The Rod and Greg Show: Neither Party Has Voters Best Interests in Mind

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, Hello Utah, and welcome to the Tuesday afternoon edition
of the Rotten Greg Show right here on Utah's Talk
Radio one O five nine k n R S live
everywhere of course on the iHeartRadio. I make sure you
downloaded today. I hope you're having a good Tuesday. I'm
rod Arquette Citizen Greg Hughes. I actually saw a little
bit of rain coming back from lunch today. Lasted about

(00:21):
three seconds, a little bit.

Speaker 2 (00:23):
I felt a little I just washed my car, so
me do.

Speaker 3 (00:26):
I just think the secret to getting out of a
drought is for me to wash my car every day,
and then.

Speaker 1 (00:30):
There we go every Yeah, maybe it would rain every time.
A trend would be kind of nice one day. All right,
should we start chanting? We're number one? We're number one
for the fourth year in a row. It's not bad.

Speaker 3 (00:39):
I have always like, I don't know when you thought
you were a number one, but this has been a
constant theme for me. This is on very on brand
for me.

Speaker 2 (00:45):
Yeah, this is just how I rolled that you're number one. Yes,
that the state is number one.

Speaker 3 (00:49):
Well, by extension, I live in it. Oh, so you're
state's number one.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
You know, I didn't even think about it. Duh, yeah, duh.

Speaker 3 (00:55):
Like before I lived here was Utah number one? No,
since I lived here is Utah number one? Yeah? So
you know these are not separate facts, These are not
separate incidences. These are connected.

Speaker 2 (01:06):
I don't know if you know.

Speaker 1 (01:06):
Do you know we became number one when you left
the state legislature.

Speaker 2 (01:12):
We were number one when I was the legislature.

Speaker 3 (01:13):
And this program, I believe it's been a choggernaut since
I arrived on a daily basis. That's my theory. I
haven't seen numbers of supported. I just feel it.

Speaker 2 (01:22):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:22):
Well, here's what if you're just joining us now. US
News and World Report every year release a list of
the best states, and for the fourth year in a row,
Utah is number one.

Speaker 2 (01:34):
That's right, That's that's great.

Speaker 3 (01:35):
You know we have Steven Moore on every weekend he
does that rich state, poor state. Oh yeah yeah, just
tax burden and like lower tax burden, lower regulatory climate
and Utah. And it's even getting under his skin because
you can't just stay stagnant to keep getting their number
one ranking. But all the states try to get the
number one, and we keep out pacing when we stay
number one. He warned us when we interviewed him last

(01:56):
that the other state legislatures are they're they're they're conspire
hiring against Utah. They don't want Utah number one next year,
not going to catch it. But we kind of that's
how we roll. That's our brand.

Speaker 1 (02:05):
Here's what he here's what US News and World report today.
Forget footloots and fry sauce. That was the first line today.
Utah is defined by high growth tech startups, strong economic diversity,
robust infrastructure, and an elite education system.

Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah, I look, that's what they say about us.

Speaker 3 (02:26):
Yeah, I've been, I've been. I've been pretty critical of
our higher ed system. And we had an interview with
the UVU associate professor what's his name, Greg?

Speaker 2 (02:34):
Was it Jackson? Greg Jackson yesterday.

Speaker 3 (02:36):
I'll tell you what I do want to. I would
like to what do they call it? What you call
it when you take your class inventory and or uh oh,
what's it called. There's a term for it when you
sit in the back. You don't take the class, but
you you just sit surveyed or something.

Speaker 2 (02:48):
You sit in the back of the class. Yeah, you
and I will monitor it.

Speaker 3 (02:50):
The two of the monitors. You and I need to
go in that monitoring class. Yeah, we need to go
sit in that class.

Speaker 2 (02:55):
Now we'd be okay, be fun. It would be fun.

Speaker 3 (02:58):
But anyway, my point there is that if that's teaching,
I kind of liked his style. I liked that he
wanted to challenge people's thoughts and you know, some critical thinking.

Speaker 2 (03:06):
Who knew in higher ed.

Speaker 3 (03:07):
So I think the infrastructure parts, right, I think that
I think it's still the best state to start a
new business. And then you get into some of the
social aspects. And I'm sure that the US News and
World Report didn't touch on this, but most charitably, getting
most charitable, giving, most church attending, most single, you know,
two parent homes. I mean, you go down the line
and some of the social ills you see in America,

(03:30):
Utah is doing it very well.

Speaker 2 (03:32):
It exist here much lower level. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (03:35):
US News evaluated each state. They use seventy one metrics
across eight categories to determine this. We're number one, number two,
South Dakota, boring, What are you doing South Dakota?

Speaker 2 (03:47):
Yeah, what do you do?

Speaker 1 (03:49):
Minnesota? That state's a disaster? Where are they ranked number three?

Speaker 4 (03:53):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (03:54):
Then now I'm starting to question this ranking. Because Minnesota
is a nightmare.

Speaker 2 (03:57):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (03:58):
Number four North Dakota.

Speaker 2 (04:01):
Yeah, exciting will be and Nebraska.

Speaker 3 (04:07):
You shouldn't have told me the other states because I
was feeling I was right high on our ranking. Then
you tell me these other states and it's like, well,
now we're the tallest building in Tuila.

Speaker 2 (04:15):
Yeah, that's what we are. Great, wonderful, No, no offense Toila.
But you're not.

Speaker 3 (04:19):
You know, there's no skyscrapers in Toila.

Speaker 1 (04:21):
I mean you look at these other five states that
I just mentioned. What do you do in these states?
I mean, here, we there's a lot.

Speaker 2 (04:27):
You can do here. Would you agree? Yeah?

Speaker 1 (04:29):
I mean that's what makes it such a great place
to live.

Speaker 3 (04:32):
There's a big motorcycle conventioned once a year.

Speaker 2 (04:35):
Yeah, which which South Dakota one of them? It's one
of them. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (04:39):
By the way, the the bottom five, uh, Louisiana, Okay, Alaska, Yeah, Mississippi,
New Mexico, and Michigan ended in the bottom five at all.

Speaker 3 (04:55):
Only Alaska because it's so far away and never warm.
It's always dark there. It's like either light all time,
dark all the time.

Speaker 1 (05:01):
I have friends, I have friends who've lived in Alaska.
They absolutely loved it.

Speaker 2 (05:05):
I haven't.

Speaker 3 (05:05):
I have a relative that lives in Alaska and he
loves it too. But you know he's a bit off,
so yeah, yeah, he's been. He's been crazy crazy kids, So.

Speaker 2 (05:14):
Yeah, I could see him like like someone once preferred
people like that. It's shy.

Speaker 3 (05:18):
A brick yeah, yeah, brick hire brick. Yeah, maybe a
tool missing a tool in the tool shed. Now I
love this this relative. I do love this kid. So
he's a that's why I can tease it.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
But but he lives in Alaska. He lives and loves it.

Speaker 3 (05:31):
Yeah, absolutely sends me pictures that look like postcards.

Speaker 1 (05:33):
What scares you most about the fact that Utah continues to.

Speaker 3 (05:37):
Do so well getting the degenerates moving here. That's what
I don't want. I don't need all the people and
all the states they ruined come in here because they
want to get They got to escape what they helped create,
and then trying to foist all that those bad ideas
on us.

Speaker 2 (05:50):
My concern water, well there you go.

Speaker 1 (05:53):
You know, let's say, if we go through another winter
like we did last winter, what we all do for
water next?

Speaker 3 (05:59):
You know what, though, I think that when we discuss
this with our audience before. One of the things that
we're not utilizing that a state like Nevada does is
we don't do the re We don't capture used water
and then retreat it and use it for things that
it doesn't all have to be culinary. We don't have
to drink all the water in this state. But there
are purposes that you could use if you captured water
that was you know, that's been used, and then treat

(06:19):
it and then send it through for purposes of cooling
like the data center, or use it for other things.
There's there's there's some I think we have some arrows
in our quiver we have not yet shot that would
help us conserve more water in Utah. I'm not as
it's nothing you take for grant. I'm not the culinary
water situation. There's there's there's solutions all over. Plus if

(06:40):
you see how much agriculture, which I'm not against agricultural
use of water there there's it's like eighty percent of
Utah's waters in agriculture, not culinary water in the reservoirs, and.

Speaker 1 (06:51):
They're getting smarter as to how they use the water.
They understand they need the water as well.

Speaker 3 (06:55):
I'm not sweat in the water asthma not something you
don't ignore. But it's the people that are like, I'm
a I'm the pioneer in my family, so I'm not
I'm not judging the pioneers coming.

Speaker 1 (07:04):
So you're you're technically an isolationist.

Speaker 3 (07:07):
Yes, you don't want to work. I do, and I
think I want Nevada, I want Colorado. I want them
all to pay for it. I don't want to pay
for the surrounding states to pay.

Speaker 1 (07:18):
We want to keep everybody out of the state.

Speaker 3 (07:19):
Yeah, they can put in a visa.

Speaker 2 (07:21):
We can. We can review their application side see if
we allow Do you look you look you look.

Speaker 3 (07:27):
Like you can you know, be gainfully employed or you're
just gott to come here and just lean on the
rest of us.

Speaker 2 (07:31):
We don't need that anymore. We don't need that. Yeah,
we don't. We don't.

Speaker 1 (07:34):
A couple of things we'll talk about today coming up,
or we'll talk about, uh, neither an issue that neither
party is talking about as we approach. There's a lot
of a lot of issues people are talking about. We'll
get into that. We'll talk about this new survey done
by the Manhattan Institute on American attitudes toward everything, and
there are comes some surprises in this survey that we'll

(07:56):
get into a little bit later, and we sometime today
we will talk about Fauci.

Speaker 2 (08:01):
Well, we talked.

Speaker 3 (08:02):
We spoke about it yesterday, but.

Speaker 2 (08:03):
I think we got to talk about questionion's going on.

Speaker 3 (08:06):
It's worth giving it more attention because this guy we
were at like narcissist level yesterday. This time, Yes, Shay
was narcist. He might be schizophrenic. I think I think
he passed bipolar, went right to schizophrenia.

Speaker 2 (08:21):
Niece.

Speaker 3 (08:22):
I don't think he's He's not using a journal or
a diary for what it's supposed to be. It's not
supposed to be. I'm the greatest person that's ever lived,
and everything about everything I do is so great. He
is writing in a way that I don't think is
the normal use of a diary.

Speaker 1 (08:37):
Journal in RFK on Laura Ingram Show, shared information that
will let you hear a little bit later on about
what he went through that will rattle your cage as well.
So a lot to get to today. As always, we
invite to be a part of the program. Eighty eight
five seven eight zero one zero on your cell phone
dial pound two fifty and say hey Rod, or reach
out to us by downloading the iHeartRadio app and make

(08:57):
sure you leave a comment on our talkback line. So
a lot great to have you with us here on
Talk Radio one oh five nine can arrest. David Harzani
is an author senior writer at The Washington Examiner. Always
puts out some great columns each and every day. David,
how are you Welcome back to the Roden Greg Show.
I'm great, Thanks for having me, David. Before we talk
about an article we saw a couple of days ago

(09:18):
where you're talking about what voters actually care about because
neither party apparently is talking about those issues. But you've
got an article out today about Anthony Fauci hearing tomorrow.
As we head into this, what are some of your
thoughts as we learn more and more about what's inside
his diary, as if we wanted to know, what are
your thoughts on all of this?

Speaker 5 (09:35):
David, Oh, well, you know that's a big question. I
guess my thought is that he is exactly the person
I thought he was a new number of years ago.
But I think it's kind of especially infuriating to read
his diary entry is because you know, reading about him

(09:55):
hanging out with journalists and celebrities. Yeah, just evote emotion
to me because I think about the people who couldn't
go to funerals, and the people couldn't go to school
who I knew, and the people who can't go to
a gardening store and get seeds, and whose lives were
taken off track and sometimes in very significant and consequential ways,

(10:18):
didn't get to have that kind of life, you know,
and so and it was because he lied about things,
and he convinced people to take up authoritarian policies, to
close churches, to close schools. The one thing I will
say that I don't hear that many people talking about

(10:38):
is that I think that because he takes the blunt,
you know, he takes most of the shots here, and
he deserves the shots he gets. But we have to
remember that he actually didn't have the power to do
those things I just mentioned. Others did. Others just listened
to him and let him lead them around without these skepticism,
and they deserve some anger to and it'll be no

(11:00):
reckoning for them either, unfortunately. But I don't know. Those
are my thirty thousand foot saw.

Speaker 2 (11:07):
You know, the question I have.

Speaker 3 (11:08):
Is I hear how he's getting to go to dinner
with Jake Tapper, you know, and he's having you know,
it's all this special time he has, especially going to
dinner or doing things. People have said that's he's saying
that at the same time he's telling Americans we can't
have our holiday dinners together.

Speaker 2 (11:23):
Do those timelines match up?

Speaker 3 (11:25):
Is it really the case that he was going to
dinner spending time directly with members of the media at
a time where he was telling Americans to not come
together as families or have those same types of dinners,
or is it just the irony that he was fine
with it when he didn't think others were.

Speaker 2 (11:41):
Do those timelines match up.

Speaker 5 (11:44):
I don't have it in front of me, but I
think they do match up. It depends where you were,
because there were some differences. But I'll tell you this,
I mean, I wish I had the dates in front
of me. I think it was March twenty twenty or
something like that. He's writing letters talking about how lockdowns
aren't working, that he is infused and frustrated about that.
To say that and then just go on television and

(12:05):
this piece I wrote, I list I think five different
times where he says something to himself or in an email,
and then the next day, the next week, a year later,
he's still contradicting what he knows to be true because
he wanted to scare us, he wanted obedience. And I'm
not saying that it was all on purpose or anything

(12:27):
like that, but he had a very high responsibility to
be truthful. He is a public health official. He is
not a propagandist. He's not a policeman, you know what
I mean.

Speaker 1 (12:36):
So anyway, I'm not sure that really, David, Let's move
on and talk about the midterm elections that you write about,
of course a couple of days ago, where I think
today we're ninety eight days away from the midterms. You
talk about the fact that neither party Republicans, Democrats, Socialists.
What everyone you want to talk about is talking about
what voters actually are caring about in this country.

Speaker 2 (12:59):
What are they not saying, what are they not talking about?
In your opinion data.

Speaker 5 (13:04):
I would say that when you look at polling, and
I'm not I don't treat poles as scientific data, but
it does give us trend lines, and it does give
us some idea sometimes about what people care about most
if you think about democrats and socialism, and really, let's
be honest, it's basically no difference anymore. The you know what,

(13:25):
are they constantly talking about APEC Israel foreign policy? No
one cares about that. I mean maybe they care to
some extent, but it's never one of their top concerns.
It barely shows up on any list. There are people
with Prosrom people against Israel, and that's changed lately, I

(13:46):
think because it's propaganda and algorithms and things like that,
but it's still not the most important thing that people
talked about the most. The most important thing is inflation.
Is can I afford the house? Can I? You know,
it's economics. It's I think it's like seven of the
top nine most important issues to people are economics. And
this is a very unpopular thing about to say, but

(14:07):
my support to see it act. I think we need
election integrity. I don't think it's going to pass. I
wouldn't break the Filibus strog but I think it's important.
But election integrity doesn't really come up is the most
important issue for people. So I get that everyone's talking
about that, but I think putting too much emphasis on
one bill getting mad at your party because the campasit

(14:29):
or want or they're seckless or whatever you think, when
there are a lot of other problems people, I think
we're much more concerned with that you could be focusing
on helping with So.

Speaker 3 (14:37):
David, is why I struggle with what is? How do
you discern between I think it's trapped, but how do
you dream? How do you discern between perceived importance and
really important? So, in other words, on September tenth, no
one in America would have told you that al Qaeda
was on two thousand and one was worth any consideration whatsoever.
On September eleventh, we all found out why we should
be looking at that. Do we have any scenarios? Do

(14:58):
you do you think with Iran? We might not know
how important it is, or it might not be on
the top ten of our most critical issues, but it's
a critical issue more so than what we might appreciate.
Are there issues like that that this president is grappling
with that really run into a mid term and make
it messy?

Speaker 5 (15:16):
I completely agree with that what you just said, send
that sentiment. I do actually think Iran is far more
important than people think, And I'm not even saying that
the things that they that most voters think are important
are the most important things. I mean, I do think,
and they're personalized, they are. But obviously there are issues
that have long term consequences, like ran they're more difficult

(15:37):
to explain, or even economic issues abstract theory is about,
you know, free markets or whatever, they're difficult to explain.
My point only is that I think there's this, Well,
first of all, I think the administration needs to do
a better job with Iran of explaining what they're doing,
you know, and all of that, especially when it comes
to gas prices. But more than that, I just, you know,

(15:59):
I just think that there are real world they used
to call them kitchen table issues. I think you know
that that if you're trying to win a midterm you
either have to explain to people why things are more
expensive than they want them to be, or have some
kind of vision for them about how you're going to
deal with that problem. I think the vision should be
we're going to cut you know, regulations and spending and taxes,

(16:20):
We're going to roll back this or that, but whatever
you're doing. I think that that is the issue they
want to hear most about, especially independents and people who
are gettable. There are a lot of people you're not
going to change their mind. They're not going to vote
for Democrats or Republicans, but you do want them to
come out. That's one. And secondly, you want to get
gettable independent voters. And I just don't feel like either

(16:41):
party is I think they're the real point of this
column is that I think they're captured by social media.
They see you're constantly on there, They're scanning all, you know,
all the other people on there, and they're just very
sensitive to what goes on on social media, which, as
many people have pointed out, is not real life.

Speaker 1 (16:59):
David, great, insight, always great. Hen you on the show.
Thanks for a few minutes of your time today, David Pleasure, Thanks,
thank you.

Speaker 2 (17:05):
All right.

Speaker 1 (17:06):
David Harzani is with the Washington Examiner talking about issues
that the politicians neither party is talking about, and I
think he's kind of spot on on that. I mean,
talk about those everyday issues.

Speaker 3 (17:17):
New York Post this Afternoon has an article headline, food
prices up thirty three percent as an American's battle highest
grocery sp price spike in fifty years.

Speaker 2 (17:25):
You think that's not an issue. It is an issue.

Speaker 1 (17:27):
It is all right, more coming up rodding Greg with
you right here on talk radio one oh five nine
can Arrests. Rodding Greg back with you on this Tuesday afternoon.
You're on Utah's talk radio want oh five nine can Arrests.
S'm rod Urkid, I'm Cittizen.

Speaker 2 (17:42):
Greg Hughes. Turn your microphone on, probably help help. We're
trying to shadow man a little bit.

Speaker 1 (17:49):
Now. We were just before the break, we had a
conversation with David Harzani he is a senior writer at
the Washington Examiner about, you know, the issues that neither
party is really talking about in this upcoming midterm election,
which I believe as of today is ninety eight days away,
and affordability is an issue. Now, I want to take
you back Greg to when Bill Clinton and Nude Gingridge

(18:11):
decided that something needed to be done about the welfare
system in this country, and they did do something.

Speaker 2 (18:16):
They did. It was it was landmark.

Speaker 3 (18:18):
It was based on then Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson and
the Wisconsin Legislature's Welfare State Welfare Reform proved the model,
proved it the work, and was adopted by New King
Ridge's Republican Congress and President Clinton.

Speaker 1 (18:34):
And there's a new survey out taking a look at
welfare thirty years later, and where do we stand. Joining
us on our Newsmaker line is Carl Abramson. He's the
external affairs manager Joy of the Manhattan Institute. They've done
this survey on American attitudes. Carl, Thanks for joining us.
This a big survey, a lot of questions in this survey.
What stood out to you most.

Speaker 4 (18:53):
Carl, absolutely so. Just for a little bit of context
for your listeners, we ran this national survey examining American
attitudes towards the welfare state, and so that some of
you may note, twenty twenty six is the thirtieth anniversary
of President Bill Clinton's landmark welfare reform from nineteen ninety six,
and so we wanted to see kind of how is

(19:13):
the American public thinking about these reforms thirty years later,
and so we asked about some of the specifics from
that bill in nineteen ninety six, but we also asked
about a number of what we consider kind of first
principles questions about the American welfare system, including the design
of the safety net, and so we were really looking
to answer a fundamental question confronting American social policy, and

(19:36):
that question is, do voters still support the principles that
kind of reshaped the nation's welfare system in the nineteen nineties,
or his public opinion shifted towards a more universal, a
more unconditional vision of government assistance. And what we found
really kind of the key takeaway here is that there's
a really durable public consensus supporting those reforms, but also

(19:56):
supporting the principles that underpinned them. Americans are vastly more
supportive of targeted benefits than universal benefits, which I think
is the crux of the issue here. So to get
a little bit more specific, sixty seven percent of Americans
per our survey, including fifty four percent of Democrats and
sixty three percent of independents, believe that assistants should be targeted,
it should be focused on those who are really unable

(20:18):
to provide for themselves, rather than kind of universal benefits
available to everyone. And just to call out one more
kind of key takeaway, we found a really resounding rejection
of the idea that government welfare should be designed to
reduce income inequality. And so we asked this, We asked respondents,
what should the main goal of government welfare programs be.

(20:39):
Should it be to make sure that everyone has a
basic minimum, it's basic standard of living, or should it
be to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.
And what we found is that sixty five percent of
voters believe it should be for a basic standard of living.
And this included overwhelming majorities of Republicans, Democrats, and independents.
And I think you see a lot of focus in
the media, especially among voices, among pundits, among academics, there's

(21:03):
this laser focus on income inequality. And what we found
is that Americans are just a lot more interested in
helping the vulnerable than creating an equitable economic system where
wealth is more evenly distributed. Americans are worried about single mothers,
people who are struggling to put food on the table.
They're worried about disabled folks who are unable to work,
They're worried about the elderly. They want these people to

(21:25):
get the help rather than seizing the wealth of billionaires
and redistributing it.

Speaker 3 (21:30):
You know, the cross tabs that you provide are just
absolutely fascinating just how people self identify themselves as voters
whether they lean right lean left, and what that means.
Let me ask you this, with all those different cross
tabs and really saying different things and how divided these
two parties are, there's something about the consensus that this

(21:51):
welfare should be for those that are in need, and
it should be related to work where appropriate, and all
the things that the ninety six reforms implemented. What Good
News read you surprised at what I would consider a
strong I mean, we can talk about these socialists and
Democrats Socialist Party all the time, but there seems to
be universal acceptance and expectation that welfare be for those
that are need as a help up, not just some

(22:14):
new way to live and some quality of life to
be provided.

Speaker 4 (22:18):
Absolutely, we definitely found that on the welfare side. But
to call attention to what is honestly a smaller part
of the poll, which was our questions about abolitionist proposals,
so things like abolishing the police, abolishing US borders, abolishing prisons.
These are topics that like, as I'm sure you know,
they've gained some salients in recent months, THEFA candidates Democratic

(22:38):
Socialist of America. These candidates have racked up some electoral wins,
particularly in New York City, where the Manhattan Institute is
based and where I and where many of my colleagues live.
So we were asking in this poll about these abolitionist proposals,
and so we asked about abolishing the police. Eighty two
percent opposed abolishing the police, including sixty one percent of

(23:00):
as you said in the cross tabs, these very left
leaning voters. So you think about kind of the constituencies
that you would associate with these ideas, the far left,
the DSA, These are extremely unpopular proposals. We've looked at prisons,
seventy nine percent of post fifty nine percent of those
being very left leaning voters who oppose abolishing prisons. We
found the exact same thing on abolishing US borders. And

(23:24):
what we found is that these are incredibly politically toxic ideas.
So it should be clear to Republicans who are probably
doing this already, that attacking Democrats on these lines is
likely advantageous. But I would actually say that maybe more importantly,
especially for the health of the Democratic Party, it should
be clear to more mainstream Democrats that they have the
edge here over their leftist opponents on this issue. They

(23:45):
can be more vocal about their support for police, for incarceration,
for border security. The vast, vast majority of Americans feel
the same way.

Speaker 1 (23:53):
Carl You saying, I found interesting in this as well
is the generational divide that exists between younger voter and
older voters. Eventually those older voters are going to go away.
So is this younger generation kind of starts taking control.
What does the survey say could possibly happen when they do.

Speaker 4 (24:14):
Absolutely. I think one of the interesting pieces there is
on universal basic income. So this was something that to
kind of talk a little bit about the past. Here
Andrew Yang, who ran for president in twenty twenty as
a Democrat, This was like the first time a lot
of people heard about universal basic income. He was on
the scene with this idea that the government should be

(24:34):
replacing welfare with a single system, a system that gives
every American a check every month. And our survey found
that it's pretty unpopular. But as you said, Democrats supported
it a little bit, and young voters supported it a
little bit as well, by slight margins. So I do
think it's an open question kind of if we revisited
this in ten twenty or as we did here in

(24:55):
thirty years after some reforms, what these voters would be thinking.

Speaker 3 (25:00):
So you know when you talk about that though, here's
what I I another. Going to the cross tabs a
little bit, forty nine percent of those that would self
identify that were responding to your poll as leaning left.
Forty nine percent of those were identified as Democrat socialist.

Speaker 2 (25:20):
I mean that is a giant number.

Speaker 3 (25:21):
You look at you look at the Republican side, you
had fifty eight percent as traditional conservatives, forty two percent
as Make America Great Again movement, you know, the MAGA.
But that's smaller than a traditional conservative. When you get
to the left of center side, I think the number
that's the strongest is that that Democrat socialist. Does that
mean that that party is just stuck as far left

(25:43):
as they can be because that base has such a
strong representation.

Speaker 4 (25:48):
It's a good question, I think so, yes, that number
of the forty nine percent is definitely concerning. But I
think when you look at the attitudes across the survey,
and as we've talked about, just by them identifying as
democratic socialists, when presented with the option of are you
a democratic socialist or a traditional liberal, they still support

(26:08):
government assistants that is tied to work. They still support
government assistants that generally is trying to keep people from
being dependent.

Speaker 5 (26:16):
On the government.

Speaker 4 (26:17):
And whether those are for traditional traditional liberal perspectives or
traditional conservative perspectives, they're not necessarily democratic socialist perspectives. So
I do think that there's a bit of a bright
thought there, and.

Speaker 3 (26:30):
I want to correct myself. Actually, the traditional liberal was
actually fifty one percent, but right behind it at forty
nine percent was a Democrats socialists, whereas you saw a
bigger gap between traditional conservatives at fifty eight percent and
MAGA at forty two So traditional public democrats are still Liberals,
are still hanging on by a threat, but there seems
to be a big push behind them with the socialists.

Speaker 5 (26:52):
Absolutely.

Speaker 1 (26:53):
Carl Abramson, he's with the Manhattan Institute, joining us on
our Newsmaker line. More coming up on the rout In
Gregg Child.

Speaker 3 (26:59):
The Rut and Gregg Show continues on Utah's Talk Radio
one oh five nine, Cantersts and everywhere on the iHeartRadio app.

Speaker 2 (27:06):
I'm citizen in Hughes and I'm Roder Arquette.

Speaker 1 (27:08):
You know I'm reading this story, Greg, and it's sad
when you have a lawmaker, especially right now in Washington,
and the feeling that the American people have toward Congress.
So you have a lawmaker there who's trying to get
something done the American people's support, and we're talking about
the Save Act right yep, but being attacked for it.
I mean, here's the story in this afternoon's trip Ley

(27:30):
read you the headline, Mike leads threats to Nick's August
recess are infuriating his colleagues. Good, yes, good, they read
more of it. Senate Republican leaders are used to headaches
caused by Utah sender Mike Lee. Create more of you would, Mike.
But the battle is reaching in Apex as Lee attempts
to derail the August recess and force another vote on

(27:53):
President Donald Trump's priority voting bill, which is the Save Act.

Speaker 3 (27:58):
So I don't expect personally, I'll just speak for myself.
I don't expect the Salt Fake Tribune to say anything
that would be four and on behalf of the people.
But in a country where we have a lot of division,
where there's a lot of part you know, polarization by
you know, partisanship, going on to see polls that show
eighty percent of America, without regard to party, want to
see secure elections, support the Save Act. This is the

(28:21):
easiest bill that the Senate could ever take up and
pass collectively if their priority.

Speaker 2 (28:27):
Was the people. Yeah, because the people. This is not
a partisan issue.

Speaker 3 (28:31):
This is a this is a bipartisan we want And
to those that would say, well, you don't need it
because it's already against the law for people that aren't
allowed to vote, to not vote, well, I'd say two things. One,
out of an abundance of caution, do it anyway, or two,
then why are you fighting it so hard if it's
already done?

Speaker 1 (28:47):
All Right, We've got more to come. Our number two
of the Rod and Gregg Show, It's coming your way,
Stay with us. It is our number two of the
Rod and Gregg Show. With you here on Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine knrs live everywhere on the
IHA Radio app. Hope you're having a great Tuesday, everybody.

Speaker 2 (29:04):
I'm right, Arquette, I'm citizen Greg Hughes.

Speaker 1 (29:08):
You know, I wonder if Mike Lee is saying to himself, Greg,
I never thought I had to work this hard. I mean,
he's working his tail off on this, folks.

Speaker 3 (29:19):
We have another senator that's just recently, I think an
hour ago, said that they are that this senator I
think from Indiana is willing to not a recess for
August and has joined Senator Lee that is up. Now
you have ten Republican senators saying this. That motion to
recess has always been like, we assume there's no opposition,

(29:40):
and they do it with no one in the chamber.
Once you have stated opposition this way, that has to
actually have a vote in the Senate with ten members
voting against it, you got yourself a debate coming at least.
And now these senators are going to have to tell
their constituents. I know it's seventy eighty percent support of
you support it, and I represent you as your senator.

Speaker 2 (29:59):
But I want to go home anyway.

Speaker 3 (30:00):
I don't want to have to wor I've been working
three and a half days for how long. I'm exhausted.
I don't want to secure our elections. I don't want
to take this vote that you the people have shown
by a clear majority, by a super majority, really that
you'd like us to do. I don't want to do.
I want those senators Republican especially to have to make
that argument to constituents, because I don't think that the
people are the priority right now. And there's nothing more

(30:21):
important to a US senator than their recess down. They
love recess more than a fourth grader. They love recess.
They got to have it, and here they are great.

Speaker 1 (30:32):
I mean you could what is it a five week recess,
I think is usually what it takes. Right, they leave down,
they don't come back till after Labor Day? Is that correct?

Speaker 2 (30:40):
That's about the timeline, right, A couple of days.

Speaker 1 (30:42):
Would it kill them to stay in town for a
couple of days.

Speaker 3 (30:46):
It's the lowest haging fruit, I mean, the biggest political win. Yeah,
I mean it's there's no one's going to tell them.
Why in the world would you require ID the vote.
I can't believe you'd expect our elections to be that secure.
I mean, there's no pushback they're going to get from content.
This is again a by part. You look at the polls, Republicans,
Independents and Democrats alike support showing idea to vote. They

(31:09):
don't want people don't want their votes canceled out by
people that shouldn't be legally allowed to vote. It is
there is something seriously wrong and something going on. There's
good reasons and real reasons. Don't tell me that you're
just worried about married women losing the right to vote.
This is a contrived, actually insulting argument. The fact that
they are holding out so strong. I think there's something

(31:31):
else going on here that's not for and on behalf
of the people well they represent.

Speaker 1 (31:35):
Yeah, well, I'll give you an example. I think even
if they get it to a vote, let's say, you know,
things start opening up, they do get a vote to
it and they lose. A loss is a win for
people who favor checking ideed's before you vote, because now
you can say that senator there, that senator there wants
to have people who shouldn't be voting voting in this

(31:57):
country today, so it would embarrass them. They do not
want to be embarrassed, Greg. And that's what this, I
think all comes down to.

Speaker 3 (32:04):
And I'll tell you if you get to that moment,
I think the people that would like to go home
and under the darken knight and the jury, no one's watching,
and never have to tell their constituents. I was one
of the ones that didn't want to do it. They
don't want to be put on that record. They don't
want to be on that roll call vote that says
I'm against the Save America Act. They don't want to
say it. Even if they aren't, and to the point

(32:25):
where they would have to, they'd probably flip their vote
to a yes.

Speaker 2 (32:27):
What are they so afraid of if they lost Greg?

Speaker 1 (32:30):
I mean a lot of people thinking, they look, what
is the what is the story behind the Republicans say,
you know what, win or lose, We're gonna put it
for a vote.

Speaker 2 (32:39):
Why can't they say that?

Speaker 3 (32:42):
I have got to tell you that I in campaigns
and elections. I don't understand why any Republican senator they
know I know. I can tell you why the Democrats
don't want it. I can tell you why the California
particularly California senators and represents don't want it. Because they've
got a ton of people voting that shouldn't be voting. Well,
they like it, they get it. They get congressional districts
drawn on raw population, including illegals, so they get more

(33:04):
representation in Congress. There is there is an easy reason
to understand why Democrats do not want the Save America
Act to pass, But why Republicans who would be at disadvantage,
inherently disadvantaged in an election from people that aren't supposed
to vote, the voting vote harvesting, and all think about this,
that that one vote alone, that one bill stops voter

(33:26):
harvesting because you have to present an idea when you vote.
You don't get the harvest votes like that anymore. That
every Republican should want a fair and free election, level
playing field, easy to vote, hard to cheat, and for
them to oppose it. And we got the clip of
John Cornyn. He doesn't know why they're even trying because
they don't have the votes. The legislative body is in
flex all the time. You were always there's no there's

(33:48):
no pat stopped. This is where everybody's at. You can
go get those votes. You can go if there's an
amendment needed, there's common ground to be found, you can
That's what it all. It's what it takes leaders of
legislative bodies to do. These guys out like the script's
already written and it's not worthing and revisiting.

Speaker 1 (34:03):
Yeah, well, let's play that audio sound bite. So this
is Texas center John Cornyn, who, by the way, is
a short timer.

Speaker 2 (34:09):
He'll be out in January. He's just bitter.

Speaker 1 (34:11):
But he's just bitter. List of what he said when
about the recess and about the vote on the Save America.

Speaker 6 (34:17):
Act, I don't understand the rationale. I think it's basically,
we're we're over promising and we're not going to be
able to deliver on that promise because we don't have
the votes to pass it or no matter how long
we stay, and we're not gonna we're not going to
change the filibusters. So but somehow the President's convinced that
if he presses hard enough that we will will come around.

(34:41):
And but I just don't think that's likely to happen.

Speaker 2 (34:43):
If he's putting food in an impossible position here, well,
I think.

Speaker 6 (34:47):
Yeah, it's well, I wouldn't say impossible. Well, they'll figure
it out, but it does.

Speaker 2 (34:52):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (34:52):
So he talks like it's other people. You know, we
don't have the vote. No, you don't want to vote
for it. It's you, You're one of the ones that
don't want to vote for this. It's it's not we, okay.
And and to the point of the filibuster, do what
they did for the Civil Rights Act and in the sixties.
Continue to debate it. Yeah, continue to debate it until
and by the way, this whole if you do an amendment,
you have to start all over. These guys have had

(35:14):
amendments thrown at bills all the time. The Senate rules
absolutely contemplate and allow they act. When Harry Reid was
a Senate, was the majority leader and he wanted to
get Obarack Obama's uh, you know, his Obamacare passed, he
didn't let them go home. He said, you're staying. We're
staying here. We'll stay here seven days. We'll stay here
every day till we pass it. We're not going home
till we do it. And guess what they did.

Speaker 2 (35:35):
They pay passed. Well, didn't they pass it like the
night before Christmas or something? That?

Speaker 1 (35:39):
I mean, the Democrats have the courage to push and
push and push.

Speaker 2 (35:44):
Why don't the Republicans? No?

Speaker 3 (35:46):
I mean you you the Democrats are a lot more.
They can get their votes. I mean some of the
some of the deals they had to make with some
of those senators to get their yes vote on that
were remember the the nebasket payoff or whatever they get.
And then Mary Landrew, she was a Senator from Louisiana.
They gave her like two hundred million of run around
money she could spend federally anywhere she wanted to get
her vote. We don't want to see trades like that.

(36:07):
But what it shows if you take the sixty Civil
Rights Act that LBJ is as president, and he had
been the Senate president, knew their.

Speaker 2 (36:13):
Rules rule well well, and he was an arm twister.
J was a well known.

Speaker 3 (36:17):
That guy had kept them open, and they're going to
talk that thing to death. And they were so far
away from having the votes there till they finally got
that passed. What Harry Reid did to pass the Obamacare
Act or Obamacare legislation, he kept them there and they
couldn't leave till they got something done. These Republicans act
like what more than three and a half days. Well,
this is just unreasonable. But Mike Lee, what's he at?
What's he talking about? Go do the job. You don't

(36:40):
have anything to talk about then, and you're gonna you're
gonna have the lowest voter turnout amongst Republicans if these
do nothing. Senate can't do something that eighty percent of America,
without regard to party affiliation, wants the Senate to do.

Speaker 1 (36:51):
You know, I wonder in our reality and we want
to ask them how infuriating is this?

Speaker 2 (36:56):
Right now?

Speaker 1 (36:56):
The American public has said, what eighty three percent. I've
heard as high as ninety percent. The American people want this,
but we've got a few senators in the US Senate
who are blocking us from nable to do that. That's
that's infuriating.

Speaker 3 (37:10):
Can you find another issue with that kind of bipartisan support? No,
but they'll vote on other things that don't have eighty
percent of the public supporting it.

Speaker 1 (37:17):
Eight eight eight five seven o eight zero one zero
triple eight five seven o eight zero one zero on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod,
or leave us a message on the talkback line. Infuriating. Yes,
we'll talk more about that and get your calls.

Speaker 3 (37:30):
It is the Rod and Greg Show on Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine canter s everywhere on the
iHeartRadio app. I'm Citizen Hughes.

Speaker 1 (37:38):
And I'm Rod Arkatt. You know we've been talking about
Mike Lee, the Save America Act big story. Tomorrow, of course,
Greg is going to be Anthony Fauci. You will appear
before Senator Ran Paul's committee. And you know the frustrating
thing about there there will be fireworks. There's no doubt
tomorrow that there'll be fireworks, but nothing. Gregan, do you

(37:58):
believe anything is going to come out of this?

Speaker 2 (38:02):
No, I know, other than what Fauci is.

Speaker 3 (38:05):
I mean now that if you read his diaries, I
don't even think he he doesn't use it like a diary.
I think diaries are like self reflection or journals that
you may want to remember moments in your life. This
guy writes, I'm so popular. I talked to barbar Streisan.
I you know, CDC doesn't want me to talk to
the media because I'm a rock star and they're not.

(38:25):
I mean, he that the way he talks about himself
and the things he finds important enough to write down
is weird, and that's saying it nicely. Well, maybe a
guy that's an egomaniac or worse like he is, when
he gets into that committee, we'll try to try to
salvage this reputation and this image that he has clearly
loved about himself for so long. Maybe he tries to

(38:48):
fight back and salvage it. If he does, I think
he gets worse for him. He's probably smart to just
shut up about it, because there's so many moments in
that diary that reveal his private thoughts and beliefs, and
his posicians what they just can contradict what he forced
upon the American people, and what he said publicly was
the case. I've never told it. I never shut down anything.

(39:08):
In his diary, I talked.

Speaker 2 (39:09):
To the New York school shut it down, convinced.

Speaker 3 (39:11):
Him shut it down. I talked to the chief of
staff of governor knew some they're going to close down
the California schools. This guy talks about his direct involvement
with school the largest school districts in America, And then
when asked, why do you feel any regret from closing
down these schools given how far behind the students are now?
I never I never shut down anything. I never directed
anyone to shut down anything. I gave information. Well, the

(39:32):
diary says otherwise.

Speaker 1 (39:33):
Well, here's what you want. One more piece of information
from those diaries that will make your board boil. Yeah,
this is OURFK Junior.

Speaker 2 (39:40):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (39:40):
He was on Laura Ingram last night and he basically
said that that Fauci had to receive the COVID vaccine
in a very public ceremony, though roughly five months later
he suffered a pulmonary infarnction. Listen to this information that
OURFK Junior shared with Laura Ingram last night.

Speaker 7 (39:59):
He lied about mass he lied about the social distancing,
He lied about the transmission, He lied about natural immunity.
He lied about the capacity, as you just said, of
the vaccine to prevent infection prevented. He got vaccinated a
very very public UH press conference in January of twenty twenty,

(40:22):
and then five months later he hadn't this the first
time that we knew this from the diary. He had
a pulmonary infarction, which is one of the adverse events
and NIA, CDC and FDAs that are expected from the vaccine.
He never told anybody. He got treated for it privately

(40:42):
by the best doctors in America. At the same time,
he was telling everybody that.

Speaker 2 (40:46):
That was not an adverse event.

Speaker 3 (40:49):
You believe that, yeah, yeah, well, you know you that
he had on the side effects that he absolutely rejected
was in side effect. He had it himself and the
best doctors in the country treating them, and was encouraging
Americas to still do it. And don't worry about that.
That's not a real side effect. That's you know, I've
seen video where he's complaining about you know you like,

(41:09):
we got to get this serious. You got to put
real consequences in front of people to get get rid
of their ideological beliefs on this.

Speaker 2 (41:16):
And he was asked.

Speaker 3 (41:16):
About that that that statement was found and his answer
back was, well, I didn't. I didn't mean it that way. Well,
I wish the Member of Congress when he was in
that commutey had said, well, tell me how you did
mean that, Like how I heard that statement he was
read and what he had said that. I don't know
any other way you could interpret what he said other
than threaten them with their jobs, threaten them with the

(41:39):
ability to live or you know, livelihoods, everything, or else.
If you don't, they're going to let their beliefs that
this isn't safe carry the day, and we have to
force them to do it.

Speaker 1 (41:49):
That's what he meant, didn't I And in his diary
somewhere I may be off on this, but basically, said
Rachel Maddow on MSNBC at the time, msn now was
the greatest effort. I mean, he loved Rachel Maddow.

Speaker 2 (42:02):
Right, yep. Now the diaries point out.

Speaker 6 (42:04):
How much I don't understand the right.

Speaker 1 (42:07):
There we go, uh and now we understand through the
diaries how much he hated the Fox News personalities. He
called Tucker Carlson a total a hole. He called Sean
Hannity the same thing, anybody on Fox.

Speaker 2 (42:22):
He went after it because they were critical, because.

Speaker 1 (42:24):
They were credit questions, They were asking him difficult questions,
asking him to explain things. Yet, I mean, this guy,
I mean, think about the damage. Now, he's not entirely
to blame, but he was the face of COVID in
our efforts to over you know, deal with this. But
as Robert Kennedy just said, I mean, look what he
did to the economy. Look what he did to our

(42:45):
social interactions. Greg, wear a mask and stand six feet
apart from somebody. Look what he did to our children.
The impacts of our children are still being felt today.
Yet now the sad thing, no one's going to be
held accountable for any of this.

Speaker 3 (42:58):
He had that pardon. He had a pardon just to
get out of jail free card for anything for anyone ever. Man,
I bet he gets speed. He then't he get a
speeding ticket, anyware, you have pardon for everything, because it's undefined,
it would be anything in the world.

Speaker 2 (43:10):
A what a scam that is.

Speaker 3 (43:13):
And then you find out that Biden is just wasn't awake,
wasn't there. It's an auto pen giving out all these pardons.
And then even we haven't talked about during the show,
but he admits in twenty seventeen, before he's even elected president,
that he broke the law by keeping classified documents, the
very thing they went after Trump for, and that he
went on television to say, it's what he did is
so wrong. He admitted to the biographer that, yeah, I

(43:36):
kept all these classified documents. Petreus went he got charged
for doing that. You got all kinds of examples of
people that have been punished by the law severely for
keeping and retaining. Bolton's in jail because of or going
to jail because of classified documents he kept for the
same reasons that Biden did. He wanted to write a
book about it, so he wanted to keep it. They
and so did Petreus. General Petreus, They Bolton and portray

(43:59):
Us both have suffered, you know, charges, criminal charges. Biden
never did Biden never will. And this guy walks in
there and then starts auto pen giving out pardons to
people for reasons he doesn't even know.

Speaker 1 (44:13):
And Biden's keeping him in his home in Delaware. And
guess Hozel is staying in the home.

Speaker 3 (44:18):
Hunter Biden compromise. Yeah, just out of his mind.

Speaker 1 (44:23):
Just nuts nuts nuts. All right, more to come on
the Rod and Greg Show. You'll be stepping out. You're
headed up to a concert tonight.

Speaker 3 (44:30):
I am post Malone, so I'm going to the Post Malone.

Speaker 2 (44:34):
Well enjoy So you'll be stepping out, Yes, sir.

Speaker 3 (44:36):
Yeah, lucky, I'm sure you want to go to Post Malone.

Speaker 1 (44:40):
No, okay, all right, more coming up, Rod and Greg
with you here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine k n rs. If you weren't listening before the break,
Greg has stepped out. He's headed to a Post Malone concert.
How about the you tonight? So we'll carry it all
by ourselves for the next hour and a half. You're

(45:03):
on the Rod and Greg Show in Utah's Talk Radio
one oh five nine can ters. We did open up
the phones a little bit earlier. If you'd like to
talk about the efforts on Mike leed's part to save America.
I mean, the media is being critical of him. Some
establishment Republicans are being critical a Mike Lee, But you
have to admire the guy and I do for everything
that he's trying to do for the American people. When

(45:23):
it comes to the integrity of our elections. Mike Lee,
of course is carrying the water for Donald Trump to
improve election integrity, and that includes the Save Act. It's
very simple. When you vote in a federal election, you
need to show a driver's license voter ID that you
are an American citizen. And he's been working on this

(45:47):
for a long long time. The Senate now is ready
to go on its five week vacation and they won't
be back until September. And Senator Lee, and he has
what nine other senators now support him, is basically urging
John Thune, the Senate majority leader, to back off on
the recess.

Speaker 2 (46:06):
Say give it a few you know.

Speaker 1 (46:07):
Let's not recess until we make an effort to get
this bill passed. Okay, that's all he's asking for. And
he's facing fierce opposition from Thune, who says, look, the
votes just aren't there. We're just going through the motions.
But simply, I think going through the motions in voting
on this act is really worth it because it will

(46:31):
show the American people, and this I think what a
lot of well the Democrats are really afraid of this,
but there are some Republicans who are afraid of it
as well. It will show the American people whether or
not the people we send back to Washington care about
voter integrity and to make sure that we do everything
that we can to stop people who shouldn't be voting

(46:54):
in these elections because they are not citizens. We need
to be able to stop that, and any lawmaker in there. Now,
the Democrats we talked about this Greg and I did
last week, have already kind of let the cat out
of the bag as to why they're so opposed to
the Save America Act. Now they'll say it's because of
women and people who are you know, married women. They

(47:16):
have to go dig out all this information. Well they
don't have to do that. But what is going to happen,
as a matter of fact, is that you want the
Senators to stand up there and say yea, your name,
And that's what I think. Mike Lee says, it's important
for the American people to see and he's done. You know,
that's what he's trying to do. It's that easy. But
there are some and you heard a bit that we

(47:38):
played a moment ago with John Cornyn, he's the outgoing
Senator from the state of Texas, saying, why are we
doing this? We don't have the votes, Why are we
doing this? Do it because the American people are asking
you to do it. The American people in the latest
survey show, I think it's eighty three percent of Republicans,
nearly seventy two percent of Democrats. The Latino population is

(47:59):
also heavily in favor of this. Are basically saying, yes,
we do not think someone who is not a member
of this country should be allowed to vote in a
federal election. To me, that makes a whole lot of sense,
and I think it does to you people as well.
But people are fighting this, and that's why people are
so frustrated with the Senate and really with the with

(48:21):
the House, because they're saying, what on earth are you
people doing up there? I mean, you can pass a
simple bill that most of the American people want passed.
I mean, this is an easy one, guys, Yet they
refuse to do it, and that's what I think is
so frustrating to people when it comes to this. Now,

(48:42):
I want to take a minute and share with you
some information. As of today, I believe we're Sunday, Monday two. Yeah,
we are ninety eight days away from.

Speaker 2 (48:51):
The midterm elections. You believe that ninety eight?

Speaker 1 (48:53):
Des Well once it look like now you've got the
Democrats who feel their upbeat because typically in a midterm election,
the sitting president and the party he represents lose anywhere
from ten to twenty seats. We've lost as many at
one time of forty eight seats. I think that happened
under Barack Obama at one time in a midterm election

(49:14):
that he had to deal with the Republicans. They've all
gone through it. So what does the situation look like
this time? Well, the Democrats are up ahead. You know,
they're feeling kind of optimistic. But the lead they have
right now is nothing compared that they have the lead
that they've had in previous mid term elections. So they're upbeat,

(49:35):
but they've got some challenges. The issue that I don't
hear them hammer enough about, maybe they do, is the
cost of living. It's expensive out there folks. I mean
gas prices are the other day I paid four forty nine.
I think they're down now a little bit. The gas
prices are hurting the American people, as are grocery prices

(49:56):
and just the cost of living in general. So Democrats
are going to pound on that issue. The other thing
the Democrats want and really, I don't know about you,
but have the have you heard any plan? And we've
got ninety eight days maybe it's somewhere, have you heard
any plan from the Democrats come out and say this
is how we're going to solve the problem. I haven't

(50:16):
heard that, have you? Because they don't have a solution.
That's the challenge they face. They are going to run
their key, Their key issue in this campaign comes down
to one word Trump. They're going to run against Donald Trump.
They're going to say, look what he's doing to this country.
We've you know, and they've already said, look, if we
get control the House, we're going to impeach him again.

(50:37):
That's going to do a lot for the country, right,
But they're going to try and do that. So that's
the key. So they're now on the Republican side. First
of all, redistricting a lot of redistricting has gone around
the country, which will help Democrat which will help Republicans.
Accept Here in Utah, we now have a democratic district.
We that makes a lot of sense, but apparently redo

(51:00):
so redistrict is going to be a very big issue
for them. Now there are now twenty three Democrats running
for the House. Okay, they're saying this race is going
to come down to about eleven to twelve districts because
most other districts because of redistricting are pretty well said.
But the race in ninety eight days from now is

(51:21):
really going to come down to about anywhere from twelve
to eighteen House races, and in the Senate maybe even
fewer than that. Now the Democrats are so hoping that
they can beat Susan Collins in Maine, that they'll win
that seat. Well, first of all, they had to deal
with Platiner, and the guy they've replaced him, I believe

(51:42):
his name is Roy Jackson is worse than Platner. So
no telling what could happen there. You have a vote,
I believe it maybe tomorrow or next week in Michigan
for a center race. You've got a socialist, a man
who claimed, you know, he denies he as a communist,
but he is who could win the Democratic nomination that
opens up the seat for Mike Rogers on the Republican side.

(52:02):
So it's going to be real interesting to see how
this all shakes out. Of course, we'll be talking about
it for the next.

Speaker 2 (52:07):
Ninety eight days.

Speaker 1 (52:08):
Going to be very very interesting, and we invite you
to stay tuned to us. All right, welcome back to
the Rod and Greg Show with you on this Tuesday
evening and Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine Canter s.
Greg has stepped out a little bit early tonight, so
I'll handle it until we wrap things up at seven o'clock.
Don't forget that Jesse Kelly show coming your way at seven.

Speaker 2 (52:28):
Jesse.

Speaker 1 (52:28):
We'll have a lot to say about doctor Fauci as
he heads before a Senate hearing tomorrow, and he'll also
have some comments concerning Lindsey Graham wonderful ceremony at the
National Cathedral for the South Carolina Center today. President made
some remarks, as did Sean Hannity, and Sean a close
friend of Lindsey Graham. They didn't always agree, but had

(52:50):
some very nice remarks that he made at that celebration
of life for Lindsey Graham today. A couple of things.
Before the break, we were talking about the upcoming midterm elections.
There are a couple of things I have mentioned that,
you know, the the one issue that the Democrats are
going to run on in November, and it's already started.

(53:13):
They aren't going to talk about affordability because they don't
have a plan. They can't talk about gas prices because
they don't have a plan. They can't talk about the
cost of living. They can't they don't have a plan
to bring that all down. Those are important issues. But
the one issue that they are going to talk about
a lot, and they're still doing it now, is Donald Trump.
Donald Trump. That is their platform. We are going to

(53:35):
stop Donald Trump from whatever they think he's doing in
ruining America. That's what they're going That's what that that
that that whole approach that they take come November is
we you need to let vote us, vote for us,
because we are going to stop Donald Trump. We will
do everything we can. As a matter of fact, Keem

(53:55):
Jefferies has already admitted it, said, look, you put the
house back in charge come November. Our first steps will
be to impeach Donald Trump. I'm not sure if he's
saying that to appede the base or if he's saying
that because you know, he you know, he just thinks

(54:16):
that Donald Trump is ruining America. Well, there are a
lot of Americans who don't believe that. As a matter
of fact, there is a poll out or re some
poll from our MS Research. Never heard of them before,
maybe Scott Raspuinsen's old company, that had some very good
news for the president. The poll, conducted between January between

(54:36):
July thirteenth the until a week later about July twenty first,
showed the president's net approval ratings increased to the highest
level that he has seen since spring, despite the US
Israeli strakes on Iran and some inflationary woes. So among

(54:57):
the Republicans out there right now, the members who voted
for Donald Trump still believe in the guy. Now, do
we want something done with Iran? We do, and that
you know, nutcre crack apparently you know, send coom and
sending out a text message tonight that Iran fired more

(55:19):
missiles at US sites in the Mid East, you know,
and we're going wait a minute, you know, the president hasn't.
We haven't gone after you for a couple of days
and you said, please, don't you know, we've got to
do this. We've got you know, let's figure out something.
Yet in return, what do they do? They're dropping missiles again.

(55:41):
You cannot trust these people. The only way that you're
really going to hurt them, you know, militarily. I mean,
we could probably do more, but we we really haven't.
The one way to hurt them is economically. And we're
starting to hear now that the blockage of this and
the attacks on their country is really starting to hurt

(56:04):
them economically. Now, how much longer can they hold on
we do not know, but that's the way that's really
going to have to get them to the table. All Right,
a lot more to come here in the Roden Gregg
Show when we come back. We'll talk more about the
CADS involving Shiloh Hendricks in Minnesota.

Speaker 2 (56:23):
That's coming up.

Speaker 1 (56:23):
All right, Welcome back everybody to our number three of
the Rod and Greg Show on Utah's Talk Radio one
five to nine.

Speaker 2 (56:30):
Can or s.

Speaker 1 (56:30):
Greg had to step out a little early tonight. He'll
be back tomorrow at four for Wingman Wednesday. So I'll
solo it until we wrap things up tonight at seven o'clock.
Prior to the Jesse Kelly Show. We talked about this
yesterday because this is a story that I don't think
is getting a lot of attention, and it should because

(56:53):
it's a real challenge in my opinion, to free speech
in America. While at a this took place in Rochester, Minnesota,
there was a woman who is at a playground there
with her son last April. Her name is Shiloh Hendrix.
You may have heard us talking about this yesterday. She

(57:16):
watched as her you know, she took her own child
to the park, she saw an eight year old Somali
child allegedly ran to her diaper bag and stole something.
Apparently it was one of those fruit packs of juice
that you see. Well, Hendricks reportedly shouted at the child
and called him the N word. Now this in a

(57:37):
public space. There was a fellow Somali bystander, his name
is Shirmaki Omar, began following and recording Hendrix and asked
if she called the child a racial slur. Hendrix confirmed
that she did, and then called Omar the same or

(58:00):
as well.

Speaker 5 (58:01):
Well.

Speaker 1 (58:02):
During this interaction, Hendricks is seen walking away from the
Somali nationals, but the man says, turn around and say
that word to me again, and he was recording.

Speaker 2 (58:11):
All of this. Now.

Speaker 1 (58:13):
Omar basically said that our Hendrix that her speech was
hate speech and that he would post the video on
the world to see, which you can see it now.
And the world did see it and had the opportunity
to judge for itself whether viewers of the incident condemned her,

(58:33):
criticized her, or defended her. It was all their pejorative prerogative,
I should say, to have their own First Amendment thoughts
on this.

Speaker 2 (58:42):
Now.

Speaker 1 (58:43):
I don't like what she did, but in America, you
have a right to do this. And is this lead?
Is this going to lead to more of stories like this? Well,
joining us on our any Hour Newsmakers to talk about that.
As Brianna Lyman, an elections correspondent at the Federal l
she writes about this, Brandon, thanks for joining us tonight.

(59:03):
Let's talk about this case and why you think it
may lead to more cases like this.

Speaker 8 (59:10):
Yeah, this case is really interesting because Hendrix said words
that I think were indefensible for most people, and most
people don't justify the language choice, but her words were
nonetheless free speech, and yet she was criminalized and punished
by the government for that free speech. And what I
mean by that is Hendrix was found not guilty on

(59:32):
disorderly conduct for the child, but she was found guilty
on disorderly conduct to the Somali migrants who was filming
the incident, And when he was filming the incident, he said,
I'm going to post this for the world to see.
So he was already making it clear that he was
following her through the park, taunting and going her into
saying those words again for camera, because he wanted a

(59:53):
viral moment, and he wanted a viral moan, because he
wanted her to be judged for her words. And that's fine.
Let the Internet judge her. But to have the government
judge her and work around it so that they could
punish her for her free speech is problematic because this
is free speech. Hate speech is free speech. The First
Women was not written to protect speech that everybody agrees with,
if that makes everybody so cozy. It was written to

(01:00:14):
protect the rights of people to say things that may
be unpopular.

Speaker 3 (01:00:18):
You know, Brianda, we're watching these striking contradictions. I mean,
you have the left, the leftists that would obstruct federal
law enforcement. I'm thinking of ice under the banner of
freedom of speech. They're protesting, they're getting in the way.
That doesn't seem to cause the left any kind of
issue at all. You look at what's happening over at
the UK, and they are putting people in jail for

(01:00:39):
things they post online. When we get to this case,
to your point, we're not excited about what she said,
but it is speech, even the fighting words. And you
bring this up in your article that it doesn't hold
muster because he invited her to repeat what he had
heard her say. There's no fighting words going on here.
What is the logical extension of this? I mean, how
do you combat the hypocrisy of the left as as

(01:01:00):
well as what they're willing to go in the face
of law and clear logic. They're willing to go against
and really find someone guilty. What happens from that point, Yeah, well.

Speaker 8 (01:01:11):
This case is the logical conclusion of the left insistence
that speech is violence, right, that hate words are dangerous speech,
because that basically creates a permission structure for censoring words
that you dislike. Or disagree with, because if words are violent,
then it justifies someone acting in self defense. And if
someone's being violent towards you, it usually requires you to maybe,

(01:01:32):
let's say, hit them back for example, right, or defend yourself.
And if that means you think you know, you're your hand,
maybe even a weapon for self defense, it's justified. So
when we start saying that speech is violence, you are
implicitly justifying violent and physical resistance to that speech. And
I think the assassination of Charlie Kirk is the culmination
of that as well. Right, this case with Charlie Hendrix

(01:01:53):
is the thing that Charlie Kirk is the biggest one,
because remember remember Matthew Dad from MSNBC. Right after Charlie
was assassinated, he said that Charlie is the most divisive figure.
He was pushing hate speech, and hate speech leads to
hateful words, which leads to hateful accents. He was justifying
the murder of Charlie Kirk by saying, well, Charlie's words
were hateful and that made people angry, and that ultimately

(01:02:16):
led someone to do something very violent. Tyler Robinson, Charlie's
alleged assassin, said that Kirk spread too much hate and
that hate can't be negotiated out. The hate he was
allegedly spreading was free speech, and so the left has
justified violence toward free speech, and it's going to get
worse if we don't take a stance.

Speaker 1 (01:02:34):
Well, let me ask you this, Brianna, because you right
about this. The words that this woman used in Minnesota,
the N word. I think ninety nine point nine percent
of Americans would be offended by the use of that word.
Some may not, unfortunately, but I mean words. They They're
not violence, are they? Is that how the left interprets
it sometime that these words are in fact violence and

(01:02:56):
they should.

Speaker 2 (01:02:57):
Be dealt with.

Speaker 8 (01:03:00):
Words are not The words are violent in a very
narrow category, which the Supreme Court has consistently touched on
in their decisions that hate speech offensive speech is not violence.
Anything that could cause imminent harm to someone may be
saying I'm about to kill you or I'm going to
take this either. But those are those narrow exceptions. She
doesn't fit any of those categories. But the less wants

(01:03:20):
to broaden that distinction so that it is basically an
all encompassing gotcha for anything that you believe in if
you are a Republican or a conservative, or someone who's
just angry and says something that they probably shouldn't have said,
maybe said it in the heat of the moment, but
at the end of the day, words can be offensive,
they can be rude, but ninety nine point nine percent
of the time, including in this case, they are not violent.

(01:03:42):
And if we want a free society to persevere and
to continue to prosper, we have to preserve that distinction
because if you don't have free speech, you don't have
a free society, and that is a bedrock of free society.

Speaker 3 (01:03:56):
So and you're so right. So I find that the
judiciary has become so politicized. Some of the rulings that
are made just they just seems to be partisan. The
facts or the legal precedent doesn't really even play into
the equation. But these kind of rulings get up, they
get appealed, and at some point along the way, you
would hope that there is an appeals court that reviews

(01:04:17):
the facts. It's black and I mean freedom of speech,
and every point you've made, including fighting words, can be proven.
The not you know, the fighting word exemption does not
apply in this case, and it's easy to see why.
So at some point I imagine this gets appealed and
at some term point it gets overturned. But in the meantime,
what in the world do we do and how long
does it take to get that appeal to throw this

(01:04:38):
this terrible ruling out, And then do we lose more
of our freedom of speech while we wait for that appeal?

Speaker 2 (01:04:45):
Well?

Speaker 8 (01:04:45):
Yeah, I mean I think we always lose more of
the freedom that we have while wating for the courts
to decide. I know here at the Federalist, when we
were censored by the Biden administration, we felt the impact,
even though we immediately sued in Missouri v. Biden, and
we felt those impacts for long time. The demonetization, we
were getting pulled off Google things like that, that's the
real risk. I'm not particularly sure what Minnesota's legal process

(01:05:09):
looks like. I would suspect that an appeal somehow going
to be shot down because it is a left wing
judiciary in Minnesota. I think the other point to make
here is when we are talking about free speech, think
of that team. Remember in twenty sixteen, he posted a
meme that if you vote Hillary Clinton, to make sure
to vote, you know, the day after in tact and
he had been sentenced to jail time during the Biden

(01:05:31):
years and he was eventually had his conviction overturn. That
was free speech, but the left wanted to widen that
distinction of what is permissible and what's not to say
this was impermissible because they didn't like the free speech
So they are using every tool assassinations law fair to
silence through speech.

Speaker 1 (01:05:47):
Brianna Lyman from the Federalist joining us on our any
of our news micer line, and we recorded that interview
earlier when rig was here talking about the case in
Minnesota involving a woman by the name of Shiloh Hen.
If you want to find out more, you can just
google that, you know, just following up on our conversation here. Words,

(01:06:07):
they may be offensive, they may be rude. I hate
some words. I hate people using those words. But they
are not violence. They're not and in my opinion, free
societies ought to preserve that distinction. Omar was free to
call Hendrick's speech hateful. He's free to say, hey, that's

(01:06:27):
hate speech. He was free to publish it and let
the public judge her, and they have. But what should
concern everyone is that the government thought it should punish
her too, and that's wrong. And as we're moving in
that direction more often, as we talk about the battle
for religious liberty and free speech. It's on every day

(01:06:51):
and we cannot let the other side win more. Coming up,
Rod and Greg with you right here on Utah's Talk
Radio one oh five nine KNRS. How which all to
put an extra one thousand dollars in your pocket? Well
you can do so each and every day Monday through
Friday between nine am and five pm here on Talk
Radio one oh five nine kN RS. It's our inflation

(01:07:11):
vacation one thousand dollars cash giveaway now here. How it works,
very very simple. At about five past each hour, We'll
give you a nationwide keyword. All you do is have
to listen to that keyword, write it down, go to
our website at knars dot com and enter that word
and you could win one thousand dollars. We call it

(01:07:34):
an inflation vacation. We do it Monday through Friday from
nine am to five pm right here on Talk Radio
one oh five nine canters again. It begins again tomorrow
morning at nine o five here on KNRS. All Right,
I mentioned this numerous times here on the show, and
I think, you know, the Republicans, as we move into

(01:07:55):
the midterm elections, need to talk more and more about
two things. First of all, the success they've had. Now
there is no doubt the president. He said he would
do it, and he had secured the border. Now, one
of the programs that he has come up with and
apparently is turning out to be quite a success, is
his controversial self deportation program. Remember this what it does.

(01:08:20):
It pays unauthorized immigrants to leave the US and apparently
it is on paced right now for more than two
hundred thousand departures according to information that was gathered by Axios.
Now two hundred thousand versus the ten point five million

(01:08:45):
that were allowed into the country during Biden's years is nothing,
but still it does show that some of these programs
are working now. Was launched last year, as you recall,
with a multimillion dollar ad campaign. I think this was
when Christy Gnome was head of Homeland Security. The initiative

(01:09:07):
is a carrot stick that has long sticks here through
July sixteenth, the nearly six hundred million dollar program, dubbed
Project Homecoming by the Department of Homeland Security has helped
out about thirte hundred and thirty two thousand people exit

(01:09:28):
the United States. Roughly seventy thousand more have signed up,
and apparently from the numbers I've been able to see,
are on track to leave, So that'd be about two
hundred thousand people under this program. About half the self
deportation that have taken place. Deportations have involved immigrants held

(01:09:52):
in detention under an effort to accelerate the departures, and
began when DOGE staffer brought Project home Coming into ICE facilities.
If you look at the big picture of this when
it comes to immigration and the border, it is a
key part of the administration's push to remove one million,

(01:10:17):
huge number, one million unauthorized immigrants into the United States.
The idea was that unauthorized immigrants would be so fearful
of being arrested and detained by ICE agents and border
prorection that they'd voluntarily leave and go home. They were
given a promise of free travel, we the taxpayer would

(01:10:41):
foot the bill, and a stipend of one thousand dollars
paid to them once they leave the United States. It
was called the self Deportation Plan. Now the stipend, by
the way, originally was at one thousand dollars is now
has increased to twenty six twenty six hundred, I'm sorry,

(01:11:05):
and was briefly three thousand dollars last Christmas. It started slowly, okay,
it only attracted about what's the number that I've seen
about twenty four thousand immigrants in the first six months.
But the White House, realizing that this could be a

(01:11:27):
real positive for the President and his border issues, urge
DHS officials to move quickly, quickly, quickly, and faster, and
they have so each self deportation is now costing you
and I the American taxpayer about twenty five hundred dollars

(01:11:48):
plus stipend paid to the deportee. Removing the immigrant who
doesn't volunteer for deportation costs about eighteen thousand dollars, so
it's a lot cheaper. So again, this is a program
that I said, I think the administration should be talking
about all the time, along with inflation, along with gas prices,

(01:12:08):
explaining to the American people what they're trying to do
do in Iran. These are the key elements that the
Republicans need to talk about to the American people all
the time. That's what they need to do. All right,
more coming up Rod and Greg with you Rod here
alone today or this afternoon, final hour of the show.
Greg had stepped out. He'll be back tomorrow right here
on Utah's Talk Radio one O five nine knrs. All right,

(01:12:32):
welcome back, final half hour they're Roding Greg show with
you on this Tuesday evening. Greg had stepped away early tonight.
He'll be back with us tomorrow. Don't forget the Jesse
Kelly Show coming your way at the top of the hour. Now,
I want to take you back over the years when
the food police were at it. Remember there was a

(01:12:54):
while ago, I can't remember how long ago that word
went out that eggs are bad for you and we
shouldn't eat eggs anymore. And over the years we've had
other suggestions about don't eat this, don't eat that, it's
bad for you. Matter of fact, Michelle Obama one time
tried to convince schools around the country not to allow

(01:13:14):
kids to drink chocolate milk. Remember that the food police,
they're always out there. And it's funny. Over time, all
of a sudden, people go, well and maybe it's o
katieat an egg Well, come to find out, eggs are
you know, one of the best protein providers that we
have out there, and you know, but their story after

(01:13:36):
story about don't eat this, don't eat that. As I mentioned, well,
what happens when the food police get out of hand
and really start annoying you just a little bit, Well,
let's talk about that now. Earlier Greg and I had
a chance to talk with Stacy Matthews. She is a
columnist and contributor at Red Stage. She talked about when
food police get out of hand, and we asked Stacy

(01:13:58):
to begin with why she'd so mad at the food police.

Speaker 9 (01:14:03):
This has been kind of an ongoing thing, Rod, And
that's just kind of different from the Maha stuff because
I've really enjoyed, you know, the conversations people have had
about Maha and learning new things about you know, food
added is and things that a lot of people don't
really think about but they need to know more information on.
But the issue that I've persistently dealt with, probably for
the last ten years or so, and you know, seeing

(01:14:25):
it and experiencing it personally, is people who take an
innocent picture that you post on social media, like you know,
a milkshaker, a sweet tea, and they all of a
sudden have to tell you how bad the ingredients are
for you and how you should choose other things. I
just think that's a little bit, a little bit too much.

Speaker 3 (01:14:42):
You know, I've read your calm and it's just a
bunch of busy bodies people getting into a grown adult's business.
I mean, if you wanted to. And I see, I
see Trump handle. This president Trump handle is uh really
well with with RFK Junior. I mean, he'll he'll say
he hates it, I eat these these birds, and then
RFK will say it's a miracle the presidents alive and
as well because of all that he consumes.

Speaker 2 (01:15:03):
They make a joke of it.

Speaker 3 (01:15:04):
Is there is there a way to approach the food
police or just these these busy buddies, these judge people
with humor? Or? Are we just going to be Are
we all plagued with them?

Speaker 9 (01:15:14):
Well? I think it depends on who you're who you're
talking to. I know, in my situation, the people I
was dealing with, I just got to the point where
it shut me down pretty much from posting photos because
and it wasn't the same people every time. It was
different people. But even when I would, you know, try
to engage with with the people, they would still try
to argue with me about ingredients, you know, and then

(01:15:36):
they get in arguments amongst each other. And you know,
keep in mind that the reason that most people post
pictures of their food, you know, online is not because
you know their foodies or anything like that. They're just
trying to start a conversation with people.

Speaker 6 (01:15:49):
You know.

Speaker 9 (01:15:50):
It's a way to kind of connect with people and
talk about different things, and it just takes kind of
the joy out of doing it when you have the
food police, you know, telling you what you should and
shouldn't be eating. That sweet teas is not good for you.
It's got too much sugar and that sort of thing.
And it let me be the judge of what I
can have and what I can now, you know, And
let me say this to you know, when you put

(01:16:11):
things out there on social media, you invite comments, and
it's not always going to be a comment that you
like or are going to want to see.

Speaker 2 (01:16:18):
I just feel like.

Speaker 9 (01:16:18):
There should be a line dram with people in terms
of getting a little bit too i don't know, nosy
or too preachy about you know, what foods are good
for you and what foods are not good for you?

Speaker 1 (01:16:31):
You know, Stacy, I've always wondered who made the food
police the experts on food? I mean, who made who
crowned them. You're an expert on food, so go ahead
and police what people are eating.

Speaker 9 (01:16:44):
Well, you know, Rod, we have experts online on everything.
Oh yeah, I'm getting I'm getting my you know, We've
had a lot of house projects here at my house
over the last two years, and I've joked with people
that I'm working on getting my YouTube degree in cross
space engineering, you know, because I'm researching. So a lot
of people do research online and that's good. I mean know,

(01:17:05):
a lot of people, you know, look for information. But
then some they think it makes them an expert, and
you know, when you talk to them, you realize they're
not really an expert. They're just trying to be a
little bit preachy, you know, and suggests that, you know,
maybe you should be making better choices when you're probably
doing okay.

Speaker 3 (01:17:22):
You know. I find that beyond food, everybody's a critic.
As you said, everybody seems to be a self appointed expert.
Is the risk really when you invite people into your
private life or if your food choices.

Speaker 2 (01:17:33):
Or where you live or what car you like.

Speaker 3 (01:17:35):
Is there any decision or anything that you do in
your life that if you let the social media and
all the chirpers out there see a decision you've made
in your life, there's not just an avalanche of uh,
you know, petty opinions about that what they're looking at.

Speaker 9 (01:17:51):
I can honestly say the one thing on social media
that that's even more consistent than the food police are
the people who when they somebody requesting prayer, it's almost
it's like universal. And that's that's the one good thing
you know about social media is when you get online
and you've got, you know, some problems going on. You
got a loved one who is sick, and you know

(01:18:12):
you're having an issue with your job or what have you.
Those things, when you, you know, go online and post
about it, generally people will immediately offer a prayer.

Speaker 2 (01:18:22):
That's not positive.

Speaker 9 (01:18:24):
That's one of the few, one of the few good
things you get out of social media.

Speaker 5 (01:18:31):
State.

Speaker 1 (01:18:32):
Let me ask you, are the food police just an
irritant or do people pay any attention to them at all?

Speaker 5 (01:18:39):
Well?

Speaker 9 (01:18:39):
I think people do pay attention and people like me,
paid attention, and it basically basically led me to stop
posting pictures of food, you know, except in rare instances.
And again it's not because I'm a foodi or anything.
It was just, you know, in the early days of
my time on social media, which started, you know, maybe
around twenty twelve or twenty thirteen, it used to be fun.

Speaker 8 (01:18:59):
It was.

Speaker 9 (01:18:59):
It was a converse station started with the way people
could kind of connect with each other and everything. And
you know, a lot of people a lot of times
when I would post something like Christmas cookies or something
like that, people would, you know, oh man, I need
to bake me some cookies. Those look so good, you know.
But then it became, oh, well, there's there's too much
sugar in those cookies, or you're using the wrong ingredients,

(01:19:19):
or you know, those aren't good for you, you know.
And I think, because as you guys have noted, everybody
is an expert on social media, I think it's only
going to get worse. And we can do a couple
of things with it. You know, you can do like
me and just kind of let it shut you down
from it, which I just found out that is more
beneficial for me but you know, some people have a

(01:19:40):
good way of responding to the people. They either you know,
cut them off, they unfriend them, or they banter back
and forth with them and hopefully can get them to
see their viewpoint, you know, and let them know that
you don't take everything so seriously. It's just a picture
of an ice cream cone.

Speaker 8 (01:19:54):
You know.

Speaker 9 (01:19:54):
But let's not you know, have a four alarng because
a four a long fire of it. It's just ice.
It's just a hamburger. Let's not get too crazy, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:20:03):
Do the do the.

Speaker 3 (01:20:04):
Food police or nebby people people that get into a
grown person's business, do they actually hurt uh the discussion
about healthy food? Because in my mind and the world
according to Greg, I'm eating my fruit loops. Now, I'd
like you RFK Junior to get the red dye out
of my fruit loops.

Speaker 2 (01:20:20):
But I'm eating them.

Speaker 3 (01:20:21):
So I'm really hoping that you get something past that
gets the dangerous die out of my fruit loops when
we talk about.

Speaker 9 (01:20:26):
Some of the things with you, because I don't. I
try not to eat red M and m's anymore.

Speaker 2 (01:20:33):
They tell us this red dies bad.

Speaker 3 (01:20:35):
Well you better do some about to die because I'm
still eating, so I'm not going to stop.

Speaker 2 (01:20:38):
So you got to go get that out. But so
doesn't they attack.

Speaker 3 (01:20:41):
On our diet actually harm a real constructive conversation about
why is it that in the United States we may
allow certain ingredients or types of dyes and things in
our food that other countries have banned. That's I think
that conversation could continue, But don't go after me. I'm
not the culprit here, right.

Speaker 9 (01:20:59):
And I think ultimately, I mean, I think I feel
like for the most part, the conversations that have had
about food online, especially in the Maha era, I think
they are constructive. I mean they may start out destructive,
but I think ultimately they'll be instructive. You know, it's
just gotten more people like me, you know, like where
I never knew this about the red dye and I

(01:21:21):
had no idea, and now like every time I buy
something like the vitamins I take, for instance, there's so
that's you know, that's being you know, instructive, and and
that didn't come just from you know RFK. You know,
I read about you know that from other people talking
about it online and how they're saying, well, you know,
there's there's a lot of different options available to you
if you don't want to take you know, vitamins with

(01:21:41):
red dye. Here here your options you. So I think
ultimately the conversations that we're having are are being productive
and instructive, but you're always going to have that element
out there, Rod and Greg who who are going to
try to spoil it for everybody? And I think we
need to try to to mute them, negate their comments

(01:22:02):
as much as we can.

Speaker 1 (01:22:03):
Well, we really want to know Stacy's we wrap up
this interview. Have you really stopped eating red eminem's?

Speaker 2 (01:22:11):
You don't have to, Actually I have.

Speaker 9 (01:22:17):
I have stopped eating red eminems. And it's funny and
I'll try to be really quick. There's a movie I
think it's called The Wedding Planner, and I don't know
if you guys have seen it, but j Lo is
in at Matthew mcconey and one of the things in
the movie, he's a die. He plays a doctor. And
one of the things in the movie he does is
he only eats the brown eminems. And when she asked
him why he did, he said, he said, I figure

(01:22:38):
those are the closest to actual chocolate because they're brown.

Speaker 1 (01:22:41):
Because They're brown. Stacey, Thank you was always an enjoyable
moment with Stacy Matthews. She is the columnist and contributor
at Red State, talking about the food police and how
they've kind of gone wild on social media or coming
up on the Roden greg Show with Utah's Talk Radio
one O five nine k n r S final segment
of the Rod and Gregg Show with you on this

(01:23:03):
Tuesday afternoon in Utah's Talk Radio one O five to nine,
Canter s live everywhere on the iHeartRadio app. Make sure
you download it. It offers you two opportunities. One that
you can listen to us wherever you go. Maybe you're
out of town on vacation. Want to find out what
Utah's are talking about. You can do that. You can
listen to us anywhere by downloading it. You can also

(01:23:26):
be involved in the show. Maybe I haven't got time
to call, but you do want to make a comment
on an issue that we're talking about. And all you
do is download the iHeartRadio app, look for Canters dot
com and in doing so, you'll see a little red
microphone button in the upper right hand corner of our
web page and a website and click on that and

(01:23:48):
leave us a talkback message. And you can do that
in thirty seconds. Very very easy to do. As a
matter of fact, you just count down and counts it
down for you and if you need to do it again,
you can do that. So there are benefits if you
download the iHeartRadio up now the count is up to ten, well,
actually eleven. Ten senators have joined Utah Senator Mike Lee

(01:24:11):
in calling for John Thune to hold off on the
recess for senators until the Senate gets a chance to
vote on the Save America Act. Here's a refresher this
from Harry Enton, the CNN data guru, talking about the
percentage of Americans who support what Mike Lee and Donald
Trump are trying to do.

Speaker 10 (01:24:30):
Gifted all that much and you can just see it
right here. Okay, so we're talking about voters favoring photo
ID to vote among all voters, are talking seventy seven percent.
And this is uniform basically, or universal, I should say
universal Democrats sixty two percent, Independent seventy seven percent, Republicans
ninety five percent. This is something that is popular across

(01:24:51):
the political spectrum. It is a rare thing that is
popular across the political spectrum When it comes to voter ID.
The voters are with President Trump on this. With that
they're Democrats, Independences, and Republicans overall.

Speaker 5 (01:25:03):
Very clear.

Speaker 10 (01:25:03):
We're talking about three and four overall who support the
idea of photo ID in order to vote.

Speaker 2 (01:25:08):
Even sixty two percent of Democrats.

Speaker 8 (01:25:10):
Show an ID when you show up to vote, now
showing a very specific ID one.

Speaker 2 (01:25:14):
You register to vote proof.

Speaker 10 (01:25:17):
Of citizenship like a passport, birth certificate or real ID,
which not every state has.

Speaker 2 (01:25:22):
How do voters feel about that?

Speaker 10 (01:25:23):
Yeah, okay, so I think this might be a little
bit more in the eye of the beholder. Johnny and
I were talking about this so document proving citizenship to vote,
which you can see here, is again it's clear the
majority are for the majority are with President Trump.

Speaker 5 (01:25:38):
Here.

Speaker 10 (01:25:38):
We're talking about fifty four percent of Americans. We've seen
this in poll after poll after poll. It is lower
than the voter ID, but it is clear you get
that fifty four percent who supported it. You got thirty
seven percent of post which is a sizeable minority, but
definitely lower than the majority. And then among independents, which
is a group that President Trump has really struggled with,
you still see it here, right, You see the majority
of the plurality of independence forty one nine percent supporting

(01:26:01):
the idea of needing document proving citizenship to vote forty
nine percent versus thirty eight percent who are posed. So
whether it's overall or independence, yes, the support is lower
than it is for photo ID, but it is very
clear that the majority of people are in fact for it.

Speaker 1 (01:26:14):
Are in fact for it, that's right. Majority of Americans
are in fact in favor of what Mike Lee and
Donald Trump are trying to do. Very simple to show
ID that you are an American citizen and then you
can go ahead and vote in a federal election. And
there are some within the US Senate on the Republican side,
John Thune, John Cornyn or saying, look, it's a waitful vote.

(01:26:38):
Why sit here for a couple of days and debate
an issue and vote on an issue that you know
is going to lose. That's their argument. Mike Lee is saying,
let's have a vote on it so the American people
can see which lawmaker that they've elected is for or

(01:26:59):
against voter ID, and that's what they're trying to do.
So so far, as I mentioned, thunder Lee working his tailoff.
Now has eleven Senators, including himself, who are encouraging John
Thune to hold off on the August recess, five week
recess that begins I think the end of this week
and goes through the Labor Day. That's all he's asking

(01:27:22):
for is a chance to vote. We'll see over the
next few days what happens. By the way, Anthony Fauci
appears before a Senate committee tomorrow talking about revelations in
his diary. Should be interesting. Now we'll have the latest
on that for you tomorrow afternoon. Head up, shoulders back.
May God bless you and your family this great country
of ours. We'll talk to you tomorrow, and four have

(01:27:43):
a good evening.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Crime Junkie

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: Neither Party Has Voters Best Interests in Mind

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

Crime Junkie

Dateline NBC

All Episodes