April 29, 2024 • 35 mins
Hour 1 of A&G features...
- The White House Correspondent's Dinner, and why Jack hates it...
- A widely ignored story...
- SD Governor Kristi Noem responds to the dog killing controversy...
- The new Pentagon report on China...
- more on the student protest debate.
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):
From the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio at the George Washington
Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty Armstrong and Getty Show.
I was excited to.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Be up here on stage with President Biden to night,
mostly to see if I could figure out where Obama
was pulling the strings from. I have to admit it's
not easy following President Biden. I mean it's not always
easy following what he's.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Saying, like everybody's so uncomfortable.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Colin Joe's from SNL did the thing and the White
House Correspondent to dinner, and he was the guy that
gets up there and makes jokes. I thought it was,
you know, fine, but I really admired the fact that
he didn't seem to care at all. Jokes that got
no response, didn't seem to bother him a bit, which
I just think is awesome he did. I thought one
(01:03):
of the funnier things he said was he said, by
the way, he mentioned his wife, who is actress Scarlett Johansson.
He mentioned, uh, by the way, my wife would like
to meet each and every one of you when this
is over, and don't feel bashful about coming up to her.
Just walk right up and introduce yourself. She loves to
meet new people. Oh wow, that's funny. She threw her
(01:25):
hand back and laughter. Oh yeah, I have a feeling.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Colin has a very good sense of what's a good
joke and what's not before it, you know, is hurt
by an audience with you know, all of his experience
on Saturday Night Live, and so he's acutely aware that
some of these jokes are not going to get a
laugh because people are so uncomfortable with him. And I'll
bet he kind of enjoyed that time.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
He's also rich, good looking, and married to Scarlet Johanson.
You should be pretty comfortable all day, every day.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Yeah, I suppose.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
So.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Yeah. Would you like to reiterate why you hate that
gathering White House correspondents dinner? Oh?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
I learned that mostly from that book This town Mark
Lee Bovicia.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Open with talking.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
About that, And it's a book where they all they
call it nerd prom and they all kind of like, oh, hi,
isn't this kind of silly? But it's really a gathering
of the media and government who work together to have
their cool lives, and they all feel like they run
the world, and we're all envious of their positions and
wish we could be them and they It just drips
(02:29):
of that, and.
Speaker 1 (02:30):
They get together and laugh about the things that actually
matter to Americans yep, yep, yep, yep, yep.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
And the adversarial role the press is supposed to play
with government just doesn't appear to exist at all, and
it becomes transparently true at that gathering.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
I feel like, yeah, yeah, So here is a story
that the media has mostly ignored, except on the conservative
side of things, and I think it's absolutely worth bringing
to your attention. And it comes out of the category
of every administration has way too much power both sides,
and so we have these wild veering from guardrail to
(03:10):
guardrail in terms of the executive branch, which includes the
regulatory power to affect all of our lives and work
and recreation and the rest of it. So another example
of that is the Biden administration put out its new
guidelines or clarification of Title nine, which is the federal
(03:31):
civil rights law that prevents sex discrimination in any educational
institution receiving government funding. You're probably familiar with it, but
they have gutted protection for women and girls, partly in
the name of transgender rights, which you know, last time
it checked, women are slightly more than fifty percent of
(03:55):
the electorate. I think they're just cow telling to the
are far left, that's into all the radical gender theory,
neo Marxist garbage and thinking. Most women, especially democratic leaning women,
college educated, have that social degree, and they're down with
all this stuff because they don't understand what it really is.
So I guess politically they can get away with it.
(04:16):
But here's what they did. It's just outrageous. Four chief problems.
Number one, the proposed rule expands the definition of sex
to include gender identity, of course, so that means any
K through twelve school, college, or university receiving direct or
indirect federal funding would have to open its bathrooms. It's
(04:37):
locker rooms, it's housing accommodations, and any other sex separated
educational programs to someone who's biologically of the opposite sex.
Federal law demands there are dudes in your daughter's dressing room,
locker room, bathroom. It's shocking, it is shocking. It's a dangerous.
(04:57):
Let's see who am I quoting here, the Washington Examine
or Partiall Perry.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
Would this stuff go away with a Republican administration.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Uh yeah, h at least far as far as title
nine goes. Yeah, does Trump ever talk about this stuff?
I don't recall him ever talking about this stuff. No,
he almost never does.
Speaker 3 (05:15):
Do you have too many liberal Manhattan friends that are
okay with this stuff that he doesn't want to or
because it just seems like such a winning issue to me?
Speaker 1 (05:22):
Yeah, this is one of those topics that I just
don't think he cares about. He hasn't learned about it,
He doesn't know much about it. He'll occasionally refer to
woke people. Do we have any of our Trump woke clips?
Why Alice referred to it? Some He's just not It's
not a big on his radar screen. I don't think.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
Yeah, woke means what whatever that one is. I don't
remember what he says, but we'll hear it here momentarily.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
But I do everything woke turns to. You know what
woke means? It means you're a loser.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Yeah, but he doesn't get into the specifics.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Yeah. Yeah. So it also opens biological men up to
joining women's and girls sports teams, in spite of how
poorly that polls. Let's see, well that's kind of in
the weeds. I won't go there, but it's outrageous and
stupid and terrible, and I hope Trump gets elected and
(06:20):
overturns it. So problem number two the proposed rule. Excuse me.
The proposed rule rolls back protections that were enacted during
the last Trumpet administration that reinstalled due process in the
whole thing questions of sexual harassment or assault, and they've
gone back to the guilty until proven innocent presumption if
(06:41):
you're accused of either sexual harassment or assault. The Trump
administration got one hundred and twenty four thousand public comments
there is a growing crisis of sexual violence and education
in the departments of blah blah blah. But they said
that you have to have a live hearing and allow
both the accused and the complainant student's advisor to cross
examine parties and witnesses involved. Institutions must also presume that
(07:04):
those accused are innocent prior to the investigation and decision
making process sees. But President Biden's proposed rule rolls back
those protections, leaving schools with the guilty until proven innocent presumption,
which is disgusting and especially considering expulsion from school losses, scholarships,
and financial aid. Reputational harm can drastically change the trajectory
(07:26):
of someone's life. Those are material punishments. Those are much
more than just you know, the school whacking on your wrist.
That's akin to a judicial punishment. According to those of
us who are kind of into this sort of thing
they mentioned, the proposed rule will install a Heckler's veto
at schools that are federally funded by forcing students, teachers,
(07:46):
and professors to toe the line on the woke sexual
orthodoxy or be faced with a Title nine federal complaint.
And this might be the worst part. Wow. Currently, campus
speech is discussion of sexual issues not considered harassing just
because it is pervasive. Debates and discussions about sex and
(08:06):
gender are are allowed. Certainly, to constitute verbal sexual harassment,
the speech must not only be present pervasive, it must
also be severe enough in nature to deny or limited
person's ability to participate in essence, But the Biden administration
discards the current definition. Instead, it would be essentially, if
(08:30):
it offends people, it's it's sexual harassment or sex sexual
orientation harassment, and.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
By people that probably includes if one person complains.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
Uh, yeah, exactly, exactly, Bah. The use of the term
hostile environment does nothing to limit its reach or protect
free speech under these schools. Again, that's kind of in
the in the rule in the weeds. But i'll jump
the fourth part, which is related and this is insidious.
I'm sorry, this is the worst part. It removes protection
(09:08):
for institutions that adhere to a traditional belief on sexuality, gender,
and marriage by limiting previous protections for any religious universities
that get any sort of federal funding. You have to
be down with the gender bending madness or you will
lose your funding. So it's it combined with the third section.
It's forced speech, which the First Amendment forbids as well,
(09:31):
not directly, but that's how it's been interpreted by every court.
So you have to be down with the radical gender theory,
queer theory whatever, awesome, And so you're harassing people and
all this stuff is on the line with the presidential election. Yeah, yeap.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
The Pentagon paid the Rand Corporation to tell them how's
America doing? And the Rand Corporation said, eh, and not
so good. We can get into the particulars of that
a little bit later. It's depressing interesting and obviously true.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
How America is doing in terms of military preparation, strength, cohesion, just.
Speaker 3 (10:15):
Being able to survive as a thing. Oh real, Yeah,
the experiment. How's the experiment going? Oh wow, it's pretty interesting,
So stay tuned for that. Also, what's the other thing
I wanted to get do? Oh Man came across a
controversial column about the whole Harvey Weinstein thing. Yeah, I'll
be interested to see how people react to this kind
(10:37):
of saying, Look, there's a relationship between these scumbags and
up and coming actresses that has always existed and nobody
wants to admit that. And I think I know where
that's headed anyway, So see how that strikes you.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Among other things on the way, stay with.
Speaker 4 (10:54):
Us, the NFL now expanding the use of these admittedly
far from fashion forward, soft shell helmets athletes now giving
the option to wear garden caps beyond practice to regular
season games engineer to enhance protection against head injuries by
(11:15):
as much as twenty percent.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
The NFL introduced.
Speaker 5 (11:17):
Garden caps during training camps in twenty twenty two. A
year later, the NFL mandating their use during practices for
most players. And it's not just the pros. Some high
schools have been using them for years.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
Reduces head injuries by twenty percent. Eighty percent of statistics
are made up on the spot. I can't imagine how
you'd possibly come up with that number. But so they
might have new safer helmets, so that when would they start.
I heard they look funny, though, of course, helmets only
don't look funny because you're used to the way they look.
I'm sure the first time someone put one on it
looked pretty funny.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
Right, yeah, I'm looking at them right now beginning with
twenty twenty four games. Okay, yeah, yeah, they're different, but
they don't look particularly funny to me. They just look
like a helmet that's gonna protect your head better.
Speaker 3 (12:02):
So Columbia just put out a statement they were not
able to come to an agreement with student protesters. The
agreement should be you leave or you get expelled. Do
you agree? I don't understand why this is so hard.
We're still getting texts about the governor of South Dakota
shooting her dog, Christy Nome. Whether or not you think
(12:23):
that's a big deal. She put that in her book
that's apparently coming out for some reason, it didn't help
that she mentioned the dog's name Cricket. Cricket makes it
extra cute and lovable, right, yeah, and we shot it
in a gravel pit. We have the governor's statement about
the controversy coming up at a moment.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
We got this text.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
By the way, the complainers haven't mentioned one point two
million dogs are euthanized annually, according to the latest statistics.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
One point two million. Yeah. It is a such a
divide between the part of America that understands ranch and
far life and that which doesn't and has a soft,
fuzzy warm view of pets. And I'm not trying to
suggest they're bad people for that. It's just a question
of realism versus the lack of it. To me. Plus,
(13:13):
there are millions more dogs, as Jack indicated, then can
possibly have a home found for them. Right, And.
Speaker 3 (13:24):
Perhaps you think shooting the dog is exceptionally cruel as
opposed to put to sleep.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
I don't know why, but maybe you do. So. Christin
nom has written, I can understand why some people are
upset about twenty year old story of Cricket, one of
the working dogs at our ranch. In my upcoming book,
No Going Back. The book is filled with many honest
stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions,
and the lessons learned. What I learned from my years
(13:50):
of public service, especially leading South Dakota through COVID. That's
a good shot right there, and that's a good Hey.
Remember I didn't shut down my state is people are
looking for leaders who are authentic, willing to learn from
the past, and don't shy away from tough challenges. My
hope is anyone reading this book will have an understanding
that I always work to make the best decisions I
can for the people in my life. The fact is
South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill
(14:13):
livestock can be put down. Given that cricket has shown
aggressive behavior, had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them,
I decided what I did. I would jump in there
and say, and I love dogs. I mean I love dogs.
A dog that in the country that kills livestock and
attacks people, it's not even a question if that dog
(14:36):
will be put down anyway, whether running the rancher in politics.
I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else
to handle, even if it's hard and painful. I followed
the law and was being a responsible parent, dog owner,
and neighbor. As I explained in the book, it wasn't easy,
but often the easy way isn't the right way. I
agree with her.
Speaker 3 (14:52):
I just don't think it's going to work politically, and
she's not going to be on the ticket because of
that story alone.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
I think you're right. Yeah, people are. They're just too
many people who vote will not They will hear what
I say and say I don't care she killed a dog.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Right exactly. Joe brought us the story last week of
the snowfer.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (15:13):
It's not a sneaker, it's not a loafer. It's a snowfer. Yeah,
I'm looking at the picture of it. I hadn't seen
a picture of it. It's coming out in the spring.
It's from New Balance. I think it's a particularly ugly shoe,
but we'll see if it catches on. It's the foot
The Wall Street Journal did a review of this. It's
the footwear equivalent of a spork, and no one knows
what to make of it. Like the Liger combination. Lion tiger,
(15:36):
that's right, Napoleon Dynamite's favorite animal.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
It's probably my favorite animal.
Speaker 3 (15:42):
Like the Liger, the cronut and the Chortal before it.
What's a cronut is a croissant and a donut, But
what's a chortal?
Speaker 1 (15:50):
A short? Anybody know what that is?
Speaker 3 (15:54):
No, this shoe is a confounding hybrid released in August.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
I think it's ugliness is going to be part of
its ironic appeal.
Speaker 3 (16:04):
Could be, why do we need a sneaker loafer combo?
Speaker 1 (16:12):
I don't know, so you can step out of church
and mow your lawn in the same footwear. Yeah, it
really is. I don't know it.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
Yes, Katie Green, what can you tell us about the chortle?
The chortle is the cross between a chuckle and a snort. Well, okay,
so it is actually the the laugh. Oh okay, kind
of laugh. But that's way different than Liger or Cronat.
I would not have included that it's a distraction. No
bad journalism. Uh, how's America doing? The Pentagon wanted to
(16:47):
find out. They paid a think tank to come up
with the answer. We've got that for you, coming up
from the Rain Corporation, and it's it's first of all,
you're not going to disagree with any of their conclusions exactly.
Speaker 1 (16:59):
It ain't good. Can we just whistle past the graveyard
please and pretend everything's fine?
Speaker 3 (17:04):
That might be the best way to approach it. That
might be the best way to That might be my
new attitude on life.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
What's you know? Not n I can do about it?
Give up? Is that giving up? I don't know. It's
a lot like giving up Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:25):
For a year since I delivered this space, and my
wife chills with me tonight, was worried how I do?
I told her, don't worry. Just like riding the bike.
She's That's what I'm worried about. The twenty twenty four
elections in full swing. And yes, age is an issue.
(17:47):
I'm a grown man, run it against a six year old.
Speaker 1 (17:54):
Age is the only thing we have in common.
Speaker 6 (17:58):
My Vice President actually indoor me.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
So as Joe Biden at the White House Correspondents dinner
the other night. If you're a Biden fan, I guess
you found it charming and whatever counterpoint, your vpis an idiot,
But it speaks a little to our political dysfunction. And
you know we've always had I mean, that is politics.
It's an adversarial thing, but we all know we're at
(18:23):
a different level now than we've ever been before. And
that fits in with this study out from RAND, the
Rand Study, which actually comes out tomorrow. I'm reading from
David Ignatius in the Washington Post. He got an early
copy of it before it comes out tomorrow. He said
it has the anadyne title of the Sources of Renewed
(18:43):
National Dynamism. That is fairly academic and dry sounding. And
I hope this isn't too academic and dry. Maybe Joe
can make body noises throughout to jazz.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Up, but I'd be delighted. Sure.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
It's part of a series of reports commissioned by the
Pentagon to assess the United States competitive position as it
facing China, which is pretty interesting. Though the report is
mostly written in the dry language of sociology, it is
explosive stuff, says David Ignatius. And I don't think any
of this will surprise you or you will disagree with
what has what has led to the relative decline in
(19:17):
US standing worldwide?
Speaker 1 (19:20):
As the report asks.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
The opening chapter explains American's problem starkly quote, It's a
competitive position is threatened both from within in terms of
slowing productivity growth and aging population. A polarized political system
and an increasingly corrupted information environment, and outside in terms
of a rising direct channel from China and declining deference
(19:42):
to US power from dozens of developing nations, that has
all headed the wrong.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
Direction so far. Yeah, absolutely accurate.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
That's all bad news, but all completely true. I don't
think anybody could argue with any point of that this
decline is accelerating, warns the study. The essential problem is
seen in starkly different terms by different segments of SI.
In groups of political leaders, there's a right wing narrative
of decline and a left wing one. Though they agree
that something is broken in America, the two sides disagree,
(20:10):
often in the extreme, on what to do about it.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
That is that is interesting.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
Both sides agree that there is something broken in a
way that you know didn't used to be, but we
have no this Well, the solution seems to be from
both sides get rid of the other side.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
Well, right, I was going to say, I think from
a conservative perspective, a great deal of what's broken is
what the progressive left has gotten enacted. They broke it.
Speaker 3 (20:41):
Unless Americans can unite to identify and fix these problems,
we risk falling into.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
A downward spiral.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
Recovery from significant long term national decline is rare and
difficult to detect in the historical record. That was the
sentence that stood out to me the most. Hit us
with that one more time, Recovery from signific long term
national decline is rare and difficult to detect in the
historical record. Which is kind of a fancy way of saying,
(21:07):
we can't come up with any examples in history where
a superpower, a power started head in this direction for
a while and turned it around.
Speaker 1 (21:14):
If anybody knows of any of the examples, any of
those examples, please write. I've been saying that for years.
You remember asking historians all kinds of people. I've been saying,
is there any example of any country society ever straightening
this out?
Speaker 3 (21:28):
I don't think anybody's ever answered yes.
Speaker 1 (21:31):
M no, oh boy. The author's note.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
Think of Rome or Habsburg, Spain, or the Ottoman and
Austrio Hungarian empires, or the Soviet Union. When great powers
have slid from a position of pre eminence or leadership
because of domestic factors, they seldom reverse the trend, and
by seldom they mean never that they can come up
with yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I've said for many, many years it would take a
war or a cataclysm like a giant plague, and then
we had a giant plague and it made everything worse,
more divided. So yeah, to me, it's about managing the
decline and slowing it out of our duty to our
children and grandchildren and just the future citizens of the
(22:16):
United States. It's a force for good and decency in
the world, and we need to fight to at least
run out the string. It keeps us string running as
long as we can.
Speaker 3 (22:25):
Now listen to some of these specific examples. Again, the
Pentagon commissioned this report to try to figure out, you know,
what's our situation recompeting with China over the next decade
or one hundred years. And listen to this some of
the triggers that they have here and see if you
agree with them, what causes national decline. The RAND authors
(22:47):
site many things that are familiar here, says David Ignatius.
Here's the quote from the report, addiction to luxury and decadence.
Dang wow, failure to keep pace with technological demands. I
think I'd be like, you know, we don't make our
own computer chips, stuff like that. Failure to keep pace.
(23:09):
Oh that I already said that, ossified bureaucracy, loss of
civic virtue, military overstretch, self interested in warring elites, unsustainable
environmental practices.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Yeah. But other than that, how are we doing? Yeah,
that's a hell of a list, meaning you could have
stopped after the first two. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
The only one I'd agree with, maybe is the unsustainable
environmental practices. I'm not exactly sure what they mean by that.
That might be way too far down the road of
you're worried about climate change. But I want to get
a Hong Komo on that, because, like you said, the
first couple, addiction to luxury and decadence. The Iran Corporation
actually lists that as one of the reasons we're in
decline and may not be able to turn it around.
(23:51):
Absolutely clearly true.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
Yeah, we're just we're very soft people, speaking for myself.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Loss of civic virtue.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
Mm hmm, without a doubt, Doo needed a community to country.
If people scoff at that idea.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
Well just did the most people in China hate their
own country?
Speaker 1 (24:14):
No?
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Now, part of that is the government constantly shows them
movies about all their successes around the world and the
evils of other countries, but they like their country and
think they do good things, not bad things. Watch the
YouTube video of John Stewart with David Sanger from two
mondays ago, that book that I'm loving so much about
the New Cold Wars.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
John Stewart's all.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
About, yeah, well China and UH and Russia and all this,
but we caused them to act that way. It's the
things we do. We're an awful country and that's why
these other countries.
Speaker 1 (24:44):
Act this way.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
Wow, that's not the way they feel about it in
the other countries that are going to try to take
over the earth.
Speaker 1 (24:50):
And did Sanger try to push back on that at all?
He tried to, He's a reasonable guy.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
He tried to a little bit, but the crowd was
all with John Stewart and cheering him like crazy.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
As you know how it works on those shows.
Speaker 7 (25:00):
God, the pathetic, obvious adolescent obligation to be self hating
on the left makes me insane because it's such a
transparent pose.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
I mean, it's like the thirteen year old who's bored
by everything and nothing and everything sucks. I mean, I understand,
what all do you just say?
Speaker 3 (25:22):
I can't recognize that at all. I have to spend
forty eight hours of doing that. What says her dad
of a couple of teenagers.
Speaker 1 (25:29):
Yeah, I mean I went through it. Everybody goes through it.
I'm not mocking anybody, but it's like, okay, all right,
I've dealt with this before. Fine, but just it's to
me that my country sucks and is bad compared to
other countries. Yeah, all right. Everybody goes through that. Then
they get a little perspective and realizes that, you know,
(25:50):
they're good and bad and mistakes made, but intent is
blah blah blah. It's it's so adolescent. The fact that
it's a guy as smart as John Stewart could fall
for annoy Yeah, and the crowd cheer that sort of thing.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
So here's the final paragraph from David Ignation in the
Washington Post. Who's a lefty but and his his answers
would be different than mine. But I think this summary
is completely right. The message of this study is screamingly obvious.
America is on a downward slope that could be fatal.
That's a pretty heavy sentence. Fatal for the most important
(26:26):
country in the history of the world.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
Those are my words.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Back to his words, what will save us as a
broad commitment starting with elites to work for the common
good and national revival. We have the tools, but we
aren't using them. If we can't find new leaders and
agree on solutions that work for everyone, were sunk. He
is right about that, and he would he would come
from a different place of what the solutions are that
everybody should, you know, rally around. But that's the problem
(26:53):
in itself right there. If we can't find new leaders
that agree on solutions that work for everyone, we're sunk.
When I read that, first thing that popped into my
mind was like maybe the last gasp of having a
hope for this country. Seriously was the ah, God, the
(27:13):
name of it is flipping out of my head. It
was that report that was commissioned by the Obama administration
to deal with the entitlements. You'll think of it, you know.
The name was that, Yeah, the Erskine Bowls thing. We
got two senators, two reasonable grown up senators, one a Democrat,
one a Republican, got a whole bunch of different people
together came up with a plan that was a combination
(27:35):
of tax cuts and raining and entitlements, I mean increased
taxes and cutting entitlements that had to be done to
set us on the right course. Clearly the right thing
to do, couldn't make it happen. That might have been
the last gasp of elites being grown ups making the
hard choices. And we just don't live in a world
(27:56):
where that can happen anymore.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Well, I don't think it's rewarded anymore. And as politicians
are entirely self serving, if we don't if we don't
even ask them to do that, they're not going to
do that on their own. It's almost hilarious the idea
that people would expect that. Yeah, I'm sure David Ignatius
and I have differing views of what it would take
to lead that national revitalization. But I also know that
(28:20):
we could probably you know the ven diagrams overlapping circles.
I think he and I could certainly agree on a
pretty good overlap area and then say, hey, with all
our differences David and I, it's like Brett Bear has
his common ground segment on Special Report and eating and
(28:41):
really hammer that and use that as a starting point.
That would that would be a very good thing. But
the problem is, and I'm reminded of an article I
came across that I shared on the show many many
years ago. I think the headline was the one emotion
that that says your relationship is doomed, or the one
emotion a relationship can't have, and that is contempt, anger, resentments.
(29:09):
But you know, I could lift list off one hundred
emotions that can take place in a relationship. But if
you are contemptuous of your spouse or your partner, they're stupid.
They'll never get it. You're doing. It's over, just to
just end it. And the problem is, for reasons that
you know, we don't really need to get into, we
(29:30):
now have almost entirely of politics of contempt.
Speaker 3 (29:33):
Oh yeah, I remember last year when I was citing
that one poll that the vast majority of both sides
believe the other side is out to destroy America. I
mean that is yeah, that both sides have contempt for
the other side. And you know, both sides feel like
they have their good reasons. Like I feel like I'm
a man of the right. I feel like I have
good reasons to be something close to contemptuous of the left.
(29:56):
And I'm saying a lot of it on college campuses today.
But we're ever gonna survive. We're never gonna pull out
of our spiral if we're that way.
Speaker 1 (30:04):
Yeah, yeah, I think the performative politics, social media, online
fundraising at all is really rewarding the outer fringe. I mean, like,
next segment, I'd like to run a couple of clips
of Bill Maher recently. Bill Maher and I absolutely would
not have contempt for each other and our ideas. We
might disagree, but again we could find that common ground.
(30:25):
Me and some DEI jackass on a college campus, I
do have contempt for them. I think they're a brainwashed
and be wrong about everything. But the for instance, on
the other hand, if they wanted to sit down and talk,
I would absolutely have a generous conversation with them, hundred percent.
But the addiction to luxury and decadence, that's a cultural
thing that crosses party lines that ain't going to be
(30:49):
turned around easy. And then the stuff earlier criticized I'm
a man wearing mink underwear right now.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
And the stuff earlier about a corrupted information environment will
correc up to makes it sound like somebody's doing it
on purpose kind of or whatever. But that's just you know,
the advent of the way we get our information. I
don't know how that's going to get fixed where we
all have a journalism is now advocacy. Sure, yeah, that's
some rough stuff right there and there, And there are
no examples of anybody pulling out of the spiral. Why
(31:22):
would anybody listen to this show? I can't imagine who
wants to have any part of their day be this.
Speaker 1 (31:31):
Yeah you can, you can bellow at the audience you
can't handle the truth, but they're not listening it. So yeah, yeah, whoops,
Well something much more lighthearted coming up? Everybody gow.
Speaker 3 (31:43):
We took the audience like it was a disobedient dog
into a gravel.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Pit, and oh like we're Christine ol Yeah, oh my us.
Who are we about to hear from? This is NYU
professor Scott Galloway, who we featured last week. He is
not part of the woke anti Israel crowd and is
(32:08):
calling for some level of sanity. He was talking to
Bill Maher on his show the other night. Let's hear
the first one Michael did.
Speaker 8 (32:14):
The double standard here is pretty striking. Dylan Ruth goes
into a Charleston church and kills nine members of a
black church. If I went down to the plaza of
any of these universities with a white hood, a Confederate
flag and signs, and started saying Dylan globalized, Dylan kill
black people, right, There'd be no need for context. We
(32:35):
wouldn't be talking about free speech. I'd be out of academia.
And if I whipped up students into a frenzy such
as we started harassing non white students on their way
to the library and I started getting in their face
or even throwing things at them, and that has happened,
we wouldn't be having a conversation about the First Amendment.
We call in the National Guard. That is one thousand
percent true. Yeah, brilliantly said, yeah, let him roll on, Michael.
(32:59):
I think he got a had a nineteen year old
at pretty wide birth. The point of being nineteen is
y act stupid and you're learning to move on. I'm
glad the camera isn't following me around. It wasn't when
I was nineteen. The faculty, if we made the mistake
of hiring you and you want to support islamichi had
or the Islamic Republic, then you know what we made
a mistake, and we should rectify that mistake that we
(33:19):
signed we pay these people, and if they are not
taking the temperature down and they lack the critical thinking
that they can't they can't criticize a murderous atocracy.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
Pretty simple, they should be fired.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
Wow, and a response from the lefty crowd for Bill Maher,
that's definitely my new theme is these kids didn't raise themselves,
sort of theory of yeah, the nineteen year old the
message siloed altruistic idiots. But the people in charge of
(33:54):
the universities are grown ups and they should say to
them get or were expelling you.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Right to the kids? You mean yes, yeah, okay, yeah,
I was still on this point about fire the faculty, but.
Speaker 3 (34:08):
Well yeah, so yeah, the faculty is the fault the
that's I'm agreeing with him on that. Yeah, See, administrators,
why aren't the grown ups taking.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
Charge because A they agree with the kids. B those
are high dollar customers for a very expensive hotel resort,
that sort of thing. That's the relationship between college students
and college administrators. Now it is not teacher and student,
it is high dollar client and expensive day camp. I
(34:39):
wonder how long.
Speaker 3 (34:42):
This will last, or the attitude about these colleges, or
if they've done themselves permanent damage. Forbes had an article
over the weekend that got a lot of attention about
the new ivys. How people are turning away from these
Ivy League schools, and these are the schools there are
gonna be the new Ivy League schools, which I find
the whole thing just sickening. I'll be just as sickened
by the new Ivy's League schools, I'm sure, in terms
(35:03):
of it's so important that you get your kid in
there and all that. But they may have damaged themselves,
I hope.
Speaker 4 (35:10):
So.
Speaker 1 (35:11):
Yeah, Well, there's no mystery as to why revolutionary movements
always try to mobilize young people. It's because they're big
enough to do some damage, but dumb enough that they're
easily swayed by whatever's whispered or shouted into their ears.
Armstrong and Getty
From the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio at the George Washington
Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty Armstrong and Getty Show.
I was excited to.
Speaker 2 (00:14):
Be up here on stage with President Biden to night,
mostly to see if I could figure out where Obama
was pulling the strings from. I have to admit it's
not easy following President Biden. I mean it's not always
easy following what he's.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Saying, like everybody's so uncomfortable.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Colin Joe's from SNL did the thing and the White
House Correspondent to dinner, and he was the guy that
gets up there and makes jokes. I thought it was,
you know, fine, but I really admired the fact that
he didn't seem to care at all. Jokes that got
no response, didn't seem to bother him a bit, which
I just think is awesome he did. I thought one
(01:03):
of the funnier things he said was he said, by
the way, he mentioned his wife, who is actress Scarlett Johansson.
He mentioned, uh, by the way, my wife would like
to meet each and every one of you when this
is over, and don't feel bashful about coming up to her.
Just walk right up and introduce yourself. She loves to
meet new people. Oh wow, that's funny. She threw her
(01:25):
hand back and laughter. Oh yeah, I have a feeling.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Colin has a very good sense of what's a good
joke and what's not before it, you know, is hurt
by an audience with you know, all of his experience
on Saturday Night Live, and so he's acutely aware that
some of these jokes are not going to get a
laugh because people are so uncomfortable with him. And I'll
bet he kind of enjoyed that time.
Speaker 3 (01:45):
He's also rich, good looking, and married to Scarlet Johanson.
You should be pretty comfortable all day, every day.
Speaker 1 (01:51):
Yeah, I suppose.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
So.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Yeah. Would you like to reiterate why you hate that
gathering White House correspondents dinner? Oh?
Speaker 3 (01:59):
I learned that mostly from that book This town Mark
Lee Bovicia.
Speaker 1 (02:06):
Open with talking.
Speaker 3 (02:07):
About that, And it's a book where they all they
call it nerd prom and they all kind of like, oh, hi,
isn't this kind of silly? But it's really a gathering
of the media and government who work together to have
their cool lives, and they all feel like they run
the world, and we're all envious of their positions and
wish we could be them and they It just drips
(02:29):
of that, and.
Speaker 1 (02:30):
They get together and laugh about the things that actually
matter to Americans yep, yep, yep, yep, yep.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
And the adversarial role the press is supposed to play
with government just doesn't appear to exist at all, and
it becomes transparently true at that gathering.
Speaker 1 (02:46):
I feel like, yeah, yeah, So here is a story
that the media has mostly ignored, except on the conservative
side of things, and I think it's absolutely worth bringing
to your attention. And it comes out of the category
of every administration has way too much power both sides,
and so we have these wild veering from guardrail to
(03:10):
guardrail in terms of the executive branch, which includes the
regulatory power to affect all of our lives and work
and recreation and the rest of it. So another example
of that is the Biden administration put out its new
guidelines or clarification of Title nine, which is the federal
(03:31):
civil rights law that prevents sex discrimination in any educational
institution receiving government funding. You're probably familiar with it, but
they have gutted protection for women and girls, partly in
the name of transgender rights, which you know, last time
it checked, women are slightly more than fifty percent of
(03:55):
the electorate. I think they're just cow telling to the
are far left, that's into all the radical gender theory,
neo Marxist garbage and thinking. Most women, especially democratic leaning women,
college educated, have that social degree, and they're down with
all this stuff because they don't understand what it really is.
So I guess politically they can get away with it.
(04:16):
But here's what they did. It's just outrageous. Four chief problems.
Number one, the proposed rule expands the definition of sex
to include gender identity, of course, so that means any
K through twelve school, college, or university receiving direct or
indirect federal funding would have to open its bathrooms. It's
(04:37):
locker rooms, it's housing accommodations, and any other sex separated
educational programs to someone who's biologically of the opposite sex.
Federal law demands there are dudes in your daughter's dressing room,
locker room, bathroom. It's shocking, it is shocking. It's a dangerous.
(04:57):
Let's see who am I quoting here, the Washington Examine
or Partiall Perry.
Speaker 3 (05:02):
Would this stuff go away with a Republican administration.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
Uh yeah, h at least far as far as title
nine goes. Yeah, does Trump ever talk about this stuff?
I don't recall him ever talking about this stuff. No,
he almost never does.
Speaker 3 (05:15):
Do you have too many liberal Manhattan friends that are
okay with this stuff that he doesn't want to or
because it just seems like such a winning issue to me?
Speaker 1 (05:22):
Yeah, this is one of those topics that I just
don't think he cares about. He hasn't learned about it,
He doesn't know much about it. He'll occasionally refer to
woke people. Do we have any of our Trump woke clips?
Why Alice referred to it? Some He's just not It's
not a big on his radar screen. I don't think.
Speaker 3 (05:37):
Yeah, woke means what whatever that one is. I don't
remember what he says, but we'll hear it here momentarily.
Speaker 1 (05:46):
But I do everything woke turns to. You know what
woke means? It means you're a loser.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Yeah, but he doesn't get into the specifics.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Yeah. Yeah. So it also opens biological men up to
joining women's and girls sports teams, in spite of how
poorly that polls. Let's see, well that's kind of in
the weeds. I won't go there, but it's outrageous and
stupid and terrible, and I hope Trump gets elected and
(06:20):
overturns it. So problem number two the proposed rule. Excuse me.
The proposed rule rolls back protections that were enacted during
the last Trumpet administration that reinstalled due process in the
whole thing questions of sexual harassment or assault, and they've
gone back to the guilty until proven innocent presumption if
(06:41):
you're accused of either sexual harassment or assault. The Trump
administration got one hundred and twenty four thousand public comments
there is a growing crisis of sexual violence and education
in the departments of blah blah blah. But they said
that you have to have a live hearing and allow
both the accused and the complainant student's advisor to cross
examine parties and witnesses involved. Institutions must also presume that
(07:04):
those accused are innocent prior to the investigation and decision
making process sees. But President Biden's proposed rule rolls back
those protections, leaving schools with the guilty until proven innocent presumption,
which is disgusting and especially considering expulsion from school losses, scholarships,
and financial aid. Reputational harm can drastically change the trajectory
(07:26):
of someone's life. Those are material punishments. Those are much
more than just you know, the school whacking on your wrist.
That's akin to a judicial punishment. According to those of
us who are kind of into this sort of thing
they mentioned, the proposed rule will install a Heckler's veto
at schools that are federally funded by forcing students, teachers,
(07:46):
and professors to toe the line on the woke sexual
orthodoxy or be faced with a Title nine federal complaint.
And this might be the worst part. Wow. Currently, campus
speech is discussion of sexual issues not considered harassing just
because it is pervasive. Debates and discussions about sex and
(08:06):
gender are are allowed. Certainly, to constitute verbal sexual harassment,
the speech must not only be present pervasive, it must
also be severe enough in nature to deny or limited
person's ability to participate in essence, But the Biden administration
discards the current definition. Instead, it would be essentially, if
(08:30):
it offends people, it's it's sexual harassment or sex sexual
orientation harassment, and.
Speaker 3 (08:41):
By people that probably includes if one person complains.
Speaker 1 (08:45):
Uh, yeah, exactly, exactly, Bah. The use of the term
hostile environment does nothing to limit its reach or protect
free speech under these schools. Again, that's kind of in
the in the rule in the weeds. But i'll jump
the fourth part, which is related and this is insidious.
I'm sorry, this is the worst part. It removes protection
(09:08):
for institutions that adhere to a traditional belief on sexuality, gender,
and marriage by limiting previous protections for any religious universities
that get any sort of federal funding. You have to
be down with the gender bending madness or you will
lose your funding. So it's it combined with the third section.
It's forced speech, which the First Amendment forbids as well,
(09:31):
not directly, but that's how it's been interpreted by every court.
So you have to be down with the radical gender theory,
queer theory whatever, awesome, And so you're harassing people and
all this stuff is on the line with the presidential election. Yeah, yeap.
Speaker 3 (09:48):
The Pentagon paid the Rand Corporation to tell them how's
America doing? And the Rand Corporation said, eh, and not
so good. We can get into the particulars of that
a little bit later. It's depressing interesting and obviously true.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
How America is doing in terms of military preparation, strength, cohesion, just.
Speaker 3 (10:15):
Being able to survive as a thing. Oh real, Yeah,
the experiment. How's the experiment going? Oh wow, it's pretty interesting,
So stay tuned for that. Also, what's the other thing
I wanted to get do? Oh Man came across a
controversial column about the whole Harvey Weinstein thing. Yeah, I'll
be interested to see how people react to this kind
(10:37):
of saying, Look, there's a relationship between these scumbags and
up and coming actresses that has always existed and nobody
wants to admit that. And I think I know where
that's headed anyway, So see how that strikes you.
Speaker 1 (10:52):
Among other things on the way, stay with.
Speaker 4 (10:54):
Us, the NFL now expanding the use of these admittedly
far from fashion forward, soft shell helmets athletes now giving
the option to wear garden caps beyond practice to regular
season games engineer to enhance protection against head injuries by
(11:15):
as much as twenty percent.
Speaker 3 (11:16):
The NFL introduced.
Speaker 5 (11:17):
Garden caps during training camps in twenty twenty two. A
year later, the NFL mandating their use during practices for
most players. And it's not just the pros. Some high
schools have been using them for years.
Speaker 3 (11:28):
Reduces head injuries by twenty percent. Eighty percent of statistics
are made up on the spot. I can't imagine how
you'd possibly come up with that number. But so they
might have new safer helmets, so that when would they start.
I heard they look funny, though, of course, helmets only
don't look funny because you're used to the way they look.
I'm sure the first time someone put one on it
looked pretty funny.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
Right, yeah, I'm looking at them right now beginning with
twenty twenty four games. Okay, yeah, yeah, they're different, but
they don't look particularly funny to me. They just look
like a helmet that's gonna protect your head better.
Speaker 3 (12:02):
So Columbia just put out a statement they were not
able to come to an agreement with student protesters. The
agreement should be you leave or you get expelled. Do
you agree? I don't understand why this is so hard.
We're still getting texts about the governor of South Dakota
shooting her dog, Christy Nome. Whether or not you think
(12:23):
that's a big deal. She put that in her book
that's apparently coming out for some reason, it didn't help
that she mentioned the dog's name Cricket. Cricket makes it
extra cute and lovable, right, yeah, and we shot it
in a gravel pit. We have the governor's statement about
the controversy coming up at a moment.
Speaker 1 (12:41):
We got this text.
Speaker 3 (12:42):
By the way, the complainers haven't mentioned one point two
million dogs are euthanized annually, according to the latest statistics.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
One point two million. Yeah. It is a such a
divide between the part of America that understands ranch and
far life and that which doesn't and has a soft,
fuzzy warm view of pets. And I'm not trying to
suggest they're bad people for that. It's just a question
of realism versus the lack of it. To me. Plus,
(13:13):
there are millions more dogs, as Jack indicated, then can
possibly have a home found for them. Right, And.
Speaker 3 (13:24):
Perhaps you think shooting the dog is exceptionally cruel as
opposed to put to sleep.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
I don't know why, but maybe you do. So. Christin
nom has written, I can understand why some people are
upset about twenty year old story of Cricket, one of
the working dogs at our ranch. In my upcoming book,
No Going Back. The book is filled with many honest
stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions,
and the lessons learned. What I learned from my years
(13:50):
of public service, especially leading South Dakota through COVID. That's
a good shot right there, and that's a good Hey.
Remember I didn't shut down my state is people are
looking for leaders who are authentic, willing to learn from
the past, and don't shy away from tough challenges. My
hope is anyone reading this book will have an understanding
that I always work to make the best decisions I
can for the people in my life. The fact is
South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill
(14:13):
livestock can be put down. Given that cricket has shown
aggressive behavior, had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them,
I decided what I did. I would jump in there
and say, and I love dogs. I mean I love dogs.
A dog that in the country that kills livestock and
attacks people, it's not even a question if that dog
(14:36):
will be put down anyway, whether running the rancher in politics.
I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else
to handle, even if it's hard and painful. I followed
the law and was being a responsible parent, dog owner,
and neighbor. As I explained in the book, it wasn't easy,
but often the easy way isn't the right way. I
agree with her.
Speaker 3 (14:52):
I just don't think it's going to work politically, and
she's not going to be on the ticket because of
that story alone.
Speaker 1 (15:00):
I think you're right. Yeah, people are. They're just too
many people who vote will not They will hear what
I say and say I don't care she killed a dog.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Right exactly. Joe brought us the story last week of
the snowfer.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
That's right.
Speaker 3 (15:13):
It's not a sneaker, it's not a loafer. It's a snowfer. Yeah,
I'm looking at the picture of it. I hadn't seen
a picture of it. It's coming out in the spring.
It's from New Balance. I think it's a particularly ugly shoe,
but we'll see if it catches on. It's the foot
The Wall Street Journal did a review of this. It's
the footwear equivalent of a spork, and no one knows
what to make of it. Like the Liger combination. Lion tiger,
(15:36):
that's right, Napoleon Dynamite's favorite animal.
Speaker 1 (15:39):
It's probably my favorite animal.
Speaker 3 (15:42):
Like the Liger, the cronut and the Chortal before it.
What's a cronut is a croissant and a donut, But
what's a chortal?
Speaker 1 (15:50):
A short? Anybody know what that is?
Speaker 3 (15:54):
No, this shoe is a confounding hybrid released in August.
Speaker 1 (16:00):
I think it's ugliness is going to be part of
its ironic appeal.
Speaker 3 (16:04):
Could be, why do we need a sneaker loafer combo?
Speaker 1 (16:12):
I don't know, so you can step out of church
and mow your lawn in the same footwear. Yeah, it
really is. I don't know it.
Speaker 3 (16:21):
Yes, Katie Green, what can you tell us about the chortle?
The chortle is the cross between a chuckle and a snort. Well, okay,
so it is actually the the laugh. Oh okay, kind
of laugh. But that's way different than Liger or Cronat.
I would not have included that it's a distraction. No
bad journalism. Uh, how's America doing? The Pentagon wanted to
(16:47):
find out. They paid a think tank to come up
with the answer. We've got that for you, coming up
from the Rain Corporation, and it's it's first of all,
you're not going to disagree with any of their conclusions exactly.
Speaker 1 (16:59):
It ain't good. Can we just whistle past the graveyard
please and pretend everything's fine?
Speaker 3 (17:04):
That might be the best way to approach it. That
might be the best way to That might be my
new attitude on life.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
What's you know? Not n I can do about it?
Give up? Is that giving up? I don't know. It's
a lot like giving up Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6 (17:25):
For a year since I delivered this space, and my
wife chills with me tonight, was worried how I do?
I told her, don't worry. Just like riding the bike.
She's That's what I'm worried about. The twenty twenty four
elections in full swing. And yes, age is an issue.
(17:47):
I'm a grown man, run it against a six year old.
Speaker 1 (17:54):
Age is the only thing we have in common.
Speaker 6 (17:58):
My Vice President actually indoor me.
Speaker 3 (18:02):
So as Joe Biden at the White House Correspondents dinner
the other night. If you're a Biden fan, I guess
you found it charming and whatever counterpoint, your vpis an idiot,
But it speaks a little to our political dysfunction. And
you know we've always had I mean, that is politics.
It's an adversarial thing, but we all know we're at
(18:23):
a different level now than we've ever been before. And
that fits in with this study out from RAND, the
Rand Study, which actually comes out tomorrow. I'm reading from
David Ignatius in the Washington Post. He got an early
copy of it before it comes out tomorrow. He said
it has the anadyne title of the Sources of Renewed
(18:43):
National Dynamism. That is fairly academic and dry sounding. And
I hope this isn't too academic and dry. Maybe Joe
can make body noises throughout to jazz.
Speaker 1 (18:52):
Up, but I'd be delighted. Sure.
Speaker 3 (18:54):
It's part of a series of reports commissioned by the
Pentagon to assess the United States competitive position as it
facing China, which is pretty interesting. Though the report is
mostly written in the dry language of sociology, it is
explosive stuff, says David Ignatius. And I don't think any
of this will surprise you or you will disagree with
what has what has led to the relative decline in
(19:17):
US standing worldwide?
Speaker 1 (19:20):
As the report asks.
Speaker 3 (19:21):
The opening chapter explains American's problem starkly quote, It's a
competitive position is threatened both from within in terms of
slowing productivity growth and aging population. A polarized political system
and an increasingly corrupted information environment, and outside in terms
of a rising direct channel from China and declining deference
(19:42):
to US power from dozens of developing nations, that has
all headed the wrong.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
Direction so far. Yeah, absolutely accurate.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
That's all bad news, but all completely true. I don't
think anybody could argue with any point of that this
decline is accelerating, warns the study. The essential problem is
seen in starkly different terms by different segments of SI.
In groups of political leaders, there's a right wing narrative
of decline and a left wing one. Though they agree
that something is broken in America, the two sides disagree,
(20:10):
often in the extreme, on what to do about it.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
That is that is interesting.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
Both sides agree that there is something broken in a
way that you know didn't used to be, but we
have no this Well, the solution seems to be from
both sides get rid of the other side.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
Well, right, I was going to say, I think from
a conservative perspective, a great deal of what's broken is
what the progressive left has gotten enacted. They broke it.
Speaker 3 (20:41):
Unless Americans can unite to identify and fix these problems,
we risk falling into.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
A downward spiral.
Speaker 3 (20:46):
Recovery from significant long term national decline is rare and
difficult to detect in the historical record. That was the
sentence that stood out to me the most. Hit us
with that one more time, Recovery from signific long term
national decline is rare and difficult to detect in the
historical record. Which is kind of a fancy way of saying,
(21:07):
we can't come up with any examples in history where
a superpower, a power started head in this direction for
a while and turned it around.
Speaker 1 (21:14):
If anybody knows of any of the examples, any of
those examples, please write. I've been saying that for years.
You remember asking historians all kinds of people. I've been saying,
is there any example of any country society ever straightening
this out?
Speaker 3 (21:28):
I don't think anybody's ever answered yes.
Speaker 1 (21:31):
M no, oh boy. The author's note.
Speaker 3 (21:36):
Think of Rome or Habsburg, Spain, or the Ottoman and
Austrio Hungarian empires, or the Soviet Union. When great powers
have slid from a position of pre eminence or leadership
because of domestic factors, they seldom reverse the trend, and
by seldom they mean never that they can come up
with yeah.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
I've said for many, many years it would take a
war or a cataclysm like a giant plague, and then
we had a giant plague and it made everything worse,
more divided. So yeah, to me, it's about managing the
decline and slowing it out of our duty to our
children and grandchildren and just the future citizens of the
(22:16):
United States. It's a force for good and decency in
the world, and we need to fight to at least
run out the string. It keeps us string running as
long as we can.
Speaker 3 (22:25):
Now listen to some of these specific examples. Again, the
Pentagon commissioned this report to try to figure out, you know,
what's our situation recompeting with China over the next decade
or one hundred years. And listen to this some of
the triggers that they have here and see if you
agree with them, what causes national decline. The RAND authors
(22:47):
site many things that are familiar here, says David Ignatius.
Here's the quote from the report, addiction to luxury and decadence.
Dang wow, failure to keep pace with technological demands. I
think I'd be like, you know, we don't make our
own computer chips, stuff like that. Failure to keep pace.
(23:09):
Oh that I already said that, ossified bureaucracy, loss of
civic virtue, military overstretch, self interested in warring elites, unsustainable
environmental practices.
Speaker 1 (23:22):
Yeah. But other than that, how are we doing? Yeah,
that's a hell of a list, meaning you could have
stopped after the first two. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
The only one I'd agree with, maybe is the unsustainable
environmental practices. I'm not exactly sure what they mean by that.
That might be way too far down the road of
you're worried about climate change. But I want to get
a Hong Komo on that, because, like you said, the
first couple, addiction to luxury and decadence. The Iran Corporation
actually lists that as one of the reasons we're in
decline and may not be able to turn it around.
(23:51):
Absolutely clearly true.
Speaker 1 (23:54):
Yeah, we're just we're very soft people, speaking for myself.
Speaker 3 (24:00):
Loss of civic virtue.
Speaker 1 (24:02):
Mm hmm, without a doubt, Doo needed a community to country.
If people scoff at that idea.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
Well just did the most people in China hate their
own country?
Speaker 1 (24:14):
No?
Speaker 3 (24:14):
Now, part of that is the government constantly shows them
movies about all their successes around the world and the
evils of other countries, but they like their country and
think they do good things, not bad things. Watch the
YouTube video of John Stewart with David Sanger from two
mondays ago, that book that I'm loving so much about
the New Cold Wars.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
John Stewart's all.
Speaker 3 (24:35):
About, yeah, well China and UH and Russia and all this,
but we caused them to act that way. It's the
things we do. We're an awful country and that's why
these other countries.
Speaker 1 (24:44):
Act this way.
Speaker 3 (24:46):
Wow, that's not the way they feel about it in
the other countries that are going to try to take
over the earth.
Speaker 1 (24:50):
And did Sanger try to push back on that at all?
He tried to, He's a reasonable guy.
Speaker 3 (24:54):
He tried to a little bit, but the crowd was
all with John Stewart and cheering him like crazy.
Speaker 1 (24:58):
As you know how it works on those shows.
Speaker 7 (25:00):
God, the pathetic, obvious adolescent obligation to be self hating
on the left makes me insane because it's such a
transparent pose.
Speaker 1 (25:14):
I mean, it's like the thirteen year old who's bored
by everything and nothing and everything sucks. I mean, I understand,
what all do you just say?
Speaker 3 (25:22):
I can't recognize that at all. I have to spend
forty eight hours of doing that. What says her dad
of a couple of teenagers.
Speaker 1 (25:29):
Yeah, I mean I went through it. Everybody goes through it.
I'm not mocking anybody, but it's like, okay, all right,
I've dealt with this before. Fine, but just it's to
me that my country sucks and is bad compared to
other countries. Yeah, all right. Everybody goes through that. Then
they get a little perspective and realizes that, you know,
(25:50):
they're good and bad and mistakes made, but intent is
blah blah blah. It's it's so adolescent. The fact that
it's a guy as smart as John Stewart could fall
for annoy Yeah, and the crowd cheer that sort of thing.
Speaker 3 (26:02):
So here's the final paragraph from David Ignation in the
Washington Post. Who's a lefty but and his his answers
would be different than mine. But I think this summary
is completely right. The message of this study is screamingly obvious.
America is on a downward slope that could be fatal.
That's a pretty heavy sentence. Fatal for the most important
(26:26):
country in the history of the world.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
Those are my words.
Speaker 3 (26:29):
Back to his words, what will save us as a
broad commitment starting with elites to work for the common
good and national revival. We have the tools, but we
aren't using them. If we can't find new leaders and
agree on solutions that work for everyone, were sunk. He
is right about that, and he would he would come
from a different place of what the solutions are that
everybody should, you know, rally around. But that's the problem
(26:53):
in itself right there. If we can't find new leaders
that agree on solutions that work for everyone, we're sunk.
When I read that, first thing that popped into my
mind was like maybe the last gasp of having a
hope for this country. Seriously was the ah, God, the
(27:13):
name of it is flipping out of my head. It
was that report that was commissioned by the Obama administration
to deal with the entitlements. You'll think of it, you know.
The name was that, Yeah, the Erskine Bowls thing. We
got two senators, two reasonable grown up senators, one a Democrat,
one a Republican, got a whole bunch of different people
together came up with a plan that was a combination
(27:35):
of tax cuts and raining and entitlements, I mean increased
taxes and cutting entitlements that had to be done to
set us on the right course. Clearly the right thing
to do, couldn't make it happen. That might have been
the last gasp of elites being grown ups making the
hard choices. And we just don't live in a world
(27:56):
where that can happen anymore.
Speaker 1 (27:57):
Well, I don't think it's rewarded anymore. And as politicians
are entirely self serving, if we don't if we don't
even ask them to do that, they're not going to
do that on their own. It's almost hilarious the idea
that people would expect that. Yeah, I'm sure David Ignatius
and I have differing views of what it would take
to lead that national revitalization. But I also know that
(28:20):
we could probably you know the ven diagrams overlapping circles.
I think he and I could certainly agree on a
pretty good overlap area and then say, hey, with all
our differences David and I, it's like Brett Bear has
his common ground segment on Special Report and eating and
(28:41):
really hammer that and use that as a starting point.
That would that would be a very good thing. But
the problem is, and I'm reminded of an article I
came across that I shared on the show many many
years ago. I think the headline was the one emotion
that that says your relationship is doomed, or the one
emotion a relationship can't have, and that is contempt, anger, resentments.
(29:09):
But you know, I could lift list off one hundred
emotions that can take place in a relationship. But if
you are contemptuous of your spouse or your partner, they're stupid.
They'll never get it. You're doing. It's over, just to
just end it. And the problem is, for reasons that
you know, we don't really need to get into, we
(29:30):
now have almost entirely of politics of contempt.
Speaker 3 (29:33):
Oh yeah, I remember last year when I was citing
that one poll that the vast majority of both sides
believe the other side is out to destroy America. I
mean that is yeah, that both sides have contempt for
the other side. And you know, both sides feel like
they have their good reasons. Like I feel like I'm
a man of the right. I feel like I have
good reasons to be something close to contemptuous of the left.
(29:56):
And I'm saying a lot of it on college campuses today.
But we're ever gonna survive. We're never gonna pull out
of our spiral if we're that way.
Speaker 1 (30:04):
Yeah, yeah, I think the performative politics, social media, online
fundraising at all is really rewarding the outer fringe. I mean, like,
next segment, I'd like to run a couple of clips
of Bill Maher recently. Bill Maher and I absolutely would
not have contempt for each other and our ideas. We
might disagree, but again we could find that common ground.
(30:25):
Me and some DEI jackass on a college campus, I
do have contempt for them. I think they're a brainwashed
and be wrong about everything. But the for instance, on
the other hand, if they wanted to sit down and talk,
I would absolutely have a generous conversation with them, hundred percent.
But the addiction to luxury and decadence, that's a cultural
thing that crosses party lines that ain't going to be
(30:49):
turned around easy. And then the stuff earlier criticized I'm
a man wearing mink underwear right now.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
And the stuff earlier about a corrupted information environment will
correc up to makes it sound like somebody's doing it
on purpose kind of or whatever. But that's just you know,
the advent of the way we get our information. I
don't know how that's going to get fixed where we
all have a journalism is now advocacy. Sure, yeah, that's
some rough stuff right there and there, And there are
no examples of anybody pulling out of the spiral. Why
(31:22):
would anybody listen to this show? I can't imagine who
wants to have any part of their day be this.
Speaker 1 (31:31):
Yeah you can, you can bellow at the audience you
can't handle the truth, but they're not listening it. So yeah, yeah, whoops,
Well something much more lighthearted coming up? Everybody gow.
Speaker 3 (31:43):
We took the audience like it was a disobedient dog
into a gravel.
Speaker 1 (31:46):
Pit, and oh like we're Christine ol Yeah, oh my us.
Who are we about to hear from? This is NYU
professor Scott Galloway, who we featured last week. He is
not part of the woke anti Israel crowd and is
(32:08):
calling for some level of sanity. He was talking to
Bill Maher on his show the other night. Let's hear
the first one Michael did.
Speaker 8 (32:14):
The double standard here is pretty striking. Dylan Ruth goes
into a Charleston church and kills nine members of a
black church. If I went down to the plaza of
any of these universities with a white hood, a Confederate
flag and signs, and started saying Dylan globalized, Dylan kill
black people, right, There'd be no need for context. We
(32:35):
wouldn't be talking about free speech. I'd be out of academia.
And if I whipped up students into a frenzy such
as we started harassing non white students on their way
to the library and I started getting in their face
or even throwing things at them, and that has happened,
we wouldn't be having a conversation about the First Amendment.
We call in the National Guard. That is one thousand
percent true. Yeah, brilliantly said, yeah, let him roll on, Michael.
(32:59):
I think he got a had a nineteen year old
at pretty wide birth. The point of being nineteen is
y act stupid and you're learning to move on. I'm
glad the camera isn't following me around. It wasn't when
I was nineteen. The faculty, if we made the mistake
of hiring you and you want to support islamichi had
or the Islamic Republic, then you know what we made
a mistake, and we should rectify that mistake that we
(33:19):
signed we pay these people, and if they are not
taking the temperature down and they lack the critical thinking
that they can't they can't criticize a murderous atocracy.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
Pretty simple, they should be fired.
Speaker 3 (33:31):
Wow, and a response from the lefty crowd for Bill Maher,
that's definitely my new theme is these kids didn't raise themselves,
sort of theory of yeah, the nineteen year old the
message siloed altruistic idiots. But the people in charge of
(33:54):
the universities are grown ups and they should say to
them get or were expelling you.
Speaker 1 (34:00):
Right to the kids? You mean yes, yeah, okay, yeah,
I was still on this point about fire the faculty, but.
Speaker 3 (34:08):
Well yeah, so yeah, the faculty is the fault the
that's I'm agreeing with him on that. Yeah, See, administrators,
why aren't the grown ups taking.
Speaker 1 (34:16):
Charge because A they agree with the kids. B those
are high dollar customers for a very expensive hotel resort,
that sort of thing. That's the relationship between college students
and college administrators. Now it is not teacher and student,
it is high dollar client and expensive day camp. I
(34:39):
wonder how long.
Speaker 3 (34:42):
This will last, or the attitude about these colleges, or
if they've done themselves permanent damage. Forbes had an article
over the weekend that got a lot of attention about
the new ivys. How people are turning away from these
Ivy League schools, and these are the schools there are
gonna be the new Ivy League schools, which I find
the whole thing just sickening. I'll be just as sickened
by the new Ivy's League schools, I'm sure, in terms
(35:03):
of it's so important that you get your kid in
there and all that. But they may have damaged themselves,
I hope.
Speaker 4 (35:10):
So.
Speaker 1 (35:11):
Yeah, Well, there's no mystery as to why revolutionary movements
always try to mobilize young people. It's because they're big
enough to do some damage, but dumb enough that they're
easily swayed by whatever's whispered or shouted into their ears.
Armstrong and Getty
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.
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.