October 27, 2025 • 50 mins
Steve Bonta is Publisher of The New American magazine discusses this delicate tension that exists between governments and its citizens or subjects. Our US Constitution galvanized a disparate group of brave pioneers to realize that freedom didn't come from governments but was inherent to our humanity given to us by God Himself. And it's this idea that insults the real oligarchs and elites that exist only to claim their entitled power and control at all costs.
Bill Martinez Live is broadcast live Mondays at 3PM ET on W4CY Radio (www.w4cy.com) part of Talk 4 Radio (www.talk4radio.com) on the Talk 4 Media Network (www.talk4media.com). Bill Martinez is viewed on Talk 4 TV (www.talk4tv.com).
Bill Martinez Live Podcast is also available on https://www.billmartinezshow.com, Talk 4 Media (www.talk4media.com), Talk 4 Podcasting (www.talk4podcasting.com), iHeartRadio, Amazon Music, Pandora, Spotify, Audible, and over 100 other podcast outlets.
Bill Martinez Live is broadcast live Mondays at 3PM ET on W4CY Radio (www.w4cy.com) part of Talk 4 Radio (www.talk4radio.com) on the Talk 4 Media Network (www.talk4media.com). Bill Martinez is viewed on Talk 4 TV (www.talk4tv.com).
Bill Martinez Live Podcast is also available on https://www.billmartinezshow.com, Talk 4 Media (www.talk4media.com), Talk 4 Podcasting (www.talk4podcasting.com), iHeartRadio, Amazon Music, Pandora, Spotify, Audible, and over 100 other podcast outlets.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
The topics and opinions expressed in the following show are
solely those of the hosts and their guests and not
those of W FORCY Radio. It's employees are affiliates. We
make no recommendations or endorsements for radio show programs, services,
or products mentioned on air or on our web. No
liability explicitor implies shall be extended to W FOURCY Radio
or it's employees are affiliates. Any questions or comments should
be directed to those show hosts. Thank you for choosing
(00:21):
W FOURCY Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Well, hello, glad you could join us. I'm Bill Martinez
and Boil. A lot on the docket and a lot
to talk about. We're going to have Steve Bonta, the
publisher of the New American magazine up in just a
moment to talk about the global the global economic order.
Who really holds the power? You know, a lot of
dark money flying around, and I think routinely people have said, oh,
it's George Soros's fault. Well, I think George Soros is
(01:00):
just only a piece of the puzzle. There's lots of
dark money that's flying around that is doing everything they
can to deconstruct the United States of America. And this
shouldn't be new. I mean, as soon as America became
a nation, what we did was we turned the whole
global order on its head. It wasn't about czars, it
(01:23):
wasn't about kings, it wasn't about the traditional governmental apparatic.
This was a whole different idea. They took the pyramid,
the construct of the I guess what you would say,
the traditional work pyramid where you would have the CEO
(01:44):
on top and then it would go all the way
down to the minions. Well, our founding father said no,
we're going to let the minions be in charge. There's
going to be a government of for and buy we
the people. Well that was the revolutionary you know, when
did that ever happen? Where did that come up? And
that really threatened the whole global even then the global
(02:05):
economic order. And here it is. For two hundred and
fifty years almost there have been attacks on this country
to undermine and here we are at this point, at
this at this dawn of this new era where you're
looking at what's happening in New York where you've got
an admitted democratic socialist and don't be fooled by the
(02:29):
name democratic Okay, it's socialist. That's it's socialism, which is,
you know, on the road to communism. That's what it's
all about. History has pointed that time and time again.
So it's just a very euphemistic way to say communism.
But forget about the like I said, forget about democratic
(02:49):
that's just all that's just window dressing. That's not what
it's all about. And again, all you have to do
is listen to what Mamdani is offering. And it's straight
from the playbook state from minkanf you know, the communist manifesto.
And we have been saying all along, well, all that's
fine and well, but when are we the people going
(03:12):
to compare it with I believe the greatest document that
have liberated men and that have created more prosperity than
any other form of government in the history of mankind,
and that is our US Constitution. How does Mam Donnie's
constitution square up with our constitution? Does it add or
take away? Well, clearly it takes away. I mean starting
(03:33):
with property. You know again, that's the tradition of the
socialism and communism is that you don't own anything. And
of course this was doubted from the rafters by the
World Economic Forum. You know Klaus Schwab who said you
will by twenty thirty, you will own nothing, and you'll
like it. I mean he could have almost said it
with a German accent, I think and sound like you know,
(03:55):
member of Sergeant Schultz. You know you will like it.
But I mean you've got to really suspend a lot
of tradition and success in order to come to that point. So,
like all regimes that have done this, they first, you know,
make it seem nice because they want to get a
segment of the community moving in that direction. And then
(04:18):
for anybody else that resists, well then you know, we
have ways to get you to comport right. I mean,
this is nothing new. I mean maybe for these new kids,
new kids who are growing up into this, they may
think that it's new, but look, there's enough history and
hopefully they would look into their history books. Or even then,
I mean, with all the AI that's around and how
(04:38):
efficient they have become and utilizing AI, do some research
and find out for themselves. You know what this all
leads to. It leads to shared misery, It leads to
anything but what they told you they were going to do.
I mean We've already had government run grocery stores in
Kansas and it didn't last long. In fact, you saw
(05:02):
the shelves. I remember when I saw the shelves. This
was before they went out of business. And they'll wonder
the people there in Kansas were complaining about it because
all there was was just literally one package of hot
talk buns on the shelf. That was it. I mean,
that should have told you everything there is to know
about government run grocery stores. But Mamdani, like all other
socialists and communists, you know, you just didn't have enough time,
(05:24):
didn't have money. You know, of course we wouldn't do
it that way. It would be different. Well, it's never different.
It always ends up in the same place where it
becomes bankrupt and inefficient and very painful for those that
are served by this type of government. And you know,
on one hand, you know, the Republicans are saying, oh,
(05:45):
we had to you know, we had a champion, you know,
went a championis and think, oh, this is going to
be great because this is going to be pined the
tail on the donkey, and you know, use Mamdannie as
kind of the poster child of the Democratic Party. I mean,
the Democratic Party is in a total there's no question.
I mean, I feel for those Democrats who are moderate
and reasonable, and they're probably wondering, what the heck where
(06:07):
do I go? You know, I don't see myself as
a Republican and myself as a Democrat, but I don't
see myself as this Democratic party. And this is why
so many are leaving, whether it's Tulsea Gabbert or RFK
Junior and on and on. And there's millions of people
across the country who have done so. And I'm saying,
look it, let's go back and remember what our first
(06:28):
president said when he was talking about party factions, that
it would not be positive for our unity, it would
be problematic. And I don't know, I mean, maybe this
could possibly head to a situation of where, you know,
we realize that partisanship is not in our best interest.
It's argumentative. I mean, if you want to have argument
(06:49):
all the time, I guess you know, hey, I have parties,
have the Red Shirts and the Green Shirts. You know,
have this competitive issue going on. But if it's about
America and America's people, and we're in it for the
common interests of one another, regardless of your perception. And
by that I mean, you know, again, using the Constitution
(07:12):
as a litmus test. If we all agree that that
is our constitution, we better but we say, hey, this
is it, then that's what we look at. Any idea,
any policy that comes in, anybody deciding we're going to
open up the borders and just let millions of people
come in illegally, does it add or take away from
(07:33):
the Constitution? Does providing healthcare for illegal immigrants? Does it
add or take away, you know from the Constitution. Having
a level playing field to where commerce can be conducted
in a way that is fair and even handed. Does
that add or take away from the US Constitution? Does
(07:54):
having a system where you can utilize the treasury and
tax money to buy votes? Does it add or take
away from the Constitution? Having rigged elections where people are
unsure that the voting machines are qualified and that they
are operating efficiently. Does this add or take away you
(08:20):
know from the Constitution? Just you know, go right on
down the line here, ladies and gentlemen. And if we
ignore the Constitution and think that especially socialists or somebody
else who has has no promise, has no you know,
no loyalty to the Constitution. And this is the thing
that still beguiles me is I'm wondering how some of
(08:41):
these ideologues who seem to be so dispossessed of the
Constitution can take an oath of office. You know, if
you can't take an oath of office swearing your allegiance
to the constitutionists to serve and protect we the people
and our national interests, you know, what is it? Or
maybe you just slide yourself and say, oh, it's okay
(09:04):
in the in the uh uh, in the reason of
what they the Muslims call takia, that it's okay to
lie if it if it meets meets the end goal.
Well wait a minute, you know that's that's a that's
a breach of trust. You know, we we can't be untrustworthy.
I mean, if that's the case, then am I supposed
(09:27):
to be driving my car and have a lack of
trust that you see a red signal and you're you're
not going to stop at it? I mean, it comes
down it's that basic, right. This is what we're faced
with today, ladies and gentlemen. And you know, again, we've
got to get back to those traditions and those issues
that are are really important. We have Steve Bonta joining
(09:51):
us now, and uh, you know, I want to bring
him on. Steve Bonta, as I mentioned, is the publisher
of the New American magazine. Hey, Steve, welcome to show.
Good to have you with us.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
Hey Bill, good to be here. How are you.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Hey, I'm doing terrific. You know, we're trying to lay
down the foundation of this global economic order and who
really holds the power. You know, there's a lot of
report about dark money out there. We want to blame
George Soros for everything, but it's deeper than that, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (10:17):
Well, yeah, yeah it is. I mean in the sense
that it goes back quite a few generations, you know,
the state of affairs. George Soros is certainly a power player,
so as you mentioned Klaus Schwab earlier on and others
like that who perhaps are not as well known. But yeah,
I mean, it's it's kind of the way things are.
I wanted to point out though, that all is not lost.
I mean, the elections in Argentina on Sunday were just
(10:40):
a resounding rebuke of global power brokers for the most part.
I mean, everyone myself included kind of expected the Javier
and Milat and his freedom movement, we're going to be
set back. That the Socialists were poised to make a
comeback and instead they got routed. So you know, so
they are beatable. But you know, one of the significant
(11:03):
things is that they changed the voting. Back in September
they had votes in Buenos Aires Province. Is that there
is just a map voting around in the Argentine Facebook
shows that, you know, all the districts in Buenos Aires
Province back in in September all voted for the piRNAs,
the Socialists, and now fifty days later, five zero, less
(11:23):
than two months later, they're all they've changed it so
they have to vote with a paper ballot and they
have poll watchers and everything else else. They enforced the
voting laws and suddenly mirapol aidic to they're all voting
overwhelmingly for Formulae and the pro freedom you know movement.
So you know, obviously, you know, vote voter control is
something we've talked a lot about here in the United States. Exact,
(11:45):
you know, they've taken advantage of obviously the fact that
it's all now computerized and people to the early voting,
and I mean that that's a major lever of control.
It's wielded not just by venal Democrats and you know,
local ward healers and that sort of thing. People tend
to think it's you know, it's a local thing, but
it's really, you know that something else is being pushed
(12:05):
by George Soros and his ill his ascendency over the
voting system. Because control the votes, you can control who
gets into office exactly anyway, So that was a little
piece of good news I wanted to make sure you
didn't pass up on because.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
No, no, thank you for bringing that up. No, not
at all. And you know that's that's a bright sign
and something that here in the United States we should
draw encouragement from. I mean, you know, we've done a
lot of research on this, going back to Jimmy Carter
and you know, the mail in ballots, all this stuff
that's going on. What we've experienced in twenty twenty, I mean,
(12:41):
still rest musen they're pulling indicates that the majority of
Americans do not have trust in the system as it
stands right now.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
Steve Yes, but of course we're all paranoid, we're all delusional.
There's no evidence that anything you know, untoured happened in
twenty twenty. And so for I mean, you know, the
narrative is unbelievably persistent. Nobody listens. I mean, I mean,
most people reject it out of hand. And we saw that,
you know, there's literally no way that Biden got you know,
eighty one million people to vote for him in twenty twenty.
(13:11):
But they were able to take advantage of this unique
convergence of circumstances, you know, paranoia over COVID and all
of the you know, the sudden and oftentimes illicit changes
to the electoral laws, like what happened in Pennsylvania was done,
was done extra constitutionally. They changed the laws so people
could use these drop boxes and all this, and and
you know, the socialists are nothing if not clever and resourceful.
(13:34):
When they see an opportunity to seize power, to preserve power,
they take it.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
And I think that, you know, frankly, I think that
Denish Jesuza's you know, documentary film showed how they did
it pretty exactly.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
Well. I think, Yeah, I think in part, I think
there's lots of evidence out there, and there's been some
smart people Danish desuza. Uh, just one of many that
have demonstrated time and again how this could have happened.
But the courts are not interested in taking this topic up.
You know, our Congress is not interested in doing it,
(14:10):
you know, because it served the interests of the Democratic Party.
They got the results they wanted. The challenge for them
going forward is can they continue to pull this ruse
over the eyes of the electorate.
Speaker 3 (14:24):
No, and of course you know the argument that they
used to get it again to avoid the question because
no one wanted to deal with it back in twenty twenty,
twenty twenty one. You have no standing, therefore we're going
to dismiss it. Okay, well, then who does has standing?
I mean that begs the question. So are you saying,
in effect that there exists a class of crimes, namely
electoral manipulation, where nobody really has standing to do anything
(14:46):
about it, you know, unless you can prove, well, they
stole my dead mother's name and they use it that
kind of those sorts of trivial things. Maybe you know,
they'll allow prosecution, but you know, systematic corruption apparently nobody
has standing, so the courts won't do anything about it,
and this, this, this becomes you know, very difficult in practice.
So I think the salutary lesson is that in spite
(15:06):
of the undoubted power and entrenchment of the globalists, it
is possible. I mean, if if Argentina can fight back,
we sure as he came here in the United States, However,
we're gonna have to get our electoral house in order
between now and next November's, you know, November of next
year's elections, because if the if, if, if the if,
the broad capacity to cheat in in critical swing states
(15:29):
and even in non swing states continues to exist, cheat,
they will and they'll probably get the you know, the
results that they want because it's a midterm election. But
Argentina's elections were midterm elections too, and people thought, oh, well,
no one's going to turn out. And then Argentina and
you know, and Milay went out. He's very clever guy.
He went out into the slogan he said, he went
to this, you know, uh la Liberta Albano or Argentina retrose,
(15:51):
which means liberty will advance or Argentina will go backwards.
And Liberta Laban say, is the name of his his party,
and that that really resonated with the gen Z types
in Argentina, and you know, so so voting can be
a powerful tool, a powerful check against these people, including
you know, all the propaganda, all the AI, all the
(16:13):
you know, they're ascendency over finance and everything we've talked
about before in your show, you know, the Fiat money,
everything else that they do in theory can be put
to naught if the voice of the people is loud enough,
if people you know to do it. But you know,
to do that, you have to make sure that the
bad guys can't cheat. And that's gonna be a tall order.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
And the thing is, Steve, I mean, look at where
America is now compared to where we were a year ago.
I mean there's a huge contrast here. And yes, the
media is continuing on beating their drum, doing everything they
can to malign this president, whether it's a ballroom or
you know, name it. I mean, they just cannot help themselves.
(16:56):
They're just so enraged over everything that is Donald Trump,
and everything that is Donald Trump for the most part,
is benefiting the American people.
Speaker 3 (17:06):
Yeah, it's kind of funny. I mean, on a daily basis,
I go through the the Google News aggregator. And you
can just go down and look at every Trump's story,
and every single one, with the occasion, with the exception
of the occasional Fox News story exception of that, every
single one is negative. Every headline, you know, it's it's
always Trump did this, but you know, and there's always
(17:29):
a butt, you know, but he also I forget what
the lay of there. There they were, they were producing
his speech in Malaysia the other day or yesterday and
everything else. You know, well, you know, Trump met with
you know, the prime minister, Prime Minister Ibraham and Malaysia.
But he made a fool of himself and he he
talked to you know, the prime min the King of Thailand,
the Prime Minister of Cambodia. But you know, he was
(17:50):
clearly making it all about himself. You know, they can
never give him credit for anything domestic beforren. It's remarkable
I've never seen. But people I think are just tuning
it out of this point. And the fact is most
people don't get their news from you know, the Wall
Street Journal Cy and NCNBC, Bloomberg and so forth. They
get it from people like you.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Right well, Steve, thank you, and also the New American
because we're both admitted to pursuing the truth no matter
where it leads. And the thing is that the people
need to stay engaged. They may disengage from the mainstream media.
That good on them, but you need to still stay
engaged because this is a government of for and by we,
the people. Otherwise it becomes a government of for and
(18:29):
by the elites. And this is how we got to
to this, you know, this great thirty eight trillion dollars
in debt situation that we're living under right now, right.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
Yeah, yeah, But I mean, I think there are cautious
grounds for optimism and maybe a Generational Thing bill, because
what we have now is we have the it's a
gen Z phenomenon. So the gen Z is kind of
like the first generation that's grown up worthy where their
entire world is defined by unfettered access information via the Internet.
And you know, and we're seeing we've seen a spate
(19:04):
of things already. Of the Argentine elections of the Lais,
it was the gen Zers that supported Malayia, that that
voted for him. He calls him his leones, his lions,
lions of liberty, you know, and then and they go
out but a few months ago. It was in Katmandu
and Nepal where where the gen Zers responded to an
attempt by the by the communist government there by their
longtime communist dictator to shut down the internet a la China, right,
(19:27):
And they said, no, we're not doing this, And they
turned out and had this this joyous protest, and like
eighty of them got shot down and killed, but they
persisted anyway, and finally the guy fled the country and
Nepal still has problems, but at least isn't run by
a communist dictator anymore, you know. So one sees this
this kind of thing, and they're they're elsewhere in the world,
you know, they're just stirrings of discontent were more and more,
(19:49):
I mean gen Z regardless of what ethnicity language they speak,
they're all aware of the fact that all around the world,
you know, people are supposed to have unfettered access to
the internet and and and and where that falls short,
you know. So, so I think that that that really
is leading to just a generational change what we're seeing.
And I think a lot of people, certainly the legacy
(20:10):
media failed to understand that the old days of the
you know, the Dan Rathers and people like this telling
us what to think, right, defining the Overton window, and
we all more or less fall in lining, except for
a few outliers who think for themselves. But we don't
care about them because they never elect anyone anyway. Now,
everybody thinks like your kooky uncle who lives in a
(20:31):
who lives in a you know, out in the mountains
or something like that. Everybody has that, you know, that
mindset now, and it's great, but because it's similar to
the mindset of the American you know, the people who
set up the United States. I mean, if you there's
a wonderful book published, oh by the what was his name,
Bernard Balin. He was a historian at Harvard University, and
it was called The Ideological Origins of American Founders. I
(20:52):
read it years ago, and it was a very frank
account of the American Founders. And we tend to think
of all these these stayed intellectual, really smart guys, you know,
like they were all conspiracy theorists playing to bail. And
you know, he says, he says, one thing you find
when you look at the founder the earth, they were
all seeing conspiracies everywhere and sinister plots, and they were
(21:14):
just just reflexively cynical and skeptical about everything they were
told by the crown, by the government. And so, you know,
I think we've kind of come we kind of come
back to that. And it's probably the Internet we have
to thank for that that people now are just reflexively
skeptical again and saying, no, you know, don't talk to
me about the COVID vaccines. You know, I don't want
to hear about the twenty twenty elections. I don't want
(21:34):
to hear about the J sixers because it's all bs
what they're telling me, you know. And and this seems
to be again it's not a fringe thing anymore. It's
you know, it's everybody and and you know, the mainstream Musa.
We've got to we've got to get things back to
the way they were when when when I was young,
and people believe, you know, people's way of thing was respectable,
you know, uh, they they respected their betters and and
(21:55):
all this, Well that that's that's gone.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Yeah, Well the betters uh broke trust with the zers
and that's really and yes, I mean you look at
what happened with COVID. You look at what happened, you know,
with the twenty twenty election, the J six ers. I mean,
we're still trying to figure out who the heck killed JFK. Steve.
Speaker 3 (22:17):
Yeah, well, I mean I find it reassuring because in
my generation, I'm almost sixty two years old, I was
always kind of one of those guys that people would
edge away from, you know, I start talking about how
the Federal Reserve. Oh that's Steve. He's a little bit
he's the crazy uncle. You know. Now everybody's like that,
And I sort of part of me wishes I were
forty years younger, because I would probably fit in a
lot better with the gen Zers than I do with
(22:39):
my own state and relative in my own generation. I
don't know, but I think our generations, I really am.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Well, I am too, and I think our generation still
needs to come alongside the ziers to help them to
where they don't waste energy. Yes, and this is what
our experience, what we can bring to the table here
and complement this effort to where we maximize this uh
to the point that we you know, the the endgame
is what we all want, and that's a better America
(23:08):
for all Americans, right.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
And without violence. I mean that's the key. And the
amazing thing is that for all of the you know,
the doom saying oh we're headed towards the civil war
and so forth, I mean, yeah, there is conflict and
there may be some more to come. I mean, the
left is not going to give up its grip on power.
But by and large, I mean I'm surprised that we've
made so much progress in the right direction with comparatively
(23:32):
little violence. Yeah, you know, we may yet get through
this thing without the country tearing itself apart. And that's
that that I find very encouraging. Well, people have to
stand fast, you know, they have to.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
But you're right, I mean the violence is still here.
I mean, let's let's not delude ourselves. I mean, you know,
we used to always think, particularly with you know, violence
targeted toward people of faith. I mean we used to
always say, oh, well, the Christian persecution is happening overseas,
and you know, you read about it, you know, in
(24:05):
all kinds of different publications, Voice of the Martyrs and
on and on, but not here in America. But look
what's happened in this year. I mean we have a
lot of shootings of Christian churches and synagogues, and this
is I say a lot. I mean more than we're
used to. And and you know, this is something that
we need to we need to be mindful of because
(24:25):
and I've been very sensitive about the rhetoric and the
language is coming out, especially from our elected officials. These
are the leaders of the country talking about people being
Nazis and you know, in Hitler and things like this.
This is all this all conditions the ground and the
environment to do some crazy stuff. I mean, you know,
(24:48):
the murdering of Charlie Kirk, give me a break. And
I say that. I don't say that flippantly. I say
it that because of this language, and especially after it,
the language just it was almost like, Okay, we paused
for a minute. He was assassinated, you know, maybe we
saw his funeral on TV, and then it was like, oh,
(25:09):
just can't wait to get back to business as usual.
Speaker 3 (25:11):
Yeah, well, but here's the good thing. And you know,
if Charlie wherever Charlie is now, I think he probably
sees it this way. You know, that event was a
terrible thing. Sure, galvanized people didn't it, Oh it did.
It's a lot of people because you know, the problem
is that people on the right, we're on the right,
big are and little are tend to want to be
nice to everybody. They tend to want to do the
(25:32):
Christian thing right, right, I mean, because that's just not
all of us are Christians necessarily, but I say the
overwhelming majority are in some sense, you know, and we
believe in turning the other cheek and loving your enemies
and all this type of thing, and that it's it's
difficult to maintain that attitude and also be militant in
the sense of saying, but I'm not going to give
(25:52):
on certain things, right, Sometimes I'm just not going to
not going to give any ground on I mean, I
think and again, if you look at the Founding era
as the example, you see the same mentality. The Founders
did not want war with the British. Even after Lexington
conquered in the Siege of Boston, there was still you know,
they they kind of hoped there was a way out
of it, but ultimately obviously didn't go in that direction.
(26:16):
But they had certain red lines, as we would say,
I mean, I mean, they they they loved the English,
most of them were very much they were all Anglo
files they didn't want to fight with some other country.
They they realized the debt that they owed to England,
the common law and John Locke and all the rest
of this stuff. You know, it's not like it, but
but but there were certain things that they weren't going
to allow the English to do. And one was to
(26:37):
disarm them, right exactly. They weren't They're not that that
was a line they were not willing to cross. And
obviously beyond a certain point, they weren't willing to accept
taxation without representation either. And uh and that that you know,
so and and one could could go on. So you know,
it's very clear. People like Benjamin Franklin were very much
in Nathaniel Green. You know, they were they were late
(26:59):
comers to the war. They didn't want you know, they
were not men of violence. Some of them, maybe like
Samuel Adams, had a different take on it, you know
exactly they were itching for a fight, you know, but
you know, by and large, you know the view. You know,
they kind of knew what what that would mean. So
I mean, I think we you know, we hue to
that example of being resolute. You know, there's certain lines
(27:20):
that we're not going to cross like allow ourselves to
be completely disarmed and all this sort of thing. But
right now, you know, where the question of the Second
Amendments concern. We're moving in the right direction, aren't we.
I mean, we're seeing over the course of the last
twenty years, you know, state after state after state adopting
constitutional carry. I think Florida was the latest just recently.
And you know, it's it's happening, and it's happening without
(27:41):
people having to take up arms and do all this
sort of thing. So it's very encouraging. Right we seem
to be a you know, bit by bit, election by election,
you know, and so so the death of Charlie Kirk,
the martyrdom of Charlie Kirk was I mean and sometimes
a terrible event, but it's being turned into a positive thing,
I think because people are realizing, okay, you know, we
(28:03):
can still love our enemies without being squishy and nice,
you know, right exactly.
Speaker 2 (28:08):
Well, and I think we were realizing in the process
that you know, freedom isnt free, and and and the
other thing in terms of my Christian brothers and sisters is,
as the Word of God says, there's a time for
war and a time for peace. And my takeaway in
that of that verse is that you better know the difference,
(28:29):
because if you don't know the difference, you could be overwhelmed.
And it's hard. You're exactly right, I mean, Christians want
to turn the other cheek. We we're peace loving because
we reflect and and have a moral value and consideration
for life. That is that is unique, you know, to
our to our faith.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
I have to remember, war doesn't necessarily mean shooting war. Right,
the world has been in a state of war since
the fall of Adam and Eve, yes evil. It's an
eternal conflict in some ways, right, you know, started in
the heavens, right and uh and and so that the
continuation of that, and it's largely fought in the the
arena of ideas and words. But even there, you know,
(29:12):
you can choose to be resolute and an unapologetic defender
of liberty, or you can be squishy. Yes, right, let's
I'll just get you know. And so so that's the
thing and and and the beauty of it. No blood
need necessarily be shed. Uh And and I mean Harley
Kurt never shed anyone's blood, and yet he had he
did have a tremendous impact just because he was bold, right.
Speaker 2 (29:33):
And right exactly. Well, and you and you talk about
the power of of the First Amendment, and I still
and you and I talked about this before.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (29:42):
I think the single figure that really opened up the
gates for us to be able to uh kind of
calm things down and allow for free speech was one
Elon Musk in the purchase of of Twitter.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
That helped me.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
It was huge. What what he did, you know, for America?
And I just I'm so grateful and I will always
be grateful for what he did in restoring and bringing
us back to our founding But you know, you talk
about our founding fathers and how they were struggling with
(30:16):
this new concept, and I don't imagine that initially they
galvanized around freedom. I think freedom was a byproduct of
this whole process, and they realized that the ultimate calling
that we could have was to be free. And that
really galvanized, I believe, and you know, brought you know,
(30:37):
people together to where they realized, Okay, you know, we
love the mother country. We really don't want to do this,
but for the sake of freedom.
Speaker 3 (30:45):
Well, and you know, we have over several generations sort
of unlearned that lesson. You know, it's the economy stupid,
it's security stupid, whatever happens to be. And you know,
I mean, people have a right to expect the government
provide a modicum of security and and economic stability, to
be sure, but freedom is a rallying cry unlike any other.
(31:09):
And I actually I watched Javier Milay, the Argentine presidents,
speech to his supporters last night. The results of the
election were I think far exceeded even Malay's expectations, and
he tends to be pretty pretty optimistic. One of the
things he said was, we are now going to make
Argentina the freest country in the world. And so because
that's what our strength is is in freedom. And he
(31:31):
went on in that vein the rapturous applause of the
people in the in the room, and you know, that's
really what it's about. People do rally around the standard
of liberty.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Well, and what he and what he's realized, and of
course their country not that long ago was oppressed. They
were so far away from freedom and now they're beginning
to realize this and they're unleashing this natural resource within
the embodiment of the people. There in their home kin
and America should look at that as an example to say,
(32:03):
look at with the history, the rich tradition and everything
that we have, seems if we could have I know,
we talk in terms of a revival in a religious
sense all the time, but if we could have a
revival in terms of you know, our founding and our
values that we enjoyed some two hundred and fifty years
(32:26):
ago and unleashed the GDP of three hundred and fifty
million Americans, whoof man, there there'd be a lot of
fun that we'd have.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
Oh yeah, yeah, I mean, I mean, nothing's going to
stop us now if that happens. I Mean the problem is, though,
we still have to sort out a few things. So,
I mean, freedom got a black eye back in the
you know, during the sexual Revolution and the drugs and
stuff of the sixties and seventies because the people who
who prosecuted that particular that particular campaign, so to speak,
(33:02):
the culture War, did it under the banner of freedom.
They you know, the Woodcock Wolodcock, the wood would Stock Festival. Yes,
Woodcock's a bird, but the Woodstock Festival was carried out
under the battle. It was you know, greater freedom and
you know, sex, drugs and rock and roll. It's all
about freedom, you know, it's all you need is freedom. Well,
you know that's a type of freedom, but that's what
we would call license. And so of course sensible people
looked at it and said, well, now, no, that's not
(33:24):
really what they want, what we want, and so then
they said, well, we need to crack down and have
all these the government should make a law, you know,
and so the drug war began and all these other things,
and so, you know, people on the right sort of
distanced themselves from this ideal of freedom because because freedom
is what those hippies want, you know, all those drug people,
we don't want that. We want law and order. Of course,
(33:45):
that's very easily turned into something, you know, I mean,
that's kind of the way the Nazis did too. They're
all about law and order, you know, they they and
so you have to be careful. And before long we
had just these byzantine drug laws and everything else. And
then of course, with nine to eleven, you know, all
the surveillance state that was brought us all done. The
you know, law and order becomes paramount and freedom somehow
(34:05):
gets lost, and people like Ron Paul for a long
time where these lone voices in the wilderness. Oh you
sound kind of like a hippie talking about freedom. Only
hippies and weirdos and beat nicks think about that, you
know where you know? And so, But now we've come again,
kind of come full circle where people are realizing, yeah,
you do need to have law and order within within value,
but we've taken it way too far, and now everybody
(34:28):
is surveilled and tracked and controlled and everything else, and
we don't want that. And so freedom has become you know,
real freedom in the sense the Founders understood, I think
is now is once again in vogue. The problem is
still a lot of these gen Z people are very young,
very green. You know. The doctrine of freedom is something
that kind of distills gradually on your soul, like the
(34:50):
dus from heaven. You have to spend years and years
studying it, thinking about it, practicing it in your life,
learning what it is to be a free and agent
unto yourself well, you know, a free human being. It's
not something that can be learned. You know. The couple
of catch phrases, I mean that that can start you
in the right direction. So you know, the extent that
people in our generation have that experience, you know, you know,
(35:14):
I think it needs to be it needs to be
shared with all these enthusiastic and energetic younger souls.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Well, well to balance it out, Like you said, these tensions,
these dynamic tensions have to be measured in such a
way and balanced in such a way that it doesn't
abandon and lose its purpose. And the challenge that we've
had traditionally is just like you said, something seems to
be going awry, and we look to the government to
fix it.
Speaker 3 (35:38):
Oh tally the federal government, yes, rightly, right.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Yeah, and so we that's the that's the wrong spot.
I mean, you know, this has to be measured at
a local level, individually, one soul at a time, and
as we do that, then hopefully we bring people together
in such a way that are focused on the same
you know, the same objective to where we can reinforce
(36:03):
and help manage that dynamic tension between freedom and irresponsibility.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
Well, a lot of that manages itself in a system
where federalism is respected, right because you know, I mean
if you look at at alcohol, which is a problem,
which what what do you do about alcohol. How do
you I At one point, we try to federal level
one size fits all, and that didn't work, you know,
although they did it the right way. They amended the Constitution,
you know, and the Volstead Act and all that sort
(36:30):
of thing, and they amended it again to get rid
of it. But it turned out this, this wasn't a
good idea. And so now, for the most part, you know,
local governments and state governments experiment and try to figure
out what what what works best. It's not an easy question,
you know, because yeah, if I if I drink and
get drunk, it may be a private thing. But then
if I get behind the wheel of a car, or
(36:51):
I get into a violent fight, or I start, you know,
in a drunken rage, you know, abuse my wife or
my children and something, then it's not so much. It's
not a personal thing anymore. But it's a difficult thing.
And so federalism allows experimentation, right And the same would
be true of drugs, except no, you know, long ago
we decide, well, let's let's let the federal government do that,
you know, let's let's let them pass all the laws.
(37:13):
And you could and you could go through area after
area education is another good example. You know, maybe it's
true that communities have a vested, you know, interest in
ensuring a certain level of education. You don't want to
have an illiterate population, for sure, But what does that
look like. Well, traditionally it was done via local schools
and local schoolhouses and all that sort of thing. Now
(37:34):
it's all done by the federal government in the Department
of Education.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
And how's that work in for us?
Speaker 3 (37:38):
Yeah, exactly, So, I mean federal federalism, and that's the
missing ingredient. And interesting Argentina is also a federal republic
like the United States. But federalism is I think, isn't
the often neglected key to the maintenance of this balance
that you're talking about of liberty, Because then, you know,
if you live in a state and you find out
the laws here are just too oppressive, I don't like it. Well,
(37:59):
you can move to another state, right, And people do
that all the time. They vote with their feet and
so you know, but well, everything at the federal level
doesn't work that way. It's one size fits all.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
Well, Steve, And as you say, and I think right
now where we are, we need to answer these difficult questions.
Otherwise the tendency is going to be okay, Well, the
federal government didn't work, so maybe we need to look
outside and look to the United Nations ors some type
of global control, which is what you wrote about in
terms of protecting free speech. I mean, you got situations now, like,
(38:32):
for example, in England, if you if you say the
wrong thing, you know, you're you're subject to arrest. I mean,
some of the conversation you and I had, I mean,
we're okay here in America so far, but in England
they might say, well, oh yeah, Steve Bonta was with
Bill Martinez. They had this conversation, and we're going to
arrest him at the airport, right.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
Yeah, yeah, and it has happened, although mostly English you
know citizens that get you know, they get that when
they you know, return home from saying something in it
in an interview in another country and that kind of thing.
But yeah, it could, in theory happen. And obviously you know,
now the maybe it may not be obvious, but but
the but the European Union in particular, the EU is
trying to force its version of non free speech on
(39:15):
the rest of us, on our Internet companies, for example,
forcing them to comply with their laws and if you don't,
we're gonna We're going to find you and all the
rest of this. So it's a it's a very very
vexed topic, indeed, And you know, I got to say,
it's not by accident that a lot of this is happening.
A lot of the interesting stuff is not happening in Europe.
I mean, there are some places, you know, Italy and
(39:35):
so forth, they're having they're having a nationalist revival in Europe.
It's less clear to me outside of maybe Poland perhaps
that that that that nationalist revival and say in Italy
with Georgia Moloney or something like that, is actually translating
into more freedom for Italians or you know, or whether
or whether they're still acquiescing to the European Union and
(39:57):
most of these things in terms of the you know,
crack down on speech and controlling the finances all the
rest of this stuff. So, you know. But on the
other hand, there's a lot of exciting things happening in
Latin America, not just Argentina and here in the United
States and who lesser extended in parts of Asia. You know,
you can see, uh, you know, people but people are
people are fed up with being controlled.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Do you do you think that Trump factor is playing
into some of this?
Speaker 3 (40:21):
Absolutely, But you know, Trump again, Trump is mostly attractive
because because because he he is unapologetically pro American, you know,
given where we're coming from the Biden years, that in
itself seems refreshing. A lot more encouraging is the fact
that he talks a lot about getting rid of the
(40:43):
income tax and winding up the federal Reserve and uh,
you know, all this sort of thing, stopping taxes on
Social Security. But so far it's all been taught. Now,
he's only been in office about ten months at this point,
so we'll give him a little attitude.
Speaker 2 (40:58):
But look what he's done in ten months.
Speaker 3 (41:01):
A lot of what he's done has been, you know,
basically getting our foreign policy on a s or more
rational basis, our immigration policy and this sort of thing.
I guess, you know, probably free speech were better off
than we were. Certainly that, you know, the cancel culture
and the DEI stuff has mostly faded into the woodwork,
although it'll come right back if if Trump, if if
(41:22):
Trump is out of office and is replaced by you know,
Gavin Newsom. In twenty twenty eight, or something like that.
I would think we should also point out under the Constitution,
it's really Congress that is most responsible for that. It
shouldn't be you know, this, this this mighty presidential colossus
making all the changes it should most of it should
come through Congress with the complaisance of the President. And
(41:45):
so you know, you'll know that the republic is back
in full flower when this stuff is coming from Congress.
Good example of the tariffs. I greatly fear that the
Supreme Court decision may go against Trump or where the
terarifts are concerned, because it's pretty plain to me he
has no authority, no legitimate constitutional authority. The Levy tariffs
problem is Congress refuses to do it. So he's kind
(42:08):
of doing the right thing but in the wrong way,
so to speak. Yeah, and this is the case in
a lot of things. I mean, I I don't think
it's necessarily wrong what he's doing. We talked about this
the last time we talked, you know, with with with
regard to you know, sending the National Guard and so
forth to cities. But you don't want to see that
happen too often. You would hope that the local governments
(42:28):
and local constabularies will be adequate to the task and
won't sit in their hands the next time some favorite
interest group decides to go out and riot in the
streets and willfully assault people and smash cars and you know,
attack policemen and so forth, you would think, right, you know,
full flower. And most of this is coming from the
state and local level. The president's mostly a dude who
(42:51):
signs bills and occasionally gives an inspiring speech.
Speaker 2 (42:54):
Yeah, no, I'm I'm with you on that. But Trump
is concerned about lives of Americans, whether it's in Portland, Chicago,
these hot spots in d C, I mean DC of
all places. And it was like the mayors and everybody
was just, oh, it's just another body count. I mean,
it was almost like we're back in the era of
Vietnam where we just got worn out watching you know,
(43:16):
the casually counts every night on television. It was like, Okay,
it's Chicago, another weekend. You know, you got x amount
of shootings and yeah, maybe five, seven, eight people die. Okay,
we'll wait until the next weekend. And it just it's
just been going on that way. It's like a sick mantra.
And then Trump you know, comes up and says this
is unacceptable. So he's putting the heat on these lawmakers
(43:38):
to step up and the people. We the people need
to take note of these lawmakers that aren't stepping up
and not fulfilling their duty to the American people.
Speaker 3 (43:48):
Right, yeah, absolutely, And I mean, you know, again, the
day that Trump stands up and gives a state of
Union address or a victory speech after electure or something
says like We're going to make America the freest on
earth that you know, I will definitely sit up and
take notice when he says that. So, I mean, because
that's the key. And I think we're freer now than
(44:10):
we were a year ago, no doubt about that, and
certainly freer now that we were during the COVID despotism.
But we have a long way to go. You know,
We've still grown under the yoke of essentially a progressive
income tax and an inflationary monetary system that would give
the Founders nightmares. And that's just for starters. I mean,
the reason I was a little late getting back is
(44:32):
I took my wife, who's a recent immigrant to the
United States, to the bank to day. She has a
green card. Now our social Security card, took her to
a local bank to open a bank account so that
she can now replace it. And you know what, they
wouldn't let us do it. Why is that because federal
regulation said you have to have at least two things
that prove your current address. Okay, so passport won't suffice.
(44:53):
You have to have an envelope with some kind of
a bill, like the heating bill that shows your name
on it. And I was afraid this would be the case.
Brought along stuff that had my address on it, you know,
and the guy was very apologetic when you first, oh,
this is fine, will be but then he actually entered
in the computer computer kicked it back and said, Nope,
you can't do this.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
Because her name wasn't on the bill as well.
Speaker 3 (45:12):
No, because well she's only been the United States now.
Speaker 2 (45:14):
No, no, I know that.
Speaker 3 (45:16):
And the thing is post nine to eleven. That's the
first thing they did after nine eleven. They changed all
the banking laws, making it much much harder for anyone
to just open a bank account without proving six ways
to Sunday. Not only that you are who you say
you are, you know, which for which a passport would
presumably suffice, but passports don't have your address on them,
so then you have to have all these proofs of
(45:36):
address and all this stuff. Couldn't do it, so you know,
we spent we wasted over an hour doing that, and
you know, I guess we'll have another go at it
in a couple of months, you know. And she gets
a couple of things in the mail that have her
name on it, and we can we can actually if
they if they if they're admissible. But this is this
is a major problem with with the world we live
in today. I mean, the memory of nine to eleven
(45:56):
has receded and we're we're you know, we're now asserting
control over our borders and king out the illegal immigrants.
But all of those controls, you know, all all the
new identification stuff persists. I mean, they recently removed the
requirement that you take off your shoes, yes, exactly, though
some airports still do. Like when I was at West
Palm Beach International Airport last weekend, they still I think
(46:20):
they required no maybe it didn't, but it was, but
but there were there were some other things so so
at their discretion they still do that. But but it's
still a far cry from what it was pre nine
to eleven.
Speaker 2 (46:29):
Yeah, without a doubt. Well, well, Steve Tuman has left here.
Let's talk government shut down here in these last two years, right, yes,
just for fun?
Speaker 3 (46:37):
Is it still shut down? Bill? I haven't really noticed.
Speaker 2 (46:40):
Well it, you know, for the people that are expecting checks.
I feel for them, you know, because this has got
to be really hard on them air traffic controllers and
the longer this goes. I mean, you know, Court Schumer
says this is good for the Democratic Party that the
people are in pain. I can't even believe he made
such a stupid statement.
Speaker 3 (47:01):
Well, part of you know, the cynical part of me,
you know, says, yeah, just keep giving us the sound
bites of Chuck you know, you, you and your comrades.
I mean, the only person I mean, I never thought
i'd say something like this a year ago, But the
only person in that party who seems to have a
modic of common sense is is Fetterman. Yes, exactly, which
is why he's now being said, well maybe he should
(47:21):
be the presidential candid for the Democrats in twenty twenty eight.
You know, he's he's also very quirky and so forth.
But yeah, I mean, I haven't really noticed the shutdown,
except for the fact that my wife's Social Security card
like two or three weeks longer than they said it
would to get because they shut down the government after
we did the initial filled out the form before it
actually arrived, so it was delayed. But you know, no biggie.
(47:43):
As far as air traffic control, I mean, everything was
normal last weekend, the last time I flew. But but
we'll see. I mean, it's it's an inconvenience and if
it goes on long enough. I think the Republicans do
have some kind of nuclear option right where they can.
They don't want to do it at this point, but
you know, they do have a majority in both houses.
Speaker 2 (48:02):
Well, I you know, I think that the people are
calling for action, Steve, you know, nuclear or no nuclear.
They want this government opened up again. And I believe
that the Republicans do that, they exercise a nuclear option,
they'll be rewarded for that.
Speaker 3 (48:19):
Well yeah, I mean in particular, I mean we can't
we can't go for long without a functioning military. I
mean we just we just had two separate aircraft in
the space of like two hours crash in the sea
near from you know, they both originated for the carrier Nimitz.
I don't know if you saw that. It's in the
South China Sea right now, and they'd had helicopter go down,
and then the F eighteen went down very shortly thereafter,
and they think they got some bad fuel or something
(48:40):
like this, and one has to wonder if that's something
related to the fact that they're shorthanded. Yeah, somewhere along
the you know, I don't know anything about it, but
it sort of makes you wonder. And obviously, given the
array of formidable enemies that we now face, you know,
we can't afford to have the military shut down.
Speaker 2 (48:58):
You think me.
Speaker 3 (49:00):
I mean, it's kind of nice to see the unconstitutional
portions of the government shut down. To them, I say,
you know, you know, get rid of them permanently, exactly.
Speaker 2 (49:08):
I'm with you on that. I mean, all the dogs
you pointed out and that could have happened is now
available to Donald Trump, and we'll see, we'll see if
he takes that step. He's the publisher of the New
American magazine. Steve Bonta has been our guest. Steve, where
can they go to subscribe the.
Speaker 3 (49:24):
New American dot com? And there's a big old subscribe
button right at the top of the page and you
can see peasy yep, you can subscribe. Encourage you to
do that for our great You can see a couple
of our recent issues there, but we also have day
to day online content on our website.
Speaker 2 (49:39):
Well, Steve Bonta cannot thank you enough, appreciate you coming
on the show. Take care, be well, My friends will
take care well, and our thanks to you for sharing
a part of your day with us. For more information,
you can go to Bill Martinez Live dot com. May
God bless you and keep you. May make his face
shine upon you, May be gracious unto you and give
you peace. God bless you. Thank you. Prodicutt also product
The topics and opinions expressed in the following show are
solely those of the hosts and their guests and not
those of W FORCY Radio. It's employees are affiliates. We
make no recommendations or endorsements for radio show programs, services,
or products mentioned on air or on our web. No
liability explicitor implies shall be extended to W FOURCY Radio
or it's employees are affiliates. Any questions or comments should
be directed to those show hosts. Thank you for choosing
(00:21):
W FOURCY Radio.
Speaker 2 (00:38):
Well, hello, glad you could join us. I'm Bill Martinez
and Boil. A lot on the docket and a lot
to talk about. We're going to have Steve Bonta, the
publisher of the New American magazine up in just a
moment to talk about the global the global economic order.
Who really holds the power? You know, a lot of
dark money flying around, and I think routinely people have said, oh,
it's George Soros's fault. Well, I think George Soros is
(01:00):
just only a piece of the puzzle. There's lots of
dark money that's flying around that is doing everything they
can to deconstruct the United States of America. And this
shouldn't be new. I mean, as soon as America became
a nation, what we did was we turned the whole
global order on its head. It wasn't about czars, it
(01:23):
wasn't about kings, it wasn't about the traditional governmental apparatic.
This was a whole different idea. They took the pyramid,
the construct of the I guess what you would say,
the traditional work pyramid where you would have the CEO
(01:44):
on top and then it would go all the way
down to the minions. Well, our founding father said no,
we're going to let the minions be in charge. There's
going to be a government of for and buy we
the people. Well that was the revolutionary you know, when
did that ever happen? Where did that come up? And
that really threatened the whole global even then the global
(02:05):
economic order. And here it is. For two hundred and
fifty years almost there have been attacks on this country
to undermine and here we are at this point, at
this at this dawn of this new era where you're
looking at what's happening in New York where you've got
an admitted democratic socialist and don't be fooled by the
(02:29):
name democratic Okay, it's socialist. That's it's socialism, which is,
you know, on the road to communism. That's what it's
all about. History has pointed that time and time again.
So it's just a very euphemistic way to say communism.
But forget about the like I said, forget about democratic
(02:49):
that's just all that's just window dressing. That's not what
it's all about. And again, all you have to do
is listen to what Mamdani is offering. And it's straight
from the playbook state from minkanf you know, the communist manifesto.
And we have been saying all along, well, all that's
fine and well, but when are we the people going
(03:12):
to compare it with I believe the greatest document that
have liberated men and that have created more prosperity than
any other form of government in the history of mankind,
and that is our US Constitution. How does Mam Donnie's
constitution square up with our constitution? Does it add or
take away? Well, clearly it takes away. I mean starting
(03:33):
with property. You know again, that's the tradition of the
socialism and communism is that you don't own anything. And
of course this was doubted from the rafters by the
World Economic Forum. You know Klaus Schwab who said you
will by twenty thirty, you will own nothing, and you'll
like it. I mean he could have almost said it
with a German accent, I think and sound like you know,
(03:55):
member of Sergeant Schultz. You know you will like it.
But I mean you've got to really suspend a lot
of tradition and success in order to come to that point. So,
like all regimes that have done this, they first, you know,
make it seem nice because they want to get a
segment of the community moving in that direction. And then
(04:18):
for anybody else that resists, well then you know, we
have ways to get you to comport right. I mean,
this is nothing new. I mean maybe for these new kids,
new kids who are growing up into this, they may
think that it's new, but look, there's enough history and
hopefully they would look into their history books. Or even then,
I mean, with all the AI that's around and how
(04:38):
efficient they have become and utilizing AI, do some research
and find out for themselves. You know what this all
leads to. It leads to shared misery, It leads to
anything but what they told you they were going to do.
I mean We've already had government run grocery stores in
Kansas and it didn't last long. In fact, you saw
(05:02):
the shelves. I remember when I saw the shelves. This
was before they went out of business. And they'll wonder
the people there in Kansas were complaining about it because
all there was was just literally one package of hot
talk buns on the shelf. That was it. I mean,
that should have told you everything there is to know
about government run grocery stores. But Mamdani, like all other
socialists and communists, you know, you just didn't have enough time,
(05:24):
didn't have money. You know, of course we wouldn't do
it that way. It would be different. Well, it's never different.
It always ends up in the same place where it
becomes bankrupt and inefficient and very painful for those that
are served by this type of government. And you know,
on one hand, you know, the Republicans are saying, oh,
(05:45):
we had to you know, we had a champion, you know,
went a championis and think, oh, this is going to
be great because this is going to be pined the
tail on the donkey, and you know, use Mamdannie as
kind of the poster child of the Democratic Party. I mean,
the Democratic Party is in a total there's no question.
I mean, I feel for those Democrats who are moderate
and reasonable, and they're probably wondering, what the heck where
(06:07):
do I go? You know, I don't see myself as
a Republican and myself as a Democrat, but I don't
see myself as this Democratic party. And this is why
so many are leaving, whether it's Tulsea Gabbert or RFK
Junior and on and on. And there's millions of people
across the country who have done so. And I'm saying,
look it, let's go back and remember what our first
(06:28):
president said when he was talking about party factions, that
it would not be positive for our unity, it would
be problematic. And I don't know, I mean, maybe this
could possibly head to a situation of where, you know,
we realize that partisanship is not in our best interest.
It's argumentative. I mean, if you want to have argument
(06:49):
all the time, I guess you know, hey, I have parties,
have the Red Shirts and the Green Shirts. You know,
have this competitive issue going on. But if it's about
America and America's people, and we're in it for the
common interests of one another, regardless of your perception. And
by that I mean, you know, again, using the Constitution
(07:12):
as a litmus test. If we all agree that that
is our constitution, we better but we say, hey, this
is it, then that's what we look at. Any idea,
any policy that comes in, anybody deciding we're going to
open up the borders and just let millions of people
come in illegally, does it add or take away from
(07:33):
the Constitution? Does providing healthcare for illegal immigrants? Does it
add or take away, you know from the Constitution. Having
a level playing field to where commerce can be conducted
in a way that is fair and even handed. Does
that add or take away from the US Constitution? Does
(07:54):
having a system where you can utilize the treasury and
tax money to buy votes? Does it add or take
away from the Constitution? Having rigged elections where people are
unsure that the voting machines are qualified and that they
are operating efficiently. Does this add or take away you
(08:20):
know from the Constitution? Just you know, go right on
down the line here, ladies and gentlemen. And if we
ignore the Constitution and think that especially socialists or somebody
else who has has no promise, has no you know,
no loyalty to the Constitution. And this is the thing
that still beguiles me is I'm wondering how some of
(08:41):
these ideologues who seem to be so dispossessed of the
Constitution can take an oath of office. You know, if
you can't take an oath of office swearing your allegiance
to the constitutionists to serve and protect we the people
and our national interests, you know, what is it? Or
maybe you just slide yourself and say, oh, it's okay
(09:04):
in the in the uh uh, in the reason of
what they the Muslims call takia, that it's okay to
lie if it if it meets meets the end goal.
Well wait a minute, you know that's that's a that's
a breach of trust. You know, we we can't be untrustworthy.
I mean, if that's the case, then am I supposed
(09:27):
to be driving my car and have a lack of
trust that you see a red signal and you're you're
not going to stop at it? I mean, it comes
down it's that basic, right. This is what we're faced
with today, ladies and gentlemen. And you know, again, we've
got to get back to those traditions and those issues
that are are really important. We have Steve Bonta joining
(09:51):
us now, and uh, you know, I want to bring
him on. Steve Bonta, as I mentioned, is the publisher
of the New American magazine. Hey, Steve, welcome to show.
Good to have you with us.
Speaker 3 (10:01):
Hey Bill, good to be here. How are you.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Hey, I'm doing terrific. You know, we're trying to lay
down the foundation of this global economic order and who
really holds the power. You know, there's a lot of
report about dark money out there. We want to blame
George Soros for everything, but it's deeper than that, isn't it.
Speaker 3 (10:17):
Well, yeah, yeah it is. I mean in the sense
that it goes back quite a few generations, you know,
the state of affairs. George Soros is certainly a power player,
so as you mentioned Klaus Schwab earlier on and others
like that who perhaps are not as well known. But yeah,
I mean, it's it's kind of the way things are.
I wanted to point out though, that all is not lost.
I mean, the elections in Argentina on Sunday were just
(10:40):
a resounding rebuke of global power brokers for the most part.
I mean, everyone myself included kind of expected the Javier
and Milat and his freedom movement, we're going to be
set back. That the Socialists were poised to make a
comeback and instead they got routed. So you know, so
they are beatable. But you know, one of the significant
(11:03):
things is that they changed the voting. Back in September
they had votes in Buenos Aires Province. Is that there
is just a map voting around in the Argentine Facebook
shows that, you know, all the districts in Buenos Aires
Province back in in September all voted for the piRNAs,
the Socialists, and now fifty days later, five zero, less
(11:23):
than two months later, they're all they've changed it so
they have to vote with a paper ballot and they
have poll watchers and everything else else. They enforced the
voting laws and suddenly mirapol aidic to they're all voting
overwhelmingly for Formulae and the pro freedom you know movement.
So you know, obviously, you know, vote voter control is
something we've talked a lot about here in the United States. Exact,
(11:45):
you know, they've taken advantage of obviously the fact that
it's all now computerized and people to the early voting,
and I mean that that's a major lever of control.
It's wielded not just by venal Democrats and you know,
local ward healers and that sort of thing. People tend
to think it's you know, it's a local thing, but
it's really, you know that something else is being pushed
(12:05):
by George Soros and his ill his ascendency over the
voting system. Because control the votes, you can control who
gets into office exactly anyway, So that was a little
piece of good news I wanted to make sure you
didn't pass up on because.
Speaker 2 (12:17):
No, no, thank you for bringing that up. No, not
at all. And you know that's that's a bright sign
and something that here in the United States we should
draw encouragement from. I mean, you know, we've done a
lot of research on this, going back to Jimmy Carter
and you know, the mail in ballots, all this stuff
that's going on. What we've experienced in twenty twenty, I mean,
(12:41):
still rest musen they're pulling indicates that the majority of
Americans do not have trust in the system as it
stands right now.
Speaker 3 (12:49):
Steve Yes, but of course we're all paranoid, we're all delusional.
There's no evidence that anything you know, untoured happened in
twenty twenty. And so for I mean, you know, the
narrative is unbelievably persistent. Nobody listens. I mean, I mean,
most people reject it out of hand. And we saw that,
you know, there's literally no way that Biden got you know,
eighty one million people to vote for him in twenty twenty.
(13:11):
But they were able to take advantage of this unique
convergence of circumstances, you know, paranoia over COVID and all
of the you know, the sudden and oftentimes illicit changes
to the electoral laws, like what happened in Pennsylvania was done,
was done extra constitutionally. They changed the laws so people
could use these drop boxes and all this, and and
you know, the socialists are nothing if not clever and resourceful.
(13:34):
When they see an opportunity to seize power, to preserve power,
they take it.
Speaker 2 (13:39):
Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 3 (13:40):
And I think that, you know, frankly, I think that
Denish Jesuza's you know, documentary film showed how they did
it pretty exactly.
Speaker 2 (13:48):
Well. I think, Yeah, I think in part, I think
there's lots of evidence out there, and there's been some
smart people Danish desuza. Uh, just one of many that
have demonstrated time and again how this could have happened.
But the courts are not interested in taking this topic up.
You know, our Congress is not interested in doing it,
(14:10):
you know, because it served the interests of the Democratic Party.
They got the results they wanted. The challenge for them
going forward is can they continue to pull this ruse
over the eyes of the electorate.
Speaker 3 (14:24):
No, and of course you know the argument that they
used to get it again to avoid the question because
no one wanted to deal with it back in twenty twenty,
twenty twenty one. You have no standing, therefore we're going
to dismiss it. Okay, well, then who does has standing?
I mean that begs the question. So are you saying,
in effect that there exists a class of crimes, namely
electoral manipulation, where nobody really has standing to do anything
(14:46):
about it, you know, unless you can prove, well, they
stole my dead mother's name and they use it that
kind of those sorts of trivial things. Maybe you know,
they'll allow prosecution, but you know, systematic corruption apparently nobody
has standing, so the courts won't do anything about it,
and this, this, this becomes you know, very difficult in practice.
So I think the salutary lesson is that in spite
(15:06):
of the undoubted power and entrenchment of the globalists, it
is possible. I mean, if if Argentina can fight back,
we sure as he came here in the United States, However,
we're gonna have to get our electoral house in order
between now and next November's, you know, November of next
year's elections, because if the if, if, if the if,
the broad capacity to cheat in in critical swing states
(15:29):
and even in non swing states continues to exist, cheat,
they will and they'll probably get the you know, the
results that they want because it's a midterm election. But
Argentina's elections were midterm elections too, and people thought, oh, well,
no one's going to turn out. And then Argentina and
you know, and Milay went out. He's very clever guy.
He went out into the slogan he said, he went
to this, you know, uh la Liberta Albano or Argentina retrose,
(15:51):
which means liberty will advance or Argentina will go backwards.
And Liberta Laban say, is the name of his his party,
and that that really resonated with the gen Z types
in Argentina, and you know, so so voting can be
a powerful tool, a powerful check against these people, including
you know, all the propaganda, all the AI, all the
(16:13):
you know, they're ascendency over finance and everything we've talked
about before in your show, you know, the Fiat money,
everything else that they do in theory can be put
to naught if the voice of the people is loud enough,
if people you know to do it. But you know,
to do that, you have to make sure that the
bad guys can't cheat. And that's gonna be a tall order.
Speaker 2 (16:33):
And the thing is, Steve, I mean, look at where
America is now compared to where we were a year ago.
I mean there's a huge contrast here. And yes, the
media is continuing on beating their drum, doing everything they
can to malign this president, whether it's a ballroom or
you know, name it. I mean, they just cannot help themselves.
(16:56):
They're just so enraged over everything that is Donald Trump,
and everything that is Donald Trump for the most part,
is benefiting the American people.
Speaker 3 (17:06):
Yeah, it's kind of funny. I mean, on a daily basis,
I go through the the Google News aggregator. And you
can just go down and look at every Trump's story,
and every single one, with the occasion, with the exception
of the occasional Fox News story exception of that, every
single one is negative. Every headline, you know, it's it's
always Trump did this, but you know, and there's always
(17:29):
a butt, you know, but he also I forget what
the lay of there. There they were, they were producing
his speech in Malaysia the other day or yesterday and
everything else. You know, well, you know, Trump met with
you know, the prime minister, Prime Minister Ibraham and Malaysia.
But he made a fool of himself and he he
talked to you know, the prime min the King of Thailand,
the Prime Minister of Cambodia. But you know, he was
(17:50):
clearly making it all about himself. You know, they can
never give him credit for anything domestic beforren. It's remarkable
I've never seen. But people I think are just tuning
it out of this point. And the fact is most
people don't get their news from you know, the Wall
Street Journal Cy and NCNBC, Bloomberg and so forth. They
get it from people like you.
Speaker 2 (18:08):
Right well, Steve, thank you, and also the New American
because we're both admitted to pursuing the truth no matter
where it leads. And the thing is that the people
need to stay engaged. They may disengage from the mainstream media.
That good on them, but you need to still stay
engaged because this is a government of for and by we,
the people. Otherwise it becomes a government of for and
(18:29):
by the elites. And this is how we got to
to this, you know, this great thirty eight trillion dollars
in debt situation that we're living under right now, right.
Speaker 3 (18:41):
Yeah, yeah, But I mean, I think there are cautious
grounds for optimism and maybe a Generational Thing bill, because
what we have now is we have the it's a
gen Z phenomenon. So the gen Z is kind of
like the first generation that's grown up worthy where their
entire world is defined by unfettered access information via the Internet.
And you know, and we're seeing we've seen a spate
(19:04):
of things already. Of the Argentine elections of the Lais,
it was the gen Zers that supported Malayia, that that
voted for him. He calls him his leones, his lions,
lions of liberty, you know, and then and they go
out but a few months ago. It was in Katmandu
and Nepal where where the gen Zers responded to an
attempt by the by the communist government there by their
longtime communist dictator to shut down the internet a la China, right,
(19:27):
And they said, no, we're not doing this, And they
turned out and had this this joyous protest, and like
eighty of them got shot down and killed, but they
persisted anyway, and finally the guy fled the country and
Nepal still has problems, but at least isn't run by
a communist dictator anymore, you know. So one sees this
this kind of thing, and they're they're elsewhere in the world,
you know, they're just stirrings of discontent were more and more,
(19:49):
I mean gen Z regardless of what ethnicity language they speak,
they're all aware of the fact that all around the world,
you know, people are supposed to have unfettered access to
the internet and and and and where that falls short,
you know. So, so I think that that that really
is leading to just a generational change what we're seeing.
And I think a lot of people, certainly the legacy
(20:10):
media failed to understand that the old days of the
you know, the Dan Rathers and people like this telling
us what to think, right, defining the Overton window, and
we all more or less fall in lining, except for
a few outliers who think for themselves. But we don't
care about them because they never elect anyone anyway. Now,
everybody thinks like your kooky uncle who lives in a
(20:31):
who lives in a you know, out in the mountains
or something like that. Everybody has that, you know, that
mindset now, and it's great, but because it's similar to
the mindset of the American you know, the people who
set up the United States. I mean, if you there's
a wonderful book published, oh by the what was his name,
Bernard Balin. He was a historian at Harvard University, and
it was called The Ideological Origins of American Founders. I
(20:52):
read it years ago, and it was a very frank
account of the American Founders. And we tend to think
of all these these stayed intellectual, really smart guys, you know,
like they were all conspiracy theorists playing to bail. And
you know, he says, he says, one thing you find
when you look at the founder the earth, they were
all seeing conspiracies everywhere and sinister plots, and they were
(21:14):
just just reflexively cynical and skeptical about everything they were
told by the crown, by the government. And so, you know,
I think we've kind of come we kind of come
back to that. And it's probably the Internet we have
to thank for that that people now are just reflexively
skeptical again and saying, no, you know, don't talk to
me about the COVID vaccines. You know, I don't want
to hear about the twenty twenty elections. I don't want
(21:34):
to hear about the J sixers because it's all bs
what they're telling me, you know. And and this seems
to be again it's not a fringe thing anymore. It's
you know, it's everybody and and you know, the mainstream Musa.
We've got to we've got to get things back to
the way they were when when when I was young,
and people believe, you know, people's way of thing was respectable,
you know, uh, they they respected their betters and and
(21:55):
all this, Well that that's that's gone.
Speaker 2 (21:57):
Yeah, Well the betters uh broke trust with the zers
and that's really and yes, I mean you look at
what happened with COVID. You look at what happened, you know,
with the twenty twenty election, the J six ers. I mean,
we're still trying to figure out who the heck killed JFK. Steve.
Speaker 3 (22:17):
Yeah, well, I mean I find it reassuring because in
my generation, I'm almost sixty two years old, I was
always kind of one of those guys that people would
edge away from, you know, I start talking about how
the Federal Reserve. Oh that's Steve. He's a little bit
he's the crazy uncle. You know. Now everybody's like that,
And I sort of part of me wishes I were
forty years younger, because I would probably fit in a
lot better with the gen Zers than I do with
(22:39):
my own state and relative in my own generation. I
don't know, but I think our generations, I really am.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Well, I am too, and I think our generation still
needs to come alongside the ziers to help them to
where they don't waste energy. Yes, and this is what
our experience, what we can bring to the table here
and complement this effort to where we maximize this uh
to the point that we you know, the the endgame
is what we all want, and that's a better America
(23:08):
for all Americans, right.
Speaker 3 (23:10):
And without violence. I mean that's the key. And the
amazing thing is that for all of the you know,
the doom saying oh we're headed towards the civil war
and so forth, I mean, yeah, there is conflict and
there may be some more to come. I mean, the
left is not going to give up its grip on power.
But by and large, I mean I'm surprised that we've
made so much progress in the right direction with comparatively
(23:32):
little violence. Yeah, you know, we may yet get through
this thing without the country tearing itself apart. And that's
that that I find very encouraging. Well, people have to
stand fast, you know, they have to.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
But you're right, I mean the violence is still here.
I mean, let's let's not delude ourselves. I mean, you know,
we used to always think, particularly with you know, violence
targeted toward people of faith. I mean we used to
always say, oh, well, the Christian persecution is happening overseas,
and you know, you read about it, you know, in
(24:05):
all kinds of different publications, Voice of the Martyrs and
on and on, but not here in America. But look
what's happened in this year. I mean we have a
lot of shootings of Christian churches and synagogues, and this
is I say a lot. I mean more than we're
used to. And and you know, this is something that
we need to we need to be mindful of because
(24:25):
and I've been very sensitive about the rhetoric and the
language is coming out, especially from our elected officials. These
are the leaders of the country talking about people being
Nazis and you know, in Hitler and things like this.
This is all this all conditions the ground and the
environment to do some crazy stuff. I mean, you know,
(24:48):
the murdering of Charlie Kirk, give me a break. And
I say that. I don't say that flippantly. I say
it that because of this language, and especially after it,
the language just it was almost like, Okay, we paused
for a minute. He was assassinated, you know, maybe we
saw his funeral on TV, and then it was like, oh,
(25:09):
just can't wait to get back to business as usual.
Speaker 3 (25:11):
Yeah, well, but here's the good thing. And you know,
if Charlie wherever Charlie is now, I think he probably
sees it this way. You know, that event was a
terrible thing. Sure, galvanized people didn't it, Oh it did.
It's a lot of people because you know, the problem
is that people on the right, we're on the right,
big are and little are tend to want to be
nice to everybody. They tend to want to do the
(25:32):
Christian thing right, right, I mean, because that's just not
all of us are Christians necessarily, but I say the
overwhelming majority are in some sense, you know, and we
believe in turning the other cheek and loving your enemies
and all this type of thing, and that it's it's
difficult to maintain that attitude and also be militant in
the sense of saying, but I'm not going to give
(25:52):
on certain things, right, Sometimes I'm just not going to
not going to give any ground on I mean, I
think and again, if you look at the Founding era
as the example, you see the same mentality. The Founders
did not want war with the British. Even after Lexington
conquered in the Siege of Boston, there was still you know,
they they kind of hoped there was a way out
of it, but ultimately obviously didn't go in that direction.
(26:16):
But they had certain red lines, as we would say,
I mean, I mean, they they they loved the English,
most of them were very much they were all Anglo
files they didn't want to fight with some other country.
They they realized the debt that they owed to England,
the common law and John Locke and all the rest
of this stuff. You know, it's not like it, but
but but there were certain things that they weren't going
to allow the English to do. And one was to
(26:37):
disarm them, right exactly. They weren't They're not that that
was a line they were not willing to cross. And
obviously beyond a certain point, they weren't willing to accept
taxation without representation either. And uh and that that you know,
so and and one could could go on. So you know,
it's very clear. People like Benjamin Franklin were very much
in Nathaniel Green. You know, they were they were late
(26:59):
comers to the war. They didn't want you know, they
were not men of violence. Some of them, maybe like
Samuel Adams, had a different take on it, you know
exactly they were itching for a fight, you know, but
you know, by and large, you know the view. You know,
they kind of knew what what that would mean. So
I mean, I think we you know, we hue to
that example of being resolute. You know, there's certain lines
(27:20):
that we're not going to cross like allow ourselves to
be completely disarmed and all this sort of thing. But
right now, you know, where the question of the Second
Amendments concern. We're moving in the right direction, aren't we.
I mean, we're seeing over the course of the last
twenty years, you know, state after state after state adopting
constitutional carry. I think Florida was the latest just recently.
And you know, it's it's happening, and it's happening without
(27:41):
people having to take up arms and do all this
sort of thing. So it's very encouraging. Right we seem
to be a you know, bit by bit, election by election,
you know, and so so the death of Charlie Kirk,
the martyrdom of Charlie Kirk was I mean and sometimes
a terrible event, but it's being turned into a positive thing,
I think because people are realizing, okay, you know, we
(28:03):
can still love our enemies without being squishy and nice,
you know, right exactly.
Speaker 2 (28:08):
Well, and I think we were realizing in the process
that you know, freedom isnt free, and and and the
other thing in terms of my Christian brothers and sisters is,
as the Word of God says, there's a time for
war and a time for peace. And my takeaway in
that of that verse is that you better know the difference,
(28:29):
because if you don't know the difference, you could be overwhelmed.
And it's hard. You're exactly right, I mean, Christians want
to turn the other cheek. We we're peace loving because
we reflect and and have a moral value and consideration
for life. That is that is unique, you know, to
our to our faith.
Speaker 3 (28:48):
I have to remember, war doesn't necessarily mean shooting war. Right,
the world has been in a state of war since
the fall of Adam and Eve, yes evil. It's an
eternal conflict in some ways, right, you know, started in
the heavens, right and uh and and so that the
continuation of that, and it's largely fought in the the
arena of ideas and words. But even there, you know,
(29:12):
you can choose to be resolute and an unapologetic defender
of liberty, or you can be squishy. Yes, right, let's
I'll just get you know. And so so that's the
thing and and and the beauty of it. No blood
need necessarily be shed. Uh And and I mean Harley
Kurt never shed anyone's blood, and yet he had he
did have a tremendous impact just because he was bold, right.
Speaker 2 (29:33):
And right exactly. Well, and you and you talk about
the power of of the First Amendment, and I still
and you and I talked about this before.
Speaker 1 (29:42):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (29:42):
I think the single figure that really opened up the
gates for us to be able to uh kind of
calm things down and allow for free speech was one
Elon Musk in the purchase of of Twitter.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
That helped me.
Speaker 2 (29:56):
It was huge. What what he did, you know, for America?
And I just I'm so grateful and I will always
be grateful for what he did in restoring and bringing
us back to our founding But you know, you talk
about our founding fathers and how they were struggling with
(30:16):
this new concept, and I don't imagine that initially they
galvanized around freedom. I think freedom was a byproduct of
this whole process, and they realized that the ultimate calling
that we could have was to be free. And that
really galvanized, I believe, and you know, brought you know,
(30:37):
people together to where they realized, Okay, you know, we
love the mother country. We really don't want to do this,
but for the sake of freedom.
Speaker 3 (30:45):
Well, and you know, we have over several generations sort
of unlearned that lesson. You know, it's the economy stupid,
it's security stupid, whatever happens to be. And you know,
I mean, people have a right to expect the government
provide a modicum of security and and economic stability, to
be sure, but freedom is a rallying cry unlike any other.
(31:09):
And I actually I watched Javier Milay, the Argentine presidents,
speech to his supporters last night. The results of the
election were I think far exceeded even Malay's expectations, and
he tends to be pretty pretty optimistic. One of the
things he said was, we are now going to make
Argentina the freest country in the world. And so because
that's what our strength is is in freedom. And he
(31:31):
went on in that vein the rapturous applause of the
people in the in the room, and you know, that's
really what it's about. People do rally around the standard
of liberty.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Well, and what he and what he's realized, and of
course their country not that long ago was oppressed. They
were so far away from freedom and now they're beginning
to realize this and they're unleashing this natural resource within
the embodiment of the people. There in their home kin
and America should look at that as an example to say,
(32:03):
look at with the history, the rich tradition and everything
that we have, seems if we could have I know,
we talk in terms of a revival in a religious
sense all the time, but if we could have a
revival in terms of you know, our founding and our
values that we enjoyed some two hundred and fifty years
(32:26):
ago and unleashed the GDP of three hundred and fifty
million Americans, whoof man, there there'd be a lot of
fun that we'd have.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
Oh yeah, yeah, I mean, I mean, nothing's going to
stop us now if that happens. I Mean the problem is, though,
we still have to sort out a few things. So,
I mean, freedom got a black eye back in the
you know, during the sexual Revolution and the drugs and
stuff of the sixties and seventies because the people who
who prosecuted that particular that particular campaign, so to speak,
(33:02):
the culture War, did it under the banner of freedom.
They you know, the Woodcock Wolodcock, the wood would Stock Festival. Yes,
Woodcock's a bird, but the Woodstock Festival was carried out
under the battle. It was you know, greater freedom and
you know, sex, drugs and rock and roll. It's all
about freedom, you know, it's all you need is freedom. Well,
you know that's a type of freedom, but that's what
we would call license. And so of course sensible people
looked at it and said, well, now, no, that's not
(33:24):
really what they want, what we want, and so then
they said, well, we need to crack down and have
all these the government should make a law, you know,
and so the drug war began and all these other things,
and so, you know, people on the right sort of
distanced themselves from this ideal of freedom because because freedom
is what those hippies want, you know, all those drug people,
we don't want that. We want law and order. Of course,
(33:45):
that's very easily turned into something, you know, I mean,
that's kind of the way the Nazis did too. They're
all about law and order, you know, they they and
so you have to be careful. And before long we
had just these byzantine drug laws and everything else. And
then of course, with nine to eleven, you know, all
the surveillance state that was brought us all done. The
you know, law and order becomes paramount and freedom somehow
(34:05):
gets lost, and people like Ron Paul for a long
time where these lone voices in the wilderness. Oh you
sound kind of like a hippie talking about freedom. Only
hippies and weirdos and beat nicks think about that, you
know where you know? And so, But now we've come again,
kind of come full circle where people are realizing, yeah,
you do need to have law and order within within value,
but we've taken it way too far, and now everybody
(34:28):
is surveilled and tracked and controlled and everything else, and
we don't want that. And so freedom has become you know,
real freedom in the sense the Founders understood, I think
is now is once again in vogue. The problem is
still a lot of these gen Z people are very young,
very green. You know. The doctrine of freedom is something
that kind of distills gradually on your soul, like the
(34:50):
dus from heaven. You have to spend years and years
studying it, thinking about it, practicing it in your life,
learning what it is to be a free and agent
unto yourself well, you know, a free human being. It's
not something that can be learned. You know. The couple
of catch phrases, I mean that that can start you
in the right direction. So you know, the extent that
people in our generation have that experience, you know, you know,
(35:14):
I think it needs to be it needs to be
shared with all these enthusiastic and energetic younger souls.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Well, well to balance it out, Like you said, these tensions,
these dynamic tensions have to be measured in such a
way and balanced in such a way that it doesn't
abandon and lose its purpose. And the challenge that we've
had traditionally is just like you said, something seems to
be going awry, and we look to the government to
fix it.
Speaker 3 (35:38):
Oh tally the federal government, yes, rightly, right.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Yeah, and so we that's the that's the wrong spot.
I mean, you know, this has to be measured at
a local level, individually, one soul at a time, and
as we do that, then hopefully we bring people together
in such a way that are focused on the same
you know, the same objective to where we can reinforce
(36:03):
and help manage that dynamic tension between freedom and irresponsibility.
Speaker 3 (36:09):
Well, a lot of that manages itself in a system
where federalism is respected, right because you know, I mean
if you look at at alcohol, which is a problem,
which what what do you do about alcohol. How do
you I At one point, we try to federal level
one size fits all, and that didn't work, you know,
although they did it the right way. They amended the Constitution,
you know, and the Volstead Act and all that sort
(36:30):
of thing, and they amended it again to get rid
of it. But it turned out this, this wasn't a
good idea. And so now, for the most part, you know,
local governments and state governments experiment and try to figure
out what what what works best. It's not an easy question,
you know, because yeah, if I if I drink and
get drunk, it may be a private thing. But then
if I get behind the wheel of a car, or
(36:51):
I get into a violent fight, or I start, you know,
in a drunken rage, you know, abuse my wife or
my children and something, then it's not so much. It's
not a personal thing anymore. But it's a difficult thing.
And so federalism allows experimentation, right And the same would
be true of drugs, except no, you know, long ago
we decide, well, let's let's let the federal government do that,
you know, let's let's let them pass all the laws.
(37:13):
And you could and you could go through area after
area education is another good example. You know, maybe it's
true that communities have a vested, you know, interest in
ensuring a certain level of education. You don't want to
have an illiterate population, for sure, But what does that
look like. Well, traditionally it was done via local schools
and local schoolhouses and all that sort of thing. Now
(37:34):
it's all done by the federal government in the Department
of Education.
Speaker 2 (37:37):
And how's that work in for us?
Speaker 3 (37:38):
Yeah, exactly, So, I mean federal federalism, and that's the
missing ingredient. And interesting Argentina is also a federal republic
like the United States. But federalism is I think, isn't
the often neglected key to the maintenance of this balance
that you're talking about of liberty, Because then, you know,
if you live in a state and you find out
the laws here are just too oppressive, I don't like it. Well,
(37:59):
you can move to another state, right, And people do
that all the time. They vote with their feet and
so you know, but well, everything at the federal level
doesn't work that way. It's one size fits all.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
Well, Steve, And as you say, and I think right
now where we are, we need to answer these difficult questions.
Otherwise the tendency is going to be okay, Well, the
federal government didn't work, so maybe we need to look
outside and look to the United Nations ors some type
of global control, which is what you wrote about in
terms of protecting free speech. I mean, you got situations now, like,
(38:32):
for example, in England, if you if you say the
wrong thing, you know, you're you're subject to arrest. I mean,
some of the conversation you and I had, I mean,
we're okay here in America so far, but in England
they might say, well, oh yeah, Steve Bonta was with
Bill Martinez. They had this conversation, and we're going to
arrest him at the airport, right.
Speaker 3 (38:51):
Yeah, yeah, and it has happened, although mostly English you
know citizens that get you know, they get that when
they you know, return home from saying something in it
in an interview in another country and that kind of thing.
But yeah, it could, in theory happen. And obviously you know,
now the maybe it may not be obvious, but but
the but the European Union in particular, the EU is
trying to force its version of non free speech on
(39:15):
the rest of us, on our Internet companies, for example,
forcing them to comply with their laws and if you don't,
we're gonna We're going to find you and all the
rest of this. So it's a it's a very very
vexed topic, indeed, And you know, I got to say,
it's not by accident that a lot of this is happening.
A lot of the interesting stuff is not happening in Europe.
I mean, there are some places, you know, Italy and
(39:35):
so forth, they're having they're having a nationalist revival in Europe.
It's less clear to me outside of maybe Poland perhaps
that that that that nationalist revival and say in Italy
with Georgia Moloney or something like that, is actually translating
into more freedom for Italians or you know, or whether
or whether they're still acquiescing to the European Union and
(39:57):
most of these things in terms of the you know,
crack down on speech and controlling the finances all the
rest of this stuff. So, you know. But on the
other hand, there's a lot of exciting things happening in
Latin America, not just Argentina and here in the United
States and who lesser extended in parts of Asia. You know,
you can see, uh, you know, people but people are
people are fed up with being controlled.
Speaker 2 (40:18):
Do you do you think that Trump factor is playing
into some of this?
Speaker 3 (40:21):
Absolutely, But you know, Trump again, Trump is mostly attractive
because because because he he is unapologetically pro American, you know,
given where we're coming from the Biden years, that in
itself seems refreshing. A lot more encouraging is the fact
that he talks a lot about getting rid of the
(40:43):
income tax and winding up the federal Reserve and uh,
you know, all this sort of thing, stopping taxes on
Social Security. But so far it's all been taught. Now,
he's only been in office about ten months at this point,
so we'll give him a little attitude.
Speaker 2 (40:58):
But look what he's done in ten months.
Speaker 3 (41:01):
A lot of what he's done has been, you know,
basically getting our foreign policy on a s or more
rational basis, our immigration policy and this sort of thing.
I guess, you know, probably free speech were better off
than we were. Certainly that, you know, the cancel culture
and the DEI stuff has mostly faded into the woodwork,
although it'll come right back if if Trump, if if
(41:22):
Trump is out of office and is replaced by you know,
Gavin Newsom. In twenty twenty eight, or something like that.
I would think we should also point out under the Constitution,
it's really Congress that is most responsible for that. It
shouldn't be you know, this, this this mighty presidential colossus
making all the changes it should most of it should
come through Congress with the complaisance of the President. And
(41:45):
so you know, you'll know that the republic is back
in full flower when this stuff is coming from Congress.
Good example of the tariffs. I greatly fear that the
Supreme Court decision may go against Trump or where the
terarifts are concerned, because it's pretty plain to me he
has no authority, no legitimate constitutional authority. The Levy tariffs
problem is Congress refuses to do it. So he's kind
(42:08):
of doing the right thing but in the wrong way,
so to speak. Yeah, and this is the case in
a lot of things. I mean, I I don't think
it's necessarily wrong what he's doing. We talked about this
the last time we talked, you know, with with with
regard to you know, sending the National Guard and so
forth to cities. But you don't want to see that
happen too often. You would hope that the local governments
(42:28):
and local constabularies will be adequate to the task and
won't sit in their hands the next time some favorite
interest group decides to go out and riot in the
streets and willfully assault people and smash cars and you know,
attack policemen and so forth, you would think, right, you know,
full flower. And most of this is coming from the
state and local level. The president's mostly a dude who
(42:51):
signs bills and occasionally gives an inspiring speech.
Speaker 2 (42:54):
Yeah, no, I'm I'm with you on that. But Trump
is concerned about lives of Americans, whether it's in Portland, Chicago,
these hot spots in d C, I mean DC of
all places. And it was like the mayors and everybody
was just, oh, it's just another body count. I mean,
it was almost like we're back in the era of
Vietnam where we just got worn out watching you know,
(43:16):
the casually counts every night on television. It was like, Okay,
it's Chicago, another weekend. You know, you got x amount
of shootings and yeah, maybe five, seven, eight people die. Okay,
we'll wait until the next weekend. And it just it's
just been going on that way. It's like a sick mantra.
And then Trump you know, comes up and says this
is unacceptable. So he's putting the heat on these lawmakers
(43:38):
to step up and the people. We the people need
to take note of these lawmakers that aren't stepping up
and not fulfilling their duty to the American people.
Speaker 3 (43:48):
Right, yeah, absolutely, And I mean, you know, again, the
day that Trump stands up and gives a state of
Union address or a victory speech after electure or something
says like We're going to make America the freest on
earth that you know, I will definitely sit up and
take notice when he says that. So, I mean, because
that's the key. And I think we're freer now than
(44:10):
we were a year ago, no doubt about that, and
certainly freer now that we were during the COVID despotism.
But we have a long way to go. You know,
We've still grown under the yoke of essentially a progressive
income tax and an inflationary monetary system that would give
the Founders nightmares. And that's just for starters. I mean,
the reason I was a little late getting back is
(44:32):
I took my wife, who's a recent immigrant to the
United States, to the bank to day. She has a
green card. Now our social Security card, took her to
a local bank to open a bank account so that
she can now replace it. And you know what, they
wouldn't let us do it. Why is that because federal
regulation said you have to have at least two things
that prove your current address. Okay, so passport won't suffice.
(44:53):
You have to have an envelope with some kind of
a bill, like the heating bill that shows your name
on it. And I was afraid this would be the case.
Brought along stuff that had my address on it, you know,
and the guy was very apologetic when you first, oh,
this is fine, will be but then he actually entered
in the computer computer kicked it back and said, Nope,
you can't do this.
Speaker 2 (45:09):
Because her name wasn't on the bill as well.
Speaker 3 (45:12):
No, because well she's only been the United States now.
Speaker 2 (45:14):
No, no, I know that.
Speaker 3 (45:16):
And the thing is post nine to eleven. That's the
first thing they did after nine eleven. They changed all
the banking laws, making it much much harder for anyone
to just open a bank account without proving six ways
to Sunday. Not only that you are who you say
you are, you know, which for which a passport would
presumably suffice, but passports don't have your address on them,
so then you have to have all these proofs of
(45:36):
address and all this stuff. Couldn't do it, so you know,
we spent we wasted over an hour doing that, and
you know, I guess we'll have another go at it
in a couple of months, you know. And she gets
a couple of things in the mail that have her
name on it, and we can we can actually if
they if they if they're admissible. But this is this
is a major problem with with the world we live
in today. I mean, the memory of nine to eleven
(45:56):
has receded and we're we're you know, we're now asserting
control over our borders and king out the illegal immigrants.
But all of those controls, you know, all all the
new identification stuff persists. I mean, they recently removed the
requirement that you take off your shoes, yes, exactly, though
some airports still do. Like when I was at West
Palm Beach International Airport last weekend, they still I think
(46:20):
they required no maybe it didn't, but it was, but
but there were there were some other things so so
at their discretion they still do that. But but it's
still a far cry from what it was pre nine
to eleven.
Speaker 2 (46:29):
Yeah, without a doubt. Well, well, Steve Tuman has left here.
Let's talk government shut down here in these last two years, right, yes,
just for fun?
Speaker 3 (46:37):
Is it still shut down? Bill? I haven't really noticed.
Speaker 2 (46:40):
Well it, you know, for the people that are expecting checks.
I feel for them, you know, because this has got
to be really hard on them air traffic controllers and
the longer this goes. I mean, you know, Court Schumer
says this is good for the Democratic Party that the
people are in pain. I can't even believe he made
such a stupid statement.
Speaker 3 (47:01):
Well, part of you know, the cynical part of me,
you know, says, yeah, just keep giving us the sound
bites of Chuck you know, you, you and your comrades.
I mean, the only person I mean, I never thought
i'd say something like this a year ago, But the
only person in that party who seems to have a
modic of common sense is is Fetterman. Yes, exactly, which
is why he's now being said, well maybe he should
(47:21):
be the presidential candid for the Democrats in twenty twenty eight.
You know, he's he's also very quirky and so forth.
But yeah, I mean, I haven't really noticed the shutdown,
except for the fact that my wife's Social Security card
like two or three weeks longer than they said it
would to get because they shut down the government after
we did the initial filled out the form before it
actually arrived, so it was delayed. But you know, no biggie.
(47:43):
As far as air traffic control, I mean, everything was
normal last weekend, the last time I flew. But but
we'll see. I mean, it's it's an inconvenience and if
it goes on long enough. I think the Republicans do
have some kind of nuclear option right where they can.
They don't want to do it at this point, but
you know, they do have a majority in both houses.
Speaker 2 (48:02):
Well, I you know, I think that the people are
calling for action, Steve, you know, nuclear or no nuclear.
They want this government opened up again. And I believe
that the Republicans do that, they exercise a nuclear option,
they'll be rewarded for that.
Speaker 3 (48:19):
Well yeah, I mean in particular, I mean we can't
we can't go for long without a functioning military. I
mean we just we just had two separate aircraft in
the space of like two hours crash in the sea
near from you know, they both originated for the carrier Nimitz.
I don't know if you saw that. It's in the
South China Sea right now, and they'd had helicopter go down,
and then the F eighteen went down very shortly thereafter,
and they think they got some bad fuel or something
(48:40):
like this, and one has to wonder if that's something
related to the fact that they're shorthanded. Yeah, somewhere along
the you know, I don't know anything about it, but
it sort of makes you wonder. And obviously, given the
array of formidable enemies that we now face, you know,
we can't afford to have the military shut down.
Speaker 2 (48:58):
You think me.
Speaker 3 (49:00):
I mean, it's kind of nice to see the unconstitutional
portions of the government shut down. To them, I say,
you know, you know, get rid of them permanently, exactly.
Speaker 2 (49:08):
I'm with you on that. I mean, all the dogs
you pointed out and that could have happened is now
available to Donald Trump, and we'll see, we'll see if
he takes that step. He's the publisher of the New
American magazine. Steve Bonta has been our guest. Steve, where
can they go to subscribe the.
Speaker 3 (49:24):
New American dot com? And there's a big old subscribe
button right at the top of the page and you
can see peasy yep, you can subscribe. Encourage you to
do that for our great You can see a couple
of our recent issues there, but we also have day
to day online content on our website.
Speaker 2 (49:39):
Well, Steve Bonta cannot thank you enough, appreciate you coming
on the show. Take care, be well, My friends will
take care well, and our thanks to you for sharing
a part of your day with us. For more information,
you can go to Bill Martinez Live dot com. May
God bless you and keep you. May make his face
shine upon you, May be gracious unto you and give
you peace. God bless you. Thank you. Prodicutt also product
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.