July 10, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 4 of A&G features...
- How elite universities use race
- Dean Cain weighs in on the new Superman movie
- Generation Alpha & the radicalization of young women
- Final Thoughts!
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, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe, Ketty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Jetty and he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
We just got done talking about tacos, which is, you know,
fairly mid brow. Let me hit you with the most
erudite high brow thing I've seen in a long time.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
I don't even know what it means.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
This is from our friend Tim Sander, for who Joe
had a fabulous hour about America and everything about that
leading up to fourth of July.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
You should find that in the podcast.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
But anyway, June twenty seventh, I believe our three our
friend Tim Sandfer tweeted this out. Gorvadal was right. That's
a good start for an erudite tweet. Gorvadal was right.
The three saddest words in the English language are joysh
Carol Oates. You're a certain sort of person that like, wow,
(01:08):
bam zoom.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
You really stuck at the well.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Wow, I just got done watching a couple of guys
fight on a golf course. So Joyce, Carol Oates say, okay,
oh boy. So the communist young man who is running
for the mayoralty ship of New York City Old Mamdani.
(01:35):
There he got in some trouble allegedly for claiming to
be African American and applying to a college. He's from Africa.
He's actually of Indian descent, but he claimed to be
African American because he knew that would help him in
Modern Woke College. And The New York Times wrote about
(01:59):
it and then suffered an enormous backlash because, as Jim
Garritty of The National Review put it quite brilliantly, you
can do that. You can lie about all the things
progressives claim to hold sacred or exploit them as long
as you are a progressive and you have power, and
(02:19):
they won't say a thing, witness Elizabeth Warren or whomeover.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
If you are a conservative, God help you. But that
is the rule.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
And so the conservative, I'm sorry, Progressive America was shocked
that The New York Times even wrote about it, but
Garretty mentioned Neil Gorsitch's concurrence in the big Harvard Dei
case of a couple of years ago, and I went
digging for it and found it and have spent a
fair amount of time and effort editing it. It is,
as I said earlier, perhaps the most brilliant takedown of
(02:48):
the whole DEI thing I've ever come across, and I'm
going to read a pretty good chunk of it to
you here. The first part I will tell you is
the intellectual making of the argument and the sighting of law,
most of which I've edited out. But then he gets
into the particulars of how it works, and that's when
it becomes unintentionally hilarious and or is unmasked as being
(03:11):
incredibly stupid. So again, this is going to be a
little more reading than we generally do, but I think
you'll enjoy it. So this is Gorsch with whom Justice
Thomas joins. For many students, an acceptance letter from Harvard
to University of North Carolina is a ticket to a
brighter future. Tens of thousands of applicants compete for a
small number of coveted spots. For some time, both universities
(03:32):
have decided which applicants to admit or reject, based in
part on race. Today, the Court holds that the equal
protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not tolerate this practice.
Few pieces of federal legislation rank insignificance with the civil
rights Act of nineteen sixty four. Title six of the
law contains terms as powerful as they are easy to understand.
(03:54):
No person in the United States shall, on the ground
of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in,
be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The
message for these cases is unmistakable, and the trial records
reveal that both schools routinely discriminate on the basis of
(04:16):
race when choosing new students. Exactly what the law forbids.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Man, before you go any further, how in the hell
have we gone sixty years.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Doing this? I mean, because it is so clear cut.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
Yeah, because of the bullying of their progressive left, I think,
I mean, people like you and me. We've been yelling
about this all the while, but yeah, people got cowed
into thinking. No, the way to fix racism is racism anyway.
When a party seeks relief under a statute, dar task
is to apply the laws terms as a reasonable reader
(04:54):
who would have understood them at the time Congress enacted them.
After all, only the words on the page constitute the
law opted by Congress and approved by the President.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
That's a quote from another case. The key phrases in.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Title six at issue here are subjected to discrimination and
on the ground of begin with, the first, to discriminate
against a person meant in nineteen sixty four what it
means today to treat an individual worse than others who
are similarly situated. And he looks to a dictionary to
make a distinction, to make a difference in treatment of
favor of one is compared with others, to make a
(05:26):
difference in treatment or favor on a class or categorical basis.
The provision of Title six before us this Court has
held prohibits only intentional discrimination. From this, we can safely
say that Title six forbids a recipient of federal funds
from intentionally treating one person worse than another similarly situated
on the ground of race, color, or national origin.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
If I were a justice, I would weigh in on.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
The uh concurrence with Obs Trey Obs obvs.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Period Right, Obs versus Othehelser problem nineteen sixty four.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Without question.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Congress in nineteen sixty four could have taken the law
in various directions, but to safeguard the civil rights of
all Americans, Congress chose a simple and profound rule, one
holding that a recipient of federal funds may never discriminate
based on race, color, or national origin.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Period.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Again, this ought to be engraved in a monument somewhere.
The crazy part coming up soon start with how Harvard
and unc use race. Like many colleges in universities, these
schools invite interested.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
Students to complete the common Application.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
As part of that process, the trial records show applicants
are prompted to tick one or more boxes to explain
how you identify yourself. The available choices are American, Indian
or Alaska Native, Asian, Black, or African American, Native, Hawaiian
or other Pacific Islander, Hispanic or Latino or White. Applicants
can write in further details if they choose. Where do
(07:02):
these boxes come from? Gorsa tasks bureaucrats. A federal interagency
commission devised this scheme of classification in the nineteen seventies
to facilitate data collection. The commission acted without any input
from anthropologists, sociologists, ethnologists, or other experts.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
That's really interesting. I had never heard of it. Yeah,
this is the part that I really really wanted to
get to.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
But The first part was so eloquent and so clear,
just you know, I want everybody to be rock solid
in their confidence that no racism means no racism anyway. So,
but the bureaucrats who did this without input from you know,
all these scientists, recognizing the limitations of their work, federal
(07:46):
regulators cautioned that their classifications quote should not be interpreted
as being scientific or anthropological in nature, nor should they
be viewed as determinants of eligibility for participation in any
federal program.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
They made it.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
Clear, look, this is just data collection. We're just curious
about this. But then, in the way activists do, I'm sorry,
I'm deporting from departing from gorst here. They took the
data and decided, hey, let's use this and change the
world anyway.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
Back to Gorsicic. Wow.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
Despite that warning, others eventually use this classification system for
that very purpose, to sort out winners and losers in
a process that, by the end of the century would
grant preferences.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
In jobs and university admissions.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
These classifications race rest on incoherent stereotypes. Take the Asian category,
it sweeps into one pile East Asians, Chinese, Korean, Japanese
and South Asians, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, even though together they
constitute sixty percent of the world's population. This agglomeration of
(08:55):
so many peoples paves over countless differences in language, culture,
historical experience. It does so even though few would suggest
that all such persons share quote similar backgrounds and similar
ideas and experiences. That's a quote from a different case. Consider,
as well, the development of a separate category for Native
Hawaiian or other Pacific islander. It seems federal officials disaggregated
(09:18):
these groups from the Asian category only in the nineteen nineties,
and only in response to political lobbying these sites when
that happened, And even that category contains its curiosities. It appears,
for example, that Filipino Americans remain classified as Asians rather
than other Pacific islanders. I've seen the Philippines. A very
(09:43):
good friend is from the Philippines. They are Pacific islands.
It seems federal officials disaggregated oh blah blah blah blah,
buh Filipino Americans. The remaining classifications depend just as much
on irrational stereotypes the Hispanic category.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
I knew the where house was going, because I I'd
been meaning to talk about this, having been down in
Florida with all the Cuban immigrants there, and how different
the Cuban culture is from what I'm used to, and
the hilarity that it's all thrown together as Hispanic.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
And it's even more insane than that. Listen to this.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
The Hispanic category covers those whose ancestral language is Spanish, Basque,
or Catalan, but it also covers individuals of Mayan, mixed
Tech or Zappotech descent, should not speak any of those languages,
and whose ancestry does not trace to the Iberian Peninsula,
but bears deep ties to the Americas. That would be
the native people of Central and South America. The white
(10:38):
category sweeps in anyone from Europe, Asia, west of India,
and North Africa. That includes those of Welsh, Norwegian, Greek, Italian, Moroccan, Lebanese,
Turkish or Iranian descent. It embraces an Iraqi or Ukrainian
refugee as much as a member of the British royal family. Meanwhile,
(11:00):
Black or African American covers everyone from a descendant of
enslaved persons who grow up in the poor rural South,
to a first generation child of wealthy Nigerian immigrants, to
a black identifying applicant with multi racial ancestry whose family
lives in a typical American suburb. If anything attempts to
(11:20):
divide us up, all up into a handful of groups,
have become only more incoherent with time. No doubt, American
families have become increasingly multicultural, a fact that has led
to unseemly disputes about whether someone is really a member
of certain racial or ethnic groups.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
There are decisions.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Denying Hispanic status to someone of Italian Argentine descent, as
well as someone with one Mexican grandparent.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
These are all court cases he's citing. Yet there are.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
Also decisions granting Hispanic status to a Sephardic jew whose
ancestors fled Spain centuries ago, Wow, and bestowing a sort
of Hispanic Seas status on a person with one Cuban grandparent.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
I can check the box of Hispanic again.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
This is completely incoherent. Given all of this, is that
any surprise that members of certain groups sometimes try to
conceal their race or ethnicity, or that a cottage industry
is sprung up to help college applicants do so, we
are told, for example, at one effect of lumping so
many people of so many disparate backgrounds into the Asian
category is that many colleges consider Asians to be quote
(12:29):
overrepresented in their emissions admission pools.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
A terrible word that shouldn't even exist. Overrepresented, well said.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Paid advisors in turn tell high school students of Asian
ancestry to downplay their heritage to maximize their chance of admissions.
We will make them appear less Asian when they apply.
One promises, if you're given an option, don't attach a
photograph to your application. Another instructs it is difficult to
imagine those who receive this advice would find comfort in
(12:59):
a bald, mistaking assurance that race conscious admissions benefit the
Asian American community, which Soda Mayor claimed in her descent,
and blah blah blah.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
Hiding your ethnicity because you will be penalized for it,
and that's not considered racism.
Speaker 1 (13:21):
Right exactly, And it is hard not to wonder whether
those left paying the steepest price are those least able
to afford it, children of families with no chance of
hiring the kind of consultants who know how to play
this game.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Yeah, well that's good Neil Gorsich if you need him. Wow.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
I can't believe it took us this long to end this.
And of course, as we've been talking about, the universities
are finding a way around it. They're still doing it.
Oh yeah, all all the time, coast to coast. Yeah wow,
any comment on that text line? Four one KFTC Cat
in California was recently reunited with her family after she
(14:00):
went missing fifteen years ago as a kitten or hear
me out cats look like So the movie Superman's coming out,
a new Superman's coming out and getting a fair amount
of attention, and Joe tried to ruin it for us
(14:20):
earlier by explaining how the director has said a bunch
of woke things, and I'm sure he has as a
Hollywood crowd tends to do. Dean Kin, who was the
Superman of the nineties. It probably perfect for you, right, Katie. Yes,
he's probably a heart throb for you.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
Yeah, some devil.
Speaker 3 (14:43):
Barry dean Kin, who is fifty eight years old now
played Superman in the nineties TV series Lewis and Clark.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
He came out.
Speaker 3 (14:50):
He's not happy with this, He said, how woke is
Hollywood going to make this character? How much is Disney
going to change their snow white? Why are they going
to change these characters to exist for these times? He's
unhappy with the new Superman, with the director having told
or the actor, and the actor and the director both
saying things that people are happy with.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
Anyway, told the Sunday.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
Times in London that Superman is the story of America,
an immigrant that came from other places and populated the country,
and the director added, but for me, it's mostly a
story that says basic human kindness as a value, and
it's something we have lost. Really do I need to
think about any of those things when I go see Superman?
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Why are you lecturing us about immigration? Uh?
Speaker 3 (15:33):
Cain said, I think bringing Superman into it. I think
this was a mistake by the actor playing Superman in
this movie to say it's an immigrant thing, and I
think it's going to hurt the numbers on the movie.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
I was excited to feed the film. I'm excited to
see what it is.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
I'm rooting for it to be success, but I don't
like trying to tie this into immigration.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
I would agree, But.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
The more I think about it because I was wondering earlier.
I thought, how could you possibly You got a bunch
of money for the actor, this could make you a
household name or the director. You got a bunch of
money and reputation involved, why would you want to step
in it? But I think they probably think that immigration
being a hot story, and of course, because they hang
(16:14):
around people like them, they think the vast majority of
Americans don't like the way immigrants are being treated right now,
they think calling this an immigrant story is a good hook.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
Well, and if you're bubbled, even if on one level
you recognize that half of America thinks differently than you do,
if you never run into those people, and here's a hint,
movie boy, you do all the time, you're just such
a bully. They're afraid to express their opinion. But you
start to think everybody exuious with this, and those who
don't are troglodites and monsters. And I don't care if
(16:49):
I offend them.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
And the more I think about it, they felt like
they needed to have a hook that ties into something important.
Otherwise they'd be saying, yeah, we made another superhero movie.
We hope we aren't too tired of superhero movies because
people are tired of superhero movies, it would seem so
this probably started in the works back when Marvel was
still ruling the the box office, and it's not so
(17:13):
much anymore.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Armstrong and geddy.
Speaker 4 (17:19):
The little boy in your Cincinnati thought he came up
with a life hack for the claw machine.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
Turns out didn't work.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
He tried climbing inside but got stuck, and he won
a free chance to get rescued by police and firefighters,
who eventually were able to pull the little guy out.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
Kid got stuck in the claw machine.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
The young man is a junior at Columbia.
Speaker 3 (17:44):
I don't know how old the kid was, but my
son asked the other day, my thirteen year old ass,
He said, what do you call my generation? And I
don't actually know what do you call people that age?
Speaker 2 (17:51):
Do you know what they are? No?
Speaker 3 (17:55):
Okay, could you look into that, KDC if you can
figure that out. What's the generation after Generation Z? Is
that what we've been talking about lately?
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Yeah? Gen Z? Gen ZI?
Speaker 3 (18:06):
Yeah, youngest generation is Generation Alpha? Okay A basically, so
we start over again, yes, okay, excellent, Yeah, although there's
so many thousand and six years old.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
They might be you know generation you know, beta from.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
Yeah, and they probably have nothing in common with today's
six year old.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Right.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
It was that like that whole don't write just twenty
twenty on your checks or you know, or twenty twelve,
or don't write, you know, the day to what's today's
date seven ten twenty five, right, twenty twenty five because
bank systems might think is from nineteen twenty five.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Because that happens a lot. Yes, that's happened all the time. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
Anyways, speaking of young people, I found this very interesting.
I was considering trying to cram these two things together.
The incredible radicalization of young women around the world as
their male companions they don't have companions, but as the
males of their generation are swinging to the right. Not
not a lot, but some. And how weird and interesting
(19:11):
that is. But we'll do that another time, I want.
I'm just gonna go with this. It was a piece
written by Mark Penn and Andrew Stein, and they're both Democrats.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
Penn you may recognize recognized his name.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
He was a Polster and advisor to the Clintons in
the nineties and two thousands, and this other guy was
a New York City Council president for a number of
years in the eighties and nineties. But the title is
gen Z the useful Idiot Generation. Young people usually become
less radical with time. Are we seeing an exception? And
(19:47):
they go into describing, you know, hippie Vietnam War protesters
who got jobs, got married and had children. Exactly, wash
your damn dirty hippie feet. Now their band children see
them tethered to Fox News. Today's young Americans are following
the first part of that pattern. Ask a group of
them to choose between capitalism and socialism and they'll split
(20:10):
right down the middle. And he goes into the nominating
horrifying Zoron Mundami, who says he wants to capture the
means of production.
Speaker 2 (20:20):
I've heard that phrase.
Speaker 1 (20:22):
Yeah, you know what, Oh, I ought to get into
the PolitiFact thing. Someday PolitiFact rated is false, the idea
that Mundami's a communist.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
And then when it came out.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
That he said we need to seize the means of production,
which is straight out of the communist manifesto, they said
incomplete data anyway, But will the young people outgrow their radicalism?
And this is the part that really intrigued me. There's
reason to doubt it. Record numbers of gen Z are
pursuing higher education, with fifty three percent of those eighteen
(20:56):
to twenty four having completed at least some college. That's
a tr trubbling sign given how left wing ideology has
come to dominate higher education. And again, these are two
mainstream democrats writing colleges where many young people learn that
socialism means free stuff. They're indoctrinated to blame capitalism for racism, inequality,
(21:16):
and climate change. Unlike the older generations, they grew up
after the end of the Cold War and have no
memory of the atrocities committed by the Soviet Union, Maoist
China and other socialist regime regimes.
Speaker 3 (21:28):
I have no memories is an interesting way to put it.
I didn't live through most of that stuff my memories
or because somebody taught them to me.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
Yeah, that's an excellent point.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
And he said, they say, maybe they'll see socialism and
action in New York. But here's the really intriguing part. Meanwhile,
the process of growing up is slowing down. They're talking
about what I mean, it's not automatic that a young, idealistic,
way left person becomes a conservative. It happens through processes, experience,
(22:00):
mugged virality exactly, the process of growing That's actually a
great phrase. The process of growing up is slowing down.
The median age of first marriage is thirty, almost five
years later than it was in nineteen eighty five, and
that means that young people settle down and take on
responsibilities later, if they ever do. Nearly half of gen
(22:23):
Z adults aren't are not in a committed romantic relationship.
They largely live communally, often work from home, and are
connected primarily through the four plus hours they spend each
day on their phones. Their primary sources of information are
TikTok and Facebook, whose algorithms lead them to material that
reinforces their preconceptions rather than challenges them.
Speaker 3 (22:46):
Four hours a day on their phones, what would they
have been doing before, because I mean, that's the whole
opportunity cost thing. There are only so many hours.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
In the day.
Speaker 3 (22:54):
There would have been more television watching back in the day,
but all four hours wouldn't have been taken up with that.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
No, but lots and lots and lots of relating to
real human beings who don't feed you agreement based on
their algorithms in my experience, my friends, my girlfriends, my wife,
my family, they all feel free to disagree with me
semi regularly in a way that Facebook and TikTok never will.
(23:22):
They will, With all due respect to your sister in
law who constantly posts garbage that you hate, those algorithms
again lead them to material that reinforces their preconceptions.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
I think even much other than that, your real life.
Maybe that's not true anymore. Is about to say, your
real life you don't talk about politics nearly at all,
as opposed to being bombarded with it on your whatever
device you're looking at.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
Yeah, but I think in general, because I actually do
agree with that. But in general, real life quote unquote
is much more messy and much less catering to you
in a hundred different ways than virtual life is, which
tends to lead people toward less deeied, idealistic progressive I'm
(24:09):
going to.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
Tell people I know, from now on, I want you
to I'm going to use an algorithm, and I want
you to feed me things I only want to hear.
Only say things I want to hear or I'm interested in.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
They would make a squinty face and say, no, I'm
not doing that. And there's more another traditional source of ballast,
religion has been become lighter as well. More than one
third of gen Z reports zero religious affiliation. Roughly sixty
percent did not participate in religious services growing up. That
(24:39):
produces a lack of moral grounding. We've had a really
interesting couple of conversations about that. Let's not get off
on that.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
But yeah, I don't know if you could make a
blanket statement of lack of moral grounding because you didn't
participate in organize religion.
Speaker 2 (24:54):
Right.
Speaker 1 (24:55):
But their greater argument is the things, the inputs, the
influences in life that tended to make you more realistic
and therefore more conservative, are missing, including religion. Put this
all together, and it's little wonder that about half of
eighteen to twenty year olds twenty four year olds tell
pollsters that they support Hamas over Israel. Hammas specifically, not
(25:19):
the Palestinian people fing Hamas. By and large, these young
adults aren't hardcore idelogus. They're merely ignorant. About half of
young Hamas supporters say they don't want to wipe out Israel.
They prefer two state solution. Call them the useful idiot generation.
Mouthing slogans and causes they don't understand and from which
they would recoil if they did again.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
This was written by Democrats.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Yeah, and that's you know, the Queers for Palestine thing
is the perfect example of that. It's the useful idiot generation,
mouthing slogans and causes they don't understand and from which
they would.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
Recoil if they did. Well.
Speaker 3 (25:58):
A guy like Mark Penn, who worked for the claims
he realizes Democrats are never going to win another major
election and unless they get this under control.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
So he's trying to.
Speaker 3 (26:06):
Figure out why do were young people? Why are they
so crazy? That's what he's trying to figure out. Final
couple of sentences. The older generations are not blameless here.
We created the environment that produced this unmored generation. Socialism
and anti Semitism will continue to fester and grow if
we don't stand up and reform our universities, reinforce our
basic values, and balance our social media.
Speaker 2 (26:28):
I agree completely.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
I am sticking with the idea that reforming our education
systems or tearing them down and building substitutes, is the
most important issue for America for the next fifty years.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
I saw where did I come across this somewhere on
social media anyway? It was somebody talking about the whole
dating world getting back to people, not coupling or whatever.
But it was one of your dating sites and they
had posted a picture of somebody who had at a
profile young woman or a profile included you know, the
(27:04):
things she's interested in, some pictures and it said and
if you're a Trump supporter, you can f all the
way off. And I mean, and the person said that
this is fairly common in the world of that online
dating anyway.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
What is I mean?
Speaker 3 (27:19):
Can you imagine that not only do do politics matter
enough to me in meeting someone that I have to
mention what side I'm on, I need to like as
harshly as you possibly can criticize the other side, Right, I.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
Mean that's so crazy to me.
Speaker 3 (27:43):
Yeah, yeah, just dating. And I mean you gotta be
old to get this. But can you imagine dating? And
what year would that have been?
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Eighty eight?
Speaker 3 (27:54):
And somebody says, and if you like Walter Mondale, you
can f all the way off.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
Well I didn't say it sounds so nuts. Well, yeah, exactly,
that would be what I would think.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
That is a crazy person, right, They are insanely into
this stuff. I don't want anything to do with them anyway,
I will feel free too, indeed, f off. But if
that's common, well then no wonder if people aren't getting
together who want to get involved with that, even if
you agreed with them. Yeah, yeah, I'm reminded of the whole.
(28:31):
And you know, and the last paragraph they kind of
touched on how, hey, we adults are not blameless. No,
are you effing kidding? We're to blame completely. The kids
aren't to blame. And I don't just mean us of
a certain ideology. I mean because we did permit this
to happen on our watch, partly because we had no
idea what was going on. The Marxists are very very
(28:54):
clever at covering their actual intent and what they're actually doing,
which is why you know, parents seeing what was going
on in their kids' classrooms during COVID was such an
enormous pivot point in the history of this because it
had gone so much farther than anybody had any idea.
(29:15):
But I'm I'm reminded of the whole. You know, every
kids special year, special everybody gets a trophy, you know,
the graduation address at high school, praising you like you'd
all cured cancer and invented, you know, nuclear fusion and that.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Sort of thing. So these twenty year olds.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
Think not only that the world needs to be saved
right now, but that they're the ones most qualified to
do it, which is with all due respect to how
stupid I was in so many ways at that age,
just because of the age, I never thought.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I am the savior of war the world.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
Not within a million miles of that did I think that.
And yet you know, every cod dang girl at Columbia
thinks that.
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Sincerely, Yeah, and to the point of violence. This is
a great high falutin conversation. But we've got drunks fighting
on a golf course. We need to get to We
will finish strong next stay here. Joe is the perfect
person to be involved as the go to announcer for
(30:29):
all of this.
Speaker 1 (30:31):
Yes, indeed, Jack, when you combine men, many many men,
and a great deal of alcohol, occasionally conflicts arise, even
in the pastoral setting of your local golf course. In fact,
golf fight videos are one of my favorite forms of
entertain I didn't know that was a thing. That's a genre.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
Huh, Yeah, I mean it's not like it happens a lot.
I've probably witnessed one or two.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
Angry confrontations that he could or did become violent in
my entire career being on golf courses since I was
like a little kid.
Speaker 3 (31:05):
You've seen these videos, kiddie, Oh yeah, Joe, you have
to scour the internet there everywhere.
Speaker 2 (31:10):
Oh, I know it, I know it.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
And they're so delicious because frequently they include a drunken idiots,
people who shouldn't be fighting anybody, or in this case,
a couple of drunk yahoos who got very very belligerent
and really really wanted to fight the group that they
were having a dispute with the group they were having
(31:31):
a dispute with wanted no violence whatsoever. But the aforementioned
yay who's insisted on it, not understanding that one of
the fellas in the group was indeed an NHL star
built like a brick stadium and was having none of
their nonsense. Not only that had fought many a fisticuff
(31:55):
in his days and didn't particularly care if he had
another one. Here's some of the audio.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
You guys need to get off the golfoard.
Speaker 5 (32:02):
You're not scaring anybody come on, man, I told you,
go God, come on, man, get them out here.
Speaker 1 (32:22):
So that is a tiny little sample of the video,
which is posted at Katie's corner. If you're in the
mood for some lane entertainment, I will tell you that
this Jack, as I know you have poor violence, says
I do do uh? The NHL player, the former player
Nick Turnowski in uh.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
In question.
Speaker 1 (32:40):
He absolutely resists any violence for the longest time till
the guy comes at him, gives him three good licks
and says that's enough. Get away from the The guy
comes at him again. Oh here, First he hurls him
into a lake, but the guy just keeps coming at him.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
So finally he puts him down.
Speaker 1 (33:00):
It was not a I'm going to hospitalize this guy
or render him unconscious. It was he grabbed him by
the jersey slash golf shirt, gave him a few good licks,
then said go about your business.
Speaker 2 (33:10):
Drunkie, but drunk he wanted more. Who watch Final Thoughts?
Who watch Final Thoughts? Go have some final thoughts? Hooray,
here's your host for Final Thoughts, Joe Getty. Let's get
a final thought from everybody on the crew.
Speaker 3 (33:26):
Why not?
Speaker 2 (33:26):
Michaelangelow will you lead us off.
Speaker 4 (33:28):
Yeah, this cold virus has been killing me and it
doesn't help that all morning Hanson has been putting leeches
on my back.
Speaker 2 (33:34):
Loss of blood is starting to really make me right handed.
Speaker 1 (33:37):
No, no, no, a little more blood. We gotta let
that bad blood out. You'll be fine, Katie Green esteemed Newswoman.
As a final thought, Katie.
Speaker 3 (33:45):
Not only has that video at Katie's corner, but someone
has converted the moment where the guy is mid air
flying into the lake into an oil painting and.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
It's oh the Internet for the wind jack a final thought.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Yeah, Earlier we referenced a famous fight between Charles Barkley
and a dwarf that he threw through a window. Yes,
and Charles Barkley was asked if he regretted that, and
he said, I regret we were on the first floor,
which is one of the funniest things anybody's ever said.
You know what, I'll stick with the theme from my
final thought. My buddy Gordy, who is an elite hockey
player almost at AHL quality, but he has this bit
(34:19):
he does on the golf course if he disagrees with.
Speaker 1 (34:21):
Somebody, said, that's it. We're going and then he starts
to take off his golf glove.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
He pulls off the belt grow.
Speaker 1 (34:27):
Then he says, give me a second, I gotta And
then you got a pingstake when you pull off one
finger in time.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
Anybody who's ever worn a golf I'll be right with you.
I am gonna light you up. Excuse me, hang on this.
It is very.
Speaker 3 (34:37):
Funny, Armstrong and Getdy wrapping of another grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
So many people think so little time.
Speaker 1 (34:43):
Good Armstrong and Giddy dot com again you'll find that
fabulous entertaining video of drunken Ya who's under Katie's corner.
We got hotlinks, pickups, made swag. Oh the hoodies flying
off the shelves.
Speaker 3 (34:55):
Okay, cool, We will see tomorrow. God bless America.
Speaker 2 (35:03):
Man, I'm strong and Getty. There are two ways to
look at this. Where shide are you all? This is
a national emergency.
Speaker 4 (35:12):
Let me say Let me say one thing.
Speaker 2 (35:15):
The fruit of my loins a terrible phrase.
Speaker 3 (35:19):
Anytime you mention your loins, I feel like I want
to run from the room.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
I have lovely loins. What are you talking anyway? Thank
you for your attention to this matter. Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe, Ketty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Armstrong and Jetty and he Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
We just got done talking about tacos, which is, you know,
fairly mid brow. Let me hit you with the most
erudite high brow thing I've seen in a long time.
Speaker 2 (00:33):
I don't even know what it means.
Speaker 3 (00:34):
This is from our friend Tim Sander, for who Joe
had a fabulous hour about America and everything about that
leading up to fourth of July.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
You should find that in the podcast.
Speaker 3 (00:44):
But anyway, June twenty seventh, I believe our three our
friend Tim Sandfer tweeted this out. Gorvadal was right. That's
a good start for an erudite tweet. Gorvadal was right.
The three saddest words in the English language are joysh
Carol Oates. You're a certain sort of person that like, wow,
(01:08):
bam zoom.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
You really stuck at the well.
Speaker 1 (01:12):
Wow, I just got done watching a couple of guys
fight on a golf course. So Joyce, Carol Oates say, okay,
oh boy. So the communist young man who is running
for the mayoralty ship of New York City Old Mamdani.
(01:35):
There he got in some trouble allegedly for claiming to
be African American and applying to a college. He's from Africa.
He's actually of Indian descent, but he claimed to be
African American because he knew that would help him in
Modern Woke College. And The New York Times wrote about
(01:59):
it and then suffered an enormous backlash because, as Jim
Garritty of The National Review put it quite brilliantly, you
can do that. You can lie about all the things
progressives claim to hold sacred or exploit them as long
as you are a progressive and you have power, and
(02:19):
they won't say a thing, witness Elizabeth Warren or whomeover.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
If you are a conservative, God help you. But that
is the rule.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
And so the conservative, I'm sorry, Progressive America was shocked
that The New York Times even wrote about it, but
Garretty mentioned Neil Gorsitch's concurrence in the big Harvard Dei
case of a couple of years ago, and I went
digging for it and found it and have spent a
fair amount of time and effort editing it. It is,
as I said earlier, perhaps the most brilliant takedown of
(02:48):
the whole DEI thing I've ever come across, and I'm
going to read a pretty good chunk of it to
you here. The first part I will tell you is
the intellectual making of the argument and the sighting of law,
most of which I've edited out. But then he gets
into the particulars of how it works, and that's when
it becomes unintentionally hilarious and or is unmasked as being
(03:11):
incredibly stupid. So again, this is going to be a
little more reading than we generally do, but I think
you'll enjoy it. So this is Gorsch with whom Justice
Thomas joins. For many students, an acceptance letter from Harvard
to University of North Carolina is a ticket to a
brighter future. Tens of thousands of applicants compete for a
small number of coveted spots. For some time, both universities
(03:32):
have decided which applicants to admit or reject, based in
part on race. Today, the Court holds that the equal
protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not tolerate this practice.
Few pieces of federal legislation rank insignificance with the civil
rights Act of nineteen sixty four. Title six of the
law contains terms as powerful as they are easy to understand.
(03:54):
No person in the United States shall, on the ground
of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in,
be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The
message for these cases is unmistakable, and the trial records
reveal that both schools routinely discriminate on the basis of
(04:16):
race when choosing new students. Exactly what the law forbids.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Man, before you go any further, how in the hell
have we gone sixty years.
Speaker 2 (04:28):
Doing this? I mean, because it is so clear cut.
Speaker 1 (04:31):
Yeah, because of the bullying of their progressive left, I think,
I mean, people like you and me. We've been yelling
about this all the while, but yeah, people got cowed
into thinking. No, the way to fix racism is racism anyway.
When a party seeks relief under a statute, dar task
is to apply the laws terms as a reasonable reader
(04:54):
who would have understood them at the time Congress enacted them.
After all, only the words on the page constitute the
law opted by Congress and approved by the President.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
That's a quote from another case. The key phrases in.
Speaker 1 (05:04):
Title six at issue here are subjected to discrimination and
on the ground of begin with, the first, to discriminate
against a person meant in nineteen sixty four what it
means today to treat an individual worse than others who
are similarly situated. And he looks to a dictionary to
make a distinction, to make a difference in treatment of
favor of one is compared with others, to make a
(05:26):
difference in treatment or favor on a class or categorical basis.
The provision of Title six before us this Court has
held prohibits only intentional discrimination. From this, we can safely
say that Title six forbids a recipient of federal funds
from intentionally treating one person worse than another similarly situated
on the ground of race, color, or national origin.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
If I were a justice, I would weigh in on.
Speaker 3 (05:49):
The uh concurrence with Obs Trey Obs obvs.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
Period Right, Obs versus Othehelser problem nineteen sixty four.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Without question.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
Congress in nineteen sixty four could have taken the law
in various directions, but to safeguard the civil rights of
all Americans, Congress chose a simple and profound rule, one
holding that a recipient of federal funds may never discriminate
based on race, color, or national origin.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Period.
Speaker 1 (06:24):
Again, this ought to be engraved in a monument somewhere.
The crazy part coming up soon start with how Harvard
and unc use race. Like many colleges in universities, these
schools invite interested.
Speaker 2 (06:37):
Students to complete the common Application.
Speaker 1 (06:40):
As part of that process, the trial records show applicants
are prompted to tick one or more boxes to explain
how you identify yourself. The available choices are American, Indian
or Alaska Native, Asian, Black, or African American, Native, Hawaiian
or other Pacific Islander, Hispanic or Latino or White. Applicants
can write in further details if they choose. Where do
(07:02):
these boxes come from? Gorsa tasks bureaucrats. A federal interagency
commission devised this scheme of classification in the nineteen seventies
to facilitate data collection. The commission acted without any input
from anthropologists, sociologists, ethnologists, or other experts.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
That's really interesting. I had never heard of it. Yeah,
this is the part that I really really wanted to
get to.
Speaker 1 (07:25):
But The first part was so eloquent and so clear,
just you know, I want everybody to be rock solid
in their confidence that no racism means no racism anyway. So,
but the bureaucrats who did this without input from you know,
all these scientists, recognizing the limitations of their work, federal
(07:46):
regulators cautioned that their classifications quote should not be interpreted
as being scientific or anthropological in nature, nor should they
be viewed as determinants of eligibility for participation in any
federal program.
Speaker 2 (08:00):
They made it.
Speaker 1 (08:01):
Clear, look, this is just data collection. We're just curious
about this. But then, in the way activists do, I'm sorry,
I'm deporting from departing from gorst here. They took the
data and decided, hey, let's use this and change the
world anyway.
Speaker 2 (08:15):
Back to Gorsicic. Wow.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
Despite that warning, others eventually use this classification system for
that very purpose, to sort out winners and losers in
a process that, by the end of the century would
grant preferences.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
In jobs and university admissions.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
These classifications race rest on incoherent stereotypes. Take the Asian category,
it sweeps into one pile East Asians, Chinese, Korean, Japanese
and South Asians, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, even though together they
constitute sixty percent of the world's population. This agglomeration of
(08:55):
so many peoples paves over countless differences in language, culture,
historical experience. It does so even though few would suggest
that all such persons share quote similar backgrounds and similar
ideas and experiences. That's a quote from a different case. Consider,
as well, the development of a separate category for Native
Hawaiian or other Pacific islander. It seems federal officials disaggregated
(09:18):
these groups from the Asian category only in the nineteen nineties,
and only in response to political lobbying these sites when
that happened, And even that category contains its curiosities. It appears,
for example, that Filipino Americans remain classified as Asians rather
than other Pacific islanders. I've seen the Philippines. A very
(09:43):
good friend is from the Philippines. They are Pacific islands.
It seems federal officials disaggregated oh blah blah blah blah,
buh Filipino Americans. The remaining classifications depend just as much
on irrational stereotypes the Hispanic category.
Speaker 3 (09:58):
I knew the where house was going, because I I'd
been meaning to talk about this, having been down in
Florida with all the Cuban immigrants there, and how different
the Cuban culture is from what I'm used to, and
the hilarity that it's all thrown together as Hispanic.
Speaker 2 (10:12):
And it's even more insane than that. Listen to this.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
The Hispanic category covers those whose ancestral language is Spanish, Basque,
or Catalan, but it also covers individuals of Mayan, mixed
Tech or Zappotech descent, should not speak any of those languages,
and whose ancestry does not trace to the Iberian Peninsula,
but bears deep ties to the Americas. That would be
the native people of Central and South America. The white
(10:38):
category sweeps in anyone from Europe, Asia, west of India,
and North Africa. That includes those of Welsh, Norwegian, Greek, Italian, Moroccan, Lebanese,
Turkish or Iranian descent. It embraces an Iraqi or Ukrainian
refugee as much as a member of the British royal family. Meanwhile,
(11:00):
Black or African American covers everyone from a descendant of
enslaved persons who grow up in the poor rural South,
to a first generation child of wealthy Nigerian immigrants, to
a black identifying applicant with multi racial ancestry whose family
lives in a typical American suburb. If anything attempts to
(11:20):
divide us up, all up into a handful of groups,
have become only more incoherent with time. No doubt, American
families have become increasingly multicultural, a fact that has led
to unseemly disputes about whether someone is really a member
of certain racial or ethnic groups.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
There are decisions.
Speaker 1 (11:37):
Denying Hispanic status to someone of Italian Argentine descent, as
well as someone with one Mexican grandparent.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
These are all court cases he's citing. Yet there are.
Speaker 1 (11:49):
Also decisions granting Hispanic status to a Sephardic jew whose
ancestors fled Spain centuries ago, Wow, and bestowing a sort
of Hispanic Seas status on a person with one Cuban grandparent.
Speaker 2 (12:04):
I can check the box of Hispanic again.
Speaker 1 (12:08):
This is completely incoherent. Given all of this, is that
any surprise that members of certain groups sometimes try to
conceal their race or ethnicity, or that a cottage industry
is sprung up to help college applicants do so, we
are told, for example, at one effect of lumping so
many people of so many disparate backgrounds into the Asian
category is that many colleges consider Asians to be quote
(12:29):
overrepresented in their emissions admission pools.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
A terrible word that shouldn't even exist. Overrepresented, well said.
Speaker 1 (12:37):
Paid advisors in turn tell high school students of Asian
ancestry to downplay their heritage to maximize their chance of admissions.
We will make them appear less Asian when they apply.
One promises, if you're given an option, don't attach a
photograph to your application. Another instructs it is difficult to
imagine those who receive this advice would find comfort in
(12:59):
a bald, mistaking assurance that race conscious admissions benefit the
Asian American community, which Soda Mayor claimed in her descent,
and blah blah blah.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
Hiding your ethnicity because you will be penalized for it,
and that's not considered racism.
Speaker 1 (13:21):
Right exactly, And it is hard not to wonder whether
those left paying the steepest price are those least able
to afford it, children of families with no chance of
hiring the kind of consultants who know how to play
this game.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Yeah, well that's good Neil Gorsich if you need him. Wow.
Speaker 3 (13:39):
I can't believe it took us this long to end this.
And of course, as we've been talking about, the universities
are finding a way around it. They're still doing it.
Oh yeah, all all the time, coast to coast. Yeah wow,
any comment on that text line? Four one KFTC Cat
in California was recently reunited with her family after she
(14:00):
went missing fifteen years ago as a kitten or hear
me out cats look like So the movie Superman's coming out,
a new Superman's coming out and getting a fair amount
of attention, and Joe tried to ruin it for us
(14:20):
earlier by explaining how the director has said a bunch
of woke things, and I'm sure he has as a
Hollywood crowd tends to do. Dean Kin, who was the
Superman of the nineties. It probably perfect for you, right, Katie. Yes,
he's probably a heart throb for you.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
Yeah, some devil.
Speaker 3 (14:43):
Barry dean Kin, who is fifty eight years old now
played Superman in the nineties TV series Lewis and Clark.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
He came out.
Speaker 3 (14:50):
He's not happy with this, He said, how woke is
Hollywood going to make this character? How much is Disney
going to change their snow white? Why are they going
to change these characters to exist for these times? He's
unhappy with the new Superman, with the director having told
or the actor, and the actor and the director both
saying things that people are happy with.
Speaker 2 (15:10):
Anyway, told the Sunday.
Speaker 3 (15:12):
Times in London that Superman is the story of America,
an immigrant that came from other places and populated the country,
and the director added, but for me, it's mostly a
story that says basic human kindness as a value, and
it's something we have lost. Really do I need to
think about any of those things when I go see Superman?
Speaker 2 (15:30):
Why are you lecturing us about immigration? Uh?
Speaker 3 (15:33):
Cain said, I think bringing Superman into it. I think
this was a mistake by the actor playing Superman in
this movie to say it's an immigrant thing, and I
think it's going to hurt the numbers on the movie.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
I was excited to feed the film. I'm excited to
see what it is.
Speaker 3 (15:46):
I'm rooting for it to be success, but I don't
like trying to tie this into immigration.
Speaker 2 (15:51):
I would agree, But.
Speaker 3 (15:54):
The more I think about it because I was wondering earlier.
I thought, how could you possibly You got a bunch
of money for the actor, this could make you a
household name or the director. You got a bunch of
money and reputation involved, why would you want to step
in it? But I think they probably think that immigration
being a hot story, and of course, because they hang
(16:14):
around people like them, they think the vast majority of
Americans don't like the way immigrants are being treated right now,
they think calling this an immigrant story is a good hook.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
Well, and if you're bubbled, even if on one level
you recognize that half of America thinks differently than you do,
if you never run into those people, and here's a hint,
movie boy, you do all the time, you're just such
a bully. They're afraid to express their opinion. But you
start to think everybody exuious with this, and those who
don't are troglodites and monsters. And I don't care if
(16:49):
I offend them.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
And the more I think about it, they felt like
they needed to have a hook that ties into something important.
Otherwise they'd be saying, yeah, we made another superhero movie.
We hope we aren't too tired of superhero movies because
people are tired of superhero movies, it would seem so
this probably started in the works back when Marvel was
still ruling the the box office, and it's not so
(17:13):
much anymore.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Armstrong and geddy.
Speaker 4 (17:19):
The little boy in your Cincinnati thought he came up
with a life hack for the claw machine.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
Turns out didn't work.
Speaker 4 (17:26):
He tried climbing inside but got stuck, and he won
a free chance to get rescued by police and firefighters,
who eventually were able to pull the little guy out.
Speaker 2 (17:36):
Kid got stuck in the claw machine.
Speaker 1 (17:39):
The young man is a junior at Columbia.
Speaker 3 (17:44):
I don't know how old the kid was, but my
son asked the other day, my thirteen year old ass,
He said, what do you call my generation? And I
don't actually know what do you call people that age?
Speaker 2 (17:51):
Do you know what they are? No?
Speaker 3 (17:55):
Okay, could you look into that, KDC if you can
figure that out. What's the generation after Generation Z? Is
that what we've been talking about lately?
Speaker 2 (18:04):
Yeah? Gen Z? Gen ZI?
Speaker 3 (18:06):
Yeah, youngest generation is Generation Alpha? Okay A basically, so
we start over again, yes, okay, excellent, Yeah, although there's
so many thousand and six years old.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
They might be you know generation you know, beta from.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
Yeah, and they probably have nothing in common with today's
six year old.
Speaker 2 (18:23):
Right.
Speaker 1 (18:24):
It was that like that whole don't write just twenty
twenty on your checks or you know, or twenty twelve,
or don't write, you know, the day to what's today's
date seven ten twenty five, right, twenty twenty five because
bank systems might think is from nineteen twenty five.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Because that happens a lot. Yes, that's happened all the time. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
Anyways, speaking of young people, I found this very interesting.
I was considering trying to cram these two things together.
The incredible radicalization of young women around the world as
their male companions they don't have companions, but as the
males of their generation are swinging to the right. Not
not a lot, but some. And how weird and interesting
(19:11):
that is. But we'll do that another time, I want.
I'm just gonna go with this. It was a piece
written by Mark Penn and Andrew Stein, and they're both Democrats.
Speaker 2 (19:23):
Penn you may recognize recognized his name.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
He was a Polster and advisor to the Clintons in
the nineties and two thousands, and this other guy was
a New York City Council president for a number of
years in the eighties and nineties. But the title is
gen Z the useful Idiot Generation. Young people usually become
less radical with time. Are we seeing an exception? And
(19:47):
they go into describing, you know, hippie Vietnam War protesters
who got jobs, got married and had children. Exactly, wash
your damn dirty hippie feet. Now their band children see
them tethered to Fox News. Today's young Americans are following
the first part of that pattern. Ask a group of
them to choose between capitalism and socialism and they'll split
(20:10):
right down the middle. And he goes into the nominating
horrifying Zoron Mundami, who says he wants to capture the
means of production.
Speaker 2 (20:20):
I've heard that phrase.
Speaker 1 (20:22):
Yeah, you know what, Oh, I ought to get into
the PolitiFact thing. Someday PolitiFact rated is false, the idea
that Mundami's a communist.
Speaker 2 (20:32):
And then when it came out.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
That he said we need to seize the means of production,
which is straight out of the communist manifesto, they said
incomplete data anyway, But will the young people outgrow their radicalism?
And this is the part that really intrigued me. There's
reason to doubt it. Record numbers of gen Z are
pursuing higher education, with fifty three percent of those eighteen
(20:56):
to twenty four having completed at least some college. That's
a tr trubbling sign given how left wing ideology has
come to dominate higher education. And again, these are two
mainstream democrats writing colleges where many young people learn that
socialism means free stuff. They're indoctrinated to blame capitalism for racism, inequality,
(21:16):
and climate change. Unlike the older generations, they grew up
after the end of the Cold War and have no
memory of the atrocities committed by the Soviet Union, Maoist
China and other socialist regime regimes.
Speaker 3 (21:28):
I have no memories is an interesting way to put it.
I didn't live through most of that stuff my memories
or because somebody taught them to me.
Speaker 2 (21:37):
Yeah, that's an excellent point.
Speaker 1 (21:40):
And he said, they say, maybe they'll see socialism and
action in New York. But here's the really intriguing part. Meanwhile,
the process of growing up is slowing down. They're talking
about what I mean, it's not automatic that a young, idealistic,
way left person becomes a conservative. It happens through processes, experience,
(22:00):
mugged virality exactly, the process of growing That's actually a
great phrase. The process of growing up is slowing down.
The median age of first marriage is thirty, almost five
years later than it was in nineteen eighty five, and
that means that young people settle down and take on
responsibilities later, if they ever do. Nearly half of gen
(22:23):
Z adults aren't are not in a committed romantic relationship.
They largely live communally, often work from home, and are
connected primarily through the four plus hours they spend each
day on their phones. Their primary sources of information are
TikTok and Facebook, whose algorithms lead them to material that
reinforces their preconceptions rather than challenges them.
Speaker 3 (22:46):
Four hours a day on their phones, what would they
have been doing before, because I mean, that's the whole
opportunity cost thing. There are only so many hours.
Speaker 2 (22:53):
In the day.
Speaker 3 (22:54):
There would have been more television watching back in the day,
but all four hours wouldn't have been taken up with that.
Speaker 1 (23:00):
No, but lots and lots and lots of relating to
real human beings who don't feed you agreement based on
their algorithms in my experience, my friends, my girlfriends, my wife,
my family, they all feel free to disagree with me
semi regularly in a way that Facebook and TikTok never will.
(23:22):
They will, With all due respect to your sister in
law who constantly posts garbage that you hate, those algorithms
again lead them to material that reinforces their preconceptions.
Speaker 3 (23:33):
I think even much other than that, your real life.
Maybe that's not true anymore. Is about to say, your
real life you don't talk about politics nearly at all,
as opposed to being bombarded with it on your whatever
device you're looking at.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
Yeah, but I think in general, because I actually do
agree with that. But in general, real life quote unquote
is much more messy and much less catering to you
in a hundred different ways than virtual life is, which
tends to lead people toward less deeied, idealistic progressive I'm
(24:09):
going to.
Speaker 3 (24:10):
Tell people I know, from now on, I want you
to I'm going to use an algorithm, and I want
you to feed me things I only want to hear.
Only say things I want to hear or I'm interested in.
Speaker 1 (24:19):
They would make a squinty face and say, no, I'm
not doing that. And there's more another traditional source of ballast,
religion has been become lighter as well. More than one
third of gen Z reports zero religious affiliation. Roughly sixty
percent did not participate in religious services growing up. That
(24:39):
produces a lack of moral grounding. We've had a really
interesting couple of conversations about that. Let's not get off
on that.
Speaker 3 (24:45):
But yeah, I don't know if you could make a
blanket statement of lack of moral grounding because you didn't
participate in organize religion.
Speaker 2 (24:54):
Right.
Speaker 1 (24:55):
But their greater argument is the things, the inputs, the
influences in life that tended to make you more realistic
and therefore more conservative, are missing, including religion. Put this
all together, and it's little wonder that about half of
eighteen to twenty year olds twenty four year olds tell
pollsters that they support Hamas over Israel. Hammas specifically, not
(25:19):
the Palestinian people fing Hamas. By and large, these young
adults aren't hardcore idelogus. They're merely ignorant. About half of
young Hamas supporters say they don't want to wipe out Israel.
They prefer two state solution. Call them the useful idiot generation.
Mouthing slogans and causes they don't understand and from which
they would recoil if they did again.
Speaker 2 (25:41):
This was written by Democrats.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Yeah, and that's you know, the Queers for Palestine thing
is the perfect example of that. It's the useful idiot generation,
mouthing slogans and causes they don't understand and from which
they would.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
Recoil if they did. Well.
Speaker 3 (25:58):
A guy like Mark Penn, who worked for the claims
he realizes Democrats are never going to win another major
election and unless they get this under control.
Speaker 2 (26:06):
So he's trying to.
Speaker 3 (26:06):
Figure out why do were young people? Why are they
so crazy? That's what he's trying to figure out. Final
couple of sentences. The older generations are not blameless here.
We created the environment that produced this unmored generation. Socialism
and anti Semitism will continue to fester and grow if
we don't stand up and reform our universities, reinforce our
basic values, and balance our social media.
Speaker 2 (26:28):
I agree completely.
Speaker 1 (26:29):
I am sticking with the idea that reforming our education
systems or tearing them down and building substitutes, is the
most important issue for America for the next fifty years.
Speaker 3 (26:43):
I saw where did I come across this somewhere on
social media anyway? It was somebody talking about the whole
dating world getting back to people, not coupling or whatever.
But it was one of your dating sites and they
had posted a picture of somebody who had at a
profile young woman or a profile included you know, the
(27:04):
things she's interested in, some pictures and it said and
if you're a Trump supporter, you can f all the
way off. And I mean, and the person said that
this is fairly common in the world of that online
dating anyway.
Speaker 2 (27:18):
What is I mean?
Speaker 3 (27:19):
Can you imagine that not only do do politics matter
enough to me in meeting someone that I have to
mention what side I'm on, I need to like as
harshly as you possibly can criticize the other side, Right, I.
Speaker 2 (27:38):
Mean that's so crazy to me.
Speaker 3 (27:43):
Yeah, yeah, just dating. And I mean you gotta be
old to get this. But can you imagine dating? And
what year would that have been?
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Eighty eight?
Speaker 3 (27:54):
And somebody says, and if you like Walter Mondale, you
can f all the way off.
Speaker 2 (28:01):
Well I didn't say it sounds so nuts. Well, yeah, exactly,
that would be what I would think.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
That is a crazy person, right, They are insanely into
this stuff. I don't want anything to do with them anyway,
I will feel free too, indeed, f off. But if
that's common, well then no wonder if people aren't getting
together who want to get involved with that, even if
you agreed with them. Yeah, yeah, I'm reminded of the whole.
(28:31):
And you know, and the last paragraph they kind of
touched on how, hey, we adults are not blameless. No,
are you effing kidding? We're to blame completely. The kids
aren't to blame. And I don't just mean us of
a certain ideology. I mean because we did permit this
to happen on our watch, partly because we had no
idea what was going on. The Marxists are very very
(28:54):
clever at covering their actual intent and what they're actually doing,
which is why you know, parents seeing what was going
on in their kids' classrooms during COVID was such an
enormous pivot point in the history of this because it
had gone so much farther than anybody had any idea.
(29:15):
But I'm I'm reminded of the whole. You know, every
kids special year, special everybody gets a trophy, you know,
the graduation address at high school, praising you like you'd
all cured cancer and invented, you know, nuclear fusion and that.
Speaker 2 (29:32):
Sort of thing. So these twenty year olds.
Speaker 1 (29:37):
Think not only that the world needs to be saved
right now, but that they're the ones most qualified to
do it, which is with all due respect to how
stupid I was in so many ways at that age,
just because of the age, I never thought.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I am the savior of war the world.
Speaker 1 (29:58):
Not within a million miles of that did I think that.
And yet you know, every cod dang girl at Columbia
thinks that.
Speaker 3 (30:07):
Sincerely, Yeah, and to the point of violence. This is
a great high falutin conversation. But we've got drunks fighting
on a golf course. We need to get to We
will finish strong next stay here. Joe is the perfect
person to be involved as the go to announcer for
(30:29):
all of this.
Speaker 1 (30:31):
Yes, indeed, Jack, when you combine men, many many men,
and a great deal of alcohol, occasionally conflicts arise, even
in the pastoral setting of your local golf course. In fact,
golf fight videos are one of my favorite forms of
entertain I didn't know that was a thing. That's a genre.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
Huh, Yeah, I mean it's not like it happens a lot.
I've probably witnessed one or two.
Speaker 1 (30:58):
Angry confrontations that he could or did become violent in
my entire career being on golf courses since I was
like a little kid.
Speaker 3 (31:05):
You've seen these videos, kiddie, Oh yeah, Joe, you have
to scour the internet there everywhere.
Speaker 2 (31:10):
Oh, I know it, I know it.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
And they're so delicious because frequently they include a drunken idiots,
people who shouldn't be fighting anybody, or in this case,
a couple of drunk yahoos who got very very belligerent
and really really wanted to fight the group that they
were having a dispute with the group they were having
(31:31):
a dispute with wanted no violence whatsoever. But the aforementioned
yay who's insisted on it, not understanding that one of
the fellas in the group was indeed an NHL star
built like a brick stadium and was having none of
their nonsense. Not only that had fought many a fisticuff
(31:55):
in his days and didn't particularly care if he had
another one. Here's some of the audio.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
You guys need to get off the golfoard.
Speaker 5 (32:02):
You're not scaring anybody come on, man, I told you,
go God, come on, man, get them out here.
Speaker 1 (32:22):
So that is a tiny little sample of the video,
which is posted at Katie's corner. If you're in the
mood for some lane entertainment, I will tell you that
this Jack, as I know you have poor violence, says
I do do uh? The NHL player, the former player
Nick Turnowski in uh.
Speaker 2 (32:38):
In question.
Speaker 1 (32:40):
He absolutely resists any violence for the longest time till
the guy comes at him, gives him three good licks
and says that's enough. Get away from the The guy
comes at him again. Oh here, First he hurls him
into a lake, but the guy just keeps coming at him.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
So finally he puts him down.
Speaker 1 (33:00):
It was not a I'm going to hospitalize this guy
or render him unconscious. It was he grabbed him by
the jersey slash golf shirt, gave him a few good licks,
then said go about your business.
Speaker 2 (33:10):
Drunkie, but drunk he wanted more. Who watch Final Thoughts?
Who watch Final Thoughts? Go have some final thoughts? Hooray,
here's your host for Final Thoughts, Joe Getty. Let's get
a final thought from everybody on the crew.
Speaker 3 (33:26):
Why not?
Speaker 2 (33:26):
Michaelangelow will you lead us off.
Speaker 4 (33:28):
Yeah, this cold virus has been killing me and it
doesn't help that all morning Hanson has been putting leeches
on my back.
Speaker 2 (33:34):
Loss of blood is starting to really make me right handed.
Speaker 1 (33:37):
No, no, no, a little more blood. We gotta let
that bad blood out. You'll be fine, Katie Green esteemed Newswoman.
As a final thought, Katie.
Speaker 3 (33:45):
Not only has that video at Katie's corner, but someone
has converted the moment where the guy is mid air
flying into the lake into an oil painting and.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
It's oh the Internet for the wind jack a final thought.
Speaker 3 (33:58):
Yeah, Earlier we referenced a famous fight between Charles Barkley
and a dwarf that he threw through a window. Yes,
and Charles Barkley was asked if he regretted that, and
he said, I regret we were on the first floor,
which is one of the funniest things anybody's ever said.
You know what, I'll stick with the theme from my
final thought. My buddy Gordy, who is an elite hockey
player almost at AHL quality, but he has this bit
(34:19):
he does on the golf course if he disagrees with.
Speaker 1 (34:21):
Somebody, said, that's it. We're going and then he starts
to take off his golf glove.
Speaker 2 (34:25):
He pulls off the belt grow.
Speaker 1 (34:27):
Then he says, give me a second, I gotta And
then you got a pingstake when you pull off one
finger in time.
Speaker 2 (34:31):
Anybody who's ever worn a golf I'll be right with you.
I am gonna light you up. Excuse me, hang on this.
It is very.
Speaker 3 (34:37):
Funny, Armstrong and Getdy wrapping of another grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 2 (34:42):
So many people think so little time.
Speaker 1 (34:43):
Good Armstrong and Giddy dot com again you'll find that
fabulous entertaining video of drunken Ya who's under Katie's corner.
We got hotlinks, pickups, made swag. Oh the hoodies flying
off the shelves.
Speaker 3 (34:55):
Okay, cool, We will see tomorrow. God bless America.
Speaker 2 (35:03):
Man, I'm strong and Getty. There are two ways to
look at this. Where shide are you all? This is
a national emergency.
Speaker 4 (35:12):
Let me say Let me say one thing.
Speaker 2 (35:15):
The fruit of my loins a terrible phrase.
Speaker 3 (35:19):
Anytime you mention your loins, I feel like I want
to run from the room.
Speaker 2 (35:23):
I have lovely loins. What are you talking anyway? Thank
you for your attention to this matter. Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.