The Rod and Greg Show: Raction to Judge's Decision on Maps; Salt Lake Country Republican Party; Networks Admit Dems caused Shutdown

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
A lot of fallout on the decision that the judge
made picking an independent group, a leftist group's map. Wouldn't
that be nice? You got a little group together, a
little club. Why have a legislature draw your congression maps
when you can just go out there and do it yourself.
Have this judge memorialize your left leftist work is the
law of the land. And so there's we have more

(00:21):
to discuss about that.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
Yeah, we're going we're going to be doing that for sure.
Matter of fact, you mentioned that getting a lot of attention.
There is storytime.

Speaker 1 (00:31):
Like Judge Diana Gibson. Yeah, just from the parachute that in,
Diana Gibson.

Speaker 2 (00:36):
Judge Diana Gibson.

Speaker 1 (00:39):
Correct, Diana Gibson.

Speaker 2 (00:40):
Yeah, I just want to make sure. Well, here's the
New York Times headline on the story today, Greg judge
rejects Utah's Republican draw and redistricting map. This is what
gets you the sub headline, right. The judge instead adopted
a map drawn by a centrist coalition. Democrats celebrated the
ruling ahead of the twenty twenty six midterms, but Republicans

(01:02):
vow to fight it on well, you know, a a
centrist coalition. Well, by the way, Data republic was just
so you're about to did a deep dive into Mormon
Women for Ethical Government?

Speaker 1 (01:17):
Yes?

Speaker 2 (01:18):
And what did she find?

Speaker 3 (01:20):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (01:20):
What did what did she find?

Speaker 1 (01:22):
This is an of course, you'll we shouldn't be surprised
this this group has ties and funding, uh with NGOs
that have been funded these are these are the left
of center groups. Uh that they there is these NGOs
have been infiltrating and embedding themselves in American culture, in
our politics. And she's got the receipts and she says

(01:43):
as much, I have the receipts. Uh. And she is saying,
and she's putting in this post that this Mormon Women
for Ethical Government fits into the State Department backed efforts
to remake America. Every Utah needs to read and understand
how this coup with these NGOs is happening in real time.
And she is happy to walk you through because she

(02:03):
and she is Data Republican. Is she you know we
had her on the air. I think we were the
first interview she has had.

Speaker 4 (02:10):
Her.

Speaker 1 (02:11):
Her work is impactable. Everybody follows her. They know she
knows how to follow the money. And again, this group
isn't just left of center as we were lamenting yesterday.
It looks much more organized and a lot more diabolical
than we had talked to.

Speaker 2 (02:24):
Yeah, so we'll get into that. We've got a lot
to get in more into that story today. Also, we're
going to be talking about the networks and how the
networks work to make sure the Democrats did not get
blame for the shutdown. That's a task in itself, and
an interesting ruling coming out of Ohio and the use
of pronouns in a school. We'll get into that as well.

(02:47):
So we've got a lot to get to today. As always,
we invite you to be a part of the program.
Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero on
your cell phone dial pound two fifty, say hey Rod,
or leave us a message on our talk back line
and eray. Is today last day for the Journey tickets? Yeah? Today,
last day today, Greg, for the Journey tickets. I know
you're excited. Yeah, I can't win. You can't win.

Speaker 1 (03:08):
You don't like Journey, but I love Journey. And yeah, uh,
Greg Wire, it's a man named Greg Wire is gonna
call tickets.

Speaker 2 (03:17):
I'm sure Greg Wire, all right?

Speaker 1 (03:20):
Hug Yeah, Greg Wire hugg Has.

Speaker 2 (03:25):
It's almost over. The House is closed to voting on
ending the government shutdown. Finally. This is the message from
Mike Johnson early this morning talking about the vote today.

Speaker 5 (03:35):
We believe the long national nightmare will be over tonight.
It was completely and utterly foolish and pointless in the end,
as we said all along, I just want to apologize
to any Americans who are out there who still have
flight cancelations or delays today. I want to apologize to
the many American families who are made to go hungry
over the last several weeks, our troops and other federal

(03:56):
employees who are wondering where their next paycheck would come from.
All that's on the Democrats.

Speaker 3 (04:01):
Just never forget.

Speaker 5 (04:02):
They voted fifteen times between the House and the Senate
to close your government, and the Republicans tried every single
day of the shutdown to open it, and we voted
fifteen times to do that. They have a lot to
answer for, And I just want to say that we're
very optimistic about the vote tally tonight. We think this
is going to happen, and we're sorry that it took
this long. So Republicans are going to deliver for the people.

(04:24):
We're ready to get back to our legislative agenda. We
have a very aggressive calendar for the remainder of this year.
There'll be some long days and nights here, some long
working weeks, but we will get this thing back on tracks.

Speaker 2 (04:35):
I'll speaker Mike Johnson this morning telling that the vote
could happen, and Greg it could happen during the show.
We're told it's scheduled right around eight pm Eastern time,
which will be of course six pm our time, during
the final hour of our show, so we'll we'll keep
track of it. Why did the Democrats fight so long?
You're a great article today by Byron York and the
Washington Examiner, and he goes into the fact that this

(04:56):
is really all about the failing Obamacare healthcare system. It is,
I mean, the Democrats have hung their hat on this
since when did when was it approved twenty ten? Yeah,
I think it was in twenty ten, yep, when it
became law. And it is a huge failure. This is
not affordable healthcare in this country. Matter of fact, you
ran into someone today. You shared a story earlier before

(05:18):
we went on the air about what happened to a
certain individual and his mother.

Speaker 1 (05:21):
Yeah, let me, yeah, let me just get let me
share it with you. He gave me permission to share
this on the air. Working to help help his relative
with a costly surgery. The insurance cost for that would
be sixty thousand dollars in this country, in this country,
at a good hospital here in Slag City. If he

(05:41):
were to pay cash, there was a discount for cash.
It was forty two thousand dollars.

Speaker 2 (05:46):
Still a lot of money.

Speaker 1 (05:47):
This person is originally from Mexico, and so they speak Spanish,
looking up and identifying the most prestigious, nicest hospital network
and hospital in Mexico. That procedure twelve thousand dollars. Wow,
sixty thousand with insurance, forty two thousand cash here, twelve
thousand if you pay in cash, if you pay if

(06:08):
you go to Mexico there and again nice. I'm not
talking some bar, like some hot you know, with a
dirt floor, you know, and chickens flying around everywhere. I'm
talking about a real hospital. Yeah, twelve thousand dollars.

Speaker 5 (06:19):
Do you know?

Speaker 1 (06:20):
It just shows that when you separate the person who's
paying and the person who's receiving the care, and they're
not the same. These prices go one way and the
care is a different way, and the two don't meet,
and it gets more expensive and the care gets worse.
If you connect the two amazingly gets better. And we
have proof of this. Think about elective medical procedures like

(06:42):
lay six, sury whatever as plastics are, you know, cosmetic surgery.
The affordability and the ability for people to do it.
They know what they're paying for, they know what they're
going to get, and you will find that those prices
seem to be within reach. They're certainly not sixty grand
for a procedure like you'll find for something that again
would be twelve thousand somewhere else in a different country.

(07:06):
Obamacare didn't do anything to even address that. It exacerbated
all of those problems and made them worse.

Speaker 2 (07:12):
Well, the Democrats realized there was a problem, So what
do they use? They use COVID to create this emergency
where they pump more money in, give everybody subsidies, raise
the poverty level on that issue. Right, they realize again,
it's done twice, and each time the Senate Democrats and
Democrats in the House go along with this extension and

(07:33):
pumping yet more American taxpayers dollars into it, and it's
still not working. Greg. So what do they do? They say, Okay,
we'll shut down the government if we don't get what
we want. I think, and you and I talked about
this yesterday. This shutdown has exposed two things, failing Obamacare
and problems within this SNAP program. I just hope Republicans
address this once the new year gets underway. Well doubt it,

(07:57):
but I'm hoping.

Speaker 1 (07:57):
Well, let's be adults, and let's just I'm just going
to tell you there's a hard truth out there of folks,
and that is if you're a Republican, a conservative, so
you don't get the same treatment from a media that
we like to say is irrelevant but actually gets to
set the narratives. So Democrats only job in life is
to criticize Republicans. They don't have to bring ideas to
the table. They don't have to accomplish anything. They just

(08:19):
have to attack, destroy our foundational institutions, attack Republicans, and
they see electoral success for doing it. Republicans have to
do more, you know what, they have to do solve problems,
they have to address issues, they have to get the
work done and that's what it's going to take to
see good mid terms and see the president be successful
in the second term.

Speaker 2 (08:37):
All right, more to come on the Rod and Greg
Show wing Man Wednesday. We'll talk about a reaction more
reaction to the judge's decision on congressional maps. That's coming
up on the Rod and Greg Show and Talk Radio
one oh five nine. Cannaus So joining us.

Speaker 1 (08:50):
Jason Perry, Director of Hinclians, sue of Politics. Jason, Welcome
to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 2 (08:56):
I'm so glad to be with both of you. Now.

Speaker 1 (08:58):
You have a very fancy show on a KU ed
you know, at University of Utah. I have been a panelist.
Rod's been a panelist on your program. It's on public television,
so we just you know, it's it's not it's not
my vibe. I don't know, but I love being on
there and you and you do a very good job.

Speaker 6 (09:15):
But well it's time for you to come back this weekend.
Emmy Award winning program.

Speaker 1 (09:21):
Congratulations sir for you.

Speaker 7 (09:24):
So you come back.

Speaker 1 (09:25):
Yes, Well, now you've got some sweat, you got some
hardware over there, so you're gonna win that Emmy if
you're not just nominated but hey, look, I saw an
interview that you did on a local channel and you're
very You're very i would say, diplomatic. You're very calm.
You know, you're you're usually the host, so you don't
really jump into the fray too much. But I saw

(09:47):
in that interview, with all of your institutional knowledge, head
of Hinckley Institute, there in you view it looked like concern.
But it certainly was surprise over the judges decision to
take this third part party groups map, make it law,
and and what some of those consequences may be, maybe
going away from the whole urban urban suburban rural formula

(10:10):
that we've used a number of times over a couple
of redistricting. Maybe you share with our listeners, you're you're
you're a veteran of Utah politics. Why were you surprised
if you were, and what do you think the consequences
are of a decision like this.

Speaker 6 (10:24):
Well, there are a couple of reasons that I was
surprised about the decision itself, and it's it's because at
the heart of this issue really is who does get
to draw the maps? And I know we're talking about
that in the courts, and we can talk about that
a little more here. But of all the groups, whether
it's prop for an independent redistricting commission, or the legislature,

(10:45):
the people themselves through the initiative process, the only group
that's not really listed as one that can pick a
map is the court. That that would be kind of
the reason there there was There are a couple of
ways this decision could have gone, but having the court
pick a map, and particularly the one that was chosen,
was not something that many suspected.

Speaker 2 (11:07):
Jason. A lot of people have mentioned this, Creig and
I mentioned it on the show yesterday, the timing of
this decision coming down minutes before the deadline. What do
you make of that, Jason.

Speaker 6 (11:18):
Well, I think that's going to be a little bit
of the argument in these court cases that come as well,
and for the listeners who are following this closely or not.
The Lieutenant Governor had given a deadline of the tenth
of this month to have a map in place, and
this map was delivered with about thirty minutes to spare
at that time. And so what's interesting is why I

(11:41):
think this is going to be part of the court
cases going on in the dialogue is because this particular
map did not have a chance to have public airtime
or for people to react to it or the legislature.
It just with thirty minutes to spare and up being
the map that's in play. And I think that the
way that it happened probably ends up givinging some at
least some arguments to the legislature and the other side.

(12:05):
But I think the Court is in the middle of
this one and is probably going to be the court
that helps decide it in the end.

Speaker 1 (12:10):
Jason, you you're touching on a point that I've I've
been offended by and I've heard some commentary on it,
but I think some are missing it, and that is
there was The Court wanted to know what its deadline
was that it would need. It asked the Lieutenant governor,
what are your deadlines for, you know, to prepare for
the next election cycle. The Court was informed it would
be November first. The Court asked for an extension it

(12:31):
was it was made to November tenth.

Speaker 2 (12:35):
They it has.

Speaker 1 (12:35):
Already known that this judge sat on this case for
quite some time, giving little time for reaction or any
kind of due process to appeal if necessary. But this
ten minutes or twenty minutes to midnight. It's it feels hostile.
It feels I mean there you're once the close of
business happens on the tenth, there is, that's just the
eleventh we're talking about. It feels like it was an

(12:57):
attack on and vindictive towards the legend say branch and
even the executive branch to put that out right before
midnight you mentioned it. Am I overreading that? Or is
there something going on there? I mean, that seems to
be gaming it to the next level. That doesn't or
at least tell me what would be the logical reason
to let that out. Well it's before midnight.

Speaker 6 (13:20):
Well, I'll tell you it's impossible to speculate about that.
But what I do know is that given the timing
of it, there was no opportunity to react before the
map went into effect. And that's why the Lieutenant Governor
the next day said, well, I'm going to put into play.

Speaker 2 (13:35):
This map is chosen by the court.

Speaker 6 (13:38):
I'm not sure I'm prepared just to say there was
some nefarious.

Speaker 2 (13:43):
Plan behind it or.

Speaker 6 (13:45):
Not, but I'll tell you for sure, it made it
so there was no opportunity for the legislature to do
anything but start using this map.

Speaker 2 (13:53):
As part of their future lawsuit. Jason, this is going
to create a very interesting election next year, depending on
what finally comes all out of this. I mean there's
a lot of confusion and scrambling out there right now,
is there not?

Speaker 4 (14:05):
Oh?

Speaker 2 (14:06):
There really is. And I'll tell you it's interesting and great.

Speaker 6 (14:09):
And I talked about this in the past two is
look at what on the national stage right now as
of this afternoon, in the House of Representatives, two hundred
and nineteen Republicans, two hundred and fourteen Democrats.

Speaker 3 (14:20):
One got sworn in today.

Speaker 2 (14:21):
And you start looking at that makeup.

Speaker 6 (14:23):
You put that through the lens of Prop fifty in California,
where they're looking to increase the number of Democrats there.
You replicate this in a couple of places around the country,
and the House of Representatives could be in play for
the Democrats in this next election cycle.

Speaker 2 (14:41):
You take that, and let me give you just.

Speaker 3 (14:42):
One more layer and think, ask whatever you want about
this too.

Speaker 6 (14:45):
But in this map that was chosen, this district one
heavily heavily Democratics. So you look at that race, and
there are lots of local races, our local elected officials,
the people in our state House and Senate are looking
at that saying, wow, how do my race change? If
there's a record turnout of Democrats in the first congressional districts.

Speaker 2 (15:05):
That's going to be interesting to follow. Jason. I know
we'll be talking more down the line.

Speaker 1 (15:09):
Yes, thank you for joining us, and thanks for your
You know you're very You're very diplomatic there, sir, I
expect as much. So very good. You weren't ready to,
you know, rattle any sabers, but I knew that going in.
It's good to talk to you, brother. Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 2 (15:23):
You're good to talk to you both. By all right,
Jason Perry direct to the Hinkley Institute of Politics. I'll
put the University of Utah. More coming up on The
Rodden Gregg Show and Talk Radio one oh five nine
k n R. S. If if you have someone on
your holiday shopping list and you're trying to figure out
what should I get them, and you know they're a
big Journey fan, sorry, uh, why not try and win

(15:43):
these tickets and give them away for Christmas?

Speaker 4 (15:47):
Nice?

Speaker 2 (15:48):
You know you are very thoughtful, thoughtful.

Speaker 1 (15:51):
It's a very renaissance of you to be so thoughtful.
I dragged my knuckles. I can't think of anything to
buy for anyone. Oh I can all I just pay
stuff I want and then yeah, my wife looks to me, like,
who did you buy this for? For you? I did
not want whatever it is. Well, I did not want
golf clubs. Well they're really good.

Speaker 2 (16:13):
Well that's what my wife have gotten. Now we're at
that point. Just go pick it out yourself. I'll wrap
it up and yeah, come.

Speaker 1 (16:19):
The king of the gift cards. And I know that
sounds totally faceless, and but yes, you know what though,
I pick really bad gifts, so actually they're appreciated. My
family gift cards are more appreciated because I'm not very
good at picking.

Speaker 2 (16:35):
It's not lazy, told me to stop.

Speaker 1 (16:39):
I have gone to buy things that I've been super
excited to give, and I've been told by my wife
and children to stop doing that.

Speaker 2 (16:45):
Yeah, all right, let's get lazy. Let's get to our callers.
We're talking about this redistricting plan, this judge. I've got
a quote or two from this judge's ruling. I'll share
with you in a minute. But we want to get
to your phone calls right now.

Speaker 1 (16:57):
Yeah, let's go to the phone. Let's go to Dakota,
who's been waiting from Santa Quin to go to Thank
you for holding. Welcome to the Ron and Greg show.

Speaker 8 (17:06):
Yeah, thanks taking my calls.

Speaker 4 (17:07):
Guys, I just have a.

Speaker 8 (17:10):
Question, Greg.

Speaker 1 (17:11):
Yeah, good.

Speaker 8 (17:12):
Please forgive my ignorance. But this has been going on
since January. Correct, Yes, and she put the She asked
the question tune. Was there anything that the legislation could
have done, like, hey, we see that she's trying to

(17:32):
delay this. Was there anything they could have done sooner
other than waiting for the verdict to come out last minute.

Speaker 1 (17:42):
It's a great question, and it points to the diabolical
nature of this whole thing. When a judge receives the case,
receives a case, they hear the oral arguments. They can
sit on that for as long as she want. And
and what happened is she waited as long as humanly possible.
They went to the Supreme State Supreme Court. This is

(18:04):
prior to this nightmare ruling of the map itself. But
her ruling on their process came out at such a
late hour the legislature went to the State Supreme Court
to seek relief. Because it's so beyond the pale folks.
She got to know about this State Supreme Court and
the Republican governors that have appointed these members. They are

(18:24):
not originalists like you'd find in our US Supreme Court.
These are not conservatives or people that read the law
as it stated the plain language. You've got some activists
out there, and including in our State Supreme Court. They
were unable to seek relief. So then she was able
to slow bake that literally to ten minutes or twenty
minutes before midnight of the time that you have to

(18:45):
send information to the clerks to begin.

Speaker 3 (18:47):
To draw those maps.

Speaker 1 (18:48):
So to the question of could the legislature have done
anything to expedite to work around her to get this
done faster. By design, she held this as long as
humanly possible, to give the legislative branch no options of
how to move forward. Nothing they could have done in
any kind of due process way you need some time,
you need some there was none given in those processes

(19:12):
on by like I said, by design, and.

Speaker 2 (19:14):
A judge can sit on a decision as long as.

Speaker 1 (19:16):
They want they can, and she did, and it was
it was, Yeah, it was done.

Speaker 2 (19:20):
Listen to some of these quotes. You know, I did
not read the ruling, but uh, listen to some of
these quotes. This was in the New York Times article today.
Greg I was talking about where the Time rights that
the map judge. They came up with their own map, right.
The legislature followed the rules to a t and submitted
that map, right, But she rejected him. She said the map,

(19:42):
the new map still failed to uphold the state's constitution.
I'm not sure where she's coming from on that. Instead
facing the deadline, that's what the Time said, she had
to adopt one of the plaintiffs proposed maps.

Speaker 3 (19:57):
Hmm.

Speaker 2 (19:57):
Right, And here's what she said. The the court bears
the unwelcome obligation right to ensure that a lawful map
is in place, She wrote, saying that she would accept
the plaintiff's map one as the standing congressional map for
the state. That map, of course, preserved a democratic leaning district.
She had to do it, She had no other choice.

Speaker 9 (20:18):
I know.

Speaker 1 (20:18):
Yeah, so so, And here's here's what's. When they had
their hearing to present their maps and look, the legislature,
they went through their normal process. They were told their
normal process wasn't going to work. You have to use that.
You can have no partisan considerations, and when I talked
to members of my former colleagues, those that have been
the legislature when they had to go back to the
drawing board and on bended nie come to this judge

(20:41):
with this new map, they were all telling me, we can't.
We are not able to know voter registration, we're not
laid allowed to know voter outcomes and past elections. There
can be zero voter information in terms of partisan information
about who would win or who'd lose, if that's the case.
And that's what it was. And they went through this
new process, which, by the way, mate, put probably two

(21:02):
districts more competitive for maybe giving both a Republican and
a Democratic chance at a race instead of this deep
dark blue for plus twenty four percent Kamala Harris district
that they came up with. It is it is hard
for me to imagine that for all the non partisan
considerations that you had to stay away from, like a

(21:23):
spent fuel rodge, you couldn't know any of that information.
That the map that she accepted is a is as
partisan and as dark blue as it.

Speaker 2 (21:31):
Is as it possible it is.

Speaker 1 (21:33):
It's just it's it's insulting. It doesn't pass the smell test.

Speaker 2 (21:36):
Let's go back to the phones real fast. Get another
comment on this, John and South Jordan, John, how are
you welcome to the Rod and Greg Show. Thanks so
much for joining us.

Speaker 10 (21:43):
John.

Speaker 11 (21:45):
Hey, there's been an unbelievable effort over the years for
Colorado especially, but other Democrats, and if you are able
to look at any of the literature that the Democratic
Party puts out to their constituents here to take over
this state, to make it purple and then to make
it blue, just like Colorado. So what needs to happen

(22:06):
now is the legislature has to suck it up and
impeach this judge for deliberately causing this problem. And it's
up to the legislature to decide what the districts look like.
They need to change the constitution. We need to get
rid of referendums. It's not a democracy. We're supposed to
be a representative republic and our representatives can make laws,

(22:28):
but then they get over it and by special interest
groups all the time. So we have to fix that.
If it's part of the constitution, that was a big
mistake to begin with.

Speaker 12 (22:37):
We got to do what we can. Yeah, we do
fix that, Okay, go ahead. One other thing, Go ahead, John,
we lost to met He hung up on that, but.

Speaker 1 (22:51):
I'm sad that I interrupted him.

Speaker 2 (22:52):
A lot of talk about that coming up on this
whole impeachment thing, we'll dig into that. Matter of fact.
The chairman of the Salt Lake Countyublican Party is going
to join us at the top of the hour. He's
taking a look at this map. He's dug into these neighborhoods.
He has got some amazing information that we'll share with
you as well.

Speaker 1 (23:09):
In that Democrat narrative. And then do we need to
keep these communities together? Wait to you here, he is
the chair of the Salt Let County Republican Party. Wait,
do you see how they jerry mannered this Salt Lake
County and who they kept in their dark blue district
and who never made the cut in the count the
common community that was supposed to be part of that process,
and a partisan partisan data that was never supposed to

(23:31):
be part of it.

Speaker 2 (23:31):
All right, Moore, coming up here on the Rod and
Gregg Show, wing Man Wednesday and Talk Radio one oh
five nine Cannas. Back to the phone as we go,
Let's go to Randall and Lyndon. Randall how are you
welcome to the Rod and Gregg Show.

Speaker 13 (23:43):
Pretty good, glad to be with you. I listen to
you guys a lot. I'm also eighty years old. I've
been following politics since fifty some years. Actually, I was
walking across the campus the Church College of Hawaii when
I heard Kennedy's assassination.

Speaker 2 (23:59):
Wow.

Speaker 13 (24:00):
Wow, that's when I started politics. I really get irritated
that Judge Is needs to be impeached kicked out. Secondly,
what really questions me is these LDS women that have
bought into all the lives of the left. I cannot

(24:20):
understand where they get their stuff.

Speaker 1 (24:23):
Randalls, think about this. I don't mean to interrupt you,
but you're so right. Think about this. These LDS Women
for Ethical Government just drew a map that someone that's
LDS can't win. They can't win, no one of that
of the faith that the Church's Christ celebrity saints could
run in a plus twenty four percent Kamala Harris district
and win. Someone tell me I'm wrong, but I think

(24:45):
it's it's a disgrace.

Speaker 8 (24:48):
Yeah, I agree.

Speaker 11 (24:50):
One thing I want to bring up.

Speaker 13 (24:51):
The Progressive Movement was founded in the late eighteen hundreds
by endwo mostly college professors in the eastern part of
the United Okay, they came up with two conclusions for
the progressive movement. One, our Constitution is a flawed document
needs to be replaced.

Speaker 2 (25:10):
Yes. Number two, there is no God true.

Speaker 13 (25:14):
So progressive movement all these years, that's their two their
basic two basic beliefs. They've joined with the Democrat Party,
which was founded in eighteen twenty eight, which happens to
be two years before the Church was organized. And also
they were founded to protect slavery, which is one of
the things that our Constitution is against. Yes, they were

(25:35):
the cause of a civil war, they created the KKK.
They've I have in the last years, I've had time
to go through all of the things the Democrat Party
has stood for, proposed put into elected, all that nearly
everything they proposed has been contrary to the Constitution and
contrary to God's laws.

Speaker 2 (25:54):
Yeah. Well, they, like you pointed out, they don't believe
in the Constitution, they don't believe in God. And that's
what we have today. Let's go back to the let's
go to win luck. I believe it is in pleasant growth. Hi,
Welcome to the Rod and Greg Show. Thanks for joining us.

Speaker 8 (26:07):
Hey, Jant's great to talk to you.

Speaker 14 (26:09):
It seems to me that with this redistricting problem, we
have a scheduling or a calendar issue. Whoever scheduled the
deadline didn't take into account the appeal process, and so
whoever did the scheduling needs to be seriously put on
a palette or somewhere and talked to.

Speaker 1 (26:32):
Yeah, you know, you're so right, and it's a great observation,
and people are pointing to our Lieutenant governor Didre Henderson
is giving this deadline, giving a ten day past the
deadline that they needed. I think what you're saying is that,
knowing that those hard deadlines for just the administrative work
of putting on an election, we're sitting there, you would
never give the courts that deadline as the deadline, because

(26:53):
you do, you rob the legislative branch of any opportunity
to appeal because your backs against the wall. Those mandatory
deadlines should have been in October and not in November.

Speaker 2 (27:07):
Because are there to state rules low greg that say
you have to have sixty days, ninety days, one hundred
and twenty days out. I mean, is she will not
justifying what she did? But is she following no, the
rules that are clearly stated.

Speaker 1 (27:18):
So but I what I say is that is one
hundred percent correct. So if you know that you're up
against hard, hard deadlines, what you should be communicating to
the court is, I need to know well before those
hard deadlines so that you can have that window of
appeal if you if you felt like you needed it.
But here I also just say this, as we see
these rogue judges around the country doing things that are

(27:40):
so patently and clearly unconstitutional. It might take some time,
but you ultimately get those those decisions reversed in a
higher court or even the Supreme Court. We don't have
that here. I'm just going to tell you sadly, the
new I'm gonna give you the news. This State Supreme
Court are not originalists.

Speaker 3 (27:58):
They are.

Speaker 1 (27:58):
They are more activist. We had, like Mike Lee's brother,
Tom Lee was on was a justice. He's not on
there anymore.

Speaker 2 (28:04):
He's not.

Speaker 1 (28:05):
You have some of those conservatives that are and originalists
that were on the State Supreme Court that are no
longer on there. The crop we have now they are
are air activists.

Speaker 2 (28:14):
Yeah, they sure are. And the court lawmakers have already
gone to him once what's going to be a difference
in the second time if you think about it.

Speaker 1 (28:22):
Yeah, I just don't. I think they're going to get
that appeal. You're not going to get any relief from
this this Supreme Court. They're they're firmly on the side
of the leftists on this.

Speaker 2 (28:30):
All right, coming up the chairman of the Salt Lake
County Republican Party. He's done a lot of digging into
this news district. They'll share what he has found out.
Coming out, stay with us right here on the Rotting
Gregg Show.

Speaker 1 (28:49):
I'm rod Ark, I'm citizen Greg Hughes joining us. This
is this is an important interview. This is a discussion
that we've been having yesterday. We've been continuing it today.
The breaking news of this judge. What's her name, Diana,
Diana Gibson. That's name of judge Diana Gibson. We want
to know who the judge is.

Speaker 2 (29:10):
So comes up, remember that name.

Speaker 1 (29:12):
Yes, she's not impeach first and a lot of our
callers today have called and said as much and have
made a very strong case for that to happen. But yesterday,
while we were going through this, the Salt Lake County
Republican chair Mike carry uh started to get back on
on X and he started losing him back and saying, look,
you want to tell me that there was no partisan consideration,

(29:33):
let me show you some things. And I, in real
time am learning as I'm watching this, I can't see anything.
They don't even like light pink in this district. There's
not even a light pink like I vote Republicans sometimes
that they have allowed into this district. This district is
so unbelievably drawn with nothing but political consideration, partisan consideration,

(29:54):
And I thought that he was Mike was able to
frame this so well. We've asked him to join us
on the program. He is here and studio Mike, thank
you for joining us on the running great.

Speaker 2 (30:03):
As you started digging into this mic, how many times
did you say to yourself, Wow, what's going on here?

Speaker 3 (30:09):
WHOA? I mean it was pretty obvious.

Speaker 15 (30:12):
I mean, you know, I ran for county council last
year in the large race, and so I had to
look at some of these precinct maps, especially after the
November election when frankly were surprised that uh, you know,
Natalie Pinkney won as a at large candidate in that race.
And we look at the we looked at some key
data points, and you know, I don't I've ran my

(30:33):
own campaign, so I didn't go very deep. But the
two things I looked at was one, I wanted to
see how Trump had performed on the on the you know,
on the at the top of the ticket, across all
the precincts. And then because I had an idea that
I might run for chair this year in March and so,
and then the second thing I looked at was we're
the blue parts Assault Lake County. I keep hearing all

(30:54):
as Salt Late County is blue, but if you've been
the Harriman or Draper.

Speaker 2 (30:56):
You know that's not true, right.

Speaker 15 (30:58):
And I've met a lot of people in the north
end the county too that just can't believe, you know,
how how blue Salt Lake County is. And the reality
is that we ever turnout problem, you know. So we
got beat by like twenty points when it comes to
turnout in the northeast quadrant, and that's enough to overwhelm
the other three quadrants. So when I saw this map
come out on new CD one, I'm like, oh, that

(31:20):
looks really that outline looks really familiar to something I
saw last fall in December, and so.

Speaker 1 (31:25):
You overlayed maybe the vote. So the one thing that
no one was allowed to use. I was told I
talked to Republican lawmakers. Yeah, there's saying I can't know
the voter fil I can't know voter registration. We can't
look at voter outcome. We can't look at any of
these things. And so those were those were considerations that
were not supposed to be factored in. You factored them
in on this newly drawn district that was supposed to

(31:47):
be we don't know. This is supposed to bring two candidates,
a Republican and a Democrat and have a fair fight
and see it might be one, it might be the other.
We don't know. You overlay this. It's all It is
not just blue, it's dark blue blue.

Speaker 3 (32:00):
They the Rhode Island.

Speaker 1 (32:01):
It does, and it has cut out in sol Late
County because all you ever hear is that this is
all about Solate County. Anywhere I see even a slight
pink in Sandy and Draper and Riverton, Harriman, anywhere there
is a Republican any kind of strength, it is not
inside this district. So maybe tell our listeners explain how

(32:23):
you know that there were there it was pretty impossible
to draw something like this without partisan considerations. How could
they get that accurate?

Speaker 15 (32:31):
Well, let's cause this right. So the map that the
judge what's her name again.

Speaker 3 (32:36):
Diana Gibson.

Speaker 2 (32:39):
Forgot Diana Gibson, We.

Speaker 1 (32:41):
Need we need a bumper music with that name.

Speaker 15 (32:45):
So the map that she put out there and said
this is the map we're going to go with follows
no law. Okay, it really doesn't. I mean, who drew
this map? We know, we know it was the Mormon
Women for Ethical Government. Yep, women voters. They're not the legislature, okay.
And and you know, when when I look at you know,

(33:07):
when I look at some of the requirements of prop
for and I sat through some of the preliminary discussions
with the you know, the state party and and even
some of the legislators back when they were looking at
the five options that the legislator legislature was presenting, and
then they ultimately opted to go with the map. Ce
you know, any I can't tell you how many times

(33:28):
I was told, don't pay attention to any partisan data. Okay,
we cannot talk about partisan data, any partisan data that
gets mentioned, will basically be struck from public comment and
not to be considered. We want to play this above
board with the with the judge, and I appreciate that.
I appreciate the legislature doing their job as public servants
to try to follow what the judges.

Speaker 2 (33:47):
Ordered them to do.

Speaker 3 (33:48):
But then we turn around and we see this map.

Speaker 15 (33:50):
I mean, the reddest part of this map is the
lake in the airport, which has got like twenty people.

Speaker 1 (33:55):
He's not kidding you, not kidding.

Speaker 3 (33:57):
It is the reddest part of the reddest part.

Speaker 1 (33:59):
It's not a lot of people, but they voted apparently
are the people near that like voted Republican because that's
why it's read.

Speaker 15 (34:04):
And when you compare that to CD three, and this is,
by the way, this hasn't even showing you the rest
of the map, which is now put what was it
Congressional District three now covers Vernal in Saint George or
in the same district, and everything in between, and everything
in between. There's a reverse l that covers the entire

(34:24):
east side of Utah, in most of southern Utah.

Speaker 1 (34:27):
Saint George to Blanding, Morgan County to Hurricane This is
all one this is a so called one area. So Mike,
to your point, if you're not supposed to interrupt or
disturb communities of interest, what is the community of interest
between Saint George and Blanding or any of these that

(34:48):
because they have three maps that we would say probably
interrupt or bisect thirteen either cities or counties to give
you three congressional maps, to say that you have one
that you didn't want to interrupt anything, and even that one,
I would argue, you've interrupted Salt Lake County in a
big way because there's a lot of Salt County in
this map. They didn't count well.

Speaker 15 (35:07):
And if you look at Map three that was proposed
or Map CE, I forget what it was called.

Speaker 3 (35:11):
You know it kind of split the county on an
east west yes model.

Speaker 15 (35:16):
I live in a previously an area that was unincorporated.
Ten years ago, we incorporated in Cottonwood Heights. Now all
of Cottonwood Heights is in CD one. My neighbors in
literally in my backyard are sandy Okay.

Speaker 3 (35:28):
So are they? Are? They not contiguous with me anymore?

Speaker 15 (35:31):
Like you know, this whole, this whole myth that you know,
we tried to keep community of interest Yeah, there's one
community of interests represented in that map, and that's the
Democrat voting block.

Speaker 1 (35:40):
It is the part is in consideration of that that
community plus ten to plus twenty by most.

Speaker 2 (35:45):
But you hear all these people yesterday reacting to this
in in CD one or the proposed CD one, They're
all saying, our community has now come together. We outdo
you know we have one person we can go to
instead of two. Apparently that's a real struggle.

Speaker 15 (35:58):
Well, and did you see the map that the the
Los Eskama i think presented or someone from the the
committee that on this in the special hearing a few
weeks ago, they had like two lego bricks, one for
the north half of the county and one for the
south half of the county. And then all of northern
Utah with the rest of Northern Utah was was one
district and all of southern Utah was one district. I mean,

(36:19):
that's that's where we're up against. You know, follow prop
for when it benefits the Democrats, but not when it's
you know, Republicans trying to do their job of you know,
keeping it on the up and up and follow the
direction of the court.

Speaker 2 (36:32):
We've got a few more questions. Can you hang with
us a little bit? All right? All right, Mike carry
the chairman of the Salt Lake County Republican Party, joining
us here on the Rodden Greag Show in Utah's Talk
Radio one h five nine, kayn Ars. What was her
name again?

Speaker 1 (36:45):
Diana?

Speaker 2 (36:46):
Diana Gibson? Yeah, what was her name? Mike Gibson? Thank you.
Just want to make sure my.

Speaker 1 (36:52):
Friend and former colleague, Francis Gibson, Former represented Francis Gibson,
wants everyone to know he is not related to this woman.
He doesn't not know. They don't see each other at
family picnict He doesn't know anything about Diana Gibson, says
former state Representative Francis Gibson. No relation, Yeah, none at.

Speaker 2 (37:09):
All, Mike Caerry, he is the chairman of the Salt
Lake County Republican Party, joining us in studio this afternoon
to talk about this. You hear this over and over again, Mike.
We are a grassroots, local, grassroots organization. Do you believe
that in any any of this? No, absolutely not. This
is one of the most curated things I've ever seen.

(37:32):
We know back from twenty eighteen. You know, everyone of
the talks about will of the people, will of the people,
who's at fifteen point three percent?

Speaker 15 (37:38):
And the reality is in that in that election that
we had a lot of things on the ballot that year.

Speaker 2 (37:43):
I think marijuana was on the ballot, Medicaid expansion was
on it.

Speaker 3 (37:46):
Medicaid expansion.

Speaker 15 (37:47):
You know, it's a midterm, so naturally you know you're
going to see lower turnout. The Democrats are really good
at motivating people to get out the vote, especially in
this new district that is like the bluest part of
the state. And then we know that there's a ton
of money that comes from out of state that went
into this initiative. But everybody that talks about will of
the people fifty point three percent, the reality is that
there was something like eighty thousand people that didn't even

(38:09):
vote on the issue on that it didn't even check
the box on that issue. And then in addition to that,
it was like a third of registered voters didn't even
return a ballot. So don't spare me the will of
the people nonsense. When we're talking about thirty to thirty
one percent of the Utah registered.

Speaker 1 (38:23):
Vote, I swear we have to have a redo on
that on the twenty sixth ballot. We got to now
that we know what they mean by the word fair.
That means democrat. You know, no compartisan consideration for Republicans only.
They can consider all the Democrat consideration they want. But
let me ask you a question. You're you we share
something in common. You and I are both pioneers to Utah.

(38:43):
I grew up in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. You've you're pioneered across
the planes here.

Speaker 3 (38:49):
You're a Steelers fan. I'm a lowly Giants fan.

Speaker 1 (38:51):
Yeah, so you know we have that so you but
you you bring a perspective. We were talking hearing the
commercial break when people talk about, you know, jerrymandering. And
by the way, Democrats have had congressional seats here in
Utah very very recently. It's not been a long time.
In these redistrictings. You've processes, you've seen in the our
formula of urban and rural and it's combination. You've seen

(39:12):
Democrats hold seats here in Utah. But talk about a
little bit about these states back east that you know
so well that you have family that live in and
give some apples to apples comparison. When we're talking about
fairness and what's going on.

Speaker 15 (39:25):
I will gladly present to any Utah Democrat who's saying
will of the people, will of the people, I would
gladly present to them any congressional map of Massachusetts, where
I have family, New Jersey, where most of my family
still lives, in Maryland, where I lived for eleven years
before here. Because you look at a place like Massachusetts,
for example, is my favorite example, nine congressional districts all Democrat,

(39:50):
and yet Trump Trump won or lost by about the
same percentage that Kamala Harris lost here in Utah.

Speaker 2 (39:57):
Okay.

Speaker 15 (39:57):
So if you want to talk about equal representation, no,
I'm sorry, there's there's there's no prize for second place
in this. You either win the legislature who draws the
map according to our constitution, or you don't.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
That's simple, That's right, And that's where I think this
job Jodge, what's her name again.

Speaker 2 (40:14):
Diana Gibson, Diana Gibbson.

Speaker 3 (40:15):
Judge Diana Gibson. Just judge Diana Gibson severely missed the mark.

Speaker 10 (40:21):
Here.

Speaker 15 (40:21):
We have a map that now exists as our congressional
boundaries that wasn't drawn by anybody in government.

Speaker 1 (40:29):
And look at Massachusetts nine members of Congress that they
don't have a single Republican seat. New Jersey could flip
like two or three if it was fair maps. You know,
have you've seen have you ever seen Jerry Nadler's map.
It looks like a praying mantis because you've seen that thing.
And when they start to look like, you know, insects,
you know there's the fixes in. We've not had that

(40:49):
if you look at the maps that have been done
in the past, even the maps that the legislature drew.
Now it was that important balance. And I think in
Utah when you only have four seats of the urbans,
bourban and rural constituencies that are only four members of
Congress need to advocate for our economies interconnected. They all
are important constituencies and it grows our numbers. I had

(41:10):
someone say to me, oh, so you must like the
way that California does it, because that's what they're trying
to do right now with their Prop fifty. They have
fifty two members of Congress. You might have a little
bit more specific community when you got fifty two members
of Congress versus our only R four. Mike, tell me
about Salt Lake County. What in the way it's been
it's been redistricting has happened before, and what happens now?

(41:33):
What is the other consequences in Salt Lake County where look,
there are Republican areas of this county, but when you
create this dark, dark blue Jerry Mander district inside this county,
Salt Lake County, and you go down ballot. So this
was meant to only impact the congressional race, but we
have other races that are going to happen in November.
What happens potentially do you worry about as the chair

(41:54):
of the party in Salt Lake County?

Speaker 15 (41:55):
Well, you know, I've been saying for over a year
that this the next year's DA's race, and Salt Lake
County is the single most important important race in the state.
And now with this, with the amount of money that's
going to come in to the Democrat Party machine, Okay,
it's just going to be it's going to be ten
times harder now for us to run that race. I'm

(42:16):
going to be I'm going to be making a lot
of phone calls over the next six to eight weeks
to really try to buttress and support what we have
in the GOP. I mean, Utah has been such a
red state for so long, okay, that we've never really
had to rely on an organizational infrastructure that we need
now to put in place very quickly, okay, to defend

(42:38):
kind of the home front. I've been saying for a
long time, even before I ran for office last year.
Salt Lake County is kind of the front lines for
the whole state if you want to keep us from
going Colorado or Oregon two.

Speaker 1 (42:47):
Point that's right, that's right. We don't have the muscle
memory for these tough races and how we build up
for around.

Speaker 15 (42:52):
All the money goes into campaigns, and I get it, okay,
but you know, you get these smaller municipal races like
we just saw with the amount of money that the
Democrats stumped into there. They've they've been open about going
after two Senate seats and eight House seats next year
in our in our state, in our state House. It's
you know, we've we've got to we've got to start
acting like we're actually playing, you know, a grudge match,

(43:15):
and there's like we're in the red zone and there's
two minutes left on the clock.

Speaker 3 (43:19):
Yeah, okay, And it's a tie ball game.

Speaker 15 (43:20):
We got to stop resting on our laurels of a
twenty one point six Trump majority.

Speaker 2 (43:24):
Mike, We've had a few calls coming in since since
it's broke, basically saying impeach and where do you go
from here? What do you think needs to happen? Or
what are you encouraging members of the party here in
Salt Lake County, especially those within that district being affected?
What are you encouraging them to do? Listen, I'm a
construction guy.

Speaker 15 (43:43):
I'm not a political wonk, okay, but but I do
enough about separation of powers, okay. And anytime I think
this judge needs to be impeached, I think everyone needs
to call their senators, call their House district members, especially
you know, on the Republican side obviously, and and uh
and pressure them to and peace in the next session.
You know we are we are now in a situation

(44:03):
because of the way the judge delayed for seven or
eight months or initial decision that put the legislature on
a scramble to try to come up with some maps.
And now here we are twenty one minutes before midnight
on the night of the deadline, where the LG's got
to start producing, you know, doing her work, important work
for next year. You know, you can't tell me there
was no gamesmanship involved here, and so I think I

(44:24):
think there only is only.

Speaker 1 (44:25):
One option but to impeach at this point, I agree
absolutely so to our listeners.

Speaker 2 (44:30):
Yeah, and we'll get a few more saying that Mike'
has been great, haven't you come in and talked to us.
Great work on this, Thanks for having We'll see where
this goes from here.

Speaker 1 (44:37):
All right, I'll talk to you, sir, a right for
coming in.

Speaker 2 (44:39):
All right, more coming up on the Roden greg Show
and Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine k NRS.
All Right, we're talking about this judge. What was your
name again? Diana Gibbson Dianny Gibson, of course is ruled and.

Speaker 1 (44:50):
Debbie Gibson, Debbie not Francis Gibbson, Diana Gibson.

Speaker 2 (44:54):
Frans is no no relationship. By the way, we spoke
just a short time ago with my Kerry Salt Lake
County Republican Party chairman, and you know, we asked them
what can people do? And the message is, if you
want to get rid of this judge or impeacher call
your state lawmaker.

Speaker 1 (45:09):
I think we need to start rattling sabers. I'm not
giving up this ship on this. I really think we
need to. We cannot be okay. I think the left
is depending on busy people to move on, forget it,
think oh, this is just the legislative deal. They're just
mad they that they didn't win and just move on.
See what's going on around this country, see the attack
that we're seeing happen, and understand that we're ground zero
here in Utah and we have to get involved. We

(45:30):
have to engage and expect our lawmakers to impeach this judge.
I'm not going to be subtle about it.

Speaker 2 (45:36):
Eight eight eight five seven eight zero one zero triple
eight five seven o eight zero one zero on your
cell phone, dial pound two fifty and say hey, Rod,
or leave us a message on our talk back line.
The question is, are you willing to call your state
lawmaker tonight or tomorrow, be it a state senator or
a state a member of the House, and say we
want you to impeach this judge. That's the question they
should be all right, let's go to our talk back

(45:57):
line and see what they have to say tonight about
this story.

Speaker 16 (46:00):
Afternoon, gentlemen, this is Viper two pieces of advice. One
that LDS Women's group is no more LDS and the
Pope two communists lie about everything at all times, every
single time. The reason is is because no reasonable person
would want to purchase anything the communists are selling.

Speaker 2 (46:20):
That's all. See you back at base.

Speaker 1 (46:24):
Thank you, Commander Mike Viper. Metcalf's our it's wingman Wednesday
and we just heard from Commander Mike Viper Metcalf he is,
he is our commander and uh yes, sir, I think
both points are well taken.

Speaker 2 (46:38):
That group there are no more Mormon than the Pope
is true.

Speaker 1 (46:42):
This group is I think what a farse.

Speaker 2 (46:44):
Yeah, yeah, they are all right. Back to the talk
back line. Let's hear what this listener has to say.
You guys have hit right upon that.

Speaker 6 (46:52):
I think now we see didra Henderson's true colors?

Speaker 2 (46:58):
Yeah, I'm not sure what she could have done, but
that goes.

Speaker 1 (47:02):
Back to her caller that said, if you had to
give the judge a hard deadline, giving them the deadline
that were you, you have minutes to have to now
start moving, So there's no point, there's no chance for
the legislative branch to appeal or try to find a
way through other than you've run out of time.

Speaker 4 (47:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (47:20):
I think the color is pointing out and might well
be the case that the hard deadline that the Lieutenant
Governor should have given knowing that a vote of this,
a decision of this magnitude may also include an appeal
or should that hard deadline for that judge should have
been in October not November?

Speaker 2 (47:37):
Yeah? Well, I wonder even Greg she gave what was
it November? First? Henderson gave the judge another ten dates?
What happened in those ten days? Why did she need
an initial ten dates? She hadn't ruled on anything since
when their case was argued back in January.

Speaker 1 (47:52):
Yeah, No, this this farce. The ten days she asked
for was to push the envelope that much further, to
make it so that difficult. So ten I going to
put out a statement that said, I even if there's
even if there's an appeal, we don't have time to
wait for an outcome to understand it. We are going
to move forward with what this map says. Right now,
we're going to formalize it. We're moving forward until a

(48:13):
judge tells us to stop work and change it. And
I think that frustrates people. They would have liked to
have seen some due process here on something this serious.

Speaker 2 (48:21):
I didn't get it, did we?

Speaker 11 (48:22):
All?

Speaker 2 (48:22):
Right back, Let's go to our phones eight eight eight
five seven o eight zero one zero on your cell phone,
dial pound two fifteen and say, hey, ron let's get
to the callers.

Speaker 1 (48:30):
Let's go to Mark in West Point. Mark, thank you
for calling the Ronnie Gregg Show.

Speaker 10 (48:36):
Good evening, gentlemen, make it quick. Yes, I would. I
will call to get get her impeach because I'm angry.
But my question is, and you guys may have already
discussed this, because I just got on the radio to
hear this portion of it. What exactly would you I mean,
in order to get impeach you got to do something

(48:56):
illegal or wrong? What are they actually? What did she
do that is an impeachable offense?

Speaker 1 (49:03):
So great question, Mark, thank you for asking. So there's
two things I think that are that are that apply here. One,
I think that there's a there is a you know,
every judge, just like every sworn public servant, is sworn
to uphold the constitution of this state and of the
United States.

Speaker 2 (49:20):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (49:21):
This she has failed in her sworn duty to uphold
our state constitution. She has violated in the most egregious ways.

Speaker 2 (49:27):
Because because the constitution says it's the legislatures.

Speaker 1 (49:32):
So clearly clearly one and that. But I would say
that the one that is even more significant than that
is what she did to prevent the legislative branch from
being able to exercise its rights. In terms of it,
if there's a court ruling, they have to have time
to be able to appeal, like everybody does. We all
have due process as citizens. But even this legislature, if

(49:54):
there was going to be a ruling from a lower
court judge, there should have been time afforded for the
for appeal. She gamed this up so much. She held
onto this decision for nine months, and then she scheduled
the hearings after she said, you've lost. Now you can
come on bended knee and tell me what your map's
going to be. I give you thirty days. Do you
know how long the legislature takes and their hearings for
redistricting it forever public hearings around the state. She gave

(50:17):
thirty days on her terms that the legislature had to
come up with maps that would would better define prop
for us as she was defining it, gave that legislature
thirty like cats on a hot tin roof only thirty days.
They come with that thirty days. She hears the oral arguments,
and then she waits, and she says, what's the latest
I can have it. The Lieutenant governor says, November first

(50:39):
is our cutoff date. I want more time. They give
her ten more days. She waits till ten to twenty
minutes before midnight. Once you end, once you go past
the close of business, you've not met that deadline. So,
in a more succinct way, she has violated her oath
of office by depriving the legislative branch it's separate and
equal powers and its ability to appeal and to protest.

(51:02):
These types of judges judgments are rulings from a lower court.
She gamed it up. I'm telling you that there's probably
a more articulate way to express that. But what she
did has has taken away our voice. It has taken
away our legislative separate and equal powers, and even the
executive branch. Even though you don't see the Lieutenant governor
complaining too loudly she has been given. I don't think

(51:24):
really any choice because of those critical deadlines to conduct
it an election.

Speaker 2 (51:28):
It'd be an interesting case. And see what if, in fact,
this gets to that point. We don't know if it
will yet a lot of people calling for it. Interesting
to see how they lay this all up. Yeah, yeah,
let's take a break and when we'll come back with
more of your thoughts eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero on your cell phone dial pound two fifty,
say hey Rod or leave it's comment on our talk
back line. More coming up on the Rod and Gregg Show.

(51:50):
Let's go to the phones right now as we continue
our discussion on this judges ruling. We go to get
my mouse working properly.

Speaker 1 (51:57):
Let's go to Walter.

Speaker 2 (51:59):
We go there it is all right, Walter, go ahead, Walter,
Thanks for calling.

Speaker 4 (52:04):
Yes, I have a question as to whether we can
drow up a class action lawsuit against this Diana and
people back in Washington and this group here in sol
It you know, for Jerry.

Speaker 1 (52:21):
Manderin you know, thank you for the call, Walter. The
litigation against Judge Diana Gibson. Diana Gibson, not Debbie Gibson
from the Gibson or former state Representative Francis.

Speaker 2 (52:38):
Gibson, Diana Relation, Diana Gibson.

Speaker 1 (52:40):
Judge Diana Gibson. You can't sue the judge, although the
judge can be impeached if the if the legislature hears
from the people and there is a demand that this
be this wrong be righted. I think that there is.
I think that I I think it can happen.

Speaker 4 (52:56):
I do.

Speaker 1 (52:56):
I I'm not I'm not pessimistic about that, but I
do think it takes a community to come out and
expect their legislators to address this. As far as assuing
the entity, boy, the entity is a complicated one. It's
got it raised over two million dollars from back in
eighteen to do it. It's this Catherine Kanter. They're from Chicago,
they got a long history ACLU. Gavin Newsom's pack a

(53:18):
lot of people. They it'd be hard to get them
to litigate.

Speaker 2 (53:22):
Shutdown is about to come to an end. The House
prepared to vote on it. We'll keep rye on it
in the coming hour. Eighty eight. Yes, the Democrats ninety
six to zero, but that's going to change. They've got
a ways to go. But we're keeping our eye on it.
We probably will get a vote here within the next
ten or fifteen minutes. Final tabulation.

Speaker 1 (53:38):
Well, the Democrats don't know how to do anything but
be performative.

Speaker 3 (53:42):
There's nothing there's.

Speaker 1 (53:43):
Something substantive about it they've got and so they're going
to throw and they're gonna throw tantrums and there'll be
tons of antics going on here. But at the end
of the day, after they're are all that said and done,
they I do believe they have the votes to get
it passed and see this government reopened finally, and we
don't stop talking about the fact that this Democrats put
us through the longest close government closure in history and recklessly,

(54:06):
wrongfully and we as the as the people, need to
remember that to that front of the moment.

Speaker 2 (54:12):
And the question is, Greg, I go back a couple
of days ago, I asked, what was it all about?

Speaker 16 (54:15):
What was it for?

Speaker 2 (54:16):
Nothing's been achieved except pain for people affected by this.

Speaker 1 (54:21):
Well there's been pain. But one of the parts that's
frustrating is that you've got a lot of Democrats here
that are going to that think it's still fine to
argue against opening the government. They're still going to complain
that they're opening it and they're mad that they're doing it.
That should be that should be such a stigma. They
should not even confess that they should be embarrassed at
this point, and a lot aren't. They still want to

(54:42):
keep that government closed.

Speaker 2 (54:44):
Well, there's been a lot of media coverage about this,
of course, and most of the media's message has been
don't blame the Democrats for the shutdown. But in the
last couple of days things started to change. Joining us
on our Newsmaker line to talk about that is Curtis how,
managing editor at NewsBusters. Curta, Yes, thanks, what happened? What changed?

Speaker 9 (55:03):
Well, I think it's because they couldn't have continued this game,
the charade much longer. The shutdown was different than previous shutdowns,
you know, you think back to the shutdown of twenty
seventeen into eighteen and the one in twenty thirteen. In
the one in the nineties, the liberal media were very
clearly the main focus in thesis of any shutdown coverage

(55:26):
was driving home the point that any pain or dysfunction
in the country was caused by Republicans and their ill
perceived and just outright wrong views. Whereas this one because
the Democrats willingly chose to shut down the government over
Obamacare subsidies and refusing to continue biden araspending levels. They

(55:50):
kind of overly only focused on the fallout of said
shutdown in the network eating newscasts. In October, we found
less than twenty percent of shutdown stories mentioned that Senate
Democrats had repeatedly voted against, except for three a clean
continuing resolution. But once it would became clear that the
shutdown was over with, I think the strategy shifted because

(56:15):
they were mad that their team caved. I think that
is why they gave up the ghost, and they came
out swinging Monday morning saying that they had given up
on their whole strategy to drive the country into a shutdown,
that they had backed away from what they had been
demanding because they were hoping that their team would hold
out much a lot longer for this. But I think

(56:37):
the reason, guys, I think the key takeaway here is
the airline situation became simply untenable and it started trickling.

Speaker 15 (56:46):
Up to the swamp.

Speaker 1 (56:49):
You know even that even what you've just described, which
I agree with wholeheartedly, that media narrative is one where
when it was a Republican not getting to sixty votes
to have a continued resolution. It was all the damage
being caused by these Republicans holding the America hostage and
the stories of what that meant. When you see them
disappointed that the Democrats weren't willing to use that kind

(57:12):
of leverage against American people for what they wanted. Yeah,
they're critical of the of the Democrats, but in maybe
a different way. I think it still shows that they
are trying to create a narrative where the Republicans are
still the villain in this story. Or am I just
paranoid at this point?

Speaker 4 (57:29):
Oh?

Speaker 9 (57:30):
No, I certainly think you're right that when there is
critical coverage of Democrats in the liberal elite media, legacy media,
it is not because you know, saying you guys are
wrong on policy and maybe the Republicans or moderates or
anyone else has a point. No, No, it's because you're
not going far enough to the left. You know, so

(57:51):
often when you watch these Sunday interviews and a Democrats
when they do face challenging questions, it is often because
they're hitting them. They're hammering them from the left. You're
not going to see Bernie Sanders be hit from the left,
you're going to see people like Jaheen Shaheen and Tim
Kaine and so on and so forth be hit from
the left. So I definitely think that is part of

(58:11):
the narrative and the one thing that they did see
during the shutdown as well. I did another study at NewsBusters.
I looked at five Capitol Hill journalists, and by a
two to one margin, I found that their social media
accounts are x feeds, were complaining more about the speaker,
Mike Johnson, keeping the House out of session than the
actual effects of the shutdown. So the other thing that
the media were trying to do during the shutdown was

(58:33):
somehow trying to put the blame on the shutdown on
Mike Johnson and the House for not somehow staying in session,
as if to suggest that the House standing around and
members of Congress running to the Cannon Office building atrium
where all the networks do their live shots to complain
about Mike Johnson were somehow going to move the needle
when it didn't and Mike Johnson in the House. They

(58:55):
left before the shutdown with the clean cr you know,
by technically it had bypart is in support, you know,
with Jared Golden the main Democrat voting for it, So
you know that part really didn't really, it was not really.

Speaker 7 (59:07):
Part of the equation.

Speaker 9 (59:08):
And also the separate discussion about healthcare costs that people
hundreds of per percent, about the poverty line needed subsidies,
being a commentary on the state of the ACA.

Speaker 2 (59:18):
Yeah, here's an example of what you've been talking about, Curtis.
A headline I think this was in the New York
Times as of yesterday, a columnist as reclined, very liberal columnists,
but the headline says Democrats were winning the shutdown. Who
said they were winning the shutdown? Curtis, in the media,
we wanted them.

Speaker 9 (59:40):
I was going to say, we were just about you
think of the Scooby dow line. I was just about
to get away with it if it weren't for you
meddling kids. Yes, it's so stupid, but I think now,
you know, in the timing of the shutdown definitely was
part of the equation to guys, you know, coming up
on the holidays, you know, with travel and the fact

(01:00:02):
that this involved their traffic controllers and snap benefits, and
you know, separately for us, you know, gives conservatives this
laid bear the idea of just how many Americans are
dependent on things like food stamps. I mean, that's just
I mean, that's just it. It's untenable. You're seeing stories
about people having food stamps, having been on food stamps
for thirty or four years, and you think that's not

(01:00:25):
what this was created to do. Obviously the left likes
them because then it creates dependency.

Speaker 1 (01:00:30):
So here's that. I read this. I'm back on a
New York Times page and I don't see it on
here now, But earlier today they were describing the senators
voting for this opening the government as Democrat defectors. Now,
that same paper and the regime media would call Republicans
that flip over to vote with the majority of Democrats
as statesmen or a statesman like reaching across the aisle.

(01:00:53):
They put noble Yeah, noble intentions behind Republicans that team
with Democrats and a majority of Democrats. They are describing
Democrats who reach across the aisle and join Republicans as defectors.
Does anyone notice other than us in this conversation, the
hypocrisy there and in the narrative, and how hypocritical it is.

Speaker 9 (01:01:15):
Yeah, people who put party a country over party. Yes,
you know, and that was a lot of the sudden
respect bias that we saw, you know, last week with
the passing of Dick Cheney. You know, he was no
longer a war criminal who should have been hung. He
was he was a noble statesman. Because he voted against
Doland Trump of the Republicans, he supported Kamala Harris. All

(01:01:39):
sins were forgiven. I mean, John mccainney was the same
thing until unless he ran for president. When he wasn't
running for president, he was one of their favorites because
he did the thumbs down and all that other stuff.
You know, that doesn't excuse obviously Republicans not having a
message or coming across is disorganized. But in this case
on the shutdown, the Republicans were, you know, in terms

(01:01:59):
of message discipline. I was pretty impressed because usually the Rights,
the one that kind of has these splitting factions, credited
Leader Soon and Speaker Johnson, obviously the president, but this
one was really member. This was really on Congress to
keep everybody in line, and they definitely did. But you're right,
that is a long bias that goes back decades since
the media researcher that it has been around in nineteen
eighty seven and well before that, where yeah, liberal Republicans

(01:02:23):
are framed a statesmen and moderate Democrats. The liberal media are,
you know, almost turning their heads at their viewers and saying,
what is wrong with these peoples?

Speaker 16 (01:02:32):
Open the government?

Speaker 2 (01:02:33):
That's the most on our Newspaker line. That is Curtis
Howkey's with the Media Research Center right here on Talk
Radio one oh five to nine Cannai Smart Coming Up Center.
The House has just passed vote to concur with the
Cenate resolution ending the government shut down after a record
what forty forty one days. I think that's where we
ended up. The House voting tonight two twenty two in

(01:02:55):
favor of concurring with the Center resolution, those against two
oh nine, and I look, Greg, I'm looking at the
numbers right now. Six Democrats crossed the lines and decided
to vote with the Republicans. Two Republicans voted with the
Democrats against it, but six Democrats have crossed party lines
and decided to vote in favor of opening up the government.

Speaker 1 (01:03:16):
Again, folks, I'm here to report that there are six
apparently level headed Democrats in the House of Representats, and
there are two hundred and seven that want to see
you suffer. Yeah, okay, so that and then we have
how many Republicans we got what was it? How many Republicans?

Speaker 2 (01:03:31):
But all I know is two Republicans crossed over and voted.

Speaker 1 (01:03:35):
So there's two Republicans. To find out their names because
apparently they want us, they want us to suffer too.
I don't like those will Republican no votes now? I
believe greg they will put I don't know, is it
a resolution of bill? Whatever it is, will zip it
on order to the White House, and the President could
be signing it tonight. I mean, I'm going I'm sure
that that's a You know what I gotta say you,

(01:03:56):
I love the physical nature of the legislative process. That
these are bills. You don't send an email and say
sign it. These are actual physical copies. They have to
be delivered physically from one chamber to the other. They
have to have their sign they have to be voted
on your either your speaker, your speaker pro tem has
to sign it. They have to deliver it back to
the Senate that they receive it. They do it, then

(01:04:17):
it physically has to be taken to the White House.
The day you start to electronically transfer all this good night, Irene. Okay,
it is not going to be good. You can't do it.
You must, whether it's our state legislature or in the Congress.
You keep that physical nature of the process. It is
a way to keep the paper trail true and to
make sure that skulldugeryel there's lots of it. Less of

(01:04:40):
it happens when you have the physical copies of the
bills that you have to pass and then move along
for a signature.

Speaker 2 (01:04:45):
You know what, Greg, I think some praise needs to
go to Mike Johnson, and particularly to John Thune. Now
a lot of people when he was name majority leader
of the Senate had some questions about him, but I
think he has come through on this, and both the
House and Senate Republican leadership stayed strong, stayed true, They
did not back down.

Speaker 1 (01:05:03):
It was a critical moment and I and there have
been many of those moments earlier, and you know this
like this last year and before where we saw our
more strident and more conservative Republicans that could not get
on board with a bill that they said was spending
any amount that they thought was irresponsible, and so they
wouldn't they wouldn't sign up. They'd team up with the
Democrats because they wouldn't even if it was a paired

(01:05:24):
back bill. They thought the Republicans were spending too much,
and so they would they would team up with the Democrats,
which didn't get us anywhere. And on the on the
on the Senate side, we'd have these familiar Rhino senators,
the Republicans that would always team up with the Democrats.
And so even if you had a majority, you felt
like we were still in the minority because we had
these small micro minorities that would team up with the

(01:05:46):
Democrats for whatever reason, even if it was a good cause.
At the end of the day, you didn't see progress.
What you saw happened this time was nobody really liked
the Continuing Resolution. It wasn't people weren't clicking their heels,
but they were not going to shut down the government.
And they were going and they they knew that there
was important things that the big, beautiful bill did that
they didn't want to see reversed. They held to their guns,
hats off, as you say to Speaker Johnson. With one

(01:06:08):
of the narrowest majorities in congressional hit in US history,
in the Congress and Majority leaders soon and keeping those
Rhinos that love teaming up with the Democrats keeping with us.

Speaker 2 (01:06:20):
You know, the media out there is going to say
this was all about those courageous Democrats who are trying
to save Obamacare extend the subsidies. Right, Not true, I
if you go to its core, Greg In my opinion,
this was just another shot at Donald Trump. The Democrats
had to prove since Joe Biden was worthless, had to

(01:06:41):
prove the the American people that they know how to fight.
They hate Donald Trump. I mean, I don't know how
you wake up every morning hating someone the way these
Democrats do, but they do. And they needed to show
their baits. See, we can fight. And it's more than Obamacare.

Speaker 1 (01:06:58):
It is Trump d syndrome two on steroids. And the
thing is that somehow, or a lot somehow, probably the
regime media's help, they don't get. That's great to appeal
to a base. The base is not a majority of
any vote that you're going to win an election, whether
it's local, whether it's national, you know, presidential election, You're
not going to win on a base alone. You have
to bring people together. It's an effort of addition how

(01:07:21):
the American people are not showing I think a more
collective disdain for the Democrats that have shut down this government.
How they're still voting no to keep because they want
the government to stay shut That should be such a
shameful vote. They don't have the courage to do that.
They would be afraid of the electric back they're electoral backlash,

(01:07:41):
but they're not. And again, a base doesn't win you
an election. You have to go beyond your base. And
the Democrats don't care. And I don't think they get
they're held accountable the same way or not.

Speaker 2 (01:07:51):
Well, a lot of work to do, As Mike Johnson
said in his comments this morning before the vote, We've
got a busy several days, if not weeks. They're going
to beat some long days and weeks ahead of us,
and I hope down this it has exposed Snap, it
has exposed the failure of Obamacare. I think for the
Republicans to show a strong position heading in the next fall,

(01:08:12):
they need to address both issues. Greg absolutely, there's no
doubt that those two programs, SNAP and Obamacare are a mess.
They're causing the American people billions of dollars. The Republicans
need to come up with a plan.

Speaker 1 (01:08:25):
And I think that we don't have the luxury of
just saying no, like democrats do, or saying democrats are
bad and that's all we have to say, like they
do about Republicans. We have to come up with solutions,
and we should. We should actually show up with the solutions.

Speaker 2 (01:08:37):
And we can. We can. All right, more coming up.
It is the Rotting Greg Show right here on Utah's
Talk Radio one oh five nine an rs.

Speaker 1 (01:08:44):
Yeah, if you missed, you missed a segment. You don't
want to miss anything. I'm telling you. Every one of
these hours have been power packed today.

Speaker 2 (01:08:49):
They've been busy.

Speaker 1 (01:08:50):
They sure have.

Speaker 2 (01:08:51):
The House, by the way, if you didn't catch abb
these newscasts a moment ago, have voted now to reopen
the government. They passed the bill that the Senate passed yesterday,
though they to concur with it today. And we're seeing
that the President will sign that bill as soon as
it goes from the Capitol down to the White House
and he'll sign it. And if that happens between now
and then, we'll try and bring it to you live
if we can.

Speaker 1 (01:09:11):
Yeah, And I think I think the the you know,
the the kabuki. Political kabuki theater that came at a
heavy price for a lot of people needs to end.
And to those Democrats that are still holding out and
they're still mad that they're not able to use the
American people as leverage, as they've called it callously, I
hope we all remember this in November. I hope we

(01:09:32):
remember this in the elections. And you know, I just
think that the media is certainly not the REGI media
is certainly not going to tell you the real story.
But we will, We're gonna keep We're gonna let you
know these these are people that don't have any interest
in the everyday American people. They see them as pawns
to promote themselves in their power.

Speaker 2 (01:09:49):
Well, let's move on to a different story, another interesting story.
This is a case settled just a couple of days ago,
or ruling in the case, I should say, we're a
federal appeals court is now barring and high school district
greg from enforcing policies that their opponents. They compel students
to use preferred pronouns for students who trans identify, so

(01:10:09):
you have to refer them as to how they want
to be referred to or you can be kicked out
of school.

Speaker 1 (01:10:16):
Very confusing to me.

Speaker 2 (01:10:17):
It is well joining us on our Newsmaker line to
straighten all of this out hopefully. As Sarah Parshall Perry,
she is Vice president of Defending Education. Sarah, great to
have you back on the show. Give us a background
on this story and what happened.

Speaker 10 (01:10:29):
Yeah, so we.

Speaker 7 (01:10:30):
Actually sue the old A Tangi School districts two and
a half years ago. We have member parents who have
children in the district and what concerned us very much
with the fact that there is a policy banning the
use of biologically accurate sex pronouns to refer to transgender
students by their chosen pronouns and their chosen names. Well,

(01:10:52):
unless you ascribe to gender ideology, you are not going
to be finding yourself in a position to be, unfortunately,
anything other than forced to express a message with which
you do not disagree. And the Supreme Court has said
over and over again, the First Amendment doesn't just protect

(01:11:12):
your right to speak, it protects your right not to
be forced to speak. And that's something we saw directly
at issue here. This anti harassment policy was so broad
in scope that it not only required the use of
mandatory pronouns and chosen names that were biologically inaccurate. That

(01:11:33):
anti harassment policy also attached to the personal devices of
children after they left the school day, So when they
were out of the custody of these schools, specifically throughout
the district, back home with their parents, they could still
be tarred and feathered for misgendering an individual online who

(01:11:56):
happened to be enrolled or teach at the school. That
incredibly onerous overreach by a government school. And so we
were incredibly encouraged that just a few days ago, by
a vote of ten to seven, the end Box six
Circuit rules in our favor that not only did the
school have no control over children when they were home

(01:12:19):
with their parents under the fourteenth Amendment, under the First Amendment,
they couldn't be forced to use pronouns that they believed
were inaccurate. They wrote over and over again that listen,
pronouns convey a message. They have put their thumb on
the scale of that message, and that is something the
Constitution prohibits.

Speaker 1 (01:12:39):
So here's what confuses me. Beauties in the eye of
the beholder. As I read this and I've listened to
the description, here's What gets so messy? What if the
pronouns you're using offend the person that's listening to them.
Let's say that it's a biological mail and I've called
you a mail and it defends them. What if they
wanted to go buy a shee and I called the

(01:13:01):
machine and that offended the meaning? What pronouns are going
to offend?

Speaker 8 (01:13:06):
Who?

Speaker 10 (01:13:06):
Is there?

Speaker 1 (01:13:07):
Is there a way to define that? Because someone might
be offended that you didn't use their preferred pronoun. They
might be offended that you that you did use it.
I don't know what, I don't know who. If this
does this apply across the board? Nobody? Everybody's going to
get offended, So just gear up and be okay? Or
is there a or is the biological use of someone's
gender the policy?

Speaker 7 (01:13:29):
You know, it's interesting that you should say that this
is what happens when we sort of dismantle biological reality.

Speaker 3 (01:13:35):
That's crazy.

Speaker 1 (01:13:36):
It's crazy.

Speaker 7 (01:13:37):
Then you get into philosophical exercises like this, realize there's
no self limiting principle.

Speaker 4 (01:13:43):
No.

Speaker 7 (01:13:43):
What What the ultimate fool crumb is here is if
you're in a government school and the government says you
were only allowed to say X and you say I
can't say X because my belief dictate. Why the school
has absolutely no constitution right to muzzle you, and what
governs there is the ability to speak in accordance with

(01:14:06):
your beliefs. Listen, we just saw a Supreme Court case
argued about two weeks ago in a case called Child's
versus Salazar that deals with a counselor in the state
of Colorado who has patients come to her for unwanted
gender dysporia and same sex attraction. She wants to be
able to counsel in accordance with her best clinical practices,

(01:14:27):
her clinical beliefs, her religious beliefs, her political beliefs, and
what the state of Colorado has done. And Colorado is
a consistently bad after when it comes to free speech.
It's made multiple trips to the Supreme Court. What it's
tried to argue is you can't counsel in accordance with
your beliefs. You can only affirm sexual orientation and gender identity.

(01:14:49):
So here we see a practice, the private practice subject
to government regulation and in our case, a private student
subject to government regulation. But in both contacts, the First
Amendment is very explicit about the right to be able
to communicate only those messages with which you believe, And

(01:15:09):
unfortunately it looks like Olatangi schools stuck their thumb on
the scale. But what we're encouraged about was that this
case is going to ultimately create better case law in
other schools across the country as well.

Speaker 2 (01:15:22):
Sarah, What would happen to a student if, in fact
they violated this policy that has now been struck down.
Would they be kicked out of school? What would they
have to do? Sarah?

Speaker 7 (01:15:32):
Yeah, it was actually pretty autocratic and orwellian. These were
students who could be separated from school. They could be
they could be detained, they could be expelled. They would
have notes put in their records. This is something that
can track a students during the pendency if their entire education,

(01:15:52):
your education record follows you all the way into high school.
What you're doing is essentially marking these students with a
scarlet letter to say, these are individuals who are critical
of gender identity because of their sincerely held religious beliefs.
And that's something from which a student has very little recourse.
Once there is a statement of disciplinary action in an

(01:16:13):
individual's record, it takes a lot of work through a
statutory law called FURPA to try to go back and
get the record corrected. So what they were doing is
marking these kids for differential treatment and singling them out
for being disfavored specifically because of what they believe, and
that is totally onerous to our constitutional republic.

Speaker 1 (01:16:37):
Two issues that have emerged just recently that I think
are related to this. I believe there is a Supreme
Court ruling that said that the United States can require
a visa or a passport to identify someone by their
biological gender. And then you have the International Olympic comm Me.
I believe that it is said that they're only letting
the biological male or female compete in the male or

(01:16:59):
female Olympic sports. When you have when you have kind
of what I feel is like a pendulum maybe coming
back towards sanity. Does that color and all this. Does
this school district just run and hide and feel embarrassed
for the moment they lived in? Or are they fighting this?
I mean, how do they comport their policy with some
of the other things that are happening around the country.

Speaker 7 (01:17:20):
Well, it's interesting you should say that, because now the
second step of this litigation is going back down to
the district court and actually getting the school district to
comply with the Sixth Circuit rooming. So this is not
yet over. So at this point we have to wait
and see if the school district is going to double
down or whether or not it's going to take its
ball and go home and recognize that now all of

(01:17:42):
the seventeen judges on the Sixth Circuit have weighed in
and they have determined that, yes, the policy is unconstitutional.
You know, the Supreme Court has weighed in on the
First Amendment time and again. We have seen a First
Amendment case in the last sixth Supreme Court term. Love
the First Amendment. It is very clear even the liberals

(01:18:04):
have both hit occasionally with the Conservatives on First Amendment protections,
It's very clear they do treat this as a first principle,
one of our first and most important enumerated rights. It's
not something to be taken lightly simply because you're dealing
with a young middle school student who doesn't want you
say something with which he does not agree. And that

(01:18:25):
is just a principle of good American governance. And that's
being fidelity, that's expressing fadelity to the Constitution itself and
everything the Supreme Court's written for more than two hundred years.

Speaker 2 (01:18:38):
Sarah, thank you very much. Interesting case coming out of
Ohio and the debate over pronouns.

Speaker 1 (01:18:42):
Greg look Man commentsen just got takeover here, we got
we've got, we got signs that people are, you know,
getting their their bearings back. So hopefully this is the
school district they can get the courts to force them
to stop the nonsense.

Speaker 2 (01:18:56):
What a ridiculous rule? All right? Final segment of the
Rod and Greg Show coming up right here on Utah's
Talk Radio one oh five nine, kayn Ars, final segment
with you today and no, mister Hughes, I was not
around when this happened.

Speaker 1 (01:19:08):
But did you know this must be a medieval story?

Speaker 10 (01:19:12):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (01:19:12):
Not quite?

Speaker 1 (01:19:13):
Okay, not quite.

Speaker 2 (01:19:15):
Back in seventeen ninety three, okay, close, I wasn't around.
A penny could get you a biscuit, a candle, or
a piece of candy. These days, many sit in drawers
or glass yards and are basically cast aside as collected
as lucky keepsakes. The lucky penny. Guess what today the

(01:19:35):
last day the US Mint in Philadelphia is printing pennies.
Really pennies killed, he said, no one uses them.

Speaker 1 (01:19:44):
We do use pennies. I have a penny in my car.
I keep pennies because do you well, you know what's
gonna happen. They're gonna it's gonna you know what they're
gonna do. They're gonna raise everything four cents. That's what's
gonna happen. Everything goes up four cents, with the with
the with the disappearance of the penny.

Speaker 2 (01:19:58):
The president ordered this, and here's his here's why you
said this? He he says, it costs it costs nearly
four cents per penny to make one penny.

Speaker 1 (01:20:07):
Well, there you go, say, everything gets ruined. I hate that.

Speaker 2 (01:20:12):
Isn't that crazy? Isn't that crazy? Here's another story? How
about this?

Speaker 7 (01:20:15):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (01:20:15):
The GMO Ford, his name is Jim Farley, is issuing
a wake up call Greg to Americans. Speaking to a
Business Edition podcast, Farley said, listen to this. Greg Ford
has five thousand open mechanic positions right now that hasn't
it hasn't been able to fill despite an eye popping

(01:20:39):
one hundred and twenty thousand dollars salary.

Speaker 1 (01:20:43):
They can't they can't fill it, or they can't don't
know about that.

Speaker 2 (01:20:45):
They can't fill it.

Speaker 1 (01:20:46):
They're gonna fill it. People are gonna hear about this.
They're gonna come in drows. They just didn't know. I
don't know what. I don't know what they're what want
ads they were reading, but they didn't see this one
in there. They're gonna go. They're gonna come now.

Speaker 2 (01:20:57):
Wow, one hundred and twenty thousand dollars, five thousand jobs
open at ford plants around the country.

Speaker 1 (01:21:02):
Well, I'm gonna tell you. I have a friend who
has a you know, it's an intergenerational uh auto auto shop,
you know, repair shop. Yes, and they've had a difficult
time as time's gone on of keeping auto mechanics on
premise because you can make a lot more money doing
other things that aren't as maybe as labor intensive as
repairing cars, or you can get the dealerships to pay

(01:21:22):
way more. And I'm gonna tell you right now, if
you've got a if you got a job paying.

Speaker 2 (01:21:26):
What I would imagine, there's some great benefit.

Speaker 1 (01:21:30):
Sure, I mean, I think you'll see a giant move.

Speaker 2 (01:21:33):
I hope, but I hope.

Speaker 1 (01:21:34):
So we need look, there is there is dignity and
work in labor and I'm done with this whole. You know,
we're not there's jobs we won't do, and we're not
smart enough to do the other jobs. So you need
a bunch of h one b one visas forget all that.
We can do these jobs. Our young people can do
these jobs.

Speaker 2 (01:21:51):
If if they want to work and if they want.

Speaker 10 (01:21:54):
To do them.

Speaker 1 (01:21:55):
Yeah. And but another part was always the wage. You
gotta have a you gotta have a wage that makes sense.
That wage makes all the sense in the world to me.
You know, I'm telling you, these kids are gonna do this.

Speaker 2 (01:22:03):
You know, Ford probably has a factory like in Tennessee
or Kentucky. If you're making one hundred and twenty thousand
dollars a year, you're doing all right.

Speaker 1 (01:22:10):
You're doing great, I say, especially, is that's the start. Yeah, Yeah,
that's a good that's a good gig.

Speaker 2 (01:22:15):
That's a good gig.

Speaker 1 (01:22:16):
I'm gonna tell my nephews about that right now. I
got a nephew's on a baseball scholarship next year and
he's studying diesel mechanic.

Speaker 2 (01:22:22):
It's smart.

Speaker 1 (01:22:23):
Yeah, that's why he wants he's a workhorses.

Speaker 2 (01:22:25):
I have a nephew who wants to be an electrician, yes,
and some training. Right now I'm being an electrician.

Speaker 1 (01:22:31):
I'm telling you that I'm excited for these young men
in my family that are that are looking at at
jobs that are actual work because the world is their oyster.

Speaker 4 (01:22:39):
It is.

Speaker 1 (01:22:39):
There's not a bunch of people like them, and they
got high work ethics. They work hard, they do good jobs,
and they want to do it. It's they enjoy it.

Speaker 2 (01:22:47):
So you're around all the time, are you hearing it
all here in the state that they're businesses? Like you're
talking about those those trade jobs. Are people having a
tough time filling them? Are you hearing any some are?

Speaker 1 (01:22:59):
They are having a tough time. But again, I think
his wages increase, which they are. That's you're going to see.
You're going to see that. And we just need, like
these high school counselors to stop just pointing to colleges
and they got to start letting these kids know all
the great opportunities that are available, including in the in
the trades, because these are these are phenomenal jobs. I

(01:23:20):
grew up in a in a in a part of
this country where being a member of the trades really
was was the most ignorant that was the toughest job.
But if you did the toughest job, you were the
toughest guy, and you were the one most respected. There
was no nobody looked down on hard work, no one.

Speaker 2 (01:23:35):
It was it was.

Speaker 1 (01:23:36):
There was dignity and work, and we got to get
back to that.

Speaker 2 (01:23:39):
And hopefully the push there. The Davis Applied Technology Center,
I think this is what's called had a big open
health the other day. I wonder how one they were
trying to show people the job opportunities that are out there,
and there are a plenty, yes there are.

Speaker 1 (01:23:52):
And again U tas in such a great position because
we have a young emerging work force. A lot of
states don't have young people ready to learn these things,
these trades and do it. So it's all up upside.
If we get it right, all right, that does it
for us tonight, Head up, shoulders back. May God bless
you and your family and this great, great country of ours.
The government should be reopened anytime now. We'll talk to

(01:24:14):
you tomorrow

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

The Rod & Greg Show News

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

.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: Raction to Judge's Decision on Maps; Salt Lake Country Republican Party; Networks Admit Dems caused Shutdown

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;}On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

All Episodes