March 18, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 4 of A&G features...
- Who is the leader of the Democrat party?
- Tracy Morgan vomit update
- Trump derangement syndrome & reinforcing distorted thinking
- 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 Getty. Arm Strong
and Jetty, I know he arms strong and Yetty.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
We talk to our Republican colleagues all the time. I
talked to them all in the gym. When you're a
sixty year old on a bike panting in your shorts,
the inhibitions sort of fall away.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
You know, I'm not here to posture shame, but for
a guy who seems to be spending most of his
life in the gym, a little less talk, you talk
a little more core. Second of all, in the gym,
they're only being agreeable with you.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Christ. They don't eaves him alone in the gym on
the stationary bike.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Oh sure, Chuck, I'm definitely gonna do that. But I
have to tell you something. Peddling really hard and not
going anywhere. It's a great metaphor for the Democratic Party
right now.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Also Bocrat. So a couple of reasons. I wanted to
play that clip from John Stewart last night, who's a
Democrat and got a Democrat audience. There they are mocking
maybe the most visibly powerful person in the Democratic Party. Now,
I mean, you keep hearing about how leaderless they are
because there's not a single voice like was Nancy Pelosi
(01:42):
for years or Barack Obama or Bill Clinton or whoever.
There just isn't in. Chuck Schumer's as close to it
as they've got, and they're mocking him endlessly and laughing
at him. I just saw him up on the CBS
Early Show today, that whole posture thing. God, he is
a bent over old man. Yeah, olllow.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
Did you see that poll of who is the leader
of the Democratic Party that somebody did recently might have
been ANBC.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
It was a series of people with sevens and eights. Well, yeah,
that's what I would say. From Kamala to.
Speaker 4 (02:15):
And AOC at ten, AOC was the had the not
the majority of plurality, but barely barely in a sea
of of of midgets.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
Right, Yeah, so there's nobody that's really the leader. But
I'd say AOC is the very top. And I don't
mean that in any sort of like disparaging way, just
in terms of news coverage and the ability to get
attention and whatever. She's she's clearly at the very top.
Far dreamier eyes than Chuck Schumer, too, So I just
(02:49):
thought that was kind of funny or interesting. See what's
going to emerge out of that party. I have no
idea something will. Somebody's gonna come along. Maybe it's Josh
Shapiro from Pennsylvania. I mean, I keep mentioning in this
book I read about I'm reading about uh Carter in
the peace process in the seventies. He came out of
freaking nowhere. He was on nobody's radar shortly before the
(03:12):
presidential election in seventy six, he was barely on anybody's
radar in Georgia, let alone anywhere else in the country.
So there's there could be somebody out there that hits
the scene and it's like, whoa, here's our leader. Nice,
So gonna be me, Gavin Newsom, have you heard I'm
a moderate? Now well? Sort of The point is it's
often often not the people they throw out, the Rudy Judiani's,
(03:35):
the Ted Kennedy's, the whoever the well known name. It's somebody. Yeah,
it's a somebody you don't know, and just all of
a sudden, anyway, that's enough of that. Uh first, a
dumb story before we get to a significant story. I
think this is a dumb story. Trump announced he will
release thousands of documents related to the jfk assassination. He
(03:57):
did not provide additional I'm reading from the New York Times.
He did not provide additional details on what the trove
of files would include, because it ain't gonna include much,
but he has long promised to release them unredacted. I'm
all for that. I think it's cool. I got to
imagine there'll be some interesting tidbits in there, but I
don't expect to. It was the mob. Look right here,
(04:17):
they've got John Cotty Gotti on the phone ordering the
hit or something, right right, I don't expect anything like that.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
I think there could be some historically really interesting stuff.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
I agree, I agree. I don't think it's like the
smoking gun, per se. No eighty thousand pages are going
to be released. I think it's just a good swipe
at we keep too many things secret for too long.
Give me any reason whatsoever there should be eighty thousand
pages of government paperwork on the jfk assassination sixty two
(04:55):
years later that the American people don't get to see
about their own government. There's no argument whatsoever. They just
a government likes to keep things secret. It gives them
more power. You know. I could see for a certain
amount of time.
Speaker 4 (05:12):
If the British m I five was or six or
whatever the MII is, if they were involved somehow or other,
and we had to keep that cool.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
Okay, sources and methods. It's many years you got anything
like that, if it would include a quote from somebody
you didn't know was a spy, you know, from the
MI five aware. Yeah, but no, that makes no sense
to keep it a secret. It's just part of the whole.
We're in charge, you know, we we we keep the
power the information among ourselves. Don't like it. So the
(05:43):
National Archives and Records Administration has said that the government
has already released ninety nine percent of the roughly two hundred,
three hundred and twenty thousand documents that have been reviewed
since nineteen ninety two. So that makes me think it's
going to be more interesting. I mean, out of all
all of those documents, I why did you keep this
one percent back? It's got to be something somewhat interesting
(06:06):
in there. Can we at least characterize it somehow? Why
why is it held back in? What sort of stuff
is it that doesn't seem unreasonable. Well, we're gonna find
out in a couple of days because it's coming out.
Here's the other thing, and more important, Trump and Putin
are on the phone right now, I guess discussing how
(06:29):
to handle that whole thing. And one thing I know
Putin doesn't really like the idea is a bunch of
NATO troops in Ukraine. But that's the plan at least
currently from the UK. A significant number of countries are
willing to provide troops in Ukraine when there's a peace
deal with Russia, a spokesman from the British Prime Minister
Heir Starmer said yesterday Britain and France have led the
(06:52):
efforts for this whole peacekeeping plan that Trump obviously kicked off.
More than thirty countries are expected to be involved in
what they're calling the Coalition of the Willing, a phrase
going back to the Iraq War, to support Ukraine. Starmer's
spokesperson told reporters yesterday the contribution capabilities will vary, of course,
(07:13):
but this will be a significant force, with a significant
number of countries providing troops. Reuters goes on to say
Russia has repeatedly rejected the idea of soldiers from countries
belonging to the NATO military allianes being stationed in Ukraine.
I mean he has said that's a non starter, but uh,
thirty countries involved in a coalition of the willing, including many,
(07:37):
many troops, is the plan from Europe.
Speaker 4 (07:42):
Putin will find a way either to say no outright
or hear Lavrov will say, you know, I can see
that sort of thing working. I like the broad outlines
of it. Of course, we'll need forty percent of Ukraine,
including of course Crimea, and and we get to keep Georgia,
and NATO also disarms the Baltic States and Germany, you know,
(08:09):
stops manufacturing BMW.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
He'll just have a crazy, huge ask while.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
Simultaneously saying yes, yes, I think that's a great idea.
He's not going to accept that many, that many essentially
NATO troops in Ukraine, I don't think unless he gets
again a huge ask.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Granted I left out my favorite part of this article.
Asked if the peace keeping troops would be allowed to
fire back if targeted. The spokesperson said military planning meetings
were taking place to go through the details. Now, if
you can't answer that question with of course they will.
Why else would they be there, right? Otherwise they're human
(08:56):
shields and if you kill our human shields will then
maybe we'll send guys who are allowed to shoot back,
So don't or will sanction you or something.
Speaker 4 (09:08):
Yeah, wow, wow, this evokes, if you're at all familiar
with it, the history of the UNS peacekeeping forces, the
famous Blue Helmets, who unless they're committing like crimes and
getting drug dealing going or raping your local women, don't
do much tall ask the Israelis, there are Blue Helmets
whose specific gig was to make sure Hesbela didn't set up,
(09:31):
you know, attack ready outposts on their border, and they
would they set up just the sort of outposts that
they're supposed to be looking for, fifty one hundred yards
away from the UN headquarters or the UN outposts, completely useless.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
Well, there's gonna be something to watch unfold over the
next couple of days, because this big meaning yesterday announcing
the thirty countries willing to be the Coalition of the
Willing that was yesterday. Trump's talking to Bootin today. I
think this is gonna unfold fairly quickly.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Yeah, this is my screen, is not knee your cynicism either.
I hope and pray to be proved wrong. I just
I don't see the math take in shape where that
can happen me neither.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
And does Europe have the h horsepower to even pull
it off?
Speaker 4 (10:19):
Uh, yes, if they're willing to use it. Actually, if
you look at Europe's military and how it stacks up
against Russia without the US, now, it's actually pretty impressive.
Now Europe doesn't have great air defense and intelligence capabilities
because they've been leaning on US for that sort of
(10:41):
thing for a long time, but it's militaries constitute together
a massive air force, giant navy, and formidable army according
to this analysis, and those all the land forces, which
are just a fraction of what they were after the
Cold War, are now gradually rebuilding and adding advanced equipment.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
It's gradual.
Speaker 4 (10:59):
But just to take a look at the numbers in
conventional combats, say strategists, Russia would struggle against Europe. Europe
has just under two million active military personnel, just under
two million.
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Russia has one point three four. I don't know if
this is the way to look at it, though, to
add together all the European countries and act like they
would come together and fight in some way. I don't know.
I mean last week when we were looking at the
numbers country by country, England's got seventy eight thousand. The
Brits have seventy eight thousand people in the army, as
(11:37):
opposed to North Korea that has a million.
Speaker 4 (11:39):
Your skepticism is warranted, sir. Are they battle ready to
what extent? Could they cooperate and maneuver together reasonably well,
according to what I've read. But Russia, on the other hand,
is still incompetent and corrupt militarily.
Speaker 1 (11:55):
They've got some.
Speaker 4 (11:55):
Battle hardened troops for sure, but they're out numbered by half.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Well, if we got a land war going on between
Russia and multiple European countries, that's a big deal. Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
Armored fighting vehicles Europe wins thirty three thousand to eleven thousand,
triple that number. Self propelled artillery twenty two hundred to
fourteen hundred, combat planes twenty one hundred to eleven hundred,
an advantage of a thousand.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
Where does this come from? This just seems like such
a crazy way to look at it to me. Even
in World War II, it wasn't all the countries gathered together,
you know, uniformly fighting. You couldn't add all the everything together,
and you couldn't give you any information the bridge. I mean,
the Brits have a fighting force in their own interests.
In France has a fighting force and its own interests.
(12:48):
But Eisenhower commanded all of them. Yeah, I just I
can't imagine that coming together in this circumstance. Uh.
Speaker 4 (12:58):
If Russia invaded Europe, I can't man. They would have
its challenges obviously, No, I think they would join together.
But expecting Europe to behave coherently is an ask in
I apology.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
But you know that ain't the way it's gonna happen.
He's gonna try to take off a chunk of Estonia
and then and see what happens. And he is a
calculating some bitch. I can't wait to hear what we
hear out of that phone call today. Stay with us.
Speaker 5 (13:28):
A fisherman from Peru survived being stranded in the ocean
for ninety five days by eating insects, birds, and sea turtles,
which proves one thing. He's a horrible fisherman.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
That's a pretty good joke. It's got to pop into
your head. He's a fisherman and he's eating birds. What happened? Hey,
some days they don't bite, all right. It's called fishing,
not catching. And I know it feels.
Speaker 4 (13:58):
Coming up a trio of story involving mental health, including
that social media has become a breeding ground for delusions.
Speaker 1 (14:07):
Wow, I should bring back up that Gallup poll about
young people and whether they're thriving or not. Fits in
with that.
Speaker 3 (14:17):
So.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Comedian Tracy Morgan was in the front row at the
Knicks game last night in New York City. You know,
if you're going to see stars at NBA games, they're
going to be in the front row, either in Los
Angeles for the Lakers or New York for the Knicks.
And he was in the front row. And I haven't
watched the video. Okay, who's seen the video? One of
you have, Katie Joe, somebody has seen the video. I
just saw still Picksy more than enough throwing up during
(14:41):
the game. Yeah, yep.
Speaker 6 (14:43):
It was a little reminiscent of that that scene from
Family Guy where it's just projectile what he wants.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
To Peter, Peter hold my ears.
Speaker 6 (14:52):
But yeah, but the odd part was at the end
they took him away in a wheelchair, and when he
pulled the towel that he was wiping his mouth with away,
it looked bloody.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
Well, any good. He's fifty six year old. He's had
some health problems. When he got his the limo he
was in got hit by a Walmart truck and he
ended up getting like two hundred million dollars or something
like that. So he's ungodly wealthy. But he throws up
at the Knicks game. They actually had to stop the
game a little bit to clean up the floor. He
just posted from the hospital and said he feels fine.
(15:24):
He said he was hospitalized for food poisoning, which is
either true or completely not true, who knows. Uh. He
did say, thank you all for your concern. I'm doing
okay now and doctors say it was food poisoning. I
pretty appreciate my MSG family for taking good care of myself.
And then he said, more importantly, the Knicks are now
want to know when I throw up on the court,
(15:46):
so I'll have to break it out again for the playoffs. Ah,
the lighter side, the lighter side of maybe drinking in
drugs or who knows what, but.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
Yeah, the blood part, if indeed, I don't want to
talk about Tracy Morgan's fuke anymore.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
That's funny. Neither do I. That's perfect.
Speaker 4 (16:08):
First you got the guy eating rats in the Bronx.
Then you move over to Manhattan. You got people puking on.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
The back basketball court. What's wrong with you New York?
Is Eric Adams to blame. So we're going to talk
about mental health and all that sort of stuff. There
is a Gallop survey that's out with young people in
their attitudes about American and everything like that, and everything
was going in the wrong direction. We talked about that
in hour two if you want to grab that on
(16:34):
the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand. But one of
the things that was going down is there expectations for
life in five years, which seems like a bit of
a mental health crisis to me. But yeah, we can
touch on that again. If you didn't hear, it's pretty interesting.
It makes me worry about my teenagers that I've got.
I don't want them to feel the same way.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
One of the mental health stories is a good deal
lighter than that. It's Republicans in a certain state have
introduced a bill defining Trump derangement syndrome as a mental
illness Armstrong and getty.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Yo yo yo yo Yo.
Speaker 4 (17:11):
Minnesota Republicans, like California Republicans, can do about anything they
want because they can't get anything passed, and recently, five
GOP lawmakers in the great now insane state of Minnesota
have sponsored They've introduced a bill that adds Trump derangement
syndrome to the state's definition of mental illness. Trump derangement
(17:37):
syndrome is defined as acute onset of paranoia in otherwise
normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and
presidency of President Donald J.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
Trump. According to bill, symptoms may include Trump induced general hysteria,
which produces an inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences
and signs of psychic pathology in President Donald J. Trump behavior.
You know, it's close to true. I mean, he started
thinking about some of the stuff like school closings and
all that. But uh, and I find this amusing. But
(18:11):
in general, I would like us to get away from
all these all this performative politics.
Speaker 4 (18:19):
But yeah, yeah, I think, well it's also partisan whenever
anything Trump is involved. It's difficult for people to let
them their gardens think critically. But the never to be forgotten. Example, though,
is insisting that the kids be kept in school, even
(18:41):
though Red States private schools. Europeans were all saying no, no, no,
put them back in school. It's very important and they'll
be fine, and the teachers will be fine to continue
to say no, we've got to keep the kids home
and we can't even let them play with others just
because Donald Trump said they should open up the schools,
(19:01):
or maybe you know, the teachers union said it too.
But that is beyond like oppositional, that is that is
close to a mental illness.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
I have breaking news on the seven Dwarf front. I
just saw the ad for the new snow White. Yes,
the CGI dwarves are better than real dwarves would be
they Oh, they just are oh better in what way?
In the same way that a CGI dragon would be
(19:35):
better than a horrible mechanical dragon, I suppose. But you
don't have mechanical dwarfs. They're actual people. It's not a
jobs program. It's supposed to be an entertaining show about
snow White. And I just saw the trailer, and the
CGI dwarves are really really good.
Speaker 4 (19:53):
Speaking of derangements, you're deranged, What do you mean they're
better dwarfs than real dwarfs. There aren't real dragons to
be dou a cgi dragon. That is a bizarre and
indefensible statement. I disavow it. But back to the Trump
derangement syndrome thing. I mean, if I like stepped on
(20:15):
a rusty nail, and Kamala Harris said, well, I guess
once you've stepped on it, is it too late? Anyway,
Let's presume that you can still get a tetanus shot.
And Kamala Harris said, Joe, you should get a tetnis shot.
And I refuse to just because it was Kamala Harris.
That is certainly a mental condition, that's wealth condition.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
You can still get in a tetnis shot after you've
scraped yourself with some rus something rusty. I have done this, Okay, excellent.
So yeah, it's it's more than just than performative politics.
I think.
Speaker 4 (20:46):
Anyway, I wish them luck with that. Oh that's right,
that's what I wanted to get to. I've been hearing
Obama derangement syndrome or whatever. It is believed that the
term was coined by the late Great Charles Crouthammer in
two thousand, George Bush derangement syndrome. I remember that at
the time, I did not remember that. Anyway, Well done, Charles,
(21:08):
you are missed. Illinois has introduced a.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Bill that would make a mental health episode a defense
for physically attacking a peace officer. Oh wow, We'll just
read it so then we could comment. Yeah, yeah, I
need to hear the details.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
Provides that it is a defense to aggravated battery when
the individual battered is a peace officer and the officer
responded to an incident in which the officer interacted with
a person whom a reasonable officer could believe was having
a mental health episode, and the person with whom the
officer interacted has a documented mental illness and acted abruptly.
Speaker 1 (21:46):
All right, there are so many questions.
Speaker 4 (21:49):
By the way, over one hundred thousand law officers had
been attacked in.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
The line of duty in twenty two and twenty three.
Really that many? I didn't know what with that offer.
Speaker 4 (22:01):
More killed in the three years including twenty one, twenty two,
and twenty three than in any other consecutive three year
period in the past two decades, according to the FBI.
That so, all right, My questions are these? What is
a documented mental illness.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
What's included?
Speaker 4 (22:22):
How does that excuse physically attacking a law enforcement officer
if the officer acted abruptly.
Speaker 1 (22:31):
If you're on any SSR I, as many of you are,
you have a documented mental illness, and police officers, you're
having a long day. You got to keep you're serving,
you're protecting. I'm going to give you a big laugh. Okay,
you're in a volatile situation with people who may or
(22:52):
may not be like officially nuts or like unofficially nuts,
which is a lot of your job. And you've got
to deal with your this situation without ever acting even
once abruptly. And then if they attack me and it
turns out they take well buttrin because they have minor depression,
(23:13):
they're off the hook, said the Second City Cop blog.
If this passes, mental illness will be an excuse to
attack and beat police officers. In fact, who wants to
bet there will be thousands of people who suddenly have
doctor notes that permit them to attack cops. Yeah yeah, wow. Crazy.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
And speaking of crazy, finally, this social media. According to
a recent study, who did this? A couple of universities?
This you've never heard of? Social media? Creates ideal conditions
for psychological delusions to develop and intensify, especially for disorders
(23:56):
involving distorted self perception like narcissism and body dys morphia.
Unlike real life interactions that provide reality checks through physical cues.
Speaker 1 (24:06):
I feel like I'm the only person in the world
that can that is not narcissist, a narcissist.
Speaker 4 (24:14):
I'm less narcissistic than anyone in the world, right, I'm
more immune to narcissism than everyone.
Speaker 1 (24:22):
So it's interesting what they're talking about. Unlike real life,
where you have.
Speaker 4 (24:28):
Physical cues and nonverbal communication, which you jack have studied
and is a huge part of communication, social media removes
these guard where guardrails and creates feedback loops that reinforce
distorted thinkings ah interest thinkings, thinking I'm a native English speaker.
Speaker 1 (24:48):
Ause he's crazy thinkings.
Speaker 4 (24:50):
Researchers recommend that people with delusional disorders reduce social media
use and suggest developing technologies that make online interaction interactions
more grounded in reality.
Speaker 1 (25:03):
That's interesting.
Speaker 4 (25:07):
Because we all exist as disembodied versions of our selves, right.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
And tone in tweets and texts and stuff like that.
Tone is so difficult.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
Yeah, yeah, and people with psychological disorders frequently have distorted
self perception, and they use social media at higher rates
than others. And in real life it's restaying what they
said before, but other people's reactions help ground us in reality.
Online we can create any identity we want, and, unlike
(25:40):
face to face interactions with others that.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Help shape who we are as people, they.
Speaker 4 (25:46):
Guide us and shape us, digital identities can be entirely
self created.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Yeah, well, has anybody ever looked into this? We're all
aware of this. I don't do it because I'm not
on social media in this way, but we're aware of
this phenomenon of people present a certain image of themselves
on social media that is obviously way better than the
real thing. You're always smiling and happy and in love,
(26:16):
and your kids are always, you know, well dressed and
smiling and happy and everything is the Is the presenting
that all the time and then falling short of it
done anything to people? Oh? Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 4 (26:32):
What's interesting about this study, and you've kind of guessed
some of it, is that for narcissists, that very thing
you've described you can self promote through carefully crafted images
and reinforce your interview of yourself as damn near flawless. Meanwhile,
if you have like a body dysmorphic disorder or just
(26:53):
insecurity or needing disorder or whatever, the feedback you get
from the world is not a friend's saying you're not fat,
you're fine. The feedback you get is these incredible people
who many of them don't even exist because they're you know,
filtered in the rest of it. They're your feedback to
what you ought to be. I guess I don't know.
(27:15):
I'm not an impressionable young woman, so I believe this stuff.
It's difficult for me to relate to. But I've raised
a couple of girls, so I get it.
Speaker 1 (27:23):
Man. To the extent that we're on social media, my
brand is kind of schlubby screw up, so anything I
can post that reinforces that is to my benefit work wise.
So I don't really have the you know, glossy image
that I'm trying to portray.
Speaker 4 (27:42):
Right, you're like insulated from narcissism and like, you know, insecurity.
Speaker 1 (27:48):
Oh no, no, no, no, I'm a schlubby screw up exactly.
But I've never really thought about it on this level
before because I know some I'm thinking to some people
I know who's man there. Online presence is very very
perfection oriented and knowing in the back of your head
that that's not really you. You know, you didn't have to
(28:11):
you didn't used to have that. Maybe a little with
your friends, I suppose. Well, no, if they're actually friends
of yours, they you're presenting more of the real you. Sure.
Speaker 4 (28:21):
Yeah, yeah, I'm telling you need to unplug the Internet.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
I mean that might be the very sort of thing
that made all celebrities crazy is they had a public
persona of being always happy and cool and well dressed
and everything like that, and they knew that wasn't them.
Now everybody's got that right, Yeah, to a large extent.
And that's a great point.
Speaker 4 (28:42):
I remember when we were on TV and we would
both get recognized all the time.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
It makes you weird. It made me really weird. It
put I was so anxious.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
Isn't the right word, because it wasn't like I was
suffering from anxiety.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
Well maybe I was. I don't miss that. I don't
miss at all getting wrecked ignized all the time the world.
Speaker 4 (29:02):
Yeah, it was incredibly off putting. And you know, to
the extent that we had a public self image that
was at odds with reality, you know, honestly just being
like energetic and entertaining. I would always give the example
of I would be at your big box store for
(29:22):
my third trip because my efforts to fix the plumbing
I had the wrong thread or whatever, or you know,
the directions weren't right, whatever, and it was just becoming
a day long torture of grimy, sweaty misery.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
And there you are in crocs and a T shirt
with a hole in it. Probably not a not crocs.
Speaker 4 (29:41):
I'm a grown man anyway, And that was a direct
shot at a good friend.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
Hope you enjoyed it. And then somebody'd be like.
Speaker 4 (29:51):
Hey Joe, I really love a show and stuff like that,
and and everybody was lovely, like ninety nine.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
Percent of the time. Mom says, I'd like to hold
your head out of the very toilet. I'm trying to
fix it all. No, it was just it was so
jarring psychologically. Yeah, to be famous to be terrible. So
and most most young people are huge numbers of young
people think that's the that is happiness. Oh wow. But
(30:20):
then so now now everybody has a kind of celebrity
impression that they're putting out to everyone they know, and
they don't live up to that. I don't. I don't know, right.
I think you're onto something. They need to study this.
They literally are. That's what I was talking about. Are
you thriving or not. I want to hit those numbers
again because I think it's interesting and I want people
(30:41):
to email or text where you rank on the thriving
scale compared to Gallop, among other things. On the way,
we'll finish strong, Stay tuned. It is Trump's world. For
just the past few days, Donald.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
Trump deported hundreds of Venezuela and Seal Salvador just bye
the judge's or declared that CNN and MSNBC should be illegal.
Speaker 1 (31:05):
By the way, I'm not against everything he does. That's
pretty funny. So throughout this earlier and I want to
mention again just so you could text her email because
I'd kind of be interested how people actually answer this question.
It's a Gallop question, and they did it for young people,
but I want to do it for all y'all. Your expttion,
(31:27):
your expectations of life in the next five years, and
it's a very broad question. It's just a scale of
zero to ten. You expect life to be sucky in
the next five years or great in the next five
years zero to ten. Now for young people, the numbers
have gone down a lot since the early two thousands,
(31:48):
from about an eight point five on average to down
to about a seven point five ten percent drop. Why well,
and we talked about that earlier, and you can check
our two if you want to get the podcast. We
think it might have something to do with what happened
(32:09):
in that amount of time. What happened around two thousand,
mid mid two, two and five, two thousand and seven,
two thousand and eight, around then till now, well, freaking
smartphones and everything that might be it.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
And I pointed my finger at least one of my
several fingers. The fact that our government schools are indoctrinating
children that their country is terrible, The American dream is dead.
You're either oppressed or you're the oppressor, which is worse.
Speaker 1 (32:38):
And you'll be underwater because the climate change or on fire.
Speaker 7 (32:45):
I'm strong, I'm strong, You're ready.
Speaker 1 (32:58):
So text or email it would be interested in Where
you are scale is zero to ten, where you expect
you to be in your life in five years. I'm
a nine. I think I'm a full nine. Here's your
host for final thoughts, Joe Getty.
Speaker 4 (33:10):
Hey, let's get a funnel thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap up the show.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
Wouldn't that be fun? Michael Angelowar technical director, will lead
us off.
Speaker 8 (33:16):
Michael, Yeah, I had a first in all the years
of working with you guys. I actually had to take
the headphones off when you did that rat story. I
almost I was getting physically sick, almost, and I had
to turn it off, right.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
Which is why I tried to be restrained Michael. Jack
no filter, Katie, zero, no less than no filter. Katie. Well,
all right, you told me you had to paint a picture.
This is radio theater in a picture of a man
eating rats. Jenny Raynor stem Newswoman as a funnel thought, Katie,
that was it. Quit yelling at me, all right, Jack,
(33:52):
final thought. Man, I'm not usually this into a news story,
but I want to know what Trump said to Putin
and what Hooton said to Trump, and any news that
breaks on that front. I'll be all over today. My
final thought.
Speaker 4 (34:05):
Whether you're talking about the awful new snow White movie
or the awful recent Star Wars movies and shows, and
the rest of it. There's one sin you can't get
away with, and it's not that you're starlitsa's bad things.
And it's not that you're too woke or not woken off,
since you're not freaking entertaining, and that's been the problem
with those vehicles.
Speaker 1 (34:27):
Armstrong in Getty rabbing U about other grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 4 (34:30):
So many people are think so little time got Armstrong
in getty dot com.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
A lot of great clicks there for you. We will
see you tomorrow. God bless America. I'm strong and getcha.
It's Holliver. We need to adapt our approach. GUSI. I
hope you'll stand up and stop this madness. You're kind
of damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
(34:54):
Blah blah blah blah blah blah. My point was mad.
That's the author a hole in the sky where a
tree once stood. Somebody's making money on your feet there.
Your time has expired. They are very much armstrong and
get it.
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty. Arm Strong
and Jetty, I know he arms strong and Yetty.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
We talk to our Republican colleagues all the time. I
talked to them all in the gym. When you're a
sixty year old on a bike panting in your shorts,
the inhibitions sort of fall away.
Speaker 3 (00:37):
You know, I'm not here to posture shame, but for
a guy who seems to be spending most of his
life in the gym, a little less talk, you talk
a little more core. Second of all, in the gym,
they're only being agreeable with you.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Christ. They don't eaves him alone in the gym on
the stationary bike.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Oh sure, Chuck, I'm definitely gonna do that. But I
have to tell you something. Peddling really hard and not
going anywhere. It's a great metaphor for the Democratic Party
right now.
Speaker 1 (01:18):
Also Bocrat. So a couple of reasons. I wanted to
play that clip from John Stewart last night, who's a
Democrat and got a Democrat audience. There they are mocking
maybe the most visibly powerful person in the Democratic Party. Now,
I mean, you keep hearing about how leaderless they are
because there's not a single voice like was Nancy Pelosi
(01:42):
for years or Barack Obama or Bill Clinton or whoever.
There just isn't in. Chuck Schumer's as close to it
as they've got, and they're mocking him endlessly and laughing
at him. I just saw him up on the CBS
Early Show today, that whole posture thing. God, he is
a bent over old man. Yeah, olllow.
Speaker 4 (02:01):
Did you see that poll of who is the leader
of the Democratic Party that somebody did recently might have
been ANBC.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
It was a series of people with sevens and eights. Well, yeah,
that's what I would say. From Kamala to.
Speaker 4 (02:15):
And AOC at ten, AOC was the had the not
the majority of plurality, but barely barely in a sea
of of of midgets.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
Right, Yeah, so there's nobody that's really the leader. But
I'd say AOC is the very top. And I don't
mean that in any sort of like disparaging way, just
in terms of news coverage and the ability to get
attention and whatever. She's she's clearly at the very top.
Far dreamier eyes than Chuck Schumer, too, So I just
(02:49):
thought that was kind of funny or interesting. See what's
going to emerge out of that party. I have no
idea something will. Somebody's gonna come along. Maybe it's Josh
Shapiro from Pennsylvania. I mean, I keep mentioning in this
book I read about I'm reading about uh Carter in
the peace process in the seventies. He came out of
freaking nowhere. He was on nobody's radar shortly before the
(03:12):
presidential election in seventy six, he was barely on anybody's
radar in Georgia, let alone anywhere else in the country.
So there's there could be somebody out there that hits
the scene and it's like, whoa, here's our leader. Nice,
So gonna be me, Gavin Newsom, have you heard I'm
a moderate? Now well? Sort of The point is it's
often often not the people they throw out, the Rudy Judiani's,
(03:35):
the Ted Kennedy's, the whoever the well known name. It's somebody. Yeah,
it's a somebody you don't know, and just all of
a sudden, anyway, that's enough of that. Uh first, a
dumb story before we get to a significant story. I
think this is a dumb story. Trump announced he will
release thousands of documents related to the jfk assassination. He
(03:57):
did not provide additional I'm reading from the New York Times.
He did not provide additional details on what the trove
of files would include, because it ain't gonna include much,
but he has long promised to release them unredacted. I'm
all for that. I think it's cool. I got to
imagine there'll be some interesting tidbits in there, but I
don't expect to. It was the mob. Look right here,
(04:17):
they've got John Cotty Gotti on the phone ordering the
hit or something, right right, I don't expect anything like that.
Speaker 4 (04:25):
I think there could be some historically really interesting stuff.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
I agree, I agree. I don't think it's like the
smoking gun, per se. No eighty thousand pages are going
to be released. I think it's just a good swipe
at we keep too many things secret for too long.
Give me any reason whatsoever there should be eighty thousand
pages of government paperwork on the jfk assassination sixty two
(04:55):
years later that the American people don't get to see
about their own government. There's no argument whatsoever. They just
a government likes to keep things secret. It gives them
more power. You know. I could see for a certain
amount of time.
Speaker 4 (05:12):
If the British m I five was or six or
whatever the MII is, if they were involved somehow or other,
and we had to keep that cool.
Speaker 1 (05:21):
Okay, sources and methods. It's many years you got anything
like that, if it would include a quote from somebody
you didn't know was a spy, you know, from the
MI five aware. Yeah, but no, that makes no sense
to keep it a secret. It's just part of the whole.
We're in charge, you know, we we we keep the
power the information among ourselves. Don't like it. So the
(05:43):
National Archives and Records Administration has said that the government
has already released ninety nine percent of the roughly two hundred,
three hundred and twenty thousand documents that have been reviewed
since nineteen ninety two. So that makes me think it's
going to be more interesting. I mean, out of all
all of those documents, I why did you keep this
one percent back? It's got to be something somewhat interesting
(06:06):
in there. Can we at least characterize it somehow? Why
why is it held back in? What sort of stuff
is it that doesn't seem unreasonable. Well, we're gonna find
out in a couple of days because it's coming out.
Here's the other thing, and more important, Trump and Putin
are on the phone right now, I guess discussing how
(06:29):
to handle that whole thing. And one thing I know
Putin doesn't really like the idea is a bunch of
NATO troops in Ukraine. But that's the plan at least
currently from the UK. A significant number of countries are
willing to provide troops in Ukraine when there's a peace
deal with Russia, a spokesman from the British Prime Minister
Heir Starmer said yesterday Britain and France have led the
(06:52):
efforts for this whole peacekeeping plan that Trump obviously kicked off.
More than thirty countries are expected to be involved in
what they're calling the Coalition of the Willing, a phrase
going back to the Iraq War, to support Ukraine. Starmer's
spokesperson told reporters yesterday the contribution capabilities will vary, of course,
(07:13):
but this will be a significant force, with a significant
number of countries providing troops. Reuters goes on to say
Russia has repeatedly rejected the idea of soldiers from countries
belonging to the NATO military allianes being stationed in Ukraine.
I mean he has said that's a non starter, but uh,
thirty countries involved in a coalition of the willing, including many,
(07:37):
many troops, is the plan from Europe.
Speaker 4 (07:42):
Putin will find a way either to say no outright
or hear Lavrov will say, you know, I can see
that sort of thing working. I like the broad outlines
of it. Of course, we'll need forty percent of Ukraine,
including of course Crimea, and and we get to keep Georgia,
and NATO also disarms the Baltic States and Germany, you know,
(08:09):
stops manufacturing BMW.
Speaker 1 (08:11):
He'll just have a crazy, huge ask while.
Speaker 4 (08:15):
Simultaneously saying yes, yes, I think that's a great idea.
He's not going to accept that many, that many essentially
NATO troops in Ukraine, I don't think unless he gets
again a huge ask.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Granted I left out my favorite part of this article.
Asked if the peace keeping troops would be allowed to
fire back if targeted. The spokesperson said military planning meetings
were taking place to go through the details. Now, if
you can't answer that question with of course they will.
Why else would they be there, right? Otherwise they're human
(08:56):
shields and if you kill our human shields will then
maybe we'll send guys who are allowed to shoot back,
So don't or will sanction you or something.
Speaker 4 (09:08):
Yeah, wow, wow, this evokes, if you're at all familiar
with it, the history of the UNS peacekeeping forces, the
famous Blue Helmets, who unless they're committing like crimes and
getting drug dealing going or raping your local women, don't
do much tall ask the Israelis, there are Blue Helmets
whose specific gig was to make sure Hesbela didn't set up,
(09:31):
you know, attack ready outposts on their border, and they
would they set up just the sort of outposts that
they're supposed to be looking for, fifty one hundred yards
away from the UN headquarters or the UN outposts, completely useless.
Speaker 1 (09:49):
Well, there's gonna be something to watch unfold over the
next couple of days, because this big meaning yesterday announcing
the thirty countries willing to be the Coalition of the
Willing that was yesterday. Trump's talking to Bootin today. I
think this is gonna unfold fairly quickly.
Speaker 4 (10:02):
Yeah, this is my screen, is not knee your cynicism either.
I hope and pray to be proved wrong. I just
I don't see the math take in shape where that
can happen me neither.
Speaker 1 (10:15):
And does Europe have the h horsepower to even pull
it off?
Speaker 4 (10:19):
Uh, yes, if they're willing to use it. Actually, if
you look at Europe's military and how it stacks up
against Russia without the US, now, it's actually pretty impressive.
Now Europe doesn't have great air defense and intelligence capabilities
because they've been leaning on US for that sort of
(10:41):
thing for a long time, but it's militaries constitute together
a massive air force, giant navy, and formidable army according
to this analysis, and those all the land forces, which
are just a fraction of what they were after the
Cold War, are now gradually rebuilding and adding advanced equipment.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
It's gradual.
Speaker 4 (10:59):
But just to take a look at the numbers in
conventional combats, say strategists, Russia would struggle against Europe. Europe
has just under two million active military personnel, just under
two million.
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Russia has one point three four. I don't know if
this is the way to look at it, though, to
add together all the European countries and act like they
would come together and fight in some way. I don't know.
I mean last week when we were looking at the
numbers country by country, England's got seventy eight thousand. The
Brits have seventy eight thousand people in the army, as
(11:37):
opposed to North Korea that has a million.
Speaker 4 (11:39):
Your skepticism is warranted, sir. Are they battle ready to
what extent? Could they cooperate and maneuver together reasonably well,
according to what I've read. But Russia, on the other hand,
is still incompetent and corrupt militarily.
Speaker 1 (11:55):
They've got some.
Speaker 4 (11:55):
Battle hardened troops for sure, but they're out numbered by half.
Speaker 1 (11:59):
Well, if we got a land war going on between
Russia and multiple European countries, that's a big deal. Oh yeah, yeah.
Speaker 4 (12:09):
Armored fighting vehicles Europe wins thirty three thousand to eleven thousand,
triple that number. Self propelled artillery twenty two hundred to
fourteen hundred, combat planes twenty one hundred to eleven hundred,
an advantage of a thousand.
Speaker 1 (12:27):
Where does this come from? This just seems like such
a crazy way to look at it to me. Even
in World War II, it wasn't all the countries gathered together,
you know, uniformly fighting. You couldn't add all the everything together,
and you couldn't give you any information the bridge. I mean,
the Brits have a fighting force in their own interests.
In France has a fighting force and its own interests.
(12:48):
But Eisenhower commanded all of them. Yeah, I just I
can't imagine that coming together in this circumstance. Uh.
Speaker 4 (12:58):
If Russia invaded Europe, I can't man. They would have
its challenges obviously, No, I think they would join together.
But expecting Europe to behave coherently is an ask in
I apology.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
But you know that ain't the way it's gonna happen.
He's gonna try to take off a chunk of Estonia
and then and see what happens. And he is a
calculating some bitch. I can't wait to hear what we
hear out of that phone call today. Stay with us.
Speaker 5 (13:28):
A fisherman from Peru survived being stranded in the ocean
for ninety five days by eating insects, birds, and sea turtles,
which proves one thing. He's a horrible fisherman.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
That's a pretty good joke. It's got to pop into
your head. He's a fisherman and he's eating birds. What happened? Hey,
some days they don't bite, all right. It's called fishing,
not catching. And I know it feels.
Speaker 4 (13:58):
Coming up a trio of story involving mental health, including
that social media has become a breeding ground for delusions.
Speaker 1 (14:07):
Wow, I should bring back up that Gallup poll about
young people and whether they're thriving or not. Fits in
with that.
Speaker 3 (14:17):
So.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Comedian Tracy Morgan was in the front row at the
Knicks game last night in New York City. You know,
if you're going to see stars at NBA games, they're
going to be in the front row, either in Los
Angeles for the Lakers or New York for the Knicks.
And he was in the front row. And I haven't
watched the video. Okay, who's seen the video? One of
you have, Katie Joe, somebody has seen the video. I
just saw still Picksy more than enough throwing up during
(14:41):
the game. Yeah, yep.
Speaker 6 (14:43):
It was a little reminiscent of that that scene from
Family Guy where it's just projectile what he wants.
Speaker 1 (14:50):
To Peter, Peter hold my ears.
Speaker 6 (14:52):
But yeah, but the odd part was at the end
they took him away in a wheelchair, and when he
pulled the towel that he was wiping his mouth with away,
it looked bloody.
Speaker 1 (15:01):
Well, any good. He's fifty six year old. He's had
some health problems. When he got his the limo he
was in got hit by a Walmart truck and he
ended up getting like two hundred million dollars or something
like that. So he's ungodly wealthy. But he throws up
at the Knicks game. They actually had to stop the
game a little bit to clean up the floor. He
just posted from the hospital and said he feels fine.
(15:24):
He said he was hospitalized for food poisoning, which is
either true or completely not true, who knows. Uh. He
did say, thank you all for your concern. I'm doing
okay now and doctors say it was food poisoning. I
pretty appreciate my MSG family for taking good care of myself.
And then he said, more importantly, the Knicks are now
want to know when I throw up on the court,
(15:46):
so I'll have to break it out again for the playoffs. Ah,
the lighter side, the lighter side of maybe drinking in
drugs or who knows what, but.
Speaker 4 (15:57):
Yeah, the blood part, if indeed, I don't want to
talk about Tracy Morgan's fuke anymore.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
That's funny. Neither do I. That's perfect.
Speaker 4 (16:08):
First you got the guy eating rats in the Bronx.
Then you move over to Manhattan. You got people puking on.
Speaker 1 (16:12):
The back basketball court. What's wrong with you New York?
Is Eric Adams to blame. So we're going to talk
about mental health and all that sort of stuff. There
is a Gallop survey that's out with young people in
their attitudes about American and everything like that, and everything
was going in the wrong direction. We talked about that
in hour two if you want to grab that on
(16:34):
the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand. But one of
the things that was going down is there expectations for
life in five years, which seems like a bit of
a mental health crisis to me. But yeah, we can
touch on that again. If you didn't hear, it's pretty interesting.
It makes me worry about my teenagers that I've got.
I don't want them to feel the same way.
Speaker 4 (16:53):
One of the mental health stories is a good deal
lighter than that. It's Republicans in a certain state have
introduced a bill defining Trump derangement syndrome as a mental
illness Armstrong and getty.
Speaker 1 (17:06):
Yo yo yo yo Yo.
Speaker 4 (17:11):
Minnesota Republicans, like California Republicans, can do about anything they
want because they can't get anything passed, and recently, five
GOP lawmakers in the great now insane state of Minnesota
have sponsored They've introduced a bill that adds Trump derangement
syndrome to the state's definition of mental illness. Trump derangement
(17:37):
syndrome is defined as acute onset of paranoia in otherwise
normal persons that is in reaction to the policies and
presidency of President Donald J.
Speaker 1 (17:47):
Trump. According to bill, symptoms may include Trump induced general hysteria,
which produces an inability to distinguish between legitimate policy differences
and signs of psychic pathology in President Donald J. Trump behavior.
You know, it's close to true. I mean, he started
thinking about some of the stuff like school closings and
all that. But uh, and I find this amusing. But
(18:11):
in general, I would like us to get away from
all these all this performative politics.
Speaker 4 (18:19):
But yeah, yeah, I think, well it's also partisan whenever
anything Trump is involved. It's difficult for people to let
them their gardens think critically. But the never to be forgotten. Example, though,
is insisting that the kids be kept in school, even
(18:41):
though Red States private schools. Europeans were all saying no, no, no,
put them back in school. It's very important and they'll
be fine, and the teachers will be fine to continue
to say no, we've got to keep the kids home
and we can't even let them play with others just
because Donald Trump said they should open up the schools,
(19:01):
or maybe you know, the teachers union said it too.
But that is beyond like oppositional, that is that is
close to a mental illness.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
I have breaking news on the seven Dwarf front. I
just saw the ad for the new snow White. Yes,
the CGI dwarves are better than real dwarves would be
they Oh, they just are oh better in what way?
In the same way that a CGI dragon would be
(19:35):
better than a horrible mechanical dragon, I suppose. But you
don't have mechanical dwarfs. They're actual people. It's not a
jobs program. It's supposed to be an entertaining show about
snow White. And I just saw the trailer, and the
CGI dwarves are really really good.
Speaker 4 (19:53):
Speaking of derangements, you're deranged, What do you mean they're
better dwarfs than real dwarfs. There aren't real dragons to
be dou a cgi dragon. That is a bizarre and
indefensible statement. I disavow it. But back to the Trump
derangement syndrome thing. I mean, if I like stepped on
(20:15):
a rusty nail, and Kamala Harris said, well, I guess
once you've stepped on it, is it too late? Anyway,
Let's presume that you can still get a tetanus shot.
And Kamala Harris said, Joe, you should get a tetnis shot.
And I refuse to just because it was Kamala Harris.
That is certainly a mental condition, that's wealth condition.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
You can still get in a tetnis shot after you've
scraped yourself with some rus something rusty. I have done this, Okay, excellent.
So yeah, it's it's more than just than performative politics.
I think.
Speaker 4 (20:46):
Anyway, I wish them luck with that. Oh that's right,
that's what I wanted to get to. I've been hearing
Obama derangement syndrome or whatever. It is believed that the
term was coined by the late Great Charles Crouthammer in
two thousand, George Bush derangement syndrome. I remember that at
the time, I did not remember that. Anyway, Well done, Charles,
(21:08):
you are missed. Illinois has introduced a.
Speaker 1 (21:11):
Bill that would make a mental health episode a defense
for physically attacking a peace officer. Oh wow, We'll just
read it so then we could comment. Yeah, yeah, I
need to hear the details.
Speaker 4 (21:25):
Provides that it is a defense to aggravated battery when
the individual battered is a peace officer and the officer
responded to an incident in which the officer interacted with
a person whom a reasonable officer could believe was having
a mental health episode, and the person with whom the
officer interacted has a documented mental illness and acted abruptly.
Speaker 1 (21:46):
All right, there are so many questions.
Speaker 4 (21:49):
By the way, over one hundred thousand law officers had
been attacked in.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
The line of duty in twenty two and twenty three.
Really that many? I didn't know what with that offer.
Speaker 4 (22:01):
More killed in the three years including twenty one, twenty two,
and twenty three than in any other consecutive three year
period in the past two decades, according to the FBI.
That so, all right, My questions are these? What is
a documented mental illness.
Speaker 1 (22:20):
What's included?
Speaker 4 (22:22):
How does that excuse physically attacking a law enforcement officer
if the officer acted abruptly.
Speaker 1 (22:31):
If you're on any SSR I, as many of you are,
you have a documented mental illness, and police officers, you're
having a long day. You got to keep you're serving,
you're protecting. I'm going to give you a big laugh. Okay,
you're in a volatile situation with people who may or
(22:52):
may not be like officially nuts or like unofficially nuts,
which is a lot of your job. And you've got
to deal with your this situation without ever acting even
once abruptly. And then if they attack me and it
turns out they take well buttrin because they have minor depression,
(23:13):
they're off the hook, said the Second City Cop blog.
If this passes, mental illness will be an excuse to
attack and beat police officers. In fact, who wants to
bet there will be thousands of people who suddenly have
doctor notes that permit them to attack cops. Yeah yeah, wow. Crazy.
Speaker 4 (23:36):
And speaking of crazy, finally, this social media. According to
a recent study, who did this? A couple of universities?
This you've never heard of? Social media? Creates ideal conditions
for psychological delusions to develop and intensify, especially for disorders
(23:56):
involving distorted self perception like narcissism and body dys morphia.
Unlike real life interactions that provide reality checks through physical cues.
Speaker 1 (24:06):
I feel like I'm the only person in the world
that can that is not narcissist, a narcissist.
Speaker 4 (24:14):
I'm less narcissistic than anyone in the world, right, I'm
more immune to narcissism than everyone.
Speaker 1 (24:22):
So it's interesting what they're talking about. Unlike real life,
where you have.
Speaker 4 (24:28):
Physical cues and nonverbal communication, which you jack have studied
and is a huge part of communication, social media removes
these guard where guardrails and creates feedback loops that reinforce
distorted thinkings ah interest thinkings, thinking I'm a native English speaker.
Speaker 1 (24:48):
Ause he's crazy thinkings.
Speaker 4 (24:50):
Researchers recommend that people with delusional disorders reduce social media
use and suggest developing technologies that make online interaction interactions
more grounded in reality.
Speaker 1 (25:03):
That's interesting.
Speaker 4 (25:07):
Because we all exist as disembodied versions of our selves, right.
Speaker 1 (25:12):
And tone in tweets and texts and stuff like that.
Tone is so difficult.
Speaker 4 (25:18):
Yeah, yeah, and people with psychological disorders frequently have distorted
self perception, and they use social media at higher rates
than others. And in real life it's restaying what they
said before, but other people's reactions help ground us in reality.
Online we can create any identity we want, and, unlike
(25:40):
face to face interactions with others that.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Help shape who we are as people, they.
Speaker 4 (25:46):
Guide us and shape us, digital identities can be entirely
self created.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
Yeah, well, has anybody ever looked into this? We're all
aware of this. I don't do it because I'm not
on social media in this way, but we're aware of
this phenomenon of people present a certain image of themselves
on social media that is obviously way better than the
real thing. You're always smiling and happy and in love,
(26:16):
and your kids are always, you know, well dressed and
smiling and happy and everything is the Is the presenting
that all the time and then falling short of it
done anything to people? Oh? Yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 4 (26:32):
What's interesting about this study, and you've kind of guessed
some of it, is that for narcissists, that very thing
you've described you can self promote through carefully crafted images
and reinforce your interview of yourself as damn near flawless. Meanwhile,
if you have like a body dysmorphic disorder or just
(26:53):
insecurity or needing disorder or whatever, the feedback you get
from the world is not a friend's saying you're not fat,
you're fine. The feedback you get is these incredible people
who many of them don't even exist because they're you know,
filtered in the rest of it. They're your feedback to
what you ought to be. I guess I don't know.
(27:15):
I'm not an impressionable young woman, so I believe this stuff.
It's difficult for me to relate to. But I've raised
a couple of girls, so I get it.
Speaker 1 (27:23):
Man. To the extent that we're on social media, my
brand is kind of schlubby screw up, so anything I
can post that reinforces that is to my benefit work wise.
So I don't really have the you know, glossy image
that I'm trying to portray.
Speaker 4 (27:42):
Right, you're like insulated from narcissism and like, you know, insecurity.
Speaker 1 (27:48):
Oh no, no, no, no, I'm a schlubby screw up exactly.
But I've never really thought about it on this level
before because I know some I'm thinking to some people
I know who's man there. Online presence is very very
perfection oriented and knowing in the back of your head
that that's not really you. You know, you didn't have to
(28:11):
you didn't used to have that. Maybe a little with
your friends, I suppose. Well, no, if they're actually friends
of yours, they you're presenting more of the real you. Sure.
Speaker 4 (28:21):
Yeah, yeah, I'm telling you need to unplug the Internet.
Speaker 1 (28:25):
I mean that might be the very sort of thing
that made all celebrities crazy is they had a public
persona of being always happy and cool and well dressed
and everything like that, and they knew that wasn't them.
Now everybody's got that right, Yeah, to a large extent.
And that's a great point.
Speaker 4 (28:42):
I remember when we were on TV and we would
both get recognized all the time.
Speaker 1 (28:47):
It makes you weird. It made me really weird. It
put I was so anxious.
Speaker 4 (28:53):
Isn't the right word, because it wasn't like I was
suffering from anxiety.
Speaker 1 (28:56):
Well maybe I was. I don't miss that. I don't
miss at all getting wrecked ignized all the time the world.
Speaker 4 (29:02):
Yeah, it was incredibly off putting. And you know, to
the extent that we had a public self image that
was at odds with reality, you know, honestly just being
like energetic and entertaining. I would always give the example
of I would be at your big box store for
(29:22):
my third trip because my efforts to fix the plumbing
I had the wrong thread or whatever, or you know,
the directions weren't right, whatever, and it was just becoming
a day long torture of grimy, sweaty misery.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
And there you are in crocs and a T shirt
with a hole in it. Probably not a not crocs.
Speaker 4 (29:41):
I'm a grown man anyway, And that was a direct
shot at a good friend.
Speaker 1 (29:46):
Hope you enjoyed it. And then somebody'd be like.
Speaker 4 (29:51):
Hey Joe, I really love a show and stuff like that,
and and everybody was lovely, like ninety nine.
Speaker 1 (29:56):
Percent of the time. Mom says, I'd like to hold
your head out of the very toilet. I'm trying to
fix it all. No, it was just it was so
jarring psychologically. Yeah, to be famous to be terrible. So
and most most young people are huge numbers of young
people think that's the that is happiness. Oh wow. But
(30:20):
then so now now everybody has a kind of celebrity
impression that they're putting out to everyone they know, and
they don't live up to that. I don't. I don't know, right.
I think you're onto something. They need to study this.
They literally are. That's what I was talking about. Are
you thriving or not. I want to hit those numbers
again because I think it's interesting and I want people
(30:41):
to email or text where you rank on the thriving
scale compared to Gallop, among other things. On the way,
we'll finish strong, Stay tuned. It is Trump's world. For
just the past few days, Donald.
Speaker 3 (30:56):
Trump deported hundreds of Venezuela and Seal Salvador just bye
the judge's or declared that CNN and MSNBC should be illegal.
Speaker 1 (31:05):
By the way, I'm not against everything he does. That's
pretty funny. So throughout this earlier and I want to
mention again just so you could text her email because
I'd kind of be interested how people actually answer this question.
It's a Gallop question, and they did it for young people,
but I want to do it for all y'all. Your expttion,
(31:27):
your expectations of life in the next five years, and
it's a very broad question. It's just a scale of
zero to ten. You expect life to be sucky in
the next five years or great in the next five
years zero to ten. Now for young people, the numbers
have gone down a lot since the early two thousands,
(31:48):
from about an eight point five on average to down
to about a seven point five ten percent drop. Why well,
and we talked about that earlier, and you can check
our two if you want to get the podcast. We
think it might have something to do with what happened
(32:09):
in that amount of time. What happened around two thousand,
mid mid two, two and five, two thousand and seven,
two thousand and eight, around then till now, well, freaking
smartphones and everything that might be it.
Speaker 4 (32:20):
And I pointed my finger at least one of my
several fingers. The fact that our government schools are indoctrinating
children that their country is terrible, The American dream is dead.
You're either oppressed or you're the oppressor, which is worse.
Speaker 1 (32:38):
And you'll be underwater because the climate change or on fire.
Speaker 7 (32:45):
I'm strong, I'm strong, You're ready.
Speaker 1 (32:58):
So text or email it would be interested in Where
you are scale is zero to ten, where you expect
you to be in your life in five years. I'm
a nine. I think I'm a full nine. Here's your
host for final thoughts, Joe Getty.
Speaker 4 (33:10):
Hey, let's get a funnel thought from everybody on the
crew to wrap up the show.
Speaker 1 (33:13):
Wouldn't that be fun? Michael Angelowar technical director, will lead
us off.
Speaker 8 (33:16):
Michael, Yeah, I had a first in all the years
of working with you guys. I actually had to take
the headphones off when you did that rat story. I
almost I was getting physically sick, almost, and I had
to turn it off, right.
Speaker 1 (33:29):
Which is why I tried to be restrained Michael. Jack
no filter, Katie, zero, no less than no filter. Katie. Well,
all right, you told me you had to paint a picture.
This is radio theater in a picture of a man
eating rats. Jenny Raynor stem Newswoman as a funnel thought, Katie,
that was it. Quit yelling at me, all right, Jack,
(33:52):
final thought. Man, I'm not usually this into a news story,
but I want to know what Trump said to Putin
and what Hooton said to Trump, and any news that
breaks on that front. I'll be all over today. My
final thought.
Speaker 4 (34:05):
Whether you're talking about the awful new snow White movie
or the awful recent Star Wars movies and shows, and
the rest of it. There's one sin you can't get
away with, and it's not that you're starlitsa's bad things.
And it's not that you're too woke or not woken off,
since you're not freaking entertaining, and that's been the problem
with those vehicles.
Speaker 1 (34:27):
Armstrong in Getty rabbing U about other grueling four hour workday.
Speaker 4 (34:30):
So many people are think so little time got Armstrong
in getty dot com.
Speaker 1 (34:33):
A lot of great clicks there for you. We will
see you tomorrow. God bless America. I'm strong and getcha.
It's Holliver. We need to adapt our approach. GUSI. I
hope you'll stand up and stop this madness. You're kind
of damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
(34:54):
Blah blah blah blah blah blah. My point was mad.
That's the author a hole in the sky where a
tree once stood. Somebody's making money on your feet there.
Your time has expired. They are very much armstrong and
get it.
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.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com