Rep. McClintock Joins Me With Shutdown Truths

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Congresson Tom McClintock, thank you for that memory, Sir.

Speaker 2 (00:04):
You're very welcome. Trevor.

Speaker 1 (00:05):
Good to talk to you, and good to talk to you.
I saw a TV interview you were doing, and I'm
assuming you're in your office there. It looked like it
it was the one with the Winston Churchill frame Life
magazine in the background. Is that your congressional office?

Speaker 2 (00:18):
No, actually that's my home office.

Speaker 1 (00:20):
Okay, you're like me. I decorate. I got rfkk JFK
frame just like that Life magazine. I couldn't believe. I like,
we got the same taste in political decoration.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
Uh, well, I'd draw inspiration from it.

Speaker 1 (00:34):
Well, listen, I want to explain to everybody out there.
I just played back your words there. Explain what a
simple bill is.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
Well, they call it the clean continuing resolution, which makes
no policy changes. It simply continues spending at current levels
that everybody had already agreed to, so that we can
continue the appropriations process and finish that. And that's what
the Democrats blocked for forty three days.

Speaker 1 (01:03):
Appropriations process. Why do we need continuing resolutions? Explain why
that's different than having the budget for the year or
the time period already set where you don't need to
do continuing resolutions.

Speaker 2 (01:17):
Well, the continuing resolution is a poor substitute, but it
keeps the doors open if there's an impasse or if
it simply is taking longer than usual to go through
the appropriations bills. The federal budget process is actually a
very logical process when it's followed. It's just not often followed.
And that is that the House and the Senate have

(01:37):
to pass a budget resolution that sets limits on spending
for both the discretionary side, that's what we actually appropriate
in votes, and on the mandatory side, those are the
laws that automatically dispends by Social Security, for example, interest
on the debt that doesn't require an appropriation. It simply

(01:59):
continues to to spend that money until the law itself
is changed. On that budget resolution is adopted. Then the
discretionary spending is done through the twelve appropriation bills that
originate in the House. They divide up the federal government
to twelve separate sections. Those are then sent over to

(02:21):
the Senate, and then for the mandatory side, that's supposed
to be a reconciliation bill. That reconciliation bill makes all
of the changes in law that are necessary to meet
the budget resolution that then also goes over to the Senate.
The appropriation bills require a closure which is three fifths
of the Senate in order to even be considered. The

(02:43):
beauty of the reconciliation bill is it gets expedity consideration.
That is, there is no closure vote, and that's passed
by a simple majority. The problem is that the appropriations
bills often run basically get ignored in the Senate because
they can't make that sixty vote closure vote. Uh. And

(03:05):
when that happens, the clock runs out, and then we're
faced with the Hobson's choice of watching the government shut
down for lack of an appropriation or passing and continuing
resolution to buy more time. Does that make sense that
well complicated process.

Speaker 1 (03:21):
Well, I gotta say it's it's so it works.

Speaker 2 (03:24):
It just hasn't been followed very often.

Speaker 1 (03:27):
It's more work than scholastic rock. So just it sounds like,
as well, when's the last time we didn't do a
CR I'm not keeping count at home.

Speaker 2 (03:38):
Oh boy, the last time we had we had the
entire discretionary side funded by appropriations bills. It's been a
few years. Usually it's a combination of the two. They
it's a combination of appropriation bills and then continuing resolutions
for the remainder of that when the House in the

(03:58):
Senate cannot come to an agreement. So it is the
fundamental apartment in my view, is that those appropriation bills
need to be uh, need to receive the same expedetic
consideration as reconciliation. That that would prevent a lot of
a log jam that's comed up the process over the years.

Speaker 1 (04:17):
Well, let me you called it a poor substitute. Why
does it happen? The log jam? But how do we
unjam it?

Speaker 2 (04:26):
Well, as I said, I think, I think that if
the appropriation bills get expedatic consideration in the Senate, that is,
they're not subject closer uh, that would be a major
stake for President. Well, I'm more certain it means that
a simple majority in the Senate would be making these
decisions rather than a three fifths majority, which is often

(04:46):
uh and ends up simply blocking action.

Speaker 1 (04:50):
Let me ask you, I'm just trying to figure it
all out. Then, why currently do we seem to like
run out of time? Why is it always up to
the last minute?

Speaker 2 (04:58):
Well, because human nature, Okay, it's plus plus. You know,
the divisions in our country are vast right now. Those
divisions are reflected in the in the House and the Senate,
and it's much harder to get a consensus on many
of these issues because of those deep divisions. I said,
it's it's it's complicated by the fact that the appropriation

(05:20):
bills require sixty votes in the Senate before they can
even be considered.

Speaker 1 (05:23):
Conderson. Tom McClintock. I heard of Congress from from Missouri
Democrats say that as people wanted this so that he
can make a point. Boy, they're out of touch with
their people, aren't they.

Speaker 2 (05:32):
Well, I believe so. I mean, the American people said
too things very clearly. They did not want to shut down,
and they did not want to see more spending. People
understand that this this government is worse than broke. We're
actually borrowing close to two trillion dollars a year just
to pay our bills. Put another way, all that discretionary
spending and the appropriation bills we've been talking about, that's
what funds what all of us think of as the

(05:54):
actual government, the Department of Defense, the National Parks, all
of the federal bureaucracies, all of the offices in Washington,
everything we think of as the government itself is on
the discretionary side. And all of that money, all of
it plus some, is now being borrowed. Or put another way,

(06:14):
the thirty eight trillion dollars of debt that we've run up,
which is the highest debt to GDP in the country's history,
just paying the interest on that debt is now over
trillion dollars a year. That's actually more than we spend
on the entire defense budget of the country. We're now
paying simply to rent the money that we've already.

Speaker 1 (06:35):
Spent, well thirty eight trillion. I've been saying, thirty seven trillion.
Thank you for the update. That's a sad update. I've
heard Speaker Johnson talk about the clean cr you know,
I think that's a nice name for it, but it's
not reality. Aren't we spending the same level as Joe Biden?
And if we are, I hope you're going to tell
me that we've taken some of that and put it

(06:55):
to border and it's not going for the crazy stuff
that Joe Biden was spending.

Speaker 2 (07:00):
That is the beauty of the continuing resolution. Does get
the president a greater discretion to move funds around within
those levels. But the reason they call it a clean
cr is because there were no policy changes in it.
There were no changes in law. It was simply continuing
spending levels that the Democrats that agreed to back in March,
but they decided they would hold that hostage over their

(07:21):
demands for one and a half trillion dollars of new spending,
of money we simply don't have. And they wanted to
do some absolutely terrible things as well. And if you
look at their alternative bill, you remember, in the Big
Beautiful Bill earlier this year, we put in Medicaid reforms

(07:41):
that require able bodied adults to look for work. They
wanted to remove that. We had the provisions that prevent
states from padding Medicaid receipts that states like California views
to pay for health care for illegals. They wanted to
gut that. We required verification of legal status before an

(08:02):
alien can access these funds. They wanted to get rid
of that. We put in fifty billion dollars in rural
healthcare assistance for our small rural hospitals that are on
the edge. They wanted to take that away. They also
wanted to take away health sedgancey accounts from about ten
million Americans. That's actually in their alternative bill. And you

(08:24):
know our position wasn't you we'd have that debate, but
shouldn't we first reopen the government then take that to
the people.

Speaker 1 (08:31):
Well, yeah, but I back to our spending. I guess
I just got caught up in the Doe chainsaw where
we're cutting and cutting and cutting, and then I hear
we're doing the same spending as as a Biden administration.
It's kind of deflating.

Speaker 2 (08:46):
Well, the Big Beautiful Bill did change the trajectory by
about a trillion and a half dollars over the next
ten years. Not nearly enough, but it did make changes
in man a Tory spending that do start to bend.
That cost curved down. The the continuing Resolution affects the

(09:07):
discretionary spending.

Speaker 1 (09:08):
Well, I tell you, I saw action today. Secretary rolinds
I about SNAP. They're gonna start over and verify. That's
gonna save a lot of money right there.

Speaker 2 (09:15):
Oh yeah, I mean SNAP is a complete disaster, and
and and and one of my biggest concerns with it,
uh is that you know it serves a very important function.
We do not want anybody in this country starving to death. Uh.
But uh, you know, I've seen advertisements that that whole foods,
which for for for lobster tails and caviar that are

(09:39):
all EBT eligible, are all you know, food stamp SNAP eligible. Uh.
That's outrageous. Uh. A SNAP ought to be limited to basic,
fundamental food stuffs that keep people from starving, you know, grains, rice, poultry,
but none of this fancy stuff. It's certainly none of

(10:01):
the things that are making people obese and actually costing
them their health.

Speaker 1 (10:06):
Well, I would think if somebody asked you to describe
your your views. You live and die by the Constitution,
and you take heat for it at times? Correct, would
that be a good description of you?

Speaker 2 (10:17):
Oh I don't mind the heat?

Speaker 1 (10:19):
Okay, Well good. I know you've studied the Constitution. And
that's why I want to come back and ask you
about these these rogue judges and you know, coequal brand
separation and all of that. But it really seems like
it's gone over the line. We're going to come back
with Congressman Tom McClintock and delve right into that.

Speaker 3 (10:37):
This is the Trevor Cherry Show on the Valley's Power.

Speaker 1 (10:41):
Talk, separation of powers, co equal branches judicial, legislative, and executive.
And if I'm writing, all these judges going against President Trump,
like we just had one yesterday, say that Department of
Transportation cannot do restrictions on immigrants and driver's license, that
that cannot be enforced, and they say it's unconstitutionally explain.

Speaker 2 (11:02):
That, Well, think about it this way. In order for
the Supreme Court to issue a ruling that affects the
entire country, at least five Supreme Court justices must concur
in that decision. And yet today we're watching individual district
court judges asserting this authority all by themselves. The fact

(11:23):
is about ninety two percent of the national injunctions that
are block President Trump during his first year in office
have been issued by district court judges who have long
records of left wing judicial activism. They're all appointed by Democrats,
and I think that that gravely undermines the independence's judiciary

(11:45):
and the public's confidence in it. The good news is
that as these rogue judges' decisions are appealed, virtually all
of them are reversed at the Appellate Court. Level or
at the Supreme Court level. Supreme Court issued decision earlier
this year that essentially warned them to knock it off,

(12:07):
not to assert their their own authority for the for
the executive authority the president that the Constitution is very
clear about. Article two of the of the Constitution that
establishes the presidency begins with the words that the executive
powers shall be vested in a President of the United

(12:28):
States of America, not some of the executive powers, all
of them. The h the presidency exists to execute the
laws of the judicial branch is established for a very
different reason. Their role is to resolve cases and controversies

(12:50):
brought to them by individual injured parties. Traditionally, this means
injured party seeks regress through his local district court. The
decisions are limited to the unique circumstances of the individuals
involved in that case or controversy and are restricted to

(13:10):
cases within the district and then you can appeal first
to the circuit court and ultimately to the Supreme Court.
These judges are basically usurping the executive authority of the President,
and the Supreme Court now in one major case, has
already told them to knock it off. And I think
we're probably going to see several more decisions coming down

(13:33):
from the Supreme Court of restoring those guardrails between the
executive and the judicial functions.

Speaker 1 (13:42):
And seeing how quickly, how they rise so fast and
then they go look for the facts while they put
that I guess is the right word in junction in yeh, yeah,
it's a political tactor, right, just to set back the
Trump administration time wise, to slow it down. Have you
ever seen judges behaved this way in any their administration, and.

Speaker 2 (14:02):
Not to this extent. There have been cases on both
sides where a court will overstep its authority, but never
at this magnitude. This is entirely unprecedented. And again the
good news is the system still works. These rogue judges'
decisions are very rapidly appealed to the appellate levels. They're reversed.

(14:23):
They so you know, our system does still work. And ultimately,
again the Supreme Court's been very clear about restoring the
guardrails not only between the executive and judicial but also
between the executive and the legislator.

Speaker 1 (14:37):
Well, I guess the Supreme Court can tell them to
knock it off, but if they if they keep doing it,
the process is still going to be clogged up. What
kind of power would the Supreme Court have to come in,
because they look at it immediately and throw it out
so that it doesn't clog up the Trump administration.

Speaker 2 (14:52):
Yeah, that's why they call it the Supreme Court. The
Supreme Court. What's established in the constitution. The lower courts
are all established by Congress through statue.

Speaker 1 (15:02):
But that takes time though, right, Like now we have
these you know, immigrants, commercial drivers in California still driving
because of Federal court Appeals Court stepped in. It takes time, right, And.

Speaker 2 (15:13):
I think we had another district court judge just released
hundreds of fallons back onto the streets. Yeah, and I
think with Chicago, Yeah, yes, I mean this is this
is a serious problem. But again, I'm confident in the
ability of the Supreme Court ultimately to police it. All.

Speaker 1 (15:29):
Right, Let's say the executive branch gets a little antsy
and tired of being patient, and they say it's unconstituted
or it is constitutional, sending in the National Guard to
protect law enforcement. They'd be violating their oath of office
if they did not do that, right, But you got
the judges saying, oh, it's unconstitutional. How long would the
executive branch wait around? Eats go around for the Supreme Court?

(15:52):
Pretty soon? The four years of Trump's done well, I.

Speaker 2 (15:56):
Mean, most of the decisions that I've seen have been
reversed or stayed at the appellate court level very rapidly.
And I suspect we'll see these cases state as well.

Speaker 1 (16:09):
I guess they expected it. They Trump knows He's been
in court a few times, hadn't he.

Speaker 2 (16:13):
Yeah, Well, the biggest problem that we have is politicized judges,
and you know, we're seeing that problem now play out
as you look at the background of the judges that
are causing these problems, as I said, of them, are
have records of left wing activism, appointed by democratic presidents.

(16:37):
And that's not the role of the court. The role
of the course has decide cases and controversies are rising
from disputes involving the law. They do not empower the
the hundreds and hundreds of district court judges to individually
step into the role as president of the United States
and try to exert executive authority. That is just fundamental

(16:59):
to our system.

Speaker 1 (17:01):
We're probably experiencing tds spreading and we need to lock
these judges down at home. Here in closing congresson thank
you for your time here. I want to get your
final opinion here on Prop. Fifty. What it means you're
California DOJ fild in court to stop it. It sounds
good what the DOJ saying. But again, we've trump proofed
this state. How do you think it is going to

(17:21):
turn out?

Speaker 2 (17:23):
Well, I can't see the future on that one. I
can see the damage that it's done. It's massive. This
is the most radical partisan Gary Mander anywhere in the country.
The practical effect of it is to disentfranchise literally millions
of California voters who cast their votes for Republicans. And

(17:44):
Republicans received forty percent of the congressional vote in California
in the last election. This Gavinmander will translate that into
just eight percent of the seats, just four out of
fifty two congressional seats, even though Republicans we'll seemly get
four forty percent of the congressional vote. That's the opposite
of democracy. That is despotism. And I certainly hope that

(18:07):
the courts will step in uh and and reverse that
and We'll just have to wait and see.

Speaker 1 (18:13):
Gavin Mander copyright Tom McClintock. Hey, jerry mandering, I've had
to correct some people since you corrected me again. Who
was the original jerry that was mandering? Where was he from?

Speaker 2 (18:25):
Yeah? Elbridge, Gary was the governor of Massachusetts when he
figured out that you could adjust lines to maximize partisan advantage.
Now that was the old day when it was an
art form. It's now become a science with with you know,
the modern computers and the granular data that those computers

(18:48):
can now process. So it's and that's what that's what
the Independent Commission was all about. That's that's what protected
Californians from exactly that kind of abuse, no matter who
was in charge that Independent Commission to draw the last lines,
they had one hundred and ninety six public meetings, They

(19:09):
received more than thirty three thousand written communications, They listened
to every constituency and community in the state, and over
a period of nine months, they drafted a consensus plan
in public. This Gavin Mander, was drafted behind closed doors
by partisan zealots in a matter of days. And now

(19:30):
that protection has gone and Californians, millions of Californians have
been disenfranchised in their congressional votes and that can't be
allowed to stand. So I wholeheartedly wish Pam Bondi in
the Department of Justice god speed in contesting this in court.

Speaker 1 (19:49):
Comes from Tom McClintock. Thank you for your time where
you appreciate it, and enjoy your weekend and enjoy the rain.
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (19:55):
Thanks, Trevor Tikere.

Speaker 1 (19:56):
You bet you. Gavid mander On ma, I get it.

Speaker 3 (20:01):
This is the Trevor Cherry Show on the Valley's Power Talk.

Speaker 1 (20:06):
In C Double a's announced result of an investigation that
says six college basketball players manipulated games by supplying inside
information to gamblers. It's happened in some players. University of
New Orleans, Mississippi Valley or is on a state. We
had fresnel state issues last year. In C double A
noted these six are not the only ones caught up

(20:29):
in the gambling investigation. More announcedment's coming soon.

Speaker 2 (20:34):
Man.

Speaker 1 (20:34):
That's it. Remember I was in my all all over
the pro sports. I'm like college man. That's it, man,
this is it's probably even down in high school those
Texas Friday night light games and finding out everything that
they can bet on. I had no idea that that was.
I knew betting, but I didn't know like in the

(20:57):
fourth inning, on the first pitch, whether if it's a
ball or strike and it's under ninety seven miles an hour,
and that's an addiction. I mean, that's like you've run
out of normal things to bet on. Well, there be
three field goals. I knew there were bets like that,
but down to each pitch, that's a lot of control

(21:17):
that those pitchers have to throw the ball and throw
the game Guardians pitcher Emmanuel Classy arrested by FBI at
JFK Airport. He went before a judge yesterday, pled not guilty.
He posted a six hundred thousand dollars bond, surrendered its passport,
limited his travel between New York and Ohio. He has

(21:39):
to refrain from gambling and submit to GPS monitoring. They're
not messing around with this yet. A run sports man.
He was arrested with the pitch rigging indictment. There were
more album Luis Ortiz, one of his teammates, similar charges.
He was arrested in Boston on Sunday. If convicted, they

(22:02):
each face decades in prison. This is a message being
sent right now to clean up sports, because even if
you're making the major league minimum, what is it, three
four hundred thousand dollars something like that, why why would
you even and that's the minimum, why would you even
mess around with running years? Possibly if you're young enough
decade or more of making money to do something like that. Well,

(22:28):
I think we figured it out, haven't we. The NBA
guys getting caught. It's the thrill. It it that that's simple.
Yet that's why people getting gambling problems. They get that
endorphin rush, that that thrill of the win. So there's

(22:48):
your update on college sports. Deis infected sports the NFL.
If you thought the NFL had dropped, there woke DEI
new new No, Oh, look, Disney did man. Disney has
decided their business report doesn't need the the EI nonsense
in there. They removed diversity and DEI from their annual

(23:10):
business report. Disney did. When Disney does it, you know
something is shifted here a little bit. The NFL de EI. Yeah,
NFL went fear full on the colon meister. Did they
not remember Colin Kaepernet We haven't talked about him in
a while. Maybe he'll make a comeback. He I think
he tried, didn't he? He gave it a few runs.

Speaker 3 (23:32):
Is your message directly to them, after the years that
you have been off the on the off the field,
what is your message CHINAFL teams.

Speaker 4 (23:40):
That I can help make you a better team. I
can help you win games. You know, I know right
now the situation likely won't won't allow me to come
in and step into a starting role. I know I'll
be able to work my way to that though, and
show that very quickly. So to the teams that have questions,

(24:00):
more than anything, I would say no, I'd love to
come in for a workout. I'd love to sit down
with you and have that conversation about how I can
help you be a better team.

Speaker 1 (24:09):
Yeah, he's really the godfather of DEI in the NFL.
We can give him that title, can't we. NFL's proud
of their commitment. They have the Art Runey rule, or
not Art Rooney, the Rooney rule. I guess that is
is that Art or did he have a son? I
can't keep them all straight. The Rooney rule currently requires

(24:31):
a team interview at least two minority, which includes women
candidates when hiring for head coach, also for the general
manager any coordinator position, at least one minority candidate for
the quarterback coach role, with the NFL hoping to expand
the Rooney Rule to require at least one diverse candidate
for any senior level executive position, so in the interviews
they have to interview at least two minorities and women

(24:54):
for the head coach job. NFL requires if a team
loses a minority coach or executive to another club to
become a head coach or executive, then the team losing
the minority employee will receive a third round draft pick
for two years after such a loss. That can affect
outcomes of seasons. All off skin pigmentation. Guys, we can't

(25:20):
look past skin pigmentation. Imagine if this were all about redheads,
we'd be like, that's ridiculous that if you lose a
redhead then the team you lose it too, that you
don't you get two draft pick? What third round draft
pick awarded for a third consecutive year if both a
minority coach and a minority executive leave in the same year. Now,

(25:45):
Colin Kaepernick, the colon Meister, he got the remember the
anthem kneeling. That was just a I thought that might
pass and fade, but it just grew, didn't it. Look
at that NFL requires players on the field of standard
in the playing of the NASA anthem. I'll give them
a slight little or you can stay in the locker room.

(26:08):
It's part of their Inspired Change initiative. The NFL permits
all the messaging on the field. It requires the phrase
it takes all of us have to be stenciled in
one end zone for all games. The other end zone
they got to rotate it. I think these are social
justice messages. They have a pre approved list. You can

(26:30):
choose choose love, inspire change to make sure that we
point out that there's racist white people. You can also
pick stop hate and so we can point out there's
racist white people. You can also put in racism in
the end zone. Is that water or fire? They throwing

(26:52):
fuel on a fire or they throw the water on
a fire. You can can answer that yourself. You can
have inspired change on your helmet. You can choose choose
love and racism and spire chain, stop hate and it
takes all of us. You can put that on your helmet.
You have to in the NFL do a diversity and
inclusion report. You got to provide an overview of mobility

(27:15):
patterns for minority coaches and general managers and identify any
occupational access barriers. Well, there's old Clinton in the front office.
I can tell you he didn't like black people. I
heard him say that his colored friend. Yeah, he's the
word color. Well that's a roadblock. I don't know if
he may uses that word anymore. It's fun to watch

(27:38):
the old Johnny Carson's Yeah, that was the polite word
that you would use then. I mean even Cassius Clay
used it before he went to you know, the whole
Black Power movement, be proud of it. Use the term black,
not colored. Then we went from that to African American.
The change. I always love when I see Black Americans say,

(28:04):
I'm an American. I didn't live in Africa. I'm not
an African American. I'm an American American. All team executives
are required to participate in d diversity, equity, inclusion leadership workshops.
They also still support let's see here. They they go
into the full slicing of the pie. HE'SI in Pacific Exchange.

(28:27):
The black Engagement Network Latina Latino AX. I don't know
what that means. Pride, LGBTQ plus I A. They give
opportunities for employment based on your shared racial, ethnic, sexual,
or gender backgrounds. Not the right person for the right job. Wellly,

(28:49):
George Costanza never would have been hired for the Yankees
travel team office, wouldn't He didn't, He didn't check the
things off. But I see one thing in common kind
of discriminates against white dudes and maybe white people in general.
And with the messaging in the end zone, I think
the messages that white people are racist. I mean, what

(29:12):
more they wanted to do with this? In the NFL
over seventy percent of black athletes are there. Apparently they
don't do diversity, equity and inclusion with the players. Do
they al agree? Mister Sharpton agreed? Can you imagine if
we did this to sports, here's the way you prove

(29:35):
your point? What would happen? It would be unwatchable?

Speaker 2 (29:41):
Right?

Speaker 1 (29:42):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (29:43):
This is the tremor Chary show on the Valley's Power Talk.

Speaker 1 (29:48):
America is sixty percent Caucasian, sixty percent white. One hundred
and ninety one point four million white people in America,
So we to figure out some more racism going on
here we're at USC. Let's do a study, guys, Let's
see who can we go after as races. Let's look around. Well,

(30:10):
let's go let's do our math here. Let's figure out
how many podcasters are white? And then let's go figure
out out of all those podcasters, how many of them
are men. Now, let's make an issue about it. Anybody
can do a podcast. There's no race quoto on it.
There's no gender quoto on it. I said. The host

(30:31):
of the top one hundred podcasts at twenty twenty four
were overwhelmingly white and male. USC wants us to know.
Of the top podcast sixty four percent were hosted by dude.
Seventy seven percent of those were white, underlying a severe
lack of diversity. This has become a major, major problem,

(30:53):
they said. If we expand beyond the top one hundred,
sixty six percent of the hosts of the top five
hundred and ninety two pods guests are male, and almost
eighty percent were white. It seems to stop. Guys, Listen, listen,
anybody can do a podcast.

Speaker 2 (31:12):
Here.

Speaker 1 (31:12):
Here's here's here's two pieces of advice. Be interesting and
be professional, and then guess what will happen? People of
all color will watch and listen. There you go, usc,
there you go. Why did they do studies like this? Us?

(31:33):
See what if? What about the percentage of your football team?
Why don't you go in on that, right? Why won't
you study that? That's silly. Football is different and you
got to have your best on the field. Well, because
why you got to win the game, right exactly? Point made,
point made. To win, you got to be professional. So

(31:55):
why don't we call them pro sports teams? Now not
all of those are are winners. But you take the
worst NFL team still amazing talent, amazing talent. I'll sell
this BYU basketball game. And you know what they're doing,

(32:16):
very very mormon. It was very very clean, very wholesome,
smiling young people. You know the jumbo trons they go around,
do the kiss cam. You know, they keep fans all interested.
This is gonna spread, This will definitely spread. They use
their jumbo tron. One side is a female, the other

(32:37):
side is a male, and then they put on the
jumbo tron. Is this a mutual match? It's a dating
game during the game, and I guess those that want
to play along. They have their yes and no signs
so they can go yes, it's a match, or the

(32:57):
guy can go no boom.

Speaker 3 (33:00):
Boom boy.

Speaker 1 (33:02):
That's that is Uh, ladies, you don't understand this. You
don't the guy thing. I mean even at a dance
or a club going up and Hi, would you like
to dance? Uh no, just the you'll think about that,
uh all night, like it's in your head. Like Ladies,

(33:24):
you don't have that nervous You don't have to deal
with that. Well maybe in today's world women do. I
wouldn't be surprised are the ones that ask the guys
out on dates. But normally But so that's a jumbo tronte.

Speaker 4 (33:36):
Women.

Speaker 1 (33:37):
You got all the power, That's what I'm saying. You
have the power. Yes, God balanced that out a little bit.
When we gotta go number one, we just get to
stand up. It's quick. It all balances out. There's good,
give and take, good and bad on both sides. I'll
stop right there because my whole life I couldn't imagine

(33:59):
that happening once month.

Speaker 2 (34:00):
To me.

Speaker 1 (34:01):
This dating game thing, though, is that's gonna take off.
Watch we'll be hearing about this. It'll be sponsored. You'll
have viral reactions that will go around. We'll hear of
half court weddings. This is where we met. Uh huh,
we're gonna get married right out here. City Councilvan Nick Richardson.
He got married to his bride at the elementary school

(34:23):
where they where they met, and they had it all
beautifully decorated out there. It looked like a gold and
white palace. They turned this little elementary school into. So yeah,
we'll be seeing some of the jumbo tron things like that.
That's interesting, you know, that's really amazing that it took
this long for this idea to come out. You would

(34:44):
have thought that would have that would have already happened.
I don't know if I've ever had an original, good
idea like that. I got all excited in nineteen ninety seven. Hey,
online gambling, Mike, give people. It is all over the place.
You know, everything that I think of like that is
all over the place. Uh. The Marxist Socialist left, and
I think, can we just call that today's Democrat party?

(35:06):
Are they there yet? Okay, they're in transition. A lot
of them are gone that way. A lot of them
are Democrats Socialists of America. That think child mutilation across
the country is a good thing.

Speaker 3 (35:20):
They insist that Trevor Kerry Show on the Valley's Power
Talk