The Rod and Greg Show: Collapse of Dems Affordability Scandal; Utah Speaker Mike Schultz

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
If you ever asked yourself how the pioneers survived the
people who settled this this state in weather like this,
because it's no different.

Speaker 2 (00:07):
Yeah, yeah, I don't. I don't know. I think they
were just built different. There's no way they were walking
around like and they were smaller, like maybe you just
needed less calories can like, I don't.

Speaker 1 (00:17):
Know, they were smaller for you go to cove Fort.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
The little pioneer houses almost they look like little you
think you'd find those in the Wizard of Oz and
the Munchkins lived there. I mean they're tiny. I think
they were.

Speaker 1 (00:33):
Well, do you think is it easier to handle the
heat if you're smaller?

Speaker 2 (00:36):
I'm thinking I'm thinking yeah, yeah, So I think that
it's like if you have less calories to burn, less
calories to consume, maybe maybe there's just less of you
to get hot. I don't know.

Speaker 1 (00:46):
Yeah, I've always wondered that.

Speaker 2 (00:48):
I'm telling you that I would not be able to
survive this kind of heat. Thank goodness, it's it's dry heat,
not humidity, But I still wouldn't be able to do
it without a c Yeah.

Speaker 1 (00:56):
Liz Peak will be on the show a little bit later,
and Liz lives of New York, and we'll talk to
her about how she's handling the heat back there. Because
I grew up in that country. You grew up in
that country. The humidity in that part of the country
can be just overwhelming.

Speaker 2 (01:11):
So to give you an example, if you were crazy
enough to in high humidity in the eighties, forget the nineties,
and you bought a milkshake, okay, and you put a
napkin around that milkshake when you bought it, you wouldn't
last five minutes before that thing would start sweating. It
would make the napkin you're holding saturated and wet. The
thing would be all over your hand. Yeah, and you's

(01:32):
not even including the shake that's inside what you're holding,
just what you're holding, which you couldn't even set it
down anywhere because it would just be a it'd be
like a sponge of condensation.

Speaker 1 (01:41):
Yeah, it's kind of crazy, kind of crazy. Well, we've
got a great show lined up for you today here
in a minute, we'll talk about the inflation numbers. But
then the speaker at the Utah House, Mike Schultz, who
was inside the Oval office yesterday, I wonder if he
lifted anything like stole a pen or something.

Speaker 2 (01:57):
If you held this salt he went and picked up
some new no paths depends on stuff.

Speaker 1 (02:01):
We'll talk to Speaker Showles about what this announcement by
the President yesterday on bears, ears and grand staircases. I mentioned, Liz.
People will join us and in the five o'clock Howard,
I think we'll have quite a discussion on this, Greg,
What should u V you do to honor Charlie Kirk?

Speaker 2 (02:18):
Yeah, and that should be a what question, not if? Yeah,
And I'm to being told that there's an if in
there that whether they if they should honor or remember
Charlie Kirk in that moment, if they should if if
that university should it should never be an if it
should just be how yeah?

Speaker 1 (02:36):
How well. There's an article in the Salt Lake Tribune
written by They picked it up from the New York
Times and the New York Times reporters saying the university
is struggling as to what exactly to do. But it's
like you said, it's not if, it's what if.

Speaker 2 (02:50):
They try to say nothing to see your folks, Let's
just move along. Let's pretend it never happened. That's just
that's that's the wrong answer. It can't and it can't
be acceptable.

Speaker 1 (03:00):
Yeah. Yeah, Well I have a sense they're going to
try and not do anything.

Speaker 2 (03:05):
It'd be wrong. I'm with you, I agree with you.
Let's get into that topic. Do we get that one?

Speaker 1 (03:10):
Yeah, we'll get into that in the five o'clock.

Speaker 2 (03:11):
Okay, I'm loaded for bear for that one. I'm ready
to go.

Speaker 1 (03:14):
Yeah. You went off during our morning meeting today on
this and Iran and I just said, they're going no, no, no, no, yeah,
anything anything. All right, let's talk about inflation. CNBC anchor
Rix Andelly was in a very very good mood today, Greg,
a very good mood. Yes, do you want to hear? Why? Well,
let's find out. Here's Rix Sanelly CNBC talking about inflation today.

Speaker 3 (03:38):
This is our junior release the Consumer Price Index. Expecting
a headline number to be negative, negative one tenth percent.
This is four times more negative minus four tenths percent.
That would be the biggest negative drop that we've seen
since four to twenty since uh basically COVID timing, which

(03:59):
really affects, of course, all of the inflation data points.
So that goes back basically six years low. And if
we look at the CPI month over month on the
core also under expectations comes in at goose egg zero
zero would be the smallest amount.

Speaker 2 (04:16):
It would equal Jan of twenty one.

Speaker 3 (04:18):
To find a smaller changer, a more negative changer, and
minus one ten percent.

Speaker 1 (04:23):
That's May of twenty twenty. Wow. He was excited today.
That is the biggest drop, as he mentioned greg in
six years. Much of it attributed to energy prices. Now
we're seeing spikes again because of the latest action against Iran,
but I don't think they're going to go up. What
do we reach at one time one hundred and twenty
a barrel high teens or twenty and I heard today.

(04:44):
Last I heard he was about seventy eight dollars a barrel.
As I mentioned to Steve Moore last week when we
had Steve on the show, the world is adjusting to
this now. And I think that's what is taking place,
don't you.

Speaker 2 (04:55):
And this is what I love. The markets will adjust
far better than the experts predict.

Speaker 1 (05:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (05:00):
So the experts want to tell the experts air quotes.
They want to tell you what's going to happen. The
markets indicate what's going on, and you see that, you
see a calming of these oil price commodity price as
you see the ups and downs of the Iran conflict,
but you're seeing that the stability of like the reserves
we have in Venezuela and the United States are are
a plenty. You see the pipelines being built to get

(05:22):
out of that straight in the first place, creating more
production and getting the different conduits or different you know,
pathways for delivery. All those things. The market's telling us
that that they're gonna be financial word is becoming more
comfortable with alternative routes, and the straight of her moves
certainly doesn't hold the same you know, threat that it

(05:43):
did prior to the conflict starting.

Speaker 1 (05:44):
I looked at an illustration today, Greg, and I think
there were four or five major pipelines that are now
being built in the Middle East from Oman and the Arabs,
you know, avoiding the straight of her moves. They just
know this is going to be this. If this thing
is going to become that political, we're just going to
find another way around it.

Speaker 2 (06:03):
And that's what they'll do, rightly. So that's what they're
doing rightly. So and I think that's a smart way
to deal with it. In addition to what we're doing
and how we're having to deal with and we never
want Iran as showing why you never want them to
have a nuclear bomb? Why that you don't want? I mean,
they are showing this in spades. You have to learn
from this. So there's a lot of work to resolve
on that front. But to the extent that they control

(06:23):
any kind of supply chain for oil, you got to
get out of that straight. You got to make that
irrelevant because they are still a problem even if you
don't have it. So get that taken care of it.
And again I would say the markets, if they get
too bullish, they retract. They tell the truth. The markets
will tell the truth.

Speaker 1 (06:38):
They do and the Trumpster, by the way, we'll be
talking about this Thursday night in an address to the nation,
and we hope to be able to carry that live
for you. Now when we come back Bear's Ears Grand staircase.
Here we go again, we'll talk with the Speaker of
the Utah House. What is next.

Speaker 2 (06:53):
You sound a little pessimistic about that.

Speaker 1 (06:55):
I am not. I know the idiotic judges in this
country will step in inside.

Speaker 2 (07:00):
Think it was a great day and I think it's
going to hold forever.

Speaker 1 (07:02):
I only hope so I do. I do hope that,
but I'm not confident yet. All Right, we'll talk about that.
Speaker of the House, Mike Shulds will join us coming
up next on the Rod and Greg Show. You know that,
said one of my grandchildren said the other day. There's
a I have a radio next next to our bed,
wake me up in the morning, right.

Speaker 2 (07:19):
Next to your lantern. It lights up the room when
it gets dark. What's that exactly?

Speaker 1 (07:29):
That really blow their mind? All right, big day yesterday
for Utah. The presidente again pledging to do what he
said he would do during the campaign and reduce the
size of two huge national monuments here in the state.

Speaker 2 (07:43):
Of Utah, egregiously huge millions of acres encumbered. I've said before,
these Democrat presidents in their last weeks in office, use
utah It's rural communities as their personal atm They encumber
millions of acres of land. This is what their environmentalist
wacko donors have wanted. They as a thank you for
their support and money, they go and take land because

(08:04):
those environmentalists, I don't know if you know, but they
think humans are the problem. Humans are the enemy. They
want no one to touch anything. Just get all humans
off of anything in Utah. And it really we the
state and it's the residents pay the price.

Speaker 1 (08:16):
Well, Utah's entire congressional delegation was there along with the
Governor and Speaker of the House Mike Schultz, who's joining
us on our Newsmaker line right now to talk about that.
Speaker Shoals, thanks for joining us this afternoon. We've been
to this rodeo a couple of times already, Speaker Shoals,
what's new? What's different about this EO signed by the
President yesterday.

Speaker 4 (08:35):
Well, you know, I don't know that we're you know,
if the next administration comes back in and changes it.
You know, it's quite likely or possible that that could happen,
but we're going to do a few things to try
and prevent that. I can tell you that. So one,
I'm super grateful to the President for coming in making
these changes, reducing these down to sizes that are somewhat reasonable.

(08:57):
We have to recognize and pay attention also in the
Antiquities Act, where Congress pass pass the Antiquities Act specifically
says that these monuments must be only the size necessary
and as small as possible to protect the architecture, the
resources that is trying to be protected. One point three

(09:19):
million acres on bears Ears, one point nine million acres
on Grand Staircase is absolutely ridiculous. Most of the monuments
that we have here in the state of Utah were
only a few thousand acres, and so you know, to
reduce them down to the size that's reasonable and appropriate,
I think is super important. Right now, Bears Aers one
hundred and twenty thousand acres still, Grand Staircase one hundred

(09:41):
and eighty thousand acres still, and so there's still send
of the largest monuments that we have here in the
state of Utah. And so just grateful President Trump coming
in and do it now. We are working and trying
to work with Congress to address antiquities aut but Congress
doesn't seem to be doing a whole lot right now.
So you know, I don't know what's going happen there,
but we are continuing forward with our lawsuit and there

(10:04):
will be other lawsuits filed, and so I think that's
the place where I think we'll find the courts and
the judiciary we'll look at this and look at what
the Antiquities Act says, and rule in favor of that
says President Clinton and President Biden clearly went outside of
what Antiquities Act that was passed by Congress and the

(10:27):
size of these monuments. So we're going to keep on this.
We're going to keep working to keep these monuments the
size that President Trump just made them.

Speaker 2 (10:36):
Speaker Chaulez, you know, if you live along the Wisetatch Front,
you don't interface with the Bureau of Land Management very often.
You don't know what it means that the federal government
owns land inside of our state. Our rural communities know
this one of the things that people might not know
and because they ask, Okay, it's not a monument, now
what is it. It's still federal land. This is this
Bureau of Land Management land. But the access the land

(10:56):
used permits the access that the public's always had to
the land or any any Utah as Utahon has added,
the land that is restored. When you see a president
that pulls this in, I think these monuments were in
the millions of acres. Maybe share with our listeners, what
what is it that that has improved today for Utahon's
with the president scaling these monuments back versus what they

(11:17):
look like under these Democrat Obama and Biden expanding them
out in millions of acres.

Speaker 4 (11:23):
Yeah, so great question. And what happens with the land
as it just reverts back to the DLM with the
same protections that it had in place. However, it then
does allow to have the land manage and it doesn't
create the same processes to shut down off shut down
access under the Biden administration. We saw the Biden administration

(11:45):
come in and close over two thousand miles of roads
on our public lands. A lot of those was targeted
inside of Their's years and targeted inside of Grand Staircase.
And you know, we fought to get them open back up.
So one that's the other thing. So these monuments are
designed to go through travel management plans with the intent
of closing down access to the citizens of the state.

(12:09):
That's wrong and that's what we saw happen, and so
that's why this is so important. Also on Bears Years,
it specifically says that the pinion junipers should be protected. Well,
guess what, Pinion junipers don't need to be protected. They
are actually in basic tree that come in and take
over everything and push out all the grasses and all
the other habitat, which then takes away resources for our

(12:32):
mule deer herds and our elk herds and our other
forms a while bye, as well as suck up all
the water out of the ground, leading less water in
our rivers and in our lakes. And so in the
Babylon fire you're seeing it right now, that's because of
overgone junipers. It's gone crazy. And so being come able

(12:53):
to come in and do prescribed burns knock back some
of the junipers and create more habitat for our deer
and elk and our wildlife herds is another crucial thing
that we'll be able to start doing again, working with
the DLM to do this.

Speaker 1 (13:10):
Speakers shoals, could we see some changes right away? So
I don't know how significant the changes would be, but
even some minor changes right away with the President's order yesterday,
could we see some right away?

Speaker 5 (13:21):
Well?

Speaker 4 (13:22):
Oh, absolutely, I do believe we could. At the speed
in which the Trump administration is moving and the things
they're getting done, and that with the emphasis on the
wildfires right now, there's a lot of things that we
could go in and do and make these lands better
and do better maintenance on them and make them more productive,

(13:42):
and trying to increase our wildlife herds. Get some of
these access roads that have been closed off to the public,
get them open back up again. Absolutely, I think we'll
start to see some the media action out of the
Trump administration and the BLM on this.

Speaker 2 (13:58):
Yes, yeah, your shoulders this time yesterday, just twenty four
hours ago. You were at the White House. You're at
You're in the West Wing, you're in the Oval Office.
I are there any fun facts, any kind of inside
stories that you can share with our audience. When I've
been to the White House, there's been these, maybe some
unguarded moments that have been funny. But anything that because

(14:18):
you know, what we don't see is the sea of
cameras that you're looking at standing behind the desk the
Oval Office, behind the President. But any anything that struck
struck you as you were in that ceremony yesterday that
you might want to share.

Speaker 1 (14:31):
You didn't lift any pens or any any envelope.

Speaker 2 (14:34):
Yeah, I loaded Air Force one when I got inside it.
I'll just confess it. But did you get any good
swag out of this thing?

Speaker 4 (14:42):
I'll tell you I was at an incredible opportunity, and I
just felt extremely blessed to be there and to be
working on this issue over the last couple of years
and to have it coming together. I just felt incredibly
blessed to be there. But yeah, so President Trump actually
has on his desk he read button that he could
push for a diet cope. I almost push that button,

(15:04):
but because it was right there in front of me,
is everything I could to not push it. But when
I was about ready to push it, Marco Rubio comes
in and Marco says, misters's president, Sir Iran just hit
two cargo ships with drones in the in the in Iran.
They're in the Strait of Hormuz. And uh so it

(15:24):
was interesting to watch watch that play out real time
and uh and and to listen to the president's reactions
and uh the first thing he said was how much
damage was there? And was anybody killed? And so it
just it just shows the level of intensity that I
think our president is going to right now, that he
truly does care about our nation and and and and

(15:47):
world peace and getting things right. And then you know,
he said, well, they're going to get bombed tonight and
wait for next week. So it was just kind of
interesting to watch that all play out in real life.

Speaker 1 (15:57):
Speak of the House might thank for joining us on
our nudes maker line. I would have pushed the right button.
I couldn't have failed myself.

Speaker 2 (16:04):
Yeah, it's a very interesting story to see something like
that happen in real time where the Secretary of State
comes in Mark Rubio and tells them that and where's
concerns lyeing and what that? You know, that unscripted moment
looks like. But talk about putting a damper on your celebration.
I mean, now you can't press the button. You can't
do it because you lift a pen. You can't do anything. No,
I'd still take a pen, yeah.

Speaker 1 (16:24):
I know you would. All right, more coming up it
is the Roder greg Show with you right here on
Talk Radio one all five dying can arrests.

Speaker 2 (16:31):
So yesterday's five o'clock topic, we talked about the what
you know wilds with the wild and Wildlife and that
was great. But a lot of good talkback comments on too,
not just callers, but talkback, So I like both.

Speaker 1 (16:43):
Yeah. Yeah, if you can't wait on the phone for
us to get you on the air, and you leave
a talk bath message. What about thirty seconds?

Speaker 2 (16:49):
Yeah, and it counts down on the app for you
tells you when to start.

Speaker 1 (16:52):
Yeah, it does, it does all right. One of the
issues that no doubt will come to light during the
mid terms affordability. That's what the Democrats are now pushing for. Right.
But you have the inflation report coming out today, the
lowest has been in six years. My guess is it
may go back up a little bit because of the
you know, the the uncertainty of what's going on in
the Middle East. But I think things are starting to

(17:14):
level out on that Craig.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
Yeah, it was almost a half a percent drop month
over month. We've not seen a drop like that in
the inflation for as you said, for six years. And
we're not out of andy, we're not out of the woods.
But I do think the markets, do you know, they
adjust accordingly, and when you see and when you see
these numbers coming out, it's not that it's all pie
in the sky, but it's it's far better than when
when there wasn't an Iran conflict and we're in the

(17:36):
Biden administration and everything was nine percent. Interest in growing
we're seeing I think we're seeing as good as numbers
as we could hope get in the circumstances.

Speaker 1 (17:44):
That's little. I tell you what Liz Peak is now
joining us. Liz a good friend of the show, a
columnist at the Fox News. You know, Dems are line
to voters, you claim, Liz, because they're talking about affordability.
When you heard that, when you hear that word from
a Democrat, and how do you respond, lives.

Speaker 6 (18:01):
Well, that they're just not telling the truth.

Speaker 7 (18:04):
And you know, at some point facts have to matter
and you have to really kind of review the record.
The record is that the most expensive cities and states
in America by far are those that are run by Democrats.

Speaker 6 (18:17):
And I don't just mean that there's a mayor or
a governor.

Speaker 7 (18:20):
I'm talking about in the case of states, for example,
states that are run by a Democrat governor, a Democrat legislature,
and very often a supermajority Democrat legislature that's been in
place for decades.

Speaker 6 (18:33):
I mean.

Speaker 7 (18:33):
New York, of course, is like the poster child for this.
Ma'm Donnie, our new mayor is crowing about how he's
going to really zero in on lowering the cost of living.
Where's he been, folks? Because we've had decades of Democrat
rule in New York City and New York State, and
they've done nothing but drive the cost of living higher.

Speaker 6 (18:53):
And here's the thing, it's policy.

Speaker 7 (18:55):
It's not geography, it's not whether, it's not things that
cannot be controlled. It's entirely the creation of policy, which
in terms of labor costs, because they're very pro union
and they discriminate against non union workers, they drive up
the cost of construction. It's energy, where again looking at

(19:18):
New York, but the same thing could apply to California
and a number of other Blue states. They have basically
refused to accept local and in a particular local fossil fuels,
which are very low cost to a lot of neighborhoods
and so forth, New York being a good example where

(19:38):
we could do fracking, for example upstate. So they don't
want to do that, So they go to electrification, which
is also looking to renewables, and that's very expensive, and
it just kind of goes on and on. I mean, basically,
their choices are not user friendly. They're not consumer friendly.
They're friendly to special interests, largely like the environmentalists or unions,

(20:01):
and they have expensive I mean, the idea of this party,
the Democrat political party, absconding with affordability claims as their
platform are just ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (20:14):
You're so right, and you point out where were they
during the Biden administration, because I remember Schumer crying about
gas prices and during Trump's first term, and then he
didn't have a word to say during the Biden administration.
And it's unbelievable that, you know, they say we want
to help people afford their homes, they mean pay for
your home. They're going to give you government housing, healthcare,
universal health care, well, you know, and keep the lights on, yeah,

(20:34):
with your alternative energy. So everything that they would argue
would be a solution, we know is actually going to
compound the price and make it less affordable. But here's
the thing, but, Liz, voters vote on emotion. We I'm
a Republican. I like math. Okay, I like to show
you the math of it all. I want to show
you the math of Biden's inflation at nine percent, show
you that it's not that way here, what is the

(20:55):
emotional appeal to let the public, the electorate know that
their promises of affordability or just flat out falls.

Speaker 7 (21:02):
Well, I mean, you're right, the people who are voting
for the progressive left at this point are not looking
at facts. I mean fact number one. For example, they
embrace socialism. If anyone can bring me an example of
socialism succeeding in any country, I am very open to that.
I'd love to see where that has been the case.

(21:25):
They conflate communism and socialism. But however you define it,
things like rent control are a failure. They're failed every
place they've ever been. Basically, when government takes a bigger
share of the economic pie, it is a given that
the economy becomes less productive, less successful. We've seen it

(21:48):
in European countries that kind of went hard left and
then they had to tack back to the middle because
there was no growth in jobs or opportunities, and not
any increase in wages because themies just stagnate. So they
don't believe in facts and reason. And so honestly, you
do feel like you're sort of talking into the wind

(22:08):
when you oppose these policies because they're you know, you
kind of get the feeling no one pays attention. But
I tell you what, when you have a lot of
people with really kind of crazy ideas like abolishing prisons.
If those people begin to actually implement some of their
nuttier ideas, it won't work, and ultimately they will be

(22:29):
out of a job. Now, I say that in recognition
that in California, for example, they went very aggressive on
raising the minimum wage in fast food restaurants. The upshot
of that was a lot of fast food restaurants automated
and people lost their jobs. Did that were down to
the negative viewpoint of the politicians? Probably for the people

(22:50):
who lost their jobs? But is there a you know,
is the voter, the average voter sitting there taking all
the information in and making a choice.

Speaker 6 (22:59):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (23:00):
Yeah, I was going to ask you there's a follow
up to this, because it leads right into my question
I have for you. Who are these gullible voters? I mean,
like Greg said, can't they do math?

Speaker 2 (23:10):
If I can track it? They should?

Speaker 1 (23:15):
Who are these people?

Speaker 6 (23:16):
I'm I'm sorry.

Speaker 7 (23:17):
The progressive left has said that math is racist, so
they like but they don't like math.

Speaker 6 (23:25):
You're right, exactly, Well, I'll tell you who they are. Actually.

Speaker 7 (23:30):
The amazing thing about all this is all this chatter
about the progressive left caring about the working man and
the working woman and very few of them are working
men or women. Almost all of them are college educated liberals,
mostly white.

Speaker 6 (23:47):
You don't see a lot of black people.

Speaker 7 (23:48):
Are brown people showing up at these rallies, uh, you know,
denouncing I don't know our relationship with Israel or think,
you know, think of any other kind of progressive project.
They're they're white, mostly white, not entirely young, college educated liberals,
and they really don't and they all feel there's an
expression they don't know come here from Sickham. Honestly, that's

(24:11):
kind of how I feel about these people.

Speaker 1 (24:13):
Thank you, Liz. I mean, she nails it on these,
on these she's fun to out.

Speaker 2 (24:19):
On the show. Just straight bottom line.

Speaker 1 (24:21):
Yep, yep. The government interferes in our life, would you agree?

Speaker 2 (24:25):
Huh?

Speaker 1 (24:26):
Every every time we turn around in California, it's worse.
Do you know what's happening now? In Sacramento. They have
deployed the city there has deployed trash spies and they
go through your trash. They look in your big trash bins, right,
so you comply with new standards of the type of
trash you can throw away. They want to make sure

(24:48):
that the organic stuff is in the organic bin, and
if it's not, they'll make you get in there and
put it in there.

Speaker 2 (24:54):
I I can't stand this, you know, you know you
believe that down to so many things they don't even
have containers for. There's things I want to throw away
when I see these, like all your plastics imperigo here.
What if you have something that's in between you don't
know what how to throw it away?

Speaker 1 (25:07):
So they have trash spies. That's it now in Sacramento
and they go around looking inside your trash.

Speaker 2 (25:13):
It all goes to the same landfill. It's all scam anyway,
it's all scam. Yeah, it all goes to the same landfill.

Speaker 1 (25:19):
It is all right. Five o'clock. Coming up, we're going
to talk about the debate over a memorial for Charlie
kirk At you be you yes, What are your thoughts
on this? It's an important one. We'll get into it
and get to your calls. Coming up. England plays in
the World's Cup tomorrow. Yeah, she asked for time off.
I said no, true, First off, Aby wouldn't ask her.

(25:42):
She doesn't know how to not work hard.

Speaker 2 (25:44):
She has too much.

Speaker 1 (25:45):
I think she's the hardest working woman in radio Today.

Speaker 2 (25:48):
Woman I think she's the hardst news director, hardst working
news director period.

Speaker 1 (25:52):
Yeah, naturally.

Speaker 2 (25:52):
I don't think there's anyone anywhere, Yeah that puts in
as much time and care for the broadcast.

Speaker 1 (25:58):
So she is such a big England fan and she is.
Why is that? Why don't she like much?

Speaker 2 (26:03):
I don't even understand the connection when you think when
you think of soccer, don't you think of England?

Speaker 1 (26:08):
No, you don't. I always have, but they haven't won
anything for like centuries. I don't keep scoring. I wouldn't
know who won last although I heard Argentina did. Argentina
won last time? They may win again if.

Speaker 2 (26:22):
In this tournament every four years?

Speaker 1 (26:23):
Or is this every four years? So like the Olympics.

Speaker 2 (26:26):
Yeah, well, it seems a lot of lott a lot
of time to wait to see the next one. You know,
it just seems seems a bit much. I like the
super Bowl every years.

Speaker 1 (26:34):
Kinds to me it'd be a lot more fun if
it was every year.

Speaker 2 (26:37):
Can you imagine if you half these rules? Okay, fourth
quarter comes to zero, Hey, refs come up ten more minutes?

Speaker 1 (26:43):
Here we go.

Speaker 2 (26:44):
What we were just holding on for fourth down? We
wanted to win the game, right, here at defense. Not
ten more minutes.

Speaker 1 (26:49):
I wouldn't that wouldn't work with it. And it's not
sudden death. You have to wait till the clock runs out. Yeah,
it's kind of crazy, Yeah, kind of crazy. All right,
interesting article. This was a article that first appeared in
the New York Times. The Salt Lake Tribune picked it
up today. The debate over what UVU is going to do,
if anything, greg to honor Charlie Kirk.

Speaker 2 (27:12):
Well, so when we talked about this this morning, how
you honor Charlie Kirk or how you remember such a terrible,
terrible moment in American history. Forget about Utah history or
UVU history, but in this country. To have someone that
was such a powerful thought leader on going to campuses
across this country, to have debates, to have people that,

(27:34):
if they disagreed, come to the front of the line,
to have this power of discourse and have him murdered
because of it, it's one of the It's such a shameful,
horrific attack on freedom of speech at an institution of
higher learning. It magnifies this even more because you would hope,
even if it might not be the case, that our
institutions of higher learning are where diversity of thought can

(27:54):
occur and debate can occur. To not memorialize that terrible,
terrible moment, to not forget, to learn from, to make
sure we never are okay with or whitewash that moment
and that terrible dark moment of history. You've got to
do something. Now. What you want to put there, I
think is open to debate. But if you put something there,

(28:17):
if you were to mark that moment as a school,
I think I can't believe that there are some that
want to our debating whether to put anything at all.
Maybe we've moved past that. That's old news. It shouldn't
be we should never ever ever forget. And you know, again,
I hate to say it, but if this was someone
left of center that was killed for their political beliefs,

(28:39):
it wouldn't even be a question that you wouldn't want
to forget it. We would all be told and we
would want to still remember that you cannot be killed
you for your thoughts and for your speech. That is
the essentien. It's like the heart and soul of a
freedom of speech. So let's forget about the political leanings
of whoever was murdered for that reason. For someone to
be murdered for that reason, asassinated for that reason, cannot

(29:02):
be forgotten. Know, it has to be remembered. And if
it's uncomfortable, good, it needs to be uncomfortable. It needs
to be a hard subject. And you know what that is.
Just I just can't. I cannot entertain any serious thought
or discussion that that school of which I was a
student at one point would ever not be committed to

(29:23):
remembering that moment and make memorializing it.

Speaker 1 (29:26):
Well, there's a there's a line in the story Greg
that just cracks me up and says, Utah Valley University
does not want to be defined by Charlie Kirk's killing. Well,
guess what you already are. Yeah, it happened. You can
do about it, it's except to honor his effort of
promoting free speech civic dialogue. I mean, you've seen all

(29:49):
the videos I have since Charlie was assassinated almost a
year ago now, of clips of him appearing on college campuses,
exchanging interacting with students. Did he ever treat any of
them negatively? He respected them?

Speaker 2 (30:02):
They raise questions, But it was propaganda that tries to
take his comments out of context, that try to make
him look hateful. He was respectful. He would tell a
father and son that came up for a question who
had completely polar opposite political beliefs that the father and
son relationship was primary to everything. The political beliefs would
be secondary. This was Charlie Kirk and I got to

(30:23):
tell you he was really moving minds amongst young people.
And we talk a lot about our young people on
the show and where they're getting their information from and
how they're reacting. He was a thought leader that was
really changing hearts and minds in a powerful way. To
be assassinated. It is our nightmare come true, and we
cannot forget it. We cannot say, well, we don't want
to be reminded by that, well you know what, or

(30:45):
we don't want to be known for it. It happened
and we should never forget it. And it's their responsibility,
because it happened on their campus, to make sure that
that is remembered in its proper context and that we
learned from it. That that is just something we can
never see how up and again, and we better be
on guard and we better be sensitive to that.

Speaker 1 (31:03):
I'm not sure how long it's going to take. Greg
but how long is it going to take for Dallas
not to be known as the place where JFK was assassinated?

Speaker 2 (31:10):
A great point, and I have toward it. Yeah, the
book depository that you go up, and they made a museum.
We don't want this building remembered for JFK's asassination.

Speaker 1 (31:17):
Really they haven't. They have an X on the pavement. Yep,
this is where he was shot. Yeah, and how did.

Speaker 2 (31:26):
And how did Dallas grapple with let's never forget this
horrific moment without you know, this would put a dark
cloud over our city. No, they have appropriately. Look, I
read a giant. I read a book. It started me
on a path of wanting to learn more about John F.
Kennedy after as a college student, I went to it.
It was a it was a college newspaper convention there.
It was a November of ninety three, thirty year anniversary,

(31:49):
and the whole conference was wrapped around that assassination November
of ninety three, And I learned a ton about this
things I didn't really know. It has not put that
the city of Alice in a negative light at all.
In fact, you're nothing but appreciative that they took the
time to make sure we don't forget and that we
know the details of that presidential assassination. It's important. It's

(32:11):
important for us to know and to understand. And shame
on you. I mean, if UVU is arguing against any
acknowledgment or memory of what happened there, shame on them.
That is that is unacceptable.

Speaker 1 (32:25):
Yeah, well, apparently the university has set up a committee
to study this.

Speaker 2 (32:28):
No gee, yeah, that's that's the answer. Let's just study
it again. It's just we're going to just circle things.
We're going to study things. We're not going to make decisions.
The only tough decision to be what you would put
there to memorialize that moment and that and that and
Charlie Kirk is but I can see that debate being rigorous.
But of what you what you do to memorialism. But

(32:50):
if that isn't a question, you have to put something
there to remember that, to never forget it, and to
unders put it in context. It can never happen, It
should never happened, ever, that someone's killed for their belief.

Speaker 1 (33:02):
Well, I'm looking a social media right now. There is
an Italian artist. His name is Sergio fumari I believe
he right now is working on a beautiful statue honoring
Charlie Kirk that will be displayed in New York, New
York City's Times Square on the one year one year
anniversary of his assassination. And it's a beautiful statue.

Speaker 2 (33:20):
Wait, I didn't Arlie remembered for that. I'm using the
flawed logic that we don't want to be remembered for that.
So Times Square they've allowed it for a permit, and
they've allowed this artist to put this bronze up and
to remember Charlie Kirk. Do they see any value in that?
They should. When I say they, I mean UVU that
that campus, it happened there. They should absolutely be committed

(33:42):
to putting something that helps us never forget what happened there.

Speaker 1 (33:45):
Yeah, there's the one coming in this story. I just
don't want to dwell on it anymore. Well, you don't
just forget it folks had happened. Yeah, you don't want
to dwell on it anything.

Speaker 2 (33:56):
I remember said that about all the families and people
that were present that saw this and went through this
horrific moment in real time. I you know, to say,
to whitewash it, to try to pretend it never happened,
to move on to say yeah, we don't want to
ever think about that again. I'd tell you a shame
on you if you if that's your mindset, because that

(34:16):
is an important moment, that a sad, dark moment, but
a moment nevertheless that we should not be forgetting.

Speaker 1 (34:22):
We took three hours of calls that day from people
who were there talking about what they saw. I'd like
to hear from them now or anybody. Should there be
some I don't know, a memorial, a monument, a statue
honoring Charlie Kirk there.

Speaker 2 (34:38):
We have the smartest listening audience to the land, and
I know if someone thinks this should never be repeated
talked about and should be quickly forgotten, honestly, tell tell
me why that that's a reasonable way to what happened.
I want to know, all right?

Speaker 1 (34:51):
Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero. Trouple
eight five seven o eight zero one zero on your
cell phone to help pound two fifty and say hey Rod,
or leave us a message on our talk line by
downloading the iHeartRadio app. Your calls in comments coming up.
There was an article that the Salt Lake Tribune picked up.
It was in the New York Times, written by a
reporting name Jack Healy. He's talking about UVU and the

(35:13):
fact that the university is pondering how to remember his killing.
Apparently there's quite a big debate going on. Apparently, Greg,
they have set up a committee. But here here are
some of the things. All right, Greg, you'll just blow
you away. Yeah, that liberal student groups on the campus,
why they objected to a some sort of remembrance for

(35:34):
Charlie Kirk. Okay, this is what they had to say,
among other divisive views that Charlie Kirk had. He called
George Floyd a scumback. Yeah, okay, he is sorry. George
Floyd is not a model citizen. Right. He called Islam
incompatible with Western civilization.

Speaker 2 (35:55):
I think that's bearing out in many many ways.

Speaker 8 (35:57):
Ye.

Speaker 1 (35:57):
If you understand, yes, you know Islam, you understand it
is not compatible with Western civilization.

Speaker 2 (36:03):
Career law is just not a thing in our legal system,
and it's a big thing for them. And among other things,
you post same sex marriage. He believed in the nuclear family.
You haven't mentioned anything that deserves to be shot and killed.
And if somebody on the left has the opposite feeling,
if you had somebody that wanted to advocate for transgender

(36:25):
you know, gay rights, abortion, you name it. You will
never find me trying to justify that person being killed
for promoting and debating the issues that they may truly
believe in if they want to have the debate. I
love debate. I think I honestly learned more in my
college years debating liberals than I did talking to people

(36:47):
that I agreed with. I think when my beliefs were challenged,
when I went and spoke with people that were highly
intelligent and what good knowledgeable on certain topics, I had
to know my stuff. I had to come prepared. That's
what helped me really form my worldview. Is are those
challenges to things that I instinctively thought I believe, but
then I had to figure it out. That is the

(37:09):
beauty of diversity of thought and of debate. So there's
just no moment where where if you whatever you believe,
but whether it's what Charlie Kirk believed or some leftist
believes that, there's a moment where assassination and silencing that
person through violence is I can't believe it. To say
it out loud, it's it's not acceptable Okay, it's just

(37:29):
not and we shouldn't. We should do something for all
the callers that called in and talked about and it's
a tough thing to talk about, but what happened. If
you can't find something positive, a life lesson, something to
take from that that would hopefully change the trajectory and
help people understand why we can never live through something

(37:49):
like that again, or shouldn't live through that, you're derelicting
your duty. You should find a teaching moment and a
moment to really reflect on what happened there, and you
should do it. It happened on their campus. And if
they want everyone else to tell their story, I guess,
but they should be. There should be a teaching moment
in here and something that we can draw that would
be a positive message from such a horrific, you know moment.

Speaker 1 (38:13):
Yeah, I don't know, Greg. If Charlie Kirk ever read
Stephen Covey's Seven Habits of Highly Effective People? Okay? Yeah,
Well one of the habits is seek to understand to
be understood. Yes, okay, and that's what Charlie Kirk. Did
you watch those exchanges that he has with students, they'll
ask him a question and he'll fire right back and
ask them a question because he wants to understand where

(38:35):
they're coming from. It's a great technique to use. Charlie
was a master of it. Covey talked about the importance
you just explained to it. You love debating liberals because
it helped you understand where they're coming from. This memorial
justice and symbol. This is how we have an exchange.
I'm going to share how I feel, You share how
you feel, and what is wrong with putting up something?

(38:59):
I'm not sure what they could put up there, but
a place where people would remind let's let's have a conversation,
let's have a dialogue.

Speaker 2 (39:05):
Yeah, I don't know what it would look like. But
a listener heard us talking about what would you put there?
And I've heard this idea before and I like it.
It's it's where there's a table and Charlie Kirk's at
and you could show students that are lined up waiting
to have that debate. It could be that. It could be,
but I'll tell you this, something has to be You
have to you have to acknowledge what happened there and

(39:26):
why it happened, and what the this wasn't random. This
is a this is a horrifically planned out on purpose
for the purpose of silencing him, assassination that you've got
to draw some some lessons from. It has to happen.
And if you can't do that at UVU, what are
they What are they worth? If they don't even have
the instinct to want to have a teaching moment of

(39:48):
about freedom of speech in that in that very spot
where that terrible set that took place.

Speaker 1 (39:54):
Yeah, come on, we want to get to your phone
calls eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero
triple eight five seven o eight zero one zero on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty. Leave us a
message on our talk back line. We already have some
of those comments and we'll get to those coming down.
It is the Tuesday afternoon edition of The Rod and
Gregg Show and Utah's Talk Radio one o five to
nine KNRS. Have a little bit more discussion on this

(40:16):
whole debate over the memorial for Charlie kirk down a UVU.
But these are the type of people that we're dealing with,
would you agree. I mean, we had a gentleman by
he's a chancellor at the university of California in San Francisco.
All right appeared before Congressional Committee today. A member of
the Republican Party. She represents Illinois. Her name is Mary Miller.

(40:38):
Asked him questions about women getting pregnant and having babies. Right,
listen to how he responded to this.

Speaker 9 (40:46):
Of course, the vast majority of pregnancies are in women.

Speaker 5 (40:51):
And I have absolutely no problem with using the word
pregnant women.

Speaker 6 (40:54):
I use it myself as a non biological woman.

Speaker 2 (40:58):
Ever had a baby?

Speaker 1 (41:00):
A transgender person can.

Speaker 6 (41:02):
That's not a biological woman. Has a non biological woman
ever had a baby?

Speaker 1 (41:08):
I would. It's ridiculous. It is ridiculous. A vast majority
of women are pregnant.

Speaker 2 (41:14):
Really, and I use the term myself. He says, Oh,
do you you say women get pregnant? Put a bad
put a star on your forehead that you say that
women have the vast majority. Not just stating I have
no problem saying pregnant women. I say it myself. You
say it yourself. Look, I heard someone maybe it was

(41:35):
Jesse Kelly that said, or maybe it was actually someone
else that said. This whole debate about women and engender
it's like a test balloon to see if you can
get the population to just deny everything they instinctively know
about life and turn against themselves and turn against the truth.
Because if there's ever a moment where we're watching it,

(41:56):
it's what we just heard out of this chancellor from
the you see San Francisco that says the vast majority
of women have babies or get pregnant. It's all I mean,
that's the only ones that actually get pregnant or women.
But if you can just walk away from something so blatantly,
irrefutably true and call it the opposite, you can do
that on a lot of topics that aren't that easy

(42:18):
to discern.

Speaker 1 (42:19):
And this type of thinking, I think it's what exists
down to UVU right now. When it comes to a
memorial for Charlie Kirk, they're so woke. They just, you know,
for someone to say, we don't want to be reminded
of the event that happened here, excuse us, you know what,
they don't. We'll always remember the event that happened there.

Speaker 2 (42:35):
See, we could take a higher view and say this
is freedom of speech. And this is someone who had
a political view. He wanted to debate it, he wanted
diversity of thought. He actually those that disagree, he got
to come to the front of the line. They wanted
to have this out and you can talk in those terms.
What I think these woke people at that school don't
want to talk about is the violence of the movement
of the assassin subscribe to that movement. That leftist movement

(43:00):
is violent. We've talked about on the show. There is
no bothism going on in America right now. There is
a violent reaction from one side. And that's what I
think they want to whitewash history about. They don't want
that to be part of it. But you don't even
have to go to that detail to memorialize that, that
that place, that that you know, that part of the

(43:20):
of the school. You can just go to the freedom
of speech and that you can say it without risk
of losing your life.

Speaker 1 (43:27):
Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero on
your cell phone dial pound two fifteen, say hey, Rod,
let's listen to a couple of comments on our talk
back line. Here's what one listener had to say, Greg Rod.

Speaker 5 (43:38):
You beginning to follow from history.

Speaker 10 (43:40):
And remember the shooting at the University of Texas Austin's
clock Power and then the Kent State shooting so as well,
and how they've gone down in history.

Speaker 1 (43:54):
Yeah, I remember the luck Tower down at ut In, Austin,
certainly in the shootings at Kent State. Universe what sixty
eight sixty.

Speaker 2 (44:02):
Nine the Kent State is what I remember when we
were talking about this this morning on our production calls
to no one's whitewashing that. And if Kent State thought
they could just like say nothing to see here, folks,
let's just all move along. No one did. Yeah, you know,
And I think again, there are moments in our history,
good and bad, that you don't want to forget and
that you learn from. Right, So let's have something positive

(44:23):
to learn from a horrific, terrible moment that really has
impacted I think negatively our young people, especially who knew him.
I think everyone felt, at least my age and those
we knew who Charlie Kirk was. We were aware, but
it was our kids and the younger generation who really
did know a lot more about him. And that's where
I learned from my young adult kids about Charlie Kirk.

Speaker 1 (44:46):
He's not coming on our talk back line.

Speaker 8 (44:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 11 (44:48):
I had a really quick question, maybe you guys could answer.
When was somebody who was left or left of center
last killed or whatever for their beliefs and their their rhetoric.
I can't remember a conservative or anything like that. Can

(45:10):
you kill somebody for left of center talk?

Speaker 1 (45:13):
That's a good question. I'm trying to remember somebody on
the left who was killed for their thoughts? Yeah, I do.

Speaker 2 (45:19):
Now they will George Floyd because he was and it
wasn't because of speech. He was killed and they said
it was unjust. And there's memorals everywhere about Georgia. And
they don't want to get into George Floyd's history at all.
They want to talk about what led to what mindsets
led to him being having his life taken. Well, if
you can, if you can all rally around that, you

(45:39):
cannot tell me that there isn't the the merit to
really remember this and what's happened, what happened at u Vu.

Speaker 1 (45:47):
Yeah, here's another comment.

Speaker 12 (45:50):
I trace a great many of our problems, especially civics,
to our poor education system. I asked the President for
an executive order to reinstitute the Pledge of Allegiance. Our
children are mar getting in education, they are being inductionated.

Speaker 1 (46:15):
I think I think most schools I still think do
the Pledge of Allegiance? I think elementary schools do. I think? Okay,
I'm wrong.

Speaker 2 (46:22):
I'd love to say I think that's the case, but
I'm an old head. I really don't know for sure.
And in today's world, who it's not safe to assume. Yeah,
but that's the way that was the state of play
not that long ago that the Pledge of Allegiance was
still part of it.

Speaker 1 (46:34):
Every morning, Yes, every morning? All right, more coming up?
More your calls eight eight eight five seven eight zero
one zero, or you can leave us a message on
our talk back line by downloading the iHeartRadio app. I
don't know where this is going to go, Greg, but
a step in the right direction. This is an idea
that you support, Okay, I mean in late this afternoon
out of Washington, the US House today voted overwhelmingly to

(46:59):
make daylight saving Time permanent. Love it the measure to
spare Americans the semi annual clock changing sure shortens winter days,
and faces an uncertain path to enactment because it's got
to go to the Senate.

Speaker 2 (47:15):
Yeah. So so, look, I don't want to be negative.
I want to believe that what the House passed the
Senate can take up and pass as well, and President
Trump would sign it into law. He said he's already
said he's supporting. Yeah, but I feel like I'm staring
at the Save America Act, but like a less consequential bill.
Like I really love this bill, but it's gonna RaSE

(47:37):
it's going to meet the same fate in the Senate.
You're not going to get anyone that's going to do
a talking filibuster on this, and you don't have sixty
votes in the Senate to pass it. So we're just
wasting time. I mean, look, it's not a waste, but
I just don't have I'm not I feel like I'm
just getting you know, let it. We get all excited
out when something comes out of the House and then
we get to get the cold water thrown on us
once it gets to the Senate.

Speaker 1 (47:57):
But the vote in the House, greg was three point
thirty eight no, three eight to one seventeen. Yeah, so
it's bipartisan. It's a bipartisan bill. It's called, by the way,
the Sunshine Protection Act.

Speaker 2 (48:08):
I love it. I wanted more sunshine, less dark.

Speaker 1 (48:12):
You know, I like confused so you will stay lighter
later in the winter.

Speaker 2 (48:18):
Yeah, it'll stay.

Speaker 1 (48:19):
Yes, so it's but it'll be darker in the morning. Yes,
you like that, love it? See I like it early
morning sunrise.

Speaker 2 (48:26):
Man, I hate walking out of the studio at the
end of the show.

Speaker 1 (48:29):
It's dark. I like it when it happens for a
little while. Yes.

Speaker 2 (48:33):
Yeah, so we've actually shortened it used to be like
half a year and a half here. We've actually compressed this.

Speaker 1 (48:38):
Yeah, but the way down.

Speaker 2 (48:39):
Yeah, so there's that.

Speaker 1 (48:40):
But I don't think we change over to what first
Sunday in November and first Sunday in March.

Speaker 2 (48:45):
You do it after Halloween so the kids have more
light for Halloween than you go into the dark days
of the Dark Ages. But yeah, look, are you tired
of switching your clocks twice a year? I'm tired of it.
I don't want to. A lot of it does it
by itself.

Speaker 1 (48:57):
I get they all do it automatically.

Speaker 2 (48:59):
Not my stove in my kitchen doesn't, or my microwave doesn't.

Speaker 1 (49:03):
They don't change.

Speaker 2 (49:05):
It's a pain. It's still a pain. So I I
just want to just have one time. Arizona does it.

Speaker 1 (49:12):
You know, the sky hasn't been it. I think Indiana
doesn't change.

Speaker 2 (49:16):
Well, they're smart, you know, just Arizona seems and they
have to live in a world where everyone else changes
and they don't, and they seem to survive just because if.

Speaker 1 (49:24):
You, if you're doing business in Arizona, when it changes,
you've always wondered, all right, are they on time with us?
Or they in Arizona?

Speaker 2 (49:32):
And you never change your time, but everybody else does.
You got to keep that, You got to keep track
of that. This this is probably music to their ears
as well, because it just keeps everybody consistent. I love it.
I hope it passes.

Speaker 1 (49:43):
I I think this is an easy one for lawmakers.
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (49:47):
I think walking two hundred and fifty miles in Utah
is easier than getting something done in the Senate. And
I don't know why I use that analogy, just pull that.
I just pulled that example. It seems to be easier
to walk two hundred and fifty miles and work in
the Senate and get something past. It just seems to me.

Speaker 1 (50:05):
I don't know. I have a sense this may go.
I don't know why I would since it may go.

Speaker 2 (50:10):
I'm gonna bet you. Let's bet something here round of
golf dinner lunch or something, because I want you to
you this is something I want to lose. I want
to lose this one. I want you to win because
I want this to pass. But I just have faith
in the Senate.

Speaker 1 (50:23):
You say around the golf, have you ever paid for
a round of golf between the horse? I?

Speaker 2 (50:27):
Oh, you you got some?

Speaker 1 (50:29):
Really?

Speaker 9 (50:29):
You know?

Speaker 2 (50:29):
I pay?

Speaker 1 (50:30):
Yeah, occasionally, we're.

Speaker 2 (50:32):
Supposed to go every other round. But let me tell you, folks,
that means I pay.

Speaker 1 (50:37):
That's your now we could now, we possibly could if
the date stayed longer.

Speaker 2 (50:41):
Yeah, maybe run out here after this, after this shows over.
But sure, Yeah, we're supposed to pay every other round.
We trade, but that results in the I he just
forgets and so I pay every time. That's how that works.

Speaker 1 (50:55):
You know you've been on one all day. You want
it all day? You have been crappy today, I have you?
Just you've been throwing things.

Speaker 2 (51:06):
I was just flipping people off that man. I know
I was a assaulted. The audience always makes you push
me in a good move.

Speaker 1 (51:15):
Yeah, okay, all right, our number three is on its way.
Stay with us well, joining us on our newsmaker line
to talk about the US is actually safer than many
of its peer nations. Is our good friend John Lott.
John is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center. John,
thanks for joining us tonight. So we aren't all shoot

(51:35):
them up bang bang here in the United States. It's
worth in other countries, right.

Speaker 9 (51:40):
Right, Well, but the media and people compare when they
look at different countries or the rates that crimes are
reported to police. The problem is is that most crimes
aren't reported to the police, and the rate that people
report crimes to the police varies a lot across countries.
So I'll give you a simple example. You take something

(52:01):
like Australia versus the United States for rape and sexual assault.
In the United States, about forty five percent of rapes
and sexual assaults report to police. In Australia, it's nineteen percent.
So even if the two countries had exactly the same
true underlying rape and sexual assault rate, it would make

(52:23):
it look like the United States rape and sexual assault
is high as it is in Australia, simply because people
are reporting more of the crimes. And so what the
United States and some other countries though, most is they
have these giant surveys. In the United States, the Department
of Justice has the National Crime Victimization Survey, where they

(52:46):
survey two hundred and forty thousand people each year in
order to try to get an idea of not just
reported crimes out of the police, but total crimes. Australia, Canada,
a couple other countries also have these types of serve
and if you look at it for Australia, you find
that their rate and sexual assault rate, their total rate

(53:08):
is actually about three times higher at least than the
United States. Their assault rate is more than twice as high,
their burglary rate is about two and a half times higher.
Their overall violent crime rate is well over two times
higher than in the United States. And even that is
an underestimate because they count it differently. They just ask

(53:31):
people whether they have been victims of crime, not the
number of times that they've been victims. So if a
woman's been assaulted twice, or if there's been somebody's been
a victim of two robberies, that still only counts as
one case. The United States data instead counts as each
case individually. Any you can look at Canada to Canada

(53:53):
the overall violent crime rate, the total violent crime rate
in Canada is about three times higher than the island
crime rate in the United States.

Speaker 2 (54:02):
You know, John, what you've written about and pointing this out.
It's surprising because and I didn't track this until we
saw the World Cup arrive here in the United States
and you saw all these people from all over the
world say this isn't there's no crime. People aren't shooting
each other in the streets. The crime is not as
bad as we've been told. And I didn't really know
that there was this this effort to make America look

(54:24):
like it was just you know, wall to wall shootings
and crimes. Do you think that that is because other
European nations or any nation around the world want to
They don't want their citizenry to have guns. They want
us to think that having guns and the right to
bear arms causes and leads to murders and crime. Is
there a concerted effort to misrepresent America's crime rate and

(54:44):
the gun ownership because they don't want their citizen res
to have guns?

Speaker 9 (54:50):
Well, surely the claim difference is in crime by looking
at reported crime to the police rather than total crime
is often used by even America and politicians to try
to go and argue that we should have similar types
of laws to what they have in other countries like
Australia or Canada. Whether you know what it means for

(55:10):
the media, I don't know. It's interesting that the media
only looks at reported crimes, and even like in the
twenty twenty four election, when President Trump was trying to
explain to the media that, look, you need to look
at total crime. So like during the by administration, reported
crime fell by about eight percent, total violent felony crime

(55:33):
actually increased by fifty nine percent increase during his Binen's administration,
is the largest percentage increase over any four year period
of time. But even though Trump and I wrote a
number of pieces in the Wall Street Journal and other
places trying to explain that, the media just refused to
go and cover the Department of Justice data on total crime.

(55:58):
So there may be something there in terms of it.
One thing I will say is in the last year
I've given talks in Brazil and Argentina and Ecuador and
Australia and to Europe, and one thing that you see
in these other countries is just kind of the feeling
of helplessness that people have in terms of trying to
protect themselves from crime. In Australia, for example, they have

(56:21):
this incredibly high rape and sexual assault rate. Women obviously
can't defend themselves with guns, but they don't even let
them defend themselves with things like mace or pepper spray.
And you know, it's just you talk. I give talk.
They have a talk to college students in New South Wales,

(56:42):
and they don't report the crimes to the police because
they don't think anything's going to happen. They don't think
that people are going to get punished, and they don't
want to embarrass themselves. I think it's embarrassing to come
forward that people will blame them to some extent for it.
I talk to prosecute down there, and prosecutors will say, look,

(57:02):
you know, they just don't prosecute most of the cases
that come to them, and so you can understand kind
of the reaction that the women have. But you know,
you end up with a situation around much of the
world where you really appreciate kind of the difference that
American mindset has in terms of their ability to protect

(57:23):
themselves when the police aren't able to do it. And look,
we have lots of problems with police in the United
States in terms of their ability to do their job.
But when you look at this data from other countries,
you see the problem with policing is much, much, much worse.
You know, Simon Argentina, and compare our robbery rate, our

(57:46):
robbery rate, Our reported robbery rate is sixty crimes for
one hundred thousand people. In Argentina, it's one thousand and
sixty for one hundred thousand people.

Speaker 11 (57:57):
And.

Speaker 9 (57:59):
They only have a rest rate official rest rate about
nine percent. So you know, the reported rate is massively
underrepresenting the total robbery rate down there, because why bother
reporting the crime if virtually nobody's going to get arrested.

Speaker 1 (58:19):
That's the big thing.

Speaker 9 (58:20):
We've known for many decades that the rate that people
report crime in the United States depends in large part
on whether they think the criminals are going to be
caught and punished. And so you know that gap, as
huge as it is between one thousand, sixty and sixty,
you know that the true total robbery rate difference.

Speaker 1 (58:40):
Is much larger. John, thank you for joining us. You know,
John always comes up with some amazing statistics, but the
one he shared with us, like in countries like Australia,
if a woman is raped, she won't report the crime
because she knows nothing will be done about it.

Speaker 2 (58:55):
That's right.

Speaker 1 (58:56):
There's other countries around the world.

Speaker 2 (58:58):
So I found that the way they found that data
of crimes committed versus crimes reported is interesting because they
do a massive survey of two hundred and fifty thousand people.
But here's where he said it was conservative and we
ought to think about. They asked the simple question, if
you've been this year, is there if you've been a
victim of a crime and you've not reported it, they
just want a yes or no. You you might have
been a victim of a crime multiple times, but you

(59:20):
just say yes or no to not reporting it a
sexual abuse or whatever it may be. So that's okay.
I think that's even a conservative of under report or
unreported crimes that go on. And those states, those countries
of Canada and Australia would tell you that the fact
that they prohibit guns, they have restrictive gun laws, makes
those countries safer than the United States. They use that

(59:41):
that mantra all the time. Well, the stats don't show
that at all.

Speaker 1 (59:45):
Didn't hell does it all?

Speaker 8 (59:46):
Right?

Speaker 1 (59:46):
More? Coming up Rod and Greg with you on Utah's
talk radio one oh five nine canters unusual today that
two members of the US Supreme Court appeared before Congress
today in a hearing. Greg And what they're asking for
is more money for security.

Speaker 2 (01:00:00):
You really, yeah, you're looking at really Yeah, they'd like
a little bit more money for security. Well, okay, I
you don't believe the Well no, I just well is
that was that? Was that the whole point?

Speaker 1 (01:00:16):
Yeah, the whole point of the hearing today. They went
and asked for money from the budget a little bit
more security.

Speaker 2 (01:00:22):
Are you gonna play? Yeah, because here's here's my thing
about it. You don't seem too concerned about it.

Speaker 1 (01:00:29):
I don't. I don't want our Supreme Court justices living
under fear.

Speaker 2 (01:00:33):
Do you know why I'm nonplussed about this? Why you
don't If she not, well, she's under my skin for sure.
But if they really cared about security, they would find
out who leaked the Dobs draft.

Speaker 1 (01:00:44):
They just can't prove it.

Speaker 2 (01:00:46):
Well that well, then it's not Then it's not important
enough because they should be resolving that she's she's making
rulings now at Post Dobs that look like they're made
out of fear. If you look at the stats I'm
looking at at stats of how she with them if
there was a split vote, not on unanimous boats, but
if there's a split vote in the courts, she was
voting eighty percent of the time prior to Dobbs. With conservatives,

(01:01:08):
She's at like fifty and sixty percent of the conservatives. Now,
one could argue that what her testimony in Congress today
about how fraid she is and having to explain to
her twelve year old why she has a bulletproof vest
might be coloring those decisions she's making.

Speaker 1 (01:01:22):
Oh really, yeah, you think that, Well, here's what she
said today.

Speaker 8 (01:01:25):
They have required me to my children to think about
and see things that children should not have to see
or think about. One example is when threats to my
life were particularly intense a few years ago, around the
time of the dobs Leek, my security details sent me
home with a bulletproof vest, and I carried it into
my house, put it into my bedroom, dropped it down

(01:01:46):
on a table, turned around, and my twelve year old
son was standing in the doorway of my bedroom and
he wanted to know what it was and why I
had it. And I didn't know how to respond, because
maybe I lack imagination. But I didn't expect that performing
this service was going to put me in the position
of explaining to my children what a bulletproof fest was
and why I had to wear one and raised voices

(01:02:08):
in my home. I was very, very grateful that I
had Supreme Court police.

Speaker 1 (01:02:12):
Yeah. I don't think you need to explain to your
children while you're wearing a bulletproof vest.

Speaker 2 (01:02:16):
You shouldn't. But I think that if she had, I
would love that same concern she's expressing in that committee
towards the public safety that we all face with with
issues like the the you know, uh, what's the what's
it called that? Citizens citizenship when you're born and when

(01:02:37):
you come over? Birth right citizenship? Yeah, I just had
a brain cramp right now.

Speaker 1 (01:02:42):
You birthright citizenship?

Speaker 2 (01:02:45):
Yes, so birth rights. I mean the way that with
those billboards coming up and advertising for you to come
on over, have a baby here and then go back,
and it's and a lot of these people are people
that don't want to hate this country. For her to
look at that, for her to rule on that side
and then and talk about the fear she has for
her family or their safety, and then I'll tell you this,

(01:03:05):
they've tried to impeach judges. Judge Justice Roberts has rebuked
any political effort from the from Congress to impeach judges. Well,
those radical judges are part of our contributing that left
is those those activist judges are contributing to the instability
of the judiciary, the danger that's going on. I don't
see them doing their bit to h to restore that

(01:03:28):
that faith.

Speaker 1 (01:03:29):
Would you give more money for security if.

Speaker 2 (01:03:31):
They told me who leaked the Dobbs report, that's what
you gotta do. You gotta, you gotta, you gotta actually
dig in, roll up your sleeves, tell us who it is.
If you can't do it, then you don't. Then I'm
not throwing good money after a bad cause. I know,
all right, he was the wrong person to who's crying
about this to me.

Speaker 1 (01:03:51):
Talk radio kN ar s that's on a roll lately.

Speaker 2 (01:03:56):
Yeah, you know, Jesse Kelly, he has some incredible observations,
he says, Look he does, He'll tell you. They'll say, look,
we we got to do the right thing on on uh,
you know, Iran, and we got to go in there.
And we know costs or high, but we have to
go in there. But when it comes to uh, you know,
save the America Act or whatever we can I mean, anyway,
he just draws some comparison where where there seems to

(01:04:18):
be momentum or there seems to be political will to
do one thing, yeah, but fails to have we fail
to see it. And you know in Washington other places,
and there's a there is a hypocrisy there.

Speaker 1 (01:04:27):
You know what. I think it's funny. There are more
and more people, great especially on the right, who may
have questioned what the president was going to do. When
you know, when we went at when we went at
a round, people are saying, why now they're seeing how
hard they are to negotiate. Yes, well they don't, let's
put it that way. They're realizing, I think we're going
to be able to do is just take them out.

Speaker 2 (01:04:48):
Yeah, it's just.

Speaker 1 (01:04:49):
We're going to have to bomb them into submission.

Speaker 2 (01:04:52):
When you see those those MOUs and people said they're
not worth the paper their print on. But I think
that Trump was trying to president was trying to give
him a doubt. They had killed the first fifty leaders
of that country getting down there, so you know, they
just they felt like they had a you know, they
could they could work with them, or try to they
give them metha out. They have now shown to be
such terrible players that the thought of them having a

(01:05:14):
nuclear weapon, I think we all should be collectively agreeing
that's the worst case scenario Planet Earth could ever confront.

Speaker 1 (01:05:23):
Yeah, it is, it is, all right, speaking of you know,
what's going on in the Mideast with Iran. Of course,
the issue for a lot of people is them gaining
a nuclear weapon. The way they behaved, I think it's
become rather obvious that they should never have an whoever
weapon at their disposal. The other issue is oil. Now,
a few months before we went after Iran, Donald Trump

(01:05:45):
decided to pluck Maduro right out of Venezuela.

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
Eighty eight minutes.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
Eighty eight minutes. Well, now, all of a sudden, Venezuela,
the oil industry is starting to come.

Speaker 2 (01:05:56):
Back, and it's and they're a great partner now. And
if you take their oil reserves with the United States,
we're a mighty source of oil and gas in this world.
And I think that's a good thing.

Speaker 1 (01:06:07):
Yeah. Well, joining us on our newsmaker line to talk
about what's going on in Venezuela is Energy Reporter for
just the news. Kevin Kilo, Kevin, thanks for joining us tonight.
What are you hearing about oil production in Venezeuela. What
are you seeing?

Speaker 5 (01:06:20):
Yeah, well, great to talk energy with you guys again,
thanks for having me. And yeah, so Venezuela, you know,
just a little bit of there. In the nineteen seventies,
they nationalized their oil industry, and then Hugo Chavez, he
decided that all foreign oil companies there that the state
had to have a majority state in their company. So

(01:06:44):
most of the companies Conico, Phillips, x On, they said,
no way, Chevron, they went ahead with it, agreed to that,
and then of course they ended up losing. All those
companies that did back out, they lost all their assets
and it's been tied up in an international court ever
since them trying to get compensated. So Maduro in January

(01:07:05):
is removed by the United States and Donald Trump says, hey,
there's this great investment opportunity, and so you know, this
meeting with big oil executives, about two dozen of them
back in January, and you know, says hey, you know,
why don't you guys get on board. We can get
this going and really see some oil production down there. Well,

(01:07:26):
they were kind of hesitant to understand after their experience there.
They're just like, yeah, I don't think we really want that.
Exon was especially Woods, their CEO, Woods was probably the
most vocal and that and Trump didn't like that. He's like, well,
we'll just leave back on out. But everybody's kind of

(01:07:47):
changing their So over the past few months, we're seeing
oil production increase there, and even Exon was saying in
their late earnings report that they're taking a look at it.
They're seeing some promise. There was reports of a meeting
held there in Caracas, in their capital, with a bunch

(01:08:10):
of various representatives of various oil companies from all across
the world, including the United States. They were talking to
the representatives of the oil industry there, really trying to
coordinate things. And so it does look like things have
turned around a lot more than they expected. Of course,
oil companies they were looking at some one hundred billion
dollars in investment they would need to get that infrastructure

(01:08:33):
back up to par which after years of Neglexinger's socialist rule,
it wasn't you know, it was very much defuriorate it.
And then on top of that there was a heavy
crime elements, so there were concerns about security. So the
notion that they could turn this around, that the Trump
administration and the Delta Rodriguez administration, she's the acting president

(01:08:55):
in Venezuela, that they could turn all this around in
a very short period of time, there was a lot
of doubt. But that seems to be kind of dissipating.

Speaker 2 (01:09:04):
So here's my question, because I've heard that the reserves,
if you combine Venezuela with the United States our oil reserves,
our capacity to produce oil is as great as maybe
Saudi Arabia or compare Russia, things like that. My question
is this, I stopped saying sharing that stat after the
catastrophic earthquakes Caracas to that area. There have the earthquakes

(01:09:27):
damaged any infrastructure beyond what you described about, you know,
disrepair every years, the age of the of what needed
to be repaired. What have the earthquakes done in terms
of their ability to be producers of large scale producers
of oil.

Speaker 5 (01:09:42):
I'm not honestly sure what the impacts of the earthquakes
were in the oil industry. I'm sure you know, a
very large earthquake like that it's going to have some impact,
but it was probably localized around Caracas, so I'm not
sure how much impacted the offal off oil production there,
so hard to say. The bigger issue was, you know,

(01:10:03):
years of socialists neglect. That's what really hurt their mature.
And I'm sure that they're going to be repairs as
a results of the earthquakes, but I haven't heard anything
that this is persuading oil majors from coming there the
threat of an earthquake.

Speaker 1 (01:10:20):
Kevin, what do we expect from Venezuela down the future.
I mean, we know they have vast oil reserves, but
what does the world expect from them, and how could
that impact the word oil market down the road.

Speaker 5 (01:10:33):
Well, some to understand too about Venezuelan oil is its
very heavy, thick cruit. It's very similar to what comes
out of Canada, so it's not the kind of thing
anybody can rush in and do. So the oil that
comes out of our shale plays here in America is
all light sweet cruit, and our refineries, which built in
the nineteen seventies, those run off of heavy cruit, so

(01:10:55):
they have to import a lot of the products that
they refine. So Venezuela offers opportunity for another another source
of the kind of oil we need for our refineries
as well as many other uses other than just Canada.
So that's very attractive. And then of course there's the
Middle East and what's happening over there with the straight

(01:11:15):
of her moves and everything else, you know, that's not
looking so attractive anymore. So Venezuela again offers another source
that you don't have to worry about, you know, Iran
closing off some straight and preventing several countries from getting
their oil out, so you know, if their oil production does,
you know, ramp up. It offers you know, competition for

(01:11:38):
the world, basically hitting that oil market. It'll keep prices low.
It'll mean a lot for energy consumers here in America
gasoline prices, that kind of thing. So it could be
a real game changer.

Speaker 2 (01:11:49):
If I never hear the names or words straight of
her moves again in my life, it would be too soon.
My hope is that is it? And my question is
is it possible that Venezuela, a successful, robust oil producing Venezuela, can,
at least in North America make it so that we
don't have to worry about. We don't have to even

(01:12:10):
be subject to the world commodity price of anything going
on in the straight of her moves because we have
got such a well, a good partnership with Venezuela and
enough supply in North America to just forget that side.

Speaker 1 (01:12:21):
Of the world.

Speaker 5 (01:12:23):
It could be a huge benefit in that way. Definitely,
keep in mind that many countries such as the UAE
are building pipelines that circumnavigate the straight up removes, So
the Venezuela is not just you know, one development that
can really improve things for global energy markets, but as
well many other countries in the Middle Leagut, so there's

(01:12:45):
lots of hydrocarbons to be had. So Venezuela is definitely
very promising in that developing picture.

Speaker 1 (01:12:52):
Kevin Kilo, he's with just the news talking about the
emergence of Venezuela as a major oil supplier. They were
a long long time go, greg and now it's just
starting to slowly come back.

Speaker 2 (01:13:04):
Yeah, No, it's h you know Cuba and China where
they were getting all that oil whatever they were able
to produce or refine, and but they that was a
once wealthy, rich nation with a high quality of life,
and it was all taken delroyd By as socialism slash
communism always does.

Speaker 1 (01:13:20):
All right, more could be coming up or more is
coming up, we should say. On the Rod and Greg
Show and Talk Radio one oh five nine kN R S,
we shared with the audience yesterday Greg about how CNBC,
the very liberal CNBC, ranked ten states, including Utah, as
the worst in the United States. Right, yeah, interesting they

(01:13:42):
were all red states who voted for Donald Trump.

Speaker 2 (01:13:46):
Yeah, that's that's that's on brand.

Speaker 1 (01:13:49):
Yeah, that's brand. Right, they're getting ripped for this rank.

Speaker 2 (01:13:55):
If anyone thought, well, SANBC, they try to be credible
on things financials, certainly they're not a good travel No, no,
they don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:14:02):
They don't know what they're talking about. Mike Lee, our
good senator who we know have on the show occasionally,
he was too busy this week. They're back in session.
H there is a possibility, depending on what happens with
Lindsey Graham no longer around, that Mike Lee possibly could
be chairman of the very powerful Senate Judiciary Committee. Good

(01:14:25):
Mike Lee, Yeah, yeah, And he was asked by the
Washington Examiner would you be interested, and he said it
would be pretty hard to turn down.

Speaker 2 (01:14:34):
Yeah, it would be. That would be a wonderful place
for I mean, he is a great leader. He look,
he clerked for Alito, Samuel Alito as a Supreme Court justice,
and he's he's a he is a scholar. And you
can see that. He has a great relationship with the
President too. So you can see you in yesterday's announcement
that executive order he does truly respect. And I've watched
actually the exchange between Senator Lee and President Trump on

(01:14:57):
issues like the filibuster and things like that. They he
does respect Michael's legal acumen.

Speaker 1 (01:15:04):
Yeah, he does, he does, he does. Americans can finally
stop caring about the World Cup. There was a column
today which this guy just says, Okay, America's not in
it anymore. Who cares?

Speaker 2 (01:15:18):
Yeah, yeah, once you Once America was out, I mean,
I started to get caught up in it. But I was,
I was, I was struggling, but I was caught up
to as soon as the USA lost, Okay, it's over.

Speaker 1 (01:15:28):
Yeah, it's over. Yesterday France lost in the finals. Tomorrow
the big one French, Argentina and England and Abby boy,
she wound up for this one.

Speaker 2 (01:15:39):
Yeah, sure, Why is that? I don't understand the connection?
Just kidding, all right? No, I understand, and yeah, so
we'll see. For Abby's sake, I'll go. I'll go Team
England and I'll.

Speaker 1 (01:15:50):
Go with Argentina with MESSI. Yeah, yeah, that's not that
you care.

Speaker 2 (01:15:56):
No, I don't. I really, I'm trying hard to care,
but I'm you know, I'm losing it. I'm losing steam.

Speaker 1 (01:16:01):
Do you eat in your car? Not now?

Speaker 2 (01:16:05):
I did? I was your Caddy man, you I don't
want that. I like that new car smells. It's not
that as new now, but I don't. I don't need
in this car.

Speaker 1 (01:16:14):
Yeah. Well. In a new survey, fifty three of those
who responded reported that they eat in their car at
least once a week.

Speaker 2 (01:16:23):
I don't even bring the takeout home in my car
because I don't want to smell out my car. Put
in the trunk. I do now, I put the take
out the trunk so it doesn't smell up my car.
I don't want to have to smell in my car. Wow,
I'll tell you what.

Speaker 1 (01:16:37):
I did. Still have that new car smell?

Speaker 2 (01:16:39):
I think it does, yes, And you've had it for
what since? November about it. So I've had it, what
seven months?

Speaker 1 (01:16:45):
Eight months?

Speaker 2 (01:16:46):
Eight months?

Speaker 1 (01:16:47):
So you go get takeout and you don't put it
in the car.

Speaker 2 (01:16:51):
No, I don't want to smell out my car. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:16:53):
What do you have in the trunk?

Speaker 2 (01:16:54):
My golf clubs? Yeah, well, and my golf shoes. So
it's it's there with that, yeah, and then and then
I'll bring it out of that and into the house.
But I'm not putting that in my car. I don't
want to smell it.

Speaker 1 (01:17:08):
Yeah, you are cold and you are one pathetic loser.

Speaker 2 (01:17:14):
But if you want me to get the takeout, that's
where it's going.

Speaker 1 (01:17:17):
I've never had a ride in your new car. Apparently
you think I stink too.

Speaker 2 (01:17:21):
You can come ride my car and you'll have a blast.

Speaker 1 (01:17:23):
All right, head out and shouldern's back. Man, God bless
you and your family, this great, great country of hours.
We'll be back tomorrow at fur Yeah,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Betrayal Weekly

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: Collapse of Dems Affordability Scandal; Utah Speaker Mike Schultz

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;}Stuff You Should Know

Betrayal Weekly

Dateline NBC

All Episodes