The Rod and Greg Show: Schumer Shutdown Causing Democrat Infighting

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
And you, sir, can you have quite the weekend?

Speaker 2 (00:02):
Yeah, I'm gonna take a few days off, head down
to Vegas.

Speaker 1 (00:05):
Traviganza City. Yeah. I don't know if you know those folks,
but once you get this guy in front of a
craps table or you get that roulette wheel, you can't
drag him away. You can't fold that guy. Man, he will.
He's just he's putting chips everywhere.

Speaker 2 (00:18):
I don't know why I spent this money, but going
down to see the Cowboys play the Raiders. Yeah, I
don't know why I'm spending the money.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
He's not there. He's there to see good old football.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
Go to old football. Yeah. Yeah, it's fun down there.
Never seen the stadium driven by it many times now
and now get a chance, you know what we may
do as well. Yeah, I've heard a lot about this.
We may go to the sphere. Oh yes, and they're
playing and they're playing The Wizard of Oz, the original one.
And I'm told that's quite a show.

Speaker 1 (00:42):
So I did. I went there and there was they
had a movie that was made like for the Spirits,
Like no, no, it was really good because it's like
it was like how life started on Earth, like It
started with little anyway, you're surrounded by this bi uh huh.
The thing it's there's like dinosaurs walking behind you. You can
see him in peripheral and then they walk past you
and it's it is weird. Yeah, it's it's something else.

(01:05):
It's a real it's a sight to behold.

Speaker 2 (01:07):
I hear it is experience. So we may do that,
but it's good to be with you on this Friday afternoon.
We have got a lot to get to. Are we
about to write the first chapter in the death of Obamacare?
We could be. I think, well, maybe.

Speaker 1 (01:19):
We should hope. I look, I have scars on my body,
political scars that you might be able to see from
fighting Obamacare, expansion of the states, and Utah trying to
prevent that nightmare from coming to our state. We were
successful for a while, but ultimately we were defeated by
a statewide ballot. But we knew back then. We knew
We've known for so long this thing was a Ponzi scheme.

(01:41):
It was never going to work. But I think the
shutdown gave us an insight new.

Speaker 2 (01:45):
Information into it. We'll talk about that, We'll talk about
the housing crisis and what does immigration have to do
with the housing crisis. We'll break that down a little
bit later on one of our good friends, Liz Peak, will
join us and kind of take a look at the
week and what happened with the shutdown. So we've got
a great show coming your way, and we invite you
to be a part of it. Eight eight eight five
seven O eight zero one zero on your cell phone
dial pound two fifty and say hey Rod, or just

(02:07):
go to our download the iHeartRadio app and you can
leave us a message on our talk back line. Yep,
I h and easy yeah. And by the way, I
just I do.

Speaker 1 (02:16):
I love the calls, and I love the talk backs,
and I just think having the gone going conversation. We
try to, I mean, we like it throughout the show,
but five o'clock we really try to make sure you
you our listeners have a chance to opine. I've never
been disappointed.

Speaker 2 (02:29):
All right, let's get the show started off. Greg, I
have a question for you. This comes from the file
of what would you do? Okay, you ready for this one? Well,
what would you do?

Speaker 1 (02:39):
In this case? It would Quarto Rock will do. That's
my that's my north Star.

Speaker 2 (02:43):
A Tennessee mom has allowed her teenage daughter to change
her birth name, which is Dixie, after kids at school
mocked her for it and accused her of racism in
supporting the Civil War. Hold is this child, I'll tell
you that in just a second. She gets made fun

(03:04):
of all the time, says her mom, explaining why she
led her sixteen year old scrap her name. And I
said yes, no questions asked whatsoever. Dixie now goes by
the name Sky. And she was constantly being bullied and
taunted by names between classes. She said, they'd call me
things like Dixie Dust the high school student. They just

(03:27):
give it all sort of a crude meeting and they
called me that. In the hallway. She went to her
mom said Mom, could I change my name my birth name?
And her mom has said yes, and it will cost
her a couple hunder bucks apparently legally to do that.
But she's changing her name.

Speaker 1 (03:41):
Do you see that? What state that's into Tennessee? Okay,
so maybe in Tennessee that then had this debate about
Dixie College or Dixie have we ever? So this name,
it has its traditions in Utah as some people's names.
I know people, yeah, I know people named and it's
it's not just our older people. I know people that

(04:03):
are peers or even some people are younger than me
that are named Dixie. I we you go down to
saying the southern Utah, you go to Washington County, you'd
have to have a blindfold on to down and see
the word Dixie. There's Dixie Drive, there's Dixie Pharmaca. So
and I've made the argument that this, you know, this
name being so bad and such a stigma. I have
not seen it. I think it's a contrived argument. And

(04:24):
I wonder how many kids are hearing that name and
drawing these really negative connotations. Maybe some, But to change
your name, I don't know. I think it's I don't know.
Maybe Tennessee is different. But if if that story came
out of Utah, I'd say that was over that's a
reaction I see in this state. That is not going
to be the case.

Speaker 2 (04:42):
I think it's an overreaction. I understand what. You know,
she's sixteen years old and teenagers go, you know, their
emotions are all over the place. But let her stand
her ground, teach something. I mean, because if she gets
older and she's still abused for being Dixie, that's not
her fault, I mean being caught being abused. Now, it's
not her fault.

Speaker 1 (04:59):
It's a name, and it's it's a name that is
common or frequent enough, and that to have such a
negative connotation to it, I think is a reach. And
I think that that's part of that whole politically correct
world we have suffered through. And I regret that Dixie
State University is no longer Dixie State. I think Utah
Tech is a very vanilla name.

Speaker 2 (05:19):
Yeah it is.

Speaker 1 (05:20):
I regret that they changed that name. I think it
was a big mistake.

Speaker 2 (05:23):
I'm with it now. Another story today, And I think Target.
Do you ever shop at Target? Well, you don't shop?

Speaker 1 (05:28):
Well, I don't, very I actually don't.

Speaker 2 (05:31):
I don't mind going to Target. I think they're pretty
nice stores.

Speaker 1 (05:34):
Yeah, yeah, the Target.

Speaker 2 (05:35):
Boy, did they blow this one? Are you ready for this?
A new staff policy, part of a program called ten
four is forcing employees to engage with customers more often
and to smile. This is a corporate initiative.

Speaker 1 (05:49):
It's not bad.

Speaker 2 (05:50):
Employees within ten feet of a customer are now required
to smile, make eye contact, wave, and use friendly, approachable
and welcoming body language.

Speaker 1 (06:02):
Well, I think it's odd you have to tell someone
to dole. I was just gonna say, I I don't know,
but if I'm walking somewhere and I make eye contact,
I smile. I mean, I don't. I don't get overly animated,
but I don't.

Speaker 2 (06:15):
I don't.

Speaker 3 (06:15):
You say, how you doing nodile?

Speaker 1 (06:20):
It just sounds like common Curtis.

Speaker 2 (06:21):
But it takes a corporate initiative to get their employees
to smile.

Speaker 1 (06:27):
Yeah, that I think. I think that's just good manners generally.
But the fact you have to make it of corporate
policy seems a bit much.

Speaker 4 (06:35):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (06:35):
Maybe you know I have to tell young kids this now,
maybe they just walk around with a grimace on their
face and don't look at staring at the floor. I
don't know. Well, my kids don't do that, but my
kids are I don't know now their their generation, do
they smile?

Speaker 5 (06:49):
See?

Speaker 1 (06:49):
Yeah, yeah, they do. My kids. I think I think
my children all have well they're adults now, but they
have I think high emotional intelligence. I think they know
how to have a conversation.

Speaker 2 (06:58):
Now here's a question. Great, do you think Target will
place some of its smile watchers in stores to see
if they're being smiled at.

Speaker 1 (07:08):
Yeah they should. You know, remember how if you're a
Walmart greet you have to. It has to be part
of your's a scope of work to greet. If you're
a Walmart greeeder, it to say hi.

Speaker 2 (07:18):
You know, someday I would love to be a Walmart
greeter or a Costco greeter.

Speaker 1 (07:22):
Yeah, yeah, no, Costco greers have to check this receipts.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
You don't want to, well, yeah, but they can flash
them now. And they're real technical, are they. Yeah, you
don't have to shoulder. You have to draw lines fun
to be a greeter.

Speaker 1 (07:34):
Look, I I don't want to be a greeterer, but
I I always appreciate the nice little acknowledgment. And I'm
coming through the store. I think it's a nice little touch.

Speaker 2 (07:43):
I like meeting people and saying hi to people.

Speaker 1 (07:45):
There's a there's a fast food place that I go
through the drive through and they are uniquely very friendly,
like very much just nice. Yeah, it's just very nice.
And I can tell it's different than the normal experience.
And I don't know if it's a company policy or
they just were really good at hiring young people that
have good people skills, But that particular drive fast food restaurant.
I like to go because it's always a warm welcome.

Speaker 2 (08:06):
There are a couple that I enjoy, Chick fil A
and In and Out Burt. Every time you go through
one of those outlets, people are smiling, saying thank you,
really trying to be helpful that there are some others
they feel like you're imposing on them asking for a drink.

Speaker 1 (08:20):
Yep, you're putting them out. I have had that experience.

Speaker 2 (08:24):
So if you work at Target, if you know people
at Target, tell them now they have to smile yes,
what if.

Speaker 1 (08:30):
And use positive body language? I only know if that
means whatever?

Speaker 4 (08:33):
That is?

Speaker 2 (08:34):
What if you're in dart Hips. What if you're in Target,
paint this for you. What if you're in Target and
the employee doesn't smile at you, you get to go
to the bandager, say lodge complaint.

Speaker 1 (08:48):
So I was not smiled. I felt it was very judgy.
It was a very judgy look, you know. And if
you were a Maga hat in there, I wonder if
that's the test.

Speaker 2 (08:56):
If you get the test, wear a Maga hat into
Target if they smile.

Speaker 1 (09:01):
I love it that our rotten Greg hats are read
because you know the red hat alone can trigger some
of these Trump durction syndrome types.

Speaker 2 (09:07):
Again. Yeah, all right, We've got a lot to get
to today. Thanks so much for joining us. Coming up next,
we'll talk about the death of Obamacare. Are we at
the start of it? We'll talk about that coming up
right here on the Rod and Greg Show and Utah's
Talk Radio one oh five nine knrs. Certainly, this shutdown
has I think shed some light on a couple of
issues in this country, certainly the Snap program and maybe

(09:29):
a little bit later on we'll talk more about the
abuses that they found out within this program, in the fraud,
and of course on Obamacare. Is Obamacare is the first
chapter being written I think in the death of Obamacare.
Could be joining us on our Newsmaker line to talk
about that is Mark Tapscott. He is a senior congressional
analyst Washington stand and founder and editor of Hill Faith Blog.

(09:51):
And Mark is joining us on our Newsmaker line right now. Mark,
how are you welcome back to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 4 (09:57):
That's great to be back here, guys.

Speaker 2 (09:59):
We're doing very very well. Mark, Mark, let's talk about this.
I mean, could we be looking maybe hopefully at the
eventual death of Obamacare.

Speaker 4 (10:11):
The people that I talked to in Washington, both on
the Hill and folks in the same tank community and
so forth, they all say, this is if nothing else
has been achieved by the shutdown, it's put public attention
on the fact that Obamacare has been an abusimal failure.

(10:31):
You know, the promise from President Obama was that we
could all keep our plan if we liked it, and
we could all keep our doctors if we liked our doctors.
But the exact opposites happened, and healthcare expenses of thyrogeted
makes sense Obamacare.

Speaker 1 (10:47):
I completely agree. I think if you to sum it up,
when you're in a hole, you got to quit digging.
And what the Democrats were arguing for is you just
have to dig faster inside that hole. And it's not
intuitive to the American people. I love. In your article
you tell about connect reconnecting the consumer people that need
health care delivery with the ones that pay for it.
When you separate that, it seems to get out of
control in terms of cost and quality. How do you

(11:10):
do that? How do you? And so I know, those
catastrophic insurance we can't get, we can't be ready for
maybe the major surgeries or the cancer treatments, but as
far as healthcare delivery that's more common. How do we
connect the consumer or the patient with how they pay
for their care?

Speaker 4 (11:27):
You know, that is a great question, and it's it's
kind of kind of been the fundamental issue at the
heart of the healthcare debate for as long as I
can remember, and I've been up here in d C
covering things for a long time. President Prompt the night
before I believe the shutdown was officially in that posted

(11:50):
on truth Social that he wants to take away all
the money that's going to the Obamacare health care insure
and they're getting billions and billions of dollars through those
tax subsidies, and instead give that money to the consumers
in some sort of prefunded kind of deal I think,

(12:13):
probably like a health savings account, and then the decision
on how you're going to spend your money on your
health care is up to the consumer. And when it's
up to the consumer rather than a third party i eat,
an insurance company or a Medicare bureaucread, the service has
to be more directly satisfactory to the consumer. We can

(12:37):
get to a point like that I think probably the
general satisfaction of our population with healthcare will increase dramatically.

Speaker 2 (12:48):
Mark, what about that? I like that idea, But how
do we ensure that the money given back to the
American people is actually going toward their healthcare? Is a weight?
Is there a way to ensure that? And it's not
being used elsewhere which where it shouldn't be.

Speaker 4 (13:03):
You know, the analogous problem there is with the SNAP program,
and you guys mentioned that, yes, open and point. The
fraud and corruption that has been exposed in that program
is amazing. I'm not to be honest, guys, you know,
I'm just a journalist. I don't don't I don't know

(13:26):
how to do it, but I know there are smart
people in this country that can figure out a way
to do it. The only thing that would keep them
from it is the insurance industry, is lobbying and the
tendency of so many politicians in this town, Republicans and Democrats,
to think that the government is the only way you
can solve anything.

Speaker 1 (13:46):
You know, Mark, you point out, so you got your
ear to the ground. This is an issue Obamacare expand
or Obamacare and and how it's not working. Its failure.
I'm surprised. I is, this dialogue went on about what
the crets were fighting for, and it looks like they
want to send more money to these insurance companies. I
thought that the Democrats hated an insurance company. At least

(14:07):
they're executives. They're all celebrating this Luigi guy that's a
homicidal assassin and killed a healthcare executive. And well, from
what I thought, the Democrats thought that healthcare companies and
healthcare executives were the bad guys. How do they did
they even attempt to reconcile those different narratives coming from
their party or the people on the left.

Speaker 4 (14:30):
The simple answer is no.

Speaker 2 (14:32):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (14:33):
And I actually did some reporting on the relationship between
healthcare industry political contributions and the present of Congress, and
what I found was fifty eight percent of the political
contributions by the ten biggest healthcare insurers participating in Obamacare,

(14:54):
fifty eight percent of their contributions went to Democrats in
the Senate. And I think that really tells you something
about the actual motive under flying the shutdown, you know,
I mean, it's no exaggeration to say that the healthcare
insurers have got billions and billions of dollars of revenue

(15:17):
at stake and they spent a record of something else.
Are reported a record amount of lobbying in the first
three quarters of this year, lobbying Congress, and I have
no doubt that that lobbying was focused on Hey guys,
you've got to save our subsidies because we need that money.

Speaker 2 (15:34):
Yeah, yeah, Is it true, Mark, that a lot of
that lobbying money goes to Democratic candidates?

Speaker 4 (15:39):
Is that?

Speaker 2 (15:40):
Is that true the Democratic side of the isle?

Speaker 4 (15:43):
Well, you know, that kind of depends on who's in
the lighthouse. And I think the most recent and I
may be wrong about this, but I think I just
read that the lobbying totals from the first half of
the year tended to be more to the Republican oriented lobbyists.
But that's because of who's in the wine house that,

(16:05):
you know. The thing with the Congress, my guess is
that that would be more consistently to the Democrats for
the simple reason they've had a majority in Congress more
frequently than Republicans have. That could be wrong about that.

Speaker 2 (16:22):
Well, we'll keep our eye on it, Mark, and we'll
see how this all develops. We appreciate a few minutes
of your time. Thank you Mark for joining.

Speaker 4 (16:27):
Us, Rod, It's always a pleasure to be on.

Speaker 2 (16:30):
All right, Mark Tapscot joining us on our newsmaker line.
And by the way, if you want to read Mark's article,
you can go to our x page and Eray always
puts a link there if you want to read about
what Mark is saying about the possible the possible death
of a Publicare we only.

Speaker 1 (16:45):
Hope, Yes, we can only hope. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (16:47):
All right, more coming up the Friday edition of The
Rod and Gregg Show right here on Utah's Talk radio
one oh five nine kN rs. Especially for young people
who are trying to get into a home. Can they
afford to get into a home? What are some of
the factors that are involved in all of that? Vice
President JD. Vance was on the Sean Hannity Show last
night and Seawn asked him about the housing shordage and

(17:10):
what's taking place. Here's what he said.

Speaker 6 (17:12):
A lot of young people are saying housing is way
too expensive.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
Why is that?

Speaker 6 (17:17):
Because we flooded the country with thirty million illegal immigrants
who were taking houses that ought by right go to
American citizens. And at the same time, we weren't building
enough new houses to begin with, even for the population
that we had. So what we're doing is trying to
make it easier to build houses, trying to make it
easier to build factories and things like that so that

(17:37):
people have good jobs. We're also getting all of those
illegal aliens out of our country, and you're already seeing
it start to pay some dividend.

Speaker 2 (17:45):
All right. Joining us on our Newsmaker line to talk
more about this issue is Michael Acapawano. He's director of
research at the Federation for American Immigration Reform. Michael, how
are you welcome to the Rod and Greg Show.

Speaker 7 (17:56):
Great to be here, you guys.

Speaker 2 (17:58):
Mike, Well, Michael, let me ask you, what's your reaction
to the comment that you just heard from jd Vance
on the hand of the show last night about some
of the challenges facing the affordable housing market.

Speaker 7 (18:09):
You know, he's absolutely right. Is ever since the Great Recession,
i mean, housing construction collapsed to maybe a third of
what it used to be, but we kept admitting the
same number of legal immigrants, and not only that, but
millions of illegal immigrants at one point every year during
the Biden administration. So there's been no way that uh,
the housing construction could catch up with the number of

(18:31):
people were letting in, and that means higher prices.

Speaker 1 (18:34):
So talking to someone who's who has rentals and has
been in the business for a while, it told me
this just this morning, that that the rental market in
Utah or Salt Lake City market is softening, and had
not seen it soften for quite some time. We're told
in Utah we've got more people in demand of housing,
probably their own homes, bit of housing, than we have
an available available stock. Do you sense that they're that

(18:58):
the that the rental market are softening, that it's not
as hard to get into somewhere as it used to be.

Speaker 7 (19:07):
Well, what we're seeing a lot of now is you
have sudden decreases of the illegal alien population and a
lot of cities that had seen huge increases in the
past couple of years. You're seeing the same thing in
Miami in particular, because that's a place that got a
lot of them, but also Texas, Chicago, Denver cities that
took in a lot of illegal aliens. As they leave

(19:28):
now all of a sudden, a lot of the units
that they occupy because they are renting houses, they see
a decrease, and generally it's at the lower end of
the market. But these people are leaving the market the
same way they're leaving the job market.

Speaker 2 (19:40):
Michael. There is talk of the Trump administration putting some
sort of restrictions on immigration. I noticed today that Texas
Representative Chip Roy wants to introduce a bill that would
freeze all immigration. How much of a difference would it
make if we slowed down immigrants coming into this country
legally and the illegally. We've done so illegally, I think
for now, But what about legal immigration, What if we

(20:02):
slowed that down?

Speaker 7 (20:04):
Well, right now, what you're seeing is we give out
over a million Green cards a year. Half of those
green cards are to people coming into the country who
did not live here, So over half a million people
getting green cards that are new arrivals. But you're also
seeing hundreds of thousands of visas for H one b's
for students, all people who come over here to live.

(20:24):
That number alone, that's half of all new unit construction.
So if you saw a decrease in that, you kind
of see construction absorb the supply that already exists. But
you'd need slow down in that artificial demand that immigration creates,
because right now it's unsustainable.

Speaker 1 (20:40):
How does that so? I agree with you one hundred percent,
just want to be clear, But the other side of
that argument is that we do not have the skilled
labor or the labor force to meet the needs of
a growing economy. If we want the economy to succeed
and we want to grow out of where we've been,
we're going to need a ready workforce, of which we
don't have for a myriad of reasons. Do you accept

(21:04):
that premise or where is that premise wrong?

Speaker 7 (21:08):
What we've seen is that at the same time that
you've had plenty of people saying, you know, we don't
have this skilled workforce, tens of millions of Americans are
out of work and not even looking. You've seen whole
segments of the American population leave the job market because
you know, they've given up for years. Employers have relied
on cheap labor from abroad, and they don't train Americans.

(21:28):
What you need is some kind of market correction where
employers are willing to invest in Americans again rather than
take the easy way out with foreign labor.

Speaker 2 (21:38):
Where do you see this going? Do you see steps
towards trying to address this problem. Michael, what are your
thoughts on the future here.

Speaker 7 (21:46):
Well, we've seen initiatives from the Trump administration, you know,
to promote trade school. I think a lot of you know,
incentives to refocus university education from you know, frivolous degrees
degrees that don't objectively provide a return, two degrees that
you know, pay off for Americans, Degrees in hard sciences,
degrees in engineering and things like that, where those skills

(22:08):
can be put to use. Every year we see i
mean hundreds of thousands of layoffs in the tech industry,
and at the same time we bring in h one b's.
It's clear that in a lot of sectors, the problem
isn't a shortage of labor. It's a shortage of cheap labor.
And that's really what corporations are going for.

Speaker 1 (22:26):
Yeah, I think you're one hundred percent right. And I
think that there is no such thing as jobs that
Americans aren't willing to do. And I don't accept the
premise that there are jobs too sophisticated or complicated that
Americans can't do. I think that's a I think that
we've been painted into a corner as a country and
there needs to be a market shift. How long does
that take? Because if we say right now we're not
going to accept unskilled labor and we're going to enforce

(22:47):
illegal immigration, lot let it happen. And the H one
B one v's is we're going to put a pause,
We're going to do something to put better constraints on that,
to require the workforce to be coached up. That's not
going to mean that tomorrow everything looks good. How long
does it take to get to right this wrong?

Speaker 7 (23:04):
You know, it can take decades. And I mean that's
the reality. But America has been through this before, you know.
And then we had a massive wave of immigration before
essentially World War one, US cut it off, and by
the time that the seventies rolled around, you had the
lowest percentage of foreign born people ever. And the American
economy function completely fine because it had time and that
low immigration period to digest people and also to train

(23:27):
up domestic replacements. And you know, we had hotels in
the nineteen seventies, we had stanators, we had all those
sorts of things. Periods like Japan that have very little
immigration still have those things. It's not it's not a luxury.
But the thing is is you need time for the
economy to digest these people and for Americans to come
up knowing, hey, I can work in this. I'm not

(23:47):
going to be undercut or out competed or simply not
even put up for consideration because the company wants to
hire us.

Speaker 2 (23:54):
Michael, thank you for your time. Enjoyed the weekend. We
appreciate a few minutes. Thank you, Thanks so much. All
right on our newsmaker line. That's Michael Caapalano, director of
research at the Federation for American Immigration Reform. I think
he's right, Greg. You know, we got to slow the
immigration down, no doubt about it in my opinion.

Speaker 1 (24:13):
Yeah, and I'll tell you that you can't. I think
that there needs to be a sane process for legal immigration.
But that number and what that number is, that really
has to be stared at because if it has the
effect of keeping or preventing people from being able to
be trained, prepared, and be able to be a productive
member of the workforce, then we're doing it wrong, aren't we.

(24:33):
So we got we got to get this right, and
I think there's a balance there, and we got to
have laws that work, and it makes sense.

Speaker 2 (24:39):
When it comes to the issue of immigration. Greg The
one thing that I think politicians on both sides of
the aisle have never been asked, what's the correct number
it is? You know, right, how many people should we
allow in this country? What is the number that is
beneficial to America but also to the immigrant What is
that number? No one ever asked that question.

Speaker 1 (24:56):
It's such an important thing because you'll see these H
one b one visas there that are argued for and
advocated for her for so many of these jobs and reasons.
And then you see people that will show online they're
working at seven to eleven, or they're working at places
that are not actually skilled labor. And so there's something
going on there that needs to be I think vetted
and scrutinized a lot more closely.

Speaker 2 (25:17):
All right, Moore, Coming up, it is the Friday edition
of The Roden Gregg Show on Utah's Talk Radio one
oh five nine kN rs. You know, one of our
favorite people on this show now is a district judge
here in the state of Utah. It is Judge Diana Gibson.
Diana Gibson who who what's her name again? Diana Gibson
who has a rule that she, only her has the

(25:38):
authority to determine congressional districts here in the state of
utah's sole responsible.

Speaker 1 (25:42):
When she came down conclusion only she does. She then
delegate it to a left of center group to draw
it all. That was rude. Yeah, it was even ruder
that she gave us someone else the job.

Speaker 4 (25:51):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (25:51):
And well, we've been thinking of a way in which
we could honor her, Yes, and I think we've come
up with the way. Shall we let our listeners hear
it less? Okay, we talked about Diana Gibson. You may
hear that song dirty Die and Nah. I think it
was a nineteen eighty five hit from Michael Jackson, and
I think that's appropriate. We'll just call her dirty Diana.

Speaker 1 (26:09):
Yeah, and it's I'm telling you that there's a line
in there that says, let me be. She needs to
let us be. She needs a let legislature do its job,
let it let the people vote for who they want
to represent them, and let that whole you know, state
constitution thing work the way it's supposed to. She handed
that over to a leftist group is unbelievable. Calling that
a Republican has the receipts to show they're even getting

(26:30):
nng O money. This group that drew those maps.

Speaker 2 (26:33):
Now we can't leave the show of this Friday, and
we're here for a little bit yet. But John Kennedy,
I don't know if Kennedy, Senator Kennedy has a comedy
staff of writers or what. But list of what he
said last night, he was asked about Chuck Schumer and
the pressure on Schumer to get out.

Speaker 8 (26:48):
I thank of Senator Schumer who understand that the moon
wing of his party or a bunch of loons. But
I think his testicles are on back order from Schohn
and t I think how they come in and people
stand up and say, you know, we're tired of this foolishness,
then they'll continue to have an internet warfare.

Speaker 2 (27:10):
You know, I've heard a lot of lines in the
past and you probably have to. But his testicles are
on back order from China.

Speaker 1 (27:18):
Folks. I know it's the family show, but Senator Schumer's
personal inventory being on back order from China, I think
is breaking news. And I think that the Senator Kennedy
is saying something I didn't know before this. So if
Senator Schumer has a back order of certain personal items
that he needs or should have and they're on back
order from China. We're here to report it.

Speaker 2 (27:39):
Well, if that order comes in, does that change Chuck
Schumer in any way?

Speaker 1 (27:45):
What if it comes back.

Speaker 2 (27:46):
If it comes into is a back and what if
too late? Too late, too late for Chuck. A lot
of people are saying.

Speaker 1 (27:54):
That he was he he was in the Senate before
the movie, uh was a Return of the Jedi premiered
in May twenty fifth of nineteen eighty three. He was
he predates the arrival of that movie, that hit movie
from nineteen eighty three. He was already Schumer was actually
I take that, but he was a representative at that point. Yes,
he was in Congress before Return of the Jedi.

Speaker 2 (28:17):
So before Luke Skywalker showed up. Yes, wow, all right,
Mark coming.

Speaker 1 (28:21):
The second movie.

Speaker 2 (28:22):
Yes, our number two of the Rod and Greg show
here on talk radio. Your phone calls, your comments on
the week that was coming.

Speaker 1 (28:28):
Up next, Hunter Biden, this is a guy that's cocaine
got found in the White House. This is the guy
that blew all his money and his family's money on
on women and ville repute and illicit drugs, who broke
federal laws, tax evasion, you name it. There's for this

(28:48):
person to even have the goal, to have a a
to make a moral stand. Yeah, and to wag his
finger at anybody. He I just the detachment And actually
he's a bit. He's got to be crazy that he
thinks anyone's going to take him serious.

Speaker 2 (29:02):
Well, this line tonight, Greg, where he is basically saying
that the assassination of Charlie Kirk down at UVU back
in September served Mega. Yeah, are you kidding me? It's
this assassination bolstered Mega's efforts.

Speaker 1 (29:18):
You know, it exploded that the Democrats are a party
of violence. But we are not a better country or
world without Charlie Kirk in And it didn't serve anyone, Yes, sir,
If anything, it's served that that loon in his crowd,
because you know, the things that Charlie Kirk was doing
were amazing. And as much as I expect, you know,
turning Point USA to continue to go forward, you can't

(29:40):
replace Charlie Kirk. You really can't. And I hope they
have I expect them to have great success. But there
are not two Charlie Kirk walking around the world now.
So that is a loss on any definition.

Speaker 2 (29:52):
Now another name in the news, big news breaking tonight.
Abby just mentioned it at the top of the hour
in her newscast the if you're just joining us now.
The Salley County District Attorney has decided it will not
file charges against Tim Ballard. In a statement from the
DA's office, they said tonight, we want to begin by
recognizing the bravery it takes to come forward and disclose

(30:15):
deeply personal and traumatic experiences. But the office went on
to say, after a thorough investigation, we determined that there
is insufficient admissible evidence to meet the legal burden of proof.
That's a big story.

Speaker 1 (30:29):
That is. I mean they had him guilty, yeah, until
proven innocent, and and it looks like his time has
gone on. There hasn't been a a case to be made.
Even the civil cases are all being dropped. I think
they're settled. I mean, I don't know what it means
to be settled, you know, I don't know. Yeah, nothing's
being adjudicated that I know of.

Speaker 2 (30:48):
I think there were five cases brought against him, individual
cases brought against him, and I think four have either
been settled or there's one pending right now. And that's
about it. We saw Tim Ballard at the Republican National Convention.
What was it back there? Yeah, last June, last June,
last June or July. Yeah, And we talked very very

(31:08):
briefly about it, and he says, hey, the case is
rolling on. The DA's office said the survivors did provide
important and compelling statements, but critical corroborating statements were unavailable.
You don't know what that means. They also said certain
necessary elements of the charges could not be established with

(31:30):
a certainty required by law. So breaking news today, the
County DA has declined to file charges against Tim Beller. Boy.
This was a huge story when it broke a couple
of years ago.

Speaker 1 (31:41):
Well, I want to point something out, and again this
is I'm not drawing any conclusions. I'm not being judgy,
I'm not doing anything. But the absence of a criminal
case and the existence of questionable behavior can happen at
the same time. And so I don't know that I
think the entire thing sad because I think there was

(32:01):
an incredible good being done, or people believe that there
were good things happening where child trafficking we know as
a disgusting thing that exists and it happens, we're seeing it,
we're more privy to it. And I think that Tim
Ballard did a lot to bring it to people's attention
before it was become it became common knowledge and operation
Underground Railroad looked by everything I saw as some committed

(32:24):
to saving these poor children. What happened from there on
and what you know, what was said and what was accused.
It's just a really really sad chapter because if there's
good things going on, you know, who would like to
see the good things go away? It's the adversary. So
I just it's a sad it's a sad deal. But
I would, I would, I wouldn't. I'm not going to

(32:45):
draw any I'm still not going to dry any conclusions
about just I don't get it. I just don't. I
could never pretend to be one of these dudes going
over overseas, you know, like going to the strip clubs
or doing whatever to trick the traffickers that I'm interested,
so I could bust I am not. Why I don't,
It's it would be a very very difficult thing to do.
I could never do it. Now someone has to, I guess,

(33:06):
But it's the whole thing is just.

Speaker 2 (33:08):
Well, well, we'll just think of the success of the movie. Yeah,
Tim Bellard, it was. It was a huge movie.

Speaker 4 (33:17):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (33:18):
You know, Jim Cavesl played the role of Tim Ballard
at the time in that movie. And then it all
started falling apart, and and even Tim himself, what was
it about a month ago, came out and made some
statements about a certain leader within the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter day Saints. I believe his accusation back
then was had conspired or worked with others to share

(33:40):
false information and to hurt him. And you know he's
been some through rough times. Now you have the DA
saying apparently there's not enough cooperating evidence there to file
charges against Tim Ballard.

Speaker 1 (33:53):
Yep, I think I think that's I think there's something
to be said about that. And it does not I mean,
if it was his open and shut as some people
suggest that it was, I don't think sim Gill would be,
you know, shielding Tim Ballad.

Speaker 2 (34:05):
Not sim Gildoy. So yeah, not sim Gill's office, that's
for sure. Well that's breaking news. All right, this hour
we open up the phones to you eight eight eight
five seven o eight zero one zero on your cell
phone dial pound two to fifteen, say hey, Roger, you
can leave us comment on our talk back line as well.
A lot to talk about this week, greg A. Certainly
the breaking news tonight about the Tim Ballard story. You've
got the shutdown news, the redistricting news that took place

(34:28):
this week. Then one other story I wanted to bring up,
and we may get some comments on this. As I
mentioned earlier, Representative Chip Roy, who I really like. You
know who he went law school with? Who Brett Tolman.
Oh really, yeah, they both were in law school.

Speaker 1 (34:40):
Former US attorney here, and he's a talking head on
Fox Now's.

Speaker 2 (34:44):
A good friend apparently, is introducing legislation that would freeze
all immigration into this country. And I like the idea.

Speaker 1 (34:52):
Yeah, and for me before you know, the leftists, you know,
because they monitor our show so they can try to
stop us or saying look they hate all foreigner, No
one hates anybody. What you want to do is you
got to pause just to see what you have. I
think there's some real conflicting data out there and some
objectives that might be working really against you know, especially
in emerging work of young people. And we got to

(35:13):
get we gotta get this right.

Speaker 2 (35:14):
Yeah, do it well if if you're aware of American history,
the US shut the door in nineteen twenty on immigrants
coming into this country and it did not open up
again to what about nineteen sixty five under Lyndon Baines Johnson.
So and the reason was greg you know, in the
late eighteen hundreds, early nineteen hundreds, the flood of immigrants

(35:35):
from countries like your home country of Ireland came into
the country. But there got to be we reached a
point where people are saying, WHOA, enough's enough right now,
let's move forward. We've got to do We've got to
do something different right now. So you know who knows?
I mean I you know, let's absorb and let's deal
with the issues that have been created. And that's what

(35:57):
he's asking for.

Speaker 1 (35:58):
And you know this, this is the present. You get
some problems solved. This is the that we are in
the event, this is the window of opportunity to do that.
I think President Trump better than any president for a
long long time. I can solve issues four and on
behalf of the of the American people with the American
people forefront in his mind. So we got to get
it right, Yeah, all.

Speaker 2 (36:16):
Right, line threw open to you eight eight eight five
seven eight zero one zero on your cell phone dial
pound two fifty and say hey Rod, or leave us
some message on our talk back line. We've already got
some calls in. Let's go to Carl in Battleful tonight. Carl,
how are you welcome to the show.

Speaker 5 (36:31):
I'm good.

Speaker 9 (36:33):
I was just driving into Salt Lake and I noticed
a huge billboard, electronic billboard supporting our brave Judge Gibson.

Speaker 2 (36:43):
No, you're a kitty, you're a kidding parting.

Speaker 9 (36:46):
No, I'm so please support our brave Judge Gibson. It's
it's right. Driving into Salt Lake. I saw that just
about twenty minutes ago, and I just started laughing.

Speaker 1 (37:03):
Why I love our listeners. We get real time information
that that is it? That that billboard.

Speaker 2 (37:09):
Does that tell you something? You know what it tells me.
They know she's in trouble, they know she went out
of bounds, and they're trying to save her.

Speaker 1 (37:16):
But yeah, and it's not you know, it's not the
average Joe at average Joe, average Jane putting billboards up
that quickly. No, you know that's it. This this really
has been a concerted effort in the timing and everything
that she did. The decision she made that left this
legislative branch with no options or very little options right
as they're trying to figure out how to proceed. That

(37:36):
was that was by design. There's there's nothing accidental going on.

Speaker 2 (37:39):
Here, all right? More coming up, more your calls and
your talkback comments right here on the Rod and Greg
Show and talk radio one oh five nine k.

Speaker 4 (37:46):
N R S.

Speaker 1 (37:47):
And I work hard, man. I I'm hustling every day. Man,
What are you talking about?

Speaker 2 (37:50):
Yeah, we see ustle in that chair three hours.

Speaker 1 (37:55):
I do work, for sure. You could see me, folks,
I got I got multiple devices with information and social
media and then news coming across the wire. I'm hustling.
I'm multitasking. Don't tell teenbe I can multitask. Don't tell her,
but I'm doing.

Speaker 2 (38:11):
It all right. We called this. Thank Rod and Greg.
It's Friday, and time for you to weigh in on
any of the news of the week that you may
have heard us talk about, or other issues that we
did not bring up. Eight eight eight five seven eight
zero one zero on your cell phone dial pound two
fifty and say hey, Rod or talkback line as well.
We've got a talk back comment we'll get to in
a minute, but let's go right back to our phones. Greg.

Speaker 1 (38:32):
Okay, let's go to Rod and Draper. Good name, good name, Rod,
recognize that name.

Speaker 4 (38:37):
Rod.

Speaker 1 (38:37):
Thank you for holding. Welcome to RODN and Greg show.

Speaker 5 (38:41):
Okay, so you mentioned that you believe that the ACA
will be going away eventually. My question is what's the alternative.

Speaker 1 (38:53):
It's a great question. I'll give you my take. This
is a complicated issue, and I get it, and I'm
not trying to oversimplify it on purpose. I'm really not.
But this is what I know. I think that catastrophic
health issues, you've got to have some insurance for that.
But as I've looked at what catastrophic health insurance costs,
the price the premiums are nowhere close to what the
fifteen to two thousand dollars a month and the ten

(39:14):
thousand dollars deductible and then the eighty percent after. So
it looks like catastrophic is insurance that you can actually get.
But here's I believe in these health I believe in
the concept of a health savings account, and to the
extent that the Obamacare or the federal government seeds money
or pays for money for health care. If that was

(39:34):
an amount strictly dedicated to hospitals, doctors, you know, whatever
healthcare delivery you need, but you have a health care
savings account. Connecting, reconnecting the person receiving the health care
and paying for it. Reconnecting those two I think is
very very important. And my example of that would be
elective medical procedures. Look at what the alasis eye surgery

(39:56):
things like that. Look at what the free market of
these medical procedures do in terms of demand and cost.
I think when you connect those two together, we would
have a more manageable system. I still believe in a
social safety net for children, disabled, elderly, I get it,
but I do think that the people paying and receiving
should be the same person.

Speaker 2 (40:16):
There's a much brighter way to attack this, I think,
much better way.

Speaker 1 (40:19):
It has to be the way this is also.

Speaker 2 (40:21):
This is not working. This is not working, so you know,
give it time. There are some very bright people out
there who I think can come up with a better plan.
The question is do the Republicans have the guts to
tackle this? And I think they need to.

Speaker 1 (40:33):
There is no real cost. I'll give you just a
real quick example. There's a I know a friend who
had who was paying for a major surgery. If they
used insurance, the cost was sixty sixty thousand. If they
wanted to pay cash, this is a hospital in Salt
Lake City, a good one. Pay cash. The cash price
was forty two thousand. They could go to Mexico to
the finest hospital in that country and it was twelve thousand,

(40:55):
sixty forty two and twelve.

Speaker 2 (40:57):
Which one would you want?

Speaker 10 (40:58):
Right?

Speaker 2 (40:59):
All right to the phones? We got Well, let's go
to Greg in Kerns tonight here on the rod In
Greg Show. Hi Greg, how are you? We had a
rod now we've got a Greg call something about it.
Good names, go ahead, GREGA thank you.

Speaker 11 (41:11):
Yeah.

Speaker 10 (41:11):
I just wanted to make a comment about sim Gill
and how it's very typical of him to drop charges
or let make charges go down. Recently, we had a
guy in our backyard behind our house as a lodestone park,
and he had a gun and he fired five shots
towards our house. Wow, and one of my personal poverty

(41:32):
was damaged by one of the bullets. And that should
have been a felony, and it was charged as a
felony by the police officer, but when it came to
sim Gill's office, they reduced it down to a misdemeanor
and he got a flap on the wrist and nothing's
been done.

Speaker 5 (41:47):
I was just so frustrated with sim Gil. Wow, you
know he does with how he does things.

Speaker 2 (41:53):
Greg, Why did he shoot at you? Was it a neighbor?
Did you do something to your neighbor? What are you
doing out there? Maybe it's not a funny topic.

Speaker 4 (42:01):
Gun.

Speaker 10 (42:04):
He had just bought the gun. It was a five eighty.
I believe it was handgun. And I don't know if
he was on drugs or he has been drinking, but
he actually fired eleven shots total. He fired one shot
behind my neighbor's house, and then he came back behind
our house, crossed over the parkway, face back towards our house,
fired five shots towards between our houses, and then went

(42:27):
up over to the parking lot and fired five more shots.
You don't hear about this. It wasn't even the news,
but you know it was. It was terrifying. We heard
those gun shots and my property was damaged, and it
was the police came out and investigated it. And they
caught him and they took his guns away.

Speaker 5 (42:46):
But that's easy. It was just a fine.

Speaker 10 (42:48):
It was it was a felony, charged him with a felony,
and then they dropped it down to a misdemeanor.

Speaker 1 (42:55):
Thank you for sharing that that example of that story. Greg.
It's uncomfortable, and I'll tell you what happens. I'm still
waiting for charges for the No Kings rally that the Yeah,
you know, it's minimally manslaughter where he kills someone yac
so recklessly, someone dies for it. It's it's a crime.
Nothing's been charged that I'm aware of there. And it
even has a ripple effect on our law enforcement. Why
work so hard? Why investigate? Why do the probable cause

(43:19):
in paperwork? Why go through so much if you've got
someone that you know is going to catch and release
and do nothing. Yeah, it's a it's a tough It
just it makes lawlessness more practical, more viable, and it
makes all of us. It put us all in more danger.
And you know, sim Gill, I think he's been there
a long time. I think it's time, you know, he
just he needs to move on.

Speaker 4 (43:38):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (43:39):
Well, and by the way, if you're just joining us.
You're wondering, Okay, why are you talking about sim gill. Well,
just before five o'clock tonight, word broke that the Salt
Lake County District Attorney's Office will not press charges against
Tim Ballard. The evidence just didn't match up and they
won't press any charges against Tim Ballard.

Speaker 4 (43:57):
Happy.

Speaker 2 (43:57):
We'll have more on that coming up right here on
the roder catching the Rod and Greg Show on Talk
Radio one oh five nine k n r S. Phones
are open to you, willing to talk to you about
whatever is on your mind tonight. A lot of things
went on this weekend, but one of our favorite subjects
is coming up, and we've decided that if we're going
to talk about this subject, we're always going to make

(44:18):
sure we properly introduce it.

Speaker 1 (44:20):
Diana, Judge and I say, before we go to our call,
real real quick. We have a little dilemma, folks, because
when we do the podcast, we are not going to
be able to play our brand new Dirty Diana introduction
because we want to really use this from now on.
But I think E Ray has found a solution to
this for the podcast, and.

Speaker 12 (44:41):
And there you go Dirty, and we got that on loop.

Speaker 1 (44:49):
We had it so where we can't use it on
the podcast, they don't let us use it. We hear
Michael Jackson on the live show we have You Dirty, And.

Speaker 2 (44:59):
All rightlet's go to the phones. Let's go to Dave
in Herriman. Dave bring some level of sanity to this
insanity here right now? Would you, Dave?

Speaker 5 (45:10):
This is just crazy and it really makes me angry.
And I'm gonna ask hard working Greg because he's working.

Speaker 1 (45:15):
So hard, thank you for noticing, and also.

Speaker 5 (45:20):
But also since he was, you know, speaker at one point,
maybe he can answer this. Thomsudusan who don't know how
the law works? Why can we just ignore the judges
order and follow the congressional map drawn by the legislature.

Speaker 13 (45:36):
It would order, is it not?

Speaker 11 (45:39):
So?

Speaker 1 (45:39):
It would it would cause a standoff that it it
wouldn't end there, that would I would introduce new variables.
I think, Look, I I I think that they are
trying very hard because here's the here's the problem, Uh,
to your question, A judicial solution here is very very
difficult to find because we don't have our state supreme

(45:59):
court is not like the US Supreme Court, and this
doesn't have any jurisdiction beyond our state. This is a
state issue we're talking about. So even if they I
mean even if they were to appeal this to the
state Supreme Court, if you look at their rulings as
of late, they may memorialize this unconstitutional act and say
that it was actually Okay, there's there is some there's
some issues I think that they're going to look at

(46:22):
that they should look at. But they got to be
careful because this judiciary has really become so hostile to
the legislative branch, and I mean incredibly hostile. But you
can do it. You could attempt to ignore it. You
could try that would come with its also some injunctions
and court things. It would just be we just get
mess here. So I do know they don't have a

(46:42):
final answer to the people. I know the people, especially
our listeners, but well beyond our listeners are wondering what
a one? What world's going on? And be what are
you gonna do about it? Well, I there's work being
done right now.

Speaker 2 (46:52):
I love this suggestion, Greg, because what would have prevented
our Lieutenant governor, Okay Deetre Henderson from saying I will
not accept that map. I am going to accept a
map that was approved by the legislature. And that's what
I'm informing the county clerks in this state. What map
they should follow. What would prevent now would she be
I mean, what would stop her from doing that? Why

(47:13):
not stand up and say this is wrong. This is
coming from the judiciary, which in my opinion, has no
authority here. It comes from the legislature. Therefore, I'm following
their map.

Speaker 1 (47:23):
You know, I couldn't talk about that. The more I
like that idea. This is what I would tell you
would happen immediately, there would be action to try to
stop that from being the case. But what it would
what conversation it would force, is if judge Diana Gibson, Diana.

Speaker 2 (47:41):
Gibson, okay, and not.

Speaker 1 (47:45):
Thirty nins if she if you were to take if
you were to do exactly what you're saying, what you
could say is the best she had. Is what judges
around the country and states were if if a redistricting
occurred and a judge thinks that that action not follow
the Constitution, they have remanded it back to the legislature
to do it again. We've never I don't know that

(48:06):
we've ever seen them just decide where not only am
I not I'm going to draw my own map, I'm
gonna have this leftist organization over here and get to
draw it with zero process that you get to just
draw what you want. But I think if they if that,
if that standoff happened, the strongest legal case, and you
might even get a state supreme court to agree. How
on earth if you felt that what they did was wrong,
did you empower some third party group that nobody knows

(48:30):
that gets ENNGO money. That the more you look at them,
the more nefarious they look. How did they bec have
the legal authority to draw our four districts at congressional districts?
So I do think that the envelope has to be
pushed here.

Speaker 2 (48:44):
Should she have said no, I'm following the legislature map.
I think she could have no. She could have been
you know, crazy Diane would have probably thrown her in
the clink or threatened her with a fine. I mean,
now that's a possibility.

Speaker 1 (48:57):
The closest example I can give you is that the
you know, the president has clear executive powers. Yeah, as
a president, you've had judges put in junctions on him
and say you can't do it, and you've seen some
areas like we remember when Boseberg said you can't take
the they're already an international airspace. It didn't end there. No,
there was still things that were going to happen with

(49:18):
the courts and everything else that the DOJ had to
come and before the judge that would probably still happen
in the state where there would be court case, you'd
still have to make your case and this would continue on.
But it needs to continue on because what has happened
is so patently wrong, wrong, and it's unconstitutional. You may
as well not have a constitution say that your legislature

(49:39):
draws your congressional districts if they don't draw the congressional districts.

Speaker 2 (49:43):
And I do not believe Greg. Now you keep on
hearing you know, you've said this couple of times. Others
have said this few times, that she's depending on a
map drawn up by the League of Women Voters and
Mormons Mormon.

Speaker 1 (49:53):
And Women for Ethical Government.

Speaker 2 (49:55):
Are you kidding me? I don't think those two organizations
could draw a map out of a closet. No, they
had help. They had been so coordinated, Yeah, so well coordinated.
So for people to say a map drawn up by
this advocacy group. No, it's a map drawn up by
people behind this effort, working and using these advocacy groups
to get them done what they want.

Speaker 1 (50:15):
And let me give you a real life example of
our callers a question that actually happened this way, and
that was when Obama shut down the government in thirteen
twenty thirteen, and they and he wanted it to be
as painful as possible. They closed Zion's National Park and
you had people that were stranded on the side of
the road, couldn't get in, and you had a county,
a Washington County attorney and sheriff call Governor then Herbert

(50:37):
and say, hey, we're letting you know we're cutting there,
we're opening it up, and we're not asking for permission,
we're doing it. And with that information, the Obama administration
quickly reversed engineered an agreement even though it was happening anyway,
so that it didn't look like there was just this
blatant defiance of a federal shutdown. But it would not

(50:57):
have been open if that if those elected officials from
Washington County hadn't made the decision where these people are stranded,
we cannot leave them here, we're gonna open this up.
And they made that decision and latterly and then everybody
it sobered everybody up. You get something done they woke
up on. Maybe that's something that should be done in
this case.

Speaker 2 (51:13):
All right, more your calls, more your comments coming up.
It is think Rod and Greg gets Friday eight eight
eight five seven oh eight zero one zero on your
cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey Rod
or leave it. Comment on our talkback line by downloading
the iHeartRadio app. More coming up on the Rod and
Greg Show. Phones are open to you at eight eight
eight five seven zero eight zero one zero on your
cell phone dial pound two fifty and say hey Rod

(51:35):
or leave it's a comment on our talkback line. Just
make sure you download the iHeartRadio app. Let's go to
the talkback line here from one of our listeners tonight.

Speaker 14 (51:44):
Yeah, so they're getting rid of the pennies, right. I
can guarantee you that everything is gonna end at a
three now, like two dollars fifty three cents a dollar
forty three. They're gonna do that. So they have an
excuse around everything up. Who really things that are going
to round it down? They should just have everything end

(52:04):
in a zero or a five.

Speaker 2 (52:07):
What do you do now? Could you see everything? Buy
this now for two ninety nine? By it for three.

Speaker 1 (52:13):
I'm telling you this is my If you have a
problem with a penny and it takes more money to
make a penny than to have a penny, get a
cheaper way to make a penny, because otherwise I'm paying
through the nose because everything's gonna get as our as
our listener clearly astutely pointed out, everything's gonna go up.
They're just gonna round everything up. Oh my goodness, I

(52:34):
just make cheaper pennies.

Speaker 4 (52:35):
I like.

Speaker 1 (52:36):
I have a penny drawer. I have pennies that I
can use to get exact change when I need it.

Speaker 2 (52:40):
There you go.

Speaker 1 (52:41):
I still like cash, I do. I go to the ATM.
I get cash because I like cash. I mean, I
need brother watching my every transaction the world.

Speaker 2 (52:50):
Well, to bring a little levity to the show to that,
I found this on on social media this morning putting
the show together. I'm not sure if it's AI generated
or what, but it's from George Carlin. George Carlin, a
well known comedian, did a lot of funny things. I
would think probably pretty liberal in his stands, but he
talked about climate change, one of your favorite subjects. Listen

(53:10):
to this segment on George Carl.

Speaker 15 (53:11):
The planet has been here for four and a half
billion years, all right, four and a half billion. We've
been here what one hundred thousand maybe, two hundred thousand maybe,
and we've only been engaged in heavy industry for a
little over two hundred years, two hundred years versus four
and a half billion, And we have the conceit to
think that somehow we're a threat, that somehow we're gonna

(53:32):
put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue green ball. It's
just a floating around the Sun. Planet has been through
a lot worse than us for a long time than
through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drifts, solar flares, sun
spots and magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles,
bombardments for hundreds of thousands of years by comets and
asteroids and meteors, sandstorms, erosion of all kinds, cosmic radiation,

(53:56):
worldwide fires, worldwide floods, recurring ice ages.

Speaker 2 (54:00):
And we think, we think some aluminum cans.

Speaker 15 (54:05):
And some plastic bags are going to make a difference.
Planet isn't going anywhere we are.

Speaker 2 (54:14):
I love coming.

Speaker 1 (54:15):
Is that ever, so that we think in this little
nanosecond of time, we're going to take the planet and
put it out of services to the.

Speaker 2 (54:24):
Phones real quick before we head to the hour. Tim
is in South Jordan.

Speaker 9 (54:27):
Go ahead, Tim, Hey, guys talking about this anything, we're
making a whole bunch of a whole bunch of do
about nothing.

Speaker 4 (54:35):
Hardly anybody pays with cash anymore. I mean I paid
with cash and lagoon one time in the shop.

Speaker 2 (54:40):
The lady because I did just pull out my card.

Speaker 4 (54:42):
And he's not an issue. Tim.

Speaker 3 (54:45):
I use cash, I do. I want to talk to you, Tim,
I use use cash. Of course I use cash, don't
you know. Uh the seventies are calling I used I
like cash? Yeah, well why not use a card?

Speaker 2 (54:59):
Yeah yeah?

Speaker 3 (55:00):
Someplace you can't even use it? It's us legal tender.
Are they better take my cash?

Speaker 2 (55:03):
They aren't going to. They don't have to, you know, in.

Speaker 1 (55:06):
Pittsburgh it's the other way around. They don't have They
don't want to pay the fees on these cards. They
make you pay cash.

Speaker 2 (55:10):
Yeah, yeah, And I don't think on a debit card
there's a fee, is there?

Speaker 1 (55:13):
I know, but I'm telling you these shops in Pittsburgh
it's cash only. When I was back here with my
family recently, we went to a breakfast. Well, that's that's
why they say cash only. There's an ATM across the
street if you want it, but it's cash only in
this diner. I love.

Speaker 2 (55:26):
That city is failing.

Speaker 1 (55:28):
You don't have If in Pittsburgh you don't have the
dick cash, you're out of business power. You ain't get you.
I get served.

Speaker 2 (55:33):
Our good friend Lid's Peak will join us coming up
in our number three as we talk about the shutdown
and what has happened since then. That's all coming up
to stay with us, all right. Of course, the big
news of the week has been the shutdown. The Democrats,
well was it on on Tuesday finally said okay, we've
had it. We aren't fighting this one anymore. It's becoming ridiculous,

(55:54):
which it was, as you know, Greg, There's been a
lot of reaction, and that's why we wanted to bring
on our next guest. She has such great insight into
all this. We're talking about. Liz Peak. Of course, Liz
a columnist at Fox News Liz, thanks for joining us tonight. Okay,
we've had a few days since the shutdown ended. What's
your take on everything and what happened, Liz.

Speaker 16 (56:14):
I thought it was absolutely a shameful exercise of political gainsmanship.

Speaker 11 (56:19):
On the part of the Democrats.

Speaker 16 (56:20):
And make no mistake, they did not start this shutdown
to struggle or to try to min over Republicans on
Obamacare premium subsidies. I think that literally occurred to them
as it was happening, as sort of an excuse to
do it, because remember in the beginning, it was all

(56:42):
about medicator form and how they were going to fight
that tooth and nail. Look, I think they just cowtow
to the far left elements in their party that now
really do seem to be a send and in control
of the Democratic Party. I mean, that's why I think
Democrats really have to face up to here, those progressive
elements who pushed Democrats into this position, who are angry

(57:05):
in the spring when Democrats signed on to a similar
continuing resolution to keep the government up and functioning, those
are the people who are angry, And by the way,
they are the people who are angry now.

Speaker 11 (57:18):
So the upshot who wins. Who loses.

Speaker 16 (57:21):
I'll tell you who loses traditional establishment Democrats right now
because they're being primary by the far left, a lot
of them. I mean Chuck Schumer I firmly believe engineered
this shutdown because he was so terrified of Alexandri Casio Cortez.
And that continues to be a rumbling kind of narrative
here that she's going to challenge him. And guess what

(57:42):
the polling looks like. AOC could bump Chuck Schumer, the
minority leader in the Senate and clearly kind of the
number one Democrat right now in the country, and he
is scared for his career.

Speaker 11 (57:56):
So he's the guy who pushed this.

Speaker 16 (57:58):
They accomplished asolutely nothing except possibly to harden Republicans' attitude
towards these premium subsidies. By the way, a lot of
those people receiving those subsidies are in red states. So Republicans,
I think, are going to have to do something about
these very big increases that people are finding in their

(58:19):
Obamacare bills. And my guess is that they would have
been ready to come to the table and talk about it,
but now they're furious because these guys cost our economy
and our country a great deal.

Speaker 1 (58:32):
You know, Liz, It's always been the case by the regime,
media or whatever. The Republicans were always the bad guy,
without regard to who was in power in the Congress
or who had the White House. If there was a
government shut down, it was solely the Republicans' fault. This
felt a little different. But do you think in the publics,
the general public size, is this another one of is

(58:54):
this a Republican failing or did the Democrats? Were they
harmed by what they did by shutting down the government?

Speaker 16 (59:01):
Sadly, the polling showed through most of the shutdown that
people were more likely to think Republicans were guilty of
engineering this than Democrats. I mean, even though I think
we can all agree the facts are the Democrats always
have argued in favor of continuing resolutions. Republicans are the

(59:22):
ones historically that have opposed that. The Republicans did not
throw anything into the original cr that they had to negotiate.
I mean, that was actually sort of the ironic thing.
Mike Johnson kept saying, there's nothing to negotiate.

Speaker 11 (59:35):
This is the.

Speaker 16 (59:36):
Spending level agreed to by Democrats. And by the way, Obamacare,
a terrible program was voted in only by Democrats. The
premiums that are under the gun here, the subsidies, those
were created by Democrats, and the fact that they were
expiring was created by Democrats in the American Rescue Act

(59:57):
and the Inflation Reduction Act. So Republicans' hands are completely clean.

Speaker 11 (01:00:02):
But to your point, the media, it doesn't care.

Speaker 16 (01:00:06):
I mean, they always blame the Republicans. Facts don't matter.
So of course, you know, you saw how Kim Jeffries
and all these people on the on ex daily hourly
saying Republicans control all three branches of government. They should
be able, they should not be letting this happen, not
mentioning that there's this thing called the philibuster and the Republicans. Yeah,

(01:00:30):
I mean, it's really it's so dishonest. I really begin
to think that the Democrat brand is dishonesty.

Speaker 2 (01:00:36):
It's just appalling, it is, Liz, Liz, I want to
go back to this issue of Schumer, but the other
the senators who voted Dan all of this. I heard
someone say today that Schumer is in trouble because he
didn't listen to the base of his party. Is the
base of the Democratic Party now based on socialism.

Speaker 16 (01:00:54):
That's a really good question, and it would be a
pretty horrifying thing historically. And I've used these numbers over
and over and I'm beginning to wonder if they're just outdated.
Up until even this year, if you wanted to ask
to self identify your political leanings, only about fifteen percent
of the country describes themselves as very liberal. So is

(01:01:17):
that really the majority of Democrats. I don't think so.
But you know, what we're seeing is, as it happens
too on the right in primaries, those are the people
now who have the energy, and they have a lot
of money, and they're the people who come out and vote.
And boy did we see that in New York City.
So you know, I begin to wonder. I don't think

(01:01:38):
in the middle of the country. No, I don't think
traditional Democrats in Ohio and Pennsylvania and those kinds of
states are keen to welcome in socialism.

Speaker 11 (01:01:49):
But you know, you do have this.

Speaker 16 (01:01:50):
Younger generation who has been taught that capitalism is evil
and socialism is fair and just and so forth. And
I'm not exaggerating that is literally the kind of teachings
that we've had in our schools and our universities, and I.

Speaker 11 (01:02:06):
Think they believe it. I mean, they don't know any better.

Speaker 16 (01:02:08):
They don't look at history, they don't look at facts,
they don't look at the fact that socialism has failed
in every country that's ever adopted it.

Speaker 11 (01:02:17):
So it's very disheartening right now.

Speaker 16 (01:02:19):
I mean, I just hope we get some leadership, frankly,
in both parties that kind of take us away from
this deep dive into progressivism and socialism.

Speaker 11 (01:02:31):
It's really bad for our country.

Speaker 1 (01:02:33):
So campaigns usually work this way. In a primary with
Republican or Democrat, you have to go to your right,
to your left, and then in the general election you
have to run back to the middle. Is the left
with the mom Donnie and the socialist side of this
being so far extreme? Can Democrat candidates run that far
to the left and then somehow pivot back to a

(01:02:54):
palatable candidate and a general election? Are they going to
have success as a party with how extreme their bases
right now?

Speaker 11 (01:03:02):
Well, I think that's a really good question.

Speaker 16 (01:03:04):
And my instinct is to say no, what happened in
New York City is not really representative, because we had
Andrew Cuomo as the person to whom they could pivot
in the middle right theoretically Democrats. He was a terrible candidate. A.
He was lazy, he didn't organize his campaign. He was

(01:03:25):
or he was not out there. I think he had
the entitlement syndrome where an established politician thinks, by dint
of his name, he's going to win. No, he didn't.
But also people hate Andrew. I mean, he's really really unpopular.
So this is a bit of an accidental election. I
would say, yeah, and so I wouldn't really look to

(01:03:49):
that as representative. But we're going to be watching, you know,
they're going to be other And there were some other
places where some pretty far left candidates did pretty well,
but again mostly I think mostly in pretty blue states.

Speaker 2 (01:04:02):
She's always insightful. I love talking to Liz and she
has a lot of fun.

Speaker 1 (01:04:06):
She bottom lines it very well. She does there's no
skirting around it. She just really goes to the point.

Speaker 2 (01:04:11):
We need more of that from Fox News. Liz Peak
joining us on the Rod and Greg Show. More coming
up right here on Utah's Talk Radio one oh five
nine knrs. If you didn't hear, two interviews that will
play back for you, one with speaker Mike Schultz his
reaction to the ruling by what's her name?

Speaker 1 (01:04:27):
Diana Gibson.

Speaker 12 (01:04:28):
Diana Gibson, Debbie Gibson, Diana all.

Speaker 1 (01:04:32):
Right, I remember that name.

Speaker 17 (01:04:33):
Now.

Speaker 2 (01:04:33):
One of the points that has been discussed since the
shutdown or during the shutdown has been the focus on Obamacare.
Will Republicans greg take advantage of this and do something
about Obamacare now that the shutdown is over? I hope
they do.

Speaker 18 (01:04:46):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:04:46):
I'm looking for this discussion because I think you have
to have answers. You can't just be a party of no.
Although the Democrats get away with that, Republicans were better
at this. We got to get some solutions.

Speaker 9 (01:04:55):
Well.

Speaker 2 (01:04:55):
Joining us on our Newsmaker line right now is Chris Jacobs,
founder and CEO of Juniper Research Group. He wrote a
great article in the Wall Street Journal about that this week. Chris,
thanks for joining us tonight. There is an opportunity here.
I guess the question is will the Republican sees it?

Speaker 5 (01:05:09):
Well?

Speaker 18 (01:05:10):
I sure hope.

Speaker 10 (01:05:11):
So.

Speaker 18 (01:05:12):
First of all, it's very clear that Obamacare has failed
by Barack Obama's own metrics. He promised in his campaign
in two thousand and eight that his healthcare plan would
lower premiums for the average family by twenty five hundred dollars,
and nobody in their right mind thinks that premiums healthcare
premiums have gone down. Democrats, of course, want to propose

(01:05:34):
throwing more money at the problem. I argue in the
piece that there were regulatory actions that the Trump administration
took in its first administration that can help some with
affordability and portability for individuals.

Speaker 1 (01:05:50):
So let me ask you this. I think that we
can Everyone is pretty good at narrating the challenges or
the expense of healthcare and where it's failing, you do
have to have it. I think you have to have answers,
not just be a party of no. What can be
done or what would be done that could really resonate
with the American people. That can be explained simply is
that possible.

Speaker 18 (01:06:12):
Healthcare gets Healthcare gets very complicated, very quickly. Yes, But
I think portability is one element of the solution, and
I talk about that in the Wall Street Journal article.
Really making sure the Democrats will always focused on pre
existing conditions and Republicans don't care about people with pre
existing conditions, and they're going to cut pre existing pre

(01:06:34):
existing condition protections, etc. I think Republican conservatives should be saying,
we want you to have coverage before you develop a
pre existing condition, and we want you to have coverage
that's portable, that can go with you from job to job,
that you buy it when you're young, I mean you
keep it until you're old. I think that's one key
element of the solution. And then I think the other

(01:06:56):
element of the solution is to try to get the
incentives right. And Trump was correct when he was talking
about not giving money to the insurance companies, but give
it directly to the patients. And this is where the
consumers can be much more powerful on behalf of their
own interest than any third party insurance company or an employer.

Speaker 2 (01:07:15):
Chris, are there people in Congress right now who are
talking about these ideas that you've been talking about? I mean,
are they ready to say, Okay, let's have a discussion.
We've got ideas similar to what you're talking about. Are
there people up there willing to do this and willing
to introduce some of these ideas.

Speaker 18 (01:07:29):
There are certainly folks. In fact, I got an email
and some tweets from Senator Tim Sheehe who actually a
sponsored a bill that would codify the health Reimbursement Arrangement
regulations from the first Trump administration that I talk about
in the Wall Street Journal article. Wants to strengthen that
from being a regulation to a law to make sure

(01:07:52):
a new president can't undo those efforts. There are certainly
other proposals being out there. Republicans are trying to come
together to talk about healthcare all a healthcare alternative, because
just throwing more money in Obamacare is not going to
fix the problem.

Speaker 1 (01:08:08):
So if I were if I could explain a potential solution,
I want to float it by you and tell me
what you think that the people could grasp very quickly.
It's that we have separated those that receive health care
and healthcare delivery from those that pay for it. Where
we see that that's connected, like elective surgery, whether it
be Lasik surgery or something like that, you see the
market demands and you see the affordability really track each other,

(01:08:30):
and you see a consumer market for those things. Is
there a way to reunite the person receiving the healthcare
with paying the bills for that healthcare so that this
third party mechanism doesn't make it so unaffordable.

Speaker 18 (01:08:45):
I think you're absolutely right. I teach health policy to
congressional staff and other folks, and I always say, everybody
is great at spending everybody else's money. Yes, if you've
ever been to an all you can eat buffet, you
can easily relate to that. In terms of the problems
of healthcare. Now, obviously somebody is not going to be
able to necessarily pay for heart bypass surgery or very

(01:09:06):
expensive chemotherapy drugs immediately out of pocket. But the idea
is particularly this was one of the principles behind health
Savings account and those sorts of reforms to empower the
patients to serve as smart shoppers for their own healthcare
because many in many cases you can kind of shop
around and think about that. Of course, the other key

(01:09:29):
to this is to make sure that consumers have the
price and the quality transparency to find out what it
costs before you undertake the procedure, as opposed to being
surprised when you get smacked with a three thousand dollars
bill after the fact.

Speaker 2 (01:09:45):
Yeah, Chris, A lot of Democrats, of course, are talking
about this as well. Like you indicated a moment ago,
the solution is to just throw more money at it.
But have you heard of any Democrats out there or say, yeah,
there are some issues here and yeah they need to
be addressed. Have you heard any Democrat make that suggestion.

Speaker 18 (01:10:05):
I think I would give them half a cheer in
the sense that some of them acknowledge that the status
quo that we have under the Biden that giving subsidies
to people making half a million dollars a year is
not a smart idea and is not a good policy
that is currently happening under the Biden enhanced COVID subsidies

(01:10:27):
that are are scheduled to expire December thirty first, So
they tend to agree on some of that. We're also
finding at least some areas of agreement that individuals should
have to pay something for their health insurance out of pocket,
because to do otherwise is leading to large instances of
fraud that the Congressional Budget Office and others have talked

(01:10:49):
about millions of fraudulent enrollees on the Obamacare exchanges. But really,
at least Democrats are talking about tinkering around the edges.
But I think we need more fundamental reforms here because
premiums keep going up and up and that's not Obamacare
has been in place for fifteen years. It hasn't solved

(01:11:11):
the problem, It's made it worse.

Speaker 2 (01:11:12):
On our Newsmaker line, Chris Jacobs talking about Obamacare and
an opportunity, Greg, you had a couple of suggestions. Chris
has got some suggestions. There is a solution to this.
My fear is it's so embedded in our system. Now
can we get rid of it completely?

Speaker 1 (01:11:26):
It's easier to say government will provide it all for
free or to cheap and cheap, and Republicans are trying
to keep you from doing it, versus the more detailed
explanation of how to really reform it and get patients
in charge of their healthcare and get these costs down.

Speaker 2 (01:11:40):
Yeah, all right, more coming up. Our Listen Back Friday
segments are on their way right here on Utah's Talk
Radio one O five to nine kN rs. All right,
time now for our Listen Back Friday segments. We look
back at some of the interviews we've done with newsmakers
this week, playing back for you just in case you
miss it.

Speaker 4 (01:11:56):
Now.

Speaker 2 (01:11:57):
The big story this week was the redistricting decision. What's
their name again? Shall we play that again? This is
our noon theme song. By the way, I love it,
Al says Dirty.

Speaker 12 (01:12:05):
And Gibson yeah very Dana, Yeah, Gibson, Diana Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:12:12):
I hope someone gets back to her and say, you know,
these crazy guys on radio play this all the time,
every time your name comes up.

Speaker 1 (01:12:18):
It was very perfect of Michael Jackson to warn us
about someone named Diana dirtya make our make things hard
for us.

Speaker 2 (01:12:26):
Yeah. Well, let's listen back to our interview we did
with Speaker of the House Mike Schulz following the ruling
earlier this week and get his reaction to where we
are and where we go from here. Here's our interview
with Speaker Shultz.

Speaker 13 (01:12:37):
Yeah, this was a smack in the face to not
the legislature at all. This was a smack in the
face to Uton's and every Uton Regardless of what side
of this issue you're on, you should be outraged right
now because if it can happen under redistricting, I want
to just flip it around and say it can happen
under any sort of circumstance. Let's just lay this out.
What you just had happened was an unelected judge, unaccountable

(01:13:01):
to the people. Throw out the legislature's mamp who is
elected by the people, and pick a map that was
drawn by a far left advocacy group and who knows
there was no transparency in the way this map was drawn,
But it was drawn by the legal women Voters, who
is a national organization that is far left. That is

(01:13:25):
who drew this map. And it was drawn with one
purpose jerrymandering a Democrat seat. There are not enough Democrats
in the state of Utah to get a Democrat seat
without heavily gerrymandering a map in order for that to happen.
So you just had to judge pick a gerrymandered map
over the top of the people of the state of Utah.

(01:13:48):
And that is not just a concern for redistricting, that
should be a real concern for the whole judicial system
in our current courts right now.

Speaker 2 (01:13:58):
Spigures you know, and you touched on that in your
comment here, Speakers shows. But what drives me nuts is
you have this group out there who are saying, well,
this is a grassroots effort. You know, it comes from
the people, it's a grassroots effort. Well, if that's the case,
Speaker shows, why on earth was former Attorney General Eric
holder commenting on this ruling today, I mean, doesn't that
tell people something?

Speaker 13 (01:14:19):
No, no, no, this was driven out of Washington, d C.
There's no doubt this was driven around out of Washington,
d C. That's where this came from. You know, that
is exactly where this came from. And you know, even
further to point to the problem with this is the
fact that you had a judge pick a map drawn

(01:14:42):
by a far left organization is just absolutely incredible to me.
And this was not driven by utahns and the whole
proposition for. Okay, fine, you say you want to follow
proposition for. The judge did not follow proposition for, had
nothing to do with proposition for. The judge unelected. This

(01:15:03):
wasn't by the people picked the process outside of proposition for,
outside of their legislature, outside of what was said and
prop for, and picked this map by this far left organization.

Speaker 1 (01:15:15):
We're speaking with Speaker Michael Mike Schultz about this judge's decision.
It's really put Utah in the blue column with the
with California and other states that are redrawing districts to
advantage districts for the advantage of Democrats, and now Utah
a red state is in that column of blue states
doing this. Uh my question is this and this is

(01:15:36):
this really is under my skin, and it's my skin.
I know it's I'm entitled to my own opinion, speaker,
but here's my issue. She sat on this judge sat
on this decision. I think it's from the beginning of
the year in January. Uh, as this was as this proceeded,
there has to be a time where the members of
Congress know their districts, know where where the boundaries are

(01:15:57):
that they represent, because filing for the next and the
twenty twenty six starts in January of twenty six, which
is coming right up. Clerks, county clerks need to know
the information. What I understand is the judge asked, when
when is the last when's the last date that we
need that you would need to know to be able
to do your job. Told it would be November first,
asked for an extension, was given till November tenth, and

(01:16:18):
then last night, minutes before midnight, so close up business
has already happened. Gives this a ruling which has the
effect of making the tenth not practical at all. It
seems to be an aggressive move, almost a statement from
this judge that she doesn't give a whit about whether
the legislative branch what they're doing, or the executive branch

(01:16:40):
and the duties they have to perform the election. I
think she should be impeached. I don't know. I think
that there are grounds for this with her conduct and
what she's doing here. Are you guys considering that at all?

Speaker 13 (01:16:53):
Well, I think everything's on the table at this point.
We're not focused on that right this second, but there'll
come a time when that discussion has had. Right now,
we're focused on trying to get decent maps. But you
brought up a really good point, and this, again is
what the people of Utah should not tolerate from a judge.
You pointed out that this was case. It's a four
year case by the way, but it was the last

(01:17:15):
part of it that we're in discussions now. Is heard
in January. The judge said in that she will issue
the ruling in June. Okay. The judge then pushed that
decision off and didn't issue the ruin until the very
end of August the first part of September. Then gave
the legislature thirty days, which is unbelievable. To redo the maps,
and then took thirty or forty more days on our

(01:17:36):
own and draw it. Took it out till the last minute.
Eleven forty one pm last night is when the judge
issued the ruining. We don't have now again. This is
why it's so terrible. It's our recourse going to the
Supreme Court at this point in time. The deadline has
came in passed. The judge drew this out till the

(01:17:57):
very last minute to where we can't even go make
a proper appeal to this Utah Supreme Court to have
them overturn this because the deadlines passed. Now the judge
structured that in a way to make that happen again.
When I say Utons were smacked in the face by this,
this judge smacked Uton's right upside the head and said,

(01:18:18):
your voice doesn't matter anymore. I know better. I'm picking
a map drawn by a far left organization out of Washington, DC,
and it's wrong.

Speaker 2 (01:18:27):
Yeah, it is wrong. So where do you go from here? Speakers, shoals,
If you can't go to the Supreme Court, do you
hope the people raise a ruckus and say something needs
to be done here? What are you hoping for.

Speaker 13 (01:18:40):
The people of this state need to stand up and
see what's going on and demand something to change, because yes,
unfortunately we don't have a very good opportunity in front
of the Supreme Court. Why because instead of ruling, the
issuing the ruling in June or even sooner, I mean,
think about that, six months to issue a ruling. I mean,
the fact that it should take to June is ridiculous,

(01:19:02):
especially on something so important. This was orchestrated and structured
to get a specific outcome. The people of the state
need to stand up and say enough is enough and
work together to put the voice of the people back
inside of the people and those that are elected, not
by an unelected judge.

Speaker 2 (01:19:20):
Part of our Listen Back Friday segment our conversation with
Speaker Mike Schulzi voice. Yeah, yeah, you kind of get
a sense that he's a little mad.

Speaker 1 (01:19:27):
Little vimen vigor. You've got separate and equal powers, and
you've got a branch that has to go get its back. Yeah,
it's been taken and it's on his watch, it's on
that legislature's watch, and you don't want to leave the
place where so you found it. No legislative branch has
been around since statehood and it's kind of a good gig.
Should have one.

Speaker 2 (01:19:43):
Yeah, go get them, Mike, all right, more coming up
more of our Listen Back Friday segments right here on
Utah's Talk Radio one oh five nine KNRS. Let's continue
with our chance to listen back to some of the
interviews we did earlier this week. Of course, let's talk
about the shutdown. It was interesting how the major networks
you call him, the the regime, the regime media, how
they covered up for the Democrats during this shutdown. We

(01:20:04):
spoke earlier this week with Curtis Holk, he's managing editor
at NewsBusters, about this and what he saw taking place
with the networks and trying to help the Democrats through
this shutdown.

Speaker 17 (01:20:14):
Well, I think it's because they couldn't have continued this game,
this 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

(01:20:38):
was driving home the point that any pain or dysfunction
in the country was caused by Republicans and they're 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 spending levels, they

(01:21:02):
kind of rely only focused on the fallout of said shutdown.
In the network evening 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

(01:21:23):
over with, I think the.

Speaker 11 (01:21:25):
Strategy shifted because.

Speaker 17 (01:21:27):
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 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

(01:21:49):
the reason, guys, I think the key takeaway here is
the airline situation became simply untenable and it started trickling
up to.

Speaker 1 (01:21:59):
The Swan 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

(01:22:20):
them disappointed that the Democrats weren't willing to use that
kind 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 am
I just paranoid at this point?

Speaker 4 (01:22:41):
Oh?

Speaker 17 (01:22:41):
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

(01:23:02):
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 know,
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

(01:23:23):
part of 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 we're trying to do during

(01:23:44):
the shutdown was 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

(01:24:05):
in the House. They left before the shutdown with the
Clean cr you know, by technically it had bipartisan 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 11 (01:24:19):
Part of the equation.

Speaker 17 (01:24:20):
And also the separate discussion about health care costs that
people hundreds of per percent, about the poverty line needed subsidies,
being a commentary on the state of the ACA.

Speaker 2 (01:24:30):
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, other than the media.

Speaker 17 (01:24:47):
We wanted them. I was going to say, we were
just about you think of the Scooby new line. I
was just about to get away with it if it
weren't for you meddling kids. 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,

(01:25:10):
coming up on the holidays, Uh, you know, with with
travel and the fact that this involved air traffic controllers
and snap benefits, and you know, separately for us, you know,
gives conservatives. This laid bare 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's it's it's untenable.
You're you're seeing stories about people having food stamps, having

(01:25:32):
been on food stamps for thirty or four years, and
you think that's not what this was created to do. Obviously,
the left likes them because then it creates dependency.

Speaker 1 (01:25:42):
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 the with the majority of Democrats
as statesmen or a statesman like reaching across the aisle.

(01:26:05):
They put noble, yeah, noble intentions behind Republicans that team
with the with Democrats and a majority of Democrats. They
are describing Democrats who reach across the isle and join
Republicans as defectors. Does anyone notice other than us in
this conversation that the hypocrisy there in the in the
in the narrative, and how hypocritical it is.

Speaker 17 (01:26:27):
Yeah, people who put party a country over party. Yes,
you know, and that was a lot of this sudden
respect bias that we saw, uh, 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,

(01:26:50):
all sins were forgiven. I mean, John McCain, it 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 thumbs down and all that other stuff.
You know, that doesn't excuse obviously Republicans not having a
message or coming across as disorganized. But in this case
on the shutdown, the Republicans were, you know, in terms

(01:27:11):
of message discipline. I was pretty impressed because usually the
Rights the one that kind of has these splitting factions.
Credit to Leader Soon and Speaker Johnson, ovious to 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, and it's been around
in nineteen eighty seven and well before that, where yeah,

(01:27:34):
liberal Republicans are framed a statesmen and moderate Democrats the
liberal media or you know, almost turning their heads at
their viewers and saying what is wrong with these people?

Speaker 2 (01:27:44):
Energetic guy, He was a lot of fun and he's
right on, he really is on all of this. All right, Well,
mister Hughes, you have yourself a great weekend, you as well, Sir,
I will as well.

Speaker 1 (01:27:53):
Safe travels.

Speaker 2 (01:27:54):
I will be back on Wednesday.

Speaker 1 (01:27:56):
I'll be manned the Ford folks here on Tuesday, I'll
be It'll be uh that NASA like board. I'll be command.

Speaker 2 (01:28:02):
You'll be there. You'll be there. All right. That does
it for us tonight, as we say each and every night,
head up, shoulders back. May God bless you and your
family and this great country of ours. Have a great,
safe weekend. We'll be back on Monday. Have a good
week

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: Schumer Shutdown Causing Democrat Infighting

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