04-29-25 - *FULL SHOW* Oh, Canada; 'Transformers' Material; TANSTAAFL

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Appreciate your time. I did end up actually, Shannon, I

(00:03):
don't think you. I don't think you knew about this.
So toward the end of the show, or maybe the
middle of the show yesterday, but after Shannon had gone
to produce a different show, I got a text at
an email from the producer at the Laura Ingram Show
on Fox News asking me.

Speaker 2 (00:20):
If I wanted to do.

Speaker 1 (00:21):
A hit on Fox News, Yeah, on Laura's show about
the rate at that Colorado Springs night club. And I
said yes, and I did, and I just noticed that
she actually posted the clip, so I just retweeted it.
If you follow me on Twitter or exits called now
at ross Putin Rossputi n which is not for Vladimir Putin.

(00:43):
I have been ross Putin online, named after the Russian
monk of the early twentieth century. I've been ross Putin
online since the mid nineteen nineties, so it is not.

Speaker 2 (00:52):
For Vladimir Putin.

Speaker 1 (00:53):
Anyway, they seemed happy with me, and they posted it
and maybe they'll have me back, and it's fine, Laura,
you know, I'm sure you know, Laura Ingram is let's
just say a little bit to my right and a
little bit trumpier than I am.

Speaker 2 (01:04):
But this isn't really.

Speaker 1 (01:06):
This was an issue that's Colorado issue. So they asked me,
and yeah, I mean she's on the she's on the
right side of the issue. And well, even if she
were on a different side, if she wanted me to
take a different opinion, I would do that.

Speaker 2 (01:20):
But anyway, it was fun to be on there.

Speaker 1 (01:21):
I got a lot of texts and tweets and emails
from folks who said, oh, I saw you on the
non Fox.

Speaker 2 (01:26):
I said, that was cool.

Speaker 1 (01:28):
This is how TV goes, though, because it's very different
from radio.

Speaker 2 (01:32):
So twenty five minutes. So okay, let me back up.

Speaker 1 (01:35):
Since COVID, TV networks and TV viewers have gotten pretty
used to people doing their hits from home, right, you
set up a room with half decent lighting, you put
on your you know, AirPods or whatever you're wearing.

Speaker 2 (01:53):
I have mine a little bit differently, set up a
little bit differently.

Speaker 1 (01:55):
But they're just people are used to seeing guests, even
pretty serious expert type guests, doing hits from home.

Speaker 2 (02:03):
But they they didn't want that. They said, can you
come to the studio.

Speaker 1 (02:08):
So they have a studio in Denver, So I drove
twenty five minutes to the studio. I waited twenty five
minutes there because you don't want to be late for that.
You can't be late for that, so you're always a
little too early. So I drove twenty five minutes. I
waited twenty five minutes. I was then after I waited
twenty five minutes, and then I you know, got the

(02:29):
microphone attached to me and the thing put in my
ear and all that, and then I sit there for
another ten or twelve minutes until it's Laura starts talking
to me, and then that's for about I actually, well,
let's let's see I actually don't actually don't know. Let's
see how if I can tell how how long this
video is. Oh so she only posted a thirty seven

(02:52):
second clip just now. But I think I think my
entire hit with her was somewhere around two and a
half min and then driving another twenty five minutes home.
But that's what you do. I'm not saying it's not
worth it. I would definitely do it again to have, however,
many tens of thousands of people, you know, get to

(03:13):
know me or whatever, have Laura Ingram, who's a little
bit outside of my usual connections, you know, tweet out
about me. It's worth it, right as I am fond
of quoting on the show. One of my favorite lines,
which I learned from Monty Python, but it's an Oscar
Wilde quote. Is the only thing worse than being talked

(03:36):
about is not being talked about. So thank you to
Laura Ingram for having me on, and I hope they'll have.

Speaker 2 (03:43):
Me back and we'll see.

Speaker 1 (03:45):
You know, if as long as part of me wishes
that more of these people would be in touch with
me to be a guest to talk about wide ranges
of issues, not just Colorado. But if i'm you know,
if they just need a guest for Colorado, that's fine too,
better than better than not being called at all.

Speaker 2 (04:02):
So there you go. What else, Oh Canada, what have
you done? So?

Speaker 1 (04:10):
Yesterday was the Canadian federal election and I got a
few things to say about it. First, the result of
the election was that the Liberals beat the Conservatives.

Speaker 2 (04:20):
They may not quite have.

Speaker 1 (04:24):
A majority, so they might have to get a few
votes from some other party. The Liberals might have to
get a few votes from some other party or parties
in order to pass legislation, and that's probably not.

Speaker 2 (04:40):
Obviously, it's not great for the Liberal Party.

Speaker 1 (04:42):
It's also probably not great for Canada because the Liberals
will probably end up working with parties that are more
to their left rather than with the Conservatives to pass stuff.

Speaker 2 (04:53):
So we will see how that plays out. Now.

Speaker 1 (04:56):
A few months ago, the betting odds had the Conservatives
at some incredible level of being a betting favorite, like
ten to one odds. It would be like if like
a super Bowl team being a fourteen point favorite or something, right,
just one of the biggest betting advantages you can imagine.

(05:22):
And then Donald Trump started talking about not just the tariffs.
Actually it wasn't even primarily the tariffs and the trade
wars that certainly hurt the Conservatives, but the primary thing
was when Trump just kept talking about wanting to annex
Canada and making it the fifty first state.

Speaker 2 (05:40):
And I don't know why he did it.

Speaker 1 (05:42):
I don't know what the upside was for him, but
Trump seemed really interested in helping to defeat the Conservatives
in Canada, and a lot of the Conservatives in Canada
are like a lot of conservatives in America, kind of
in the Western plain States, where they you know, they've
got the oil, and they grow stuff right, not inside

(06:03):
the elite liberal city centers, which is very much like America,
and in fact, much like America. The East coast and
the West coast in Canada are liberal. And then you
also have Ottawa, the capital, which is not on a
coast that's also pretty liberal. And then you look to
the west in particular, these huge swaths of land that

(06:23):
are not very densely populated, but huge swass of land.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
Think of Edmonton and Calgary and stuff.

Speaker 1 (06:28):
Like that, with oil and with all kinds of crops
that they're growing. That's conservative country. And a lot of
them love Trump. Actually they love Trump until Trump says,
I don't really think of you as a country. You
should just be a state that puts the conservative candidate
in a very tough spot because his voters on the

(06:50):
one hand, at least like Trump, and on the other hand,
are really offended by Trump and he doesn't know how
to he didn't know how to talk about it. So
Mark Carney, who replaced Justin Trudeau as Prime minister, You
remember Justin Trudeau, just this perfect example of like a
squishy millennial. Soy boy, right, just the maybe I don't

(07:13):
even know if he's millennial, but he sure seemed like one.
Just everything that's wrong with elite a feat politicians. He quit,
he resigned. This guy named Mark Carney became prime minister,
who seems like a serious guy. He's a former central
banker in Canada. I think he was a central banker
in England, and seems like a serious, reasonable fellow until

(07:36):
you start hearing among some other policies, especially on energy,
where he is fully bought in to all the climate change,
anti fossil fuel alarmism. So anyway, the Conservatives were going
to win, and then Donald Trump started talking and the
Liberals won.

Speaker 2 (07:53):
One of the things that happened, one of the dynamics
in that race.

Speaker 1 (07:56):
Was a lot of people who normally vote for third
parties in Canada because it has a parliamentary system.

Speaker 2 (08:01):
It's not like our system.

Speaker 1 (08:02):
A lot of people who normally vote for parties not
the Conservative and not Liberal but other parties voted Liberal
just to make sure the Conservatives lost, to express their
displeasure against Donald Trump, even though the Conservative Party in
Canada is not Trump's party. Mark Carney, the new Prime Minister,
was very smart. The guy, so he became Prime minister

(08:24):
on a temporary basis after Justin Trudeau resigned and now
he just won a full term through this election. But
he was very, very smart, you know what he did.
As soon as became Prime minister and Donald Trump wouldn't
shut up about annexing Canada, Carney called for elections right away.
He basically called for elections as fast as you could
call them, knowing that what Trump was doing was destroying

(08:45):
the Conservatives in Canada and that at some point Trump
might wise up and stop talking that way, and he
wanted to take advantage of the political momentum and have
the election while Trump had still turned the Canadian people
very patriotic, and at this moment, unfortunately, patriotic meant pushing
back against America. It's quite a terrible thing that Donald

(09:07):
Trump has turned one of our closest allies against us,
or at least they're voters against us. And that's what
happened yesterday. We got a lot more to talk about
on the show. Of course, in the next five minutes
is this hour's chance to win a thousand bucks thanks
to Maverick and our keyword for cash keep it here.
Nerdy Science coming up a little bit later on the
show that I am very very excited about. Actually, I'm

(09:29):
going to mention an interesting thing to you here. So
I told you the other day that the state Senate
overrode a veto of some social media regulation here in Colorado,
and so Governor Polus vetoed two things so far this session.
One of them was the bill that Kyle Clark was

(09:51):
on with me about, and we talked about how we
both were against this bill, and we encouraged politicians on
the Republican side that might listen to me a little
more and the Democratic side that might listen to Kyle
a little more to not vote to override the veto
because it just was the bill was worse than the

(10:11):
people who voted for it understood it to be. And
they were supposed to vote to override the veto last Friday,
and they put it off until this Friday, which means
they didn't have the votes to do it last Friday.
And normally, not always, but normally when that happens, normally,
when they put off a scheduled vote, it means that

(10:33):
and especially this late in the session right because we're
about to get to the end of the legislative session
pretty soon here. Normally it means they simply don't have
the votes to pass it.

Speaker 2 (10:41):
And normally, when you get to.

Speaker 1 (10:42):
That second date that they rescheduled it to, normally they
don't even have the vote that then, and they just
put it off and that's it, and so that's good now.
The State Senate then did override a veto of an
interesting and arguably more important bill, Senate Bill Lady six,
that regulates social media. And one of the things that

(11:06):
is interesting about this bill is, I think every single
district attorney in the state of Colorado came out in
favor of it, and the Attorney General of the State
of Colorado, Phil Wiser, also came out in favor of it,

(11:27):
and the governor vetoed it.

Speaker 2 (11:29):
And the bill does a lot of things.

Speaker 1 (11:31):
But one of the things that it does is it
tells social media companies that if they find that there
is an account that is violating their own policies, they
must delete the account. And it also has all kinds
of reporting requirements. You have to provide reports, you know,

(11:54):
how many kids are looking at this stuff and how
many kids are looking at that stuff. And the governor's
argument in VTA it was essentially that it turned.

Speaker 2 (12:03):
Private.

Speaker 1 (12:04):
It comandeered these private corporations like Facebook and whoever to
become arms of law enforcement. The ACLU, who I gotta say,
I don't really love these days, But the ACLU was
against the bill. Another liberal group was against the bill.

(12:25):
Governor Polus was against the bill. And I don't normally
like siding with that kind of group, but I understand
their objections.

Speaker 2 (12:33):
So Governor Polus vetoed the bill.

Speaker 1 (12:35):
The State Senate overrode the bill, and I simply assumed
that because the State House has so many more Democrats
in it than who like all this stuff than the
State Senate did, that they would override the bill too,
But they didn't.

Speaker 2 (12:53):
They didn't.

Speaker 1 (12:53):
Just yesterday, the State House failed to override.

Speaker 2 (12:57):
The veto on the social media thing.

Speaker 1 (12:59):
And it looks like, and by this the bipartisan bill,
it's got Republicans and Democrats on it. It looks like
they're going to have to put it off till next
year and hopefully come back with something that doesn't that
doesn't log in to, that doesn't log into uh, turn

(13:21):
these sites into arms of law enforcement. Sorry for my
tongue tied there, so we'll see anyway, very interesting that
they couldn't override the veto, and perhaps the fact that
the veto is overheld might give Jared Polus a little
more courage to veto more things.

Speaker 2 (13:36):
In fact, I texted him this.

Speaker 1 (13:38):
This yesterday and said, dude, you should have vetoed all
of those gun bills, all of them. And anyway, he's
not gonna say anything, but but so so I just
wanted to share that with you because that's a that's
a pretty good thing. Now, when we come back, I
actually do want to talk a little bit more about

(13:58):
some Colorado stuff that's sort of the intersection of economics
and politics. And I will just throw this question out there.
Have you ever heard the phrase Tan Staffle? You might
have to be either a bit of an econ nerd
or have read a lot of classic science fiction.

Speaker 2 (14:20):
That's a bit of a clue. Tan Staffle ta n
st aa fl. I'll tell you all about it right
after this.

Speaker 1 (14:28):
It feels like Wednesday to me should be Wednesday already,
but anyway, happy Tuesday.

Speaker 2 (14:33):
I'll tell you one interesting thing.

Speaker 1 (14:35):
Going on it at my house, or not literally at
my house, but in my family. So one of one
of my kids is very interested in acting and just
got his first callback to do an audition for a
TV commercial.

Speaker 2 (14:53):
So that'll be interesting.

Speaker 1 (14:54):
I'm not at liberty to say anything more anything more
about it, but you know, he's been getting into this.
He's been taking acting classes for a while. He got
picked up by an agent in Denver some months ago,
which was very exciting. Obviously, it's a very competitive business.
So these days, the way it works for auditions is

(15:14):
you just tape something at home and send it in
for at least the first audition for stuff generally.

Speaker 2 (15:19):
And so this is today.

Speaker 1 (15:20):
Today is he's actually gonna miss a little bit of
school today, but I'm fine with that, and he's gonna
go down for a callback and you know, try to
get a TV commercial. I don't know, there's probably gonna
be probably going to be you know, fifteen or twenty
people trying to get the part, and maybe more. I
really don't know how the business works, but it's kind
of exciting. It's kind of exciting, so I thought I

(15:41):
would share that with you. So you know, I'm an
econ nerd and I talked to you frequently about bostiad
and you know, hieking all this nerdy stuff, and I'm
grateful that any of you stick around to stick around
to listen to all that. But the reason that I
talk about this stuff is it has ongoing, permanent kind

(16:01):
of importance. It's not just for it's not nerdiness for
the purpose of being a nerd.

Speaker 2 (16:08):
Although I'm not above that. I will do that. In fact,
we will.

Speaker 1 (16:11):
Do that on a science topic later in the show,
But on econ.

Speaker 2 (16:14):
I'm not usually like that.

Speaker 1 (16:16):
When I talk to you about Bostiaut and the broken
window fallacy and all this stuff, it's because these are
lessons that apply all around us, all the time, stuff
that the government is doing to us, and they're.

Speaker 2 (16:28):
Really useful lessons to understand.

Speaker 1 (16:30):
So among the world of econ nerds, there's a phrase
an acronym tan staffle t a n staa fl, and
it was probably familiarized to probably made familiar to much

(16:52):
of the world by the great libertarian economist Milton Friedman.

Speaker 2 (16:56):
But he didn't come up with it. He didn't come
up with it.

Speaker 1 (16:59):
And and I think the first time it was made
at least reasonably well known was in the book The
Moon Is a Harsh Mistress.

Speaker 2 (17:14):
By Robert Heinlein.

Speaker 1 (17:16):
And what it stands for is there ain't no such
thing as a free lunch.

Speaker 2 (17:24):
There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Speaker 1 (17:27):
So this is from the Cato Institute who they just
had a little piece who said ten staffle first. The
website quote investigator Doug deeper and found a nineteen thirty
eight newspaper article. Right, So, the Moon is a Harsh
Mistress is a Hugo Award winning novel that is very
popular among libertarians by Robert Heinlein again nineteen sixty six.

(17:53):
Quote investigator found a nineteen thirty eight newspaper article entitled
Economics and eight Words. It was a fable of a
king who demanded that his economic advisors give him a
short and simple text on economics. As they presented him
with massive tomes, he repeatedly executed some and demanded that
the others come back with the short text that he

(18:16):
had asked for. Finally, there was just one elderly economist
left who said to the king, sire, in eight words,
I will reveal to you all the wisdom that I
have distilled through all these years, from all the writings
of all the economists who once practiced.

Speaker 2 (18:34):
Their science in your kingdom. Here is my text.

Speaker 1 (18:38):
Quote there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

Speaker 2 (18:44):
That seems to be the first.

Speaker 1 (18:45):
Time the phrase was used specifically as an economic principle.
The fable was unsigned, but quote investigator found evidence that
it was likely written by William Morrow, editor in chief
of the Southwestern Group of Scripts Howard News papers. And
you know, so the Hindline book really made it popular
in culture. You know a lot of people were you

(19:08):
remember Hindline as them of all these guys like that,
the great early science fiction writers, kind of early science
fiction writers writing in the sixth season. People would make,
you know, pins like like you might wear a political
pin to re elect somebody. Right, there were actually pins
that say Tan Staffle and Republican Party pins that said

(19:28):
Tan Staffle. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch.
But now let's tie this into Colorado. People seem to
forget this all the time, especially people of a particular
political persuasion, who think that essentially money is free, and
therefore they can make things free and it literally won't

(19:50):
cost anything, as if money grows on trees. These are
the same people who think, when you ask them where
electricity comes from, they say, those two little slots in
the wall, and when you ask them where food comes from,
they say the supermarket, or at least it's the same mindset.
And so you may recall that a few years ago,

(20:10):
two and a half years ago, on the state ballot,
we had Amendment I don't know what it was FF,
maybe I think FF. And basically what Prop FF said
was that every public school kid in Colorado gets a
free lunch. Now, remember, we already had a very solid

(20:35):
program that was means tested, such that if your family
had income below some amount, you qualified for a free lunch.
And you know, I'm not really all about giving away
people's money, but you know.

Speaker 2 (20:50):
I also understand it. And I'm also.

Speaker 1 (20:52):
Basically against public school. But as long as you're gonna
have public school, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to say
that they should try to educate kids well. And part
of educating kids well is making sure the kids are
able to learn, able to study, and bottom line is, it's.

Speaker 2 (21:11):
Very hard for a kid to learn if he's hungry.
So if we're going to go down this.

Speaker 1 (21:16):
Road of kind of socialized education, I'm relatively okay with
the idea of saying, if there are kids whose families
really can't afford to feed them. And I understand the
game theory here, like maybe there are families that really
can't afford to feed kids, and if you give the
kid a free breakfast or.

Speaker 2 (21:35):
Free lunch, they just won't.

Speaker 1 (21:36):
I get all that, but as you know, as socialism goes,
it's probably not the worst thing to make sure that
kids from low income families get a decent lunch and
or a decent breakfast. I'm not saying I'd vote for
all this, but it's not the worst thing. But think
about so every once in a while, well, I have

(22:00):
occasion to drive.

Speaker 2 (22:02):
Near Cherry Creek High School.

Speaker 1 (22:07):
And you look at the cars in the parking lot,
the kids cars in the parking lot of Cherry Creek
High School, and it's as with every school, it's it's
fairly diverse. It's not as diverse as a school in
Aurora might be. But you know, when I have a
chance to drive by Cherry Creek High.

Speaker 2 (22:22):
School, you will see.

Speaker 1 (22:24):
You know, kids of this race, that race, and the
other race, but mostly upper middle class white kids. And
you'll look in the parking lot and you'll see BMW Mercedes. Dude,
I saw a Lamborghini SUV that was a kid's car,
not a not a teachers don't have that kind of money.
At Cherry Creek High School, the teachers don't have that

(22:44):
kind of money.

Speaker 2 (22:45):
The kids do.

Speaker 1 (22:48):
And by the way, I don't begrudge anybody anything. You know,
if I had the kind of money that I could
afford a Lamborghini SUV, I'm sure as hell wouldn't give
one to my kid and spoil a kid that way. Now,
I'm not saying I wouldn't get my kid a car.
In fact, I did get my kid a car, but

(23:10):
I bought a used car, not super fan, not a
piece of junk, but not super fancy.

Speaker 2 (23:17):
Anyway, my kid doesn't need a free lunch.

Speaker 1 (23:20):
I'm not rich, but I'm definitely not poor, and my
kid doesn't need a free lunch. So this thing was
so bad that the legislature couldn't pass it, so they
gave it to the voters, and the voters here in
East California decided to pass it.

Speaker 2 (23:36):
How are they going to fund this free This is
the thing.

Speaker 1 (23:39):
Now, going back to my tan staffle, how do you
fund a free lunch? Because don't ever, forget, ever, in
anything having to do with public policy, there is no
such thing as a free version of anything that costs

(24:00):
any money to produce and to dispense. There's no free healthcare.
The doctor is getting paid. And by the way, even
if the doctor were working for free, you're still having
to lease or buy the building that he's working in,
and you're still having to pay the electricity bill because
you're not having your medical appointment in the dark. And nothing.

(24:24):
Nothing is free except like maybe a smile. Right. Even
hearing me on the radio is kind of free for you.
You're not paying for this directly, you're not paying KOA,
but somebody is.

Speaker 2 (24:44):
You hear advertisements on the radio station.

Speaker 1 (24:46):
You hear me talking about my morning show partners, and
I sure hope you go shop with my morning show partners,
because that's why I have a job. So in that context,
it's not it will appear free to you, but there
is a cost.

Speaker 2 (25:03):
I don't work for free.

Speaker 1 (25:05):
It sure costs money to run this fifty thousand watt
AM signal and however many thousand watts aur FM signal
is and to be in this building and to have
the engineers that make sure we get on the air,
and on and on and on, and it's like that
in every business there is almost nothing that's actually free,

(25:25):
and yet people of a particular political persuasion talk as
if there is. So how did they fund this not
free free lunch? They limited tax deductions for anybody making
three hundred thousand dollars a year or more if you
made and I don't have the exact provision in front

(25:46):
of me, but basically, if you made three hundred thousand
dollars a year or more, you couldn't deduct more than
X from your income taxes where and this is part.

Speaker 2 (25:56):
Of how dumb this is.

Speaker 1 (26:00):
If you were close to making three hundred thousand dollars,
you would be way way better off making two hundred
and ninety nine thousand dollars than three hundred and one
thousand dollars, massively better off.

Speaker 2 (26:14):
So if you're.

Speaker 1 (26:15):
Somebody who's actually in a position to try to tailor
your income a little bit, and maybe not that finally
to within one thousand dollars, but if you think you're
gonna get close to making three hundred thousand dollars, you'd
be better off stopping making money at that point, unless
you were gonna go way over. But if you were
just going to go a little bit over, you should stop.

(26:35):
And what does it mean when somebody who is probably
reasonably productive and able to make the high in the
high two hundreds, what does it mean when they stop?
It means that they stop whatever whatever it is they're
doing to make money, which probably involves helping other people
make money. It probably involves boosting the economy. And we

(26:56):
talk a lot about the positive multiplier effective things going
on in the economy.

Speaker 2 (27:00):
Right, you're gonna do this, and you're gonna create a.

Speaker 1 (27:02):
Dollar of economic activity, and that dollar recirculates and ends
up buying something and ends up then that person ends
up going out to dinner, and that ends up going
somewhere else, and you have this economic multiplier effect. And
so when you discourage people from making more money, you
remove not just what they make, but all of the
positive potential, positive economic impacts of what they make. So

(27:27):
so that's what they did. They decided, we're gonna go
we're gonna go soak the rich. We're gonna soak the
rich and make them pay for a free usually not
very good lunch for rich kids for their kids who
probably aren't even eating that school lunch, but whatever.

Speaker 2 (27:45):
Whatever.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
So now because the lunch became nominally free. And in
this case, and in the case of most government things,
when and they tell you something is free, what it
actually means is paid for by somebody else. We're not
giving you a free lunch. We're giving you lunch and
making somebody else pay for it. But when you do that,

(28:11):
when you give people stuff that to them is free,
what do you incentivize massive over consumption? Think about how
the state wildly misunderestimated one of my favorite bush isms,
wildly misunderestimated. And all of us out here in the
real world said that you're making a huge mistake. But
I think they did it on purpose. They underestimated the

(28:32):
number of kids who would go get the free babysitting
that is called pre kindergarten. But it's free babysitting. Who
doesn't want free babysitting. Everybody wants to get their four
year old. And if you can your three year old
out of your hair for some hours a day, I
don't give a rats behind of my four year old
is actually learning to read at that moment.

Speaker 2 (28:52):
I can teach him to read at home that night,
but God, get him out of my hair for a while.

Speaker 1 (28:57):
Please take my kid, please, And so the number of
kids who tried to get the free babysitting was much
higher than what the Democrats said would be the number
of people going to get free babysitting Instaid. The program
ended up costing a lot more, and they have to
figure that out. So now here's the headline from Axios.

(29:17):
I know I'm going a long time on this, but
this has big picture, principal stuff and important relevance right
here in.

Speaker 2 (29:24):
The state of Colorado.

Speaker 1 (29:26):
The headline from Axios healthy school Meals program in jeopardy. So,
first of all, good, good, it should be in jeopardy.
It should never have passed. Bunch of boneheaded Californians who
moved here voted to give free lunch to rich kids.
Are you kidding me? I think even your average liberal
probably thought that wasn't a great idea. But they see,

(29:47):
you know, oh, a free thing, and we're gonna and
we're gonna fund it by by you know, lowering tax
deductions for people who actually produce things in this state.
They're like, oh, yeah, let's do that. Let's soak the
rich more, let's give free stuff. Anyway, this from Axios,
This two year old initiative is so popular that it's.

Speaker 2 (30:05):
Now running short on money. Oh, you don't say.

Speaker 1 (30:09):
The state is serving one hundred and ninety four thousand
breakfasts and four hundred and fifty one thousand lunches at
eighteen hundred and five sites a year. According to the
Colorado Department of Education. The number of breakfast and lunches
served grew at least thirty percent last year and continues
to rise. So they're running out of money to keep
the program alive. Now, state legis lawmakers are going to

(30:30):
put a couple of things on the ballot to ask
for more money, so they're gonna clamp down even further.
So basically, if you make three hundred thousand dollars a
year or more in the state of Colorado, if this
bill were to pass, you would all but have your
tax deductions eliminated from in the state of Colorado. You're

(30:51):
just gonna pay tax on that whole amount. Even if
somebody who made two hundred and ninety nine thousand maybe
has fifteen thousand dollars of tax deductions from whatever, and
is gonna get a significant tax break. But as soon
as you get over three hundred, you lose all that.
The other thing they're gonna do because the original bill
requires said that you can only raise such and such

(31:12):
an amount of money based on our estimates for how
many kids are gonna want the free lunch, and the
rest you're gonna have to give back under Tabor. So
the other bill is gonna allow what will ask voters
to allow the state to keep another twelve and a
half million dollars that otherwise would have to go back
to Tabor.

Speaker 2 (31:30):
How about this.

Speaker 1 (31:31):
The program back to axios is powered by a tax
tyke on those who make three hundred thousand or a
year or more. I told you that already. Check this out.
It tellied a deficit in its first two years and
expects to fall forty two million dollars short next year. Friends,
there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. And

(31:54):
when somebody comes to you and tells you that you
are gonna get something for free, hold on to your wallet.
All right, Let me do a couple other things here.
Let me do a little bit of national thing. And
this is more of a question for you than a
statement from me. I'll make a little bit of a statement,
but mostly I want to ask you something. And then

(32:15):
in the next segment of the show, we're gonna do
some science nerdiness. So today is today marks the famous
first one hundred days of a presidency.

Speaker 2 (32:25):
This is that thing.

Speaker 1 (32:26):
This whole concept of the first one hundred days, as
if that's particularly important, was actually started by show of hands.

Speaker 2 (32:32):
Anybody know who started it? Shannon?

Speaker 1 (32:34):
Do you know who started the first one hundred days?
Is that thing? What print? And Nope, it's before Kennedy, FDR.
FDR started the first hundred days. So you know, there's
a bunch of a lot of different opinions out there.
Of course, you know, even though the Wall Street Journal
says at one hundred days, Trump two point zero is
in trouble. Matt continenty and I've got links to all

(32:55):
this stuff at the Free Press, and Matt Continetti is
a conservative and he wrote Trump's one hundred Days of Revolution.

Speaker 2 (33:02):
I think that's right.

Speaker 1 (33:03):
This does really feel like a revolutionary presidency. And for
the record, I do consider myself to a certain degree
a revolutionary. I know there are a lot of listeners
out there who might think I'm some kind of like
establishment go along guy, I'm not. My mindset is very
much more like Barry Goldwater. You know that I feel

(33:26):
I don't want to burn it all down, but I
do think we need to blow up some not literally.

Speaker 2 (33:32):
Some stuff, fix a lot of stuff.

Speaker 1 (33:35):
Our government is massively out of control, massively overly expensive,
and Donald Trump does want to fix quite a bit
of this, And Matt the subtitle to Matthew Continetti's article
at The Free Press. In his first term, Trump mostly
stuck to the preferred policies of the conservative movement.

Speaker 2 (33:55):
This time, he's doing it his way.

Speaker 1 (33:57):
So there are at least as many opinions as there
are people willing to offer opinions, and I would like
to know yours, but I want to do it in
a very concise way. So my question for you is
pretty straightforward. When I'm gonna ask you this, what is
the first word that comes to your mind when you

(34:18):
think about the first hundred days of the Trump administration?
Text me at five six six nine zero and tell
me what is the first word that comes to mind
when I ask you to think about the first one
hundred days. I don't want you to overanalyze it. I
don't want you to overthink it. And actually, in that spirit,
I'm not going to say anything more about it myself.

(34:38):
Right now, what I think. I just want to know
what you think. Don't think too much, gut reaction. How
have the first one hundred days of the Trump administration been.
I'm going to share your answers a little bit later
in the show, but when we come back, what we're
going to do right away is some really really cool science.

Speaker 2 (34:58):
Keep it here on KOA. You know I'm Nerd, right Dragon?
Do we know that?

Speaker 3 (35:02):
No?

Speaker 1 (35:03):
And I saw this very very cool story the other day.
I actually maybe Dragon sent it to me. I'm not
even sure. But about this fascinating new material that some
scientists engineers at at Princeton University have have created that
is kind of reminiscent of the Transformer movies. Joining us

(35:26):
talk about what she and her team have done. Shishi
Zang is a postdoctoral researcher at Princeton and part of
this team and joins us to talk about this cool science.

Speaker 2 (35:38):
So thanks for being here, appreciate.

Speaker 3 (35:40):
It, thank you, Thank you to me, very.

Speaker 1 (35:45):
Glad to very good. So tell so tell us, just
give us a basic, you know for non scientists, a
description of what this material is, and then we'll talk about.

Speaker 2 (35:57):
Why it does what it does.

Speaker 3 (36:02):
Uh yeah, this material, we name it my material because
we used a complex structure for this material and then
got uh specific properties Okay, and uh yeah, he creates
this material that can twist, contract, our expand, and shrink

(36:25):
in last information, this is the property that cannot found
in the conventional materials. And the material was assembled by
two rotation square delations on the top and bottom surfaces
with several tubular cristine origamia risk positioned into two.

Speaker 1 (36:45):
Okay, so there's a there's yeah, a lot of a
lot of science and engineering there. So I want to
try to I want to try to make it really plain.
So if I understand right, what you can do with
this material is you can apply either is it electricity
or magnetism, I'm not sure which, and you can make

(37:07):
it change shapes and make it do things right.

Speaker 3 (37:11):
Yeah, we can change its ships and in large, in large,
change this ship in large. There's several researchers do the
similar things, but they only change the ships in a
small level, so we can't change it.

Speaker 2 (37:26):
It's small.

Speaker 1 (37:26):
Yeah, okay, So when you say you can do this
at a large scale, and other researchers have you know,
found similar things at a small scale, what what does
large mean?

Speaker 2 (37:36):
Like you know, is it you know, is it a foot?
Is it an inch? Is it a millimeter? What's large?

Speaker 1 (37:45):
Uh?

Speaker 3 (37:46):
The large in our paper, I means is compared with uh,
it's normal sets because when we at uh loading on
this structure, on this mathe material, it will shooing a
safety percent compared with is initial size.

Speaker 1 (38:07):
Okay, but like what kind of size are you working
with here? How big is this thing? Is it? Is
it a millimeter?

Speaker 2 (38:14):
Is it an inch? What is it?

Speaker 4 (38:17):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (38:17):
You know a paper will us LiMETER. That's because our
mate material is built upon a highly modular assembly, So
this is supports the scaling up.

Speaker 2 (38:29):
Well.

Speaker 3 (38:30):
The skin down is challenging in terms of fibrication, but
we are currently exploring the fabrication techniques towards macrol or
nanoscale mathe materials.

Speaker 2 (38:42):
Okay, So I just want to do like one or
two more things on this.

Speaker 1 (38:44):
So you've created a material that you can apply an
electromagnetic commands to this stuff and you can make it
change shape and size and all kinds of things.

Speaker 2 (38:58):
And to me, it seems like an incredible magic trick.

Speaker 1 (39:01):
So what are what are you thinking of as the
first potential really functional applications If you're able to develop
this to some kind of scale.

Speaker 3 (39:15):
Uh yeah, picture, we uh give demonstrate several applications, and
I say, the first one we introduce is robotic mac materials.
So in this application we integrate magnetic response materials into THESEMBLY.
So by controlling the magnetic field, the mathemterial can be

(39:36):
rotated or quoted and deprived as a robot.

Speaker 1 (39:41):
It's it really is quite an incredible thing. And folks,
I realized this conversation probably sounds, you know, a little
challenging to understand with the with the science behind this
and all, but it's all up on my blog at
Roskiminsky dot com and and it's got there's there's some
videos in there.

Speaker 2 (39:58):
And just seeing the.

Speaker 1 (39:59):
Fact that that Shiji and her team have created materials
that you can make do things with by applying essentially
electromagnetic commands to them. But not they're not they're not
wired right. See, it's it is like a transformer. It
is one of the most remarkable things I've seen in

(40:20):
a long time. And again I realized that the science
and the conversation is a little complex, but it's it's
really a remarkable thing. So Sijizong from from Princeton University.
Thanks for making time for us, and congratulations on this
incredible scientific achievement. It must be very satisfying for you
and just a cool thing to work.

Speaker 2 (40:39):
All right, thank you. I appreciate it very much, so
thank you. All right. So let me so she's going.

Speaker 1 (40:45):
She's gone now so a nerd, So let me let
me just say right here, I I didn't know her
accent would be that thick. I realized, probably a little
bit difficult to understand, which leads me actually to a
point that I wanted to make the other day in
a different context, and that is I read a lot

(41:09):
of scientific articles, or at least I read a lot
of news stories about science, and then sometimes read the
actual scientific papers that are behind the articles, because a
lot of times the scientific papers are really, really dense,
and they're kind of beyond me because.

Speaker 2 (41:23):
I'm a nerd, but I'm.

Speaker 1 (41:24):
Not really a scientist, and a lot of this stuff
I just don't understand.

Speaker 2 (41:29):
But what I find, especially when you're.

Speaker 1 (41:33):
Talking about stuff that's in physics and engineering like this,
what I find is an enormous enormous percentage of the
names on the papers, the authors who are the researchers
and engineers and scientists, an absolutely enormous percentage are from
China and India.

Speaker 2 (41:53):
It's incredible.

Speaker 1 (41:56):
And you know this, I was going to talk about
it the other day in the context of some of
the stuff going on with.

Speaker 2 (42:02):
With Harvard and Columbia, right and.

Speaker 1 (42:05):
Now you know, potentially with Cornell all this stuff, and
specifically the issue of Chinese students because the Chinese government
can send them here as.

Speaker 2 (42:17):
Kind of sort of spies.

Speaker 1 (42:18):
The other thing the Chinese government does actually is they'll
have a Chinese student will come here with no real
connection to the Chinese government. They're just coming here to study.
And then the Chinese government decides that they probably know
something the government wants to know, so they threaten that
student's family to you know, give them information.

Speaker 2 (42:34):
So we have a whole thing going on where there's
a you.

Speaker 1 (42:37):
Know, some significant risk of the Chinese students being here.
That's a little bit tangential, though from the main point
I want to make. The main point I want to
make is and this may sound a little harsh, but
I guess I mean it that way, is America is
failing if.

Speaker 2 (42:55):
We are not and we are not.

Speaker 1 (42:58):
Creating enough students coming out of high school who have
the skills and desire to go into STEM fields, to
go into science, technology, engineering, math. Part of the reason
that so many of the best teams and this this

(43:22):
gal who was just on is like, she's a PhD
doing postdoctoral research at Princeton, right, so she's gonna be
one of the smartest engineers in the world in that field.
That girl that we just to, I shouldn't say girl,
that young woman that we just talked to is going
to be one of the smartest people in the I
realized a little difficult to understand through her Chinese accent,

(43:45):
but that that person is so much smarter than I am,
and so much smarter than the average person out there.
And we in America need to create more people like
that from a very young age. And I'm as guilty

(44:05):
of this as anybody else when I say that as parents,
we are not doing a good enough job pushing our
kids to do the kind of work that you need
to do and work as hard as you need to
do in order to be able to become what that
woman has become. And I don't be grudge at all
any person from China or India or anywhere else who

(44:26):
wants to come to America and get the best education
in the world and do this fabulous stuff. Good for them.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have them. Yes, we have
that issue with China we need to worry about a
little bit, but we should take all of them. But
we need to do a better job with American kids
so that we've got more Americans so we can compete

(44:48):
against the world, because a lot of these people who
were educating here are going to go back to their
own countries and compete against us. And I don't know,
it's been on my mind for a while. Sorry for
the rant. We'll be right back on Kowa. We make
sure you keep it here because coming up to the
next few minutes, is this chance to win a thursand
dollars in this hour's keyword for cash thanks to Maverick.

Speaker 2 (45:06):
Do you think you'll have to remove that from the podcast? Yes? Wow,
poor old podcast people.

Speaker 4 (45:13):
You know what's fascinating is that I will start the
podcast Yeah, at that point where you're asking if I'll
need to remove that from the podcast. Yeah, So to
leave everybody questionings, is what the heck we're even talking about?

Speaker 1 (45:22):
Yeah, And I'll just tell people who are listening to
the podcast right now that what Dragon just had to
remove was probably one of the best things that's ever
happened on this GLOS radio show, arguably.

Speaker 4 (45:31):
I will have one more coming up later that does
relate to your blog. I did watch the videos at
Rosskominski dot com.

Speaker 1 (45:39):
I don't even remember what I put up in the videos. No, okay,
I'll play it later.

Speaker 2 (45:44):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (45:45):
Listener text, The Dragon Redbeard Show is my absolute favorite.

Speaker 2 (45:49):
I listen every day. Oh, I appreciate that thing. A
couple of follow ups from listeners on.

Speaker 1 (45:54):
I think I'm gonna do a couple of minutes on
a couple more minutes on my last rant, because I
think it's important and I just want to respond to
a couple of listener texts, so that last rant, if
you happen to just be joining now. So, I had
an engineer scientist on from Princeton University in the previous
segment talking about this incredible scientific discovery they've made with

(46:14):
material that functions kind of like you might imagine a
transformer from the movies or the cartoons. And she's shinyese
fairly thick accent, which made a little bit hard to
understand her. And the point that I was making was
America doesn't produce enough people like her, enough people who
are smart enough and have the skill set to do
what she is doing. I'm not saying we produce none, right,

(46:37):
but for a country as big as we are, we
should have more. And I got a couple of listener
texts that I want to mention Ross. It's parents, it's family,
and I don't know how to change that culture. That's true, Ross.
All of our kids go to the School of Minds.

Speaker 2 (46:54):
Well done. That's some good parenting. What what else? Oh?

Speaker 1 (46:58):
Here, Ross, I'm a PhD researcher, and if I put
out an ad for a bioinformatics person, I don't even
know what that means. But one hundred percent of them
are from other countries. It's sad and it's a problem.

Speaker 2 (47:12):
I agree. And again, let me just make very clear.

Speaker 1 (47:15):
That what I'm saying and what I think this PhD
researcher is saying, it's not that it's sad that there
are brilliant people from India and China and Pakistan and
Japan and Mexico and wherever, and who want to come
here and learn that's not what's sad. It's not sad
that we have lots of foreign students. It's sad that

(47:36):
we don't have enough American students who are able to
rise to this level and do the hard work that
it takes to become a great scientist or a great engineer.
And again, I'm not saying we don't have any. I'm
saying we should have a lot more. Let me do
this last bit on this. This is my most recent

(47:57):
listener text Ross. I have an office above a coup
I'm learning center, and every kid going in and out
as either Indian or Chinese. My three girls play really
high level soccer. They travel all over the country. There's
one Indian kid across those three teams, and almost all
the girls are Caucasian. I believe the discrepancy isn't as

(48:17):
much with the schools, but what we value in our lives,
and in particular, how much we value extracurricular activities like sports.
So let me pick that up just for literally one minute.
I think that's right, and I do think there is
a legitimate argument to be made that if you watch
the parenting styles of some of these cultures, and I

(48:43):
hope nobody calls me racist, right, this is just everybody
knows these things to be true that in very large
percentages East Asian and in particular Chinese, but also Vietnamese, Japanese,
Korean parents and also the Asian subcontinent continent India, those

(49:05):
parents are very very highly focused on education, and they
make their you know, the tiger mom, right, They make
their kids study all the time they may, and whatever
the extra curriculum is, you know, maybe it's maybe it's
playing an instrument, but it's usually not sports. It's something

(49:26):
that is at least somewhat cerebral. And they're all over
their kids, and the kids don't have very much of
a social life. Of course, they end up reaching these
incredible achievements in these other areas later, like this gal
at Princeton, but it does leave parents like me, like you,

(49:49):
wondering what's the right balance, what's the right balance?

Speaker 2 (49:52):
Do it?

Speaker 1 (49:53):
Do you have to be that much of a tiger
mom or a tiger dad and make your kids sit
there and study for four hours every afternoon and then
play the violin for another two or three hours every
afternoon and maybe or maybe not ever get a chance
to hang out with a friend do you have to
be like that? Do you reach a level of success.

(50:14):
The other extreme, of course, is is the parents who
don't do anything to push their kids to succeed and
just let their kids do what they want and let
their kids not really grow up without the grit and
the sticktuitiveness that they need to succeed in the world.
Maybe there's something in between, and there's probably actually a
lot more parents than I think who kind of have

(50:36):
the balance about right. But I still have this little
feeling that is a nation we could do better. So
all right, I want to do two things, at least
two things in this segment for a little bit more
on the topic we've been doing. But before I do that,
I want to ask a question that I asked earlier
in the show, and then I'm going to come back

(50:57):
and share answers with you, because I think I buy
got probably close to one hundred answers the first time,
and I didn't and I didn't share them.

Speaker 4 (51:05):
So I want to ask again real quick. Wait, we
we talked a little bit yesterday. I'm going back to yesterday.
We never got to pay off from you. Oh, what
was the disgusting food meal that your mother made? Okay,
And I don't ever recall you saying what, yeah, I.

Speaker 2 (51:20):
Didn't, I didn't so okay. So here's here's the thing.

Speaker 1 (51:25):
Normally, I think what we got from people when we
asked that question, what food did your mother.

Speaker 2 (51:29):
Make that you really hated?

Speaker 1 (51:31):
It was a It was a thing that maybe their
mothers made occasionally from time to time. So my mom,
my mom, you know, was in the names, a doctor,
was in the navy.

Speaker 2 (51:45):
You know.

Speaker 1 (51:46):
Sometimes we had an occasional housekeeper would cook. Sometimes we
were on our own, we would just cook. So I
don't really have a memory of dishes that my mom
would make often, you know. Like for me, when I
think of what did I eat a lot of as
a kid, it'd be like Kraft mac and cheese with tuna.

Speaker 2 (52:02):
Fish in it.

Speaker 4 (52:03):
I'm with you there, I got there's the kitchen, you know, Yeah, did.

Speaker 2 (52:06):
You put do you.

Speaker 1 (52:06):
Ever put tuna fish in your Kraft mac and cheese?

Speaker 2 (52:10):
Yeah? Packet? Yeah.

Speaker 1 (52:13):
So, but I wouldn't say my mom cooked that because
once yea, I learned how to cook it myself at
the age of six, you know, I.

Speaker 2 (52:20):
Kind of your job. But there is a.

Speaker 1 (52:22):
Famous thing famous in my family because my mom made
dinner one time, and she did a thing that we
didn't know was possible, and she made lasagna and it
came out like soup, and so for we call it
lasagna soup. No idea how she did it, no idea

(52:46):
how it would even be possible to do.

Speaker 2 (52:50):
And it wasn't exactly disgusting.

Speaker 1 (52:52):
It wasn't like that canned spinach that I had that
one time that made me gag.

Speaker 2 (52:56):
It wasn't just it was just how is that even possible?

Speaker 1 (53:02):
So that's kind of the But I wouldn't say I
really disliked it.

Speaker 2 (53:06):
But since my mom didn't do much.

Speaker 1 (53:08):
Cooking, I probably don't have the same kinds of stories
as people whose mom cooked liver and onions. Now we
know exactly now, we know everybody hates liver and onions.
So when I ask you, what's the first word that
comes to mind, without any deep thought, just the very

(53:29):
first word that comes to your mind, when I ask
you to think about your impression of the first one
hundred days of the Trump administration, what is that word?

Speaker 2 (53:38):
Text it to me at five six six nine zero.

Speaker 1 (53:41):
I am intentionally at this time staying away from any
of my own thoughts and analysis about this and that
aspect of the Trump administration, right, because I think there's
some good stuff and I think there's some bad stuff,
just like there is in most presidencies. Well, that's not true,
and the Biden administration in the first hundred days was
all bad. But what's the first word that comes to

(54:01):
your mind when I ask you about the first hundred
days of the Trump administration?

Speaker 2 (54:05):
Five six six nine zero.

Speaker 1 (54:06):
Tell me the word and I will share your answers
right after this. Oh, this listener says, put spam in
mac and cheese.

Speaker 2 (54:15):
See, spam is.

Speaker 1 (54:16):
Not a thing that Jews ate a lot of because
it's pork. Right. I'll tell you, Uh, I had spam
for the first time within the past year when Mandy
made a few spam things and throwing them in.

Speaker 2 (54:33):
You and I both have you had spam before that?
Before that? Not before that? Very salty it was.

Speaker 1 (54:38):
It was a salted and if you get there, there's
some Asian play, Like there's a local Korean restaurant near me,
and then there was a Hawaiian barbecue place that I
think had a little bit of Japanese or Korean influence
that makes this thing that they call spam musubi, which
is kind of like a giant like a thick seaweed

(55:01):
wrapped like a sushi role, but much thicker than a
regular sushi role, like it might be the diameter of
this thing might be an inch and a half. And
it's got spam in it. And I got that recently.
It's actually actually good, that it's actually good. Oh my gosh,
we got, we got. We're gonna have two hundred answers
to this, just one or two hundred to this question. Yeah, five, six, six,

(55:22):
nine zero. What's the first word that comes to your
mind about the first one hundred days of the Trump administration?
So I'm gonna get to that in a second. I'm
really not just enjoying. I am enjoying but also appreciating
so many of your answers on this topic. We were
just talking about. There's a couple of things I want
to say again, if you're just joining, I'll just recap
this part in case you're just joining what I've talked

(55:43):
about a little bit in the last couple of shows,
the last couple of nut shows, last couple of segments
of this show was how I feel like as a
nation we could be and should be doing a little
bit better, getting more kids into science and technology and.

Speaker 2 (55:59):
Enery in math. Not that I have any objection to.

Speaker 1 (56:06):
Or problem with foreign students coming here and learning at
you know, at any of our great universities. My problem
with that is when they leave, And it's not so
much a problem with them. A lot of times it's
a problem with our government that makes it too difficult
for them to get.

Speaker 2 (56:26):
Work visas to stay and to know they can stay.

Speaker 1 (56:28):
And like, you're gonna come here and get a PhD,
and what the federal government is gonna make it harder
for you to stay or you're gonna have to worry
about being deported. So gosh, I'm gonna go back to Bangalore,
and I'll make half as much money there, or or
a quarter as much money there. But over there, a
quarter of a quarter as much money gives you just
as good a lifestyle as the full amount of money
would here. So I'm going back so I don't have

(56:49):
to deal with all the nonsense here.

Speaker 2 (56:50):
We need to stop that. We need to stop.

Speaker 1 (56:54):
We need to bring all the smartest foreigners here, the
ones who aren't gonna spy for their governments and be
used against. We need to bring them all here and
then make it so they can stay so that then,
you know, maybe Taiwan Semiconductor TSMC, which makes the most important,
most advanced ships in the world, and they are talking
about setting up here.

Speaker 2 (57:15):
Where are they going to get the people for that?

Speaker 3 (57:16):
Now?

Speaker 1 (57:17):
It doesn't need a ton of people. But you get
my point. If Donald Trump wants to reindustrialize America, so
first of all, we should really if we are doing
any of that, it should be with mostly with high
wage jobs.

Speaker 2 (57:31):
We don't want to We don't want to bring.

Speaker 1 (57:32):
T shirt manufacturing back to the United States of America.

Speaker 2 (57:35):
Frankly, we probably don't.

Speaker 1 (57:37):
I know, this is you know, a little more borderline
because of the potential.

Speaker 2 (57:42):
Hand craftsman aspects of it.

Speaker 1 (57:43):
We probably don't even want to bring furniture making in
a significant way back to the United States of America, Right, Okay,
if a bed is a little nicer or a dresser
is a little nicer, am I willing to pay twice
as much for it?

Speaker 2 (57:53):
Most most people won't be, So you could do craft things.

Speaker 1 (57:56):
I'm not saying we should ban it, but we need
to reindustrialize in a way that makes us rich, ways
that make us rich.

Speaker 2 (58:03):
And so we need the smart people now.

Speaker 1 (58:05):
Again, I am not saying we don't have any parents
who do it right, and I'm not saying we don't
have any American kids. Again, and this is regardless of race.
Any American kids who become great engineers and great scientists,
we have plenty.

Speaker 2 (58:23):
We should just have more, all right.

Speaker 1 (58:26):
One of the things that I am loving so much
about my text responses to this conversation.

Speaker 2 (58:36):
Is how many.

Speaker 1 (58:39):
Parents there are who listen to this show, who, as
far as I can tell, have been remarkable parents.

Speaker 2 (58:47):
And I am not saying this.

Speaker 1 (58:49):
Out of any kind of false modesty, have been probably
better at parenting than I have. Not trying to be funny,
not trying to be overly abusive of myself. I'm just
that's really how I feel. A couple listener texts a
balance is key. Our kids were on the Traveling ma
Athletes team in Texas. They both did four h and

(59:12):
FFA Future Farmers of America. They played and lettered in
multiple high school sports. Our daughter is a microbiologist graduating
from CSU. Our son is an engineer graduating from West Point.
Academics is important, but sports teaches them, teaches them how
to be a team player, how to lose, how to
come back from disappointment. That's from Joe. So, Joe, congratulations

(59:36):
you win parenting. And I'm not being sarcastic. I mean
that's amazing. And maybe there's some good genetics involved too.
Maybe I'm a believer in that a little bit, a
little bit, but gosh, we need more parents like that.

Speaker 2 (59:53):
I wish I had been more of.

Speaker 1 (59:54):
A parent like Joe, A little too easy on my kids,
especially one of them.

Speaker 2 (01:00:00):
Doesn't quite have the grit.

Speaker 1 (01:00:02):
I think he should have the sticktuitiveness, the interests.

Speaker 2 (01:00:08):
From time to time, this particular.

Speaker 1 (01:00:10):
Kid of mine says he's bored, and I say that
probably means you're boring.

Speaker 2 (01:00:19):
I'm not trying to be funny, and I won't.

Speaker 1 (01:00:23):
I don't feel like a failure as a parent, but
I don't feel like a great success either. And I'm
sure I'm not alone. Sure I'm not alone. Listener text.
My son played soccer starting at five, competitive soccer, middle school,
high school, varsity high school, then D three college, enjoyed

(01:00:45):
other sports as well.

Speaker 2 (01:00:46):
Twenty nine years old.

Speaker 1 (01:00:47):
Now has a PhD in cancer research and is now
employed in UH Drug Innovation pharmaceutical innovation Ross. My kids
went to the Cherry Creek Challenge School. Their competition was
for grades. It can be done, but the focus must change.
My daughter is a PhD chemist from Minds Sun is

(01:01:11):
an me. I'm guessing that means mechanical engineer. If it doesn't,
text me and tell me what that means. If it
doesn't mean mechanical engineer. Captain in the Air Force. Look
at these people, Look at these people?

Speaker 2 (01:01:24):
Is this amazing now?

Speaker 1 (01:01:26):
Another listener has an interesting point, or to actually two
interesting points from two different listeners.

Speaker 2 (01:01:32):
Ross.

Speaker 1 (01:01:32):
The money is not mostly an engineering in science. There's
a salary ceiling in those areas, especially in research at
colleges and universities. And that, don't get me wrong, it's
a great endeavor and better than many others. But engineers
have to go into management or their own business to
increase their incomes. That's true, that's true, But I don't
think that explains why we don't have enough STEM people

(01:01:55):
here because actually, in terms of your average income, unless
you're going to go start your own business and end
up being successful at it, which is only a small
percentage of population, right, A fairly small percentage of population
starts their own businesses and then whatever modest percentage of
those end up being pretty successful.

Speaker 2 (01:02:14):
So while it's true.

Speaker 1 (01:02:16):
That you could say the money isn't in engineering in science,
that's only true relative to other things that are quite
difficult to do, being a successful entrepreneur, being a successful
professional athlete, which is the kind of thing that you know,
point zero zero one percent, and I'm not exaggerating, right,
Probably point zero zero one percent of people who try

(01:02:39):
to be professional athletes actually do same thing with trying
to be let's say, an entertainer of a scale that
you make a lot of money, whether it's acting, whether
it's music, author like you know what, point zero zero
one percent Probably of people who try to do those
things becomes scessful enough to make a living at it. So, yeah,

(01:03:03):
the money isn't in engineering in science if you're comparing
to very high income things that are difficult to achieve.
But the money is in engineering and science compared to
most college degrees you would get if you were to
go into a field that relates directly to what you
studied in college, there's probably nothing with a higher expected
income than engineering in science. Maybe decent for economics. I

(01:03:28):
don't know what else. All right, one more on this, so,
and I think this is important because we were talking
about how a lot of times you have these you know,
like tiger moms and these these parents had been particular
from East Asia and South Asian countries who put so
much emphasis on the kids' education and other things that

(01:03:50):
the kids really don't do very much else right.

Speaker 2 (01:03:52):
They're not very often on the sports team.

Speaker 1 (01:03:54):
You know, at my kids' school, there's a debate team,
and I think the majority of the kids on the
debate team are uh from India or the parents are
from India. There's actually a very interesting phenomenon. I was
quite surprised when I when I the first time I
saw it, and then it starts to make sense in
line with this listener text, first generation American kids are

(01:04:19):
generally raised by parents who have known or seen poverty.
I fear that our generation why population were raised without hunger,
without hunger for food, and without hunger for excellence. It's
a great text, and I think I think there's something
to that. I really do. All right, let me share

(01:04:41):
some dragon. Do you want to do any of this?
The listener answers about the about their their word for
the first one hundred days of the Trump administration, I
can give you the.

Speaker 4 (01:04:51):
Big one that seems to be showing up quite a lot,
and I kind of blame the media on that. If
you both watched to start with a seat, it certainly does.

Speaker 2 (01:04:59):
Yeah, the meat.

Speaker 4 (01:05:00):
He has used this word quite a lot talking about
Trump in the past few months.

Speaker 2 (01:05:04):
Charming, no.

Speaker 4 (01:05:07):
Colorful, he is orange, So that goes on Celiac, no cathartic,
no very opposite, Chilean, no chill as, no, no chaos, chaos, chaos.

(01:05:30):
That's the word I was looking for, the ross chaos.

Speaker 2 (01:05:33):
I think. Okay, here's the thing.

Speaker 1 (01:05:38):
I think the chaos is an accurate word for the
first hundred days, but I think it has a negative
overtone that is intentional. Part of the reason that the
so called mainstream media, as Dragon noted, uses the word
a lot. One listener says, controlled chaos. I don't think

(01:05:59):
it's been that well controlled. Actually so.

Speaker 2 (01:06:02):
But let's go through a few more words.

Speaker 1 (01:06:04):
Quickly, determined, necessary, progressing.

Speaker 2 (01:06:09):
Tumultuous, shake up.

Speaker 1 (01:06:11):
Yeah, let's alternate here, dragon, consequential, hurrah, overdue, border.

Speaker 2 (01:06:18):
Border, Yeah, yeah, border, that's that's.

Speaker 1 (01:06:21):
Disappointing, erratic, legendary, turbulent, frustrating, horrible, bulldozer deportation, kick ass, surreal.

Speaker 2 (01:06:36):
And amazing. All right, we'll leave it there so you.

Speaker 1 (01:06:39):
Get the idea, so I'd say, And it's not surprising,
given you know, the kind of people who probably listen
to my show listen to talk radio generally, that it
might be an interesting combination of positive and negative, you know,
around fifty to fifty I think that said.

Speaker 2 (01:06:58):
Actually, let me let me end that a little bit.

Speaker 1 (01:07:04):
Most people who listen to talk radio, not all, but
most lean at least a little bit right of center.
Now here on KOA, since we're the Rocky station and
the Broncos station, and since I'm not a conservative and
not a Republican, and Mandy is also basically libertarian and
you know, Republican but not really cheering for the team

(01:07:25):
we hear a Kiowa are.

Speaker 2 (01:07:30):
We hope to be a place for everybody?

Speaker 1 (01:07:31):
Right, I'm not I'm not trying to piss off or
scare away, or annoy or offend people of one particular
political stripe. I'm trying to offend and annoy everybody, not.

Speaker 2 (01:07:47):
Just one particular political stripe.

Speaker 1 (01:07:49):
And so I hope that that means and it kind
of seems to me that it means that people with
lots of different political tastes are listening to the show.

Speaker 2 (01:07:58):
I'm actually.

Speaker 1 (01:08:01):
A little bit surprised at what a big percentage of
the people who've texted in, and and I can't even
see all of them now because I can only show
two hundred texts on the screen at the time, so
I can't see all of them. A very very big
percentage are negative, which would and a lot of them,

(01:08:24):
as Dragon said, chaotic, turbulent things like that. And I think,
let me just finish this concept and we'll hit a break,
and then we got another hour of stuff to do together.

Speaker 2 (01:08:34):
I think this points to.

Speaker 1 (01:08:35):
A little bit of political trouble for Republicans. It's not,
you know, they should be panicking, but it's a little
bit of political trouble because I guarantee you given that
you know, probably probably a third of my listeners are
very conserva are conservative to very conservative, probably a third
or you know, moderate to libertarian, then probably a third

(01:08:55):
or center left.

Speaker 2 (01:08:56):
To left right.

Speaker 1 (01:08:58):
But I'm guessing that two thirds of my listeners voted
for Trump. Maybe not enthusiastically, but I'm guessing the two
thirds of my listeners voted for Trump, and two thirds
at least of the people who texted in had negative
words to describe the first hundred days disappointing, repulsive, chaotic,
and so on. To me, this means that a lot

(01:09:20):
of people who voted for Trump are troubled not so
much by what he wants to do, but by how
he's doing it. That's what chaotic means. It doesn't mean
you will disapprove of the goal. It means you disapprove
of how it's being done. And this is something that
I think the Trump administration needs to fix.

Speaker 2 (01:09:38):
We'll be right back.

Speaker 1 (01:09:39):
I turned into an interesting conversation, I thought, and yeah,
I will. I will say again that just getting all
of these texts from people whose kids are doing.

Speaker 2 (01:09:51):
These incredible things. You know, there was another one.

Speaker 1 (01:09:53):
I didn't read the text, and the kid's going to
South Dakota School of Minds and is graduating, and all
these listeners. I guess I should be surprised because I'm
a nerd and I do kind of a I don't know,
I don't have intellectual is the right word. But I
try to do a show where you have to use
your brain a little bit, right, and so.

Speaker 2 (01:10:12):
I'm in a sense.

Speaker 1 (01:10:15):
The fact that I have so many people texting in
about how you know their kids are you know, this
kind of engineer and that kind of cancer researcher and
you know, graduating from West Point and all this stuff.
I actually take that as a point of pride, even
though those are your kids and not my kids, because
because you the parents are just people that I hope

(01:10:36):
to be able to talk to and and appeal to.

Speaker 2 (01:10:41):
On the show.

Speaker 1 (01:10:42):
So I kind of feel like I'm succeeding when I've
got folks like you listening to the show.

Speaker 2 (01:10:48):
So thank you for that, and as always, thanks for you.

Speaker 1 (01:10:51):
Know, playing along with the home game, as I like
to say, you know, texting in when I ask you to,
when I ask you to.

Speaker 2 (01:10:57):
Text and so on. So I want to do.

Speaker 1 (01:11:01):
Something like a follow up on what I did yesterday
and tie it into a local story here. So yesterday
I was for the first time ever on the Laura
Ingram Show on Fox News. And you probably wouldn't be
surprised to know that Laura Ingram is much more conservative
than I am and much trumpier than I am.

Speaker 2 (01:11:20):
But of course, if they want.

Speaker 1 (01:11:23):
To put me on TV in front of tens of
thousands or hundreds of thousands of people, or maybe a
few million people. Well, I'm gonna say yes to that.
And it was about an issue that I care about.
I mean, it was about that raid in Colorado Springs,
but it ties into a much bigger picture issue that
I care about a lot. And there are a lot
of aspects to this that are worth talking about, so

(01:11:46):
obviously of the Colorado thing there, but just backing it
out for a second, you have the fact that Joe
Biden opened the border and invited millions of illegal aliens,
some of whom are criminals, into the country. And then no,
actually before that, before that, and this really started in

(01:12:07):
its own way with John Hicklooper when he was mayor
of Denver and started doing all this stuff to make
it as nice and comfortable as possible to be homeless
in Denver. It wasn't so much about illegal aliens at
the time, but he started us down this road of
being a quote unquote welcoming city. We would welcome anybody.

(01:12:27):
I don't want us to be that freaking welcoming. I
didn't want to be so welcoming that, you know. Just
after marijuana became legal in the state of Colorado. And
by the way, I'm in favor of marijuana legalization, so
that this isn't a screen against that.

Speaker 2 (01:12:43):
We ended up with these people who called themselves.

Speaker 1 (01:12:45):
Urban campers, but what they really are is like twenty
three year old lazy bums who just wanted to go
sleep on Sixteenth Street mall and smoke pot.

Speaker 2 (01:12:53):
Way too welcoming.

Speaker 1 (01:12:55):
So once we got all that welcoming, and then we
passed a state law that makes us a sanctuary state,
you don't even need a sanctuary city anymore. And then
you have the city council and the mayor's of Denver
still talking about being welcoming. I had I had, Uh
was it Daryl Watson? I think it was Daryl Watson,
who I like pretty well. I mean, Daryl Watson's a

(01:13:17):
pretty liberal Democrat dude.

Speaker 2 (01:13:18):
But he got He took out Candy C. Tobaca in
that election in that Democratic primary, so good for him.

Speaker 1 (01:13:25):
I like him pretty well and had him on the
show and he was talking about how you know, I said,
can we do this and do that to maybe attract
fewer illegal aliens here? And he said, no, We're we're
a welcoming city. And I said, we're too welcoming. We're
too welcoming.

Speaker 2 (01:13:39):
It reminds me of one of my favorite things ever
in the in the movies.

Speaker 1 (01:13:45):
When Nigel and what's the other main character's name from
Spinal Tap Dragon Nigel and the blond Dude's characters name
is spinal Tap. Anyway, there they go to Elvis's grave.
They're standing at Elvis's grave in the movie this is

(01:14:05):
Spinal Tap, one of the truly great comedies of all time,
and one of them says to the other as they're
looking at Elvis's grave, this really puts things in perspective,
and the other one says, yeah, too much effing perspective.
And I love that line. Too much perspective. And with

(01:14:26):
all this, you know, welcoming, and you know when Daryl
Watson said, yeah, we're a welcoming city. To me, that
just put it in too much perspective. No, no, we
don't need to be that welcoming. It's not our job
to sacrifice our city, our state, our finances to be welcoming.

(01:14:49):
And I don't care if they were coming illegally or legally. Actually,
if we were going to get this massive flow of
people who are.

Speaker 2 (01:14:55):
Coming even legally, and you're going to burden.

Speaker 1 (01:14:57):
The system and we have to open shelters for them,
and we have to close.

Speaker 2 (01:15:00):
Parts, and we have to close rec centers. No.

Speaker 1 (01:15:02):
I don't want to be that freaking welcoming. No, thank you,
do it slowly, bring them legally, bring them slowly.

Speaker 2 (01:15:10):
Okay.

Speaker 1 (01:15:11):
So yesterday, so I was on Laura Ingram then talking
about this rape, and I mentioned on the show that
there's a bill that that looks like Democrats are going
to pass here in the state of Colorado that will
allow illegal aliens who plead guilty to certain levels of
certain misdemeanor crimes, certain levels of misdemeanor crimes, to withdraw

(01:15:34):
their guilty please and change them not guilty if they
claim that they didn't know that pleading guilty might cause
them to get deported.

Speaker 2 (01:15:42):
Are you kidding me?

Speaker 1 (01:15:43):
You know what, I have so much more to say
about this. I want to make sure I can give
it the time that it deserves. I'm going to hit
a quick break and we'll be right back on Kawa.

Speaker 4 (01:15:50):
Well, you were just talking about we're being too welcoming.

Speaker 2 (01:15:52):
You're welcoming here, You're welcome, You're welcome.

Speaker 1 (01:15:56):
I should have mentioned this before, but I'm gonna mention
it now today from three to six, so that's only
like starting about four hours from now. You can hang
out with Dave Logan and Ryan Edwards and Nick Ferguson
at Sam's Number three Diner and Bar that's on South
Cherry Street and Glendale, and you can hang out and
watch the Nuggets playoff game and whatever else they're going
to have on any of the screens there. Obviously, for

(01:16:18):
us here in Denver, the Nuggets are the big thing. Tonight,
the Avs lost. Man, that was a weird game. Yesterday.
The Dallas Stars scored nine seconds into the game on
a really really strange goal that was, by the way,
that was tied for the fifth fastest goal in an
NFL NHL playoff game. And then and then the Stars

(01:16:42):
scored again on another really strange goal that the goalie
didn't even see.

Speaker 2 (01:16:46):
Is very weird, and the Avs lost the game.

Speaker 1 (01:16:48):
So they're down three games to two and game six
is I want to.

Speaker 2 (01:16:53):
Say it's Thursday. I think it's Thursday, so I think
that's right. Yeah. Oh, here's another thing for Oh. I'm
just gonna.

Speaker 1 (01:17:02):
Rant for a second. Then I'll come back to whatever
I was talking about. I don't even remember what I
was talking about, so it makes this easy. Oh I do,
I remember what I saw. But so I was watching
the other playoff game, the Panthers versus the Lightning yesterday,
other NHL game.

Speaker 2 (01:17:16):
Two things that I wanted to mention.

Speaker 1 (01:17:18):
So first, earlier in the game, the Tampa Bay Lightning
scored two goals in eleven seconds, Dragon, are you listening
the Panthers in Lightning? The Lightning scored two goals in
eleven seconds. That was a new NHL record, the fastest
two goals in an NHL playoff game.

Speaker 2 (01:17:38):
And then in the third period.

Speaker 1 (01:17:40):
The Panthers scored two goals in eleven seconds that had
never been done before, and they did it twice, and
each team did it in that game.

Speaker 2 (01:17:50):
That was pretty crazy.

Speaker 1 (01:17:51):
And then the other thing, Oh, look at that CNBC
is reporting consumer confidence at five year low. It's interesting
because the stock market's been going up for the past week. Anyway,
I don't want to divert myself here. So the other
thing that happened, and this is a pet peeve of borrow.

Speaker 2 (01:18:06):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (01:18:06):
I also I also tweeted about this yesterday. I was
supposed to come back and talk about the thing I
was talking about. Let me just mention this and then
I'll try to do that. But squirrel, what's wrong with me?
So a pet peeve of mine, and I hear this
all the time, is somebody will say, you know this,

(01:18:27):
So out of that hockey game yesterday, the announcer said,
you know, one goal is stranger than the next. And
I hear that all the time. But think about that.
That's a stupid statement. One is stranger than the next.
One is crazier than the next one? Is whatever?

Speaker 2 (01:18:46):
Right?

Speaker 1 (01:18:47):
If it's if it's stranger than the next one, then
that means the next one was less strange and not
worth talking about. It means the strangest one was the
first one. Trying to say the opposite of that, you're
trying to say, they keep getting weirder, and so you
need to say one is fill in the blank adjective, then.

Speaker 2 (01:19:09):
The last I could care less about this.

Speaker 1 (01:19:12):
Oh gosh, don't do that. Don't do that. I'm not biting.
I'm not biting. But that's my pet peeve. If you're
going to use that kind of phrase, you know something
is filling the blank adjective more something then.

Speaker 2 (01:19:25):
It's got to be more than.

Speaker 1 (01:19:26):
The last, not more than the next, unless you're trying
to say that the first one was the most and
the rest are all boring, and you're wasting our time
by telling us that.

Speaker 2 (01:19:35):
What was I talking about before dreve? I was talking about.

Speaker 1 (01:19:37):
Illegal immigration and I got on this kind of rant,
and I was talking about being on the Laura Ingram
Show yesterday, so and I was talking about being too
welcoming and then you play the your welcome music.

Speaker 2 (01:19:46):
So the Trump.

Speaker 1 (01:19:48):
Administration yesterday put out an executive order where he, the President,
is ordering the Attorney General and.

Speaker 2 (01:19:54):
I think the Secretary of Homeland.

Speaker 1 (01:19:56):
Security to put together a list of sanctuary cities and
sanctuary state. And after that, what they're going to do
is they're going to look at the list and figure
out where they can start taking federal money away from
these sanctuary city and sanctuary states. And you may have
heard this already on koa's News today from the Denver Post.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency will no longer pay Denver

(01:20:18):
about twenty four million dollars and promised grant money to
cover what the city already spent to shelter migrants. According
to a letter sent this month. Apparently the city got
the letter at the beginning of this month, but they
didn't make it public until a city council presentation yesterday,
So they've known about it for four weeks, but we're
just hearing about it now. In a response to a

(01:20:41):
question from a councilwoman, Sean tell Lewis, the budget director
of the city, mentioned the letter instead of the department
has not canceled or possibly canceled federal grant dollars as
it develops the upcoming twenty twenty six city budget. And
at the other thing I wanted to say is I'm
going to do this quickly. There's a piece at Axio.
This stuff really comes together. Right. You got this giant

(01:21:02):
national issue, Trump, immigration, all this stuff, and now you've
got to make it local.

Speaker 2 (01:21:06):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:21:07):
So here's the Axios headline, Denver's defiance of Trump peaks at.

Speaker 2 (01:21:11):
One hundred days.

Speaker 1 (01:21:12):
And they're talking about all this stuff that the mayor
of Denver is doing. And the new district Attorney in Denver,
his name is John Walsh. They describe him as one
of Trump's fiercest local foes, particularly on immigration. Here's a
quote now from the DA Now just think how heinous.

Speaker 2 (01:21:26):
This is right?

Speaker 1 (01:21:27):
This guy is supposed to be involved in law enforcement. Well,
and it's not exactly law enforcement, but you know, in
making sure that the justice is done. He says, we
need to push back and refuse to cooperate in the
illegal actions that the Trump administration is taking daily. My
office will refuse to cooperate. Now, look, there may be
some level at which he's allowed to refuse to cooperate,

(01:21:49):
but if he goes too far, and it sounds like
he might want to because maybe this guy is politically
ambitious in our very left wing capital city, he might
end up being prosecuted and that might be a little
bit amusing. Listener text, Ross, you're regardless of how the
Avs lost, I hope they win the series. That's another
one regardless, Ross, similar, and don't keep texting me your

(01:22:12):
grammar things. We'll do them though maybe this week I'll
do We'll do pet peeve grammar things, but don't send them.

Speaker 2 (01:22:17):
Don't send them right now.

Speaker 1 (01:22:18):
But Ross, similar, grammar issue that drives me crazy. Uh.
I actually hear it in one of your iHeart ads
that says, and I quote, I heart podcasts reach twice
as many listeners than TikTok mm hmm, no good, no good. Okay,
we're not gonna We're not gonna do all the grammar

(01:22:40):
stuff today, though we we will do it. It's a
it's a fun topic. And don't don't ever tell me
that you could care less, because you.

Speaker 2 (01:22:47):
Know what I'm gonna say, Dragon, I could care could you? Actually?
I could care less?

Speaker 4 (01:22:52):
Did you take you ten shots to try and get
one little crumpled up piece of paper into the trash?

Speaker 2 (01:22:56):
Can we? But okay, I belie leave you that you
could care less. But I only believe.

Speaker 1 (01:23:03):
You a little because you care so little already that
it's hard to care.

Speaker 2 (01:23:07):
It's hard to care less. But you probably could. You
probably care a little, and you probably could.

Speaker 1 (01:23:12):
But most people when they say I could care less,
they mean I couldn't care less. They're trying to say
they care as little as possible, and what.

Speaker 2 (01:23:18):
They're actually saying is the opposite.

Speaker 4 (01:23:20):
I started to care more when you turn it around
and did over the head, behind back, behind the back, man.

Speaker 2 (01:23:24):
Yeah, that was interesting. That that was interesting.

Speaker 4 (01:23:26):
Yeahs you missed better than you had facing forward.

Speaker 1 (01:23:30):
We could have done some semi professional radio here where
I backed up, you know, from the from from the
microphone and took a show.

Speaker 2 (01:23:36):
Should I do that? Should we wait people's time for
a second. It's a twoday, it feels like a Wednesday. Right,
Crumple up this piece of paper and I'm.

Speaker 1 (01:23:43):
Going to back up now, so dragon, just give people
a sense of what I'm doing here.

Speaker 4 (01:23:46):
Do play by play? Well right now, you're about ten
twelve feet away. Okay, so you do the play by
play here? Go ahead, go ahead, go ahead. Crumples up
the touch the golf lay or like a really because
I know Dave Logan, whatsoever?

Speaker 2 (01:23:56):
Just do any style you like, any style you like.

Speaker 4 (01:23:58):
Hi Ross takes a step back, crumples up the piece
of paper, nice tight, white wadded little ball of papers.
Takes it three or four steps back. Ross checks the wind,
wet his finger, holds it up in the air. The
wind is blowing from east to west, which is a
normal wind around here, and this is in the Kawai studios.
Sets it up, eyeballs it and goes back and actually
makes it. Holy crap, switch switch shot shot.

Speaker 2 (01:24:22):
Right? Wow, there you go? There you go? All right?

Speaker 1 (01:24:27):
Does that make it professional radio now instead of semi professional?

Speaker 2 (01:24:30):
You actually made it. I made it. It didn't even
it was just like that was that was the best
shot I've ever done.

Speaker 4 (01:24:35):
Hear nothing but net that right into the middle of
off the corner, not banked off the window, mouthing straight
straight in.

Speaker 2 (01:24:42):
Wow, that was that was impressive. Thank you. I could
care more about that one, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:24:48):
I was, uh, two things now about White House press briefings.
Yesterday I caught a White House press briefing where they
had the borders are Tom Holman and he took so
Caroline Levin came out, she's a press secretary. She said
a few things, and then Holman came out and gave
some fairly long remarks, and I want to say.

Speaker 2 (01:25:08):
They were great. They were great.

Speaker 1 (01:25:10):
He was talking about how, you know, how he's worked
for every president since Reagan and or at least six
presidents I've encountered, but he's worked for six presidents starting
with Reagan, and Trump is the guy who's finally getting
the border under control. And he gave some unbelievable statistics.
There was one number. It was like, at some period

(01:25:36):
of time that Biden administration allowed in an average of
eleven or twelve thousand illegal aliens a day into the
You know or caught aal of whatever, and now it's
one hundred and seventy eight. And there was another number
that was really stunning, And actually Laura Ingram mentioned this

(01:25:56):
on the show yesterday just before I was on with her.
But I was listening as she was talking, and it
was about the number of illegal aliens released into the
country by ice and under the Biden administration, it was
some number of thousands over some period of time, and
apparently over the first hundred days, I think is what

(01:26:18):
he was saying.

Speaker 2 (01:26:18):
The first hundred days of the Trump administration.

Speaker 1 (01:26:20):
The number for the Trump administration of illegal aliens allowed
into the country was nine nine.

Speaker 2 (01:26:28):
And actually, so I.

Speaker 1 (01:26:30):
Was listening to it Laura Ingram, I guess didn't listen
to the whole thing, because last night Ingram said, gosh,
nine is probably nine more than I would have allowed, Like,
that's probably nicer than I would have been. But actually
Tom Holman explained the nine. He said, four of the
nine are witnesses in criminal cases, and we need them
here in order to be able to put bad guys away.

(01:26:52):
He said four of them were people who were in
such bad medical shape that we believed that if we
were to deport them, they would have died on the way,
and then one was some humanitarian thing that he didn't
elaborate further right, So it's incredible, And I will also
say I will also say that the the Trump administration,

(01:27:19):
they talked about some economics this morning, but mostly for
the last several days, they've been very very quiet. Not
so much talk about tariffs, not too much talk about
anything other than immigration. And that's very smart, because immigration
is the issue where Trump is winning the most.

Speaker 2 (01:27:36):
Right, he is doing what he said he would do.

Speaker 1 (01:27:40):
I realize, of course, that lots of politicians say they
will do things that you.

Speaker 2 (01:27:45):
Don't want them to do, but that's not my point.

Speaker 1 (01:27:49):
It's a little bit, or maybe more than a little bit,
unusual to get a sense of a politician really doing
what he promised he would do. And Trump is much
better than most. And I talked about this the other day,
so I won't go back to it anymore than that.

Speaker 2 (01:28:05):
But he promised we're going to control the border.

Speaker 1 (01:28:10):
And most of America except for the mayor of Denver
and the Denver DA and the Denver City Council and
similar people in western California versus us here in East California.
But other people in West California, there's a few people
like that who they're down with the illegal immigration. They're

(01:28:32):
fine with it for whatever reasons. And they got their reasons.
I'm sure they're fine with it. Most of us are
in And so the immigration actually is the place where
the Trump administration has its highest poll numbers right now.
The highest approval by the American people is on immigration.
The lowest is on tariffs and the economy.

Speaker 2 (01:28:54):
Believe it or not.

Speaker 1 (01:28:56):
So on the one hand, he campaigned on this one thing,
he's doing incredibly.

Speaker 2 (01:28:59):
Well on it, and they want to talk about it,
and they should.

Speaker 1 (01:29:01):
And they campaign on the other thing, the economy and
inflation and all that, and people are really down on that.

Speaker 2 (01:29:07):
That's trouble for them anyway.

Speaker 1 (01:29:09):
Holman gave a marvelous little press conference yesterday. That guy
is hardcore, hard nos, hardcore right guy for the job.

Speaker 2 (01:29:21):
This morning they.

Speaker 1 (01:29:22):
Did another press conference like that at the White House
and they had Scott Besson, who as the Secretary of Treasury.

Speaker 2 (01:29:28):
Very smart dude.

Speaker 1 (01:29:29):
I think he's a billionaire, made a lot of money
in investing, and you know, he's fine. But when you
work for the president, you got to carry the president's
water a little bit, and you got to support things
that you might not really support because you work for him,
and you got to do the best you can to
explain him. And so he's talking about some things that
I think are kind of dumb. He's talking about pushing

(01:29:49):
for I'll give you one example. One example, Donald Trump
has proposed making auto loan pay it's tax deductible. So
that's dumb for a variety of reasons. First reason is
you really shouldn't be encouraging people to take on more debt.

(01:30:10):
The second reason is you shouldn't be subsidizing people's buying
of cars by adding to our national debt that our
children going to have to pay back. That's not really
particularly different from Joe Biden's reassignment of student loans from
the people who took out the loans to the rest

(01:30:31):
of the taxpayers for the rest of us to pay
them back. Why is that any different than saying we're
gonna let your car loan be deductible. And by the way,
you might say to me, well, then ross, wouldn't you
say the same thing about mortgages? I need to answer this. Heck, yes,
why should a mortgage be tax deductible.

Speaker 2 (01:30:49):
So he and.

Speaker 1 (01:30:51):
He's talking about this, and how are they gonna pay
for that, and how are they gonna pay for no
taxes on tips?

Speaker 2 (01:30:55):
And how are they.

Speaker 1 (01:30:55):
Gonna pay for no taxes on Social Security? Remember, people
who only get Social Security, who live off of that,
don't make enough money to pay taxes anyway. So if
you're talking about no taxes on Social Security, you're talking
about no taxes for people who are already earning fifty
sixty seventy two hundred thousand dollars happen to be collecting
Social Security as well. I know, there's not a Yeah,

(01:31:16):
there might be a reasonable generalizable kind of argument about
maybe not taxing Social Security. Maybe that seems a little
bit stupid to tax social Security.

Speaker 2 (01:31:24):
Maybe we should lower the.

Speaker 1 (01:31:26):
Benefit amount and not tax it or something like that.
I get all that, but none of that's going to
happen that way. And instead Trump wants to buy the
votes of older people by lowering taxes on soci Security,
buy the votes of union workers in Nevada by eliminating
tax on tips, and buy the votes of whoever goes
to buy a new car with a loan by saying
we're gonna let it be tax deductible, all of which adds.

Speaker 2 (01:31:47):
To the deficit and the debt, and they've got to
reduce the deficit and the debt.

Speaker 1 (01:31:52):
So maybe they're going to say that they'll pay it
off with tariff revenue. But of course what does that do.
Then it makes the government addicted to tariff revenue, but
it makes it harder to get rid of tariffs.

Speaker 2 (01:32:01):
But we should have zero tariffs.

Speaker 1 (01:32:03):
We should, by the way, just to be really clear
about this, and I'm not going to go down the
whole tariff road, we should have zero tariffs on everything
coming into this country, no matter what the other countries
are doing to our stuff. Economically, that's the right answer.
I understand politically that's a difficult thing, especially when you
have a president who doesn't understand this stuff. But that's
the right answer economically. Sure, threaten them, try to get

(01:32:26):
them to lower their tariffs, absolutely, Try negotiate, threaten even
threaten tariffs, do whatever. But if they don't give in,
and they don't go along with lowering tariffs, we should
still eliminate ours. Tariffs are economic poison to the country
that imposes them. It might not be enough of an

(01:32:48):
economic poison to kill the country.

Speaker 2 (01:32:50):
Might just make you a little.

Speaker 1 (01:32:51):
Bit sicker than you otherwise would have been, but it's
still poison, all right. So Bessont was up there talking
about this kind of stuff, and I don't know, he
didn't give me a lot of confidence, even though he's
a smart dude. Then a reporter asks a question and
this kind of came out of left field for me
because I hadn't seen the original report. But I guess
punch Bowl News reported it at first, and punch Bowl

(01:33:15):
News reported, but Amazon has denied.

Speaker 2 (01:33:18):
I want to be very careful about this.

Speaker 1 (01:33:20):
Amazon has denied that it's true that they were going
to post on their website when you were looking to
buy an item, or when you were going to check out,
or I don't know where the report was, that Amazon
was going to post the tariff amount on the website

(01:33:41):
that you would have to pay or likely have to
pay when your item arrived. Now, again, I did not
see this reported anywhere other than punch Bowl News, so
and they're not a terrible outlet. They have some pretty
good sources, but I didn't see it reported anywhere else,
which seemed a little odd. So at this point, now
Amazon is denying that they are going to show on

(01:34:05):
their website how much the tariff will be when you
buy something. What was interesting this morning was to see
the Press secretary of Caroline Levitt so aggressively coming out
attacking Amazon. And she said, and I guess she believed
the report and maybe it was gonna be true. When

(01:34:27):
Amazon couldn't take the heat and is backing down and
saying no, we were never going to do that. I
don't know, but she's called it a hostile political act
by Amazon. Let me just say, if I had a
retail site, I would do that.

Speaker 2 (01:34:43):
I would do that.

Speaker 1 (01:34:44):
You got to know how much is the tariff going
to be? In fact, I mentioned this on Twitter yesterday.
Can I still call it Twitter? I mentioned this and
I got an interesting listener response. An I said, look,
I just bought Chris and I. You know, we're remodeling
a house. We're not living in it yet, and it
needs new everything. It's empty, it's gutted. And so I
just ordered on Amazon a two hundred dollars light. So yeah,

(01:35:08):
I know there's twenty dollars lights, but there's also two
thousand dollars lights. It's a two hundred dollars light. Nice light,
but not the nicest ever. And it's coming from China.
And I said, I have no idea how much tariff
is going to be. It could be ten percent, it
could be one hundred and forty five percent. It could
be one hundred dollars, it could be two hundred dollars.
I have no idea. Now, whatever it is, it's only
a two hundred dollars light And if the tariff is

(01:35:29):
on the high end of that, I'm gonna be pissed off,
but I'm not gonna be broke. But what if you're
a business who has to buy lots and lots of
stuff from China as inputs to stuff you make here
or as stuff that you sell here, and now you
have no idea how much it's gonna cost, and it
may end up costing an amount that you know your
customers won't pay, so you're gonna have to sell it
at a loss once it gets here.

Speaker 2 (01:35:51):
How can you plan all that?

Speaker 1 (01:35:53):
That's the problem with this, with this particular rollout of
all this tariff stuff. But it was very interesting to
see the Press Secretary come out calling Amazon's action, which
Amazon is denying, calling it a hostile political act and
then she held up a picture and I didn't recognize
what it was, but she made a comment about how

(01:36:15):
like Amazon has partnered with some Chinese propaganda something like.

Speaker 2 (01:36:20):
She went full on attack.

Speaker 1 (01:36:23):
Against Amazon based on what I think is an uncorroborated report.

Speaker 2 (01:36:29):
Very interesting to see the administration.

Speaker 1 (01:36:31):
Be willing to take on not only one of the
richest and most important people in the world, but someone
who recently has been a pretty good Trump supporter. Is very,
very strange, and just way too often with this group,
it's it's ready fire, aim, It's ready fire.

Speaker 2 (01:36:47):
Am uh.

Speaker 1 (01:36:48):
Hi Andy, Hello, I want to ask you about something
I don't care about. Okay, have you seen any of
this stuff with Bill Belichick's girlfriend.

Speaker 5 (01:36:57):
I have it on the blog today only because it's
I mean, at what point does having a controlling girlfriend
who's way younger than you become elder of yous? I
mean it's just, first of all, a guy that old
dating a woman that young already creeps me out. I'm
not gonna lie. I just think it's gross. Yeah, to
control what he says and what he does, that's on him. Obviously,

(01:37:20):
he's decided to trade his manhood for a hot piece
of you know what.

Speaker 1 (01:37:23):
Yeah, Well, and for people who don't know what we're
talking about, Bill Belichick, who is probably the best NFL
coach of all time and is now going.

Speaker 5 (01:37:29):
TOFL coach when he has Tom Brady.

Speaker 2 (01:37:32):
Okay, I'm just saying, all right.

Speaker 1 (01:37:33):
So he did an interview on CBS and his twenty
four is he's seventy three. His twenty four year old
girlfriend was sitting off screen, mostly out of the shot.
He and she and Bellichick are both wearing navy T
shirt navy sweatshirts.

Speaker 2 (01:37:47):
And the reporter asked Belichick, how did you two meet?
And she pipes up and says, we're not talking about that.

Speaker 5 (01:37:54):
Yeah, And then they made sure to point out that
she was ubiquitous throughout the interview. She never walked away
let him have his interview for himself.

Speaker 1 (01:38:03):
Did you ever hear the old, rather sexist thing that
the optimal age for a girlfriend is half your age
plus seven?

Speaker 2 (01:38:10):
Did this on the show? You said eight, I've always
heard half plus shown I heard half.

Speaker 5 (01:38:15):
I've never heard it.

Speaker 1 (01:38:17):
If it was half your age plus seven for Bill Belichick,
that would be a forty three.

Speaker 2 (01:38:21):
Year old girlfriend. So, but just twenty four, it's not random.

Speaker 1 (01:38:27):
I actually I know, but it's kind of an amusing
heuristic that I've heard for decades.

Speaker 2 (01:38:32):
So just go with me on this. You've heard for decades.

Speaker 5 (01:38:34):
Yeah, some of us who live in world with decent
people don't hear such things.

Speaker 1 (01:38:37):
Yeah, well that's because you're a woman, so I would hear.
I would hear all these things. It is really creepy
to have a set not only not only years fifty
years apart. Not only is he seventy three and she's
twenty four, they started dating four years ago when she
was twenty yep.

Speaker 5 (01:38:52):
I mean we know why she's dating him, and we
know why he's dating and.

Speaker 2 (01:38:55):
I know why he's dating her.

Speaker 1 (01:38:57):
But you know what's with more power to you know,
what's the crazier part of all this is that he's
getting her involved in everything, like with the university. He
told the unit that he's going to work for a
North Carolina I think it is. Yeah, And he's told
the University of North Carolina and a copy so see
her on their business emails to him, so that she
can be involved, and she's like managing him.

Speaker 2 (01:39:17):
Yeah, it's a it's a crazy thing. What do you
got coming up?

Speaker 5 (01:39:21):
We got a couple of things. I got a comedian
straight out of the trailer park.

Speaker 2 (01:39:24):
I've got.

Speaker 5 (01:39:26):
Somebody coming on before that about something important now has
gone right out of my mind. But it's actually going
to be a good interview that I'm looking forward to.
Reminding people of the forum in Douglas County tonight, I
will be moderating on home rule. We're doing an informational forum, okay,
and it's going to be really really good.

Speaker 1 (01:39:44):
Well just for my listeners or if anyone has to
go now time and place for your events.

Speaker 5 (01:39:48):
My place is North Star Academy at six thirty pm.
Doors open at six tonight, and we have a great
panel of people, some from Weld County to tell us
the practical what that's doing, which Teel's going to be
there to talk about why they want to move forward
with it. We've got a professor coming on to sort
of lay the groundwork because I'm gonna be perfectly honest,
I don't understand it. Yeah, so it's hard to have

(01:40:09):
an opinion pro con So this is an event tonight
is just to give people more information so they can
make an informed decision.

Speaker 1 (01:40:15):
Excellent and for sports fans if you want to hang
out with Dave Logan and Ryan Edwards and Nick Ferguson.
You can do that from three to six at Sam's
Number Three Diner and Bar in Glendale on South Cherry Street,
watch the Nuggets game and so on, and then go
hang out with Mandy after that.

Speaker 5 (01:40:31):
Dude, I follow on Twitter Mic O'Donnell. All he does
is stats on Colorado and it's fascinating. He's coming on
the show too.

Speaker 2 (01:40:36):
Stick around for Mandy