11-25-25 Scott Sloan Show

Scott discusses the charges against several Democrats who encouraged military members to ignore orders from the President with journalist Jack Griener. Also how to avoid overeating this Thanksgiving with Dr David Bisonette. Finally Tom Gamble breaks down the new NIL rules for Ohio High School sports.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Do you want to be an American idiot show?

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Seven hundred wlws will you'll wind it down towards Thanksgiving
and of note, and this is even brustling a number
of Republicans too.

Speaker 3 (00:12):
And it's a big question.

Speaker 2 (00:14):
How far does presidential power extend relative well, constitutionally speaking
to domestic and international invention, particularly with the military. So
whether it's in American cities or in Venezuela, or disobeying
potentially unlawful orders, it is a constitutional question for sure
that's going to be addressed out imagined by the High Court.
They ultimately decide the scope of executive branch authority through

(00:38):
Donald Trump, who's certainly pushing the envelope. Some may say
too far and illegal, and others say, well, that's the
purpose of the you know that, that's how all works.
You know, we tested and the court determines where the
line is. Jack Rinder's here. He's a constitutional attorney with
Ferouki Lawn Cincinnati. Also teaches a use at U see
a media ethics class. And it's odd that you're on
my show teaching media ethics. I think that's interesting. Irony there,

(01:03):
How are you been, friend?

Speaker 4 (01:04):
I'm good, Yeah, I'm gonna talk.

Speaker 3 (01:07):
I'm not a journalist. I'm a talk show host.

Speaker 2 (01:08):
I just I appine, so I don't have to abide
by these stupid ethics anyway. So driving is the very
latest thing is we had the six Democratic veterans that
reminded the military intelligence communities that no one has to
right to carry out orders to violate our lower constitution.
That's part of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It's
pretty clear. But I guess the question for a lot

(01:29):
of people, then Jack would be Okay, if I am
a I don't know. Let's say I'm a pilot, I'm
a fighter pilot. Am I about to fire and I
target I light up a Venezuelan boat?

Speaker 3 (01:39):
Who do I do? I make that decision?

Speaker 2 (01:41):
Go Wow, this seems like it's unlawful because we're not
at war and this is not an enemy combatant, and
we're conflating drug runners with acts of war. Despite what
the President says, How does someone who is called out
on SORTY to accomplish that mission? Do they go to
a superior I mean, I can't imagine that someone in
the battlefield wants It's absolutely clear it's illegal and unconstitutional.

Speaker 3 (02:03):
Makes that decision how'd that work?

Speaker 4 (02:05):
Yeah, I think that's right. I think that you know,
there there is something called the judge Advocate General, which
is essentially the military lawyers. Uh. People call it the
JAG or a judge advocate general, and they actually, at
least traditionally have been consulted on things like this and

(02:25):
uh will you know, sort of give the clearance in
advance of an order. And that's how it should work, okay, Uh,
so that the pilot who's flying when he gets the
order can have some assurance that you know, this has
been reviewed and it is it is being lawful.

Speaker 5 (02:44):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (02:45):
You know, it would it would be chaotic, uh, to
say the least, if if it were just an an
hoc thing that the soldiers on the front line were
supposed to uh discern on their end. But you know,
the other option is for senior commands if they think
that an order is unlawful, is to resign. And frankly

(03:11):
that's happened Alvin Holsey uh stepped down into the US
as the head of the US Southern Command. Uh. And
you know it's not been uh he he's not really
said much about it, but it certainly seems that he
was concerned about the stripes on the boats off of

(03:33):
the Evezuelan coast. So you know, I think I think
we can uh presume perhaps that he felt that that
was illegal and unlawful, and rather than that's a pooty order,
he resigned, which you know, was was pretty much the
only option to him. But I think the notion that, uh,

(03:54):
you know, soldiers in the field are making those decisions,
it's just not really accurate. Those decisions are made, uh,
you know, at levels above the actual pilot or the
infantryman who's who's on the field, and it's really incumbent
on the officers to working with jag to uh to

(04:16):
make those decisions.

Speaker 5 (04:18):
Uh.

Speaker 4 (04:19):
You know, what what I think is is, frankly more
concerning is the idea that the Congress people you know,
are are considered to have engaged in a conspiracy sedition.
I mean I think that that uh, I just don't
think there's a. I think that that's not uh an

(04:41):
accurate application of the sedition laws, and B I think
the first of themment would have something to say about
about that. So I think, you know, from A I
think the military to have their own concerns about what's
on off order and they go through training. I mean,
you know, the folks in the military, it's certainly at

(05:03):
the officer level are are are well versed in this
the code, the military code, and you know it better
than you or I. But I think that for you
and I where you know, I'm more concerned as the
notion that there's even a thread of criminal prosecution for

(05:25):
you know, the Congress people who spoke thereby we can
talk about.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
Yeah, yeah, trasition basically, it's it's intended to incite insurrection
against to overthrow the existing authority in government.

Speaker 3 (05:37):
It's not an overthrow, right, right, it's not at all.

Speaker 4 (05:42):
And again I think that we've since since the early
nineteen hundreds. You know, it's interesting that First Amendment law
really started to develop in the early nineteen hundred First
Amendment law as we know it because until the Fourteenth Amendment,
the First amend and didn't apply to the states. Okay,
so there wasn't a lot of litigation because it was

(06:05):
it was done by the states. But then the fourteenth
Amendments path and then the First Amendment now a pause
to the states, and then it was another you know,
fifty years or so before people really started you know,
the courts really started examining what the First Amendment met
in early early cases were I think, in our view

(06:27):
looking back, wrongly decided. So there were cases you know
where people, for example, advocated that people resist the draft
in World War Wide, okay, and those people were found
to have violated the law and the First Amendment, and
the Supreme Court said, there the First Amendment didn't protect

(06:47):
those people. And we I think evolved to the point
where you can talk about things, you know, as long
as you're not taking active steps. So if somebody before
January sixth said, hey, we really need to do something
about this this vote that's coming up to on the

(07:10):
on the election results because the election was rigged, you know,
we need to take action. That's protected speech under the
First Attendment, right, what is not what is not protected
is the people who stormed the capital and broke in
and every I realized the right pardon but yeah, they
wrote the law.

Speaker 3 (07:27):
Yeah, yeah, no question.

Speaker 2 (07:28):
Out of the many that were there, the ones that
broke in, once you cross that threshold, that that is
illegal and you should be punished. And you know, j
six certainly dissuaded me from supporting Trump after that because
I But I will say though, that that was an
interesting test of the constitution for you know, Democrats, progressive sale,
My god, he's destroying the constitution, shredding government. It's that's

(07:48):
it didn't work out that way simply because we have
those protections in place. It was probably the most extreme
case of testing the constitution. Trump's done a great job
of that during his tenures. And it's it's you know,
we've seen the law in many cases turn around and
overthrow the sometimes support him. But that's how our believe
or not, that's how our system works. For those are

(08:09):
things that that you know, that was illegal behavior. Yeah,
but again the court goes back and looks and says
they're able to interpret what the actions were. I mean,
he's really testing the limits of the Constitution. It's an
interesting test with the court in our country.

Speaker 4 (08:24):
Then, yeah, I think it is. And I think again,
I think the Congressman and Tigress people who were on
that video, clearly we're exercising their First Amendment right and
there they were. To me, they were simply advising, you know,
not only the people in the military, but maybe the
public that hey, look you don't have to you know,

(08:44):
you are not required to follow an unlawful order. Now
there's a lot of you know, well what's unlawful? What
makes it unlawful? As you said at the top of
our interview, you know who makes that determination. But they
were exercising their First Amendment right, and Trump has the
First Amendment right to come back and say that susition.
You know what where I think again talking about the line, right,

(09:04):
I think when the penticon, you know, when when the
Justice Department or the Department of War starts, you know,
potential prosecution mark Kelly for for this, I think that's
a line that has crossed. I think that that is
that is government sanctioning, sanctioning and potentially coercing speak. And

(09:25):
that balleys. First, if Trump just wants to go on
true social and say, you know, he's a trader, he's
a he's an interaction, and so go ahead, go for it,
that's fine. But I think when you start taking after
steps to prostitute then you're really implicating the First Amendment.

Speaker 2 (09:40):
I think, Well, at the same time, again, they said
the're going after Kelly, investigat him, but for what, well.

Speaker 4 (09:46):
For I think for this video. I mean, I don't
know that's the thing we think.

Speaker 2 (09:50):
I mean, it could be coincidental, probably not to agree
that that this is trying to silence him. But let's
say that he's involved in something else. I want to
see what the I want to see what the reason
why they're investigative. That would be nice to know.

Speaker 4 (10:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (10:04):
Yeah, Jack riders here a competitional expert on Scotland show
on seven hundred w LW. In this case, can the
executive branch legally investigator prosecute members of Congress for their
political speech?

Speaker 3 (10:15):
What?

Speaker 6 (10:15):
What?

Speaker 3 (10:16):
What protections apply there?

Speaker 5 (10:17):
Well?

Speaker 4 (10:18):
Well, I mean no, but if there is if the
if the speech is part of something bigger, and they
have probable cause, then they probably can so. I so,
as you said, we we don't know if there's something
else with Kelly, but consuming just in sort of a

(10:39):
vacuum that uh, you know, Trump is mad because of
what Kelly said, and he says, let's go getting for that,
and that's really problematic. I mean, that is that is
exactly what First Amendment should be protected. It shouldn't just
you know, it really shouldn't just be a situation where

(11:00):
Kelly wins his case if he's if he's indicted or
something which I know, I don't think I hope he
won't be. But if, but if, but it really should
stop something like that in its tracks, because I think
any kind of you know, government action that is taken
as a result of protected First Amendment activity is you know, retaliation,

(11:22):
and we're not supposed to be about that. You should
when you, when you, when you have such First Amendment right,
you ought to not only be free of a conviction,
you really ought to be free of steps leading to
a conviction. Again, unless there's something else that justifies that.
But if it is just just hey, he said this,
that makes me madd oj go getting that's really troubling.

(11:46):
I mean, that's very troubling.

Speaker 3 (11:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (11:49):
Well, I think the other people said, well, it's just
more of this Trump arrangement syndrome you're going to after
it's the derangement at the end of Trump. I mean,
he thinks any order he issues because he issues is lawful,
which of course isn't true. That would be up to
the courts to interpret that. But we know that the
long standing principle of military law because what happened in
the Norman Trials in World War Two, We're Nazis were going, well,
I was just found orders.

Speaker 3 (12:10):
That's where this came from, right.

Speaker 4 (12:12):
Yeah, exactly, and putting a plug for the movie Urmber
by the way, that was good. It's awesome. Yeah, And
it kind of raises that question. But we had it
in Vietnam, we with a college autenant college situation where
essentially that was his defense that he was following orders.
So it's problematic, but I think it's you know, it's
got to think that. It's what it's part of what

(12:34):
makes America great is that we we don't adopt it's
so clearly as long as you were ordered to do it.
I mean, you know, we we say no, that's not okay,
and you know we we have to make sure that
there's orders of lawful and h and that doesn't make
us week, that makes us great.

Speaker 5 (12:50):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (12:50):
And it also extends to the workplace to a degree.
And you think about all the whistleblowers, right you say, hey,
something wrong is going on here, and how many people
have been sent to prison, Uh, schemes and outright tragedies
uncovered because someone said this isn't right.

Speaker 3 (13:04):
I'm going to talk to someone about it.

Speaker 4 (13:06):
Exactly.

Speaker 2 (13:07):
That's exactly how it should work here too. Relative to Venezuela.
That's a more interesting nuance there that we're attacking these
ships allegedly they're carrying drugs. But even from a constitutional perspective,
as I said, you know, the president conflates drug smuggling
with violent aggression and ordering the death of foreign terrorist
organizations and saying this is not international armed conflict, and

(13:32):
then the declaration somehow, I don't know where this is
from twenty five O the lives are safe with each
boat destroying. We don't really know if there's evidence that
these were indeed drug smugglers, because we know that even
the government d Trump said, Venezuela is not the problem,
it's Mexico. The court eventually, I would imagine this is
going to be fast tracked. This has got to go
to the Supreme Court at some point, doesn't it.

Speaker 4 (13:53):
Yeah, I would think so. I mean, I think it
comes down. You know, it's going to be that interesting
issue because we do believe in our country and due
process and new process requires that, you know, you can't
just randomly blowbal boats out of the water on the
suspicion that they care and drugs. You know, you should
have probable cause and there ought to be evidence and

(14:15):
that sort of thing. The Supreme Court, however, has been
very at least you know, four maybe five members of
the Supreme Court are are pretty strong believers in something
called the unitary executive branch, which is gives a lot
of difference to the executive. And you know, there's arguments that, well,

(14:35):
when it comes to foreign affairs, that's that's the president,
that's you know, that's just his prerogative. And if he
thinks they're drudge on the boats, that he ought to
be allowed to blow him up. But that really runs
counter to a tradition that we respect the process in
this country.

Speaker 3 (14:50):
Yeah, I guess that's the thing. There's no do process here.

Speaker 2 (14:53):
The impetus, of course is stop drug flow, which is noble,
but I'm not sure that those are boats that are
caring drugs. We just we don't know that we went
out to wear the investigative process. And you could claim that, well,
that's the thing. It's a it's a you know, an
investigation by authorities because you know, we don't want to
disclose what we know because that would jeopardize other investigations.
But it's an interesting test of constitutional law.

Speaker 3 (15:14):
For sure.

Speaker 2 (15:14):
This is going to probably play out over years long
after Trump and we're gone, right, yeah, fame, you're Irene Kara. Anyway,
he's Jack Grinder, constitucial attorney with the Faruki also teaches
media ethics class at the University of Cincinnati. Jack, all
the best, Happy holidays and thanks again, appreciate it. Yeah, yeah,

(15:35):
it's be an interesting thing. I mean I look at
it and go, okay, well, the drug boats, I would
I think as a citizen to look at and go, yeah,
you hope the governments these are actual drug boats and
we're just blowing up to get rid of Maduro. Now
he's going to sit down and talk with the president,
and I guess at some point we'll find out any
stories coming out.

Speaker 3 (15:51):
I haven't seen it. Maybe you have, of uh, I
don't know.

Speaker 2 (15:54):
These were just fishermen or something like that, but we've
heard that before when there's criminal enterprise going on. But
relative to Mark Kelly and the others who produces video,
just reminding h soldiers, sailors, airmen, et cetera, that they
can disobey and illegal order, keep in mind you have
to still the lastly judge, advocate general or a high rep.
Going hey, is this legal or not? Can we find

(16:14):
can we an interpretation before I launched this rocket?

Speaker 3 (16:18):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (16:18):
And that you know, you know, if you served in
the military, and I haven't had the honor doing that obviously,
but I can't imagine having to make a decision to
take a bunch of humans lives. I mean, that's something
you trained for. But still I would imagine that first
one or the first few, you're like, I'm about to
end a whole bunch of lives right here. I hope
we're right, and that that was, you know, the one
who you know shot the missile, So that's in your conscience,

(16:40):
and I think that's uh, you know, the checks and
balances even within the military ignoring the illegal orders, but
the idea that you know, we have lawmakers that say
remind the military for whatever reason, they didn't say which
to lawful orders. By the way, So it's kind of vague,
I think intentionally, but certainly and clearly not seditious. It's
this fote anyway, it's gonna play it for a while.

(17:01):
Courts are gonna be busy with this Court's gonna be busy,
for sure. We've got a time out in We've got
news on the way. Scott's Floan show. This is seven
hundred W.

Speaker 3 (17:08):
All right, here we go.

Speaker 2 (17:10):
Everybody's whinding it down. You're pretending to work the next
just pretending to work the next couple of days about
the butter ball baby. Slowly back on seven hundred WLW.
Speaking of which, I'm not quite sure why this came
to a thing, but my g hod against green being
castrole declared as a matter of fact that Gary Jeff
Walker invited me to be popping tonight at nine o'clock

(17:33):
on his show. I said, yeah, I'll be wrong. Why
not talk about how this whole thing started? Anyway, So
for years now I've railed against green bean castrole, and
nowhere else in the world, by the way, are they
doing well Thanksgiving? The rest of the world is confused
by our Thanksgiving. But green being castle in particular is
one of those dishes people look at and go, what's

(17:55):
with the green being cast role? I think Ohio is
like the number one green bean cancel of state. By
the way, most cities are most states, turkey stuffing, pie,
sweet potatoes, mac and cheese are generally your top five.
But here in Ohi green bean castrole hiw Kentucky, Indiana.
For some reason. The person responsible for this culinary atrocity

(18:19):
is Dorcas Riley. What a great name for someone who
literally would destroy Thanksgiving. Dorcas Riley, who was a supervisor
in the Campbell Soup Test Kitchen back Camden, New Jersey,
back in the nineteen fifties nineteen fifty five, to be exact,
Campbell tasked her with creating an easy, crowd pleasing recipe
using ingredients most Americans already had in their pantries, which

(18:43):
makes one wonder, go, Okay, it's Thanksgiving, you kind of
know that's coming. It's different if Hey, what do you
want for dinner? I don't know, Let's see what we
got in the pantry, or something's coming over. I kind
of last minute. I got a crap, I got to
make something. Okay, we've all been in that situation before.

(19:03):
Much easier today we can just get you know, door
dash or something. But nonetheless, back in the nineteen fifties
this was a concern. But I contend that again back
to the history of Thanksgiving. For a long time, it's
been about eating yourself stupid with turkey and all the
things that go around it. Why would you at the
last minute create an easy crowd preezing recipe that you

(19:24):
had on hand already. Generally there's shopping or you know,
you just don't have a twenty pound turkey later around,
usually got to go out and find one at the
same time, like, okay, I don't know if it's an
afterthought or wherever. Nonetheless, Campbell's the executive side. The recipe
need to be simple and expensive and use shelf stable ingredients.
Initially green bean casserole. The original recipe was actually green

(19:47):
bean bake, which quite honestly, at any other time of
the year, it'd be just fine. Again with that, well,
what do we have. I got some Campbell's, I got
soup mix, I got some green beans. I'll throw it together.
I'll make green bean castle or green bean bake as
it were fine, you know, Tuesday night in March, knock
yourself out. But Thanksgiving in particular is difficult for me

(20:11):
because most people work so hard, especially those who are
cooking and hosting, work so hard at making it. It just
seems like it's like an afterthought. And the reason why
this came about back in nineteen fifty five. Think about it.
You're now coming out of post World War two and
we had a convenience food culture that leaned into can goods.
The gis are coming back there are used to eating

(20:32):
field rations which are largely canned can goods alike, so
that you know, there was no stigma with that before
that mean can goods were around. It was a way
to preserve food, for sure, but it really put it
over the top of the nineteen fifties. So it's more
of a convenience food culture because you know, after the
depression and after the war, people just wanted to be happy.
They want to feel, they want to do so to

(20:53):
they want enjoy their lives.

Speaker 5 (20:54):
You know.

Speaker 2 (20:55):
The automobile came along, of course, and we rebuilt the
highways and stretch across America. People just want to go
out and be in the cars and go around and
have a good time.

Speaker 5 (21:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (21:02):
Obviously they would work and work really hard in the
post war economy, but also wanted to play hard as well,
and certainly didn't want to be pinned down to a kitchen.
And women who had been helping get the factories going
and a rose the river and alike. They also a
number of them kept jobs and they needed quick, fast,
reliable recipes because it was tasked on the woman to
come home and cook even after working a little bit.

(21:23):
So it was economical of fed large groups. Every was
happy faster than the nineteen sixties and seventies green Bean
cast Role. They saw an opportunity of Campbell's going on,
how can we increase market share? So they started passing
out recipe cards in grocery stores, Adam and magazin women's
magazines too, and so that started to catch on. And
then someone decided, hey, right around Thanksgiving, we should promote.

(21:46):
Now if we made this a side dish on Thanksgiving
and marketed towards that, now we can really sell some
soup mix. It was at about big green bean or
big fried onion or whatever the hell else you put
in that thing, Campbell soup. Do we want to sell
more soup? I get that one, and now some thirty
million households will serve green Bean cast Role on Thursday.

(22:08):
They sell over forty percent of their cream of mushroom
soup is produced from November to December every year. What
other time would you eat cream of mushroom soup? That
doesn't even sound good?

Speaker 3 (22:25):
I could?

Speaker 2 (22:25):
Okay, Hey hook me up with a can of Campbell's
Tomato fire.

Speaker 3 (22:30):
Some grilled cheese. Let's go.

Speaker 2 (22:33):
I I really like their chicken noodle soup. It tastes
like being a little kid again. There are countless Campbell
soup flavors. Oh look at I go wow that. Oh ye,
I can mess with that. But who's actually eating cream
of mushroom soup? When it's not things, when it's not Thanksgiving.
It just something about it by itself. It's because you
take it's like kind of this gelatinous mass. It's just

(22:54):
it's nasty. So the issue is there's nostalgia involved. You
grew up eating Campbell soup. You can go to the
green bean castrole and so there's no nostalgia there, and
it's easy to make and the taste it hits every time.
If you like the green Bee castle, like many many
people do. I just it got to me going you
put so much work into making everything else. You're not, like,

(23:15):
I don't know, getting a box of instant mashed potatoes?
Are you serving that? I know some people might do
it because they can't cook, But if you can't cook,
you shouldn't be hosting Thanksgiving in the first place. I
don't cook, So okay, I'll go to somebody else's house
and have them cook somebody who enjoys cooking. But geez,
don't show up the green bean castro. Good lord, I
know countless people love. And that's why this time every

(23:37):
year I declare ghat against green bean castrole, simply because
it just doesn't hold up to everything else on the table.
I mean even I give ben places like I don't
really cook, or you know you're you're young and single. Okay,
so you brought I don't know brownies. I mean, like
anybody can make brownies. I don't even know if you
made it from scratch, because you can't really tell the different.

(23:57):
I guess I shouldn't say that, because if you had
a really really good brownie versus what comes in a
box of duncan heines different story. But for some reason
that doesn't a family the green bean castle does. Maybe
because dessert to me is more like an afterthought. I'm
not a big dessert guy. I will, by the way,
have a slice of pecan pie, which I keep saying this.
They were in studio last week the Dorothy Lane market people.

(24:19):
I stopped by the one in Mason yesterday got a
bunch of stuff for Thursday. But I did buy a
pecan pie, because honestly, that is the best pecan pie.

Speaker 3 (24:27):
Think I've ever had.

Speaker 2 (24:29):
Now, somebody's gonna climb Oh, you gotta go here, guy,
I don't want to turn into that topic. But nonetheless,
it's a damn good pecan pie. Will say that. So
I like the pecan pie a couple times a year.
That would be it, right there, that would be it.
But the creama mushroom soup of cream of mushroom soup
sales happen this time year. It exists simply for Thanksgivin's

(24:49):
that blow you away. I guess if we sold almost
half of your inventory at that point, the question is
who where's the other sixty percent the rest of the
year that's eating at Campbell's Cream Mushroom. There's some weird
ones like creama celery. If you just look through the
Campbell soup flavors, I might have to google that Campbell
soup flavors. There's got to be some really weird one

(25:09):
cream is celery and a cream mushroom. There's a beef
in barley, which, okay, I kind of get that those
two things go together, for sure. It's a classic, and
they just you know, and the thing is you go
look at soup? Did you ever just stand back and
look at all the flavors Cambell soup, because there's they
just picture in your mind in the grocery store. I'm
not talking about like some of the other bougie Progresso,

(25:29):
which actually does some pretty good soups, but looking at
all the Campbell slavors, look at that, go wow, that's
that's a lot of flavor souper right they're producing right there,
I say cream tomato, chicken noodles or chicken with dars.
I feel like a little kid. I think they have
the alphabet chicken souper. Their chicken soup is pretty good.
It's not bad, it's fine, but uh, cream Mushroom's like, man,
I could really have a nice bullet cream mushroom soup.

(25:51):
Creama celery sounds good, sounds like something Willy would. I'm
gonna have soup. I demand creama a mushroom. I want
creama celery.

Speaker 3 (26:01):
That's something that's old man flavor there. I just I
don't know.

Speaker 2 (26:03):
And Florence Robert, you're on the Scotsland Show. Thanks for
checking in, Happy Thanks skiving, what do you got?

Speaker 7 (26:08):
Good morning? Hey, So my wife makes a good dish
with pork chops with the creama mushroom soup over that
works really well. She fries up the pork chops, layers
it with that creama mushroom and it's delicious. So yeah,
other than the other than that in the broxy, I'm
not sure what else to do with it.

Speaker 2 (26:25):
But over those yeah, I was wonder if anybody's I mean, yeah,
i'd messed with that.

Speaker 3 (26:30):
That sounds that sounds not bad.

Speaker 2 (26:32):
But I just wonder who's going, Wow, I just want
a bowl of cream, but who's just eating the crey.
It's ingreded It's a gravy, right, it's it's a condiment.

Speaker 3 (26:40):
It helps everything.

Speaker 7 (26:41):
Else, that's what it does. It makes that gravy over
those port chops. My wife, Yam Pagan, does a great
job with that. So that's when we get some more of.

Speaker 2 (26:49):
That, all right, youtwo buddy, Hey Dan, next time you
have pork chops, I'm coming over. That sounds pretty good. There,
I messed with that, but you're sitting down, okay. So
it is a it's it's it's an ingredient for their diction.
No one's eating cream of celery. What do you use cream?
Of celery soup for they still make that even I'm
gonna do this, let me take a time out. I'm
gonna google this and I'm gonna have an answer for you.

(27:10):
Now I'm curious as well. Scott's loan show back in
about four here seven hundred ww yeah means abating the
mushroom soup that Campbell's makes, and who eats mushroom soup
if it's not part of a recipe, goes to undermine
my or support my argument, undermine green Bean Castle as
it is, especially with this being g Hodday on the
show against green Bean cast role. Martin Bailey, who's a

(27:31):
vice president and chief information security officer Campbell is called
Campbell Scott in the meeting, saying recorded by the way saying,
we have s the S word shapep we have asked
for fing poor people who buys our s. I don't
buy Campbell's products barely anymore, buy you engineered meat. I
don't want to eat a piece of chicken that came

(27:52):
from a three D printer. You know, I'll be honest
with you. I need a piece of chicken came from
a three D printer. I mean, I at least try
try anything how bad could it be? How bad could
it be for you? I mean, maybe not a steady
diet of it.

Speaker 3 (28:06):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (28:07):
We don't know the long term consequences of that. With
new stuff. We never do, but I don't know. I
mean stomach acid hits that digest you take the nutrients out,
anything bad you poop out sounds like a kind of
a win Win engineered chicken. Yeah, that guy's gonna have
a That's gonna be a rough holiday for you. Don't
want to be crapping on Campbell's around Thanksgiving. That's like

(28:27):
this is their super Bowl. It's a super Bowl of soup,
specifically the mushroom soup. I mentioned the hideous flavors are
out there, and I guess the cream of celery has
been discontinued. I'm looking at twenty one soups, most of
them discontinued from the history of Campbell's celery soup, pepper
pot soup, the bean soup, the pea soup, mock turtle soup,

(28:48):
unless you're the Brown family, the only one in twenty
twenty five eating mock turtle soup anymore. They did that
media day once a year, and they always serve the
mock turtle soup just screens old asparagus soup that doesn't
sound good. A julienne soup, no idea. Print and ear
print p r I n t A n I e

(29:10):
are printineer soup no idea. Uh wait, there's a description here.
Printedeer is exquisitely bended blended chicken and beef broth with
vegetables and fancy shapes, gels and can overnight excellent. I
need some jellied soup. Sounds good. They had oxtail soup
at one time. Oxtail by itself is actually pretty good

(29:30):
if you if you braise it right.

Speaker 3 (29:33):
What else?

Speaker 2 (29:33):
Mutton soup O good, Lord help us? And a consumme,
a consumme. So they're all there. Those are the flavors
of Thanksgiving past with the campbell soup com Well, now
they broken it out, and you know you've got chunky
soup and everything else, but oyster seuw and mock turtle
soup and the cream of celery are no longer, so
they're down due I don't know, like a dozen or

(29:54):
so flavors right now. And then you get the chunky's
and the homostile soups and that's why the soup aisle
is so full. One of the ones I have today.
I look at the future genermists, look at going. I'm
not sure about that. They have a They're discontinued. When
I saw that's kind of like, what were you thinking?
Chunky Philly style cheese steak soup. Wow, cheese steak soup?

(30:15):
Does I like cheese steak? I'm not gonna touch that.
They also have the uh cheddar cheese soup cheese soup thin.
Giving a bowl of cheese sounds good anyway? Five one
three s four, nine thousand and eight of the Big
One talk back. I heard radio app all this because
I hate green bean Castle. You can be lave it
twenty minutes a bitching about green bean Castle. Do what
you're sitting in your car or your home, wherever you're listening,

(30:36):
stuck in traffic going, then just don't eat a dummy.
I know I won't, but I I have to profess
my hatred of green bean castrole.

Speaker 3 (30:43):
That's all there is to it.

Speaker 2 (30:44):
The idea behind it is just insulting, is what it is.
And I'm fine with Campbell soup like you know, tomato soup,
chicken noodle. They don't do the chicken the alphabet chicken
soup is gone. I don't know if they still do
the chicken with stars goes to show the last of
my body can of soup. Nonetheless, I should really have
done this topic before Bill Cunningham, because no one he's
at the age now where at least one meal a

(31:05):
day of involved soup to be a perfect topic for him. Anyway,
let me hit Chris next and Cincy, what's up man?

Speaker 8 (31:14):
Hey Slony, it's Chris. I just want to let you
know that growing up, I used to have creama mushroom soup.
My mom would make it. You would dump the condensed
soup into his thoughts hand. We would do one can
of milk. We'd get up, we would heat it up,
and we would serve it with like saltines or rich crackers.
Like I had that for lunch on weekends and like

(31:36):
during a Christmas break as a kid, and even now
every once in a while as an adult, I think, gosh,
maybe I'll have some mushroom soup for lunch.

Speaker 2 (31:44):
Wow, you could be one of the few people eating
creama mushroom soup, not a Thanksgiving.

Speaker 3 (31:48):
That's incredible. You're like a unicorn.

Speaker 8 (31:49):
Man, I don't know about that, but that was that
was before three D printer, so I think they were
real mushrooms back then.

Speaker 5 (31:57):
Night.

Speaker 2 (31:59):
Seriously, man, when you mess, you'd mess with the three
D chicken breast just once.

Speaker 5 (32:02):
Right, Yeah, I think I try it with you, like,
if you taste.

Speaker 2 (32:07):
It like it tastes pretty good, this isn't bad. And
how much does it cost? Oh, it's pretty cheap, but
it's genetically modified.

Speaker 3 (32:12):
I don't know. It tastes like chicken like I don't know.

Speaker 6 (32:15):
I look at these soups.

Speaker 2 (32:15):
You've had that taste like other things, and you know
there's nothing Most of the stuff we eat is artificially
flavor with those difference.

Speaker 8 (32:22):
Yeah, but that that cream mushroom floony, I'm toonia with some.

Speaker 5 (32:24):
Rich crackers and stuff. It's not alright, I stu. I said,
it's not bad. It's worth a shot.

Speaker 8 (32:30):
If you ever get a clamor for it. But I
got I appreciate you.

Speaker 2 (32:33):
And all right, I love that brother, Thanks man, I
appreciate you. Yeah, I don't think there's every time in
my life that I go I'm think i'mnna have some
cream and mushroom soup simply because to me, it would
just remind me of the green bean castrole. Maybe that's
what it is for people. If you just eat the soup,
it's like green bean castle. Oh, Crambell Soup Company is

(32:54):
still rocking and rolling. VP is not helping. You're not
helping us. Put me down. Put me down for a
half of genetically modified three D printed chicken. Just put
me down for a half of rotisserie. You could come
out season to the printer. We'll pick this up at
a later date. Anyway, enough bs, we've got news on

(33:17):
the way in just a few minutes. Speaking of eating
yourself stupid, I have this guy in once a year,
maybe sometimes twice year. His name is David Bissonette, and
he has research. He has researched why we overeat, essentially
because food This is like the Golden Age, right, food
taste amazing. Look at the flavors from Campbell's past terrible, right,
we look like the gold Everything's delicious right now and

(33:38):
it's only going to get better. And it's delicious because
companies engineer food to make us eat more than we
should past our point of being satiated. It's called the
bliss point. David Bisonette is next as we head into Thanksgiving,
an appropriate topic on the Scott Sloan Show, Home of
the Best Bengals coverage seven hundred to.

Speaker 1 (34:00):
An American floating here on seven hundred wlwe are at
that time of year now, probably started with Halloween, but
with Thanksgiving looming here literally on the horizon.

Speaker 2 (34:11):
We can see it, we can smell it, we can
teach it, we can almost touch it. And that is
the amount of food we're gonna eat. A lot of food,
and a lot of it not good for us, a
lot of ultra processed foods. And there's something called the
bliss point. You wonder why you don't stop beating when
you're full. You only stop beating when you hate yourself,
and that is because of the confluence of fat, salt,

(34:33):
and sugar. Food scientists are a long time have been
developing that they've cracked the code years ago, and when
those three things are together in the right balance and
the right harmony, you literally unlock the code to get
people to gorge themselves, stuff themselves silly. And that's what
we face. The science behind that. Doctor David Bissonette is
here is a nutritional scientist and joins the show on

(34:54):
seven hundred, Why doctor, how are you.

Speaker 9 (34:56):
I'm very well, god, very good, good hopefully.

Speaker 3 (34:58):
I described that correctly. But in fat, salt, and.

Speaker 2 (35:00):
Sugar, yeah job, yeah, yeah. But it's interesting because this
is this is literally decades and decades and decades of
research to come up with what they call the bliss point.

Speaker 4 (35:10):
Yep.

Speaker 9 (35:11):
Yeah, they're they're developed in sensory evaluation labs in these
corporate headquarters and labs, and they determine where it is,
like you said, where the high excitation points are for
different foods combinations of assault, sugar and fat, and they
indeed it dick people and it causes what they call

(35:32):
repeat acquisition behavior going back to it because you love it,
but like you said, it's really bad for you. So
I described this, I investigate this in the book Insatiable Nations,
Unpeaceable Hunger, And that's it.

Speaker 2 (35:45):
Right as we have Yeah, for the longest time, I mean,
food was okay, I eat to live, to work, and
then I eat some more to fuel. So because I'm
working physically and in the modern area in America and
in the modernized world, that's changed, right, We are largely set,
and yet food has now become entertainment. It's also become delicious,
which we didn't have as is probably as recently as

(36:07):
a couple generations ago.

Speaker 9 (36:08):
I guess, oh yeah, you got that right. We were
very complex and we eat for emotional reasons, and the
research is now showing that this is actually caused by
depression and anxiety. We see that prevalence still high depression,
high anxiety, emotional eating. We have stress eating, and we

(36:30):
have we call mindless habit driven eating. And this is
where it becomes potentially disastrous for kids to be introduced
to these foods early on, because they carry them forward
and that's exactly what they do. It's mindless eating. It's
a default and it's terrible.

Speaker 3 (36:50):
How did we get to that point?

Speaker 2 (36:51):
I mean, if you think about how absurd it is
that I would get home after a long day of
work and have dinner and hour whatever it is, Okay,
I'm going to open a box of cheese it's or
drida and sit there and watch TV and shovel them
in my face unconsciously, just loading myself with calories.

Speaker 3 (37:05):
And it's you know what, I don't know about you.

Speaker 4 (37:07):
It's awesome, but you're doing it.

Speaker 9 (37:14):
It's often for the time you're doing it, but remember
you feel loudy after. So we have two basic mechanisms
to control appetite. One's called the homeostatic mechanism. It's balanced
in the body. It's based on energy reserves and that
normally should suffice right to say, Okay, you've got enough
fat reserves, and it has all kinds of you know,

(37:35):
hormones to sort of stop the eating, and it's a
it's a pretty good mechanism. But we also have what
they call the hidonic eating, right, the pleasure centered eating,
which you know really is in the frontal lobe of
the brain. And that explains why it is a Thanksgiving
that we fill ourselves with turkey and really say we

(37:56):
couldn't eat another bite, yet when the pumpkin pie comes out,
we have one and two pieces. So that is basically
what's happening is that our hedonic center, the pleasure center,
is causing us to overeat beyond what we need and
like you said, we enjoy it, but only for a

(38:16):
short time.

Speaker 2 (38:18):
Yeah, because the misery lasts longer. You're miserable for days
after you stuff yourself with thanks Kim. It's the best
when you're eating, and then after you feel like hell,
and you know, you don't eat, you don't you don't
eat till you're full, You'll eat till you hate yourself.

Speaker 5 (38:30):
Yep.

Speaker 9 (38:31):
Yeah, And we do that consistently, even though we say,
all right, next time, I'm not going to do this.
But you know, it's very enticing and it's part of
you know, it should be part of a you know,
sort of a almost like a moral base behavior fixed
on temperance. Right, It's kind of like a discipline that

(38:53):
we need to sort of exercise more in our lives.
But this is really difficult to do because the food
food industry promotes right with very sophisticated ads. Give you
an example, nineteen ninety seven Madison, you know, Medisine Street
and Madison Avenue. Advertisers are spending seven billion dollars in

(39:15):
advertising foods of all sorts. The USDA's budget was three
hundred and thirty three millions, and so the co and
that was to promote healthy food. And when you have
this kind of dichotomy, right, you can't overcome it easily.
And that's why my book Insatiable I talk about radical
shifts in the you know, in our lifestyle and in

(39:37):
our diet that we need to sort of promote. One is,
you know, stop the soda pop, right, it's not a
negotiable because it's too addictance.

Speaker 2 (39:46):
You can vilify certainly the fast food industry, the quick
food industry, the premide food industry.

Speaker 5 (39:52):
You know.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
But but I guess I don't know. I've almost said
this is kind of like a negative to capitalism. But
you know, they've got to increase their margins. They've got
to make more. They got to find ways for people
to buy more food. And for people to buy more food,
they have to consume the food that they're eating. And
so you want to sell more pop and chips and
candy and things that are processed.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
I get that old point.

Speaker 2 (40:10):
It's up to us to show some restraint, but it's
difficult the way is formulated. I get that whole model.
I guess the other side before someone takes away is
you know, this is bashing big food and everything. You know,
look that we have done for for example, you don't
see people starving to death anymore. You look at all
of the you know, you look at all of the
maladies that our generations before us suffered from. Malnutrition wise

(40:31):
and brain development and bone density, and all those things,
and you know that's in the rear view mirror in
the modern world. Now, that downside is we're killing ourselves
with that same knife and fork.

Speaker 3 (40:40):
We've gone to the other extreme.

Speaker 2 (40:42):
But you know, because of the ready available of food,
because the prices have dropped because of that technology, it's
eliminated starvation, which was a scourge for the world for
most of the time humans have been on this planet.

Speaker 9 (40:55):
Well, it's an interesting point you're making, but what we
don't really realized is that back in the nineteen thirty
America is teppered with malnutrician and that was within the
era of the industrial revolution and mass production. So we
actually did not solve the problem back then. It took
a while to get onto the concept of fortification. But

(41:18):
we're really fortifying food and that's what they were doing
that were ultimately so highly processed that they.

Speaker 4 (41:25):
Were worked with.

Speaker 6 (41:26):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (41:27):
Yeah, and you see that a lot today too, I
guess is this setting up to be By the way,
Doctor David Bissonett, he's a professor of nutrition, a doctorate
nutritional science, writes about insatiable, about what's called the bliss point,
and that is food manufacturer's process with manufacturers have developed
and it depends obviously on the product because this has
been researched and focused group to death that they have

(41:48):
found the exact correct proportions when the salt and sugar
and fat in a product to get you to eat
as much as possible so they can sell more and
make more money. And that is a capitalist dynamic right there,
for good or for bad. But this is starting to
sound like it's setting up to be maybe a lawsuit
developed like we saw with big tobacco, right is, hey,

(42:09):
we made a product that's highly addictive and dangerous. You
can make that case with these types of processed foods,
can't you?

Speaker 9 (42:17):
Oh you can. And in fact, it's very interestingly, these
very tobacco companies that got their hands slapped are the
very ones that bought Nubisco General Foods, and they mastered
obviously the advertising, and they're applying the same concepts to
food as they did to tobacco. They own the food company.

Speaker 3 (42:41):
Yeah, yeah, sure, and it's like, okay, we can do
that only with food.

Speaker 6 (42:44):
Now.

Speaker 3 (42:45):
I think it's a more I don't know, improving in course.

Speaker 2 (42:48):
So for example, we know that tobacco, you know, by
itself is less now I'm gonna say safe, but it's
less dangerous until you start adding chemicals and all sorts
of things to make it more addictive and consumable and
preserve it. And that's what happens when you come buys tobacco,
because now you've got tire and nicotine, and nicotine gets you.

Speaker 3 (43:07):
But there's no nicotine in food.

Speaker 2 (43:08):
How do you make the connection between a national physical
addiction to something like tobacco and then try and translate
that to potato chips.

Speaker 3 (43:16):
It's that element's not.

Speaker 9 (43:17):
There, you know. Yeah, it's very It's just I mean truly,
the food that we eat is very high in sugar,
and we have the food industry has vehicles to get
that in. Just to give you an example, two thousand
and eight, the soda pomp industry flooded, you know, the
American landscape really with about the equivalent of fifty four

(43:41):
gallons of available soda pomp for person per year. And
that's incredible, and we were big consumers and that brought
in extra calories, and these calories aren't good. I remember
teaching down in Kentucky and there was the student teams
to me and said, listen, I drink fourteen twelve ounce
doctor pepper the day and feeling good. Yeah, do you

(44:03):
have recommendations?

Speaker 6 (44:05):
And so.

Speaker 2 (44:07):
The band stupid, there's your recommendations. You're fatally stupid.

Speaker 9 (44:11):
He he was addicted. It was sugar highs and this
is you know, has a certain part of the population
affected by this. You'd be very surprised how many people
actually consume sort of pop. But also you know, sweetened
sweetened beverages as well, and you know also chips, which
are very high in fat and our so tinety mechanism
doesn't really kick in the same way for liquids and

(44:34):
for high density things like chips, so they you know,
they don't give us the signal okay, you've had enough,
even though we may have you know, consumed twelve hundred
calories and chips.

Speaker 2 (44:45):
Yeah, and it doesn't seem like it when you're eating it.
That's the thing. It's calorically that it's dense, but it's
not filling.

Speaker 9 (44:51):
It is correct. I've seen students down a full twelve
ounce bag of potato chips and top that off with
a pizza.

Speaker 5 (44:59):
Yep.

Speaker 2 (44:59):
Yeah, but it's great to have that younger person's metabolism.
That's the thing, right because when I was younger. You know,
you're playing sports or whatever. Yeah, you sit down. You
could kill a two liter of pepsi in needle, half
a loaf of bread, and an entire package of baloney
and be hungry an hour later.

Speaker 9 (45:14):
Well, this is true, but what we don't realize is
these foods that are you know, high and fat actually
cause damage to the body. We have a new phenomena, right,
it's a non alcoholic sabby liver disease. And this is leading,
This is going to lead in the next decades to
higher needs for liver transplants. We are sickening our people

(45:36):
because of that. We think, oh, we have a high metabolism.

Speaker 5 (45:38):
Not so.

Speaker 9 (45:40):
That level of intake actually causes accelerated synthesis of fat
in the liver, coming primarily from hyper corn syrups some theory,
but certainly it's from the sugar, the high serger loads
that we're eating. So no, this is not about an
issue of high metabolism and how lucky we are. We're
setting up those young people for a chronic life of

(46:04):
you know, chronic disease.

Speaker 2 (46:05):
Well, there lies the problem, doctor, right, is it? You
know you can you need more calories when you're growing obviously,
and that's why you know, you look at a teenage
boy and it's my god, how much money and food?

Speaker 5 (46:14):
Am I?

Speaker 3 (46:15):
This is great.

Speaker 2 (46:15):
I got to work a third job in order to
afford just the food. But the problem is you continue
those eating patterns, and many people, when they get to
their late twenties orly thirties maybe forties, continue to eat
like they're a teenager. That's when the weight gets packed on.

Speaker 9 (46:29):
Well yeah, absolutely. But the thing that you're not mentioning
here that's in the equation, yeah, is this high coloric
load that's required is usually tied to the youth, absolutely,
and to the high activity traditionally tagged to youth. This
is not the case anymore. We actually have a condition
called scientism. It's a new disease that's being investigated by

(46:52):
physiologists because of the high degree of inactivity in the youth.
They're actually developing old people's disease.

Speaker 2 (47:02):
Yeah, I mean we have one something yeah, something like
one and four. I think I just read a stand
on one and four. Young people between twelve and nineteen
are pre diabetic.

Speaker 9 (47:14):
Oh yeah, yeah, it's it's it's an epidemic, absolutely, And
the thing about diabetes is that you know, type two
diabetes is that it's you know, ninety five percent associated
with weighting right though, with obesity. So the only way
to solve it, of course, is to eat leaner. And again,
you know the book. If you go to insatiablewe dot com,

(47:36):
which is the website, you'll get more information about the book,
but also certain other ideas. I've got videos up there
and stuff that tackle different subjects.

Speaker 3 (47:44):
Yeah, gotcha.

Speaker 2 (47:45):
There's the thing though, because it sounds like one may
listen to you, doctor and gold. So what you're saying
is make food less delicious.

Speaker 9 (47:51):
No food is supposed to be delicious. Using spices and herbs,
it can be incredible. What happens is we've overst iimmolated
our taste buds. And if you're going to make that
radical shift to normal food, it takes a little while,
but not that long. It takes a week or two
getting off those highs and really realizing. You know, you

(48:14):
know people say to me, oh, I can't get off
soda pop. Well, you know these were patients of mine previously,
and you know, within a week they say, oh my god,
I feel so much better. Yeah, and I don't have
craving for sugar.

Speaker 5 (48:26):
Like I used to do.

Speaker 9 (48:26):
So it's actually not that difficult, and it's really the
stress of disengaging from that high level of sugar. It's
really short lived. And the same thing goes for the
foods our. Evolutionary genes were not meant to be adaptive
to this high level of tape sensation.

Speaker 2 (48:45):
If we keep eating this way, though, doctor Bissonette, want
our genetics change. I mean we all adapt to the environment.
So if we continue to eat like we eat, don't
dount our bodies to simply change.

Speaker 3 (48:55):
And it may take centuries, but don't we have.

Speaker 9 (48:57):
All Oh, really look more in terms of thousands of years, Okay,
but really what we know in terms of epide genetic
changes that take place in uteral For example, a mother
that an expected mother that eats poorly, that's overweight, she
passes on epigenetic changes to the baby, who then becomes
prone to obesity and a variety of chronic diseases. So

(49:21):
this genetic story really doesn't pan out correctly. Right, It
does appear that we can have a formula like a
code for help, and we can't really deviate from it
unless we don't become chronically ill, and the United States
is very chronically ill. You know, we have a healthcare
expenditure of about three point seven billion dollars and seventy

(49:43):
five percent of that is tied to chronic disease. Just
think about it.

Speaker 2 (49:47):
Yeah, well, I mean you believe it. You see it
all over right. We are literally the diseases we used
to die. If you look back one hundred years, even
as fascinated by the stuff, you don't you forgot existed
in this country, you have to look up the definition
of what it means hundred years ago.

Speaker 3 (49:59):
It's exactly happles to day.

Speaker 2 (50:00):
Everything is largely everything is based on what we consume,
whether it's a cancer, uh, some forms of lymphoma, but
most certainly heart disease and things. It's because of what
we're putting in our bodies as opposed to what we're
not putting in our bodies.

Speaker 9 (50:13):
There's high correlations to that, you know, quantic disease, colding cancer,
very high association with you know, low fiber and poor
dietary habits and lack of exercise as well.

Speaker 2 (50:26):
Yeah, well that's all the hard stuff, right, I mean,
you know, eating whole grains and it doesn't taste as
good as a bag of Doritos.

Speaker 3 (50:31):
I mean, you know you admit that, would you?

Speaker 2 (50:33):
I mean if you had a bag of doritos and
I had a bag of kale chips, what would you reade?

Speaker 3 (50:38):
Now, you know you'd eat the kale chips.

Speaker 2 (50:40):
But you can't tell me that the doritos are the
doritos are one hundred times more delicious than any cal chips.

Speaker 9 (50:46):
Well, listen, I go into this in the but but
ultimately you shouldn't be eating chips. That's one of the
radical changes. Chips have invaded our food supply in such
a way that we have really caused a massive obedience
in food behavior. Chips have virtually no nutritional value, yet,
like you say, they're various goods and again a radical

(51:08):
shift roup you know, stop, you know, to stop eating
these will open up your case buds actually to appreciate
the more subtle cases of fruit and vegetables. We see
this problem in children who are brought up on chips
and things of that nature. They will not eat fruits
and vegetables. We hear mothers complain about it all the time. Well,
what happened is they introduced it too early, right, and

(51:31):
they for you know they forever captured their trillren so
to speak into you know what it ends up to being, uh,
you know, a weight management problem they can never get
out of.

Speaker 2 (51:42):
All right, I gotta get gone, but I appreciate the time.
Doctor David Bissonette, he's an Associate Professor nutrition, uh doctor
in nutritional science, and writes about this and insatiable the
nation's unappeased hunger. It certainly is the scourge of well,
not just our generation, I think the past one, in
future ones as well. Doctor all the best, thanks.

Speaker 9 (51:58):
Again, well, thank you very much.

Speaker 3 (52:00):
Also, I hope.

Speaker 2 (52:01):
That none of this, whether the conversation would dissuade you
from eating like you're on death row, because I plan
on doing that on Thursday myself. It's just interesting information
and it's marketing and it's so American that we have
developed food to make us eat, us eat past the
point of being full, so we buy more, we eat more.
If you know that, do with that information what you wish?
I'm with you. I look, gluttony is it really should be?

(52:24):
There should just be the sixths, especially this time of
the year. Can we just table to gluttony for we're
just pumped the Brakes on that shall we slowly seven
hundred WLW. Here we go moments ago at the White House.
The white turkey has been pardoned, the white turkey. The
white turkey will be here at twelve oh six. Bill

(52:44):
Cunningham on seven hundred WLW talking about American giblets and
that little hag in piece of meat under the chin
of a turkey. What is that called? It is a
stupid looking bird, isn't it. What that gross, gross hanging down.
I'm not quite sure what that is. And now the
white turkey almost attacked some toddler in the White House

(53:04):
press room. More in that with Brian Combs and Ricky Chino.
When turkeys breakout, we break in here on the home
of poultry, seven hundred W WALLW.

Speaker 3 (53:16):
So this happened to UC.

Speaker 2 (53:17):
Game, and it was an f the Mormon's chant that
briefly broke out at in Ippert Stadium. I thought I
read somewhere in social and if it's true or not
that the pan on Steward said, knock.

Speaker 3 (53:25):
It off yesterday.

Speaker 2 (53:27):
This led Cincinnati Athletic Director John Cunningham to apologize to
the Brigham Young community and the Church of Jesus Christ.
The Latter Day Saints, not just UC but also Arizona
and USC other schools whose student body have engaged in
the same chant. Colorado was just find fifty thousand dollars
by the Big Twelve when their student section broke out

(53:49):
with that chant in September. Dion Sanders, by the way,
he apologized, saying the obligatory that's not indicative of who
we are, No, it is not, but it's indicative of
the people who are shouting. And that's that's my problem
with apologies. I think we are in the way. Too
many apologies age in America.

Speaker 5 (54:07):
Now.

Speaker 2 (54:07):
Don't get me wrong. I certainly wouldn't chant f the Mormons,
especially since you know they showed up whooped our butts
and they donated. The traveling folks from Utah donated over
twenty seven pounds of food to the Bearcat Food Pantry.
It's the largest donationingle donation I've ever had. And in

(54:28):
addition to that, at the Tilgate, over six hundred coats
were donated by Cougar fans to the naacp CO drive.
That's pretty cool considering the road trip, the length of
the road trip. I don't if they came here and
bought the coach and the can goods. I'm not sure,
but that takes a lot. It's one thing to do
it at home, but for a visiting team to do
that and have knowledge of doing that ahead of time,

(54:49):
that is spectacular.

Speaker 3 (54:50):
We should celebrate that.

Speaker 2 (54:52):
I don't know whoever chanted that f the Mormons, that
they missed that whole thing, but yeah, it's I think
we can agree that's atrocious. You shouldn't do that, and
I'm going to make excuses for their behavior. What I
want to talk about, though, is our apology culture. And
it's because everyone has offended everything. And I'm not downplaying

(55:13):
the insensitivity here of the f the Mormon stand. It's
bigger than that, just the nature of apologies. The thing is,
with apologies, I can only apologize for the things I
do or did. Goodness knows all of us and our
history and our life here on earth. We have things
we apologize for or should have apologized before. That is

(55:35):
an action or inaction, something you did, something you to
think of, something crass, out of place, whatever it might be.
We've all had our moments of not being the best
person we possibly could. There's none of us out there
haven't done something stupid, especially when we're younger and maybe
under the influence of alcohol. It doesn't excuse the behavior,
but it is up to the person who commits the

(55:56):
offense to apologize. I don't understand why UCEE feels they
need to apologize for something they had no control over.
They didn't sanction, they didn't approve. It's not like, hey,
if we're losing in the fourth quarter, we're gonna all
start chatting together F the Mormons. Like if you see

(56:16):
we're handing out towels that said F the Mormons on
them and wave them, or t shirts with the UC
logo on it, the barricat logo said F the Mormons.
Y know, you should apologize for that, but they're not
going to do that. You can't, you know, It's like
I can't apologize for the actions of drunken fans. Why
it just to me because it waters down apologies, Like

(56:40):
everyone apologizing except for the people who did this is
it's hollow and it reduces what an apology is and
should be. You know, the idea of now because we
abhor this behavior, why would you find a university fifty
thousand dollars for something you had no control over? They
tried to get them to shut up. The PA announced
it allegedly told them to. I don't know what the

(57:02):
wording is for that one. I don't know if it's
just simply hey, shut the hell up, I don't know.
But okay, we got to find you fifty grand. Why
the universe had nothing to do with this, Well, we
got to find you any Why Well, because we got
to make it look like we don't condone this paper. Well,

(57:23):
no kidding, ninety nine percent of the world does not
condone this behavior, of course, not whatever epithet it might
be normal saying well adjusted, well meaning, balanced people look
at that and go, yeah, that's offensive, that's stupid, You're
an idiot.

Speaker 3 (57:37):
Can't we just leave it at that?

Speaker 2 (57:39):
Fifty thousand dollars fine though, that to me, that's just
that's see insane. Well, we got to show, we got
to prove to people we're not we don't hate more.
Of course, no one hat I mean I shouldn't say
that there's hate in the world for sure, but you
know you finding someone fifty grand doesn't what does that prove?

Speaker 3 (58:00):
What does that say?

Speaker 2 (58:01):
Well, they must take this thing really seriously, Like, well,
if we find out who you are. There's gonna be
problems because you're if you're a student that you did
and you're on campus, we can make trouble.

Speaker 3 (58:09):
We're gonna find out who you are. That's different.

Speaker 2 (58:11):
Okay, go after the individual responsible. This is like this
would be like t Higgins apologizing because Jamar Chase sped
on Jalen Ramsey. TIGA's had another do with this. You
can ampathize. I mean, if you haves T Higgins. I
don't know if he would, but it said, yeah, man,
I don't know what. I love the guy, but I
disagree with this. I don't I think that's wrong. You know,

(58:33):
if you're someone in that sacks you guy, I heard
him and I told him to shut up, or a
loved one going yeah, I wouldn't say that either, but
they did, and there should be some repercussions for that
if you know who that person is. But we're in
an age now where everyone has to apologize for another
big one. And I haven't heard this one for a while,
but the apologizing over slavery in twenty twenty five, people
still do that. We're apologize, apologize to the trosties of slavery.

(58:55):
I think we all agree slavery is a bad thing,
you know, and issuing up. It's like me apologizing apologizes.
I can empathize and go, wow, I look what it
did to the culture of generations of people, the effect
it still has today. I can recognize and empathize with
that that slavery was a horrific thing, probably the darkest
stain in the history of the United States. We see

(59:15):
eyed eye on that. Most of us do, anyway, all
of us do. But for me to sit here and
go wow, I'm so sorry, I apologize because at one
time in America, slavery was a thing. It's hollow, is
what that is. Because I had nothing to do with that. Furthermore,
my people who immigrated here in the early part of

(59:35):
the nineteenth twentieth century, rather, we had no hand. It
was well over by the time that world around. Now,
are there things that happened that were racist between the
nineteen hundreds when my people first came here and today, Oh? Absolutely,
But again, you know, civil rights violation. I had no
hand in that, Selma, I had no hand in that.

(59:55):
If I did something myself, I wouldn't have apologized in
the past, asked for doing that.

Speaker 3 (01:00:01):
But that's on me. And the idea that now we
just well.

Speaker 2 (01:00:05):
I've got UC's got to apologize for the actions of
I don't know if it's a handful or a couple dozen.
I'm not quite sure because the video online it's hard
to tell how many people are chanting. Was enough in
that section to notice, wow, that's pretty harsh. But it
wasn't like it was the whole stadium. It wasn't like
the UC bearcat chielders are out there, if the Mormons,

(01:00:27):
if the Mormons, they're not.

Speaker 3 (01:00:30):
No one was doing that.

Speaker 2 (01:00:31):
It was just the maybe the student section or part
of the student section, I'm not sure. So find out
who those people are and then you can you can
kind of dox them and force them to an apology
or say this is yeah, there's going to be trouble
for you at school. But the idea of universe at
the fifty thousand dollars, fine, what what is that?

Speaker 3 (01:00:50):
What does that prove? It proves that we're anti Mormon
hate is what it proves.

Speaker 8 (01:00:54):
God.

Speaker 2 (01:00:55):
I don't think we need, you know, to do that
by a fighting someone had no control over it.

Speaker 3 (01:01:01):
You just simply go.

Speaker 2 (01:01:02):
I hope we find out those who were chanting that
and will investigate and we punish those responsible because it
is reprehensible what they did, and just kind of leave
it at that same with you saying, it's like, we
apologize because this is not, you know, Deon Sanders, the
old this is not indicative of who we are now.
It is not because it's a small number of people
were doing this. You apolo as a coach apologizing for

(01:01:26):
the student body. It's like, no, that doesn't work that way.
If one of your players did something stupid, If one
of your players said that, go, look, I don't know
what's going through his head, but we will not tolerate
the behavior. He suspended for the de X games. That's reasonable,
But a general blanket apology. Yeah, we know most people,
most all of us have nothing against Mormons or people

(01:01:47):
of color or whatever it might be. And if you
do and you say something in you're caught, then you
own up to it and you apologize or you don't
apologize and reap the consequences of that. But we are
clearly in the over apology age. And it's just one
of those things that kind of gets me like it's,
you know why, because it's insincere. It's not because we

(01:02:07):
really believe that all of ours this is reflective as
it's not. It's like you have to say something otherwise
somehow you're part of the problem.

Speaker 3 (01:02:13):
No, you're not. That's the other end of this thing.

Speaker 2 (01:02:16):
Anyway, We've got coming up at eleven oh seven here
on seven hundred w dot Tom Gamble, I know if
you heard Yester, the Ohio High School Athletic State Athletic
Association has proved nil for student athletes high school student athletes,
and this opens up obviously a Pandora's box of things. Personally,
I let's go. I'm fine with it because I mean,
look at the Elder Saint X game. You have broadcast rights,

(01:02:40):
you had revenue from ticket sales. I don't know if
they get a cut of the parking. I'm not quite
sure how it works, but a lot of money came
to those schools. A lot of money goes to the
athletic department. It goes to coaches and people who are
responsible for coaching these young people. And yet the young
people who are the spectacle the exhibition don't get anything
for it. You know, that's not how America works. Now,

(01:03:01):
Is it going to screw up high school sports to
a degree?

Speaker 3 (01:03:03):
It will.

Speaker 2 (01:03:03):
I think the biggest thing with high school sports it's
going to screw up is, Man, if you thought it
was bad now with the football, soccer, baseball, lacrosse, basketball, hockey, fishing,
best fishing, whatever the sport might be, you think the
parents shown up to those things.

Speaker 3 (01:03:21):
It's going to get worse because.

Speaker 2 (01:03:23):
Now there's literally diamonds to be had by by name, egement, likeness.
Can't imagine most high schools unless you are the biggest
high school stud in sports in the country and that elite,
elite air you're you know, you're probably not going to
get that much. I would suggest too, that those individuals
who are the best of the best and first round

(01:03:44):
draft picks, that they're going to wind up going to
an academy like IMG or something like that, or a
school it's a private school because they're going to get
recruited to play there.

Speaker 3 (01:03:52):
That's how it works now.

Speaker 2 (01:03:56):
But I think to the average high school athlete, you're
going to have those parents that think their kid is
Division one material when they're not or don't even have
the ability to make play on a college team because
they're living that dream and while they've always been good
when they were eight or nine years old, and of
course you know why that by the time you start
to develop and you know, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, and that
it range. You know, that's when you learn and you

(01:04:19):
either can or can't hit a curveball right or block
or tackle or whatever it is. And parents are because
the money and time and investment in that child and
that precious snowflake. We don't want to read the writing
on the wall. We don't think our kid can't do this.
We want to think that they're And then of course
it's a conspiracy as to why your kid is not
in the first team, why they're not getting offers, et cetera,

(01:04:40):
et cetera, that it's us against them and we're better,
and it's not. It's you know, your kid isn't as
good as you thought they were. And that's fine. But
had plenty of parents. I think most parents enjoy it
along the way and go, hey, you know what it is,
what it is. They had some great memories, met some
great friends, life lessons, all that stuff, and you take
it for what it is. But of course there's at
one percent out there that think a lot differently. It's

(01:05:00):
going to be worse and not better. Also too, I
wonder what happens in the locker rooms where you have
kids that are balling out and they are recruited and
you know, wind up getting monetary compensation or whatever it
might be from local businesses and the other kids on
the team don't.

Speaker 3 (01:05:16):
But I guess that's kind of there.

Speaker 2 (01:05:17):
Ready, when you talk about college scouts and scholarships, you know,
not everyone on the team is going to get recruited
by a school. Actually, in most schools, no one's recruited.
If you think about it, very rarely does a coup
come along that we're getting you know, two or one
or three people off this team. It just doesn't happen
all that much, well alone any school for that matter,
getting a uscout. But but you know, again, there's plenty

(01:05:39):
of schools out there and the like. But I wonder
if that's going to mess up the chemistry in the
locker And probably not as much as the crazy moms
and dads that are going to go, Now, my kid
is going to be going to they're gonna get They're
gonna be the next at age five, the next quarterback
of the Ohio State University. There are people that think that,
and you know, again, I there's just going to be

(01:05:59):
more of them because of this. But in the end,
I think it is a plus because despite all the
histornics of administrators and like wringing their hands over the
purity of sports and amateurism is dead. And it's true,
but wise amateurism dead because we have monetized. We monetize
everything in this country. If there is a platform to
make money, we're going to do it.

Speaker 4 (01:06:20):
You know.

Speaker 2 (01:06:20):
The one that got me was when my daughter was
much younger and like third grade, she wanted to cheer
and wound up doing that, and you know, elementall that'd
be middle school, I suppose, and it was kind of
eye opening as to how they monetize it because they'd
be like cheerleading competitions. Yeah, it used to be the
cheerleaders go out, you cheer and okay, great, And now

(01:06:42):
somehow they've turned cheerleading into a sport. Take that for
what you will. I guess it's interpretive like dance or
anything else. But cheerleading was a cheer We're there to
cheer on the football players. And I mean, I'm sure
back in the day, certainly back in the day, it
was a lot more sexist than it is now it's
we treat them like athletes and go, well, now we
have competitions and we have you know, you're going on.

(01:07:03):
We had to go like on weekends and sit in
a gym all for like seven hours watching girls cheer
and there's you know, and you know, the money involved
in it, and there's a lot more money than I
thought to be a cheerleader.

Speaker 3 (01:07:12):
Let's put it that way.

Speaker 2 (01:07:13):
But you know, we tell you the point is we
take everything and go, wow, there's money to be made here.
You know, all of the people responsible for those quote
unquote competitions, because once you score, then you can make money.
If it's just like interpretive, then ah, you're just a cheerleader. Okay,
let's make money off this thing. And then that you
know obviously is illustrated here with nil, so it's not
anything new. And it says, oh my god, that's the

(01:07:33):
worst thing ever, Spad. It's been slowly creeping this way
for a long time. I thought, you know, when you
start to when you start to monetize and make cheerleading competitive,
that is pretty damn American, I would say.

Speaker 3 (01:07:46):
I would say, also saw this.

Speaker 2 (01:07:52):
There is a guy and I think he's out of Toledo,
and he was trying to smuggle drugs into prison, which
is a big thing.

Speaker 3 (01:07:58):
You wonder why you makes get drugs. It's pretty easy.

Speaker 2 (01:08:00):
Some many will say it's easier to get drugs in
prison than it is on the streets. And this guy
came up with concocting a spray of narcotics, which is,
you know, once the delivery mechanism evaporates, now the drugs
are on the pages of paper or whatever it is.
He smuggled it in at least three items to a prison,
and he sprayed the pages of a book with narcotics

(01:08:25):
and then shipped them to the Grafton Correctional Institute disguised
as Amazon orders the book that he sprayed the pages
with narcotics. Jd Vance's Hillbilly elegy. Couple things there, Number one,
number one, as I'm surprised that right now progressors aren't
blaming jd Vance somehow his fault. You know, if you

(01:08:45):
wouldn't wrote the book with the drugs, wouldn't get in the prison.
Some it's jd Vance's fault. The other dayaway is you
realize what hillbilly eli elogy is about, right, that's about
how drugs have ruined neighborhoods in community and here you
are using that to deliver drugs. Pretty American, af you

(01:09:06):
asked me Scott's loan, it's home of the best Bengals.

Speaker 3 (01:09:09):
Coverage seven hundred WLW, Cincinnati.

Speaker 1 (01:09:11):
Do you want to be an American?

Speaker 4 (01:09:14):
Staff?

Speaker 3 (01:09:14):
Flow show on seven hundred WLWD.

Speaker 2 (01:09:16):
Ohio State's High School Athletic Association has loud Ohio come
the forty six states to allow nil for high school
athletes and Nile of course we name image likeness they
can sell their brand. There's some rules involved with this
whole thing, but it really is interesting how what happened
in college now permeated to high school and on that
he's the CEO of in Game Sports. They produce a

(01:09:39):
red showcase, the Skyline Crosstown Showdown, and of course HEEOC
Commissioner GCL South featuring that sint Ex Elder game last
Friday night. That'd be our my buddy in a former colleague,
Tom Gamble on the show again on seven hundred WW Tom,
how are.

Speaker 5 (01:09:52):
You Swony doing great? Yeah, appreciate the opportunity and you
know why not, Why shouldn't teenagers and high school athletes?
But it is very tricky. And it's funny. You brought
up about how there are only six states that don't
have that IL. But here's a statistic since two thousand
and two when the OHSAA member schools, over eight hundred

(01:10:15):
of them voted against the NIL. Since then, right back
then there were nine school nine states they'd had ANIL.
Now there's forty four. But here, get a load of this.
Less than one percent, less than one percent of student
athletes in those forty four states take advantage of it.
I think it's going to You're gonna find it's gonna
be much trickier to do it at the high school level.

(01:10:37):
Everybody sees what's going on in intercollegiate athletics, specifically in
football and primarily men's basketball, those two. It needs to
be a little bit different at the high school level.

Speaker 2 (01:10:46):
Yeah, I think in Indiana's surprise too, as big as
basketball is there too, you think they'd be on this thing.

Speaker 3 (01:10:50):
But it's inevitable.

Speaker 2 (01:10:51):
I mean, if you look at the trajector this time,
this is what back in twenty twenty two is when
we last voted down in Ohio and Jamier Brown comes
along and changes game.

Speaker 3 (01:11:00):
He's a if you don't know who that is. Wide receiver.

Speaker 2 (01:11:02):
He put up as a sophomore one thousand yards and
fifteen touchdowns up in Dayton. He is committed to be
a receiver for the Ohio State University. In twenty twenty seven,
he fought a lawsuit that forces the Ohio Athletic Association
High School Athletic Association to address this issue.

Speaker 3 (01:11:19):
So what's changed since they last denied this?

Speaker 5 (01:11:22):
You're correct? A Franklin County judge issued a temporary restraining
order allowing Brown through his family, right, and that's the
key student athlete family. I'll get to that momentarily, but
allowing him to pursue this currently, well, that expires. Training
order expires on December fifteenth. So the challenge is in

(01:11:45):
the OHSA. Ain't says, hey, we member school, we want
to legislate this, because if we do not, if we
don't vote this in, you never know, it could be
the judge, you never would, the governor at some point
get involved. We've seen that before, right, So if you
want to, if you want to maintain control and put
up some guardrails and do things like that, then I

(01:12:07):
think you're gonna see. And I've talked to a number
of athletic directors in which I am obviously not one
that I deal with them all the time, and most
have told me they figure it's better to enact it
now and then tweak it as you go. You know,
you got to start somewhere, and to your point, is
inevitable it is coming at some point. So their thought
process is, let's get it in there now and then

(01:12:29):
let's deal with it now. This is a proposal, and
I've read through and I watched the presentation that the
OHSAA put together, and they've hired a company called Influential
Athlete and it's interesting. It's a husband and wife. He
was a former high school athletic director and the wife
they're they're the gradys, Joe and Stephanie Grady. She was

(01:12:50):
a figure skater and spent ten years doing television news.
She was an anchor. So they've lived the life. And
I think what they what they're trying to do is
educate the athletic directors and the people from the member
schools of the OHSAA on how this is done, what's legal,
what's not. So I think here's the biggest points is

(01:13:11):
this it's set up. We're the only onus on the
school itself is that they have to police their own
kid should they sign an agreement. It's designed to be
the student athlete and the family and the OHSAA. So
if you get an agreement you as a student athlete,
you have fourteen days to send that agreement to the

(01:13:34):
OHSAA for approval. Now, on the surface, you know, it
seems if everybody, I hate to say what I'm about,
if everyone follows the rules, this would be great. This
would be a win win for everybody. The issue is
going to become not everybody follows the rules.

Speaker 2 (01:13:51):
Of course you will. You're gonna have people want to
gain the system. As with anything in life. Tom gambles
here he is missed high school football in the Tri
State and now it's fish shell. The Ohio State High
School Athletic Assotization has voted for student athletes to profit
off their name, image and likeness. We just had the
Sane ex Elder game. The money from ticket sales, concessions, parking,
all that stuff goes to the member schools. Shouldn't the

(01:14:13):
athletes who brought all those people to twenty thousand people
to pay courts last week get a cut of the money.

Speaker 5 (01:14:19):
Well, that's where it got to with college athletics, and
I'll get to that question moment, Saraily, here's the big
word I think that needs to be talked about. You
can have no collective. So what that means is colleges
and universities in their athletics department. So like I used
Texas Tech University. Yeah, they had a bunch of you know,
I'm presuming oil guys who have done well. Say here's

(01:14:42):
seven to seven and a half million dollars, go out
and get a defensive line. Okay, that's the collective. It's
it's the schools, the boosters. You cannot as part of
this collective is strictly prohibited. So what that means is
so it's no different than really re so school A
where stud player is attending school B can't all of

(01:15:05):
a sudden go hey, we can offer you this, you
just come here, and that is even going to be
vetted out. Its let's just say because again Tony, you know,
you know it's going to happen at some point. But
what's gonna happen is so if you're at if you're
the athletic director at school A, and suddenly stud athlete
goes to school B and you don't hear anything about

(01:15:27):
any NIL deal. But then after he's there for four
to six months, here comes this And again I use
the term massive. I don't know how mad it can
even be at the high school level, but then that
school aage he's going to go Wait a minute, and
on it happens in recruitment, right, I mean, that's supposed
to be illegal recruiting. It's going to happen at some
point in time in this NIL personal branding. You know

(01:15:50):
all of that, But let's just hope. Let's just hope
that you know, we all have always said, haven't we
high school sports and amateur sports it's the last as
you know, or purity that there is.

Speaker 1 (01:16:02):
Now.

Speaker 5 (01:16:02):
We're all not that naive, but let's hope that if
it's structured where the school is out of it. So
in other words, and this is why I don't think,
I mean people think there's going to be crazy types
of money thrown around. I live in northern Kentucky. Kentucky
has legal NIL. I don't know of one kid that's

(01:16:24):
been out there prominently with then IL. Because here's why
you can't wear in a video or a photograph you
can't wear your school logo, you can't be with your
school mascot, you can't be videoed on the sidelines or
on the court. So it has to be you. It's
your public recognition that you've achieved because of your athletic fame. Well,

(01:16:46):
Sonny do this pick any kid the best football player
in Cincinnati? Right, He's not in uniform, he has no
identification to school, yet he's doing something for a company.
How many people outside of the school where he plays
would even.

Speaker 3 (01:17:04):
Know who that at all? Not at all?

Speaker 2 (01:17:05):
I mean, you know, when you see the commercial with
Jamar Chaser, example, Joe Burrow, you know they're wearing it.
It's pretty clear they're in a Bengals uniform. Or because
it's good for the league, it's good for the brand.
I don't understand why the schools wouldn't want to embrace that.
And the other element of this, too is because that
makes it less attractive to stay in Ohio. And now
I were saying there's no collectives here in Ohio, so

(01:17:26):
that hamstrings us. I'm gonna are you just gonna get
recruits like the top picks? And you know, mister football
for Ohio, mister basketball, they're gonna wind up going to
some out of state prep school or an IMG academy
type program because they can monetize it.

Speaker 5 (01:17:42):
That they're going to do that anyway. I mean that
that's big time dollars. I mean, you know, there was
a basketball player from from Newport, Kentucky who went down
to a prep school in Georgia who is now committed
to the University of Kansas. I mean, he's that good.
But you're going to get that anyway. But I think
if you want to maintain to your original question, you

(01:18:03):
know when we started the amateurism piece of this, you've
got to legislate this, and that's why the HSAA would
rather govern it. And I think here's the other thing.
Of the less than one percent in the forty four states,
the majority of right out and this is a three
year period. Essentially, the majority are in Olympic sports. Because

(01:18:24):
you're not a running back wearing a uniform that nobody
sees what you look like. You're you know, you're maybe
a gymnast or a golfer or a tennis player where
they see you where you're you know, your public recognition
is just you, if not the team. So I think
you're going to see a lot of those companies, but
are they really going to get a ton of money

(01:18:45):
or are they going to get golf balls in golf?

Speaker 2 (01:18:48):
Yeah, you know quarterbacks versus yeah, golfer But I mean,
you know it's still there's some local celebrity element to it,
no question, Yeah it's and every little bit helps. I mean,
if you get you know, a lifetime supply of bridge stones.

Speaker 5 (01:19:01):
Good yeah, Oh no, I don't have any issue with it,
and I think most of I think the biggest thing
back in twenty twenty two is it wasn't clarified enough.
I think the OHSAA has clearly refined this and if
you look at all the details of their bylaws, right,
they've put some real time and thought into this.

Speaker 4 (01:19:22):
I think the.

Speaker 5 (01:19:22):
Original issue was the schools felt like the owners was
going to fall fully on them. And believe me, a
high school athletic director today, you've got be nuts to
be a high school ad with the way parents are today. Right,
we'll start with that, but today, can you imagine if
you had to govern all this Not that you have
nothing to do here, because you're gonna have to pay

(01:19:42):
attention if your athlete signs an agreement, but by having
no collective and by making it the onus of the
family and the student athlete and the OHSAA. Hopefully high
schools won't get overburdened with this because God knows, they
don't have the staff. I mean, high school ads will flee,
they will run.

Speaker 2 (01:20:03):
Probably walk to the I would think so because you know,
there's that the one percent reality in a less than
one percent of kids are going to go on to
a collegiate or pro career. Yet forty percent of parents
think that that's the case, and that you know that's true,
But that also adds an interesting mix to team chemistry,
entitlement issues, and the parent pressure as well. Man, what's
happening in the locker rooms is the question? You know,

(01:20:25):
if if you know the quarterback or I don't know alignment,
someone is getting paid and making some money off this.
Is there a jealousy component and other high jealous high
school kids undermining them and thinking it should be them.
And what happens in that locker.

Speaker 5 (01:20:37):
Room, Well, I think it goes to the kid who
maybe is a D three player whose parents are delusional
that he's going to play in Alabama or Georgia. So
now you're going to have to think about it. So
the illness is on the family and the kid. Well,
how many moms and dads are going to because I know,
I've known of circumstances where moms run X accounts for

(01:21:00):
the kid. The kid doesn't want anything to do with it.
That's how crazy this is. So now we're going to
have parents out there seeking these type of financial opportunities.
And again I'm not blaming anybody for trying to better
themselves financially, but do you really want that? How many
kids won't even know that their mom or dad is
out there trying to get these deals. It's like the

(01:21:21):
old Hey, you know, my son should be starting over yours. Well,
if you want to talk to me, we're going to
bring in the kid who yours. And most of the
time when they have those meetings coaches, the kids don't
even know what's going on. That's how crazy this has
gotten over the years.

Speaker 2 (01:21:36):
Yeah, it's you're going to see you know, toddlers in
the weight room now pretty soon because he's deathlined, right,
I mean, that's where it's going to be. Gonna be
recruited out of kindergarten at some point.

Speaker 5 (01:21:44):
Yeah, it's it's cot well and that's and you bring
up recruited. I think that's the challenge of this. You know,
there already are enough issues with recruitment, and now you
add this. I think that's where the high school administ
traiders have the biggest issue. Look at corning up to
govern recruiting. Now you're going to add this name, image,

(01:22:06):
lightness component with financial wherewithal to it? Can you imagine?
You know, Sorry, the good news is the elder saying
next game Friday night at pay Corps. That's where it's fun.

Speaker 2 (01:22:19):
Well, it wasn't fun for Brian Colmbs and his band
of elder graduates, but nonetheless it was a rollicking game anyway.
And you know, the weather could have been a little better,
but it was as bad as we thought at the
end of the day. You're right, though, it is about
these student athletes just having a good time. Most those
kids will never sniff college loll in the NFL, but
that is something they'll carry. That memory of playing at

(01:22:39):
pay Corps, home of the Bengals, their hometown team in
the NFL, is something they'll carry the rest of their lives.
Tom Gamble, CEO of In Game Sports through the Red Showcases,
Skyline Showdown, high school sports galore, and of course Commissioner
of the GCL South just highlighted at pay Corps a
week ago Friday. Fantastic buddy, thanks again for the time.

(01:23:00):
Well all right, right on late, I gotta get a
news update in. It's a Scott Sloan Show seven hundred
w A.

Speaker 10 (01:23:05):
Time time to talk about money, how to make it,
how to keep it, and how to keep others off
your stash. This is all worth advice with Andy Schaefferg Andrew.

Speaker 5 (01:23:20):
Good morning, Good morning Scott.

Speaker 6 (01:23:22):
How are you today?

Speaker 3 (01:23:22):
I'm doing well, I'm doing Are you ready for thanks? Kidding?

Speaker 5 (01:23:25):
Uh?

Speaker 3 (01:23:25):
Not quite what you mean?

Speaker 5 (01:23:27):
The hell?

Speaker 3 (01:23:27):
Can he not be? Just show up and eat? For
God's sakes, it's not hard.

Speaker 11 (01:23:31):
Well, we we're in charge of making some food. We're
gonna make some green bean cast role and you know,
put together.

Speaker 3 (01:23:37):
We're done. Sucks. What are you doing?

Speaker 2 (01:23:43):
I think it's good, the frozen green beans and the
Campbell soup, the whole thing. Oh you're an idiot. We
can't gid Where's Amy Wagner? Off to a rough start? Okay, yeah,
all right, Well let's be a world's shortest segment Uh no,
well that's good. You enjoy what you enjoy. I get it.
That's fantastic. So you don't all the cook and how

(01:24:05):
many people.

Speaker 11 (01:24:06):
We have a big family here in Cincinnati, so we
actually have two thanksgivings, one of my my folks side
and one of my wife's family sides.

Speaker 2 (01:24:13):
So that's an all day event. Oh wow, okay, so
lots of people. Yeah, we're just doing six this year.
So I got it pretty easy. So not not bad,
not bad. Ye, with the holidays coming up, I saw this.
I wanted to throw this at you. Of course, you
remember home alone, Home alone too, Right.

Speaker 6 (01:24:27):
I've seen home alone. I don't think I've seen home alone.

Speaker 2 (01:24:29):
Okay, Well, the one is that's he's in New York City.
This time he's lost a second you think, you know
after the first time you'd learn, But second time, I
think you start getting message to Kevin mccawish is like,
clearly your family doesn't love you and they don't want
you around, which it would explain later in life what
happened with mccullay culkin when he off the rails with uh,
drugs and everything else. Nonetheless, maybe too much information there

(01:24:49):
Home Alone too. The Adventure to New York. It is
a new I love high you love these indexes right
in These tests of the company called isolate dot com
reveals the true twenty twenty five price tag of Kevin's
New York City Escape and back in. This would have
been nineteen ninety two. When this movie came out, The
suite at the Plaza Hotel, New York was eleven hundred dollars.

(01:25:10):
Room service would have been nine hundred and sixty seven dollars.
The ice cream Sunday feature of the movie with an
eighteen dollars and so the total cost would be two thousand.

Speaker 3 (01:25:19):
One hundred and nine dollars.

Speaker 2 (01:25:20):
That's thousand dollars sweet today six two hundred and forty
four dollars, a four hundred and sixty eight percent increase.
In nineteen ninety two, the room service feast would be
twenty two hundred dollars, a one hundred and thirty one increase.
Ice Cream Sunday went from eighteen to twenty four, a
moderate thirty three percent increase. Total costs two thousand and
one oh nine in nineteen ninety two, twenty twenty five

(01:25:41):
eight five hundred eleven dollars.

Speaker 11 (01:25:45):
Well, I mean that was over thirty years ago. But
that does seem pretty a pretty hefty increase, you know.
But we're seeing, you know, a lot of increases in
housing over the years. You know, we're seeing a lot
of inflation. You know, we started to get some inflation
data out this morning, and so you know, we have
seen periods of time, particularly during COVID, where inflation has
been you know, significantly hot. And I think, you know,

(01:26:06):
when we talk about inflation coming down, I think what
people don't realize it's it's not like we're going to
go back to the prices that we had before, or
even prices become less expensive, they're going to rise at
a slower pace. So you know, when we have inflation,
we're not going to go back to those prices that
we've had before, even if it starts to slow a
little bit. So while that's surprising, you know, I think

(01:26:29):
that it probably falls in lines with our average annual
inflation data.

Speaker 2 (01:26:32):
Yeah, and I think too, especially the one that temist
out paid, would be the cost of a hotel in
midtown Manhattan, a four hundred and sixty eight percent increase
in thirty years, whereas the ice cream Sunday thirty three percent.
That seems about right before sixty eight, but it goes
to show you the housing crisis that we have in
the trickles down to hotel rooms too.

Speaker 6 (01:26:49):
Yep.

Speaker 11 (01:26:49):
And we have seen lower mortgage rates that helped October
existing home sales rised, you know, just about one point
two percent. You know, we're kind of seeing an annualized
activity that's kind of near a multi decade low of
about four point one million. And so I think the
takeaway is that, you know, mortgage rates are kind of
helping out the margins, but they're not creating a wave
of fresh demand. And so, you know what, we we

(01:27:11):
estimate in order from mortgage rates to drop from the
current six point three percent as far as inflation, we
need to see you know, interest rates somewhere around the
mid five percent range before we see a shift in demand.
And so we're just not quite there yet. However, I
do think we'll start to see interest rate cuts as
we move into uh, you know, maybe even December and
into twenty twenty six.

Speaker 2 (01:27:31):
All right, lest hotel So it's more ice cream, That's
what I say. Really, that's what's wrong with that.

Speaker 6 (01:27:35):
Sound's good to me.

Speaker 2 (01:27:36):
Enough whip cream? You could crawl inside like an igloo,
maybe say. But you know, I think, and not to
belabor this, but you know, food, football and family. Number
two on that list the football as you're watching on
I don't know, forty to fifty sixty intra bigger TV.

Speaker 3 (01:27:54):
That's relatively cheap.

Speaker 2 (01:27:55):
I mean, you know, talk about cost of inflation, but yeah,
you know you can buy a one hundred inch TV
for like sixteen hun dollars now that ten twenty years
ago it would have cost you tens of thousands of
So interesting enough, some things are much cheaper today, certainly
not the essentials like housing and food, but electronics. It's
an interesting example of saturating the market with more product
than it causes prices to drop.

Speaker 6 (01:28:16):
Yeah, and I think technology has a lot to do
with that too.

Speaker 11 (01:28:19):
When we built our house a few years ago, I
haven't bought a TV in probably twelve years, and my
wife said, well, we're going to need a TV for
this room. We're going to need a TV for that room.
And it started adding up. I said, you know, we're
not going to be able to afford all these TVs.
And then we go to Best Buy. There are a
couple hundred bucks and I couldn't believe the difference in
the cost from you know, back in the nineties when

(01:28:39):
they weighed three thousand pounds and they were these big
blocks and everything else. So in some areas, you know,
like the calculator, when that first came out, it was
super expensive, and now you can get one for fifty cents. So,
you know, I think that you know, technology has a
lot to do with it, and there's you know, some
advancement where it makes them building these types of technological
products a lot cheaper, and you know, the consumer gets

(01:29:01):
the benefit from that.

Speaker 3 (01:29:02):
Yeah, no quote.

Speaker 2 (01:29:03):
It's funny because the house that we bought is twenty
something years old and in the basement they had a
built a theater room. But yeah, but it's like it's
maybe like fifteen by ten and it's as like my
kids came over, like what is this big hole? It's like,
you know, probably a I don't know, a four foot

(01:29:23):
by three foot just big space. I'm like, well, that's
where the TV would go. Well, why don't you just
hang it on the wall? I said, no, it's like
TV's then we're thousands of dollars and the biggest one
you get is maybe you know, you're you're pimp, and
if you had a fifty inch TV, but the thing
weighed four thousand pounds in the back of it was
much bigger. Right now, you just hang them on the walls.
It's pretty cool to see that. It's kind of quaint.

(01:29:44):
So that's now where the home gym that we never
use will be. Anyway, that's where the treadmill goes. Let's
talk about the data return. Six weeks of silence. Economic
updates are back because the government's back and we're getting
trickles of data in there. You mentioned the mortgage mortgage
rates in there, but the jobs report came out too,
from September.

Speaker 3 (01:30:02):
Would that indicate Yeah.

Speaker 11 (01:30:03):
So employers added better than expected one hundred and nineteen
thousand new jobs. But with anything with this data, you
have to look under the hood and try to understand
what really what it really means. And so that sounded
good on the surface. However, we had revisions from the
earlier months that showed lower by thirty three thousand. The
unemployment rate rose from four point three percent to four

(01:30:25):
point four so that doesn't seem too bad, but it
is an increase, but that was largely due to more
people entering the labor force, So the labor participation rate
increased and that's a positive, you know. And besides that,
you know, we're starting to see some more data trickle
out that I think is going to be important for
the FED decision in December.

Speaker 3 (01:30:42):
Okay, very good. Jabos claims too were in there as well.

Speaker 11 (01:30:46):
Yeah, job as claims. You know, I think the layoffs
have been subdued. We you know, it feels like there's
a lot of people that are getting laid off, a
lot of companies you know, you know, cutting back on
their labor force. But the initial claims hovered around two
point I'm sorry, two hundred and twenty thousand. Over the
past two months, you know, we're the continuing claims remain
around multi year highs, just under two million. So I think,

(01:31:09):
you know, the the aggregate of these job numbers really
and reinforce our view that you know, I would characterize
this environment as low hiring, low firing. If you have
a job, you're probably going to be able to keep it,
but if you don't, it becomes more difficult to find it.

Speaker 2 (01:31:23):
Okay, it makes sense to what what data are we
missing here? I guess it's because it's an incomplete picture.

Speaker 11 (01:31:28):
Yeah, I think it's all kind of hovering around what
the inflation data is going to is going to read.

Speaker 6 (01:31:33):
Now.

Speaker 11 (01:31:34):
You know, just this morning we received the inflation data
data for PPI and you know a lot of people
hear all these acronyms, you like, what does that mean?
What's the producer price index? The producer price index is
a measurement of what wholesaler's costs are. So if you
have an organization that is buying supplies or services from
another organization, what does that inflation tell us? And usually

(01:31:54):
that's predictive of what the CPI is, and that's the
consumer price index, and that's what you and I go
to the store and what the inflation data is there.
And so what we saw this morning at eight thirty
was that the producer price Index came in a little
bit cooler. It was only up point two percent versus
point three two point seven percent annualized, which is pretty good.
And so that tells us that this might give the

(01:32:17):
Fed an opportunity to go ahead and cut rates in December,
because this data is becoming a little bit more clear
on inflation to be able to attack the labor market
a little bit more so inflation is continuing to cool
and we're going to continue to get more data the
rest of this week.

Speaker 2 (01:32:30):
Okay, so this all factors and what the FED is
going to do next month.

Speaker 6 (01:32:34):
Yeah.

Speaker 11 (01:32:34):
So you know, if you would have asked me a
week ago, I would say, hey, you know, probably we're
not going to get a cut in December. But as
you see some of this data trickle out from the
past months, it kind of reinforces the fact that we
are seeing inflation start to cool down a little bit
in a number of areas. The other thing is is
that we didn't believe that we were going to get
the CPI report, which again is the consumer Price Index,

(01:32:57):
until after the FED meeting, which is early. However, the
government recently came out and said we're going to be
able to get that report a week prior to the
meeting in December, and so that will have an impact
on the decision as well. So it does seem like,
you know, this data is not only coming out, but
coming out a little bit sooner than we expected, and
that's going to be good for market security because generally

(01:33:18):
investors don't like uncertainty, and we're starting to get a
little bit more clear data from the FED.

Speaker 2 (01:33:23):
Okay, makes sense, Andy Schaffer, all Worth Financial. It's your
weekly money tune up in a kind of a weird
week here obviously with the holidays too, and so that's
that is going to impact what we're talking about with
the week I had here.

Speaker 6 (01:33:34):
Oh yeah, yeah.

Speaker 11 (01:33:35):
And so you know the December the Central Bank rate
decision is is December tenth, and so you know, we're
not going to get some data like the November payroll
and those types of things until after the FED meet.
But you know, the policymakers have to determine, you know,
what data do they have, Does it tell enough of
the story, does it give them confidence to go ahead
and cut rates? And what we're seeing on the inner

(01:33:56):
circles of the FED. So you have basically twelve decision
makers on the FED. You have seven from the Border
government Bord of Governors, and then you have five that
are actually the FED regional presidents and they're the ones
that make the decisions. And you have two camps there.
You have one camp that's very hawkish, and what that
means is that they want to make sure that inflation
comes down significantly. They don't want to switch gears until

(01:34:17):
they're comfortable with inflation, and then you have the Dovi
sect and they're the ones that say, hey, we're starting
to see this inflation data start to cool down. The
tariffs really haven't had that much of an impact. Not
only do we think that we should have a quarter
percent cut in December, but maybe even a half a
percent cut. And I think that as we move into
twenty twenty six. You know, my opinion right now is
it is likely that we see I say it's better

(01:34:39):
than half, more than half likely that we do see
a cut in December, and maybe we see another three
cuts moving into twenty twenty six.

Speaker 2 (01:34:46):
Wow, that would certainly punch the economy up out of building.

Speaker 11 (01:34:50):
In absolutely, you know, generally speaking, you know, investors say, okay,
if rates are being cut, that obviously increases demand because
the cost of borrowing becomes a lot cheaper. That's also
a special important for businesses because now their cost of
borrowing and their debt becomes more serviceable, which allows them
to go out and hire more because they have an
influx of cash that they didn't have to pay towards

(01:35:10):
their debt in the beginning. So all of that modes
well from an economic standpoint. But it is a delicate
dance to make sure that inflation doesn't flare up once
again and we have to shift gears and reverse course
by increasing rates.

Speaker 2 (01:35:22):
That would be It's an interesting and fine line here
because you know, you look at consumer the numbers look
really good on must of but people are like, hey, listen,
I'm paying more for everything from beef to grocers and
lectures on energy, mortgage of Brant, all that stuff that's
going up, up, up and up. And yet we're going
to have a record travel season coming up, and we're
also going to have huge numbers of people buying stuff.
Are already seeing the numbers coming out early for the

(01:35:44):
Christmas holiday and people are still buying stuff. Yeah, but
the underlying thing is credit card debt's not at all
time high.

Speaker 3 (01:35:49):
Something's got to give there, doesn't it.

Speaker 4 (01:35:51):
Yep.

Speaker 11 (01:35:51):
So we actually did get a little bit of retail
data this morning as far as consumer spending.

Speaker 6 (01:35:55):
That did tick down.

Speaker 11 (01:35:56):
It wes oh, it did okay, yep, yep, just at
eight thirty this morning, it did tick down to yo
point one percent. The expectation was that it was going
to increase yo point four and so I think that
has a lot to do with the fact that the
rush and the surge of buying going into the school season,
where we usually see some seasonal activity, there is starting
to cool.

Speaker 6 (01:36:15):
A little bit.

Speaker 11 (01:36:16):
That again also gives the FED a little bit more
leeway to cut rates, because if you start seeing spending
start to decline, that allows the FED to shift gears
more towards you know, obviously, if spending is declining, then
inflation would likely come down, so they can shift gears
back towards the labor market. That also increases the probability
of a rate cut December. Now, as we move into
the holiday season, it's likely that we will see some

(01:36:37):
more seasonal spending leading up through Thanksgiving and we get
a little bit of a Santa Claus bump, you know,
towards the end of the year, and that's usually how
that goes. But I think all of this data that
suggests cooling, not only in the labor market but also
in retail spending, lends the FED a little bit more
leeway to go ahead and cut rates next month.

Speaker 2 (01:36:55):
Okay, in the past weeks is the last talk. The
last penny was produced be hoarding wheelbarrows from a pennies
and holding them for the next generation, saying this is
gonna be worse. It's a penny, but it's gonna be
worth a lot in the future because they don't make
them anymore.

Speaker 11 (01:37:08):
Well, there's a lot of people that collect coins. I
can't stand pennies. I think they smell dumb. Yeah, yeah, yeah,
And I think it makes sense. I mean, I can't
remember the last time I actually pulled out some change
and used a penny to get you know, the right
amount of the right amount on the price. But what
we're seeing is that there's a lot of people out
there that do collect coins. My mom has a coin collection.
She used to collect all of the quarters that were

(01:37:30):
minted in all of different states and things like that,
and has these in this neat book. So there's a
lot of people out where that is a hobby of theirs.
And so when you look at pennies in general, I
think for the average penny, you're probably not looking at
a whole lot of increase in price because there's still
you know, there's still a lot out there. There's a
big supply of them. I think when you start to

(01:37:51):
get in the ones like the weak penny or some
of the last minted there could be you know a
little bit of a demand there and you could see
an increase in price. But if you enjoy coin left
and go for it. Yeah, but your average every day
nineteen eighty seven penny that's dirty that you pick up
off the ground, that's not going to be worth anything.

Speaker 2 (01:38:06):
Yeah, I got you, andy, who's really going to suffer
from this? And the people who make those give a penny,
take a penny jars that sit at convenience stores and
stores where it's like, oh, it's in, it's got somebody's
logo on. It's like, yeah, you need a penny, Take
a penny. What's going to happen to that sector?

Speaker 11 (01:38:20):
Well, that jar is now going to become nickel quarters
and dimes.

Speaker 3 (01:38:24):
Well, then you got to make new I guess you
sell new new product there.

Speaker 6 (01:38:28):
That's you just create a new label and that there
give you give me all your silver.

Speaker 11 (01:38:32):
And I think that's you know, we talked about inflation,
and that's that's really a good example of inflation. You know,
the penny doesn't matter anymore. You know, the quarter is
the new penny at this point?

Speaker 3 (01:38:42):
Are that what was the nickel?

Speaker 6 (01:38:43):
Give me the nextico then probably, I mean at some point.

Speaker 11 (01:38:46):
Yeah, I mean, you know you might see you might
see that in the next twenty to fifty years.

Speaker 2 (01:38:50):
Certainly wait till you travel, you know, you go abroad
or something like that. Some of the coinage in foreign
countries are like manhole covers you're carrying.

Speaker 3 (01:38:56):
Around Lord Heart.

Speaker 6 (01:38:59):
Yeah, there are some big.

Speaker 2 (01:39:00):
Disc am I pot. I'm like, I'm good. Can I
just use my credit card on this purchase here? And
we're using that more now than ever because of because
it's convenient. He's Andy Shaeffer at all Worth Financial. Their
show Simply Money airs at six o'clock weeknights on fifty
five k RCIK. Catch the podcast as well via the
iHeartRadio app. Andy pops on the show Tuesdays. We will
Financial tune up. Have a great Thanksgiving and I hope

(01:39:23):
you choke on your green bean casserole. All right, Scott
got awful. I cannot believe we're friends. This is a
this is stupid as what this is. He knows his money,
but when it comes to cuisine he has no taste.
Andy Shaeffer at all Worth, thanks again. Willie's on the
way coming up in just minutes here. Right after news update,
I'll see you back on Monday, taking Tomorrow off and
you hope you enjoy great Thanksgiving. Me safe, travel safely

(01:39:45):
and enjoy that quality time with your family members, unless
of course you hate them. Then go to a bar
Sloaney home of the best Bengals covered seven hundred WWD, Cincinnati,