35:16):
Poster? Hole in the head gang, Hole in the head gang.

Speaker 1 (35:20):
I again, it's just it's so it is over the top,
and I'm glad that this is getting attention because I
I don't know that the Tribune has any You gotta
pay for that subscription. I don't know that anyone pays
to see anything that they do, so I don't know
how large their their subscription pool is. But again, they're
just irrelevant to us. When you see that there's no
one in Utah, I don't care. Even if you're left

(35:40):
of center, I don't know how you're gonna own this
or say yeah that I think that's really funny. Yeah,
you know this is the left has been so hyper
sensitive about everything. They're the ones that don't have a
sense of humor. You can't even make a joke. I
don't know how any of them how this passes muster
with them because it's so it's so bad, and if
you haven't seen the cartoon, you're not missing anything. But
it's again, it's a Wanted poster the Hole in the

(36:01):
Head Gang. It's got them all drawn terribly, but they've
got I think even the way that he draws Burgess
Owens has got something yeah behind this a pretty bad implication. Yeah,
and you see the red scarf around all their next
I just think this thing is.

Speaker 3 (36:15):
Like I said, at best, it's tasteless. How about that the.

Speaker 2 (36:18):
Best word for it? All right, your calls, your comments
coming up on the Rod and Greg Show. On this
Thank Rod. It's Friday eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero. On your cell phone up pound two
to fifteen, say hey Rod, or leave us a message
on our talk back line. More coming up here on
Utah's Talk Radio one O five nine. Kay, all right,
yes you can. I'm Rod Arkeett. Great to be with you.
Just joining us now. We're talking about this latest offering,

(36:40):
if you want to call it that in the Salt
Lake Tribune by political cartoonist Pat Bagley that has since
been changed. We are made aware of this by a
post from an official with TPUSA. The title of the
political cartoon is Wanted the Hole in the Head Gang,
and what it does is feature members of our congressional

(37:03):
delegation like they're on FBI wanted posters all with their
telephone number for given, but was even worse each and
never one of them dressed up with a red scarf
around their neck. Remember how Charlie Kirk was killed. And
that's I think an indication as to the tasteless factor
of this cartoon and what it offers.

Speaker 1 (37:22):
Well, you talk about they had the Tribune or they
had the editorial where they said, you got to be it,
don't dehumanize people. I don't know what this is supposed
to look like the hole in the head gang and
having wanted posters for our two members of the Senate
and our four members of Congress, but it certainly if
you were deranged and looked at this, this would ferment
hate and even maybe even worse.

Speaker 3 (37:41):
Pause.

Speaker 1 (37:41):
So I just think it's it's literally crazy that the Tribune,
its editors, as you pointed out, that this past muster
to be ever published, even if they're pulling it back
now and saying sorry.

Speaker 2 (37:50):
Yeah, someone would with decency over there would have said, no,
this is going to fly, not this one. Pat. Let's
go to the phones and get your reaction to it.

Speaker 1 (37:58):
Let's go to Hector who's been waiting orm Hector. Welcome
to the Run and Greg Show.

Speaker 4 (38:04):
Hey, guys, thanks for taking my call.

Speaker 9 (38:07):
I had a lot of friends who were at this
event at UVU, and they were there with their kids
and many of them are suffering from PTSD of viewing
that act of terror. And I just wonder if this idiot,
I mean, Rod, you pointed out that this idiot of
a cartoonist basically reminding people and bringing flashbacks with this

(38:29):
kind of imagery, would it be possible or worthwhile looking
into a class action lawsuit for pain and suffering victims.

Speaker 5 (38:36):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (38:36):
I'm not an attorney, but I was a lawmaker one,
So that's higher on the food chain, I say, But no,
I think that's the actors. It brings up a very
good point, especially with people that were present, I mean,
because Utah's a small world, especially you know, we all
know somebody that was there, and it is it's been
incredibly traumatic, and I do think that this throws gasoline
on a fire that we've been trying to put out

(38:57):
and we've been trying to move on in a positive way,
and and stunts like this does not heal a community.
It just doesn't. It's it's really detrimental. And I again,
there's I I would think for the things that people
have litigated over before that this kind of publication and
putting something like this out here, it has a net
negative result on the public.

Speaker 3 (39:19):
It's it's a terrible thing to put.

Speaker 2 (39:21):
Well, you know what they say, Greg, you can't unsee
what you've seen.

Speaker 6 (39:24):
Now.

Speaker 2 (39:24):
I've only seen this video once. That's all I want
to look, you know, look at it. But the people
who were there just you know, a few feet away
from Charlie and the way he was shot and killed.
That is and and as Hector just said, there were
kids there, you know.

Speaker 4 (39:40):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (39:40):
And I don't know how they ever forget that scene.
And to be reminded of this again by a stupid
political cartoon by the Salt Lake Tribune.

Speaker 1 (39:49):
It's unnecessary, it is and I and again it's not responsible.
These guys enjoy they attack exempt status there, their nonprofit.
They're the first major newspaper that I think it was
ever given that granted that tax status and nonprofit nonprofit.
And so that means that what they get is a
bunch of elitists, rich elitists. They get the run off,
the you know, write down their tax obligation by giving

(40:12):
money to the Tribune because it doesn't make any money.
They don't have enough revenue in advertising or subscriptions to
pay the bills. Because no one watching, no one looks
at it. And you'd think that would clue them in
if you've got to be a non profit, if you
can't run as a profitable enterprise, because nobody's reading your stuff,
nobody wants to have anything to do with you.

Speaker 3 (40:30):
So what do they do? They double down on it.

Speaker 1 (40:32):
Yeah, you know we are on we are unreadable as
a paper, So let's just put more filth out there
that just offends people. And I think again, I don't
I don't think it's overstating it that it could people
that have been were president at that event. This is
a terrible reminder. It's a terrible thing to be pushing
out their publicly.

Speaker 2 (40:49):
Well, I've always thought the perception of the Tribune, and
I've lived here what since seventy nine now, has always
been the Salt Lake Tribune is anti Utah, anti Republicans,
anti Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, anti
anti everything. Yeah, it's a perception of always the excuse
they've used as worth of the balance we're with the

(41:10):
other side. Well, I can't.

Speaker 1 (41:12):
Honestly, I think the Desert News has not gotten They've
gotten bad. I don't know, they're not as bad as
a tribune, but I just think all of media, at
least the legacy media, I like to say regime media,
but the legacy media, it's it's changed over the years.
It's just simply not something that you can read and
take in and think you're getting a fair, you know,
appraisal of what's going on in this world. It comes

(41:34):
with a bent, It comes with an agenda.

Speaker 2 (41:36):
It goes back to what we talked about, was it
yesterday two days ago? This effort to be inclusive and
where it is taking Utah, and I think that has
impacted everything in this state. And we've got to stand
up and be bold and not be afraid to in
some cases say no, it's not going to happen here.
That's right.

Speaker 1 (41:54):
And look, we actually we have a take. We do
interpret the news. We're not a news source and unbiased
news source. We do take them the headlines and we
talk about them, and we were unapologetic about it. These
this tribune is supposed to, especially with a nonprofit status,
where it's supposed to be some value to the community
that which earned them this designation. This is no value

(42:15):
to this community. This is not it's not something that
does anything but what their true their editorial board had said,
people shouldn't do this. They do themselves. They don't even
believe the words they push out there when they're trying
to be high minded after an assassination.

Speaker 2 (42:31):
You know, I don't look at it every day, Greg, probably,
I don't know if I need to. But is there
even a conservative voice on that website of the Souli
Trivine a conservative columnist.

Speaker 1 (42:42):
I stopped reading the Tribune long ago, so I would
venture to say, no, I don't think there is.

Speaker 2 (42:48):
Yeah, so, but they're here to offer balanced coverage to
the canties. Right, all right, more up, It is the
Rod and Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk radio
one five Dine knrs tonight. This disgusting political cartoon by
Pat Bagley in the Salt Lake Tribune. If you haven't
seen it yet, it's called What the Hole in the
Head Gang, and it lists all members of Utah's congressional

(43:10):
delegation like wanted posters, and has a red scarf around
their neck. Where was Charlie Kirk shot and even officials
with TPUSA or saying, what gives here? What is wrong
with Utah? It is?

Speaker 1 (43:26):
I'm going to tell you that it's it's hard to
even be I don't want to sound like I'm overstating
it or I'm exaggerating. I'm truly not. I think that
the idea that that this didn't pat that this went through.
How many editors were they work or they don't have,
they don't have anyone with any kind of conscience inside
that desert or that tribune to see that and immediately

(43:46):
know that that is just the last thing you should
be trying to publish to the general public, that message
wanted posters, red holdars around.

Speaker 3 (43:54):
The hole in the head gang, Hole in the head gang.

Speaker 7 (43:57):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (43:58):
Really, I mean from someone who, by the way we
have now learned, doesn't even live in the state anymore.

Speaker 1 (44:02):
Well so, Pat badly, she's been here for forty three years. Well,
it sounds like there's two for a layoff, is what
it sounds like to me. There's only twelve left that
are doing it. Where you think that's a trend, You
know why that trend's happening because they they're all descending
in their mental health in terms of how much they
hate Republicans and anything right of center. This guy hated
Trump so much he moved and I saw it on

(44:23):
his social media. He was saying, Okay, I'm making a
big move. I'm leaving the country. He's doing it because
he can't stand Trump. He's that crazy, and I don't
know how he stays employed. Yeah, this right there, that
should have been. I even felt that the Tribune's apology.

Speaker 2 (44:38):
Was pretty weak.

Speaker 3 (44:39):
Was it an apology?

Speaker 5 (44:40):
Don't?

Speaker 1 (44:41):
I don't even think it was. It was we want
to be intentional about our words. Okay, well, too late.
It's out there.

Speaker 10 (44:47):
You know.

Speaker 3 (44:47):
You can try to pull it back, but it's digital.
It's it's there.

Speaker 2 (44:50):
I want words, but not about Yeah, did you think
about that?

Speaker 3 (44:55):
You know, pull on the head.

Speaker 1 (44:57):
So long as it's attached to a deranged cartoon, we
can say that.

Speaker 2 (45:01):
Oh sorry about We gotta be careful.

Speaker 3 (45:03):
We don't dehumanize people.

Speaker 6 (45:05):
Huh.

Speaker 2 (45:05):
Oh really didn't they just do that?

Speaker 3 (45:07):
Charlie Kirk, I think that cartoon is humanizing and his.

Speaker 2 (45:10):
Family and his friends. Good job, guys. All right, let's
go to a talkback line. Get a thought from one
of our listeners this afternoon.

Speaker 11 (45:18):
Hey, Rod and Greg, this is Jeremy and South Jordan
just wanted to make a quick comment. You were mentioning,
is there any conservative columnists that this is a covenient
I think the better question is is there any conservative
columnists at the Desert News. I think everyone there is
like middle or left. We need true balance in our
Utah media, and that means we need a true conservative voice.

(45:39):
That's something a lot of people don't know that. Charlie
Kirk thought our media was awful and he thought Utah
needed to be cleaned up, and I agree with him.

Speaker 2 (45:46):
Yeah, and Charlie Kirk did go after Utah what's up
with your media? You know, he even said he said
the governor should be kicked out of the Republican Party,
should be expelled from the party because of some of
his stands on various issues, transgender issues when he became governor.

Speaker 3 (46:03):
He did.

Speaker 1 (46:03):
And I look, the Tribune is such a disappointment because
not the Tribute that well they are, but the Deseret
News KSL. You know, if the if the argument that
the that the Tribune was trying to make for years
and years, decade or whatever decades or whatever it is
that they were the balance. You know, they you had
to have a left of center voice because you had
this right of center KSL and Deseret News.

Speaker 3 (46:23):
Well, you don'tymore, you don't at all.

Speaker 1 (46:25):
And I'm telling you that if if they have a
newsroom or editors that are that are even an inch
right of center, I mean I I just find them
to be moderate at best, liberal at worst. And again,
you don't have a place Utons do not have. And
what a missed opportunity for a publication like the Desert News.
They could have been like the Christian Science Monitor of

(46:45):
the West, or even bigger with a readership that could
have with sports that could have drawn a national crowd
over by U or Utah sports. They could have been
an unapologetic right of center commentary. You know, you get
the epic times. I mean that they're a they're a
right of center.

Speaker 2 (47:04):
Right of center organization.

Speaker 10 (47:05):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (47:05):
And Tribune, as I recall years ago, Tribune was trying
to get to that Christian to that Christian science monitors standard.
They haven't gotten there.

Speaker 3 (47:15):
They went the other direction.

Speaker 1 (47:17):
Yeah, And so I do think that And again in Utah,
I think about the how commercially successful Fox News has
been when they decided that they were going to go
the other way there, everything is left. We're gonna we're
gonna give you a fair and bounce, but our commentary
is going to be right of center. And they did
incredibly well in ratings and viewers. Uh, and they still do.
They still beat the crowd.

Speaker 2 (47:37):
Beat a mile combined. The audiences of a CNN and
MSNBC can't come anywhere near.

Speaker 1 (47:44):
So how are the brainy acts that that owned the
these media comes How are they not spotting the appetite
for something that's not carbon copy leftist regime media blather.
I don't, it's it's a I love the callers, the talkbacks,
comment because yeah, the Tribune, they're one problem. Uh, those

(48:05):
Right News they're another problem. I think I think that
it's been disappointing.

Speaker 2 (48:09):
Yeah, you know, watched Greg. I think is you know, uh,
CBS News has a new editor very wise. Yes, who
worked for Was it was it the Wall Street Journal
or CBS News.

Speaker 3 (48:22):
May have been I thought it was the New York Times.

Speaker 2 (48:23):
May have been the New York Times. But she left,
she just couldn't stand it anymore.

Speaker 3 (48:26):
I thought she left.

Speaker 2 (48:28):
She set up a website or a blog called Substack
and a lot of very very good comments. Well CBS
has bought that and it brought her on to be
editor in chief, and everyone is freaking out. But even
the owners now of CBS saying, we got to get
back to the middle. Here we got you know, we
have gone way too far left and we've got to

(48:49):
make some changes. It's going to be interesting to see
how many changes and how big of changes she'll make
with CBS News.

Speaker 1 (48:55):
So I was I take all this with a jaundiced eye.
I always think she's supposed to be the fair you know,
down the middle. But two well placed conservatives, and I
would even argue thought leaders that national at least one
that's national, have told me that they have said that
she this will be you know, it won't be left
of center, but it won't be right of center. It's

(49:15):
going to be as about down the middle as you're
ever going to see. And they would have every right
to be as as cynical as I am, but they
are actually optimistic. And who's watching the CBS News anymore? Honestly,
it's probably just you boomers as who's watching it?

Speaker 2 (49:29):
Watches who watches eveny newscasts anymore. I mean, not a
lot of people. And I go back to this. This
is I saw this again today and it was what
yesterday I think. Uh in following up on the ceasefire deal,
here's CNN calling what has been going on in Gaza
as Israel's war, that they started that terrible. You know,

(49:53):
this this war that Israel star. They didn't start this war.
But people at CNN can't even look at it and go,
wait a minute, that's not right. Israel didn't start this war.

Speaker 1 (50:03):
The only way he comes, the only way you could
say that Israel started that war is if you say
that the United States started the war against Japan after
Pearl Harbor. Okay, if you think that that was if
that was instigated by the United States after the bombing
of Pearl Harbor, then I guess Israel is Israel's war
as it would have been the United States war. But
given that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, given that Hamas attacked Israel,

(50:24):
it's their war. They they're the ones that attacked, and
they're just defending themselves and we did in World War Two.
So it's just I just find it so intellectually dishonest
and you just get tired, and especially if you have
it that it gets on the violent side like that
cartoon was.

Speaker 2 (50:40):
All right, We've got another segment of our Thank rodin
Greg gets Friday. But when we come back, something's going
on in China and Donald Trump is aware of this,
and we'll dig into that for you when we come
back here in the Rod and Greg Show and Talk
Radio one oh five nine, Okay, nrs. President Trump today
said he would have imposed now what a one hundred
percent tariff on all products all products from China in

(51:02):
response to apparently curbs that Big Jang announced on rare
earth minerals. So that's an indication, Greg, of a rapid
escalation of tensions between the world's largest countries.

Speaker 1 (51:12):
What I love about our president is that he's a
stream of consciousness. This every other president before him, when
when countries would reach would you reach out to the
United States about issues that they're having the American people
would just simply not be privy to. Donald Trump wakes
up this morning and he has been told at some
point that countries are reaching out to the United States

(51:35):
informing them the White House that that they they're being
told by the country of China that they are going
to have export controls on rare minerals and the production
of real minerals and rare minerals.

Speaker 2 (51:46):
And China is a big producer of rare minerals, don't
They do, like of the world's minerals.

Speaker 1 (51:51):
North of ninety And it's not just the mining of
but the processing of y rare minerals. So rare minerals
are what are in our batteries, in our electronics, everything
is we become more dependent on technology and our software
everything else. It becomes more and more of a a
vital material that we manufacture with. We've known and we've

(52:14):
talked about this on the program that China has a
very scary monopoly on all of this. And it's why
you're seeing the Department of Energy actually fast track mines
in Idaho, Wyoming, Utah because they know that we need
to get better.

Speaker 3 (52:26):
We need in terms of this generals, we need it.

Speaker 1 (52:29):
Well, we're now in the event because now these countries,
and this is what I say about He put on
True Social Today a very very long message about what
has happened with countries reaching out to them about how
this is going to majorly impact their ability to manufacture
the things that they do. And so in response to that,
the President announced that he is going to put one

(52:49):
hundred percent tariffs because he's trying to slow their role
because it will have that negative impact. Well, again, I
love the fact that we know this because he's telling
he's being very transparent about it. China certainly knows now
that this is a front burner issue for us. It
prepares us for because there is he does mention that
that if they did that, we would feel the pain
from them. We're going to feel it. We're going to

(53:10):
feel some real, real effect from it. But he's saying
that we have more that China needs than we need
of them, and he's going to now pull those levers
that he hadn't pulled yet, uh to, you know, to
put them in check. We'll see what China does in
response to that. But when you hear about these tariffs
in China, know that this is a reaction to something
that came out of the blue.

Speaker 3 (53:29):
And in the long.

Speaker 1 (53:30):
Text message or posted on Trump put out, he said
that he's surprised at the president he did this because
he had been appearing like he wanted to work with
the United States on trade agreements and that this is
a contradiction to that.

Speaker 2 (53:43):
Well, he was going to meet with you, the president
of I think there was someone in Korea or something
South Korea. He was going to have a meeting with him,
and he says he's canceled it. He said, why do
I want to have a meeting right now? You know,
if they're going to do this to us, I mean,
what have we got to meet about? That's right, he said,
we don't have anything to meet about with them. If
China is going to impose these these tariffs on enriched

(54:07):
and earth minerals that we really really need, we do.

Speaker 1 (54:11):
And so he said, I was supposed to meet with
China's president she in two weeks at apec but in
South Korea.

Speaker 3 (54:17):
But what's the point? No reason to do so.

Speaker 1 (54:20):
So again, you know, and Andy, the president's a bit
salty that that those letters were sent to countries and
are very by the way there it's not one letter,
there's it's pages and pages of very prescriptive things that
they can they will no longer receive, uh from exported
from China, and it's meant to be really draconian. Well,
all of that, all those layers were sent on the
day that this peace agreement was announced, and Trump thinks

(54:43):
that there might be something to that as well. Could
be in terms of and I think China is reacting
to the growing strength of President Trump and the United
States in the world on the world stage. I think
that they are realizing this is probably a lever that
they planned to pull at some point that they controlled
all the world's earth rare minerals. I don't know that
they were planning on pulling that this week. Yeah, I
don't know, but I do think that they are worried

(55:03):
that the Trump is getting a lot of wind to
his back because of the success he's having in foreign policies.

Speaker 2 (55:09):
And could be the success of Trump. I agree with you.
I think it does scare the living daylights out of
the Chinese or trying to get a footprint on every
country around the world. They can all right, We've got
a lot more coming your way. Our number three of
the Rotting Greg Show coming up right here on Youtuh's
Talk Radio one oh five nine. Can alright stay with us.

(55:35):
It was interesting to hear from Amos Giora earlier on
the show today talking about what life is like right
now in Israel. Everybody's kind of they're hopeful, but it's
just got to be horrible to live there right now
just hoping this will come to fruition. You just don't know.

Speaker 1 (55:53):
You have to you have to let go of the
reality that we've understood our whole lives and this is
multi generational and say none of that apply, and this
new deal is going to And it's actually it's jarring
almost to think that there is celebration in the Gaza
strip and at hostage in Tel Aviv at the same time.
I mean, I just again, that's I don't know if

(56:13):
I'll say that enough that everyone else like, who cares?
But I'm telling you for me that I never thought
i'd live a day to see that.

Speaker 2 (56:19):
Yeah. Amen to that one. Well, let's talk about it
with our next guest as well, Ned Ryan. He is
co founder and CEO of American Majority. We've had Ned
on the show before. He wrote an article the other
day about the American Leviathan and we're talking about the
deep state, yep, the swamp spine on us senators, and
Ned will ask you about that here in second. But

(56:39):
I why to get first of all, Ned, as we
go to you, your reaction to what happened in the
Mid East this week, and the steps that have been
taken now.

Speaker 12 (56:45):
An incredible achievement again by Donald Trump. The shame of
it is he's not going to get the credit he deserves,
quite finally, because his last name is Trump and Trump
arrangement syndrome is a very real thing. But this is
in many ways, dude Trump not letting this go. He
was determined to bring about a ceasefire, to try and
figure out a solution that both sides would agree to,

(57:08):
and you know, bring the hostages home, bring bring those
that are deceased, bring them remains home. So so far,
so good. But he truly is the peace president. Again,
going back to it's a shame that the Nobel Peace
Prize will probably never be his because if you look
at a resume of someone who's brought about peace in
so many different places in the world, I don't think

(57:30):
anybody can beat Donald Trump's resume on that front.

Speaker 1 (57:33):
It is extraordinary. And I agree with you, it's just
he's never going to get the credit for it. But
I'm done with the Nobel I don't even want it, ye,
I don't even want it for him anymore. I'm not
going to sit in moan about it because I just
think it. I think they indict themselves when you see
what happens today and the recipient dedicates at the Yeah,
President Trump exactly.

Speaker 13 (57:52):
No.

Speaker 12 (57:52):
I thought that was a really strong move on her
part to dedicate that the prize to Trump. So, you know,
kudos to her. You're right in some ways, is it
worth it?

Speaker 5 (58:03):
You know?

Speaker 12 (58:03):
I think at some point we're probably just going to go,
we don't want your awards. But honestly, there's something to it.
The Nobel Peace Prize is just a shame that it's
become so political instead of being an objective prize.

Speaker 3 (58:16):
So let's switch gears.

Speaker 1 (58:17):
You're that you are the watchdog that we watch. Okay,
when you we listen to what you say is you're
as you're going and trying to find transparency in that
Leviathan of the swamp the federal government. So it came
out that the federal government, it's FBI and they were
surveilling US senators. And you have a column where you
talk about this and that this can't just you know,
go over lightly this there has to be things done.

(58:40):
Just maybe share with our listeners this, this is the
severity of this I mean, this is not a small
thing that's been uncovered.

Speaker 3 (58:46):
It was by whistleblow.

Speaker 1 (58:48):
It wasn't like they found the doctors, they had whistleblowers
had to come forward.

Speaker 13 (58:52):
You know.

Speaker 12 (58:52):
The shame of it is, again if anybody's been watching
the news that the FBI was in fact gave gave
a rule for Jacksmith to spy on Republican senators. It
was signed off on by then director Christopher Ray. And
it really does show. You know, I've been making this
a theme America Leviathan, the book, documentary, now The Substack,

(59:14):
so people can check out all of that Americanleviiathon dot com.
But this was my latest post at the Substack And
just the point I wanted to make though, is that
this is really a microcosm of a system that was
put in place, that was created. This was the point,
and so people go, this system is broken, well by
whose standards? According to the progressives who put in the

(59:35):
administrative state, the bureaucrats should be the deciders. They're the
ones who make the decisions in a constitution republic. That's
not true. It's the exact opposite, in fact, that it's
the duly elected representatives. So when you see the bureaucrats
spying on the duly elected representatives. I mean, that really
is the American leviathan, the administrative state in action. But

(59:56):
that is the point, that's the purpose. The real power
brokers in that form of go are meant to be
the bureaucrats. And so I guess the question I have
again for the American people is is this the form
of government you really signed up for? And I would
argue most of them did not. It's kind of caught
a lot of Americans by surprise that there has been
a form of government in place for decades. I would argue,

(01:00:17):
the last century that has nothing to do with our constitution, republic,
and now is the time for a great restoration, for
breaking apart of this administrative state and tearing it to pieces.

Speaker 2 (01:00:27):
If the leviathan is so ingrained in our system now,
and I think we all agree it probably is, how
do you change it? I mean, what is it going
to take to bring it back to where it needs
to be? And is that even possible?

Speaker 12 (01:00:39):
Ned So I think we have a moment in time.
I really do. We've got the right man in the
White House. We've got Russ Vote, who's running the office
of Management and Budget, who quite frankly, I mean Trump
called him the grim reaper in this opportunity the government
shut down. He announced just a couple hours ago that
he is going to put reduction and force in place,

(01:01:01):
and it's already being enacted today. So the chance and
the opportunity we have right now, I think is a
singular moment in history because of the dynamics, because of
the right people in the right place. But the only
way you can do it is to take aggressive action
like they're doing. It's not firing of a few thousand
bureaucrats and shutting down up program or two. It's going

(01:01:23):
to be the firing of hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats,
shutting down departments and agencies and making them cease forever.
I mean, this is the one thing that I sincerely
hope russ Vote is able to go all the way
and not only doing these reduction enforced exercises, but then
making them permanent and then removing those positions from the
federal rules so that they can't come back and another administration.

(01:01:45):
So you know, we've got a shot. I hope we
make the most of it.

Speaker 1 (01:01:49):
So there's two theories out there that I've heard, and
I have no idea which one's true, but I've heard
you kind of sound like you're in it. So there's
some people that think that this, you know, the bureaucratic
state excelrated, even if it was just recently. It was
in the last administration or two with starting with Obama
started getting even worse, and it's kind of built up
in that recent amount of time to be what it

(01:02:10):
is you're saying, we've pulled back the curtain and this
is what we've had maybe for even one hundred years.
Has it accelerated and become more draconian and we're just
more aware of what they've been up to all along?

Speaker 12 (01:02:20):
Well, I think this has been there's been a lot
more of this than we've been aware of. And it
was a system that was put in place really at
the beginning of the progressive movements, the election of Woodrow
Wilson nineteen twelve, the establishment of the administrative state and
his time in office. So I make the argument this
system was put in place one hundred years ago, and
it's kind of like compounding interest. It starts slowly and

(01:02:41):
then accelerates at the end. And I think we're kind
of towards that massively compounding interest stage in which I
think a lot of people that believe in this form
of government, the administrative state, have grown very tired and
weary of the dirty little peasants that disagree with them,
of those that dared to invite the system. And this
is the state in many way striking. I mean, Donald
Trump is an existential threat to that form of government. Again,

(01:03:03):
it's not constitutional, I'd argue, it's deeply on American So
I think you're seeing we've come to a point where
it's broken to the surface in many ways because of
Donald Trump. And because of that, they realize this is
an existential fight. Which way are we going to go?
Is the Republic going to be restored? Is the administrative
state going to continue? And they realize the stakes the

(01:03:24):
other side does, the bureaucrats, those that believe in that
form of government. So that's why I think you're seeing
it intensify and reach the stage that it hasn't in
the last few years.

Speaker 2 (01:03:33):
Ned Ryan he is the CEO and founder of American Majority,
author of a book I get up he wanted a
good read. It's called The American Leviah Thing.

Speaker 1 (01:03:42):
He's such a Watchdog, and you'll see him on Fox News.
He's always a contributor on the evening and news commentary programs.
And again, he has spent his life with grammar what
they call him the Information Act requests and he's always
pulling back curtains. And so it's good to watch him
because he's watching the swamp.

Speaker 2 (01:04:00):
Yeah, he sure is all right. Coming up next, we'll
talk about Netflix. Why should parents consider boycotting Netflix? We'll
get into that coming up next right here on the
Roden greg Show in Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine knrs. Now, you're a subscriber to Netflix.

Speaker 1 (01:04:16):
I hate this talkic. Yes, I'm so conflicted on this. Man.
I like to watch TV and they've got some shows
on that Netflix, but I'm really mad at them too.

Speaker 2 (01:04:24):
Well, they haven't been behaving properly of late, and let's
find out why. Joining us on our news maker line
right now is Bethany Mandel. She is a journalist and
author talking about the need for parents to flex their
power with Netflix, possibly even canceling Netflix. Bethany, great to
have you on the show. Give us the an update
on the latest controversy surrounding the programming on Netflix. Right now.

Speaker 10 (01:04:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 13 (01:04:48):
Absolutely So. It started last week when Lives of TikTok
started sort of a viral, very gorilla ad campaign against Netflix,
and I kind of felt like it was a campaign for,
you know, a more wholesome streaming service because she basically
Higher II, the young woman who runs with their TikTok,
just posted nothing but the worst, most woke, inappropriate content

(01:05:12):
that you see on Netflix that s geared towards children.
And there was a firestorm that erupted, and so you know,
members of Congress spoke out, and they're you know, on
Musk spoke at as well, and that that led to
a pretty significant hit on their stock price last week.
It's it's recovering this week. But it really opened the eyes,

(01:05:32):
I think to millions of American parents who didn't quite
realize that you can't just stick your kids in front
of Netflix and uh and go cook dinner, which is
the point of television.

Speaker 7 (01:05:42):
You know.

Speaker 1 (01:05:42):
I bet Bethany I I'm my kids are older now,
and I've seen the little kon for the kids. You know,
you could go to the kids and it just looks
like it's the safest place for you to put on Netflix.
So your kids don't see the adult content or the
you know, those series that we might even watch might
be just violent or something. So I've been I was,
I was unaware that there is such vile things on
that kid the kid's uh icon, There is a is

(01:06:06):
a is a consumer boycott. My question is totally self interested.
I like Netflix. I I ended my Disney subscription. I
have other consumert uh bands. But how do we get
the message across? Is it really just is it down
to the bottom line of subscriptions? Do we have to
cancel to send that message? I mean, what's the what's
the plan going forward? Because I it's so over the top.

(01:06:29):
I am stunned by the content that's on that's on Netflix.

Speaker 13 (01:06:32):
Yeah, and it's not it's you know, it is kid's
content in that they are marketing this content for kids.
They think that it is what kids should be watching
and consuming and believing and incorporating into their value system.
And it does not match with the value system of
our family and millions of other American families. But the

(01:06:53):
the I think the answer I've heard from folks since
I wrote the column at the New York Posts last
week or maybe it was early this week it's hard
to have to keep track if zero holidays, and it's like,
I don't even know what today is. But whenever I
wrote that column, I think it was earlier this week.
I heard from someone who works in Netflix and they
told me, you know, they kind of laugh when people
cancel their subscriptions because it is a drop in the bucket.

(01:07:15):
What really makes a difference is when people become kind
of like online trolls, honestly, and you know, every time
they post something on Twitter or on Facebook, you comment
and you become a squeaky wheel, and that sends a
message to other families that this content is out there
and alerts other families because a lot of us live

(01:07:36):
like very much online, and so there's a lot of
Americans who who aren't as chronically online as we are,
and alerting them to that is really important.

Speaker 2 (01:07:45):
Besie these new cartoons that are very woke and are
offending a lot of people out there right now. I mean,
who is behind this. Are these people who've been with
Netflix for a while and said, well, let's push the
end of a little envelope a little bit farther or
are these just new people who are coming in saying
we're gonna we're going to do something like this. Let's
see how it works.

Speaker 13 (01:08:06):
Yeah, So, I mean that's a great question, and that's
something I touched on in my column. They they have
you know, DEI officers who are focusing on this content
and and they have they have producers and marketers who
What's notable about all of these people who press this
content on children is they almost never have children themselves,
yet they want to influence our kids, and they've decided,

(01:08:28):
you know, through their expertise how to do that and
so on this they're they're doing it through their their
their skills and videography and and uh, you know, animation
and everything, and so you know, these are activists who
happen to work in the entertainment industry have decided that
they're going to target kids for this kind of messaging.

Speaker 1 (01:08:47):
So it's is it original Netflix content? Because you know,
Netflix does both They produce programming to watch and they
also also acquire or they stream other content from other
networks or other other sources. Is are they just drawing
from other sources that have already produced this or this
is this is its origins found with Netflix?

Speaker 13 (01:09:08):
This is original Netflix content? And so the advice that
I always give parents when people ask, because I literally
wrote a book on this, The Stolen Youth that came
out three years ago. You know, when your parents ask
for advice on how to deal with this stuff, I say,
go go for the old stuff. Go for stuff that
you watched when you were a kid. And you know,
sometimes I watch stuff that I watched when I was
a kid, and I was like, oh, this is much
more appropriate than I remember.

Speaker 12 (01:09:28):
It.

Speaker 10 (01:09:29):
Still more girls.

Speaker 13 (01:09:30):
Currently having that experience with That's Volcano turns out not
a children's movie. Another another mistake I made. My children
has like the guy Nelson and Lama, I'm like, sorry
about this, kid was much.

Speaker 10 (01:09:43):
More remember, yes, yeah, But the difference.

Speaker 13 (01:09:47):
Between that content that we you know, that was over
sexualized or like graphically violent, the difference between that and
what we're seeing now. And this is where I sort
of draw the line in my family. It's a rubicon
that I'm not willing to pross. Is that it's it's
promoting an ideology that is based in critical gender theory
and critical race theory, and that to me is just
that that's beyond the pale. You know, your garden variety

(01:10:11):
is sort of over sexualization and overly violent. That was
stuff that we grew up with and we turned out
all mostly okay. But this stuff is not the same,
not the same.

Speaker 2 (01:10:22):
Bethany Mandel joining us here on the Rod and Greg Show,
you'd never give up your Netflix.

Speaker 3 (01:10:25):
I think she gave me. She gave me a lane
I can be in and I don't have to give
it up. I think she did.

Speaker 2 (01:10:30):
So you don't have you don't have little ones.

Speaker 3 (01:10:32):
That's right, that's right, I.

Speaker 10 (01:10:33):
Just have to.

Speaker 1 (01:10:34):
She said, the biggest thing we can do is beyond
social media and kind of have a conversation about it
and put it front of mind for Americans. And I
think that's going to do a lot. And I like
that better than canceling it for me me personally, I
think everybody should, you know, exercise or consumer power anyway
they want.

Speaker 2 (01:10:50):
And she said, Mom and dad, just be aware of it,
pay attention to it. If you've got a concern, guess what,
you can always turn it off. That's right, right, all right?
Our listen back froment's coming up right here on the
Friday edition of The Rot and Greg Show and Talk
Radio one oh five nine knrs. When was Obamacare signed
into law. Was it twenty ten? Seems like right around

(01:11:12):
twenty ten, a couple of years after he'd been in office, right,
And as time has gone on, we have come to realite, Craig,
what a disaster this thing is turning out to be
for all Americans, the American healthcare system.

Speaker 1 (01:11:25):
It has and even Washington Post recently their editorial board
came clean and actually admitted there's not been any savings
with this thing. It's just been socializing medicine and the
cost of just continued to go up, up, up, I
mean eighty percent more today for your insurance premiums than
we were just you know, yeah, I mean when he
started this.

Speaker 2 (01:11:44):
Almost fell out on my chair this week when I
saw that editorial greg the Post basically writing that Obamacare
is not workable. We had a chance. Earlier this week
we talk with Joseph Vasquez, he's an associate editor at
the Media Research Center, about this, and we bangin by
simply asking, Joseph, did the Washington Post actually write and
it met this about Obama gere? We didn't believe it.

Speaker 5 (01:12:06):
It's hard to believe, yes, And I had to rub
my eyes a few times before I actually saw that
this came from the editorial board itself, and sure enough,
that's exactly what happened. You know, now that there's all
this talk about the Obamacare subsidies and Democrats wanted to
spend one point two trillion above what is already being spent.
I mean, they just let that slip in there. That
wasn't even the main focus of the story.

Speaker 10 (01:12:26):
They buried that part of the story of their editorial
in a paragraph.

Speaker 5 (01:12:32):
And I was just reading the story like another like
the Washington Post editorial board was playing both sides of
the shutdown game, and lo and behold, I came across
this admission about Obamacare, and I could not believe my eyes,
because the Washington Post was one of the very outlets,
along with a slew of others, that was selling Obamacare
as like the solution God gifts the American healthcare system

(01:12:53):
fifteen years ago. And now they're like, well, now that's
entrenched in the system, and now it's probably impossible to
get rid of it.

Speaker 10 (01:13:00):
It's like, oh, yeah, by the way, that stuff we
were telling you all that those years ago, Yeah, that
was a lot of bunk. I mean, are you serious.

Speaker 1 (01:13:06):
It's unbelievable, you know, And it is, so, so what
does I guess the strategy for them is now that
they can admit it doesn't work, now you got to
pay more. You know, that's what government does. If something
doesn't work, you just to have to subsidize it more.
So is it are they admitting also that these COVID
you know, they people weren't working, so they wanted to
you know, we had to pay more or you didn't
have to work, whatever those whatever they had to do

(01:13:26):
to insert more money into Obamacare during the COVID years,
this pandemic, they're now saying that's a baseline with no
pandemic insight, that they that this ACA doesn't survive without it.

Speaker 5 (01:13:36):
Is that?

Speaker 3 (01:13:37):
Is that what they're arguing the Democrats, Well.

Speaker 5 (01:13:39):
That's essentially what they're That's essentially what they're admitting. Man,
I'm going to give you another Captain Obvious moment. I mean,
they in critiquing Obamacare even more.

Speaker 10 (01:13:47):
This is what they said, and I almost sell out
of my chair laughing.

Speaker 5 (01:13:50):
This is what they said.

Speaker 10 (01:13:52):
Quote, this is how entitlement programs work. The preference to Obamacare.

Speaker 5 (01:13:56):
Once you habituate people to some generous government handout, they
grow to tended on it, and it becomes politically perilous,
if not impossible to fully quai fact.

Speaker 14 (01:14:06):
Thank you, captain obvious that we've been saying for fifteen years.

Speaker 1 (01:14:10):
Yes, yeah, I can't believe they said it, though, I
mean they must have been. Were they on gunpoint?

Speaker 13 (01:14:16):
Was so?

Speaker 3 (01:14:17):
Who got them to be so truthful?

Speaker 1 (01:14:18):
I honestly, it says shocking that they even described entitlements
that way.

Speaker 2 (01:14:22):
Yeah, and Joseph, didn't they just give away? Didn't they
just give away the entire democratic playbook when it comes
to entitlement programs. Make them so big that people love them,
and then when you try and cut them back even
though they aren't working, people get angry and call you're racist.

Speaker 7 (01:14:39):
Yeah, exactly.

Speaker 10 (01:14:40):
This is the only way that the Democrats can save
it by putting more.

Speaker 14 (01:14:43):
Money into it. Oh, you're admitting it's a failure, and
then we need to put more tax dollars into it.
Sure that's gonna work. You just admitted the whole loss
sucks and the only team it's.

Speaker 10 (01:14:54):
That machine well oiled.

Speaker 5 (01:14:55):
I mean, come on, that thing is a trash heap.

Speaker 10 (01:14:57):
It should have been delegated to the ashmin officially a
long time ago. But we're dealing with it now because
a lot of these politicis what is that when Nancy.

Speaker 14 (01:15:03):
Pelosi said, you got to pass the build of final
what's in it?

Speaker 2 (01:15:06):
Yes?

Speaker 10 (01:15:07):
I mean yeah, yeah. So now we find now the
Washington Post that it's oil board apparently found out fifteen
years later that that.

Speaker 5 (01:15:13):
Bill was a big mess.

Speaker 14 (01:15:14):
And now guess what, they don't have to worry about it.
The rest of us plebeians living on planet Earth have
to deal with the disaster of Obamacare. They can get
bent as far as I'm concerned.

Speaker 10 (01:15:24):
I mean, they were a part of that problem.

Speaker 1 (01:15:26):
Yeah, you're a very nuanced man. I don't know where
you're coming from. You very a lot of layers to you.
I can't figure out where you're at. Cards close to
the chest, Joseph, I don't know what you're trying to
say here.

Speaker 2 (01:15:36):
No, I'm with you.

Speaker 3 (01:15:37):
I'm picking up what you're putting down.

Speaker 1 (01:15:38):
Let me ask you this, is it true that I
didn't know it was this extreme eighty percent increase in
our healthcare premium since Obamacare became law for every American?

Speaker 3 (01:15:51):
Is that tracking?

Speaker 12 (01:15:51):
I mean?

Speaker 1 (01:15:52):
Is that because I think I've never seen anything go
anywhere but up in terms of health care costs, But
is it really eighty percent more since ACA passed something
around that.

Speaker 10 (01:16:01):
I know the Paragrin Health Institute. One of our friends,
Phil Kirpan and was actually part of the study. He
said that the per enroaly cost of Medicaid expansion from
the Obamacare changes is nearly sixty percent greater than what
experts had projected originally. I mean, we saw that coming
from a mile away, what was going to happen once
you give this one size fits all standard to Obamacare,

(01:16:23):
You're going to destroy the health insurance market. And you
know what, this one ticked me off personally because it
kind of hit closer to home. And around twenty fourteen,
when the revisions were first rolling out, my mother was
going through breast cancer and she was originally on a
private on private insurance. But then what happened was that
once we once that insurance inspired and she went on Obamacare,

(01:16:43):
she was getting treatment at the Cancers of America and Pennsylvania.
As soon as the insurance changed to Obamacare, her doctor
they kicked her off her care and she went months
without the necessary prevement for the cancer that she was battling.

Speaker 5 (01:16:58):
She was in remission. It took months for she was
finally able to find another provider that would be able
to give her the medication that she needed.

Speaker 10 (01:17:04):
So that personally kicked me off when I read that.
I'm like, that hit me.

Speaker 5 (01:17:07):
Close to hall because we didn't know if she was
even going to survive that, and she had to go
months precisely because she lost her insurance and was forced
under these Obamacare subsidies. So that's what we're dealing with that,
you know. So the fact that now ret conning the
whole Obamacare you know, drama from yet from years ago,
I mean, it's it's like a slap in the face,
like and so oh yeah, you know, by the way,

(01:17:29):
we actually we don't actually like streak your faith.

Speaker 2 (01:17:32):
Joseph fans Cares. He's with the Media Research Center, their
business area, talking about the Washington Post and it's editorial.

Speaker 1 (01:17:40):
I like Joseph Man, he's got a pep in his step. Yeah,
he's got some vimen vigor to him.

Speaker 12 (01:17:43):
I like it.

Speaker 3 (01:17:44):
I think I was as offended as he was that
they would be. Now they tell us, now you come.

Speaker 2 (01:17:49):
Kean after they came out a year ago in praise
to amazing Obamacare, is yeah, what a farce. Yeah, yeah,
well we'll talk more about that coming up with another
addition of our Listen Back Friday. Second right here on
Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine Cannas Tad Callister. Well,
well that's historian here. He was very actively involved in
the formation creation of a constitution month here in the

(01:18:11):
state of Utah passed away. We've had him on the
show before we have.

Speaker 1 (01:18:13):
He's actually sat in the very chair I'm in right
now and has been a contributor on the show in
terms of what the work he's done. Ecclesias School leader clearly,
but his work on our new constitution month of the
September is great. He really did plow the ground to
make sure that the month went well. And it's not
that long ago when that began. But he has just

(01:18:34):
been a powerful voice and I will miss I will
personally miss his contribution.

Speaker 2 (01:18:37):
Tad's a really, really good guy. All right now, let's
continue now with our list Back Friday segments. This whole
fight over the government shut down, By the way, greg
is probably not going to be open again until next Tuesday,
if se if it even gets open there, Well, the
fight is over Obamacare subsidies and we were just talking
with Joseph Vazquez about that. We also had a great
conversation with Michael Cannon. He's with a Cato Institute Director

(01:19:00):
of Health Policy Studies there, and we asked him about
Obamacare being stuck right in the middle of this, and
more and more people are starting to realize it's not working.

Speaker 7 (01:19:09):
All the low and moderate income people who are receiving
Obamacare subsidies right now would still get them. Those are
the original Obamacare subsidies, and they're going to stay in
place no matter what Congress does by the end of
the year. The subsidies that we're talking about today, the
ones that people are worried will expire, are subsidies that

(01:19:29):
reach from all the way up to one to six
people earning six hundred thousand dollars per year. If you
earn one hundred and twenty eight thousand dollars or all
the way down to the poverty line, you're still going
to get subsidies. But if this these enhanced what they
call them, or what I call Obamacare subsidies for the wealthy, expire,

(01:19:52):
then the people between one hundred and twenty nine thousand
dollars per year and six hundred thousand dollars per year
don't get any more subsidies. And that is what we're
talking about here. That is what Democrats are supposedly shutting
down the government to preserve is some temporary subsidies that
President Biden and Democratic Congress put in place and said

(01:20:12):
would expire at the end of this year. So the
fact that they expire at the end of this year
is Democrats doing, you know. And if they expire, then
the wealthier people enrolled in Obamacare will see the full
cost of Obamacare is hidden taxes, and that is what
scares Democrats.

Speaker 1 (01:20:29):
Let's dive into that, because I really think that when
you listen to the Democrats and even Republicans as they
try to articulate these this impasse or this issue, are
failing to point out the one hundred and thirty thousand
annual incomes, the six hundred thousand dollars annual income is
the impacted population. They want to make it sound like
it's the poor, huddled masses. Again, to your point, you

(01:20:51):
can't make the baseline the COVID years in a pandemic,
and that's what they're attempting to do. What will we
learn if we see that go away. Naturally, we don't
see the government open. We keep the you know, the
cr the same, and it goes through the debate that
you said that they're afraid for us to have. Maybe
we can talk about that a little more. What what
will that expose more specifically or how can I repeat

(01:21:12):
it to everyone?

Speaker 5 (01:21:13):
I know?

Speaker 3 (01:21:14):
Is the real problem.

Speaker 7 (01:21:16):
So the CBO says that for most people in the exchanges,
Obamacare is hidden taxes double their premiums. Okay, we could
get begetting them comprehensive health insurance. The CBO says, at
premiums that are sixty percent lower than the lowest cost
Obamacare plans. And yet all those hidden taxes at Obamacare

(01:21:39):
are prohibiting that because they're compulsory and they're doubling most
everyone's premiums, which and the premiums go so high that
when Congress originally passed Obamacare, they included a trillion dollars
over ten years for the people between the poverty line
and you know, one hundred twenty eight thousand dollars to

(01:22:01):
help them afford these premiums that the government was increasing. Okay,
so that's what the first trillion dollars was for. And
you know what Congress decided in twenty twenty one, just
you know, seventy years into this experiment, they decided that
wasn't enough. They decided that trillion dollars wasn't enough. So
now they want another half trillion dollars, and not just
for people bul from the poverty line to one hundred

(01:22:25):
and twenty eight thousand dollars per year, they want this
much of this half trillion new money is going to
go people to people making from one hundred and twenty
nine thousand dollars. Although we have to six hundred thousand
dollars per year, there are people making five hundred thousand
dollars per year who could get a seven thousand dollars subsidy.

(01:22:46):
And that's what the Democrats are trying to protect. They're
trying to protect people from the excessive premiums that Democrats created.

Speaker 2 (01:22:54):
Well, mikel I want to ask you are Republicans telling
that story? Because I think if the American people heard
that story, they go, well, this is a bunch of
a lawyer.

Speaker 1 (01:23:01):
There's people on that income range that are not on
the exchange and they're paying a fortune for their healthcare.

Speaker 2 (01:23:06):
Are they telling this story right?

Speaker 7 (01:23:08):
Michael usually not. But here's the thing. Here's the thing.
They have two ready made alternatives that all they need
to do is put it into law, and it would
give people access to what President Trump and what Senate
Majority leaders soon say they want to do, access to

(01:23:31):
high quality, lower cost health insurance that's so low cost
you don't even need a government subsidy. And what they
need to do is build on President Trump's biggest healthcare
victory from his first term, which was when he added
consumer protections to a type of insurance we call short
term insurance that allowed people to get that coverage that
the CBO said it's comprehensive and has premiums that are

(01:23:54):
sixty percent lower than the lowest costs of Bomacare plans.
And that would be building on a Trump success. But
you know what, they could also build on an Obama reform,
which was when President Obama saw that all the hidden
taxes in Obamacare would destroy the health insurance markets in

(01:24:15):
US territories, he said, all right, these don't apply there.
That means that in US territories, people are free from
Obamacare's mandates, they're free from Obamacare's hidden tasks. Is they
have more freedom to choose their health insurance than citizens
on the US mainland do. All US citizens should have
that freedom, and Congress can give it to them by
building on that Obama idea and letting citizens on the

(01:24:39):
mainland buy insurance from any US territory or i should say,
in the fifty States, by insurance from any US territory,
maybe from the same insurance company, with a broader provider
network and lower deductible so better coverage on some dimensions.
We've got a Republican idea, We've got a Democratic idea.
They should be running with those rather than trying to
bail out Obamacare, which is really the crisis that keeps

(01:25:02):
on giving. I mean, Democrats keeps trying to scare people
about losing their health care because they passed a law
that it is terrible. It strips people of their healthcare.

Speaker 1 (01:25:12):
So when the President said, look, if you want to
talk about healthcare costs, we can. Republicans will talk. We'll
speak with Democrats, but we're going to open the government
back up, and once we do, we'll have that discussion.
A lot of people were worried that President Trump was
capitulating maybe to Obamacare. Were those comments because he then says,
but Obamacare has been a mess. What you're proffering as
solutions is that where you believe the President's going to

(01:25:32):
go with the Democrats if they get the government back
open and they want to negotiate this healthcare issue.

Speaker 7 (01:25:39):
Look, the presidentid likes good deals, right, he doesn't like
giving some lathin away to the people on the other
side of the table without getting anything. And if they
just reauthorize these Obamacare subsidies for the wealthy Republicans and
the President will be totally capitulating to Democrats. And so
if there are members of his party that want to

(01:26:00):
do that, the way he can get them back into
line is to say, hey, look, I had this fantastic
success for my first term. It was freeing people from
Obamacare's hidden taxes, comprehensive coverage for premium sixty percent below
Obamacare premiums. You give me that, and I will give
you a I'm not going to let you pass those

(01:26:22):
subsidies unless you give me something for it, unless you
build on this victory of mine and throw in the
Obama idea as well, because then the president will at
least be getting something, and I think the gain to
freedom would be worse than the loss of freedom from
extending those subsidies, and it would make healthcare more universal
at the same time. But just to now cover, should

(01:26:43):
not be reauthorizing those subsidies. There's absolutely no excuse for it.
But if that train is leaving the station, the president
can make sure there's a victory for him in it.

Speaker 2 (01:26:51):
On our Listen Back Friday segment, Michael Cannon from the
cata Winstitute talking about the Democrat stunt and how it
is exposing Obama care fraud.

Speaker 1 (01:27:00):
One hundred and thirty thousand dollars a year householding come
up to six hundred thousand dollars a year, and you
were getting subsidized healthcare.

Speaker 2 (01:27:07):
Is there a problem with that?

Speaker 6 (01:27:09):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (01:27:09):
Justin give me a break, just a little bit.

Speaker 2 (01:27:12):
All right, Well, that does it for us this week.
As we say each and every week, head up, shoulders back.
May God bless you and your family, this great cast
you have ours, mister Hughes, have a nice weekend, a
lot of football. It's gonna be wet out there now
stay dry. We'll talk to you on Monday. Have a great,
great weekend.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

.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: Amos Guiora Live in Israel on the Ceasefire; Should Parents Ban Netflix

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg 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;}My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

All Episodes