October 22, 2024 • 36 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- The Kamala campaign is putting out disinformation ads
- Stop the long hugs!
- DNC claims we've underinvested in public schools
- Who's the most masculine?
Stupid Should Hurt: https://www.armstrongandgetty.com/
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio of the
George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Katty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Arm Strong and Getty and he Armstrong and Getty. You
take it for granted, you say, give me French fries.
I'll never forget this experience. I always figured somebody stuffs
(00:31):
the in with a hand, and I don't like that.
And they don't do it that way, that you never
touch them. It's really great. But you've been eating a McDonald's.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
You thought the fries come out of the boiling oil
and the workers making that sweet sweet four twenty five
an hour just reach in and go.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Get with their hands.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Well, do you think that's how the burg get flipped?
Oh God, someone order ice train.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
Right? Unfair but funny.
Speaker 4 (01:14):
No, I seem to allow plastic gloves on and like
a little metal thing you take him out of. Actually,
I've seen him. You can see him make him the
fries right there. It's not like it's a mystery.
Speaker 5 (01:25):
I don't think Trump stands in line at the count
nos do that far.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
Yeah, Trump eats a lot of McDonald's for real, which
helps him a lot. I mean, there's nothing, there's no
level of certainly not cardiovascularly, it doesn't. There's there's no
level of phoniness with him when it comes to like
a fast food thing, where there would be with almost
any other politician where you'd know they've never been, they've
never eat McDonald's in their lives, Whereas you know, there's
(01:54):
got tons of pictures of Trump sitting on Air Force
one in a suit surrounded by gold opulence, with a
big mac and friese. But you're right, he's probably never
stood in line in a McDonald's. All right, right, maybe
never literally never. Michael, do me a favor. Would you
please play me clip number forty six. Now I need
(02:15):
to explain.
Speaker 5 (02:16):
I had as usual, let's do you call it dvring
with the YouTube.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
TV, all the new technology. It's too much.
Speaker 5 (02:23):
But at the very beginning of my many newses, this
happened to be NBC News. Just before the show started,
I caught like the last twenty seven seconds of this commercial.
The first three seconds that we missed are clearly an
old lady saying something about I wish I'd remembered it
jumps in like midward she's talking about she depends on
(02:46):
social Security.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
So go ahead and roll at Michael tired.
Speaker 6 (02:49):
I need that money for groceries and bills. But the
way Trump is talking about cutting social security, Wow, it's crazy.
Cutting social security is like giving the middle finger to
the middle class. Kamala Harris will protect social Security, not
cut it.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Every thought was responsible for the content of.
Speaker 4 (03:11):
His add Now where does one start, well, Kamala said
the very same thing on stage with Liz Chaney yesterday.
That's part of her closing argument is Trump is going
to cut social Security.
Speaker 5 (03:25):
Perhaps you're familiar with the fact that not only has
Trump not said a syllable about cutting social Security, he
has vowed up and down to not approach it, not
even look at it, much less touch it. And in fact,
Republicans consider it such a third rail of politics at
this point they don't even breathe a word about reforming
it so it doesn't go broke. I wish Trump had
(03:47):
said something about reforming social security. That ad was for
pinocchios and throw in a bonus geppetto that was utter, pure, distilled,
weapons grade dishonest and more disinformation, disinformation and malinformation wrapped
into a burrito of deceit.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
Right, Yeah, I think it more importantly to your point
is the fact that I mean that is one hundred
percent a great example of.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
I don't know which of those words that are the
same thing.
Speaker 4 (04:17):
You want to use disinformation, So you're putting out disinformation
on purpose to mislead people one hundred and eighty degrees
from the truth. Yet you're the party that is going
to endlessly talk about reigning in free speech and having
some committee that determines what should be on the air
and all that sort of crap, which will be entirely
(04:38):
your side deciding which speed is speech is permitted or not. Folks,
if you fight against nothing else in your life, fight
against censorship, because that well, as Washington put it to paraphrase,
you know, without freedom of speech, may we be led
to the slaughter, silent and dumb like sheep. Yeah, and
(04:58):
fact checking is a different word for censorship, it seems
to be.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
And so we just got to do away with all that.
Speaker 4 (05:07):
And the fact that one side gets to makes oh
I almost dropped it as bum One side gets to
make stuff up but not get called on it, and
beyond not get called on it, they get to hold
their noses in the air and prints around as if
they're the higher than the rest of us when it
comes to truth and honesty. Give me a break. The
(05:28):
Republicans do it too, all kinds of misedited, misleading stories.
But the Republicans aren't the way. Aren't the ones, at
least to my knowledge, that are trying to claim that
you need to reign in social media's misinformation.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
So let's add in the.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Fact that that old lady trope, which is she's obviously
a voiceover actress, is the classic. Anybody who talks about
reforming social security phasing in over many years different formulas,
is trying to rip the checks out of eighty year
old's hands and make them eat dog food.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
It's just, oh my god.
Speaker 5 (06:06):
You want to talk about the lowest common denominator political message,
and here's here's the eyes.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Even the most hardcore fiscal conservative who says we need
to deal with this today, if you're already old and
getting soci security wouldn't have anything to do with you
right now.
Speaker 5 (06:21):
I get that this is an ad, but I mentioned
the burrito of dishonesty or deceit, well, the the tangy
salsa of irony.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
On God, I'm not feeling good today. I'm not liking
this can you do different metaphors that aren't like food
that would make me feel bad?
Speaker 2 (06:38):
What are you in the mood for? Like yogurt? Maybe
you're something easy to digest than an ice cream. And
it was in the chicken soup of.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
Exactly the parsley on the soup of deceit is better,
much better. That led directly into Lion Lester Holt with
a series of headlines, each of which was on the campaign,
but the two about Trump were.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Trump claimed without evidence blah blah blah and elon musk
and it may be illegal.
Speaker 5 (07:10):
Meanwhile, Kamala Harris talked to nice old people and comforted
them in their old age and then promised to make
life better for everyone.
Speaker 2 (07:18):
And in other news so oh.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
And so he actually in the newscast used the phrase
without evidence, which is used exclusively for Republicans, right right
on the heels of this ad that was utterly one
hundred and eighty percent one hundred and eighty degrees rather dishonest. Wow, unfreakingly,
it's interesting that you took an NBC news because I
watched ab ABC News and like the first ten minutes,
(07:45):
I just I couldn't believe how incredibly one sided it was.
I thought, man, they've gone all in now there were
two weeks from election today. This is like it was
designed by the Harris campaign to make her look good
and Trump look bad. It's that this is a newscast,
right right, So moving on to that's a good joint
(08:06):
a kid, I can't argue with you, So moving on somewhat.
That kid's probably forty now, right, Oh yeah, he's got
kids of his own. He's watching Fox News with the
volume two high. He's an older fella. At anyway, where
were we?
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Ah?
Speaker 5 (08:22):
Yes, anybody who knows the show knows that I Joe
am fairly Trump skeptical, love a lot of the policies,
the judges blah blah blah, and I am extremely cautious
about conspiracy theory crap because, much like the posters we
were discussing before, the one thing I want to be
(08:46):
is right.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
I would rather be right than happy.
Speaker 4 (08:49):
Having said that, I'm following a Twitter thread by Will Sharf,
who he's worked as an attorney for Trump. He's also
he very well thought of Washington, d C. Attorney's worked
on two Scotis confirmations. He's a former federal processor. I'm sorry, prosecutor.
He's a man of substance.
Speaker 5 (09:12):
And he tweeted the other day he said, remember November eighteenth,
twenty twenty two, was the key day when all four
criminal cases against Trump kicked off. Number one, Nathan Wade
was at the White House that day for eight hours.
You remember Nathan Wade, the lover of Fannie Willis. He
was at the White House.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
He was enjoying some of that sweet sweet Fannie Willis tale.
That's what he was doing.
Speaker 5 (09:37):
Yeah, oh boy, and some of the transcript of his
testimony because he was grilled in front of a congressional
committee about that in a second. That was also the
day Jack Smith was appointed the special counsel to dig
into the other charges. And Matthew Colangelo quit the DOJ
that very day and showed up a few weeks later
(09:59):
at Alvin Bragg's office in New York.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So this guy was.
Speaker 4 (10:04):
One of the top couple levels of the DOJ and
quit that job to take an assistance job at a
local prosecutor's office. Now, granted, the Manhattan DA is like
the most high profile local prosecutor, but I remember, I
remember at the time there was talk about what's Colangelo
(10:25):
doing quitting the.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
DOJ to take that job. That's a weird thing.
Speaker 5 (10:29):
And he headed up that local prosecution. All of this
launched on November eighteenth, twenty twenty two, which I do
not think is a coincidence. Then you have this, uh
what committee is this in front of?
Speaker 1 (10:45):
It?
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Doesn't say that would be helpful.
Speaker 4 (10:48):
He admitted to multiple meetings with the Biden White House
Biden Harris White House doing Fannie Willis's prosecution of Donald
Trump in Georgia, but repeatedly claimed I don't recall or
I don't remember the details of those meetings, over and
over again. So I'm I was asking if you remember,
would you have had a paralegal, someone on your team
and assistant reach out to schedule this conference with the
(11:10):
White House Council?
Speaker 2 (11:12):
I don't recall.
Speaker 4 (11:13):
Okay, do you remember who attended this conference with White
House counsel?
Speaker 5 (11:16):
I don't recall. Is it safe to assume since you
build for the conference with White House Council billible hours,
you know that you attended the conference with the White
House Council. Yes, okay? Do you remember if it was
in person or by telephone? I don't recall. He doesn't recall.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Now, that is.
Speaker 4 (11:35):
That's pretty rich. You don't remember if he was on
the phone or in person. I think anybody whose brain
works at all would remember that. Well, right, and then
they go into yeah, we're pressed for time. All right,
I'll move swiftly. He goes into all right, I'll remind you.
Here's your billing hours eight hours of two hundred and
fifty dollars. It was two thousand dollars. Do you remember
an interview with DC or the White House occurring on
(11:56):
November eighteenth, twenty twenty two. I don't remember it happening.
I know it did because the entry says that it did.
Do you remember it occurring on or near the eighteenth?
I don't remember it happening, but I do know that
it did because the date completed says November eighteenth.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
I skipped one.
Speaker 4 (12:11):
Do you have any recollection of what you were referring
to or who you were referring to when you said
you had an interview with the DC at the White House?
Speaker 2 (12:20):
I don't.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
I don't remember that. It goes on and on. Literally,
I'm looking at the next page of the transcript. Every
single answer is I don't recall.
Speaker 4 (12:33):
This is a huge Watergate style store. It's bigger than Watergate,
much bigger. Doesn't get any air I'm guessing not.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
It's outrageous.
Speaker 5 (12:47):
You know, there are a lot of folks and the
lying media that we've been referring to would never admit this.
There are a lot of folks who say who when
they say the election was stolen?
Speaker 2 (12:57):
This is what they're talking about.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
They're not talking about of votes in Georgia's spirit away
and spirited away in the night. They're talking about the
forces of government and media and lawfare and the rest
of it conspiring to fix an election.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And they have a point.
Speaker 4 (13:12):
So travel season is upon us, and they're already trying
to get the airports prepared, including one airport. Who is
going to limit the amount of time you can hug
someone to try to keep the lines moving along. This
is created a fair amount of controversy. You're gonna time
your hugs. That'd be fun work if you could get it, plice,
among other things.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
On the way, can you step up and make up play?
Here in crunch time, putting straight down the field, they're
looking farm and he comes back and drops the football.
A flag comes in very late from deep center field.
That was in Marvin's bread basket couldn't collect it at
the forty six. So that's from last night's Monday Night Football.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
If you had the over under on Harball goes nuts,
perhap harbos had.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
Exploded had exploding.
Speaker 4 (14:02):
They called a like an one of the worst penalties
you can have for like the whole helmet to helmet
trying to kill a guy and they didn't collide, but
it kind of looked like maybe he was hoping to
but missed anyway. So that's become kind of a controversial
call to trond, like, if your intent was to hit
him but you missed, does that count?
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Well, they made it count in that case.
Speaker 5 (14:23):
Wow, I didn't go to football law school, Jack, so
I'm not sure.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Sounds like the thought police to me. It's a thought crime.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
Uh.
Speaker 5 (14:30):
Friends At Prize Picks with a quick Word, America's number
one daily fantasy sports app over five million active members,
all you do is pick more or less on at
least two players, stat projections, and watch the winnings role
in Prize Picks, as Easy's most excited wa had played
daily fantasy sports, it's just you against the numbers.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Right now.
Speaker 4 (14:46):
You can win up to one hundred times your money
on Price Picks with as little as four correct picks,
and all the withdrawals are fast, safe and secure. Don't
get into some other wacky stuff on the internet. Do
Prize Picks and when your pick's hit you can get
your money in as quick.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
As fifteen minutes.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
And Prize Picks invented the flex play, which means you
can still cash out if your lineup isn't perfect. You
can double your money even if one of your picks
doesn't hit. So download the Prize Picks app today and
use the code Armstrong get fifty bucks instantly when you
play five dollars. That's the code Armstrong on Prize Picks
to get fifty dollars instantly when you play five. You
don't even need to win to receive the fifty dollars bonus.
(15:21):
It's guaranteed. Again, use that code Armstrong on the Prize
Picks app today. Prize Picks run your game. So they
actually have this sign at the airport now. Now this
is a New Zealand, but who knows if this will
catch on around the world. At the airport they have
a sign up that says max Hug time for fonder
farewells please use the car park. They're making a maximum
(15:45):
on how long you're allowed to hug someone when you
drop them off at the departure gate. What do you
suppose the hug time max is? This seems plenty.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Long to me.
Speaker 4 (15:56):
It's three thirty seconds. It's three minutes max hug minutes.
If you're hugging somebody for longer than three minutes, I
don't know. I don't know what you're doing as one
of you. You're you're, you're having sex.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
I miss you. I'll miss you too, and it's I
can't wait. It's gonna be tough without you. I know,
this is so great. It was so good. I love you.
Have you seen that new series on Netflix with the
cowboy thing? That's pretty good, isn't it.
Speaker 7 (16:22):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (16:22):
I saw turned off the stove. What are you doing
for three minutes? Yeah?
Speaker 5 (16:28):
That's that doesn't seem overally restrictive to me. Otherwise you're
just hanging out.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
Emotional farewells are common sights at airports, but travelers leaving
this airport will have a new time limit on goodbye
hugs in the airport's drop off area, intended to prevent
lingering cuddles from causing traffic jams. Who is hugging for
longer than three minutes? That's a really long hug. People
are upset about it, though, as people get blasted on
(16:55):
social media, et cetera, as happens on everything on social media.
Speaker 5 (16:59):
Right, of course, everybody's angry about everything on social media
all the time. Is there anybody who likes long goodbyes?
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Doesn't?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
Isn't it practically universal that the whole because back in
the day, for you young kids, you don't be in
pre nine to eleven, you could go to the gate
with your loved one and hang out with them at
the gate, right exactly, making small talk and.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
Yeah it was a good visit.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
Yeah, I just see you gotta rip the band aid off, right,
isn't that better?
Speaker 2 (17:32):
Yeah? I don't.
Speaker 5 (17:32):
I don't know that I know anybody who prefers the
long lingering.
Speaker 2 (17:37):
You know, it's like that last day of vacation.
Speaker 5 (17:39):
You got a flight at eleven am and you're hanging
around in the morning and you're packed, but you're not
leaving this a little weird just to just go to
just go.
Speaker 4 (17:49):
We said everything. We're gonna say it's gotten as it was,
as good as it's gonna get right, yeah right, hold
me up later this hour.
Speaker 5 (17:56):
China understands our society almost as well as we do,
and they're exploiting.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
The hell out of it. Stay with us for that.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
And President China currently in Russia for the Brick Summit,
where over the half of the words population is getting
together with one of the most evil people on earth.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
That's a troubling situation.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
I think school choice is a good idea, and particularly
underprivileged people.
Speaker 7 (18:21):
A fringe issue twenty years ago, school choice is on
the ballot.
Speaker 6 (18:25):
I'm not a fan of the vouchers, but I am
in favor of choice.
Speaker 4 (18:28):
What's happening here is we want families to control the
education dollars. Every dollar should follow every kid to every option,
and that's what we're searching for.
Speaker 7 (18:37):
Twenty nine states offer school choice programs, ranging from vouchers
and tax credits to savings accounts that allow parents to
use public money to help pay for a private or
parochial education.
Speaker 4 (18:49):
Interesting. I want to know more about that. A little
bit later, we're going to get into minimum wage.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Man.
Speaker 4 (18:54):
That old topic comes up all the time, especially the
closing days of a presidential election.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
It was the leaded political story.
Speaker 4 (19:01):
And all your big newscasts yesterday as Kamala Harrison Trump
were both speaking about it.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
So more on that later.
Speaker 5 (19:07):
I do want to flag one of the things William
Laugenessa Fox News just said seventy percent of Americans, seventy
percent are in favor of school choice. Keep that in
mind as we go further in the discussion. But the
DNC claims, quote, we've shortchanged our children by underinvesting in
our nation's public schools. And they're absolutely right about the
(19:29):
kids getting short changed, but it's not because the system
lacks funding. Taxpayers are handing over more and more of
their money, more than ever before. But adults are the
ones benefiting, not the kids.
Speaker 4 (19:43):
So is the idea that in some states, so a
chunk of my tax money goes to the public school,
I'm not going to use the local public school. So
I want to keep some of that money that I'm
paying to use in a different way to educate my kid.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Yeah. Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 5 (20:01):
There are a variety of programs, but they're all more
or less reflect that that desire. So we've increased inflation
adjusted public schools spending by one hundred and sixty four
percent since nineteen seventy So that's you know, more than
two and a half times adjusted for inflation. Yes, sir,
that's our at homes gotten one hundred and sixty four
percent better.
Speaker 4 (20:20):
Of course not did they need to get one hundred
and whatever percent better? Or were we relatively happy with
the way public schools were then? I know they had
stricter guidelines for what was proficient and all you know,
you're reading your math, all your different things, and more
people met them. So why did we even need to
spend more money anyway? American government schools and I really
(20:42):
prefer the term government schools over public schools, where that
makes it clear what's happening.
Speaker 5 (20:46):
UH spend about twenty grand per student each year, which
is that's on average, which is about fifty two percent
higher than average private school tuition. Teachers' unions plan to
give themselves more money is the definition of insanity doing
the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
Quoting now from who wrote this for the National Review,
Corey DeAngelis kind of dipping in and out of his
(21:07):
opinion piece. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, known as
the Nation's Report Card, shows that only about one in
four eighth grade public school students are proficient in math
one and four less than a third or proficient in reading,
and we are failing miserably. But despite more than doubling
inflation adjusted overall funding for student, average teacher salaries have
(21:29):
remained flat, increasing by only three percent in real terms
over the last half of a century.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
Wow.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
So if the most valuable education research and resource in schools,
teachers aren't getting the money, who is this is all?
Speaker 2 (21:42):
We talked about this the other day. It's administrative bloat.
Speaker 4 (21:44):
Right, Yeah, we talked about the percentage increase in the
number of not teachers, not students, other people at the
school doing whatever it is they do. This is so
obviously true. Is it just now breaking through to most
peace people.
Speaker 5 (22:01):
Well, let's say encounter extremely extremely inconvenient for the lefty
media to report this. This runs absolutely countered all of
their narratives on the topic.
Speaker 4 (22:09):
Will all the higher ups in lefty media their kids
go to private school so they only have kind of
like what they see on TV version of what public
schools even are. So the argument on the other side,
I suppose, would be if you let too many parents
keep their twenty grand per kid and spend it however
(22:30):
they want. We wouldn't be able to function as a
public school, is.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
That the argument?
Speaker 5 (22:33):
The government schools would be decimated for money, well, especially
because they've got so.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
Much administrative bloat.
Speaker 5 (22:39):
But in Chicago, for example, spending is nearly doubled since
twenty twelve to about thirty thousand dollars per student. Today,
spending for students skyrocketed three and a half times the
rate of inflation, whereas reading and mass scores plummeted by
sixty three percent and seventy eight percent, respectively.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
In fact, not a single student was fishing.
Speaker 4 (23:00):
In math in thirty three government schools in Chicago in
twenty twenty two. Not a single kid. So what would
most parents do? I wonder if you, if you, if
you were able to throw open the doors this much
where you just announced, Okay, next year, you you can
either send your kid to the local fourth grade public
school or you know, we'll cut you check for twenty
(23:22):
five thousand dollars, you know, different depending on where you live. Yeah,
and figure out how to educate your kid on your own.
What do you think most people would do?
Speaker 2 (23:31):
It's an interesting question.
Speaker 4 (23:32):
Plenty of money to go to a decent pub private school, yes, plenty.
Speaker 5 (23:36):
Yeah, I think many people would opt out. It depends
on the state of their local schools. When my kids
were going to government schools in the town that they
grew up in, they were quite good. It was, you know,
a reasonably affluent area of a red county in California,
and it was pretty good. It's changed since then, but so, yeah,
so it depends, but a lot would opt for that.
Speaker 2 (23:57):
A couple more stats, just very quickly.
Speaker 5 (24:00):
I mentioned this the other day, but it bears repeating
that between twenty and twenty twenty two, this is the
modern era, the number of students enrolled in government schools
increased by five percent. The number of teachers grew twice
as fast, ten percent, which, well, that's explainable because special
(24:20):
ed programs became more robust than that sort of thing.
And I'm not against more teachers, more teachers doing a
good job as a wonderful thing.
Speaker 4 (24:27):
Smaller teachers, smaller classrooms is great. Sure, Yeah, nobody's against that.
But while the students grew in population by five percent,
the number of principles and assistant principles grew by forty percent.
Now there's no possible way you can explain that not
and a chance you can explain that and have it
makes sense to me.
Speaker 5 (24:45):
And dwarfing That number administrative staff increased by ninety five percent,
or about nineteen times the rate of student enrollment since
the year two.
Speaker 4 (24:55):
Thousand also impossible to explain other than you're just creating
jobs for people to do that aren't needed. So when
last we chatted with William Launch and Ess, he mentioned
that school choice is on the ballot and seventy percent
of Americans are in favor of it.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
That is a huge majority. Can you roll the next clip?
Speaker 7 (25:13):
Michael Trump supports school choice, Harris doesn't. Number one, we
want school choice, but we have to get out of
this Washington thing. Well, Harris promises to strength and education.
Her party's platform is consistent with that of the teacher unions.
Speaker 2 (25:30):
Quote.
Speaker 7 (25:30):
We oppose the use of private school vouchers, tuition, tax credits, opportunities, scholarships,
and other schemes that divert taxpayer funded resources away from
public education.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Wow, it's a scheme.
Speaker 4 (25:43):
I gotta believe if you fully explained, even in your
like your low income inner city areas, if you explain
to people, look, we're going to cut you a check
at the beginning of the year for twenty five grand.
Here are the local private schools you could send your
kid to that are between I don't know ten and
twenty thousand dollars a year.
Speaker 2 (26:02):
Which would you rather do? They would just take that option.
Speaker 5 (26:06):
And just to make it clear for folks, it's it's
not a check exactly, it's a so you have to
use it for education.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
I just wanted to allay people's.
Speaker 4 (26:13):
Fear of I'm just trying to make the argument clear
of what would be because I think they confuse it
so much with all the various words for it, that
people don't understand that's an option. Sure could be an
option in a different structured society.
Speaker 5 (26:28):
Yeah, and the utter egregious failure of America's government schools.
And I haven't even gotten into far left neo Marxist indoctrination,
which if they were doing like the world's greatest job
in teaching to read and write and an arithmetic but
indoctrinating your kid to be a Marxist who hates America
and hates Wistern civilizations, I'd yank them out anyway, right, No, obviously,
(26:50):
if you just cut people a check, there'd be an
awful lot of people that would go on vacation and
their kid won't go to school at all. But you know,
in effect, you get to spend this much money on education, harmy,
You want tons of people would choose a different option
than their local public school. Sure, get together with four
other families and hire the best teacher in the world
(27:12):
to run a classroom for your five kids.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
And it's our for instance, and it's our money, we taxpayers' money,
and my kid.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
Why don't I get to decide exactly? And the teachers' unions,
damn them, the big ones make it sound like you're
yanking money out.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
Of public schools or government school You won't.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
Need it for that kid, because my kid's not gonna
be going there, So I'll go ahead and.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
Keep my money. Yeah, I'm keeping my money.
Speaker 7 (27:36):
Last clip Paul show growing support for school choice. Close
to one million students are currently enrolled in programs nationwide,
with taxpayers typically covering half to three quarters of private tuition.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
I think it would be nice to be able to
choose where you go to school somewhat. Public school money
should stay in public schools. That's the debate.
Speaker 7 (27:57):
Choice supporter say public money is their money too, and
that states actually spend less when students use a voucher
or tax credit than if that child attended a public school.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
How sure? Opponents say that isn't the point.
Speaker 7 (28:10):
They argue school choice programs suck resources women already struggling
public systems.
Speaker 4 (28:15):
A bloated, miserable, failing government program. How about you phrase
it like that, or how about you just bottom line
it to your own kid for less money, then we'll
be spent to go there and get a bad result.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
I can go here and get a better result. VM. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (28:34):
I think because of the way human brains work, people
have been used to government schools their entire lives. People
of our generation certainly, and younger parents. Right now, you
got to shake yourself out of the assumption.
Speaker 2 (28:47):
That that's always been there, it will always be there, It.
Speaker 4 (28:51):
Is always the best choice. Would you go with government
air conditioning service if the results were analogous to government education?
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Would you go with that?
Speaker 4 (29:01):
Would you go to a government grocery store if the
food was as miserable government?
Speaker 2 (29:06):
And quality is the education government. I could go through a.
Speaker 4 (29:09):
List of Yeah, government go and run in all restaurants.
Every town has a postave place, a Hamburger place, whatever,
run by the government's way. It's always been what's your argument,
food's bad, it's overpriced. They've got fifty people in there.
We're going to make one burger for some reason. Would
you buy a government car or would you prefer that
you kept your tax money and took a voucher down
(29:29):
to your local dealer and bought a non government car.
I don't know if it will happen in my lifetime,
because it's going to take a long time to break through,
as you've said, But with those poll numbers, I think
we're going to reach a point where we decide no,
every family's gonna come up with their own way for
educating their kid, with a bunch of different options in
(29:51):
their town. You know, this church based school, this other
private school that leans more toward arts, this private school
that leans more towards stem, whatever, this one that's closer
to my house. All kinds of different choices that are
just have better results and worth repeating Corey Deangelis's headline,
the public school system is a jobs program for administrators
(30:15):
and teachers who, again, God bless them, they do the fabulous,
fabulous works. Some of them government schools are now a
jobs program for a union to make itself rich.
Speaker 2 (30:29):
Have you considered being good at your jobs? And then
you have a whole bunch of private.
Speaker 4 (30:34):
Things, institutions and entities in your town that educate kids,
and they'll have so much reason to keep costs down
and test scores high so that they can attract more students,
whereas your public school apparently has no incentive whatsoever. As
you can see in a whole bunch of big cities
where nobody's reading at proficiency level or doing MATHI proficiency level,
(30:58):
and they just keep on keeping on.
Speaker 5 (31:00):
And to quote the great Tim Sandifer, or at least
reference him, what are they saying at those Chicago schools
about their miserable failure.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
They're saying, we need more money.
Speaker 4 (31:11):
Yeah, we would be more successful if we had more money. Wow,
that's that's quite the story, man. That's a burbling change
in the way society is structured. Let it burble, man,
let it burble. I don't know how long it'll take, man,
that's fascinating. If you have any thoughts on that text
line four one two nine five kftc.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
Armstrong, Hey Eddie.
Speaker 6 (31:33):
Let's go Trump.
Speaker 7 (31:34):
What's the main reason why you are supporting President Trump,
the border.
Speaker 2 (31:39):
Any message you got for President Trump, go get the win,
Go get the win. We got it. Win the election.
Come on, I know what I want to happen. President
Trump back in office.
Speaker 7 (31:49):
This is a state that's going to make or break
this election.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
How are you feeling about it?
Speaker 4 (31:53):
You know what we're doing winning, winning, you know why
we're winning policy. So that's Steelers fan in the parking
lot at the game the other day that Trump attended.
And I'm sure they went out of their way to
find a group of people that looked like Trump fans.
Maybe they had flags, hats, I don't know, whatever, But
Trump got introduced at the game. We didn't play the clip.
(32:14):
People started chanting USA, USA when Trump was introduced at
the Pittsburgh game and he was around doing various things
in a hard hat, helmet and that sort of thing.
We're going to talk about masculinity and how it polls
among Republicans and Democrats, which fits into this. But did
you see the thing? It was a really cool AI
picture of Trump. It's Trump's head on a Pittsburgh Steeler body,
(32:36):
and it's such a good AI picture. It looks like
Trump if he was playing in the NFL.
Speaker 5 (32:41):
It's really cool, but from like the nineteen seventies heyday,
it had that look to me.
Speaker 4 (32:47):
Yeah yeah, yeah yeah, And it's a pretty cool picture.
But anyway, the funny thing is that Newsweek on their
Twitter feed had that picture and had this disclaimer. Donald
Trump has shared is what is likely an AI generated
image on his truth social account, which showed him as
a player for the Pittsburgh Steelers. Thank you, Oh he
(33:08):
didn't play for the Steelers with Terry Bradshaw elo. Elon
Musk actually retweeted Newsweek's disclaimer with you know, the laughing emoji,
like hilarious. Thanks for the pointing out Trump isn't actually
currently a member of the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
Anyway.
Speaker 4 (33:25):
On the whole masculinity front, a poll finds that the
GOP men identify as highly masculine more than Democratic men.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Is that a surprised anyone.
Speaker 4 (33:40):
A recent Pew Research Center poll found that fifty three
percent of Republican men consider themselves highly masculine. Fifty three
percent compared to twenty nine percent of male Democrats.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
That's quite a gap. Now.
Speaker 4 (33:53):
When I first read that, I thought, what I call
myself highly masculine and a poll. Well, to get around that,
they didn't ask you, are you highly masculine or kind
of That would have been I'd feel a little uncomfortable
with that question myself, Yeah, because that just I mean,
I actually kind of do, but it just seems like
kind of a douchey thing to say anyway, But so.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
They don't do it that way.
Speaker 4 (34:14):
They have traits and then you click, you know, on
a scale of one to five where you are in
various traits, and then it puts you in the category
of how masculine you see yourself as, which is a
much better way to.
Speaker 2 (34:26):
Do it, And we got to do that on air.
That'd be fun.
Speaker 4 (34:28):
It would be qualities such as confidence, risk taking, assertiveness,
physical strength, stuff like that. You rank yourself and then
other things such as, you know, do you soft speaking,
caring about others, affectionate behavior toward this group or that group,
and then you rank yourself and then they spit out
where you are on the masculine scale. And again the
(34:49):
Republican numbers were fifty three percent highly masculine to twenty
nine percent for Democrats, which is interesting and might explain
some of the gender gap that's going on where Trump
is leading by like seventeen points among men, whereas Kamala
Harris is leading by roughly the same number among women.
And there's never been a divergence this large strictly along
(35:11):
male female in a presidential election before.
Speaker 5 (35:14):
And it helps explain why the Democrats have nominated hashtag tampon.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Trotsky, Tim.
Speaker 5 (35:23):
Who kicks around like a sitcom dad, ashamed of his maleness.
Speaker 2 (35:27):
So how much, sir, damn business? How much time I got,
Michael my out of time? I got a little less
than a minute, Okay, I can get it.
Speaker 4 (35:34):
So on the positive side for masculinity, that you had
people explaining highly masculine to me is a male who's
looking to lead in every area, someone who does not
accept just getting by, wants to excel at everything he does.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Blah blah blah. I like the description of that.
Speaker 4 (35:48):
You had other people, though, who described it as its
traditional toxic masculinity, rooting in the suppression of women and blah.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
Blah blah that sort of thing.
Speaker 4 (35:58):
Oh please, A toxic masculinity, what a ste masculine male
doesn't need to oppress anybody or belittle or hold down
anybody in toxic the point, and toxic masculinity implies that
just being traditionally male is toxic somemile, which I find
I'd like to punch him in the stomach for seeing that.
Speaker 2 (36:17):
Whoops, Sorry
Speaker 1 (36:21):
Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio of the
George Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong and Joe Katty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Arm Strong and Getty and he Armstrong and Getty. You
take it for granted, you say, give me French fries.
I'll never forget this experience. I always figured somebody stuffs
(00:31):
the in with a hand, and I don't like that.
And they don't do it that way, that you never
touch them. It's really great. But you've been eating a McDonald's.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
You thought the fries come out of the boiling oil
and the workers making that sweet sweet four twenty five
an hour just reach in and go.
Speaker 2 (00:57):
Get with their hands.
Speaker 3 (00:59):
Well, do you think that's how the burg get flipped?
Oh God, someone order ice train.
Speaker 2 (01:11):
Right? Unfair but funny.
Speaker 4 (01:14):
No, I seem to allow plastic gloves on and like
a little metal thing you take him out of. Actually,
I've seen him. You can see him make him the
fries right there. It's not like it's a mystery.
Speaker 5 (01:25):
I don't think Trump stands in line at the count
nos do that far.
Speaker 4 (01:29):
Yeah, Trump eats a lot of McDonald's for real, which
helps him a lot. I mean, there's nothing, there's no
level of certainly not cardiovascularly, it doesn't. There's there's no
level of phoniness with him when it comes to like
a fast food thing, where there would be with almost
any other politician where you'd know they've never been, they've
never eat McDonald's in their lives, Whereas you know, there's
(01:54):
got tons of pictures of Trump sitting on Air Force
one in a suit surrounded by gold opulence, with a
big mac and friese. But you're right, he's probably never
stood in line in a McDonald's. All right, right, maybe
never literally never. Michael, do me a favor. Would you
please play me clip number forty six. Now I need
(02:15):
to explain.
Speaker 5 (02:16):
I had as usual, let's do you call it dvring
with the YouTube.
Speaker 2 (02:20):
TV, all the new technology. It's too much.
Speaker 5 (02:23):
But at the very beginning of my many newses, this
happened to be NBC News. Just before the show started,
I caught like the last twenty seven seconds of this commercial.
The first three seconds that we missed are clearly an
old lady saying something about I wish I'd remembered it
jumps in like midward she's talking about she depends on
(02:46):
social Security.
Speaker 2 (02:47):
So go ahead and roll at Michael tired.
Speaker 6 (02:49):
I need that money for groceries and bills. But the
way Trump is talking about cutting social security, Wow, it's crazy.
Cutting social security is like giving the middle finger to
the middle class. Kamala Harris will protect social Security, not
cut it.
Speaker 2 (03:10):
Every thought was responsible for the content of.
Speaker 4 (03:11):
His add Now where does one start, well, Kamala said
the very same thing on stage with Liz Chaney yesterday.
That's part of her closing argument is Trump is going
to cut social Security.
Speaker 5 (03:25):
Perhaps you're familiar with the fact that not only has
Trump not said a syllable about cutting social Security, he
has vowed up and down to not approach it, not
even look at it, much less touch it. And in fact,
Republicans consider it such a third rail of politics at
this point they don't even breathe a word about reforming
it so it doesn't go broke. I wish Trump had
(03:47):
said something about reforming social security. That ad was for
pinocchios and throw in a bonus geppetto that was utter, pure, distilled,
weapons grade dishonest and more disinformation, disinformation and malinformation wrapped
into a burrito of deceit.
Speaker 4 (04:07):
Right, Yeah, I think it more importantly to your point
is the fact that I mean that is one hundred
percent a great example of.
Speaker 2 (04:15):
I don't know which of those words that are the
same thing.
Speaker 4 (04:17):
You want to use disinformation, So you're putting out disinformation
on purpose to mislead people one hundred and eighty degrees
from the truth. Yet you're the party that is going
to endlessly talk about reigning in free speech and having
some committee that determines what should be on the air
and all that sort of crap, which will be entirely
(04:38):
your side deciding which speed is speech is permitted or not. Folks,
if you fight against nothing else in your life, fight
against censorship, because that well, as Washington put it to paraphrase,
you know, without freedom of speech, may we be led
to the slaughter, silent and dumb like sheep. Yeah, and
(04:58):
fact checking is a different word for censorship, it seems
to be.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
And so we just got to do away with all that.
Speaker 4 (05:07):
And the fact that one side gets to makes oh
I almost dropped it as bum One side gets to
make stuff up but not get called on it, and
beyond not get called on it, they get to hold
their noses in the air and prints around as if
they're the higher than the rest of us when it
comes to truth and honesty. Give me a break. The
(05:28):
Republicans do it too, all kinds of misedited, misleading stories.
But the Republicans aren't the way. Aren't the ones, at
least to my knowledge, that are trying to claim that
you need to reign in social media's misinformation.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
So let's add in the.
Speaker 4 (05:44):
Fact that that old lady trope, which is she's obviously
a voiceover actress, is the classic. Anybody who talks about
reforming social security phasing in over many years different formulas,
is trying to rip the checks out of eighty year
old's hands and make them eat dog food.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
It's just, oh my god.
Speaker 5 (06:06):
You want to talk about the lowest common denominator political message,
and here's here's the eyes.
Speaker 4 (06:10):
Even the most hardcore fiscal conservative who says we need
to deal with this today, if you're already old and
getting soci security wouldn't have anything to do with you
right now.
Speaker 5 (06:21):
I get that this is an ad, but I mentioned
the burrito of dishonesty or deceit, well, the the tangy
salsa of irony.
Speaker 4 (06:31):
On God, I'm not feeling good today. I'm not liking
this can you do different metaphors that aren't like food
that would make me feel bad?
Speaker 2 (06:38):
What are you in the mood for? Like yogurt? Maybe
you're something easy to digest than an ice cream. And
it was in the chicken soup of.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
Exactly the parsley on the soup of deceit is better,
much better. That led directly into Lion Lester Holt with
a series of headlines, each of which was on the campaign,
but the two about Trump were.
Speaker 2 (07:04):
Trump claimed without evidence blah blah blah and elon musk
and it may be illegal.
Speaker 5 (07:10):
Meanwhile, Kamala Harris talked to nice old people and comforted
them in their old age and then promised to make
life better for everyone.
Speaker 2 (07:18):
And in other news so oh.
Speaker 4 (07:21):
And so he actually in the newscast used the phrase
without evidence, which is used exclusively for Republicans, right right
on the heels of this ad that was utterly one
hundred and eighty percent one hundred and eighty degrees rather dishonest. Wow, unfreakingly,
it's interesting that you took an NBC news because I
watched ab ABC News and like the first ten minutes,
(07:45):
I just I couldn't believe how incredibly one sided it was.
I thought, man, they've gone all in now there were
two weeks from election today. This is like it was
designed by the Harris campaign to make her look good
and Trump look bad. It's that this is a newscast,
right right, So moving on to that's a good joint
(08:06):
a kid, I can't argue with you, So moving on somewhat.
That kid's probably forty now, right, Oh yeah, he's got
kids of his own. He's watching Fox News with the
volume two high. He's an older fella. At anyway, where
were we?
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Ah?
Speaker 5 (08:22):
Yes, anybody who knows the show knows that I Joe
am fairly Trump skeptical, love a lot of the policies,
the judges blah blah blah, and I am extremely cautious
about conspiracy theory crap because, much like the posters we
were discussing before, the one thing I want to be
(08:46):
is right.
Speaker 2 (08:46):
I would rather be right than happy.
Speaker 4 (08:49):
Having said that, I'm following a Twitter thread by Will Sharf,
who he's worked as an attorney for Trump. He's also
he very well thought of Washington, d C. Attorney's worked
on two Scotis confirmations. He's a former federal processor. I'm sorry, prosecutor.
He's a man of substance.
Speaker 5 (09:12):
And he tweeted the other day he said, remember November eighteenth,
twenty twenty two, was the key day when all four
criminal cases against Trump kicked off. Number one, Nathan Wade
was at the White House that day for eight hours.
You remember Nathan Wade, the lover of Fannie Willis. He
was at the White House.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
He was enjoying some of that sweet sweet Fannie Willis tale.
That's what he was doing.
Speaker 5 (09:37):
Yeah, oh boy, and some of the transcript of his
testimony because he was grilled in front of a congressional
committee about that in a second. That was also the
day Jack Smith was appointed the special counsel to dig
into the other charges. And Matthew Colangelo quit the DOJ
that very day and showed up a few weeks later
(09:59):
at Alvin Bragg's office in New York.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So this guy was.
Speaker 4 (10:04):
One of the top couple levels of the DOJ and
quit that job to take an assistance job at a
local prosecutor's office. Now, granted, the Manhattan DA is like
the most high profile local prosecutor, but I remember, I
remember at the time there was talk about what's Colangelo
(10:25):
doing quitting the.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
DOJ to take that job. That's a weird thing.
Speaker 5 (10:29):
And he headed up that local prosecution. All of this
launched on November eighteenth, twenty twenty two, which I do
not think is a coincidence. Then you have this, uh
what committee is this in front of?
Speaker 1 (10:45):
It?
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Doesn't say that would be helpful.
Speaker 4 (10:48):
He admitted to multiple meetings with the Biden White House
Biden Harris White House doing Fannie Willis's prosecution of Donald
Trump in Georgia, but repeatedly claimed I don't recall or
I don't remember the details of those meetings, over and
over again. So I'm I was asking if you remember,
would you have had a paralegal, someone on your team
and assistant reach out to schedule this conference with the
(11:10):
White House Council?
Speaker 2 (11:12):
I don't recall.
Speaker 4 (11:13):
Okay, do you remember who attended this conference with White
House counsel?
Speaker 5 (11:16):
I don't recall. Is it safe to assume since you
build for the conference with White House Council billible hours,
you know that you attended the conference with the White
House Council. Yes, okay? Do you remember if it was
in person or by telephone? I don't recall. He doesn't recall.
Speaker 2 (11:33):
Now, that is.
Speaker 4 (11:35):
That's pretty rich. You don't remember if he was on
the phone or in person. I think anybody whose brain
works at all would remember that. Well, right, and then
they go into yeah, we're pressed for time. All right,
I'll move swiftly. He goes into all right, I'll remind you.
Here's your billing hours eight hours of two hundred and
fifty dollars. It was two thousand dollars. Do you remember
an interview with DC or the White House occurring on
(11:56):
November eighteenth, twenty twenty two. I don't remember it happening.
I know it did because the entry says that it did.
Do you remember it occurring on or near the eighteenth?
I don't remember it happening, but I do know that
it did because the date completed says November eighteenth.
Speaker 2 (12:09):
I skipped one.
Speaker 4 (12:11):
Do you have any recollection of what you were referring
to or who you were referring to when you said
you had an interview with the DC at the White House?
Speaker 2 (12:20):
I don't.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
I don't remember that. It goes on and on. Literally,
I'm looking at the next page of the transcript. Every
single answer is I don't recall.
Speaker 4 (12:33):
This is a huge Watergate style store. It's bigger than Watergate,
much bigger. Doesn't get any air I'm guessing not.
Speaker 2 (12:46):
It's outrageous.
Speaker 5 (12:47):
You know, there are a lot of folks and the
lying media that we've been referring to would never admit this.
There are a lot of folks who say who when
they say the election was stolen?
Speaker 2 (12:57):
This is what they're talking about.
Speaker 4 (12:59):
They're not talking about of votes in Georgia's spirit away
and spirited away in the night. They're talking about the
forces of government and media and lawfare and the rest
of it conspiring to fix an election.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
And they have a point.
Speaker 4 (13:12):
So travel season is upon us, and they're already trying
to get the airports prepared, including one airport. Who is
going to limit the amount of time you can hug
someone to try to keep the lines moving along. This
is created a fair amount of controversy. You're gonna time
your hugs. That'd be fun work if you could get it, plice,
among other things.
Speaker 2 (13:32):
On the way, can you step up and make up play?
Here in crunch time, putting straight down the field, they're
looking farm and he comes back and drops the football.
A flag comes in very late from deep center field.
That was in Marvin's bread basket couldn't collect it at
the forty six. So that's from last night's Monday Night Football.
Speaker 4 (13:55):
If you had the over under on Harball goes nuts,
perhap harbos had.
Speaker 2 (14:01):
Exploded had exploding.
Speaker 4 (14:02):
They called a like an one of the worst penalties
you can have for like the whole helmet to helmet
trying to kill a guy and they didn't collide, but
it kind of looked like maybe he was hoping to
but missed anyway. So that's become kind of a controversial
call to trond, like, if your intent was to hit
him but you missed, does that count?
Speaker 2 (14:21):
Well, they made it count in that case.
Speaker 5 (14:23):
Wow, I didn't go to football law school, Jack, so
I'm not sure.
Speaker 2 (14:27):
Sounds like the thought police to me. It's a thought crime.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
Uh.
Speaker 5 (14:30):
Friends At Prize Picks with a quick Word, America's number
one daily fantasy sports app over five million active members,
all you do is pick more or less on at
least two players, stat projections, and watch the winnings role
in Prize Picks, as Easy's most excited wa had played
daily fantasy sports, it's just you against the numbers.
Speaker 2 (14:46):
Right now.
Speaker 4 (14:46):
You can win up to one hundred times your money
on Price Picks with as little as four correct picks,
and all the withdrawals are fast, safe and secure. Don't
get into some other wacky stuff on the internet. Do
Prize Picks and when your pick's hit you can get
your money in as quick.
Speaker 2 (14:59):
As fifteen minutes.
Speaker 5 (15:00):
And Prize Picks invented the flex play, which means you
can still cash out if your lineup isn't perfect. You
can double your money even if one of your picks
doesn't hit. So download the Prize Picks app today and
use the code Armstrong get fifty bucks instantly when you
play five dollars. That's the code Armstrong on Prize Picks
to get fifty dollars instantly when you play five. You
don't even need to win to receive the fifty dollars bonus.
(15:21):
It's guaranteed. Again, use that code Armstrong on the Prize
Picks app today. Prize Picks run your game. So they
actually have this sign at the airport now. Now this
is a New Zealand, but who knows if this will
catch on around the world. At the airport they have
a sign up that says max Hug time for fonder
farewells please use the car park. They're making a maximum
(15:45):
on how long you're allowed to hug someone when you
drop them off at the departure gate. What do you
suppose the hug time max is? This seems plenty.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Long to me.
Speaker 4 (15:56):
It's three thirty seconds. It's three minutes max hug minutes.
If you're hugging somebody for longer than three minutes, I
don't know. I don't know what you're doing as one
of you. You're you're, you're having sex.
Speaker 2 (16:09):
I miss you. I'll miss you too, and it's I
can't wait. It's gonna be tough without you. I know,
this is so great. It was so good. I love you.
Have you seen that new series on Netflix with the
cowboy thing? That's pretty good, isn't it.
Speaker 7 (16:22):
Yeah?
Speaker 2 (16:22):
I saw turned off the stove. What are you doing
for three minutes? Yeah?
Speaker 5 (16:28):
That's that doesn't seem overally restrictive to me. Otherwise you're
just hanging out.
Speaker 4 (16:33):
Emotional farewells are common sights at airports, but travelers leaving
this airport will have a new time limit on goodbye
hugs in the airport's drop off area, intended to prevent
lingering cuddles from causing traffic jams. Who is hugging for
longer than three minutes? That's a really long hug. People
are upset about it, though, as people get blasted on
(16:55):
social media, et cetera, as happens on everything on social media.
Speaker 5 (16:59):
Right, of course, everybody's angry about everything on social media
all the time. Is there anybody who likes long goodbyes?
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Doesn't?
Speaker 5 (17:08):
Isn't it practically universal that the whole because back in
the day, for you young kids, you don't be in
pre nine to eleven, you could go to the gate
with your loved one and hang out with them at
the gate, right exactly, making small talk and.
Speaker 2 (17:23):
Yeah it was a good visit.
Speaker 4 (17:25):
Yeah, I just see you gotta rip the band aid off, right,
isn't that better?
Speaker 2 (17:32):
Yeah? I don't.
Speaker 5 (17:32):
I don't know that I know anybody who prefers the
long lingering.
Speaker 2 (17:37):
You know, it's like that last day of vacation.
Speaker 5 (17:39):
You got a flight at eleven am and you're hanging
around in the morning and you're packed, but you're not
leaving this a little weird just to just go to
just go.
Speaker 4 (17:49):
We said everything. We're gonna say it's gotten as it was,
as good as it's gonna get right, yeah right, hold
me up later this hour.
Speaker 5 (17:56):
China understands our society almost as well as we do,
and they're exploiting.
Speaker 2 (18:01):
The hell out of it. Stay with us for that.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
And President China currently in Russia for the Brick Summit,
where over the half of the words population is getting
together with one of the most evil people on earth.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
That's a troubling situation.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
I think school choice is a good idea, and particularly
underprivileged people.
Speaker 7 (18:21):
A fringe issue twenty years ago, school choice is on
the ballot.
Speaker 6 (18:25):
I'm not a fan of the vouchers, but I am
in favor of choice.
Speaker 4 (18:28):
What's happening here is we want families to control the
education dollars. Every dollar should follow every kid to every option,
and that's what we're searching for.
Speaker 7 (18:37):
Twenty nine states offer school choice programs, ranging from vouchers
and tax credits to savings accounts that allow parents to
use public money to help pay for a private or
parochial education.
Speaker 4 (18:49):
Interesting. I want to know more about that. A little
bit later, we're going to get into minimum wage.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Man.
Speaker 4 (18:54):
That old topic comes up all the time, especially the
closing days of a presidential election.
Speaker 2 (18:59):
It was the leaded political story.
Speaker 4 (19:01):
And all your big newscasts yesterday as Kamala Harrison Trump
were both speaking about it.
Speaker 2 (19:05):
So more on that later.
Speaker 5 (19:07):
I do want to flag one of the things William
Laugenessa Fox News just said seventy percent of Americans, seventy
percent are in favor of school choice. Keep that in
mind as we go further in the discussion. But the
DNC claims, quote, we've shortchanged our children by underinvesting in
our nation's public schools. And they're absolutely right about the
(19:29):
kids getting short changed, but it's not because the system
lacks funding. Taxpayers are handing over more and more of
their money, more than ever before. But adults are the
ones benefiting, not the kids.
Speaker 4 (19:43):
So is the idea that in some states, so a
chunk of my tax money goes to the public school,
I'm not going to use the local public school. So
I want to keep some of that money that I'm
paying to use in a different way to educate my kid.
Speaker 2 (20:00):
Yeah. Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 5 (20:01):
There are a variety of programs, but they're all more
or less reflect that that desire. So we've increased inflation
adjusted public schools spending by one hundred and sixty four
percent since nineteen seventy So that's you know, more than
two and a half times adjusted for inflation. Yes, sir,
that's our at homes gotten one hundred and sixty four
percent better.
Speaker 4 (20:20):
Of course not did they need to get one hundred
and whatever percent better? Or were we relatively happy with
the way public schools were then? I know they had
stricter guidelines for what was proficient and all you know,
you're reading your math, all your different things, and more
people met them. So why did we even need to
spend more money anyway? American government schools and I really
(20:42):
prefer the term government schools over public schools, where that
makes it clear what's happening.
Speaker 5 (20:46):
UH spend about twenty grand per student each year, which
is that's on average, which is about fifty two percent
higher than average private school tuition. Teachers' unions plan to
give themselves more money is the definition of insanity doing
the same thing over and over again expecting different results.
Quoting now from who wrote this for the National Review,
Corey DeAngelis kind of dipping in and out of his
(21:07):
opinion piece. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, known as
the Nation's Report Card, shows that only about one in
four eighth grade public school students are proficient in math
one and four less than a third or proficient in reading,
and we are failing miserably. But despite more than doubling
inflation adjusted overall funding for student, average teacher salaries have
(21:29):
remained flat, increasing by only three percent in real terms
over the last half of a century.
Speaker 2 (21:35):
Wow.
Speaker 4 (21:36):
So if the most valuable education research and resource in schools,
teachers aren't getting the money, who is this is all?
Speaker 2 (21:42):
We talked about this the other day. It's administrative bloat.
Speaker 4 (21:44):
Right, Yeah, we talked about the percentage increase in the
number of not teachers, not students, other people at the
school doing whatever it is they do. This is so
obviously true. Is it just now breaking through to most
peace people.
Speaker 5 (22:01):
Well, let's say encounter extremely extremely inconvenient for the lefty
media to report this. This runs absolutely countered all of
their narratives on the topic.
Speaker 4 (22:09):
Will all the higher ups in lefty media their kids
go to private school so they only have kind of
like what they see on TV version of what public
schools even are. So the argument on the other side,
I suppose, would be if you let too many parents
keep their twenty grand per kid and spend it however
(22:30):
they want. We wouldn't be able to function as a
public school, is.
Speaker 2 (22:33):
That the argument?
Speaker 5 (22:33):
The government schools would be decimated for money, well, especially
because they've got so.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
Much administrative bloat.
Speaker 5 (22:39):
But in Chicago, for example, spending is nearly doubled since
twenty twelve to about thirty thousand dollars per student. Today,
spending for students skyrocketed three and a half times the
rate of inflation, whereas reading and mass scores plummeted by
sixty three percent and seventy eight percent, respectively.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
In fact, not a single student was fishing.
Speaker 4 (23:00):
In math in thirty three government schools in Chicago in
twenty twenty two. Not a single kid. So what would
most parents do? I wonder if you, if you, if
you were able to throw open the doors this much
where you just announced, Okay, next year, you you can
either send your kid to the local fourth grade public
school or you know, we'll cut you check for twenty
(23:22):
five thousand dollars, you know, different depending on where you live. Yeah,
and figure out how to educate your kid on your own.
What do you think most people would do?
Speaker 2 (23:31):
It's an interesting question.
Speaker 4 (23:32):
Plenty of money to go to a decent pub private school, yes, plenty.
Speaker 5 (23:36):
Yeah, I think many people would opt out. It depends
on the state of their local schools. When my kids
were going to government schools in the town that they
grew up in, they were quite good. It was, you know,
a reasonably affluent area of a red county in California,
and it was pretty good. It's changed since then, but so, yeah,
so it depends, but a lot would opt for that.
Speaker 2 (23:57):
A couple more stats, just very quickly.
Speaker 5 (24:00):
I mentioned this the other day, but it bears repeating
that between twenty and twenty twenty two, this is the
modern era, the number of students enrolled in government schools
increased by five percent. The number of teachers grew twice
as fast, ten percent, which, well, that's explainable because special
(24:20):
ed programs became more robust than that sort of thing.
And I'm not against more teachers, more teachers doing a
good job as a wonderful thing.
Speaker 4 (24:27):
Smaller teachers, smaller classrooms is great. Sure, Yeah, nobody's against that.
But while the students grew in population by five percent,
the number of principles and assistant principles grew by forty percent.
Now there's no possible way you can explain that not
and a chance you can explain that and have it
makes sense to me.
Speaker 5 (24:45):
And dwarfing That number administrative staff increased by ninety five percent,
or about nineteen times the rate of student enrollment since
the year two.
Speaker 4 (24:55):
Thousand also impossible to explain other than you're just creating
jobs for people to do that aren't needed. So when
last we chatted with William Launch and Ess, he mentioned
that school choice is on the ballot and seventy percent
of Americans are in favor of it.
Speaker 2 (25:10):
That is a huge majority. Can you roll the next clip?
Speaker 7 (25:13):
Michael Trump supports school choice, Harris doesn't. Number one, we
want school choice, but we have to get out of
this Washington thing. Well, Harris promises to strength and education.
Her party's platform is consistent with that of the teacher unions.
Speaker 2 (25:30):
Quote.
Speaker 7 (25:30):
We oppose the use of private school vouchers, tuition, tax credits, opportunities, scholarships,
and other schemes that divert taxpayer funded resources away from
public education.
Speaker 2 (25:42):
Wow, it's a scheme.
Speaker 4 (25:43):
I gotta believe if you fully explained, even in your
like your low income inner city areas, if you explain
to people, look, we're going to cut you a check
at the beginning of the year for twenty five grand.
Here are the local private schools you could send your
kid to that are between I don't know ten and
twenty thousand dollars a year.
Speaker 2 (26:02):
Which would you rather do? They would just take that option.
Speaker 5 (26:06):
And just to make it clear for folks, it's it's
not a check exactly, it's a so you have to
use it for education.
Speaker 2 (26:11):
I just wanted to allay people's.
Speaker 4 (26:13):
Fear of I'm just trying to make the argument clear
of what would be because I think they confuse it
so much with all the various words for it, that
people don't understand that's an option. Sure could be an
option in a different structured society.
Speaker 5 (26:28):
Yeah, and the utter egregious failure of America's government schools.
And I haven't even gotten into far left neo Marxist indoctrination,
which if they were doing like the world's greatest job
in teaching to read and write and an arithmetic but
indoctrinating your kid to be a Marxist who hates America
and hates Wistern civilizations, I'd yank them out anyway, right, No, obviously,
(26:50):
if you just cut people a check, there'd be an
awful lot of people that would go on vacation and
their kid won't go to school at all. But you know,
in effect, you get to spend this much money on education, harmy,
You want tons of people would choose a different option
than their local public school. Sure, get together with four
other families and hire the best teacher in the world
(27:12):
to run a classroom for your five kids.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
And it's our for instance, and it's our money, we taxpayers' money,
and my kid.
Speaker 4 (27:20):
Why don't I get to decide exactly? And the teachers' unions,
damn them, the big ones make it sound like you're
yanking money out.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
Of public schools or government school You won't.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
Need it for that kid, because my kid's not gonna
be going there, So I'll go ahead and.
Speaker 2 (27:34):
Keep my money. Yeah, I'm keeping my money.
Speaker 7 (27:36):
Last clip Paul show growing support for school choice. Close
to one million students are currently enrolled in programs nationwide,
with taxpayers typically covering half to three quarters of private tuition.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
I think it would be nice to be able to
choose where you go to school somewhat. Public school money
should stay in public schools. That's the debate.
Speaker 7 (27:57):
Choice supporter say public money is their money too, and
that states actually spend less when students use a voucher
or tax credit than if that child attended a public school.
Speaker 2 (28:07):
How sure? Opponents say that isn't the point.
Speaker 7 (28:10):
They argue school choice programs suck resources women already struggling
public systems.
Speaker 4 (28:15):
A bloated, miserable, failing government program. How about you phrase
it like that, or how about you just bottom line
it to your own kid for less money, then we'll
be spent to go there and get a bad result.
Speaker 2 (28:31):
I can go here and get a better result. VM. Yeah.
Speaker 4 (28:34):
I think because of the way human brains work, people
have been used to government schools their entire lives. People
of our generation certainly, and younger parents. Right now, you
got to shake yourself out of the assumption.
Speaker 2 (28:47):
That that's always been there, it will always be there, It.
Speaker 4 (28:51):
Is always the best choice. Would you go with government
air conditioning service if the results were analogous to government education?
Speaker 2 (29:00):
Would you go with that?
Speaker 4 (29:01):
Would you go to a government grocery store if the
food was as miserable government?
Speaker 2 (29:06):
And quality is the education government. I could go through a.
Speaker 4 (29:09):
List of Yeah, government go and run in all restaurants.
Every town has a postave place, a Hamburger place, whatever,
run by the government's way. It's always been what's your argument,
food's bad, it's overpriced. They've got fifty people in there.
We're going to make one burger for some reason. Would
you buy a government car or would you prefer that
you kept your tax money and took a voucher down
(29:29):
to your local dealer and bought a non government car.
I don't know if it will happen in my lifetime,
because it's going to take a long time to break through,
as you've said, But with those poll numbers, I think
we're going to reach a point where we decide no,
every family's gonna come up with their own way for
educating their kid, with a bunch of different options in
(29:51):
their town. You know, this church based school, this other
private school that leans more toward arts, this private school
that leans more towards stem, whatever, this one that's closer
to my house. All kinds of different choices that are
just have better results and worth repeating Corey Deangelis's headline,
the public school system is a jobs program for administrators
(30:15):
and teachers who, again, God bless them, they do the fabulous,
fabulous works. Some of them government schools are now a
jobs program for a union to make itself rich.
Speaker 2 (30:29):
Have you considered being good at your jobs? And then
you have a whole bunch of private.
Speaker 4 (30:34):
Things, institutions and entities in your town that educate kids,
and they'll have so much reason to keep costs down
and test scores high so that they can attract more students,
whereas your public school apparently has no incentive whatsoever. As
you can see in a whole bunch of big cities
where nobody's reading at proficiency level or doing MATHI proficiency level,
(30:58):
and they just keep on keeping on.
Speaker 5 (31:00):
And to quote the great Tim Sandifer, or at least
reference him, what are they saying at those Chicago schools
about their miserable failure.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
They're saying, we need more money.
Speaker 4 (31:11):
Yeah, we would be more successful if we had more money. Wow,
that's that's quite the story, man. That's a burbling change
in the way society is structured. Let it burble, man,
let it burble. I don't know how long it'll take, man,
that's fascinating. If you have any thoughts on that text
line four one two nine five kftc.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
Armstrong, Hey Eddie.
Speaker 6 (31:33):
Let's go Trump.
Speaker 7 (31:34):
What's the main reason why you are supporting President Trump,
the border.
Speaker 2 (31:39):
Any message you got for President Trump, go get the win,
Go get the win. We got it. Win the election.
Come on, I know what I want to happen. President
Trump back in office.
Speaker 7 (31:49):
This is a state that's going to make or break
this election.
Speaker 1 (31:52):
How are you feeling about it?
Speaker 4 (31:53):
You know what we're doing winning, winning, you know why
we're winning policy. So that's Steelers fan in the parking
lot at the game the other day that Trump attended.
And I'm sure they went out of their way to
find a group of people that looked like Trump fans.
Maybe they had flags, hats, I don't know, whatever, But
Trump got introduced at the game. We didn't play the clip.
(32:14):
People started chanting USA, USA when Trump was introduced at
the Pittsburgh game and he was around doing various things
in a hard hat, helmet and that sort of thing.
We're going to talk about masculinity and how it polls
among Republicans and Democrats, which fits into this. But did
you see the thing? It was a really cool AI
picture of Trump. It's Trump's head on a Pittsburgh Steeler body,
(32:36):
and it's such a good AI picture. It looks like
Trump if he was playing in the NFL.
Speaker 5 (32:41):
It's really cool, but from like the nineteen seventies heyday,
it had that look to me.
Speaker 4 (32:47):
Yeah yeah, yeah yeah, And it's a pretty cool picture.
But anyway, the funny thing is that Newsweek on their
Twitter feed had that picture and had this disclaimer. Donald
Trump has shared is what is likely an AI generated
image on his truth social account, which showed him as
a player for the Pittsburgh Steelers. Thank you, Oh he
(33:08):
didn't play for the Steelers with Terry Bradshaw elo. Elon
Musk actually retweeted Newsweek's disclaimer with you know, the laughing emoji,
like hilarious. Thanks for the pointing out Trump isn't actually
currently a member of the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Speaker 2 (33:25):
Anyway.
Speaker 4 (33:25):
On the whole masculinity front, a poll finds that the
GOP men identify as highly masculine more than Democratic men.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Is that a surprised anyone.
Speaker 4 (33:40):
A recent Pew Research Center poll found that fifty three
percent of Republican men consider themselves highly masculine. Fifty three
percent compared to twenty nine percent of male Democrats.
Speaker 2 (33:51):
That's quite a gap. Now.
Speaker 4 (33:53):
When I first read that, I thought, what I call
myself highly masculine and a poll. Well, to get around that,
they didn't ask you, are you highly masculine or kind
of That would have been I'd feel a little uncomfortable
with that question myself, Yeah, because that just I mean,
I actually kind of do, but it just seems like
kind of a douchey thing to say anyway, But so.
Speaker 2 (34:13):
They don't do it that way.
Speaker 4 (34:14):
They have traits and then you click, you know, on
a scale of one to five where you are in
various traits, and then it puts you in the category
of how masculine you see yourself as, which is a
much better way to.
Speaker 2 (34:26):
Do it, And we got to do that on air.
That'd be fun.
Speaker 4 (34:28):
It would be qualities such as confidence, risk taking, assertiveness,
physical strength, stuff like that. You rank yourself and then
other things such as, you know, do you soft speaking,
caring about others, affectionate behavior toward this group or that group,
and then you rank yourself and then they spit out
where you are on the masculine scale. And again the
(34:49):
Republican numbers were fifty three percent highly masculine to twenty
nine percent for Democrats, which is interesting and might explain
some of the gender gap that's going on where Trump
is leading by like seventeen points among men, whereas Kamala
Harris is leading by roughly the same number among women.
And there's never been a divergence this large strictly along
(35:11):
male female in a presidential election before.
Speaker 5 (35:14):
And it helps explain why the Democrats have nominated hashtag tampon.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Trotsky, Tim.
Speaker 5 (35:23):
Who kicks around like a sitcom dad, ashamed of his maleness.
Speaker 2 (35:27):
So how much, sir, damn business? How much time I got,
Michael my out of time? I got a little less
than a minute, Okay, I can get it.
Speaker 4 (35:34):
So on the positive side for masculinity, that you had
people explaining highly masculine to me is a male who's
looking to lead in every area, someone who does not
accept just getting by, wants to excel at everything he does.
Speaker 2 (35:46):
Blah blah blah. I like the description of that.
Speaker 4 (35:48):
You had other people, though, who described it as its
traditional toxic masculinity, rooting in the suppression of women and blah.
Speaker 2 (35:56):
Blah blah that sort of thing.
Speaker 4 (35:58):
Oh please, A toxic masculinity, what a ste masculine male
doesn't need to oppress anybody or belittle or hold down
anybody in toxic the point, and toxic masculinity implies that
just being traditionally male is toxic somemile, which I find
I'd like to punch him in the stomach for seeing that.
Speaker 2 (36:17):
Whoops, Sorry
Speaker 1 (36:21):
Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
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.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.