July 29, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 3 of A&G features...
- The EU trade deal & climate change
- The democrats are losing big time
- The "E" word Island, how Walmart deals with tariffs & AI
- Sydney Sweeney's jean commercial
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 Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Arm Strong and Getty and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
President Trump riding high on his agreement with the European Union,
the block agreeing to pay fifteen percent tariffs across the board,
while opening their markets to American imports at zero percent,
and pledging to buy seven hundred and fifty billion in
American energy plus six hundred billion in private investment by
twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
So it's a little bit of the report on Trump's
big deal with the EU, which even some Trump Hayton
journalists say is a big win for the Trump administration.
Here's a little more from Jackie Heinrich of Fox and
it will bring stability, it will bring predictability.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Frands's Prime Minister slamming the deal as opsided, posting it's
a dark day when an alliance of free peoples brought
together to affirm their common values and to defend their
common interests resigns itself to submission.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Fifteen percent is not to be underestimated, but it is
the best we could get. But wasn't it or at least.
Trump's claim is it was unfair the other way before.
So when it was unfair the other way, you were
you're okay with it, you thought that was perfectly good.
But when we try to get it more even because
this isn't like, you know, when Trump's taken on some
(01:31):
of these tiny little countries whose GDP is less than Alabama.
I mean, this is the EU, which is when you
add it all together, is practically as big an economy
as US. So a couple play that Jim Kramer clip.
This was Jim Kramer on CNBC yesterday talking about the
current Trump economy.
Speaker 4 (01:51):
Our biggest problem is we have so much growth that
the Fed one cut what the.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
Oh my, oh my god, I'm so sorry. I think
it right? That take it right? Okay, it's a cable
with a cable with a ticker. Is no kind of
would take that back.
Speaker 5 (02:10):
That's really people doing live TV.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Jim to your point. Okay, so he dropped an f
bum because he was talking about how great the economy is.
All the economic numbers are just pointing the right direction.
Ian Bremmer yesterday after this deal was made, Who's no
Trump fan? Said the Trump administration just secured a landmark
trade deal with the European Union, and it's Trump's biggest
win to date. Let me tell you why. And then
(02:32):
he went through the numbers of why this is a
huge victory for the Trump administration and for America. That's something.
And I just saw a consumer confidence is way up
from previous months because apparently people people like me barely
paying attention to the tariff thing and not understanding it
at all, feel like, huh, I guess it isn't going
to be a disaster. People are feeling that way right
(02:55):
now anyway. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I love Jared Gerard Baker, who race for the Wall
Street Journal. His headline is, if Trump's tariffs are so bad,
where's the recession?
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Right?
Speaker 1 (03:06):
And and he he lists three possibilities, as I recall,
including first, it's too early to tell. Most of the
tariffs announced haven't been in place very long, if at all,
and so we'll just have to.
Speaker 2 (03:21):
See what happens.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
The average tariff paid by importers has indeed risen sharply,
which leads us to the second possibility. The tariffs thus
far have just not been big enough to cause the
harm economists warned us about. So everybody's taken a tiny
little hit, shared the pain, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
Jim Kramer seemed to be enthusiastic, and Ian Bremmer enthusiastics.
They must I don't know. They don't think this is
gonna the bad, the bad part's gonna happen. I don't know.
Speaker 1 (03:49):
Well, and Baker says third tantalizingly, perhaps the conventional wisdom
is wrong, or, more precisely, since no one can deny
the effective taxes are real, perhaps and the rush to
emphasize the negative account have overlooked the countervailing forces at
work with tariffs. The redistribution of the burden of duties
between foreign exporters, US importers and consumers may be reordering
the balance of benefit between domestic and foreign businesses and
(04:12):
between companies and consumers. It's kind of a word salad
and sophisticated stuff, But.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
We just don't know how it'll play out at this point.
So Howard Lutnik, often I think, is an overly enthusiastic
cheerleader for things in the Trump administration. But what he
says here matches up with you know, a couple of
people have already mentioned who aren't fans of Trump saying
this is a good deal and a big deal.
Speaker 6 (04:37):
Here he is, I just flew back from Scotland, and
wow with that deal, it's so amazing for America.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Why is it so great for America?
Speaker 7 (04:46):
Well, remember, the European Union is twenty trillion dollar economy,
four hundred and fifty million people. I mean, it is
head and shoulders bigger than all the other Western civilizations.
So the fact is the European Union is the monster deal.
President Trump did that deal.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Yesterday.
Speaker 6 (05:05):
We were all together in Scotland. We got the deal done.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Yeah, that's well, we'll see how it plays out. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Part of the reason I'm not like crazy into this
is that it's all fairly short term because the next
administration can take a completely different approach to it. And honestly,
if things start to look ugly, this administration can completely
change their sales and tear up the agreement. I mean
Trump's deal is and this is an oversimplification, but you
(05:38):
will pay fifteen percent tariffs to access the US market.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
We will pay non taxes to your market. It's just bullying.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Because we're such a big superpower economically speaking, the Euros
have no choice but to go with it, which you know,
may cause damage. I don't know, but that could all
change if the economy heads south. Trump could say yeah,
this is not working never mind, which is part of
the reason a lot of people are uncomfortable with this
much power to tax, because the tariff.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Is one hundred percent of tax.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
This much power to tax being granted to the executive,
it's it's a bit perverse constitutionally.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Yeah, well that yeah, that's its own different topic. But yeah,
it is amazing that one guy can can can up
end world the world economy like this.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
But anyway, to wrap up the discussion, at least from
my end, a lot of people seem to really really
want one outcome or the other. Howard Lutnek and company
wanted to be great for America. The media wants it
to be terrible, and they want to indict Trump. I'm
just curious.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
Yeah, and I hope it works out. I don't. I
don't root against anything working out for the economy for
political reasons. I hope it works out. I hope we
all get rich. Couple of things green energy wise before
we take a break, that I thought were interesting. You
mentioned the other day how the price of electric vehicles
(07:06):
and where they are and everything like that, Like there's
a whole bunch of used electric vehicles out there that
people aren't as interested in as they were a couple
of years ago. And the big tax credit that you
used to get on buying a new electric vehicles going away,
So the whole electric car thing could change a lot
(07:27):
in the next six months or so. And fitting in
with that, I came across this graph of where people
are on the whole climate change thing in general, the
share of voters who are very concerned about climate change.
I was thinking about where I would I be myself.
I'm pretty close to not concerned at all. I'm close
(07:49):
to zero on climate change. I never think about it
at all. I don't worried about it. I don't worry
about it. I never worry about it. So I think
I'm close to a zero concern on climate change.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Uh yeah, yeah, I would agree. I just there's nothing
I could do about it. The weather changes all the time.
If it gets hotter, I'll sell my coats and buy shirts.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
But for people who are very concerned, it has been
dropping year by year for a while now. I mean
it had its peak shortly after al Gore and the
hockey stick in the movie Inconvenient Truth and all that
sort of stuff, And it's been dropping little by little
for all voters. It is now at thirty seven percent
very concerned. You wouldn't get that from taking in the media,
(08:35):
would you, Because everybody in the media is in that
thirty seven percent. Everybody in academics is in that thirty
seven percent, Caldy, And I'll bet the rest skew very
very young. Yeah, and all the experts come from that
thirty seven percent. But thirty seven percent of voters are
very concerned about climate change, So obviously you do not
think it's an existential threat to human beings even being
(08:59):
alive on the planet. If if you're not in the
very concerned camp, I would assume right right, Sure. Yeah,
for Democrats it's even down to fifty eight percent, and
it was way high, not that many years ago.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
And I'll bet a chunk of that fifty eight percent
is tribal signaling. Sure they might harbor secret doubts, but
you're not. And we did a great feature on this
a few with all due modesty last week or something
like that, that in certain social settings, including social settings
where only one set of beliefs is allowed, and everybody,
(09:33):
lets you know what those beliefs are. Hello, sound familiar.
Any questioning, never mind dissent. Just saying hey, this strikes
me as odd I have questions is frowned upon so
thoroughly people are taught to just shut up. So I'll
bet there's a lot of people who are thinking. You know,
a lot of people seem to be making a ton
of money and the promises never get kept and nothing
(09:54):
has affected anything, but they don't dare say it.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
But so Democrats are propping the that low number up anyway,
So overall thirty seven percent, Democrats are at fifty eight
because Republicans are eighteen percent very concerned, and I'm shocked
that that's high, because again I'm a zero. Independents are
down to thirty six percent. There's a big chunk of
America that just what are you gonna do? China's building
(10:20):
coal plants every day, What are you going to do?
Speaker 1 (10:22):
I have a feeling that's at least a factor in
the fact that the Democratic Party has hit a thirty
five year low approval writing with American voters, according to
a New Wall Street Journal poll, which is very very
similar to another couple of polls that had come out recently.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
So it takes you back to nineteen ninety right coming
out of the Reagan era. Wow, lost to Reagan twice
and then the third Reagan term of HW Bush.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
In fact, it was, if I'm correct, right around the time,
is this right that Hillary Clinton was getting so much
derision for trying to get hillary Care through in the
UH and Newt Gingrich absolutely walloped the Democrats in the
mid term, and it looked like Clinton couldn't possibly get reelected.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Then he did.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
But yeah, yeah, thirty five year low approval rating of
a third well, and then a zoftig chick decided to
ply her skills to a president and that helped him politically.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
It helped him. Yeah, it's not the reading of history
most people have that the overreach for the impeachment helped Clinton.
Speaker 4 (11:30):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Yeah, I suppose so. I think that's the belief at
this point. Yeah, I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
I you know, trace the whole comeback back to the
chick who plied her skills.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
That was a good sentence though. Okay, I do want
to talk about the famine. I'm using my finger quotes
that all your world organizations declared today that is going
on in Gaza and the response of the media to
that and Trump to that, and uh, how about it's
(12:00):
all going to play it, among other things on the way,
stay here, Armstrong, Andyetty.
Speaker 8 (12:06):
Eight months after the election, Democrats are still trying to
dig themselves out of a hole, but a new poll
from the Wall Street Journal paints a bleak picture. It
reveals only thirty three percent of registered voters today view
Democrats favorably, while a staggering sixty three percent see them negatively.
(12:26):
That's the worst rating from the same poll since nineteen ninety.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Yes We're.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
At Sayisha Hasny on special report last night with Brett
Brett Bear Fox News Slash so Yes analysis. In a moment,
I found this next segment pretty interesting, though, go ahead, Aisha.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
We're in the dog house yet again. We certainly do
have a problem, and it's a messaging problem.
Speaker 8 (12:53):
If messaging is the problem, the new poll signals Democrats
attacking President Trump isn't working at least yet. That's because
even when more voters disapprove of Trump on issues like inflation,
they still trust congressional Republicans more than Democrats to handle
that issue by a whopping ten points on immigration the
(13:15):
same thing. More voters disapprove of Trump's handling of the matter,
but Republicans once again are trusted more than Democrats to
manage it.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
I don't know. I don't know if I believe this
analysis that people have been going with. I think it's
the crazy factor. It's the uh, I don't know. You've
got a friend who does a few things that are
just so crazy you don't trust his judgment on anything else.
I think that's what's driving it. It's not that. Yeah,
(13:46):
the Democrats' view of the economy is specifically blah blah blah.
It said.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
You're the people that want boys play girls' sports. You're
the people that want me to say LATINEX. You're the
people that think we shouldn't have police. I don't trust
you on anything. I think it's the crazy factor. Yeah,
you put a grown man in my little girl's locker room.
Yeah exactly.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
But to her point though, and it's not in contrast
to your point, it's agreeing with it. So like on
inflation and rising prices, Trump is eleven points underwater, okay,
but the Republicans in general are ten points to the positive.
So what Trump's doing right now. On immigration, these sees
(14:30):
just three points underwater, but generally speaking Republicans that are
Democrats seventeen point advantage for Republicans. So there are momentarily
momentary quibbles with the way Trump is approaching this, that
or the other, but in terms of general philosophy that
I don't care. I want the Republicans, which again I
(14:52):
don't think disagrees with your point.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
I think it agrees with it.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
Why do they have that percep or why do they
lean so strongly that way? Because I think the Democrats
have lost their effing mind. Let's see, So the Democrats
are thirty three percent favorable, sixty three percent unfavorable, far
weaker assessment than voters give to either President Trump or
(15:16):
the Republican Party. Yeah, they're underwater, but of course political
parties ought to be underwater.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Number when you got their opponents, and number two you got.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Neutrals or independents and their own party members who'd like
them to change.
Speaker 2 (15:29):
What they're doing a little bit.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
But anyway, Trump is seven percent underwater and Republicans are
eleven percent underwater. But again keep in mind, the Democrats
are thirty points underwater.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
Yeah, as always that number of people that are unhappy
with the Democrats. It's a certain chunk who think they're crazy,
like I was just talking about, and a certain chunk,
smaller chunk, but a certain chunk that thinks they haven't
gone far enough, they haven't stuck to their guns on
trans issues and defunding the police and climate change and
all the other important things.
Speaker 1 (15:58):
Which is even worse new really, but a mere eight
percent of voters view the Democrats very favorably, two and
a half times as many have the same level of
enthusiasm for the GOP.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
I we got a long way to go on what direction?
You know what the Democratic Party is going to look
like next presidential election. But I keep hearing people like
smart people throughout AOC is the current front runner slash
base of the Democratic Party, and she probably is. Who
else doomed? They are doomed, doomed if that it was you,
(16:36):
that that go ahead, try it.
Speaker 1 (16:38):
I don't know who else would it be as a
rhetorical question, But the answer is a blue state governor
who's moderate.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Yeah, but it's got to be a human being so
that yeah, you're right, but it's got to be an
actual name.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
At some point, I mean, I could throw out a list,
but nobody. Nobody is talking about Bill Clinton. Hell, nobody
was talking about Bill Clinton even after.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
He entered the Uh.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
The only issue in which voters PERFERM or congressional Democrats
Republicans are healthcare and vaccine policy.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Good luck.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
Yeah, they are screwed by themselves. I'd self inflicted wound
a lot more on the way, hope you.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Can stay here for you missus seg Maco's podcast Arstrong
and Getty.
Speaker 9 (17:20):
By the way, I never went to the island and
Bill Clinton went there supposedly, uh twenty eight times.
Speaker 5 (17:35):
You expect me to believe that Bill Clinton went to
the island only twenty eight times?
Speaker 2 (17:44):
No way.
Speaker 5 (17:47):
I mean, if anybody had VIP Diamond Island status, there's
probably still parrots alive on that island going hey, Bill
back again?
Speaker 4 (17:59):
Paybene.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Interesting take from John Stewart on the whole Epstein thing.
Bill Clinton only went twenty eight times. Really, I find
that hard to believe. God, that is something twenty eight
visits to Epstein's island knowing I mean, you had to
have some idea that he was living life on the
(18:34):
edge of okay, h.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, water under the bridge. I guess that
I have a feeling a scumbag like Epstein would tell
people who would not approve of his more reprehensible activities,
Oh no, no, they're all eighteen. Absolutely, we carefully document that,
(19:01):
and then to anybody he knows is down.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
With the perversity, he'd say, yeah, they're eighteen and wink.
So you think Bill Clinton was going to the island
specifically to have sex with women? Why'd you say? Did
you just say that? Are you talking to me? Did
I imply that in any way? Yeah? No, Why do
you think he was going? I don't know.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
I've never thought about it for the party because it
was sexy.
Speaker 2 (19:29):
I don't know. I mean, do you assume everybody was
going there to have sex with women? I don't actually know.
I haven't spent much time looking into what the whole
Epstein Island thing was about. Right, I want to get
this on. I got random. None of this stuff holds together.
I just came across this Bill Maher on his Club
(19:52):
Random podcast the other day. Man, I started watching the
Billy Joel one that's worth watching. I haven't seen Billy
Joel's having quite the moment. I haven't seen the Billy
Joel documentary on HBO. But I did see the Billy
Joel interview hour and a half long interview with Bill
maher super interesting, really really good about writing songs and
all kinds of Yeah, it's something. But on his podcast
(20:17):
Club Random, the Bill Maherr thing I was just talking about,
Mars surprised listeners by saying Trump's early push for tariffs
wasn't as dumb as I thought. Turns out to coupling
from China has some bipartisan logic. Mar added, citing rising
public support for domestic manufacturing and national security concerns. There
are quite a few people, it seems, that are either
(20:37):
backtracking or keeping their mouths shut about how dumb the
whole araf thing is at this point, as we were
talking about earlier. Yeah, how it plays out, nobody knows. No.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
Got a great note from a listener, Alnonymous about the
Walmart thing that we've been talking about. Yeah, it'll take
twenty seconds, let me just do it. First of all,
he says some lovely things about the show.
Speaker 2 (20:59):
Thank you, sir. All They're all true.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
Per your conversation on Walmart eating the costs of tariffs,
it's not what you think. The company I work for
has been dealing with Walmart and other national retailers for many,
many years. Please understand that Walmart is not all caps
eating the majority of the tariff's costs, but in fact
demanding the vendor take on the brunt of these increases.
As an example, Walmart negotiated Slash demanded that we take
(21:23):
on over seventy percent of the tariff costs from China.
They know full well that most vendors cannot take the
loss in market share and revenue, and essentially strong arm
you into agreement. Our bottom line has taking a massive
hit this year primarily due to national retailers demands.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
But with the result being the same thing, they're trying
to drive lots of smaller businesses out of business, like
the final nail in the coffin. For anybody who's trying
to compete with Walmart and Amazon, well you could.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
Say they're just trying to keep their costs as low
as possible. Sure, I don't know why you had to
put it in such a Marxist, you know, faue predator context.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Now, I don't think it's you know, untoward it anyway.
I just think it's Ladimir Ilitch I think it's just
the reality of the more the world is right now.
Different topic we talked about AI earlier just came across
this poll. A majority of college students pursuing higher education
(22:23):
degrees UH sixty two percent to be specific, believe that
learning how to use AI responsibly is essential for their
future career and success. So almost two thirds of college
kids think they need to learn how to use AI
to make their way in the world. Are the other
third stupid? What I thought was interesting was ninety percent
(22:48):
already use it for general tasks, with nearly ninety percent
of students surveyed saying they use it for schoolwork and
more almost ninety percent. Is anybody else as perplexed as
I am?
Speaker 1 (23:00):
So you're using it right now, but a third of you,
a little more than a third of you don't think
you'll need it in the future.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
Well, the word responsibly was in there, so maybe that's what. Oh,
maybe they don't believe they need to learn how to
use AI responsibly. I don't know. I'm going to use
it irresponsibly, however I decide to use it.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
But going to design weaponry a bizarre breeding experience between
men and beasts?
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Whatever I can generating truly troubling porn ning it. I'm
somewhat late to joining AI, even though I talk about
it so much, I you know, downloading chat GPT and
other stuff. But seees college kids have been on it
for a while. Apparently ninety percent of them are using
it for their schoolwork and other stuff. Like I'm I
(23:44):
am committed right now to reading Ulysses. This is the
fifteenth time in my life I've committed to reading James
Joyce's Ulysses, often held up as the greatest work of
English literature of all time. It's very difficult read, but
with the help of chat GPT, it's a lot easier.
I come across something and I think, I wonder what
this means. I just type in the phrase and chat
(24:06):
GPT immediately gives me the short version of what it
is where it comes from. It's so a lot of work. Huh,
sounds like a lot of work. It is a lot
of work. I saw a funny video about reading Ulysses yesterday.
It said, Okay, here are these steps to reading Ulysses
so you can understand it. Step one, read the entire
(24:26):
Bible and understand it. Step two read all of Irish history,
folklore and mythology, and understand it. Check it's interest.
Speaker 1 (24:36):
So when I read my Miss Marvel Mysteries, it's you know,
you think it's the Gardener, then it turns out to
be the brother.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Oh it's a Step three was to read the entire
works of Shakespeare and memorize it. You have to do
all these things before you read Ulysses to be able
to understand it. Okay, that sounds fun, doesn't it. I
feel like I had one more thing I wanted to
get on, but I don't remember what it was. It
doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. I do have this,
(25:04):
which is really apropos of nothing. Something with feathers existed
two hundred and forty seven million years ago as a reptile.
They just discovered and found some new bones. I don't
know if I think I've talked about this on the air.
When we were at the Big Museum in New York,
the Natural History Museum, the one with all the dinosaurs
(25:24):
from those fun Night at the Museum movies, a lot
of the dinosaurs now have feathers, and I know they
didn't have feathers when I went there thirty years ago.
But like your t rexes have feathers on them. Now
they've completely changed their view on that.
Speaker 1 (25:38):
Yeah, it seems to be the you know, the accepted
view of scientists that the closest relatives to the dinosaurs
now on Earth are birds.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Birds are Yeah, the birds are continued to be done.
Don't get my son Henry started on this. He'll Sti'll
get out a piece of paper and a pen and
draw the entire lineage of everything and how this is
that and this broke off there and uh but yeah, interesting,
watched Jurassic Park and the dinosaurs aren't brightly colored with feathers.
You were just beinged to. I would turn off the
television or write a stern letter to Disney or whoever
(26:08):
made those movies. Yeah, yeah, guy, I would do that too.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
I have the idiotic would be controversy of the day
ready to go. I don't think it's gonna catch on,
and I think that's.
Speaker 2 (26:22):
Important, but you want to get ahead of it in
case it does.
Speaker 1 (26:27):
No, I want to point out that it seems like
it ought to be a good controversy, but the bloom
is off. The that s white supremacy rose, and.
Speaker 2 (26:39):
I hope you're right. I think it is We really
ought to get into the what Trump said about Israel
and Gaza and all that sort of stuff, and what
the world is saying. The world is very unhappy with
what they're calling a famine in genocide and all that
sort of stuff. We've got to address that at some point.
This could be certainly the big political story for the
(27:02):
next couple of days, or weeks or thousand years.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Stay with us, ladies and gentlemen. I give you the
lovely the sexy Sidney Sweeney.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Jeans are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining
traits like her color, personality, and even eye color.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
My jeens are blue.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Sydney Sweeney has great genes. I don't know that. I
don't know from Sydney Sweeney.
Speaker 1 (27:33):
America's beautiful blonde, skinny girl with big boobs. Sydney Sweeney, right,
is now in a gen's ad, as sexy girls often are.
And you heard the voiceover of her ad in which
she equivocates between jeans.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
With a G and jeans with a J.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
It makes various dopey jokes as she zips up her
jeans having apparently just been pantless, which I think is
supposed to turn me on anyway.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 1 (28:01):
Selling jeans, well, apparently the lefty internet tried to go
wild over them.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
The internet's mad. I hate it when the Internet gets mad.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
Like a blonde haired, blue eyed white woman talking about
her jeens is good and any appropriate?
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Well, the way to sell pants? What are you talking about?
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Some going so far as to outright call it Nazi propaganda.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (28:30):
I thought it was going to be like kind of bad,
but wow, that's going to be in history books. I
will be the friend that's two woke. But those Sydney
Sweeney American Eagle ads are weird, like fascist weird, like
Nazi propaganda weird.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
I must need to another user with multiple piercings. Yes,
would this make more sense to me if I saw
the ad? Or it is the reaction as dumb as
it sound. No, the second one.
Speaker 1 (28:52):
Okay, I mean she says my jeans are blue and
they show her blue eyes. But I mean she only
utters like twelve words in the whole thing. Let's see, like,
a blonde haired, blue eyed white woman is talking about
her good genes. This is Nazi propaganda. Another added blah
blah blah. This is pure nazi as blah blah blah. No, no,
some of you are trolls.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
But anybody who believes that on any level, wow, wow,
just relax.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
This is the sort of thing though, I'm telling you
that would have caught on in the mainstream media and
been questionable problematic five years ago, and now everybody's like, yeah, okay,
now that's now, we don't do that anymore. I think
it's a turning point, fake REVERSI won't get going, won't
(29:37):
get anywhere.
Speaker 2 (29:38):
It might sell some jeans. I just so Hansen played
the ad for me. I like the fact she's not
a super skinny chick, she's caravy. Yeah yeah, good for her.
I think I saw her on Sorday Alive. I think
she hosted once. Now that i've seen her, I recognize her.
But anyway, yes, whatever. So I know, it's so hard
to know when you're seeing your action. This stuff is
(30:00):
if it's just an attempt to be a troll, or
whoever's who's reporting the trolls, it's just an attempt to
get a controversy going so you can get some clicks,
or if anybody actually means anything, I don't know. I
don't even know anymore. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
On a similar topic, the Fabulous Andrews Styles of the
Free Beacon writing about the Democratic Party's male voter outreach,
and you may recall how Democrats and journalists described Hulk
Hogan's epic performance at the Republican convention as just awful, misogynist,
you know, toxic masculinity. Dana Bash on the Unwatchable and
(30:39):
Unwatched c n N referenced at weeks later at the
Democratic Convention, where she lavished praise on Tim Walls and
Doug Emhoff for their ability to speak to men out
there who might not want to be the sort of
testosterone lated, you know, gun toting kind of guy who
wants to listen to Hulk Hogan and the kay of
(31:00):
players that came out at the GOP convention.
Speaker 2 (31:02):
I don't know what she meant.
Speaker 1 (31:03):
By players, but there was a quote her colleague, Jake
Metrosexual Tapper agreed, citing unnamed critics who described the Republican
speaking lineup as testeroni testosteroni. Anyway, so let's check back
with the uh oh, I like this line. I'm sorry
after getting blown out with male voters who actually identify
as men, Democrats Finally, realized they had a problem doing
(31:27):
what comes naturally.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
Excuse me, my poor froat, doing what comes naturally.
Speaker 1 (31:34):
They formed a bunch of committees and hired some data
nerds and other so called experts to help them understand
why they're nagging. Lectures about toxic masculinity have failed to
resonate with normal straight men who cannot get pregnant.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
And so.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
On Wednesday, the Progress Action Fund This is a Democratic
pack hosted an online press briefing on how to win
back young men ahead of the twenty twenty six midterms.
They were joined in this online press briefing by Veronica Zell,
founder and CEO of Sweetie High, a website that bills
(32:09):
itself as the cultural destination for teen and tween girls.
We swear we aren't making this up. Here are a
random sample of sweety High headlines from the past week
or so. The best Instagram captions for all your cheerleading photos.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
Okay, that's andy.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
Japanese girl group Cosmosi discuss breaking through toxic love in
their new single, Why your hot girl tummy problems might
get worse in the summer heat, and what your favorite childhood.
Speaker 2 (32:39):
Doll reveals about you.
Speaker 1 (32:43):
This is the co host of the How to Win
Back Young Men ahead of the twenty twenty six midterms teleconference.
Speaker 2 (32:50):
Do hot girls have tummy problems? I'm gonna wear them
during the summer. Apparently they do. Yes, Yes, there are
more headlines similar to what we were talking about.
Speaker 1 (33:02):
Everything you wanted to know about the princess nail trend.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Wow, similar to what we were talking about earlier. That
AOC is the leading face of the Democratic Party. Go ahead,
go ahead, try that. Try this, Try having these people
give you advice on how to win back men to
your party. I wasn't like masculine enough in their vision.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
But this is anyone who's the mom of their friend
group will relate to these eleven truths. The mom of
their friend.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Group, Yeah, I'm familiar with that.
Speaker 1 (33:38):
But them's with their lowest favorability ratings in last thirty
five years.
Speaker 2 (33:43):
I wonder why I heard. I was driving to work today,
NPR was making reference to that genes commercial. I didn't
try to. I didn't quite catch on to what they
were talking about, So I don't know if they were
taking that seriously or not, the whole blue eyes Nazi thing.
Knowing PR, probably yeah, any people are.
Speaker 1 (34:06):
Parodies of yourself, and we are enjoying it very much,
and we encourage you to continue.
Speaker 2 (34:10):
Yeah, I can't tell how much. Is the world has
gotten just really intolerably intolerable or I've just grown out
of things that are just part of the normal cycles
of life, like the next new hot girl in a
gene ad that you know I've been. I've been as
opposed to Yeah, Brookshields fifty years ago and everything since
(34:32):
A right, right, you've lost the ability to feel joy.
I have lost. I'm incapable of experiencing joy. That is
exactly right. Yes, that is a good way to sum
me up. That would be my hinge profile. I'm incapable
of experiencing joy. Would you like to get together for
coffee sometime? I won't enjoy it, or you or anything else.
(34:56):
Wasn't Brookshields your soulmate? I feel like she could be.
We've never met I've never met her roughly the same age.
I've just always felt like we could be. But it's not
too late. She's married, very happily married for now. Wow.
So we do four hours every single day, a whole
bunch of different segments. If you missed any of it,
(35:18):
get our podcast. You should subscribe to Armstrong and Getty
on demand. That's the easiest way to do it. Subscribe
to Armstrong and Getty on demand. Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty.
Speaker 2 (00:10):
Arm Strong and Getty and he Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 3 (00:23):
President Trump riding high on his agreement with the European Union,
the block agreeing to pay fifteen percent tariffs across the board,
while opening their markets to American imports at zero percent,
and pledging to buy seven hundred and fifty billion in
American energy plus six hundred billion in private investment by
twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
So it's a little bit of the report on Trump's
big deal with the EU, which even some Trump Hayton
journalists say is a big win for the Trump administration.
Here's a little more from Jackie Heinrich of Fox and
it will bring stability, it will bring predictability.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
Frands's Prime Minister slamming the deal as opsided, posting it's
a dark day when an alliance of free peoples brought
together to affirm their common values and to defend their
common interests resigns itself to submission.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
Fifteen percent is not to be underestimated, but it is
the best we could get. But wasn't it or at least.
Trump's claim is it was unfair the other way before.
So when it was unfair the other way, you were
you're okay with it, you thought that was perfectly good.
But when we try to get it more even because
this isn't like, you know, when Trump's taken on some
(01:31):
of these tiny little countries whose GDP is less than Alabama.
I mean, this is the EU, which is when you
add it all together, is practically as big an economy
as US. So a couple play that Jim Kramer clip.
This was Jim Kramer on CNBC yesterday talking about the
current Trump economy.
Speaker 4 (01:51):
Our biggest problem is we have so much growth that
the Fed one cut what the.
Speaker 2 (01:56):
Oh my, oh my god, I'm so sorry. I think
it right? That take it right? Okay, it's a cable
with a cable with a ticker. Is no kind of
would take that back.
Speaker 5 (02:10):
That's really people doing live TV.
Speaker 2 (02:12):
Jim to your point. Okay, so he dropped an f
bum because he was talking about how great the economy is.
All the economic numbers are just pointing the right direction.
Ian Bremmer yesterday after this deal was made, Who's no
Trump fan? Said the Trump administration just secured a landmark
trade deal with the European Union, and it's Trump's biggest
win to date. Let me tell you why. And then
(02:32):
he went through the numbers of why this is a
huge victory for the Trump administration and for America. That's something.
And I just saw a consumer confidence is way up
from previous months because apparently people people like me barely
paying attention to the tariff thing and not understanding it
at all, feel like, huh, I guess it isn't going
to be a disaster. People are feeling that way right
(02:55):
now anyway. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I love Jared Gerard Baker, who race for the Wall
Street Journal. His headline is, if Trump's tariffs are so bad,
where's the recession?
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Right?
Speaker 1 (03:06):
And and he he lists three possibilities, as I recall,
including first, it's too early to tell. Most of the
tariffs announced haven't been in place very long, if at all,
and so we'll just have to.
Speaker 2 (03:21):
See what happens.
Speaker 1 (03:24):
The average tariff paid by importers has indeed risen sharply,
which leads us to the second possibility. The tariffs thus
far have just not been big enough to cause the
harm economists warned us about. So everybody's taken a tiny
little hit, shared the pain, et cetera.
Speaker 2 (03:40):
Jim Kramer seemed to be enthusiastic, and Ian Bremmer enthusiastics.
They must I don't know. They don't think this is
gonna the bad, the bad part's gonna happen. I don't know.
Speaker 1 (03:49):
Well, and Baker says third tantalizingly, perhaps the conventional wisdom
is wrong, or, more precisely, since no one can deny
the effective taxes are real, perhaps and the rush to
emphasize the negative account have overlooked the countervailing forces at
work with tariffs. The redistribution of the burden of duties
between foreign exporters, US importers and consumers may be reordering
the balance of benefit between domestic and foreign businesses and
(04:12):
between companies and consumers. It's kind of a word salad
and sophisticated stuff, But.
Speaker 2 (04:19):
We just don't know how it'll play out at this point.
So Howard Lutnik, often I think, is an overly enthusiastic
cheerleader for things in the Trump administration. But what he
says here matches up with you know, a couple of
people have already mentioned who aren't fans of Trump saying
this is a good deal and a big deal.
Speaker 6 (04:37):
Here he is, I just flew back from Scotland, and
wow with that deal, it's so amazing for America.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Why is it so great for America?
Speaker 7 (04:46):
Well, remember, the European Union is twenty trillion dollar economy,
four hundred and fifty million people. I mean, it is
head and shoulders bigger than all the other Western civilizations.
So the fact is the European Union is the monster deal.
President Trump did that deal.
Speaker 2 (05:05):
Yesterday.
Speaker 6 (05:05):
We were all together in Scotland. We got the deal done.
Speaker 2 (05:11):
Yeah, that's well, we'll see how it plays out. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Part of the reason I'm not like crazy into this
is that it's all fairly short term because the next
administration can take a completely different approach to it. And honestly,
if things start to look ugly, this administration can completely
change their sales and tear up the agreement. I mean
Trump's deal is and this is an oversimplification, but you
(05:38):
will pay fifteen percent tariffs to access the US market.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
We will pay non taxes to your market. It's just bullying.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Because we're such a big superpower economically speaking, the Euros
have no choice but to go with it, which you know,
may cause damage. I don't know, but that could all
change if the economy heads south. Trump could say yeah,
this is not working never mind, which is part of
the reason a lot of people are uncomfortable with this
much power to tax, because the tariff.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
Is one hundred percent of tax.
Speaker 1 (06:11):
This much power to tax being granted to the executive,
it's it's a bit perverse constitutionally.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Yeah, well that yeah, that's its own different topic. But yeah,
it is amazing that one guy can can can up
end world the world economy like this.
Speaker 1 (06:28):
But anyway, to wrap up the discussion, at least from
my end, a lot of people seem to really really
want one outcome or the other. Howard Lutnek and company
wanted to be great for America. The media wants it
to be terrible, and they want to indict Trump. I'm
just curious.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
Yeah, and I hope it works out. I don't. I
don't root against anything working out for the economy for
political reasons. I hope it works out. I hope we
all get rich. Couple of things green energy wise before
we take a break, that I thought were interesting. You
mentioned the other day how the price of electric vehicles
(07:06):
and where they are and everything like that, Like there's
a whole bunch of used electric vehicles out there that
people aren't as interested in as they were a couple
of years ago. And the big tax credit that you
used to get on buying a new electric vehicles going away,
So the whole electric car thing could change a lot
(07:27):
in the next six months or so. And fitting in
with that, I came across this graph of where people
are on the whole climate change thing in general, the
share of voters who are very concerned about climate change.
I was thinking about where I would I be myself.
I'm pretty close to not concerned at all. I'm close
(07:49):
to zero on climate change. I never think about it
at all. I don't worried about it. I don't worry
about it. I never worry about it. So I think
I'm close to a zero concern on climate change.
Speaker 1 (08:03):
Uh yeah, yeah, I would agree. I just there's nothing
I could do about it. The weather changes all the time.
If it gets hotter, I'll sell my coats and buy shirts.
Speaker 2 (08:13):
But for people who are very concerned, it has been
dropping year by year for a while now. I mean
it had its peak shortly after al Gore and the
hockey stick in the movie Inconvenient Truth and all that
sort of stuff, And it's been dropping little by little
for all voters. It is now at thirty seven percent
very concerned. You wouldn't get that from taking in the media,
(08:35):
would you, Because everybody in the media is in that
thirty seven percent. Everybody in academics is in that thirty
seven percent, Caldy, And I'll bet the rest skew very
very young. Yeah, and all the experts come from that
thirty seven percent. But thirty seven percent of voters are
very concerned about climate change, So obviously you do not
think it's an existential threat to human beings even being
(08:59):
alive on the planet. If if you're not in the
very concerned camp, I would assume right right, Sure. Yeah,
for Democrats it's even down to fifty eight percent, and
it was way high, not that many years ago.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
And I'll bet a chunk of that fifty eight percent
is tribal signaling. Sure they might harbor secret doubts, but
you're not. And we did a great feature on this
a few with all due modesty last week or something
like that, that in certain social settings, including social settings
where only one set of beliefs is allowed, and everybody,
(09:33):
lets you know what those beliefs are. Hello, sound familiar.
Any questioning, never mind dissent. Just saying hey, this strikes
me as odd I have questions is frowned upon so
thoroughly people are taught to just shut up. So I'll
bet there's a lot of people who are thinking. You know,
a lot of people seem to be making a ton
of money and the promises never get kept and nothing
(09:54):
has affected anything, but they don't dare say it.
Speaker 2 (09:58):
But so Democrats are propping the that low number up anyway,
So overall thirty seven percent, Democrats are at fifty eight
because Republicans are eighteen percent very concerned, and I'm shocked
that that's high, because again I'm a zero. Independents are
down to thirty six percent. There's a big chunk of
America that just what are you gonna do? China's building
(10:20):
coal plants every day, What are you going to do?
Speaker 1 (10:22):
I have a feeling that's at least a factor in
the fact that the Democratic Party has hit a thirty
five year low approval writing with American voters, according to
a New Wall Street Journal poll, which is very very
similar to another couple of polls that had come out recently.
Speaker 2 (10:37):
So it takes you back to nineteen ninety right coming
out of the Reagan era. Wow, lost to Reagan twice
and then the third Reagan term of HW Bush.
Speaker 1 (10:49):
In fact, it was, if I'm correct, right around the time,
is this right that Hillary Clinton was getting so much
derision for trying to get hillary Care through in the
UH and Newt Gingrich absolutely walloped the Democrats in the
mid term, and it looked like Clinton couldn't possibly get reelected.
Speaker 2 (11:07):
Then he did.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
But yeah, yeah, thirty five year low approval rating of
a third well, and then a zoftig chick decided to
ply her skills to a president and that helped him politically.
Speaker 2 (11:22):
It helped him. Yeah, it's not the reading of history
most people have that the overreach for the impeachment helped Clinton.
Speaker 4 (11:30):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Yeah, I suppose so. I think that's the belief at
this point. Yeah, I'm not sure.
Speaker 1 (11:34):
I you know, trace the whole comeback back to the
chick who plied her skills.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
That was a good sentence though. Okay, I do want
to talk about the famine. I'm using my finger quotes
that all your world organizations declared today that is going
on in Gaza and the response of the media to
that and Trump to that, and uh, how about it's
(12:00):
all going to play it, among other things on the way,
stay here, Armstrong, Andyetty.
Speaker 8 (12:06):
Eight months after the election, Democrats are still trying to
dig themselves out of a hole, but a new poll
from the Wall Street Journal paints a bleak picture. It
reveals only thirty three percent of registered voters today view
Democrats favorably, while a staggering sixty three percent see them negatively.
(12:26):
That's the worst rating from the same poll since nineteen ninety.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Yes We're.
Speaker 1 (12:34):
At Sayisha Hasny on special report last night with Brett
Brett Bear Fox News Slash so Yes analysis. In a moment,
I found this next segment pretty interesting, though, go ahead, Aisha.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
We're in the dog house yet again. We certainly do
have a problem, and it's a messaging problem.
Speaker 8 (12:53):
If messaging is the problem, the new poll signals Democrats
attacking President Trump isn't working at least yet. That's because
even when more voters disapprove of Trump on issues like inflation,
they still trust congressional Republicans more than Democrats to handle
that issue by a whopping ten points on immigration the
(13:15):
same thing. More voters disapprove of Trump's handling of the matter,
but Republicans once again are trusted more than Democrats to
manage it.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
I don't know. I don't know if I believe this
analysis that people have been going with. I think it's
the crazy factor. It's the uh, I don't know. You've
got a friend who does a few things that are
just so crazy you don't trust his judgment on anything else.
I think that's what's driving it. It's not that. Yeah,
(13:46):
the Democrats' view of the economy is specifically blah blah blah.
It said.
Speaker 4 (13:51):
You're the people that want boys play girls' sports. You're
the people that want me to say LATINEX. You're the
people that think we shouldn't have police. I don't trust
you on anything. I think it's the crazy factor. Yeah,
you put a grown man in my little girl's locker room.
Yeah exactly.
Speaker 1 (14:06):
But to her point though, and it's not in contrast
to your point, it's agreeing with it. So like on
inflation and rising prices, Trump is eleven points underwater, okay,
but the Republicans in general are ten points to the positive.
So what Trump's doing right now. On immigration, these sees
(14:30):
just three points underwater, but generally speaking Republicans that are
Democrats seventeen point advantage for Republicans. So there are momentarily
momentary quibbles with the way Trump is approaching this, that
or the other, but in terms of general philosophy that
I don't care. I want the Republicans, which again I
(14:52):
don't think disagrees with your point.
Speaker 2 (14:53):
I think it agrees with it.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
Why do they have that percep or why do they
lean so strongly that way? Because I think the Democrats
have lost their effing mind. Let's see, So the Democrats
are thirty three percent favorable, sixty three percent unfavorable, far
weaker assessment than voters give to either President Trump or
(15:16):
the Republican Party. Yeah, they're underwater, but of course political
parties ought to be underwater.
Speaker 2 (15:21):
Number when you got their opponents, and number two you got.
Speaker 1 (15:25):
Neutrals or independents and their own party members who'd like
them to change.
Speaker 2 (15:29):
What they're doing a little bit.
Speaker 1 (15:30):
But anyway, Trump is seven percent underwater and Republicans are
eleven percent underwater. But again keep in mind, the Democrats
are thirty points underwater.
Speaker 2 (15:41):
Yeah, as always that number of people that are unhappy
with the Democrats. It's a certain chunk who think they're crazy,
like I was just talking about, and a certain chunk,
smaller chunk, but a certain chunk that thinks they haven't
gone far enough, they haven't stuck to their guns on
trans issues and defunding the police and climate change and
all the other important things.
Speaker 1 (15:58):
Which is even worse new really, but a mere eight
percent of voters view the Democrats very favorably, two and
a half times as many have the same level of
enthusiasm for the GOP.
Speaker 2 (16:13):
I we got a long way to go on what direction?
You know what the Democratic Party is going to look
like next presidential election. But I keep hearing people like
smart people throughout AOC is the current front runner slash
base of the Democratic Party, and she probably is. Who
else doomed? They are doomed, doomed if that it was you,
(16:36):
that that go ahead, try it.
Speaker 1 (16:38):
I don't know who else would it be as a
rhetorical question, But the answer is a blue state governor
who's moderate.
Speaker 2 (16:44):
Yeah, but it's got to be a human being so
that yeah, you're right, but it's got to be an
actual name.
Speaker 1 (16:48):
At some point, I mean, I could throw out a list,
but nobody. Nobody is talking about Bill Clinton. Hell, nobody
was talking about Bill Clinton even after.
Speaker 2 (16:56):
He entered the Uh.
Speaker 1 (16:58):
The only issue in which voters PERFERM or congressional Democrats
Republicans are healthcare and vaccine policy.
Speaker 2 (17:07):
Good luck.
Speaker 1 (17:08):
Yeah, they are screwed by themselves. I'd self inflicted wound
a lot more on the way, hope you.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
Can stay here for you missus seg Maco's podcast Arstrong
and Getty.
Speaker 9 (17:20):
By the way, I never went to the island and
Bill Clinton went there supposedly, uh twenty eight times.
Speaker 5 (17:35):
You expect me to believe that Bill Clinton went to
the island only twenty eight times?
Speaker 2 (17:44):
No way.
Speaker 5 (17:47):
I mean, if anybody had VIP Diamond Island status, there's
probably still parrots alive on that island going hey, Bill
back again?
Speaker 4 (17:59):
Paybene.
Speaker 2 (18:11):
Interesting take from John Stewart on the whole Epstein thing.
Bill Clinton only went twenty eight times. Really, I find
that hard to believe. God, that is something twenty eight
visits to Epstein's island knowing I mean, you had to
have some idea that he was living life on the
(18:34):
edge of okay, h.
Speaker 1 (18:37):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, water under the bridge. I guess that
I have a feeling a scumbag like Epstein would tell
people who would not approve of his more reprehensible activities,
Oh no, no, they're all eighteen. Absolutely, we carefully document that,
(19:01):
and then to anybody he knows is down.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
With the perversity, he'd say, yeah, they're eighteen and wink.
So you think Bill Clinton was going to the island
specifically to have sex with women? Why'd you say? Did
you just say that? Are you talking to me? Did
I imply that in any way? Yeah? No, Why do
you think he was going? I don't know.
Speaker 1 (19:25):
I've never thought about it for the party because it
was sexy.
Speaker 2 (19:29):
I don't know. I mean, do you assume everybody was
going there to have sex with women? I don't actually know.
I haven't spent much time looking into what the whole
Epstein Island thing was about. Right, I want to get
this on. I got random. None of this stuff holds together.
I just came across this Bill Maher on his Club
(19:52):
Random podcast the other day. Man, I started watching the
Billy Joel one that's worth watching. I haven't seen Billy
Joel's having quite the moment. I haven't seen the Billy
Joel documentary on HBO. But I did see the Billy
Joel interview hour and a half long interview with Bill
maher super interesting, really really good about writing songs and
all kinds of Yeah, it's something. But on his podcast
(20:17):
Club Random, the Bill Maherr thing I was just talking about,
Mars surprised listeners by saying Trump's early push for tariffs
wasn't as dumb as I thought. Turns out to coupling
from China has some bipartisan logic. Mar added, citing rising
public support for domestic manufacturing and national security concerns. There
are quite a few people, it seems, that are either
(20:37):
backtracking or keeping their mouths shut about how dumb the
whole araf thing is at this point, as we were
talking about earlier. Yeah, how it plays out, nobody knows. No.
Speaker 1 (20:47):
Got a great note from a listener, Alnonymous about the
Walmart thing that we've been talking about. Yeah, it'll take
twenty seconds, let me just do it. First of all,
he says some lovely things about the show.
Speaker 2 (20:59):
Thank you, sir. All They're all true.
Speaker 1 (21:01):
Per your conversation on Walmart eating the costs of tariffs,
it's not what you think. The company I work for
has been dealing with Walmart and other national retailers for many,
many years. Please understand that Walmart is not all caps
eating the majority of the tariff's costs, but in fact
demanding the vendor take on the brunt of these increases.
As an example, Walmart negotiated Slash demanded that we take
(21:23):
on over seventy percent of the tariff costs from China.
They know full well that most vendors cannot take the
loss in market share and revenue, and essentially strong arm
you into agreement. Our bottom line has taking a massive
hit this year primarily due to national retailers demands.
Speaker 2 (21:38):
But with the result being the same thing, they're trying
to drive lots of smaller businesses out of business, like
the final nail in the coffin. For anybody who's trying
to compete with Walmart and Amazon, well you could.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
Say they're just trying to keep their costs as low
as possible. Sure, I don't know why you had to
put it in such a Marxist, you know, faue predator context.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Now, I don't think it's you know, untoward it anyway.
I just think it's Ladimir Ilitch I think it's just
the reality of the more the world is right now.
Different topic we talked about AI earlier just came across
this poll. A majority of college students pursuing higher education
(22:23):
degrees UH sixty two percent to be specific, believe that
learning how to use AI responsibly is essential for their
future career and success. So almost two thirds of college
kids think they need to learn how to use AI
to make their way in the world. Are the other
third stupid? What I thought was interesting was ninety percent
(22:48):
already use it for general tasks, with nearly ninety percent
of students surveyed saying they use it for schoolwork and
more almost ninety percent. Is anybody else as perplexed as
I am?
Speaker 1 (23:00):
So you're using it right now, but a third of you,
a little more than a third of you don't think
you'll need it in the future.
Speaker 2 (23:07):
Well, the word responsibly was in there, so maybe that's what. Oh,
maybe they don't believe they need to learn how to
use AI responsibly. I don't know. I'm going to use
it irresponsibly, however I decide to use it.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
But going to design weaponry a bizarre breeding experience between
men and beasts?
Speaker 2 (23:24):
Whatever I can generating truly troubling porn ning it. I'm
somewhat late to joining AI, even though I talk about
it so much, I you know, downloading chat GPT and
other stuff. But seees college kids have been on it
for a while. Apparently ninety percent of them are using
it for their schoolwork and other stuff. Like I'm I
(23:44):
am committed right now to reading Ulysses. This is the
fifteenth time in my life I've committed to reading James
Joyce's Ulysses, often held up as the greatest work of
English literature of all time. It's very difficult read, but
with the help of chat GPT, it's a lot easier.
I come across something and I think, I wonder what
this means. I just type in the phrase and chat
(24:06):
GPT immediately gives me the short version of what it
is where it comes from. It's so a lot of work. Huh,
sounds like a lot of work. It is a lot
of work. I saw a funny video about reading Ulysses yesterday.
It said, Okay, here are these steps to reading Ulysses
so you can understand it. Step one, read the entire
(24:26):
Bible and understand it. Step two read all of Irish history,
folklore and mythology, and understand it. Check it's interest.
Speaker 1 (24:36):
So when I read my Miss Marvel Mysteries, it's you know,
you think it's the Gardener, then it turns out to
be the brother.
Speaker 2 (24:44):
Oh it's a Step three was to read the entire
works of Shakespeare and memorize it. You have to do
all these things before you read Ulysses to be able
to understand it. Okay, that sounds fun, doesn't it. I
feel like I had one more thing I wanted to
get on, but I don't remember what it was. It
doesn't matter. It just doesn't matter. I do have this,
(25:04):
which is really apropos of nothing. Something with feathers existed
two hundred and forty seven million years ago as a reptile.
They just discovered and found some new bones. I don't
know if I think I've talked about this on the air.
When we were at the Big Museum in New York,
the Natural History Museum, the one with all the dinosaurs
(25:24):
from those fun Night at the Museum movies, a lot
of the dinosaurs now have feathers, and I know they
didn't have feathers when I went there thirty years ago.
But like your t rexes have feathers on them. Now
they've completely changed their view on that.
Speaker 1 (25:38):
Yeah, it seems to be the you know, the accepted
view of scientists that the closest relatives to the dinosaurs
now on Earth are birds.
Speaker 2 (25:47):
Birds are Yeah, the birds are continued to be done.
Don't get my son Henry started on this. He'll Sti'll
get out a piece of paper and a pen and
draw the entire lineage of everything and how this is
that and this broke off there and uh but yeah, interesting,
watched Jurassic Park and the dinosaurs aren't brightly colored with feathers.
You were just beinged to. I would turn off the
television or write a stern letter to Disney or whoever
(26:08):
made those movies. Yeah, yeah, guy, I would do that too.
Speaker 1 (26:12):
I have the idiotic would be controversy of the day
ready to go. I don't think it's gonna catch on,
and I think that's.
Speaker 2 (26:22):
Important, but you want to get ahead of it in
case it does.
Speaker 1 (26:27):
No, I want to point out that it seems like
it ought to be a good controversy, but the bloom
is off. The that s white supremacy rose, and.
Speaker 2 (26:39):
I hope you're right. I think it is We really
ought to get into the what Trump said about Israel
and Gaza and all that sort of stuff, and what
the world is saying. The world is very unhappy with
what they're calling a famine in genocide and all that
sort of stuff. We've got to address that at some point.
This could be certainly the big political story for the
(27:02):
next couple of days, or weeks or thousand years.
Speaker 1 (27:04):
Stay with us, ladies and gentlemen. I give you the
lovely the sexy Sidney Sweeney.
Speaker 2 (27:14):
Jeans are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining
traits like her color, personality, and even eye color.
Speaker 1 (27:24):
My jeens are blue.
Speaker 2 (27:26):
Sydney Sweeney has great genes. I don't know that. I
don't know from Sydney Sweeney.
Speaker 1 (27:33):
America's beautiful blonde, skinny girl with big boobs. Sydney Sweeney, right,
is now in a gen's ad, as sexy girls often are.
And you heard the voiceover of her ad in which
she equivocates between jeans.
Speaker 2 (27:49):
With a G and jeans with a J.
Speaker 1 (27:52):
It makes various dopey jokes as she zips up her
jeans having apparently just been pantless, which I think is
supposed to turn me on anyway.
Speaker 2 (28:00):
Blah blah blah.
Speaker 1 (28:01):
Selling jeans, well, apparently the lefty internet tried to go
wild over them.
Speaker 2 (28:10):
The internet's mad. I hate it when the Internet gets mad.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
Like a blonde haired, blue eyed white woman talking about
her jeens is good and any appropriate?
Speaker 2 (28:20):
Well, the way to sell pants? What are you talking about?
Speaker 1 (28:25):
Some going so far as to outright call it Nazi propaganda.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
Wow.
Speaker 1 (28:30):
I thought it was going to be like kind of bad,
but wow, that's going to be in history books. I
will be the friend that's two woke. But those Sydney
Sweeney American Eagle ads are weird, like fascist weird, like
Nazi propaganda weird.
Speaker 2 (28:42):
I must need to another user with multiple piercings. Yes,
would this make more sense to me if I saw
the ad? Or it is the reaction as dumb as
it sound. No, the second one.
Speaker 1 (28:52):
Okay, I mean she says my jeans are blue and
they show her blue eyes. But I mean she only
utters like twelve words in the whole thing. Let's see, like,
a blonde haired, blue eyed white woman is talking about
her good genes. This is Nazi propaganda. Another added blah
blah blah. This is pure nazi as blah blah blah. No, no,
some of you are trolls.
Speaker 2 (29:11):
But anybody who believes that on any level, wow, wow,
just relax.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
This is the sort of thing though, I'm telling you
that would have caught on in the mainstream media and
been questionable problematic five years ago, and now everybody's like, yeah, okay,
now that's now, we don't do that anymore. I think
it's a turning point, fake REVERSI won't get going, won't
(29:37):
get anywhere.
Speaker 2 (29:38):
It might sell some jeans. I just so Hansen played
the ad for me. I like the fact she's not
a super skinny chick, she's caravy. Yeah yeah, good for her.
I think I saw her on Sorday Alive. I think
she hosted once. Now that i've seen her, I recognize her.
But anyway, yes, whatever. So I know, it's so hard
to know when you're seeing your action. This stuff is
(30:00):
if it's just an attempt to be a troll, or
whoever's who's reporting the trolls, it's just an attempt to
get a controversy going so you can get some clicks,
or if anybody actually means anything, I don't know. I
don't even know anymore. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
On a similar topic, the Fabulous Andrews Styles of the
Free Beacon writing about the Democratic Party's male voter outreach,
and you may recall how Democrats and journalists described Hulk
Hogan's epic performance at the Republican convention as just awful, misogynist,
you know, toxic masculinity. Dana Bash on the Unwatchable and
(30:39):
Unwatched c n N referenced at weeks later at the
Democratic Convention, where she lavished praise on Tim Walls and
Doug Emhoff for their ability to speak to men out
there who might not want to be the sort of
testosterone lated, you know, gun toting kind of guy who
wants to listen to Hulk Hogan and the kay of
(31:00):
players that came out at the GOP convention.
Speaker 2 (31:02):
I don't know what she meant.
Speaker 1 (31:03):
By players, but there was a quote her colleague, Jake
Metrosexual Tapper agreed, citing unnamed critics who described the Republican
speaking lineup as testeroni testosteroni. Anyway, so let's check back
with the uh oh, I like this line. I'm sorry
after getting blown out with male voters who actually identify
as men, Democrats Finally, realized they had a problem doing
(31:27):
what comes naturally.
Speaker 2 (31:28):
Excuse me, my poor froat, doing what comes naturally.
Speaker 1 (31:34):
They formed a bunch of committees and hired some data
nerds and other so called experts to help them understand
why they're nagging. Lectures about toxic masculinity have failed to
resonate with normal straight men who cannot get pregnant.
Speaker 2 (31:47):
And so.
Speaker 1 (31:48):
On Wednesday, the Progress Action Fund This is a Democratic
pack hosted an online press briefing on how to win
back young men ahead of the twenty twenty six midterms.
They were joined in this online press briefing by Veronica Zell,
founder and CEO of Sweetie High, a website that bills
(32:09):
itself as the cultural destination for teen and tween girls.
We swear we aren't making this up. Here are a
random sample of sweety High headlines from the past week
or so. The best Instagram captions for all your cheerleading photos.
Speaker 2 (32:25):
Okay, that's andy.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
Japanese girl group Cosmosi discuss breaking through toxic love in
their new single, Why your hot girl tummy problems might
get worse in the summer heat, and what your favorite childhood.
Speaker 2 (32:39):
Doll reveals about you.
Speaker 1 (32:43):
This is the co host of the How to Win
Back Young Men ahead of the twenty twenty six midterms teleconference.
Speaker 2 (32:50):
Do hot girls have tummy problems? I'm gonna wear them
during the summer. Apparently they do. Yes, Yes, there are
more headlines similar to what we were talking about.
Speaker 1 (33:02):
Everything you wanted to know about the princess nail trend.
Speaker 2 (33:06):
Wow, similar to what we were talking about earlier. That
AOC is the leading face of the Democratic Party. Go ahead,
go ahead, try that. Try this, Try having these people
give you advice on how to win back men to
your party. I wasn't like masculine enough in their vision.
Speaker 1 (33:26):
But this is anyone who's the mom of their friend
group will relate to these eleven truths. The mom of
their friend.
Speaker 2 (33:35):
Group, Yeah, I'm familiar with that.
Speaker 1 (33:38):
But them's with their lowest favorability ratings in last thirty
five years.
Speaker 2 (33:43):
I wonder why I heard. I was driving to work today,
NPR was making reference to that genes commercial. I didn't
try to. I didn't quite catch on to what they
were talking about, So I don't know if they were
taking that seriously or not, the whole blue eyes Nazi thing.
Knowing PR, probably yeah, any people are.
Speaker 1 (34:06):
Parodies of yourself, and we are enjoying it very much,
and we encourage you to continue.
Speaker 2 (34:10):
Yeah, I can't tell how much. Is the world has
gotten just really intolerably intolerable or I've just grown out
of things that are just part of the normal cycles
of life, like the next new hot girl in a
gene ad that you know I've been. I've been as
opposed to Yeah, Brookshields fifty years ago and everything since
(34:32):
A right, right, you've lost the ability to feel joy.
I have lost. I'm incapable of experiencing joy. That is
exactly right. Yes, that is a good way to sum
me up. That would be my hinge profile. I'm incapable
of experiencing joy. Would you like to get together for
coffee sometime? I won't enjoy it, or you or anything else.
(34:56):
Wasn't Brookshields your soulmate? I feel like she could be.
We've never met I've never met her roughly the same age.
I've just always felt like we could be. But it's not
too late. She's married, very happily married for now. Wow.
So we do four hours every single day, a whole
bunch of different segments. If you missed any of it,
(35:18):
get our podcast. You should subscribe to Armstrong and Getty
on demand. That's the easiest way to do it. Subscribe
to Armstrong and Getty on demand. Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
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.