August 21, 2025 • 35 mins
Hour 2 of A&G features...
- Gavin's policies & some soul nourishing
- Shrekking...
- Ukraine/Russia meeting & the peace deal
- Some texts!
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 (00:02):
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty arms Strong
and Gatty and he Armstrong and Yedetti.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
The LATINX stuff that, by the way, not one person
ever in my office has ever used the word LATINX.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
So can we finally put that to bed? Yeah? But
where did that even know? More LATINX? Everybody?
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Well, I just didn't even know where it came from,
And like, what are people talking about? I hope we
can really paint a picture in terms of our consciousness
of how impactful this has been on the LATINX community.
About three quarters of renters in the state that have
fallen behind and rent represented the Latino and African American community.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
The LATINX and Black communities.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
You've got politicians that are banning not assault rifles, but
the word LATINX.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
They're not even serious.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Wow, that's even further So that's Gavin Newsom doing his
bro podcasts that he's doing all across the country now
as he tries to be like just a regular guy
running for president, and he's doing a pretty good job
of it might work for him, but claiming that LATINX.
Whoever even heard of that before? What does that even mean?
And then a little montage of him using the term
(01:19):
in recent years, including one and where he's fighting against
trying to take away the word LATINX, blasting anybody who would.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Dare disparage it. Oh boy, but oh but it works.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
People don't hear the you know, like in newspapers or books,
there's the big headline and then there's a little sentence underneath.
People don't hear the sentence underneath. Ninety percent of people.
They just get the big headline of everything, of every story.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
And that's funny. Though. He's got to run away from
so much of that stuff because it's so freaking crazy.
Speaker 4 (01:53):
Oh yeah, I mean yeah. The least is long of
policies that are abhorrent to most Americans or excuse me,
I should have taken my coughs are present and or
results that are abhorrent to Americans. For instance, as we
outlined last hour, cal Unicorney has lost one hundred and
(02:13):
a half hundred thousand private sector jobs and added three
hundred and sixty one thousand government jobs since twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
It's just astonishing.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Well, let's be happy about this stuff though, people, Rather
than condemning the hypocrisy, we should be happy he understands
that he needs to run away from the nonsense like
trans boys in girls sports or the term LATINX, which
is one of the dumbest things that's ever happened in
my lifetime. He has to run away from it if
(02:44):
he wants to be president. He is determined, and he's right,
and that's good.
Speaker 4 (02:47):
News, right it is, Although don't let down your guard
because we've received I don't know half a dozen emails
just in the last forty eight hours from folks that
are getting ready to get back in the classroom as
teachers in California and are going through their state mandated
DEI white supremacist woke doctrine right now. They're getting educated
(03:10):
in that quote unquote educated. So getting back to Gavy,
and we talked about this fairly recently. If you're just
tuning in, but the whole bed bath and beyond thing,
the head of bed bath and beyond. Do you have
that statement or I mean for people who are not familiar,
just real.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Quickly, yes, I do.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
I'm sorry, this is I got the other screen up
about shreking a dating trend in which people are dating
unattractive people on purpose. That story we got to get
to later this hour. Yes, yes, yes, and different species
of giraffes. Yes, I already did the giraffes shreking. We
will do this hour though. It's an actual thing and
it's really quite entertaining.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Point.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
So the CEO of Bed, Bath and Beyond puts out
a statement yesterday, we will not operate or open retail
stores in California. This decision isn't about politics, It's about reality.
California has created one of the most regulated, expensive and
risky environments for business in America. It's a system that
makes it harder to employ people, harder to keep doors open,
and harder to deliver value to customers. The result higher taxes,
(04:10):
hire fees, higher wages that many businesses simply cannot sustain.
Speaker 4 (04:15):
And then Gavin Newsom, in a snarky social media post yesterday, replied.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
The company that already went bankrupt and closed every store
across the country two years ago.
Speaker 4 (04:27):
Okay, I will be responding to that in a moment.
After a word from Kevin McCarthy, former Speaker of the House,
multi generation cal Unicornean thirty three, Michael.
Speaker 5 (04:38):
There's another example of a failed California under Gavin. Instead
of a governor going out trying to create businesses, he
continues to push them away. We saw not just businesses
go away, but we're losing population because of the problem
of how they're governing California.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
All right, thank you, Kevin. Good to hear your voice.
What's the beyond? I get bedd and back, but what's
the beyond?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
Hallways, kitchens, multiple rooms and door corridors can be furnished.
All right, So, Gavin, here is my response to your
sarcasm anti rooms. Oh yeah, Foyers, window, don't get me started.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
Window treatment, that's all absolutely yes, although you do have
windows in beds and baths.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Michael. So is it a good point? Yeah, okay, where
were we? I'm sure there was a thread?
Speaker 4 (05:36):
Oh yes, So Gavin's snark about a CEO saying your
state is so hostile to business and so difficult to
operate in, We're not even gonna try. And instead of
addressing policy, he says, oh, yeah, the same company that
went bankrupt and closed all their stores two years ago.
(05:56):
Let me explain something to you, Gavin, Because you were
born with a silver spoon in your mouth. You've been
successful in business because you've been bankrolled up to your
ears by all of your rich relatives.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
But here's the way it works.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
Big companies sometimes failed to adjust with the times. Something
you know changes whatever. They're unsuccessful, they declare bankruptcy and
they reorganize. Bed Bath and Beyond has a lot of fans.
It's a cool store. I'm a fan, Judy and I
shop there for a lot of stuff for years and years,
(06:30):
and we're super bummed to hear it was closing. Well,
now they're reopening with a little different concept that's going
to be better for consumers and more likely to be
a successful business. It's the very thing we treasure in America.
Gavin innovation, adaptation, creativity and sticking to it. And these
(06:52):
people who are doing that said, the one place we're
not going to bother is California because it's so hostile
to business. Go ahead, Gavy, give us some more of
your clever, clever snark. Uh what a blank? That's That
(07:12):
was the perfect way to end my screed. It's a
multi syllable rhymes with bass shoal that's he.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Is a blank?
Speaker 4 (07:27):
What a blank whole thing to say? I mean it's
beyond like bad governance or you know, misunderstanding of the economy.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
It's just you're being a dick.
Speaker 4 (07:40):
Oh please run for president. Please, I beg you, because
your humiliation will nourish.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
My soul for a thousand years. Oh wow, soul nourishing
a thousand years. I stand by my statement. That was
a very standing on a hillside with a staff in
a robe for some reason sort of statement to make well.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
I'm I'm heading to London on vacation and I'm feeling
sure Chillian.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
I think I was preaching kind of a Gandolf sort
of thing. There. Wow, soul for a thousand years.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
You shall not stop us be lightning and storm clouds gathering.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
I love that.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
If anybody's good at ai and can do that, please,
we are lucky, send me the video.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Yes, we are lucky in that the topic of shreking
as a dating thing came up and somebody with knowledge
of this specifically texted someone I know who has friends
that have been shreking. Oh no, this is dating somebody
who looks like a swamp, who looks like Shrek.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Unappealing on purpose? Why would you do that? It's kind
of interesting. I guarantee you you'll be surprised by this
and appalled a surprise at appalled. Oh good, So stay
tuned for that. Among other things, people aren't well, people
aren't dating or getting together as much as they used
(09:15):
to be period in a way that is really unique
to human history.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
And then the way that people date, if they do
like want to get together and get together with people,
is different than it's ever been, and their obviously would
be you know, upsides and downsides to all that. The
online thing, which is really heavy on it's almost got
to be really heavy on appearance, right, because you're looking
at a picture and then you're deciding based off of
(09:42):
that whether you're interested in them or not as a
quick aside.
Speaker 4 (09:46):
Appearance in photographs, right, which can be different, honestly than
attractiveness in person very much for a variety of different ways.
Some people are better looking than their photographs generally, and
some people are the opposite.
Speaker 3 (09:59):
And then just haven't we all had this experience. You
get to know somebody a little bit, they become either
way better looking or way less attractive through their personality.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
It's just a fact. It's just a fact.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
So and then you got this Joe mocked the idea
of this term, but I got inside information that this
is actually happening shreking USA today, and it's stupid USA
today way writing a story about something called shreking is
a new dating trend that's afoot. The term derives its
name from the animated film Shrek. I think you can
(10:36):
figure that out. Shreking involves dating someone you're not attracted
to in the hopes that this person will treat you
better in return. Unfortunately, when you get shrecked as a verb,
it means the person you lowered your standards for still
ended up hurting you or not treating.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
You very well. And then I guess that feels worse because.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Plenty of people have put looks lower on the list
or hope attraction would grow over time, and that in
itself isn't a bad thing.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Says this endless for USA today.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
When it backfires is when someone assumes that just because
they're dating down and looks that they'll automatically be treated better,
and then if that doesn't happen, they're disappointed. If you
even have in your mind at all that you're dating down,
it is doomed. I mean, that is just what a
terrible way to think about someone.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
Oh my god, yes, you're cready putting them below you.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
Yeah, exactly, and on something as as not important or
uncontrollable as looks. I mean, it's just it's just such
an awful thought. I tried dating down.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
A stop right there.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Ooh ah, what a horrible thing to say or think.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
Can we just use the term dysfunction and move on
a not everything that happens as a trend bee, not
everything needs a name. See, just try to find somebody.
You know, what best advice I ever heard? Who is
a god? Saad the oddly named fellow scholar from I
think he's Jordanian anyway, you said, the secret to a
(12:18):
happy marriage is marry your best friend who you happen
to be sexually attracted to.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
That's what you're looking for.
Speaker 4 (12:26):
Quit with your shreking and you're ghosting and you're whatever
the hell trends I don't even remember what they all are, because.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
They're also stupid.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
We've all been there, said one person who's been in
the dating world. With this, we give the guy we're
not attracted to a chance, thinking he will for sure
know what he has and treat us well.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
But then he doesn't know what he has.
Speaker 4 (12:48):
Yeah, what he has is a shallow bee. What he
has is a calculating she devil, and he should run
from you.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
Suckubus, run son, run away. Did you ever think that
possibly that's it.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
He went out with you and figured out you're just
shallow and vacuous and all kinds of not appealing to him,
And that's why he shreked you.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
Not because he didn't know what he had. He found
out what he had what he said, and didn't like it.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
Amen, brother Kadie. Yes, yes, caculating she devil?
Speaker 6 (13:24):
Yes, okay, she just sounds like she sucks and she's
putting somebody below her and holding herself on a puttet pedestal.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
So yeah, no, okay, So.
Speaker 3 (13:33):
Gus, I gotta get to this because somebody texted me,
I know and this is some inside information because I
assumed what I heard about this is this is not
really a thing they tried to mate Murphy as.
Speaker 4 (13:41):
Donkey and Shrek, by the way, one of the great
characters in cinematic history.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
There's a Shrek five coming out, my son informed me
yesterday too, in which Shrek's sun Or daughter is the
star of the show.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Milk that franchise milit milkit.
Speaker 3 (13:59):
So this person texted me somebody who lives in LA
told her yesterday that shreking is all about finding the
really ugly guy that looks like Shrek, you know, lazy eye,
bad skin, the unfortunate figure, and hopes that you're so
far out of his league that he will treat you right.
And said they have done this as well as their
(14:21):
girlfriends and it hasn't worked out that well.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
But so this is someone who knows.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
Multiple people who in their mind have dated down and
then this had been disappointed that they didn't get special
treatment because they didn't.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
Realize what they had. Good. I know this. All of
this language is horrifying.
Speaker 4 (14:44):
You remember the old, the brilliant speech that that gal
gave I can never remember her name. Live in New York,
but leave before you get too hard. Live in northern California,
but leave before you get too soft.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
Live in LA, but leave before you get too shallow.
No kidding. So this person is heavy into plastic surgery.
I guess.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Oh boy, this person also charges guys for first dates.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Katie.
Speaker 4 (15:12):
Okay, the reason is a name for ladies like you,
the reason being if he likes the way she looks.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
It takes a lot of money to look that good
make up, botox, hair, expensive clothes. If you want to
take this person for drinks, it's five hundred dollars up
front so that she can get dalled up for the
date and look good. And guys are paying for this.
And this isn't a prostitus, Well, this isn't the sex exchange.
Thing is just you want to be at the bar
with me and have people see you. I need because
(15:44):
it's going to cost a lot of money for me
to look the way you want.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Me to look. Guys, stop doing this.
Speaker 4 (15:50):
Let's don't stop it. Why would you support this horror?
Speaker 1 (15:55):
I don't know. I'm back there forever alone. The fact
that this person, this person is actually getting dates that way,
the women, not the men, by the way, that's she's
an escort. Yeah it's yeah. I'm a guy too.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
I mean, it's that important to you to be seen
with somebody that looks a certain way.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
You're willing to pay five hundred bucks? What what is
your what is your friends circle? Move to Kansas and
live there for two years? Okay, just that's my treatment
plan for you. What are the kids saying touch grass exactly.
God's that a trend? No, the whole concept of dating down.
(16:35):
I'm dating. I'm dating down because I think they'll treat
me better when they realize what they've got here.
Speaker 4 (16:40):
It is if you think you're dating down, they are
oo boom the wind there it is shover. Oh my god.
I don't like humans, I really don't. I mean individuals
I like very much, but humankind.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
They have a quote in the last paragraph in USA
Today that emphasizing looks in terms of dating is probably
not the best idea. Thank you for that advice. USA Today.
Really appreciate that.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
Government of the UK says to save water, delete your
old emails.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
What are strong and getty?
Speaker 7 (17:17):
The White House not reacting after the Kremlin poured cold
water on claims of progress, saying it won't agree to
security guarantees for Ukraine unless Russia is part of the
group providing Ukraine's security.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
Extely busied this will not work.
Speaker 8 (17:31):
We have already explained more than once that Russia does
not overstate its interest, but we will ensure our legitimate
interests firmly and harshly. Discussing security issues without the Russian
Federation is a utopia a road to nowhere.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Russia wants to be involved in the security of Ukraine Ellen,
as Jackie Heinrich continues in a moment in fact, why
don't you play the next clip, Michael lenn we can
discuss on Russian.
Speaker 7 (17:56):
State media the Kremlin dug In further, saying security guarantees
should come from the five permanent members of the UN
Security Council, which also includes China, giving Moscow another lever
to veto implementation, which is the same position Russia has
held since twenty twenty two, and not how the White
House described Putin's position after Trump's meeting with him in Alaska.
Speaker 6 (18:17):
We agreed to robust security guarantees that I would describe
as game changing. We didn't think that we were anywhere
close to agreeing to Article five protection from the United States.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
No, what the heck was whit Coff thinking he was misinformed? Again?
I talked about this yesterday.
Speaker 3 (18:37):
There was a mistranslation or he misheard or something at
the very beginning miss of this. Going back a couple
of weeks, I remember when we were on the air
saying Whitcoff's in Moscow right now talking to Putin. Then
everything came out of this, the incredible pace of Trump
getting on board and European leaders and Zelenski fly all
of that came out of Whitcoff saying they've agreed to
(18:59):
security guarantees. And it seems that no, they never did.
He either made it up, which I don't think that's it.
I think he just misinterpreted something. Russia's never agreed to
the whole security guarantees of European troops on the ground
in Ukraine. He thought they did, and that's where all
this flowed from.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
Or theomaster manipulators manipulated him into thinking that they had
agreed to that, because you know, you got to admit
among their options is just outright lies. Sure, of course,
although your metaphor, by the way, people are really enjoying,
as I've talked about this in real life, that the
flowers have been arranged, the toast has been written, the
(19:43):
guest list has been gone over a couple of times,
and the groom says, get married.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
What that's putin right in my agreement? When is it
going to dawn on?
Speaker 3 (19:56):
Well, the president, but when is it going to dawn
on all the media and everybody else and all the
pundits writing this and that that Putin has zero interest
in this. He's just he did you know, you know, Bud,
I heard this this morning several times on several different
cable shows overnight, and this is true. Russia attacked Ukraine
(20:16):
with the highest number of drones and rockets in a month,
one of the biggest attacks of the entire war. And
then they say something like this could derail the peace process.
When is it going to occur to you that he
isn't thinking about that, That's not on his mind.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
He wasn't thinking how will this affect the peace process
when he sent in the drones and the missiles. In fact,
when you say it out loud, I laughed.
Speaker 4 (20:43):
I mean I couldn't tell myself, and not out of mirth,
out of you know, horror and recognition.
Speaker 1 (20:50):
Of course, what a bizarre thing to even say.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
And yet that's the assumption that's been running through all
of this the you know, back to my theme.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
Of human being.
Speaker 4 (21:00):
I I'm not sold on us as a species. I
think there is a huge vein of self delusion running
through this whole thing, which Putin is more than delighted
to exploit.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
With with Trump.
Speaker 3 (21:19):
I can't figure out if it's a It's the classic
sales tactic of you act like there's a deal, you know,
in the hopes that there is one, and if there
isn't one at the end, well you know there wasn't.
But is he just pretending doing the whole sales guy
thing or does he actually believe Putin's you know, we
got the hot mic moment with him and mccron. You know,
(21:41):
might not believe this, but I think he really wants
to do a deal for me. I mean Trump said that,
not in front of the cameras.
Speaker 4 (21:47):
Yeah, every president's a bit of an egomaniac. I mean,
it's just it's one of the job requirements. But Trump
Trump is ego driven in a way that others have
not been really, or at least he's just much more
obviously driven by various by the feeling of status and
praise and reputation, that sort of thing. And he fancies
(22:09):
himself the world's greatest deal maker. And he saw an
enormously challenging, an enormously important deal to be made.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
I mean, with the loss of life. He's absolutely right.
Speaker 4 (22:22):
And I just wonder whether Trump isn't so desirous of
a deal that it's led him to misperceive certain realities.
Speaker 1 (22:37):
He's wanted it too much, which is funny.
Speaker 4 (22:40):
It might have been Charlie Cook at the National Review
somebody who's listening to the other day mentioned that he
needs to reread his own book, The Art of the Deal,
which he allegedly well, he wrote with a ghostwriter, but
because it's made bluntly clear in that book, if you
want the deal more than the other guy, you're gonna
get screwed. And it's funny that dynamic seems to be
(23:01):
playing out here again. It might be motivated partly by
his ego but partly by a desire to quit seeing
children killed, which is, you know, God bless him for that.
But either way, the risk of if you don't give
up crap about a deal, your risk of being played
by Putin is very high. If you deal with him,
(23:23):
if you really really want a deal, holy cow, you're
in trouble. Well, it's possibly he just was misled by
Witkoff came back and told him, say, I talked to Putin.
Putin said he's okay with European troops on the ground
in Ukraine as a peacekeeping force. In Trump thought, okay, great,
that's a good starting point. Now let's get everybody together.
And turns out that's not true, that was never out,
that was never said. Maybe it's just that the naivete
(23:45):
that Americans so often have and dealing with people from
other cultures. Or I could see the Russian saying something like,
uh uh, that is something we would be willing to consider,
and of course they would never ever accept it. But
they just said they'd be willing to consider it, so
of course we would consider it, so we can reject it.
And he said they said they'd consider European peace streaping
(24:06):
keeping troops.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
I don't think there's any way Putin ever accepts the
idea of thousands of French Russian. Well, the Telegraph headline
yesterday was US Air Force could police Ukraine skies as
ten European nations are ready to send peacekeeping forces. Ten
according to the Telegraph. I just don't I don't see
how he's going to allow that at all. And then
(24:30):
that whole US patrolling the skies. I saw some former
military dude talking about that, and how how you know
the devil's really in the details on that. Are we
going to go with the if we're shot at, we're
going to respond. I mean, is that the rules of
(24:50):
engagement or not? And would it all only be defensive?
Would it be offensive? If if French and British troops
came under fire, would we let them handle that on
the ground or do we immediately go offensive into Russia
attacking you stopping that? I mean, what would be the
(25:11):
rules of engagement on that?
Speaker 1 (25:12):
Well? Right, it's an excellent question.
Speaker 4 (25:14):
I think any soldier, professional soldier could tell you the
idea of purely defensive war is not war. That's a
shooting gallery. You just volunteer to be in a shooting gallery.
Ask a lot of the guys who served in Afghanistan
during some of the incredibly ill advised rules of engagement
which handcuffed them and told them you can't shoot until
you're being shot at. Horrifying, but don't get me started.
(25:35):
So it's an excellent question.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
We'd be really into the war and very close to
at war with Russia if we decide to supply air cover.
Speaker 1 (25:47):
Correct.
Speaker 4 (25:48):
I mentioned this note from JT. We got why does
Putin need to sign anything? Since Russia will violate any
agreement they'll like violated the moment it's they just don't care,
And he asks, how would a signature by Putin change
a single thing about what European troops would do to
support Ukraine. They already know they can't trust him, so
(26:08):
why not just put boots on the ground and demand
that the current lines be honored or else The Trilac
group will respond, I'm totally serious. Name one thing that
would be different in the deployment of European troops if
Putin signed an agreement. It's you know what, most of
it's just political jt a. It would give you legitimacy
(26:30):
internationally in a way that I think is really jivy,
and it's hard for us to understand why anybody would
give a crap about that. It's like, you know, the
plausible deniability of saying those soldiers who took over eastern
Ukraine not to Russian forces there come to be called
(26:51):
the little Green men because it was so such a
joke that they weren't Russian forces. But for some reason
that sort of plausible deniability matters, I guess.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
Anyway. My point is the agreement that would be signed.
Speaker 4 (27:06):
Might help to give international legitimacy when the Allied forces
struck back against Putin. But I wouldn't spend a lot
of time in trouble getting Putin to sign on to
something he's going to violate next week. If, as you
are hinting at JT, the only thing Putin cares about
(27:29):
is force and power, organize the force and say you
cross this trip wire the force is going to be
used against you or through talking. I think that would
be perfectly fine if you are willing to accept that
it's worth Europe and the US's interests and risk of
escalating to back Ukraine in that way.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
I know a lot of you don't. Well, it works
both ways too.
Speaker 3 (27:53):
I've been I'm a fan of George will of the
Washington Post, and he's been talking and writing for years
about Article five, the whole NATO thing. That's as rock
solid and agreement as you can get. But he always
talks about treaties and agreements are true until they're not.
And at any point any NATO nation, including the United States,
could decide, you know what, we're not going.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
To go to the war for Estonia or whoever one
of the NATO nations. We're just not.
Speaker 3 (28:18):
I know we're supposed to, but we're not in the
same way that Putin would violate his Any European country
could violate the NATO agreement and might. I'll bet I
hope it doesn't happen, but I'll bet we see that
around Taiwan at some point the whole you're not going
to take that, Okay, well.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
I guess maybe they are. And we're not going to
actually go to war with China over then, which.
Speaker 4 (28:38):
Is why countries work so hard to be intertwined, because
international agreements only exist as long as they serve the individual.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Countries, you know, individual interests.
Speaker 3 (28:50):
Putin is hoping that the NATO countries won't actually honor
that Article five. Article five an attack on one and
is an attack on all that won't actually or that
when it comes to push and shove over you know,
I don't know a chuck of pol under a Stonia
or whatever.
Speaker 4 (29:07):
This is the opposite of strategic ambiguity. I think we
ought to have utter strategic clarity. You like, screw up
the turf on a soccer field in Estonia, We'll put
one hundred thousand troops there the next day.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
I don't know if a Stonia is actually a NATO
or not. But that's not my point. Just one of
those little NATO countries. Are we going to go to
war over that or not?
Speaker 4 (29:30):
I'm talking about the and they are the Baltic nations. Yeah,
that's what I'm saying, one hundred percent clarity. That is
a practically one hundred percent guarantee against aggression at against
it going from step one, the little green men and
the minor incursions to quote the world's worst president, Joe Biden.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
It's a guarantee against them. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
Well, there might be a reason that people aren't saying
that out loud. They don't want to be they don't
want to be held to it Estonia.
Speaker 4 (30:02):
When I am elected president number one, God help us
number two, I will make that policy clear.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
A lot of golf.
Speaker 3 (30:09):
Estonia has been a member of NATO since two thousand
and four, So there you go. They are And how
many of you ever even heard of Estonia? Would you
want your kid fighting in Estonia to protect it? And
that'll be a political question at some point.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Maybe we got a lot more on the way. Stay here.
Speaker 9 (30:29):
Armstrong, a british Man, set a Guinness World Record by
writing fifty five different roller coasters in one week. Anything
to avoid brushing his teeth.
Speaker 3 (30:46):
Wow, And Joe's going to be in Great Britain next
week and you're going to survey the dental care of
the Brits, among other things, and report.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
Back to us.
Speaker 4 (30:55):
I will also test the bounds of free speech and
report back on how woke their museum are.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
Not surprisingly, we got a fair number of texts about shreking, which,
according to the USA Today and somebody who texted me
with personal knowledge, is a thing where women date down.
And I feel like anybody whoses the term date down
should be pushed off a cliff. People date down on
purpose thinking this is a cliff good enough?
Speaker 1 (31:26):
Or should it be a volcano? Just ask you back
to you.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
People who date down in terms of looks feel like
they'll be treated better because this person really realizes what they've.
Speaker 1 (31:39):
Got, which is an appalling sentence. I mean, just a
ball really is.
Speaker 3 (31:45):
And the fact that there are a bunch of people
that think that and actually do that is disgusting.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
This might be how I got married. Yeah, Well maybe
I'm just so outraged because I'm wondering how often does
this happened to me?
Speaker 4 (31:57):
As a friend of the Armstrong and Getty Show, wrote
I thought I was just charming.
Speaker 1 (32:02):
Well, now I know.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
On the topic though. So a person I know said
that some of her friends have done this. They have
dated down thinking they would get treated better, and then
weren't treated better, and so they call that being shrekeed
and were disappointed. And as Joe pointed out, maybe they
just figured out you're a shallow bitch.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
A manipulative she devils. Yes, it's not quite as complicated
as it sounds.
Speaker 3 (32:33):
But then there was the other person, this friend of mine,
a person who's shreked, who actually tells guys, if you
want to go out with me, it's gonna I need
five hundred dollars to look the way you want me
to look, hair nails, everything like that, and then you
get to be seen with me, I guess or whatever.
And I thought that was appalling. But we got this
text regarding rent a hottie. How is that different from
(32:56):
renting a ferrari? So no one should ever rent a ferrari.
If you have the dollar, do what makes you smile?
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (33:05):
I would suggest that you have priorities that will lead
you not to happiness, But you do you brother, There's.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
I can't I'll have to think about it for longer
than I've got right now. On why it is incredibly
different to rent a Ferrari to see what it's like
to drive a Ferrari.
Speaker 4 (33:23):
Well, I was gonna say, number one, you get to
drive the Ferrari. If you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
Well, okay, I wouldn't even think of that. But if
you're but well, it's different.
Speaker 4 (33:32):
Are you mo Seriously, he's paying money to be seen
standing next to a Ferrari.
Speaker 1 (33:36):
That's stupid. See, I would rent a Ferrari maybe to
actually drive a Ferrari, because I don't know what it's like.
Speaker 3 (33:42):
I've never done it, and it might be pretty cool.
And then for a variety of reasons, I can't or
ever won't own one because it doesn't make practical sense.
Is that's a similar thing, but it's way different than that.
If you're actually dating, like you're trying to be in
a relationship with somebody, which is like one of the
most satisfying things that can happen in your entire existence
on planet Earth. And if that's what your goal is
(34:03):
and you're going about it this way, I don't, I
don't know what you're doing.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
Well, you're doomed to misery. Let's go ahead and bottom
line it here, doomed to misery. Yes, it's a ClearCase
of DTM. I mean, I know I see it. So
if you tell her I'm not paying you five hundred dollars,
is she going to show up in sweats and no makeup?
And I told you what an odd way to live
(34:30):
your life? No kidding, how's that working out for you?
Would be a good question.
Speaker 4 (34:34):
You know, there are you know, sub sectors of American
society that are as foreign to me as you know
somebody in Africa with a plate in their lip, or
you know in Afghanistan where they play that sport where
you whack a calf's head around on horseback or something
like that.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
I can't remember precisely.
Speaker 3 (34:52):
Outworks If you're picking somebody only and looks so, how
long is that enjoyable? I would think that would wear
off so fast. I don't really have anything in common
with you. I don't really find you very interesting, but
I guess I'll look at you.
Speaker 1 (35:03):
From how long does that last?
Speaker 4 (35:05):
So the amusing side is the British government wants you
to conserve water, and one of the ways they suggest
you to do it is by deleting your own your
old emails. That story unbelievable, and one of Obama's climate
zars says, you guys want to know the real truth
about climate change, I got it for you, oh boy,
Armstrong and Getty
Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty arms Strong
and Gatty and he Armstrong and Yedetti.
Speaker 2 (00:23):
The LATINX stuff that, by the way, not one person
ever in my office has ever used the word LATINX.
Speaker 1 (00:27):
So can we finally put that to bed? Yeah? But
where did that even know? More LATINX? Everybody?
Speaker 2 (00:31):
Well, I just didn't even know where it came from,
And like, what are people talking about? I hope we
can really paint a picture in terms of our consciousness
of how impactful this has been on the LATINX community.
About three quarters of renters in the state that have
fallen behind and rent represented the Latino and African American community.
Speaker 1 (00:49):
The LATINX and Black communities.
Speaker 2 (00:51):
You've got politicians that are banning not assault rifles, but
the word LATINX.
Speaker 1 (00:56):
They're not even serious.
Speaker 3 (00:58):
Wow, that's even further So that's Gavin Newsom doing his
bro podcasts that he's doing all across the country now
as he tries to be like just a regular guy
running for president, and he's doing a pretty good job
of it might work for him, but claiming that LATINX.
Whoever even heard of that before? What does that even mean?
And then a little montage of him using the term
(01:19):
in recent years, including one and where he's fighting against
trying to take away the word LATINX, blasting anybody who would.
Speaker 1 (01:28):
Dare disparage it. Oh boy, but oh but it works.
Speaker 3 (01:32):
People don't hear the you know, like in newspapers or books,
there's the big headline and then there's a little sentence underneath.
People don't hear the sentence underneath. Ninety percent of people.
They just get the big headline of everything, of every story.
Speaker 1 (01:45):
And that's funny. Though. He's got to run away from
so much of that stuff because it's so freaking crazy.
Speaker 4 (01:53):
Oh yeah, I mean yeah. The least is long of
policies that are abhorrent to most Americans or excuse me,
I should have taken my coughs are present and or
results that are abhorrent to Americans. For instance, as we
outlined last hour, cal Unicorney has lost one hundred and
(02:13):
a half hundred thousand private sector jobs and added three
hundred and sixty one thousand government jobs since twenty twenty two.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
It's just astonishing.
Speaker 3 (02:22):
Well, let's be happy about this stuff though, people, Rather
than condemning the hypocrisy, we should be happy he understands
that he needs to run away from the nonsense like
trans boys in girls sports or the term LATINX, which
is one of the dumbest things that's ever happened in
my lifetime. He has to run away from it if
(02:44):
he wants to be president. He is determined, and he's right,
and that's good.
Speaker 4 (02:47):
News, right it is, Although don't let down your guard
because we've received I don't know half a dozen emails
just in the last forty eight hours from folks that
are getting ready to get back in the classroom as
teachers in California and are going through their state mandated
DEI white supremacist woke doctrine right now. They're getting educated
(03:10):
in that quote unquote educated. So getting back to Gavy,
and we talked about this fairly recently. If you're just
tuning in, but the whole bed bath and beyond thing,
the head of bed bath and beyond. Do you have
that statement or I mean for people who are not familiar,
just real.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
Quickly, yes, I do.
Speaker 3 (03:29):
I'm sorry, this is I got the other screen up
about shreking a dating trend in which people are dating
unattractive people on purpose. That story we got to get
to later this hour. Yes, yes, yes, and different species
of giraffes. Yes, I already did the giraffes shreking. We
will do this hour though. It's an actual thing and
it's really quite entertaining.
Speaker 1 (03:47):
Point.
Speaker 3 (03:48):
So the CEO of Bed, Bath and Beyond puts out
a statement yesterday, we will not operate or open retail
stores in California. This decision isn't about politics, It's about reality.
California has created one of the most regulated, expensive and
risky environments for business in America. It's a system that
makes it harder to employ people, harder to keep doors open,
and harder to deliver value to customers. The result higher taxes,
(04:10):
hire fees, higher wages that many businesses simply cannot sustain.
Speaker 4 (04:15):
And then Gavin Newsom, in a snarky social media post yesterday, replied.
Speaker 1 (04:21):
The company that already went bankrupt and closed every store
across the country two years ago.
Speaker 4 (04:27):
Okay, I will be responding to that in a moment.
After a word from Kevin McCarthy, former Speaker of the House,
multi generation cal Unicornean thirty three, Michael.
Speaker 5 (04:38):
There's another example of a failed California under Gavin. Instead
of a governor going out trying to create businesses, he
continues to push them away. We saw not just businesses
go away, but we're losing population because of the problem
of how they're governing California.
Speaker 1 (04:55):
All right, thank you, Kevin. Good to hear your voice.
What's the beyond? I get bedd and back, but what's
the beyond?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
Hallways, kitchens, multiple rooms and door corridors can be furnished.
All right, So, Gavin, here is my response to your
sarcasm anti rooms. Oh yeah, Foyers, window, don't get me started.
Speaker 3 (05:21):
Window treatment, that's all absolutely yes, although you do have
windows in beds and baths.
Speaker 1 (05:29):
Michael. So is it a good point? Yeah, okay, where
were we? I'm sure there was a thread?
Speaker 4 (05:36):
Oh yes, So Gavin's snark about a CEO saying your
state is so hostile to business and so difficult to
operate in, We're not even gonna try. And instead of
addressing policy, he says, oh, yeah, the same company that
went bankrupt and closed all their stores two years ago.
(05:56):
Let me explain something to you, Gavin, Because you were
born with a silver spoon in your mouth. You've been
successful in business because you've been bankrolled up to your
ears by all of your rich relatives.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
But here's the way it works.
Speaker 4 (06:09):
Big companies sometimes failed to adjust with the times. Something
you know changes whatever. They're unsuccessful, they declare bankruptcy and
they reorganize. Bed Bath and Beyond has a lot of fans.
It's a cool store. I'm a fan, Judy and I
shop there for a lot of stuff for years and years,
(06:30):
and we're super bummed to hear it was closing. Well,
now they're reopening with a little different concept that's going
to be better for consumers and more likely to be
a successful business. It's the very thing we treasure in America.
Gavin innovation, adaptation, creativity and sticking to it. And these
(06:52):
people who are doing that said, the one place we're
not going to bother is California because it's so hostile
to business. Go ahead, Gavy, give us some more of
your clever, clever snark. Uh what a blank? That's That
(07:12):
was the perfect way to end my screed. It's a
multi syllable rhymes with bass shoal that's he.
Speaker 1 (07:23):
Is a blank?
Speaker 4 (07:27):
What a blank whole thing to say? I mean it's
beyond like bad governance or you know, misunderstanding of the economy.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
It's just you're being a dick.
Speaker 4 (07:40):
Oh please run for president. Please, I beg you, because
your humiliation will nourish.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
My soul for a thousand years. Oh wow, soul nourishing
a thousand years. I stand by my statement. That was
a very standing on a hillside with a staff in
a robe for some reason sort of statement to make well.
Speaker 4 (08:11):
I'm I'm heading to London on vacation and I'm feeling
sure Chillian.
Speaker 1 (08:16):
I think I was preaching kind of a Gandolf sort
of thing. There. Wow, soul for a thousand years.
Speaker 3 (08:24):
You shall not stop us be lightning and storm clouds gathering.
Speaker 1 (08:31):
I love that.
Speaker 4 (08:32):
If anybody's good at ai and can do that, please,
we are lucky, send me the video.
Speaker 3 (08:38):
Yes, we are lucky in that the topic of shreking
as a dating thing came up and somebody with knowledge
of this specifically texted someone I know who has friends
that have been shreking. Oh no, this is dating somebody
who looks like a swamp, who looks like Shrek.
Speaker 1 (08:54):
Unappealing on purpose? Why would you do that? It's kind
of interesting. I guarantee you you'll be surprised by this
and appalled a surprise at appalled. Oh good, So stay
tuned for that. Among other things, people aren't well, people
aren't dating or getting together as much as they used
(09:15):
to be period in a way that is really unique
to human history.
Speaker 3 (09:20):
And then the way that people date, if they do
like want to get together and get together with people,
is different than it's ever been, and their obviously would
be you know, upsides and downsides to all that. The
online thing, which is really heavy on it's almost got
to be really heavy on appearance, right, because you're looking
at a picture and then you're deciding based off of
(09:42):
that whether you're interested in them or not as a
quick aside.
Speaker 4 (09:46):
Appearance in photographs, right, which can be different, honestly than
attractiveness in person very much for a variety of different ways.
Some people are better looking than their photographs generally, and
some people are the opposite.
Speaker 3 (09:59):
And then just haven't we all had this experience. You
get to know somebody a little bit, they become either
way better looking or way less attractive through their personality.
Speaker 1 (10:09):
It's just a fact. It's just a fact.
Speaker 3 (10:14):
So and then you got this Joe mocked the idea
of this term, but I got inside information that this
is actually happening shreking USA today, and it's stupid USA
today way writing a story about something called shreking is
a new dating trend that's afoot. The term derives its
name from the animated film Shrek. I think you can
(10:36):
figure that out. Shreking involves dating someone you're not attracted
to in the hopes that this person will treat you
better in return. Unfortunately, when you get shrecked as a verb,
it means the person you lowered your standards for still
ended up hurting you or not treating.
Speaker 1 (10:54):
You very well. And then I guess that feels worse because.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Plenty of people have put looks lower on the list
or hope attraction would grow over time, and that in
itself isn't a bad thing.
Speaker 1 (11:08):
Says this endless for USA today.
Speaker 3 (11:10):
When it backfires is when someone assumes that just because
they're dating down and looks that they'll automatically be treated better,
and then if that doesn't happen, they're disappointed. If you
even have in your mind at all that you're dating down,
it is doomed. I mean, that is just what a
terrible way to think about someone.
Speaker 1 (11:31):
Oh my god, yes, you're cready putting them below you.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
Yeah, exactly, and on something as as not important or
uncontrollable as looks. I mean, it's just it's just such
an awful thought. I tried dating down.
Speaker 1 (11:47):
A stop right there.
Speaker 3 (11:49):
Ooh ah, what a horrible thing to say or think.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
Can we just use the term dysfunction and move on
a not everything that happens as a trend bee, not
everything needs a name. See, just try to find somebody.
You know, what best advice I ever heard? Who is
a god? Saad the oddly named fellow scholar from I
think he's Jordanian anyway, you said, the secret to a
(12:18):
happy marriage is marry your best friend who you happen
to be sexually attracted to.
Speaker 1 (12:24):
That's what you're looking for.
Speaker 4 (12:26):
Quit with your shreking and you're ghosting and you're whatever
the hell trends I don't even remember what they all are, because.
Speaker 1 (12:35):
They're also stupid.
Speaker 3 (12:36):
We've all been there, said one person who's been in
the dating world. With this, we give the guy we're
not attracted to a chance, thinking he will for sure
know what he has and treat us well.
Speaker 1 (12:45):
But then he doesn't know what he has.
Speaker 4 (12:48):
Yeah, what he has is a shallow bee. What he
has is a calculating she devil, and he should run
from you.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
Suckubus, run son, run away. Did you ever think that
possibly that's it.
Speaker 1 (13:03):
He went out with you and figured out you're just
shallow and vacuous and all kinds of not appealing to him,
And that's why he shreked you.
Speaker 3 (13:11):
Not because he didn't know what he had. He found
out what he had what he said, and didn't like it.
Speaker 1 (13:18):
Amen, brother Kadie. Yes, yes, caculating she devil?
Speaker 6 (13:24):
Yes, okay, she just sounds like she sucks and she's
putting somebody below her and holding herself on a puttet pedestal.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
So yeah, no, okay, So.
Speaker 3 (13:33):
Gus, I gotta get to this because somebody texted me,
I know and this is some inside information because I
assumed what I heard about this is this is not
really a thing they tried to mate Murphy as.
Speaker 4 (13:41):
Donkey and Shrek, by the way, one of the great
characters in cinematic history.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
There's a Shrek five coming out, my son informed me
yesterday too, in which Shrek's sun Or daughter is the
star of the show.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Milk that franchise milit milkit.
Speaker 3 (13:59):
So this person texted me somebody who lives in LA
told her yesterday that shreking is all about finding the
really ugly guy that looks like Shrek, you know, lazy eye,
bad skin, the unfortunate figure, and hopes that you're so
far out of his league that he will treat you right.
And said they have done this as well as their
(14:21):
girlfriends and it hasn't worked out that well.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
But so this is someone who knows.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
Multiple people who in their mind have dated down and
then this had been disappointed that they didn't get special
treatment because they didn't.
Speaker 1 (14:37):
Realize what they had. Good. I know this. All of
this language is horrifying.
Speaker 4 (14:44):
You remember the old, the brilliant speech that that gal
gave I can never remember her name. Live in New York,
but leave before you get too hard. Live in northern California,
but leave before you get too soft.
Speaker 1 (14:55):
Live in LA, but leave before you get too shallow.
No kidding. So this person is heavy into plastic surgery.
I guess.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Oh boy, this person also charges guys for first dates.
Speaker 1 (15:11):
Katie.
Speaker 4 (15:12):
Okay, the reason is a name for ladies like you,
the reason being if he likes the way she looks.
Speaker 3 (15:21):
It takes a lot of money to look that good
make up, botox, hair, expensive clothes. If you want to
take this person for drinks, it's five hundred dollars up
front so that she can get dalled up for the
date and look good. And guys are paying for this.
And this isn't a prostitus, Well, this isn't the sex exchange.
Thing is just you want to be at the bar
with me and have people see you. I need because
(15:44):
it's going to cost a lot of money for me
to look the way you want.
Speaker 1 (15:47):
Me to look. Guys, stop doing this.
Speaker 4 (15:50):
Let's don't stop it. Why would you support this horror?
Speaker 1 (15:55):
I don't know. I'm back there forever alone. The fact
that this person, this person is actually getting dates that way,
the women, not the men, by the way, that's she's
an escort. Yeah it's yeah. I'm a guy too.
Speaker 3 (16:07):
I mean, it's that important to you to be seen
with somebody that looks a certain way.
Speaker 1 (16:11):
You're willing to pay five hundred bucks? What what is
your what is your friends circle? Move to Kansas and
live there for two years? Okay, just that's my treatment
plan for you. What are the kids saying touch grass exactly.
God's that a trend? No, the whole concept of dating down.
(16:35):
I'm dating. I'm dating down because I think they'll treat
me better when they realize what they've got here.
Speaker 4 (16:40):
It is if you think you're dating down, they are
oo boom the wind there it is shover. Oh my god.
I don't like humans, I really don't. I mean individuals
I like very much, but humankind.
Speaker 1 (17:00):
They have a quote in the last paragraph in USA
Today that emphasizing looks in terms of dating is probably
not the best idea. Thank you for that advice. USA Today.
Really appreciate that.
Speaker 4 (17:09):
Government of the UK says to save water, delete your
old emails.
Speaker 1 (17:13):
What are strong and getty?
Speaker 7 (17:17):
The White House not reacting after the Kremlin poured cold
water on claims of progress, saying it won't agree to
security guarantees for Ukraine unless Russia is part of the
group providing Ukraine's security.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
Extely busied this will not work.
Speaker 8 (17:31):
We have already explained more than once that Russia does
not overstate its interest, but we will ensure our legitimate
interests firmly and harshly. Discussing security issues without the Russian
Federation is a utopia a road to nowhere.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Russia wants to be involved in the security of Ukraine Ellen,
as Jackie Heinrich continues in a moment in fact, why
don't you play the next clip, Michael lenn we can
discuss on Russian.
Speaker 7 (17:56):
State media the Kremlin dug In further, saying security guarantees
should come from the five permanent members of the UN
Security Council, which also includes China, giving Moscow another lever
to veto implementation, which is the same position Russia has
held since twenty twenty two, and not how the White
House described Putin's position after Trump's meeting with him in Alaska.
Speaker 6 (18:17):
We agreed to robust security guarantees that I would describe
as game changing. We didn't think that we were anywhere
close to agreeing to Article five protection from the United States.
Speaker 1 (18:32):
No, what the heck was whit Coff thinking he was misinformed? Again?
I talked about this yesterday.
Speaker 3 (18:37):
There was a mistranslation or he misheard or something at
the very beginning miss of this. Going back a couple
of weeks, I remember when we were on the air
saying Whitcoff's in Moscow right now talking to Putin. Then
everything came out of this, the incredible pace of Trump
getting on board and European leaders and Zelenski fly all
of that came out of Whitcoff saying they've agreed to
(18:59):
security guarantees. And it seems that no, they never did.
He either made it up, which I don't think that's it.
I think he just misinterpreted something. Russia's never agreed to
the whole security guarantees of European troops on the ground
in Ukraine. He thought they did, and that's where all
this flowed from.
Speaker 4 (19:20):
Or theomaster manipulators manipulated him into thinking that they had
agreed to that, because you know, you got to admit
among their options is just outright lies. Sure, of course,
although your metaphor, by the way, people are really enjoying,
as I've talked about this in real life, that the
flowers have been arranged, the toast has been written, the
(19:43):
guest list has been gone over a couple of times,
and the groom says, get married.
Speaker 1 (19:48):
What that's putin right in my agreement? When is it
going to dawn on?
Speaker 3 (19:56):
Well, the president, but when is it going to dawn
on all the media and everybody else and all the
pundits writing this and that that Putin has zero interest
in this. He's just he did you know, you know, Bud,
I heard this this morning several times on several different
cable shows overnight, and this is true. Russia attacked Ukraine
(20:16):
with the highest number of drones and rockets in a month,
one of the biggest attacks of the entire war. And
then they say something like this could derail the peace process.
When is it going to occur to you that he
isn't thinking about that, That's not on his mind.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
He wasn't thinking how will this affect the peace process
when he sent in the drones and the missiles. In fact,
when you say it out loud, I laughed.
Speaker 4 (20:43):
I mean I couldn't tell myself, and not out of mirth,
out of you know, horror and recognition.
Speaker 1 (20:50):
Of course, what a bizarre thing to even say.
Speaker 4 (20:53):
And yet that's the assumption that's been running through all
of this the you know, back to my theme.
Speaker 1 (20:59):
Of human being.
Speaker 4 (21:00):
I I'm not sold on us as a species. I
think there is a huge vein of self delusion running
through this whole thing, which Putin is more than delighted
to exploit.
Speaker 1 (21:18):
With with Trump.
Speaker 3 (21:19):
I can't figure out if it's a It's the classic
sales tactic of you act like there's a deal, you know,
in the hopes that there is one, and if there
isn't one at the end, well you know there wasn't.
But is he just pretending doing the whole sales guy
thing or does he actually believe Putin's you know, we
got the hot mic moment with him and mccron. You know,
(21:41):
might not believe this, but I think he really wants
to do a deal for me. I mean Trump said that,
not in front of the cameras.
Speaker 4 (21:47):
Yeah, every president's a bit of an egomaniac. I mean,
it's just it's one of the job requirements. But Trump
Trump is ego driven in a way that others have
not been really, or at least he's just much more
obviously driven by various by the feeling of status and
praise and reputation, that sort of thing. And he fancies
(22:09):
himself the world's greatest deal maker. And he saw an
enormously challenging, an enormously important deal to be made.
Speaker 1 (22:18):
I mean, with the loss of life. He's absolutely right.
Speaker 4 (22:22):
And I just wonder whether Trump isn't so desirous of
a deal that it's led him to misperceive certain realities.
Speaker 1 (22:37):
He's wanted it too much, which is funny.
Speaker 4 (22:40):
It might have been Charlie Cook at the National Review
somebody who's listening to the other day mentioned that he
needs to reread his own book, The Art of the Deal,
which he allegedly well, he wrote with a ghostwriter, but
because it's made bluntly clear in that book, if you
want the deal more than the other guy, you're gonna
get screwed. And it's funny that dynamic seems to be
(23:01):
playing out here again. It might be motivated partly by
his ego but partly by a desire to quit seeing
children killed, which is, you know, God bless him for that.
But either way, the risk of if you don't give
up crap about a deal, your risk of being played
by Putin is very high. If you deal with him,
(23:23):
if you really really want a deal, holy cow, you're
in trouble. Well, it's possibly he just was misled by
Witkoff came back and told him, say, I talked to Putin.
Putin said he's okay with European troops on the ground
in Ukraine as a peacekeeping force. In Trump thought, okay, great,
that's a good starting point. Now let's get everybody together.
And turns out that's not true, that was never out,
that was never said. Maybe it's just that the naivete
(23:45):
that Americans so often have and dealing with people from
other cultures. Or I could see the Russian saying something like,
uh uh, that is something we would be willing to consider,
and of course they would never ever accept it. But
they just said they'd be willing to consider it, so
of course we would consider it, so we can reject it.
And he said they said they'd consider European peace streaping
(24:06):
keeping troops.
Speaker 1 (24:07):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (24:08):
I don't think there's any way Putin ever accepts the
idea of thousands of French Russian. Well, the Telegraph headline
yesterday was US Air Force could police Ukraine skies as
ten European nations are ready to send peacekeeping forces. Ten
according to the Telegraph. I just don't I don't see
how he's going to allow that at all. And then
(24:30):
that whole US patrolling the skies. I saw some former
military dude talking about that, and how how you know
the devil's really in the details on that. Are we
going to go with the if we're shot at, we're
going to respond. I mean, is that the rules of
(24:50):
engagement or not? And would it all only be defensive?
Would it be offensive? If if French and British troops
came under fire, would we let them handle that on
the ground or do we immediately go offensive into Russia
attacking you stopping that? I mean, what would be the
(25:11):
rules of engagement on that?
Speaker 1 (25:12):
Well? Right, it's an excellent question.
Speaker 4 (25:14):
I think any soldier, professional soldier could tell you the
idea of purely defensive war is not war. That's a
shooting gallery. You just volunteer to be in a shooting gallery.
Ask a lot of the guys who served in Afghanistan
during some of the incredibly ill advised rules of engagement
which handcuffed them and told them you can't shoot until
you're being shot at. Horrifying, but don't get me started.
(25:35):
So it's an excellent question.
Speaker 3 (25:39):
We'd be really into the war and very close to
at war with Russia if we decide to supply air cover.
Speaker 1 (25:47):
Correct.
Speaker 4 (25:48):
I mentioned this note from JT. We got why does
Putin need to sign anything? Since Russia will violate any
agreement they'll like violated the moment it's they just don't care,
And he asks, how would a signature by Putin change
a single thing about what European troops would do to
support Ukraine. They already know they can't trust him, so
(26:08):
why not just put boots on the ground and demand
that the current lines be honored or else The Trilac
group will respond, I'm totally serious. Name one thing that
would be different in the deployment of European troops if
Putin signed an agreement. It's you know what, most of
it's just political jt a. It would give you legitimacy
(26:30):
internationally in a way that I think is really jivy,
and it's hard for us to understand why anybody would
give a crap about that. It's like, you know, the
plausible deniability of saying those soldiers who took over eastern
Ukraine not to Russian forces there come to be called
(26:51):
the little Green men because it was so such a
joke that they weren't Russian forces. But for some reason
that sort of plausible deniability matters, I guess.
Speaker 1 (26:59):
Anyway. My point is the agreement that would be signed.
Speaker 4 (27:06):
Might help to give international legitimacy when the Allied forces
struck back against Putin. But I wouldn't spend a lot
of time in trouble getting Putin to sign on to
something he's going to violate next week. If, as you
are hinting at JT, the only thing Putin cares about
(27:29):
is force and power, organize the force and say you
cross this trip wire the force is going to be
used against you or through talking. I think that would
be perfectly fine if you are willing to accept that
it's worth Europe and the US's interests and risk of
escalating to back Ukraine in that way.
Speaker 1 (27:50):
I know a lot of you don't. Well, it works
both ways too.
Speaker 3 (27:53):
I've been I'm a fan of George will of the
Washington Post, and he's been talking and writing for years
about Article five, the whole NATO thing. That's as rock
solid and agreement as you can get. But he always
talks about treaties and agreements are true until they're not.
And at any point any NATO nation, including the United States,
could decide, you know what, we're not going.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
To go to the war for Estonia or whoever one
of the NATO nations. We're just not.
Speaker 3 (28:18):
I know we're supposed to, but we're not in the
same way that Putin would violate his Any European country
could violate the NATO agreement and might. I'll bet I
hope it doesn't happen, but I'll bet we see that
around Taiwan at some point the whole you're not going
to take that, Okay, well.
Speaker 1 (28:35):
I guess maybe they are. And we're not going to
actually go to war with China over then, which.
Speaker 4 (28:38):
Is why countries work so hard to be intertwined, because
international agreements only exist as long as they serve the individual.
Speaker 1 (28:45):
Countries, you know, individual interests.
Speaker 3 (28:50):
Putin is hoping that the NATO countries won't actually honor
that Article five. Article five an attack on one and
is an attack on all that won't actually or that
when it comes to push and shove over you know,
I don't know a chuck of pol under a Stonia
or whatever.
Speaker 4 (29:07):
This is the opposite of strategic ambiguity. I think we
ought to have utter strategic clarity. You like, screw up
the turf on a soccer field in Estonia, We'll put
one hundred thousand troops there the next day.
Speaker 1 (29:22):
I don't know.
Speaker 3 (29:22):
I don't know if a Stonia is actually a NATO
or not. But that's not my point. Just one of
those little NATO countries. Are we going to go to
war over that or not?
Speaker 4 (29:30):
I'm talking about the and they are the Baltic nations. Yeah,
that's what I'm saying, one hundred percent clarity. That is
a practically one hundred percent guarantee against aggression at against
it going from step one, the little green men and
the minor incursions to quote the world's worst president, Joe Biden.
Speaker 1 (29:50):
It's a guarantee against them. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (29:55):
Well, there might be a reason that people aren't saying
that out loud. They don't want to be they don't
want to be held to it Estonia.
Speaker 4 (30:02):
When I am elected president number one, God help us
number two, I will make that policy clear.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
A lot of golf.
Speaker 3 (30:09):
Estonia has been a member of NATO since two thousand
and four, So there you go. They are And how
many of you ever even heard of Estonia? Would you
want your kid fighting in Estonia to protect it? And
that'll be a political question at some point.
Speaker 1 (30:25):
Maybe we got a lot more on the way. Stay here.
Speaker 9 (30:29):
Armstrong, a british Man, set a Guinness World Record by
writing fifty five different roller coasters in one week. Anything
to avoid brushing his teeth.
Speaker 3 (30:46):
Wow, And Joe's going to be in Great Britain next
week and you're going to survey the dental care of
the Brits, among other things, and report.
Speaker 1 (30:54):
Back to us.
Speaker 4 (30:55):
I will also test the bounds of free speech and
report back on how woke their museum are.
Speaker 3 (31:04):
Not surprisingly, we got a fair number of texts about shreking, which,
according to the USA Today and somebody who texted me
with personal knowledge, is a thing where women date down.
And I feel like anybody whoses the term date down
should be pushed off a cliff. People date down on
purpose thinking this is a cliff good enough?
Speaker 1 (31:26):
Or should it be a volcano? Just ask you back
to you.
Speaker 3 (31:33):
People who date down in terms of looks feel like
they'll be treated better because this person really realizes what they've.
Speaker 1 (31:39):
Got, which is an appalling sentence. I mean, just a
ball really is.
Speaker 3 (31:45):
And the fact that there are a bunch of people
that think that and actually do that is disgusting.
Speaker 1 (31:50):
This might be how I got married. Yeah, Well maybe
I'm just so outraged because I'm wondering how often does
this happened to me?
Speaker 4 (31:57):
As a friend of the Armstrong and Getty Show, wrote
I thought I was just charming.
Speaker 1 (32:02):
Well, now I know.
Speaker 3 (32:05):
On the topic though. So a person I know said
that some of her friends have done this. They have
dated down thinking they would get treated better, and then
weren't treated better, and so they call that being shrekeed
and were disappointed. And as Joe pointed out, maybe they
just figured out you're a shallow bitch.
Speaker 1 (32:27):
A manipulative she devils. Yes, it's not quite as complicated
as it sounds.
Speaker 3 (32:33):
But then there was the other person, this friend of mine,
a person who's shreked, who actually tells guys, if you
want to go out with me, it's gonna I need
five hundred dollars to look the way you want me
to look, hair nails, everything like that, and then you
get to be seen with me, I guess or whatever.
And I thought that was appalling. But we got this
text regarding rent a hottie. How is that different from
(32:56):
renting a ferrari? So no one should ever rent a ferrari.
If you have the dollar, do what makes you smile?
Speaker 1 (33:04):
Yeah?
Speaker 4 (33:05):
I would suggest that you have priorities that will lead
you not to happiness, But you do you brother, There's.
Speaker 3 (33:14):
I can't I'll have to think about it for longer
than I've got right now. On why it is incredibly
different to rent a Ferrari to see what it's like
to drive a Ferrari.
Speaker 4 (33:23):
Well, I was gonna say, number one, you get to
drive the Ferrari. If you know what I'm saying.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
Well, okay, I wouldn't even think of that. But if
you're but well, it's different.
Speaker 4 (33:32):
Are you mo Seriously, he's paying money to be seen
standing next to a Ferrari.
Speaker 1 (33:36):
That's stupid. See, I would rent a Ferrari maybe to
actually drive a Ferrari, because I don't know what it's like.
Speaker 3 (33:42):
I've never done it, and it might be pretty cool.
And then for a variety of reasons, I can't or
ever won't own one because it doesn't make practical sense.
Is that's a similar thing, but it's way different than that.
If you're actually dating, like you're trying to be in
a relationship with somebody, which is like one of the
most satisfying things that can happen in your entire existence
on planet Earth. And if that's what your goal is
(34:03):
and you're going about it this way, I don't, I
don't know what you're doing.
Speaker 1 (34:08):
Well, you're doomed to misery. Let's go ahead and bottom
line it here, doomed to misery. Yes, it's a ClearCase
of DTM. I mean, I know I see it. So
if you tell her I'm not paying you five hundred dollars,
is she going to show up in sweats and no makeup?
And I told you what an odd way to live
(34:30):
your life? No kidding, how's that working out for you?
Would be a good question.
Speaker 4 (34:34):
You know, there are you know, sub sectors of American
society that are as foreign to me as you know
somebody in Africa with a plate in their lip, or
you know in Afghanistan where they play that sport where
you whack a calf's head around on horseback or something
like that.
Speaker 1 (34:51):
I can't remember precisely.
Speaker 3 (34:52):
Outworks If you're picking somebody only and looks so, how
long is that enjoyable? I would think that would wear
off so fast. I don't really have anything in common
with you. I don't really find you very interesting, but
I guess I'll look at you.
Speaker 1 (35:03):
From how long does that last?
Speaker 4 (35:05):
So the amusing side is the British government wants you
to conserve water, and one of the ways they suggest
you to do it is by deleting your own your
old emails. That story unbelievable, and one of Obama's climate
zars says, you guys want to know the real truth
about climate change, I got it for you, oh boy,
Armstrong and Getty
Hosts And Creators
Joe Getty
Jack Armstrong
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.