6-14-24 - *FULL SHOW* Jack Carr; Jay Mohr; What is Project 2025

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
I am wearing my Jackson Brown Tshirt from when I saw him live in
Melbourne, Australia in two thousand andfour, which makes me want to ask
you because I like to do somelighter stuff along with all the other nonsense
going on in the world on Fridays, and that is Text me at five
sixty six nine zero and tell mewhat's your oldest T shirt? What's you

(00:23):
know if you can, if youknow what you're or one of your oldest
Let's say, I know I have, I know I have at least one
or two T shirts older than this. My oldest T shirt is from I
think it's nineteen ninety two and itsays Ross four Boss and it's a Ross
Perot campaign T shirt from when RossPerot ran for president one of the times

(00:46):
he ran for prison. Anyway,that's my oldest T shirt. But it's
it's quite small, and I youknow, I don't really wear it.
I mean it's like really small.This is not like Ross needs to lose
more weight and then it'll fit small. Anyway, text me five six six
nine zero and tell me what's youroldest T shirt? I want to know.
All right, we had a tonof stuff to do today. We
got unbelievable guests. We've got aridiculous number of tickets I'm gonna give away

(01:11):
over the course of the show tojoin me and Jack Carr. Next Friday,
We're gonna have tickets to see SteveMartin and what's his name Martin Short
at Red Rocks tonight. And I'mgonna have some tickets to give away to
see j Moore at Comedy Work.So we had a lot, a lot
going on, a lot of stuffto give away. So stick with me

(01:33):
and we will have some fun,all right. So the Supreme Court put
out a few rulings this morning.For me, only one of them isn't
interesting at all. One of themis very slightly interesting, and I'll mention
it here briefly, and that isthere. There were a few cases where,
okay, so, under under federallaw, if there's an illegal alien
here, if he is deportable,he has to be given a particular document

(01:57):
that says that says he when andwhere his hearing will be to see if
he will be deported. And therewere some illegal aliens who got forms that
didn't have everything on them that thelaw requires the form to have it didn't
say where and when the hearing was. And then later on the government sent

(02:23):
them some other piece of some otherletter that said okay, and by the
way, here's where your hearing isgonna be and when, And these illegal
aliens said, you can't deport mebased on this process. This process did
not follow the law. And forthe record, I agree with the illegal
aliens. The government has to doit right. The government won, though,

(02:46):
and the illegal aliens lost in afive to four vote. Five to
four vote with Clarence Thomas and thethree liberal judges siding with the illegal aliens.
I would have sided with them too. Government to do this stuff right.
It is, I'm not talking aboutthese are not people like terrorists,
and we need to get them out, Okay. If our government is going

(03:08):
to be using force to do anythingand the law states this is how they
have to do it, we mustnever, never ever allow them to take
shortcuts. If the law should bechanged, then change the law, that's
fine, But we cannot allow governmentto not comply with the law and say

(03:31):
we should be able to do thisanyway. But they did win at the
Supreme Court on a five to fourvote. The other case a little bit
more interesting, probably, and thatis the bump stock thing. So I've
been around guns my whole life.I never heard of a bump stock until
that lunatic used a bump stock firinga semi automatic rifle. But that was

(03:55):
firing rapidly because of a bump stock. A bump stop stock out of a
window of a hotel in Las Vegasdown into a concert and I think it
was a concert, some kind ofmusic festival, right, Shannon, and
he killed a lot of people andinjured a lot of people. And bumpstocks
are well enough known that the Bureauof Alcohol, Tobacco on Firearms has for

(04:19):
many years had an opinion on bumpstocks, and that was bump stocks are
not machine guns and may not beregulated as machine guns under the Federal Firearms
Act that allows us to regulate machineguns. And then after that thing happened
in Vegas, after that thing happened, they changed their tune and they said,

(04:41):
we're going to regulate these like machineguns the Federal I'm sorry, it's
not the Federal Firearms Act. It'sthe National Firearms Act. It's NFA.
It's a National Firearms Act, andit's an old law. It's from nineteen
thirty four, okay, And theykind of passed this thing in significant degree
to crack down on, you know, al Capone kind of folks who have
machine guns. And they put atwo hundred dollars tax on machine guns and

(05:03):
suppressors and things like that, becauseat the time, two hundred dollars is
a big, big money. Nowtwo hundred dollars isn't all that money.
You still can't buy You can't buya new machine gun. You could get
a license to buy an old machinegun pay the two hundred dollars tax,
but they're very expensive and most peopledon't do it because the cost is just

(05:24):
ridiculous. Anyway, So they passthis thing, and it defines as a
machine gun, and I'm quoting fromthe Supreme Court ruling today, any weapon
which shoots is designed to shoot orcan readily be restored to shoot automatically more
than one shot without manual reloading.Buy a single function of the trigger,

(05:45):
and that last part is the key. Buy a single function of the trigger.
Bump firing, which can be donewithout a bump stock, but a
bump stock makes it easier. Iskind of where you keep a certain sort
of pressure on a semi automatic gunso that when it fires, the recoil
pushes your finger for example, ora bump stock or something back into the

(06:10):
trigger and then it fires again.And it can do that, and it
can fire rapidly, maybe not asfast as a machine gun, but fast.
But the thing is, every timethere is a shot fired in that
scenario, it is because the triggerwas pulled. Now, the government was
arguing, well, it's kind oflike a single function of the trigger,

(06:33):
because what happens is somebody pulls thetrigger once and then it will keep going.
But the court, and this wassixty three all of the conservatives against
all of the liberals, the courtsaid, sorry, this is pretty clear
that every time there's a shot,the trigger is being pulled again, and
therefore this this can't be a singlefunction of the trigger. And this is

(06:57):
a perfect example also of if youdon't like the law, change the law.
We must not let government agencies takeauthorities they don't have because there is
almost no recourse. You can't asa voter go vote out the head of
the ATF, or go vote outMerrick Garland, the attorney general. You
can eventually vote out a president,but this is Congress's job to make these

(07:24):
laws. And again, I don'tcare about bump stocks. I've never used
one, but to me, theysound stupid and separate from the Second Amendment
arguments and all that just hypothetically likeif government were to were to ban bump
stocks, it wouldn't be my worstday. I don't care. I'm generally
not for government banning things. Butit's just not an important thing. And

(07:46):
that's not the important part. Sothis is just the key point I want
to make. The important thing aboutthis case is not whether bump stocks end
up being legal or illegal. They'restupid, and very few people have them
and very few people use them,and I don't know any serious gun person
who would ever use one. Icould be wrong. You can text me

(08:09):
and tell me I'm wrong, butthat's my opinion. The importance of this
case is the court saying to afederal agency, you cannot take authority that
the law doesn't give you. AndI find it so disappointing every time cases

(08:31):
like this end up sixty three oryou know, all the conservatives against all
the liberals, because what the liberalsare saying here is that executive agencies which
don't make law should be allowed tofunction as if they make law, and
that, my friends, is theroad to tyranny. What you want to
do? Text or phone? Youcan choose? No, no, you
choose. Come on, what doyou prefer? I don't think I have

(08:54):
access to the text. Okay,so we'll do phone then. And we
made them pretty We made them prettychallenging so far this weekend. Right now,
what we're gonna give away a pairof tickets to is Steve Martin and
Martin Short tonight. Their show iscalled The Dukes of Funnytown tonight at Red
Rocks. Can you imagine Steve Martinand Martin Short at Red Rock Red Rocks
on a on a Friday night whereyou don't have to worry about work the

(09:16):
next day? At least many peopledon't. This is actually kind of nuts.
So why don't we just make thispretty easy. What I'm gonna do
here is I'm gonna block the phonelines for a second because I want to
make sure people who are listening onthe stream have a chance. It's nine
twenty and thirty seconds as I'm speakingright now. Why don't we take caller
number three at nine twenty six callher that way we can get through what

(09:41):
we're doing here, and then Shannonwill be able to answer the phone and
does that fine? Shannon, canyou manage that caller number three at nine
to twenty six and you don't haveto answer any attrivia questions. You just
have to tell Shannon I want ticketsto see Steve Martin and Martin Short,
I'm making this as easy as possible. Three oh three seven one three eighty
five eighty five five is the number. Three h three seven three eighty five

(10:03):
eighty five. The third caller atnine twenty six will win a pair of
tickets to see these guys tonight atRed Rocks. Shannon will need to get
your name and cell number and emailaddress so that we can get those tickets
to you. All right, verygood? Gosh, I have so many
things I wanted. Okay, Iwant to do a couple of quick correction

(10:24):
so political stuff kind of So.Lauren Bolbert was on the show the other
day and she said on the showthat she had passed forty three bills out
of Congress, and she was kindof talking about how proud she was of
being so productive. But as faras I can tell, she's only passed
two. And what I think shemight be doing is including amendments that got

(10:52):
passed, but I don't actually knowhow many, if any, of the
bills those amendments were, actually becamelaw. So I just want to make
that clear. I don't like itwhen politicians exaggerate like that, especially when
it's not necessary. Right. So, but with Lauren's claim that she's,

(11:15):
you know, passed forty three billsthe way any normal person would think about
bills, Like I came up withthis idea for a law, and I
sponsored it, and I got itthrough Congress and passed and the President signed
it. I think the actual numberis probably two, so not forty three.
And then the other thing that shesaid, and I challenged her at

(11:37):
the time. I didn't challenge heron this thing because I didn't have the
information in front of me, andI probably should have. I didn't know
it was going to come up.But the other thing that she said at
the time was that the US isbuying Russian natural gas. That is definitely
not true. And I don't thinkEurope is buying Russian natural gas. I'd
have to see if any of Europeis still buying Russian natural guests, but

(11:58):
I don't think so we're exporting naturalgas from the US to Europe. Joe
Biden is actually trying to shut thatdown because he's an absolute freaking disaster moron.
But that's the kind of thing thatalso a member of Congress should get
right to claim that America is buyingRussian natural gas is a pretty outrageous and

(12:20):
wrong claim. Then the other thingthat I want to mention is yesterday we
had Richard Holtorf on the show,and he's a state rep from northern or
northeastern Colorado. Remarkable how negative thereaction was to him. On the text
line. Nobody had a good thingto say about Richard Holtorf after hearing him
on the show, And for whatit's worth, people I know who know

(12:41):
Richard Holtorf among them, nobody reallyhas anything good to say either. This
is part of the reason that I'veendorsed Deborah Flora in the fourth Congressional district
race, although there are a coupleother candidates that I like and would be
happy to see in Congress. Butone of the comments that Holds made was
that Greg Lopez, the former mayorof Parker, being the Republican nominee in

(13:09):
the special election to fill that congressionalseat for a little while before the like
from July to December, basically beforethe next Congress starts in January, and
that at that point that seat willbe filled by whoever wins the general election.
But Holdtorf said that having Greg Lopezbe the candidate in the special election
risks the Democrat winning that seat.Now, I have no idea if that's

(13:33):
true or not. I think it'sI think it's probably not really not true.
But someone told me yesterday that inthe vacancy committee meeting where the candidate
was chosen by the party to bethe Republican candidate for that special election,
Richard Holdtworf aggressively endorsed Greg Lopez.So Holdtorf aggressively endorses this guy and then

(13:58):
comes on my show and says thatit's a risk to the party that that
guy is there. So, youknow, I don't like that kind of
I don't like those kinds of shenanigansat all at all. All Right,
I'm gonna hit a break here becauseI want to get to my next guest
on time, if not early.Jack Carr, former US Navy seal sniper,
best selling author, friend of Mine, joins us. Right after this,

(14:22):
I am joined once again on theshow by Jack Carr. For those
of you who don't know, I'lljust put it this way. There are
a lot of people who aspire tobe great thriller writers and they almost all
fail. And there are a lotof people who aspire to be Navy seals
and they almost all fail. AndJack Carr has accomplished both dreams since he

(14:43):
was a kid, in part newto having a library and mom, and
before we talk about your new book, Red Sky Morning, which I have
read all of already. Yes,I'm one of the radio hosts who actually
reads these things. Jack, pleasetell my listeners what I'm looking at behind
you right now. Well, thisis the library. It took a little
longer than expected to construct. ButI've been collecting books really since I was

(15:07):
a kid. So I have booksthat date back to well the ones my
mom read me, but let's sayeven young adult ones like the Farley Mohitz
and that sort of thing, fromlet's say the third fourth fifth grade years
and then into the sixth grade yearswhen I started reading books that are essentially
the same types that I read andwrite today. And so I've been collecting
for a long time, and thisbehind me is a little bit of that

(15:30):
anyway, So now I finally havea place to put them all. This
is a it's a gorgeous library,newly built, dark wood, with one
of those library ladders that's on ahigh mounted rail, so the latter can
or ladders plural can go around theroom and he can get to books that
are way above your head. Andit wouldn't surprise me if there's three thousand

(15:52):
books in there. Do you knowthe number? Nope, no idea.
It's almost organized the way I liketo do it. I organized kind of
by night era, so different differentwars and then some that are more general,
whether it's terrorism, insurgencies, counterinsurgencies. So this is all the non
fiction in here, except for onewall of fleming on this side, and
then the room is that's all thefiction. So that's all. And that

(16:15):
includes all the paperbacks I collected allmy life. But now I'm going back
and getting all those paperbacks that Iread, really back in the eighties,
all the way through the nineties andinto the two thousands in hardcover, first
edition signed, so so I'll havethe ones that I actually read or the
ones that I shared with my grandmotheras a little kid, like the Nelson
to Mill Charms school. Yeah,the thing, And now I have all
those collections from those authors, firsteditions signed in there. So fiction room

(16:37):
and non fiction room save for Okay, last library question. What does your
mom think of this room? Oh? My mom has only seen it virtually
thus far. It was finished afterher last visit. So ok, next
time she comes out, she'll spendsome time in here. All right,
I'm hopefully i'll clean the other sideshe gets there. All right, I'm

(16:59):
gonna tell you one quick. SoI came home one day and my books
were reorganized on my bookshelf, andthey were reorganized in a way that it
first didn't make a lot of senseto me, and then I realized two
things were going on. One theywere all in order by color. All
the books that had white spines weretogether and then read, and all of

(17:19):
the dust jackets were gone. Mywife took off all the dust jackets,
threw them away, including on asigned iron rand, and reorganized them by
color. Because she's an artist,So does your new wife, does she?

(17:41):
She didn't do the thing. She'snever she's never done it again.
All right, So I want to. I want to want to also remind
folks that next Friday, I'm goingto be hosting Jack for I think our
fourth time together Live. This isan event for Douglas County Public Libraries.

(18:02):
It's over what they call their LegacyCampus, which is kind of the border
of Lone Tree in Parker. Andif you go to my website at Rosskominski
dot com up near the top,just scroll over and you'll find the book
events and you can buy tickets there. And I'm actually gonna have a pair
of tickets to give away a littlea little bit later. So Jack,
I think normally when you start anew author, I think the first book

(18:22):
is most likely to be your favoritekind of sort of forever. And I'm
probably that way with Terminal List.But I gotta say Red Sky Morning is
giving it a run for its money. This is one of my very,
very favorites of yours, and Idon't want to do much spoiling here,
So why don't you just talk alittle bit about the book so I don't

(18:44):
say anything you don't want me tosay. Yeah, well, it's definitely
my favorite, and interestingly enough,each one that I've written has been my
favorite and I think that's because mygoal is always to do it better than
I have done it before, andI feel like I am improving in my
prafticm I was a student. I'vebeen a student of the crafts and so
I was a little kid first fromthe fan perspective and now knee deep in
it, but always a student ofwarfare, always a student of writing,

(19:07):
and both are professions. I don'tlook at either one of these things,
whether it was the Seal teams orwriting as a career. I look at
them both as professions, and Ithink there's a different from a mindset perspective.
But I feel like each one isgetting better, and this one hands
down my favorite because I feel likeI did get better with this one.
Once again, it's always my goalbecause people are trusting me at the time
that they're never going to get back, So that's my responsibility to them,

(19:30):
is to pour my heart and soulinto every single word, and this one
right here, very timely. Iintroduced a character named Alice, a quantum
computer a couple of books ago,and that was before chat GPT, before
that became part of the lexicon,before a writers strike that was heavily focused
on AI in Hollywood and how AIhas really permeated all of our lives.

(19:52):
I think the latest Apple Phone updatejust put it in there without being able
to opt out, I believe,so it's becoming more and more prevalent in
our lives. Also being a tool, one can use it for good or
evil, use it as a weapon. And that's what this book is really
about. It it's based it's aboutloyalty and questions of loyalty. But that's
through really the prism of the geopoliticsbetween the United States, China, Taiwan

(20:15):
and an autonomous control of certain militaryplatforms, and I focus on really to
naval assets in this one. Butthis character Alice, I had to sideline
her a little bit last book becauseI didn't want her that become a crutch.
He didn't want to become like MichaelKnight call on the kit car on
his watch and out of nowhere,here we go. So I had to
sideline her for the last book soI wouldn't be tempted to use her as

(20:37):
a crutch. And then once I'veintroduced a character like this, can't just
disappear forever. And so she reappearshere in Redsky Morning. So This one
was a lot of research. Thisis the fortieth anniversary of The Hunt for
in October this year, so theprologue is a nod to Tom Flancy.
And then this being my seventh book, my double seventh book, there are
a lot of nods to Fleming,some overt and some very subtle, and

(20:59):
some that perhaps even the most ardentBond fans will not recognize. Uh.
So that was really fun for meto do that as well. I'm sure,
I'm sure there's a lot that Ithat I missed. And you know,
it's funny because as I'm reading throughit, I'm thinking, I got
to give Jack this book that Ihave on my bookshelf. And then I'm
thinking to myself, n I Betty'sgot it. Uh. And that is
Nicholas Shakespeare's new biography. Uh.And then yeah, and it's a beast

(21:23):
right. Look how the that thatbook, the book is enormous. It's
got to be one of the oneof the biggest paperbacks you own, probably,
right and uh but anyway, anduh, fountain Head are kind of
on park. Yeah, the samething wins a War One remembrance Once an
Eagle. We're all huh girth,right, right, that's pretty funny.

(21:45):
So uh yeah, I'm sure there'sa lot of a lot of you and
fleming stuff in there that that Ididn't get either. So all right,
there's a on the word this carefully. There's a scene in the book where
where James Reese would like to asksomebody some questions and would like to get

(22:06):
some information and the person he isasking the questions of is not inclined to
be cooperative and and Commander Reese commanderright, Reese a commander but you say
it when you're talking. Yeah,usually just say commander right, like like
lieutenant colonel and yeah right, soand and so Reese has to be a

(22:33):
little creative to inspire this guy totalk a little bit. And I'm curious
as to the creativity involved in thatscene. Is that something that you've heard
of? Is that straight out ofyour brain? And if it is straight
out of your brain? Uh,then what does your wife think of you
after reading this book? I don'tknow if she's got to that part.

(22:56):
Yeah, ask her if she's stillaround this. Uh. I would like
it to be thoughtful violence. Fromthe very beginning, I wanted to make
sure that my character wasn't just shootingsomeone on the other knee, type of
a type of a deal with information, each of the different interrogation scenes in
the novels, and it's kind ofbecome a staple people look forward to them.

(23:18):
Now in the books had to havesome touch point with history, some
touch point with reality. I liketo if a book is about China or
book is about Russia, I liketo weave in things that were either were
used in Russia, used in thegulags, used in China, and then
use it against those people who perhapshave used it on others in the past.
So I like to have that touchpoint with reality with history, and

(23:40):
this is no this is no different. So this is I think it's safe
to say this is a Chinese characterthat needs some incentive in order to spill
the beans, and James Rees certainlygives him that in this in this one.
So so just the the incentives thathe gives him are incentives that you
have reason to believe the Chinese haveused to incentivize people. Yes, I

(24:06):
think there's a couple. There's aparagraph in there. I think half of
it came from a gulag type thing, from photos of people missing eyes.
And then I think the other partof this interrogation, there's a couple aspects
to it came from the Chinese,but I think there was I have to
go back and look, but Ibelieve that the eye part came from the
Gulags and then the Chinese adopted it, and then the other part was fairly

(24:32):
Chinese specific, if memory serves.We're talking with Jack Carr about his new
thriller novel, Red Sky Morning,and of course I've read them all,
and this is right up there withthe best. Like like I said earlier,
usually in my in my brain,usually the first one is always the
best with any author, not justwith Jack. But I think this is
its equal and it's it's just afabulous book. I forgot to add a

(24:57):
quate comment on al I had somethingI wanted to say to what you said
before the first time you introduced Alice, I will say, even I thought
it was a little bit fanciful,like not quite Diosex Machina, but in
that direction and in this book,even though Alice hasn't changed, the world

(25:22):
has changed. And now when Iread Alice, I'm like, yeah,
okay, I can see that,but Alice didn't change at all, and
probably the world didn't change that much. It's just what we know about it
has changed. And you want toadd anything to that. Yes, So
we're doing research into quantum computing artificialintelligence from the military side, intelligence side

(25:45):
of the house. The people thatyou interview are understandably quite tight lipped about
some things, so that means youhave to interview a lot of them,
and each person gives you a littlebit of a hint about something, and
that is different than a hint thatan other one gives you, which allows
you This is kind of the reporterhat. I think then to piece together
this mosaic and piece together what ishappening based off multiple interviews, of course,

(26:10):
built on a foundation of what youcan find on articles and journals and
books to give yourself a foundation soyou know what to ask these different people
who work in that space. SoI would be shocked if what I described
two books ago in the Blood whenI introduce Alice, I'd be shocked if
it's much different from what I describein that novel. Yeah, is this
book intended to be a kind ofmacro warning about the potential risks of specifically

(26:37):
American tech people if they decide thatthey don't love their country. Well,
didn't start out that way, andnot really a warning, just kind of
a this is certainly a distinct possibility, and then move into autonomous control of
certain platforms. And so let's sayyour enemy in this case, let's say

(26:59):
China is working on similar type platformsthat speed up the decision making process.
And in warfare with at the tacticallevel and the strategic level, you want
to get inside the enemy's decision makingprocess to disrupt it. And typically whoever
adapts quicker makes decisions faster on thebattlefield, not always, but typically comes
out victorious. So if your enemyis making decisions at that site of speed,

(27:23):
at the quantum computer type speed,and you're not, that means missiles
could be incoming before generals are evenout of bed, certainly before anyone the
executive branch is awake. So it'sso that's really more of the question.
If your enemy has something else makingdecisions for it that gets inside your decision
making process, what do you do? And that's that's that's where we're going,

(27:48):
and we're getting there a lot fasterthan any of us would have thought
five years ago, certainly, andobviously I pose as some significant risk of
miscalculation or something get us into anuclear war that could potentially have been avoided.
But on the other hand, ifthe other guys are going to have
these automated systems that are going tomake decisions and launch hypersonic missiles your way

(28:11):
before you can react, if youdon't have speedy technology yourself, this is
a quandary to say the least,oh certainly is. And Annie Jacobson's book
Nuclear War came out after I'd alreadyfinished Red Sky Morning, but I went
through that. It's a scenario,and so she takes you through a fictional
scenario but a possibility in the futurewith all the times where things are launched,

(28:34):
from how long people have to makedecisions, all of that. So
I read that after and after readingit, I was very pleased that I
got it, But I got itright from my research for this novel,
because I started her reading her asI thought, oh, well, boy,
she went deep down the rabbit holeon this, I hope I'm close,
so thankfully, and I got totalk to her about it, and
it was a fantastic read. Butthey're almost good companion reads. If people

(28:56):
think that this can't happen and thingsthat I'm describing your Red Sky Morning.
Go back and read Annie Jacobson's bookNuclear War Scenario And although she goes into
the history of all these different entitiesthat have decision making authority when it comes
to a nuclear launch and how thatworks and how that would go down,
and then they're good companion reads.I'll say that for sure, Herer's non
fiction on fiction with perhaps a whisperof truth. This when we got about

(29:19):
three minutes left here, tell mylisteners about whichever podcast or podcasts you want
folks to focus on right now.I think you were retooling something a little
bit, But tell us what's upwith your podcasts. Yeah, so Danger
Close podcast is every Wednesday some Fridaysnow for bonus episodes. But as soon
as I come out for air afterthis book, I'll be figuring out what

(29:41):
that looks like going forward. Alot of things going on right now.
It's back from Budapest where we werefilming the show, the spinoff series over
there with Taylor Kitsch playing Ben Edwardsand that Shoup move into post production here
later this year and maybe see itsometime in twenty twenty five. But that
is is crushing it over there.It's looking so good. The scripts.

(30:03):
I could not be more pleased withthe scripts. I created it with David
Digilio, the showrunner, writing thefinale with him and finish that up.
And then my first nonfiction comes outin the Fall nineteen eighty three Marine Baby
Barracks bombing that comes out on Septembertwenty fourth. So trying to capture some
of those lessons from the pages ofhistory so we don't have to relearn them
going forward in Blood. So alot going on right now. Wow,

(30:27):
is your wife the most patient personin the world. Well, right now,
she's downstairs putting together the boxes forthose publication boxes that goes it go
out one as your name on itthat I signed last night of the night
before. So she's downstairs putting allthose together, and between interviews, I'll
run down and sign books and packagethem up and we'll get those things off

(30:49):
here. Because I was in Normandybefore this, they would have been earlier,
but I was in Normandy for theeightieth anniversary commemoration events of D Day.
And it's not just a day.It's not just June six. This
had two weeks events back there.We took forty eight World War Two veterans
back there, all creeping up onat or over one hundred years old,
and being able to be there onthe beach by my daughter my son.

(31:10):
They got to be there on thebeach with guys who were first out of
their landing craft on D Day andpointed out there's the machine gun positions.
We're there and there, and youcan see, of course, some of
the bunkers that were up there,and you can look at the ground and
see a trench complex, and itwas just a very powerful experience. So
it's been a busy few months andbusy day here to get all these out
and then off on book tour whereI'll see you shortly. Yeah, all

(31:33):
right, So folks, this comingFriday, Jack Carr will be in town.
I'll be hosting him. We'll havea conversation up on stage and get
to say hi to us if youwant to. And this is going to
be for Douglas County Public Libraries ata place they call their Legacy Campus,
which sort of the eastern edge ofLoan Tree. And if you go to
my website at Rosscominski dot com,near the top, you'll see that whole

(31:55):
row of things you can click on, like my listener trip and all that.
Just to the right of that isthe link for this you can bite
think it's there. I'm gonna havesome tickets to give away as well.
Jack, my friend, thanks forjust a really, really wonderful book.
When I when I see you inperson, I've earned time for this.
Now I'm gonna ask you to talkmore about the little airplane that's on the
spine of the of the book righthere, because you seem to be really

(32:15):
fascinated by that plane. I don'thave time to talk about it right now,
Folks, go buy Red Sky Morning. Actually I'll I don't. I
don't often say this, but Jackis one of those authors where I really
encourage you to read the books ina row. You don't have to,
but the story of James Reese ashe develops over time is so interesting and

(32:37):
carries through all the books. Ifyou haven't read Terminal Lists and everything after
it yet, I recommend you startthat way. And if you've read the
rest already, then go buy RedSky Morning right now. It's good to
see you, my friend. Thanksfor another brilliant piece of writing, and
I'll see you in a week.Sounds great. Take care, thanks for
everything, all right, see ya? All right, folks. So that's

(32:58):
that's Jack Carr. And I'll tellyou what. I got a minute here,
Why don't we do this. I'mgonna do this by text, and
I'm trying to think if there's aif there's a trivia question I should ask.
All right, I'm gonna ask areally really easy trivia question. And
we're gonna do this by text.And right now it's nine fifty three and

(33:21):
a half, so we're gonna I'mgonna take texter number seven at nine fifty
eight, and it'll be texter numberseven at nine fifty eight to five six
six nine zero. And what I'mgiving away is a pair of tickets to
see Jack Carr hosted by me nextFriday in in Lone Tree, Parker area.

(33:46):
And it's a pair of tickets.And one of the tickets comes with
a signed book and the other islike a companion ticket that does not come
with a book. So it's apair of it's two tickets and one signed
book. It's a pretty awesome freakinggiveaway. So texter number seven at nine
fifty eight at five six six ninezero. Who answers this basic question.

(34:10):
When Jack Carr was a Navy seal, what was his job? What was
his specific role as a Navy seal? What did he do? Five six,
six, nine zero, Texter numberseven at nine fifty eight, and
whoever is Texter number seven? Shannonor I will get in touch with you
to get some additional information. We'llneed your name and stuff like that so

(34:35):
we can get you on the list. All right, very very good.
I got more tickets to give awayover the course of the show. Comedian
Jay Moore joins me in studio next. I never thought that I would spend
a little time in studio with oneof the great actors of all time,
Academy Award winner Al Pacino. Youknow him from so many gangster movies.

(34:55):
Very nice ross for you to saythat, because I come from a long
line of actors. You know,my grandmother was the woman that held the
torch at the end of Columbia Pictures. My grandfather's Curly from the Three Stooges,
who nobody knows that I know.I was almost curly Joe, but

(35:19):
I was eleven years old. Whatare you? What are we doing?
What are we talking to? Thatis one of the best impressions ever.
Well, were I like al Pacino'sbecoming mumbles from Dick Tracy, the older
he gets he played mumbles, hedid. Yeah, I did not know
that, by the way, folks, In case you don't recognize the second
voice, the actual voice, it'sChristopher Walken. Come to the Comedy Works

(35:44):
in Greenwood Village. It's crazy.I'll read from the book of doone Awards.
Is he from New Jersey too?Queen's Queen's all right, it is
somewhere. I was born in Manhattan, but I don't have the accent.
This is more by the way,Yeah, yeah, indeed. And he's
been in comedy since like nineteen twentyseven something like that. And he's playing

(36:07):
Tonight and Tomorrow Night seven fifteen andnine forty five it Comedy Works out at
the Landmark Comedyworks dot com for yourtickets. You've seen him in lots of
movies and he's just done everything.And dude, it's really good to have
you in studio for the first time. Thanks man. So I want to
ask you some funny stuff and somereal stuff like you mentioned, and you've

(36:28):
been very open about it about thewhole rehab thing and I just want to
say, I'm proud of you.Yeah he likes buddy. Not not everybody
who lives in Hollywood and kind offamous and has some money, like does
what it takes to get their lifestraight. You'd be surprised. But it's
you know, it's maybe they don'ttalk about it anonymous for reason. Yeah
right at the radio, press andfilmed. Yeah right, but yeah what

(36:52):
what you know why it's anonymous isbecause if I touch the group that I
belong to, yeah, my nameright, and then I re I give
a newcomer or reason to say,see, look, it doesn't work.
That's that's why wow, press,radio and film, why it's supposed to
be anonymous. Really, so Idon't I just say I'm in a recovery
Tolsted recovery program, but I sureI don't say my name. Was there

(37:14):
a particular thing that made you say, all right, I have a problem
because I've heard okay, when you'reat your own intervention at fifty, that'll
that's a wake up call. Iwas fifty years old, sitting in my
own in my house, my ownintervention, and you know, you got
to lie to get a drug addictto their own intervention. Sure, so
the lie they told me my potI had a podcast at the time,

(37:36):
and I did it at my houseand I was told the next morning for
my podcast at eight am, Iwas going to interview Wu Tang clan.
And I was so high. Ithought that was true. Think about the
level of disconnect in my life.I thought Wu Tang clan was coming over
to my house at eight o'clock inthe morning so I could interview them and

(37:57):
help them with their careers. Ithought, you listen to Wu Tank clan
ever I have, well, thenyou know they're not mourning pepa. Indeed,
it was not Wutank clan. Uhhuh. I was my family friends
and an interventionist who had a swastikatattoo was an old meth guy, a
skinhead for real. Yeah, hewas having it removed, but you know
what, not fast enough. Thatshouldn't be a going going gone. Look

(38:22):
uh huh and uh I'm looking atthis bald guy in my podcast room with
a swastika tattoo to his head andI was like, I don't, I
don't. I don't think this guycame with Wu Tang clan. And then
he also had no teeth. Becausethey were smoked out in the eighties.
Yeah, and so it's the mostimportant day of my life. And he's
like the people. He's like gummingat me the queen, and I was

(38:42):
like, maybe he's with Wu TankClan. Hold on a minute. So
this is like scared straight kind ofThey're they're trying to tell you you're going
to be this guy. If youdon't know, I love well, I
was that guy. I was justit was just uh. It was March
eleventh, twenty twenty one. Myagent put together this rehab and he wasn't
gonna book me anymore. My girlfriendwho's now my wife, was got an
apartment, was gonna move and I'lltell me where she went. You know,

(39:05):
really there has to be like thesebottom lines. Yeah you don't go.
Yeah. But it was a fastintervention. About eight minutes in.
I said, just so everybody knowsI'm gonna go to treatment. But that's
that's because my first addiction is approval. If you don't like me, I
don't know how to act. Sothe fastest way for this approval addict to
get everybody from looking really upset tonodding their heads yes and happy again was
just to go to treatment, andthen once I was there, I just

(39:27):
I got sober, like on Spie, like I really, if I have
to get sober, I'm gonna be. I'm gonna out sober. Everybody so
so far, so good. Soobviously no drugs. Also, no alcohol,
no, no, nothing, nothingthat affects me from the neck up.
Gotcha? So yeah, And areyou happy? I've never been happier
in my life. And I hadto make that decision. When I started

(39:47):
going to meetings and all these guyswere like, you know, this is
this is the best I've ever hadat this, I had to it.
It's it's actually impossible. It's astatistical impossibility that they're all lying. It's
like a ghost story. Like everybodycan't be wrong, right if somebody saw
something that was completely creepy and ghosty, so's it'd be it would I would

(40:07):
be playing god if I was tosay, now they're all lying to me,
you know. So I was like, all right, so I'm just
And it's the first thing. Recoveryis the first thing I ever gave one
hundred percent in my life, acting, girls, stand up comedy, wrestling,
fighting, I've always had one footout to do it my maximum effort,

(40:30):
which looks to you like I'm allin eighty eighty six percent. I
always got it. I always gotsomething going on the back burner over here.
What percent are you going to betonight? It? Comedy Works one
hundred, baby, Oh, that'swrong. Comedy Works is the best,
isn't that? It's the best clubin the country, and no comedian can
name another one that can take it. It's it's there's something about it.

(40:52):
Yeah. I've been in other citiespromoting other clubs and they've asked me,
and I've said Comedy Works and bothof them both so bizarrely that unique That
downtown you're in like this cool cave. Yeah, and then Greenwood is it's
kind of like more theaters set up. Will you be able to stick around
for one more segment? Yeah?Yeah, let me ask you one question
and we'll hit a break and we'llcome back to another. Who is William

(41:14):
Jennings Bryant? Oh? Sorry,you do read a lot of nonfiction,
don't you. So you said thatyou always seek approval. Were you like
that as a kid? Oh?Yeah, insatiable. Tell me a little
bit about what you were like asa kid, and were you really funny
as a kid, or how didyou seek approval? I was annoying,
you know, because you before youdo stand up comedy, there's no there's

(41:35):
no direction or outlet, so you'rejust kind of this overflowing, whirling dervish
of just hey, look at me, look at me, Look at me,
look at me, look at me. And so it was like if
you and I were kids together,like I don't know, we're thirteen years
old, like my son in thereand I'm at your house watching TV.
I'm spending that entire time trying toconvince you how great a time we're having.
It's just an exhausting I was exhausting. I was exhausting. Were you

(42:00):
funny? There were moments I knewI could do impressions because I would do
impressions of a movie I saw tomy friends and I knew I had their
They were like, okay, yeah, it's like I knew I had their
full attention. Yes, that wasfunny. Maybe when we come back,
I'll ask you to do an impression. I don't. I know we already
did, but I love it.But the other I don't normally ask comics

(42:22):
to tell jokes and be funny.I'm not that guy, but funny to
be more funny, But I gotto say that I'm amazed by impressions.
I don't understand how people do goodimpressions. I don't understand how it's possible.
I got a lot to say aboutit. Okay, so why don't
we just take ten seconds with alPacino taking us into the breaking Well,

(42:43):
you're listening to Kowa and you knowwhat, you probably don't have a CD
and you go home a CD player. It's all to understand, Patino,
Kowa eight fifty ninety four FM.Stay here, we'll be back. Hey,
it's Noah McDonald. You're listening tothe Ross Kaminski Show. He's a
good guy. He loves that notoriousb I G. Yeah. Well,
one thing about Ross that you mayor may not know it was Norm McDonald's

(43:07):
coming at your live on the radio. You know. He he loves hip
hop and all all things black culture. Yeah, he's wearing a dushiki and
uh here here's here's here's here showy. Fine, don't you talk? Thanks,
Norm, haven't seen you in awhile, good man. When you

(43:30):
had your Ruigi board out, Itried to move that along play you know.
Uh, so that's j Moore whodoes the best freaking impressions that I
and I think we only have aboutfour minutes, so I think I want
to talk about impressions because I don'tunderstand. I mean, let me just
say one quick thing. Norm McDonaldis the only person who ever used the
F word on the air with mein studio financial that maybe maybe that one.

(43:54):
Those are very similar. You're verymoney focused. Today. Jam Moore
is playing tonight and tomorrow. It'sseven fifteen and nine forty five It Comedy
Works out at the Landmark Comedyworks dotcom for tickets and thanks to the generosity
of Mel, I might have apair of tickets to give away a little
bit a little bit later. Ihow the bleep do you? How does

(44:15):
somebody do an impression that comes outlike if Norm wasn't dead, someone might
think that's Norm. Yeah, Idon't know how I do them. Since
I was a kid, I couldeither do it right away, and if
you can do it, it's likewhen you it's like when you can finally
play an instrument or you can finallysing in tune. You finally don't excuse
me, you finally know how likea song goes. It just feels like

(44:37):
that. It just it feels likean alignment. But I don't. I
don't have any technical application whatsoever.When I try it, I can either
do it or I can't. Sothe impressions that I don't do are ones
that I tried. I'm just it'sjust the way. But that's the way
it is. Like guys that doimpressions, like guys that can do Ronald
Reagan can usually do, Nixon cando Carson can do those like more like

(45:00):
like Gravelly type guys. And thenthere's more nasally guys. There's like there's
guys that can do Alan Aldough,which to me blows my mind. But
I can just do a very likeI I'm trying to do Owen Wilson,
and I realized I was doing JenniferCoolnch but Owen Wilson's more like, what
are we doing here in the rain? Here? What about? So you

(45:22):
were telling us about how much Ilove hip hop and black culture or not?
Kat Williams, I love Cat Williams. You do a pretty good Cat
william very difficult to do without swearingconstantly. I'm not even give it a
shot. Okay, Yeah, Ilove because Kat Williams is one of my
always husband, one of my alltime favorite comedians, one of my all
time favorite people. Really, he'sa good guy. I love Kat.

(45:44):
Yeah, that's a good guy.Cat's real man. Yeah, Kat's real.
He's like adopts babies and raises kidsand he's Yeah, there's a lot
of good things he does that hekeeps way under the radar. So switching
gears here, we all about twominutes left. I just watched a TikTok
videos maybe thirty or forty five secondsof what had to be the most quintessentially

(46:07):
Californian wet wedding of all time.It was yours because we're on the beach.
You're on the beach. People somekind of flowy white silk shirt,
khaki pants and a white dress shirtand you're on the beach. You're on
the beach in Malu was like ayeah, because because we did it as

(46:30):
the tide was coming up, sopeople couldn't hang out. Really, we're
brilliant. Oh that's smart. Itwas like, well, high tides at
five, will get married at fourthirty, and then people just start creeping
towards the sea wall and then they'relike well we got to go right.
That was so smart. Yeah,that's was that your idea your wife's idea
both, because we didn't want totravel to get married. Yeah, and

(46:51):
we didn't want to go a destinationwedding and we wanted to keep it.
It was very small. Was thatat your house or her house or is
it a red proper? I usedto live on the beach and that's where
I used to live and I gotevicted when I was in rehab. My
landlord said he threw all my stuffon the beach and said come get his
stuff to tide's coming up. Hewas like he had it. Wow.
We turned out he could marry people. He's an efficient. We got married

(47:13):
by him on that beach as thetide you know, same, So it
came full circles. That's an amazingstory. So yeah, I'm happy.
Are you a Lakers fan? No, not, of course I am.
But you grew up, you know, like you should be at nets or
something for the Nicks are great.Everybody loves the next No, I hate

(47:34):
New York Sports Times from New York. So I used to be big Knicks
John Starks and Ewing and Anthony CharlesAugley that was the best. It was
like if you were going to havelike a street fight, that was your
crew. Wow, but too badit wasn't a street fight. It was
NBA basketball Rangers or Kings or Inever got into hockey because the devils came
when I was like the eighteen,so they were I had been cast.

(47:57):
Yeah wow, Yeah, well,Jay, you had a just a remarkable
career. It's so good to meetyou in person. Just put that past
tense. Well, so far,so far, I mean it's going to
continue tonight with one hundred percent effort, which is more than the usual effort.
Now, I'm I've always given ahundred percent effort at comedy works.
I thought you thought, But I'malways thinking where I was always doing pill

(48:21):
mat in ahead. Now you can'tbe present if you're wondering where your an
nexfix is coming? That makes moresense. Is there no relationship? Are
you ever present? One hundred percentpresent? Probably? I'm always multitasking,
I think to a degree, butnot not about many things poorly. That's
probably right. Not even a computercan actually multitask. They just switch tasks
faster than we can comprehend. That'sdeep. Blew your mind, bro,

(48:45):
Yeah, all right, who's gonnasend us into this break? I'm Tracy
Morgan. And you gotta love thesecommercial mattresses because you're about to get a
new mattress. Appreciate how open jaymoreis about all the stuff that he's gone
through and all the rehab and themeat. He still goes to meetings every
day, even when he's even whenhe's on tours. Pretty remarkable and a
really really funny guy, just unbelievablyfunny. Now, the Saturday early show

(49:09):
is already sold out and the Fridayearly show is gonna sell out. So
what I have available to give youif you would like to see Jay Moore,
who has been doing stand up comedy. He moved to Manhattan when he
finished high school to do stand upcomedy, and we were talking off the
air like he started doing these showsat one forty five in the morning at

(49:31):
Comedy Seller in Greenwich Village, whichis actually the first place I personally ever
saw stand up comedy. I feelkind of fortunate I got to watch stand
up comedy in probably the two greatestclubs in America, namely a Comedy Seller
in New York, which is probablythe second best, and then the best
being both locations of comedy works herein Denver and Greenwood Village. So anyway,

(49:54):
he's been doing this for thirty somethingyears. He's just incredibly good.
And I've got two pairs of ticketsto give away. You can choose nine
forty five pm either tonight or tomorrownight. There's your choices, nine forty
five pm tonight or nine forty fivepm tomorrow night. We're gonna do this

(50:15):
by text and dragon. Texter's numberwhat and what four and seven? Textures
number four and seven at what time? There's forty two and seventeen seconds ten
forty two and seventeen seconds by ourclock, not yours. So texters number

(50:35):
four and seven at five, six, six, nine zero at ten forty
two and seventeen seconds or immediately thereafter. With the correct answer to this question,
what was the first impression that Jaymoredid on my show this morning when
he was in studio with me?What was the first voice impression that Jaymore
did? He did three or fourimpressions while he was with me. I

(50:59):
just I can't believe how I can'timagine doing that. Anyway, What was
the first impression Jamore did? Textersnumber four and seven with the right answer
at or immediately after ten forty twoand seventeen seconds will win a pair of
tickets. The winners each win apair of tickets. And just so we
all understand here, we will notbe giving you physical tickets. We will

(51:20):
not be emailing you anything except justa dragon will get in touch with you
stuff. But you just go tocomedy works and go to the window and
give them your name. But weneed to get information from you. So
there's that. Let me just doa couple other things here and then we
got gonna have another guest on theshow talk about something else that I want
to I find very important. Iwould like to add real quick about the

(51:45):
texting contest here. We've had theproblem over the past couple of days.
Yeah, one text per person,please right right right right, if you
text more than once, because wecan see the phone numbers that the texts
are coming from it. But itdoesn't say your name, by the way,
but we can see the phone numbers, and if you text more than
once, all of your texts willbe ignored. That's just the rules here

(52:06):
on the Dragon Red Beard Show.I don't make the rules, okay,
I just enforce them. If you'remad. Be mad at dragon, not
mad at me. All right,So I want to just share with you
a couple of quick stories about eatinga lot. And one of these stories
actually came up yesterday. I rememberhearing in Trepid Chadbow. We're talking about
it yesterday on Kawai News. ButI'm going to do these in kind of

(52:27):
chronological order from when I first heardabout them. So there's a well known
competitive eater, two well known competitiveeaters actually from years and years of battling
it out at the Nathan's Hot DogContest at Coney Island. And these guys
eat some insane number of hot dogs, right, And one of them is
a Japanese guy named Takaro Kobayashi,and he's won the hot Nathan's Hot Dog

(52:51):
eating contest six times now. Thedude looks pretty young, but he's actually
forty six years old now. Andthis is a story from May twenty third.
All right, it's about three weeksago, and this is the headline
from USA Today. Competitive eater toKroo Kobayashi feels body is quote unquote broken

(53:14):
and retires due to health issues.He said, I've decided to retire from
competitive eating. It's all I've donefor the last twenty years. He has
this Netflix special called Hack Your Health, The Secrets of Your Gut. I've
never seen it, and I'm sureI never will. But in any case,
he said that decades of overeating forsport has left him with no appetite

(53:38):
and no sense of fullness, whichhis wife, Maggie, said has caused
him to go days without eating anythingat all. And the wife said that
Kobayashi feels like his body is broken, and he said, I hear people
say they're hungry and they look veryhappy after they've eaten. I'm jealous of

(53:58):
those people because I no longer feelhunger. I hope to live a long
and healthy life. And so heannounced that he was retiring from competitive eating.
All right. So then the nextstory that came out, and this
was three days ago. This ison ESPN's website. Joey Chestnut, the
sixteen time champion of the Nathan's FamousHot Dog Eating Contest, will not compete

(54:22):
in the annual Fourth of July eventnext month. Major League Eating announced on
Tuesday, that's Tuesday of this week. A spokesperson for Major League Eating told
ESPN that Joey Chestnut had chosen torepresent another hot dog brand. I believe
he signed a sponsorship with Impossible,like the fake meat stuff, and therefore

(54:45):
he would not be allowed to participatein the Nathan's Contest held every year.
As I mentioned before at Coney Islandin New York, he is the biggest
star in competitive eating. He's knownas Jaws. He's won the event eight
years in a row. And andas I said, since he signed a
sponsorship deal with Impossible, and thiscontest is actually sponsored by a particular hot

(55:07):
dog company, Nathan's Famous. AndI really like Nathan's hot dogs, by
the way, So they said youcan't compete. Then the story that came
out yesterday, and I do thinkwe heard this on Kawa News, but
I wanted to share it with youanyway. This is from Variety dot Com.
Grab your catchup and mustard because themother of all hot dog eating contests

(55:28):
is here. Joey Chestnut and toKaru Kobayashi, two of the world's most
famous competitive eaters, will participate inthe Ultimate Hot Dog Eating Contest live on
Netflix on Labor Day. The locationand specific timing for the September second event
will be announced at a later date. Titled Chestnut Versus Kobayashi Unfinished Beef,

(55:50):
the two eaters will embark in arematch that will determine the ultimate hot dog
eating champion, in which the competitorswill fight to eat the most all beef
hot dogs. Netflix said in arelease on Wednesday. Joey Chestnutt said,
through all my years in competitive eating, Kobayashi stands out as my fiercest rival.
Competing against him pushed me to beso much better. I know that
fans have waited a long time foranother chapter of our rivalry, and I

(56:15):
can't wait for our massive showdown liveon Netflix. It's time to give the
people what they want. They don'thave a comment here from Kobayashi, who,
as I said, recently said hewas retiring for health issues, and
so I can only imagine how muchmoney these guys are being paid for this
event. To get a guy whosaid his body is broken to come out

(56:36):
and do more of what he thinksbroke his body, that had to be
a pretty big paycheck, don't youthink. All right, Switching gears here
in a very significant way. I'vehad quite a few listeners and even some
friends who aren't around here and don'tlisten to the show email me asking about

(56:57):
something called Project twenty five. Andsome people are conservatives who are interested in
it. Some people are people whoare not even particularly political. But for
example, I've got a friend wholives in LA and he said he ended
up getting in a slightly political conversationwith some LA liberal and they brought up
this thing that my friend hadn't heardof, called Project twenty twenty five and

(57:19):
started talking about it as if itwas were the apocalypse. And so I
thought it would be really interesting tofind out what Project twenty twenty five is.
It's project over the Heritage Foundation andbeing done in coordination with some other
folks joining us to talk about it. The director of the project, pauled
Inns from Heritage Paul, Welcome toKowa. Thanks so much for being here.

(57:43):
Hey, Ross's great to view withyou. Let me first ask you
the most important question of the daythat I've been asking my listeners. What
is your oldest T shirt? Ithink I have one from where I grew
up outside Baltimore. And there's aplace called Hershey Park for people on the
East coast that's like the Hershey talkingpart. So I have one that says

(58:05):
I survived as super Duper Looper,which was a triple roller coaster back in
the day. Maybe some of thefans now, but that would be circa
early eighties. I think I'm notbearing it obviously anymore. Very good,
Oh existent, No, excellent answer. I got a lot of people who
have T shirts from the seventies,and I had one person who texted in
with a T shirt from the fromthe sixties. All right, let's talk

(58:27):
about Project twenty twenty five. Whendon't we start at the macro? What?
What is it? What's the goal? Well, you know, I'm
also trying to put it in thecontext of the COBIOSI Joey Chester. So
I don't know which is the biggernews. Look, twenty five is in
short, as their friends on theleft leg to characterize it, but quite

(58:49):
frankly, it's quite the opposite.It's an effort to really save our constitutional
republic. And it's it's a sphereof conservatives, over one hundred groups nonprofits
coming together as volunteers to make surethat the next conservative president is ready to
govern day one, and the essenceof it is to bring Americans back into
their government. You know, ourfederal government is supposed to be of buying

(59:13):
and for the people, and it'sreally we have a permanent government now in
Washington. So this is a recruitingcall, a real call for people all
over the country become working Washington andserve the next president. And that's what
we're intending to do, really bringAmericans back into their government, start making
it work for them again instead ofagainst them. And just so you know

(59:36):
where I'm coming from, I'm verylibertarian, So I'm probably with you on
most things about shrinking government to theextent that it gets into cultural conservative stuff,
I might not be with you onthat, but we'll talk about all
of it. So I assume thisis predicated, at least in the short
term, on the proposition that DonaldTrump, rather than Joe Biden, is
going to be the next president.But how much is it tied to that

(01:00:00):
versus being a standalone concept. Well, it's actually predated even of Donald's from
running for president again. And youknow, to be clear, I'm I'm
you know, I served under DonaldTrump. I'm really in politics because I
was inspired by him. But thiswe stood up in twenty twenty two before
any candidate had announced he or shewas running for president. And it's really

(01:00:21):
a recognition that on our side ofthe football, if you will, Conservatives,
libertarians, you know, I've said, people of common sense really are
out man. That the other sideis our friends on the progressive left there
are always thinking about how to takepower when they're out of power, kind
of scheming to get back in.Our side were you know, focused on

(01:00:43):
God, country, family, inour pursuit of our own happiness, and
we don't really pay attention to governance. But over time, this federal government
has become lebas in the nature ofthe last one hundred years, we now
have a permanent government. The presidentunder you know, the constitution has invested
all that executive power is supposed tobe vested in the president. Why because

(01:01:07):
it's accountable to the people. Thepresident stands for election every four years.
But in point of fact, wenow have this kind of permanent bureaucracy which
has evolved into a deep state wherenow we see the weaponization of the actual
government against the candidates, you know, to wit the persecution Donald Trump.

(01:01:27):
But this was to be clear,it's the heritage spurheading. And we've We've
been involved in presidential transitions ever since, helping Reagan stand up what would become
the Reagan Revolution. So what isnew about it is that there's one hundred
groups working together that we put asidekind of our petty differences, retirings in
their conservatives, and really trying tomake sure that we have enough people come

(01:01:52):
to serve were of caliber and arecommitted to the fight. Let me ask
you a question that sort of crossesbetween philosophy and and practicality. So you
mentioned that one of the goals isto get good people, people let's say,
who have a truly constitutional view ofthe proper role of government, to

(01:02:12):
come work in government. And Iwould say to you, Okay, that's
good. But the only thing that'sreally going to solve the problem is if
government gets much smaller and can't donearly the stuff that it does now,
because most of what government, mostof what the federal government does now is
unconstitutional, and most of the mostof federal spending right now is unconstitutional.

(01:02:34):
But the problem is that you couldbring in you know, you and me
and all of our libertarian and conservativefriends who will go into you know,
be secretary of this and secretary ofthat and spend all the time cutting regulation,
and then the next time a Democratcomes in, if we haven't actually
shrunk all and like fired half thepeople and made everything much smaller, they're
gonna be able to put everything backreally really fast. So what is a

(01:02:58):
way to reform government that is durableand will keep government somewhat under control even
if we get Kamala Harris as presidentone day, which we never will,
but you know, well, wehave to start somewhere. I hate to
say that the growth of it overthe last fifty years, and particularly acute

(01:03:20):
since a bomb the forward as youknow, they've invested these kind of apparatics
have a most like throwed in andall aspects of the government. And with
just this explosion of the national debtto thirty five trillion, the money is
gussing in all directions. So youknow, it's like kind of where to
begin to make the durable change.Though to be clear, we do have

(01:03:43):
to have a most a reformation,and that's why we're coming up on the
two hundred and fiftieth birthday here ofour country. We need to get back
to this constitutional underpinning and that youknow, how's that going to start.
Well, why it's going to startby getting the d O H back in
order and de weaponizing the FBI.We're suffering through kind of a really penous

(01:04:06):
chapter in our history where you know, these these powers have been abused by
a few who are fully unaccountable.We have to get back in there and
hold these people accountable. Now,and what what's happened with the kind of
the j six prisoners, what happenedwith Russia Gate. We've just seen a
constant, uh kind of march ondebated by by the progressive left to abuse

(01:04:31):
power. I get it, andI'm with you on these is the teaching
But like you know too, it'sultimately we have to send people the Washington
caliber who are going to have restraints. You know, we get the folks
in Congress and they're the ones,you know, pushing out these spending bills.
So that's tough. It is tough. And again I don't I think,

(01:04:54):
Look, you're right, it hasto start somewhere. We can't you
know, click our heels together andsuddenly have good government, and does have
to start some where. I justmy my hope is that if Trump wins
and if some of Project twenty twentyfive comes into place, and I imagine
that quite a bit of it willthat the good people who go into government
use the influence that they have inthe time that they have it to actually

(01:05:16):
reduce the power of all these organizationsso that the next guy can't come in
and just kick it right back upright away. Just respond to that quickly,
and I want to get to twomore things. Yeah, that's very
much in our plan. Everyone cango to Project twenty twenty five dot org.
We have a policy book there detailingeach chapter what a successful four years

(01:05:36):
would look like for a conservative governance. But you know, we're calling for
the abolition of a good five toseven agencies. Okay, good, you're
talking about pushing the powers back downto the states, to the people,
right. You know, we takesome inspiration through Elon Musk to the extent
you came aboard Twitter, and youknow, we wouldn't say that we could
fire eighty percent of people, buthe showed you an enterprise that all of

(01:06:00):
them are bloated over time when youdon't do kind of a spring cleaning.
And so we are really looking attrying to make federal government much more efficiently
and effective but much more restraint.So that starts with an entire ethos from
the top. Okay, so letme just jump back in just in the
interest of time. And you know, one of the things that I think
you're gonna be fighting against is thatDonald Trump doesn't care at all about reducing

(01:06:26):
federal spending and doesn't care about thedebt and deficit. And you, like,
maybe you personally are gonna are gonnahave to get Donald Trump to stop
spending like a Democrat. And maybeyou will and maybe you won't. That's
my fear with that guy. Butyou said early on in this conversation that
the left wants power, absolutely true, and you said our side is focused

(01:06:47):
on and I forget what all thewords were, but you started with God.
And one of the things that Ithink a lot of people on the
left are afraid of, and thatfolks like me who are libertarian at least
have some concerns about, is theinjection, the further injection of direct religiosity
into government. How would you makesomeone like me who doesn't want to see

(01:07:11):
evangelical Christianity overtly represented in policy,how would you make me feel better about
Project twenty twenty five? Well,briefly, on the first point, I
don't accept the premise comp being committedto this over spending. I think there's
only one or two candidates on theballot who would actually shut down the government
if he had to because of excessspending, and that's that's Trump. So

(01:07:34):
you know, the COVID spending wasthe suy generous of them. That said,
you know, the religiosity, Ithink, look, it's entire country
was founded on freedom of religion ornone at all. We all are here
for a limited time and we haveto live and let live. That said,
you know a lot of the moralunderpinning of our country came up today

(01:07:56):
with Christian values. This rule oflaw, all this is is underpinned by
people working in that spirit. Tobe clear, we're not advocating a theocracy
or any sort of state like that, but we have to be really clearied
that Christians and people of faith areunder attack right now. They have the
FBI surveilling Catholics at Latin Mass.They have the FBI saying half the country

(01:08:21):
could be domestic terrorists. So it'syou know, we have to counterbalance with
kind of this atheistic attack on peopleof faith. The government should be neutral.
Look, I'm against those attacks onpeople of faith. That's that's terrible
too. But what I wonder aboutand only about ninety seconds left here and
for those just joining, we're talkingwith Paul Dan's who's the director of Project

(01:08:44):
twenty twenty five at at the HeritageFoundation. But for example, do you
think we will see a push atthe federal level to have any some kind
of regulation on abortion? Just topick up one that's in the news a
lot. I mean, I thinkquite the contrary. That was the shot
of the whole repealed or Vwight.Yeah, that issue, But you know,
there's other impingements on religious practice,forcing someone to adopt somebody else's pronouns,

(01:09:11):
to force this kind of the transgenderattend on everyone, whatever the case
may be. There's you know,making people of contents compelled to do something
in order to keep their livelihood,their profession. These are all, you
know, attacked ultimately on faith basedpeople. So I think we can strike
the balance. We've gone in overa good two hundred and fifty years,

(01:09:32):
but the last five years, tobe clear, has really seen an assault
on religious liberty. So I thinkeveryone thrives when religious people are able to
practice. I do too. Ido too. I don't want the federal
government to be for a particular religionor against religion. I want them kind
of out of it. I justdon't want the government imposing a particular religion's

(01:09:56):
values on me through through legislation.Does that make sense, Yeah, I
think we're on the same page.I just think that, you know,
a lot of the characterization by thekind of the secular left of the assault
is to build up this boogyman ofyou know, a Christian state, and
it's really quite the opposite. Istrying to get back to even to you,

(01:10:16):
I'm very glad to hear that.And I think I heard you say
that Project twenty twenty five would notbe pushing for federal federal ban or federal
involvement in abortion and leave it tothe states. And I'm with you.
That's how it always would have been. I'm actually Paul, I'm actually pro
choice and was always vehemently against Roev. Wade. It was terrible law,

(01:10:36):
and it's always been a state issue, and if a state wants to
ban it, then let a stateban it. So it sounds like we
may be on the same page onthat. Well, you know at the
end of the day, Project twentytwenty five is policy proposals and personal proposals
anyone who's interested in serving in thenext And then you know, libertarian conservative

(01:10:58):
checked us out of the Project fivedot org. Create a profile, you
can go online, learn about government, actually take coursework, and you know,
and this is your opportunity to kindof get back to the country.
Love that. That's what we're ata stake right now where people have to
get off the sidelines and you eitherhave to put up or shut up.
And that that like you military service, all your family, maybe you did

(01:11:20):
it yourself. This is akin tothat you have to come serve all right,
folks. And also one of thethings I wanted to do for my
listeners with this conversation is if youhave some leftist come over to you and
say Project twenty twenty five is goingto destroy the world, I wanted to
give you a sense of what it'sreally about. And I know liberals won't
like it, but that doesn't meanit's crazy. It might mean it's constitutional,

(01:11:42):
but liberals hate that. Paul Dan'sis director of Project twenty twenty five
at the Heritage Foundation. Project twentytwenty five dot org to learn more.
Thanks for your time, Paul,appreciate the conversation place for us. All
right, we'll take quick break.We'll be right back on Kawa. One
more hour left together a little lessthan an hour, or as Dragon might
say, it's forty five minutes untilthere's five minutes left or something like that.
That's exactly you set it up.Dragon, who won the tickets to

(01:12:10):
see j Moore, Colin and Andywere the correct texters after the correct time.
Excellent. A lot of people dotext in early, even though,
and there was one guy who textedin cause it was what did we say
it was? We wanted texters fourand seven at ten forty two and seventeen
seven at ten forty two and seventeenseconds, and one gentleman or lady texted

(01:12:30):
in at eleven o'clock. So you'reso close. I imagine this person just
trying to time it. Okay,I'm going to be text number seven and
every other person there's going to belike three or four minutes between between texts.
Typically when we say, like Texternumber seven, it's such and such

(01:12:51):
a time, Usually Texter Dragon canlook it up. But I'm guessing that
texter number seven is probably within fifteenor twelve twenty seconds of the time.
It will be thirty seconds. Jaymoreis pretty popular. Yeah, so we
said ten forty two and seventeen seconds. Yeah, the proper texter was at
ten forty two and eighteen seconds.You're kidding. I am not kidding.

(01:13:15):
And the other texter was at tenforty two and twenty one seconds. Okay,
Yeah, so within five seconds ofthe time. And actually a couple
I noticed a whole bunch of peopleactually texted in just a couple seconds early.
There's probably a dozen of those thatcame in within two seconds but before
the time, so they don't count. There was a bunch of ten forty

(01:13:35):
two to fifteen So you know what, as long as we're giving stuff away,
what do we do one more?This will be my last giveaway of
this ticket, which is actually apair of tickets to see Steve Martin and
Martin Short Tonight Tonight People tonight atYes Tonight Dragon at Red Rocks. Their

(01:13:56):
show was called The Dukes of Funnytown. We learned yesterday that Steve Martin is
four inches taller than Martin Short,which is the most important thing you need
to know other than the fact thatthey're both funny. Steve Martin, by
the way, oh, why dowe do this? Why don't we make
this the trivia? This is avery very easy, a tribu easy trivia
question, actually dragging you pick texternumber what three? Text number three at

(01:14:17):
what time? Twelve eighteen, eleveneighteen Yes, eleven twelve, eleven twelve
and eighteen seconds eleven twelve and eighteenseconds. Texter number three at five six,
six nine zero. Who answers thequestion? What instrument to Steve Martin
play? It's a very very easyquestion. I mean, you either know

(01:14:39):
it or you don't. It's notan instrument that lots of people play.
He's almost a professional add it.Yeah, Oh, he is a professional.
Addit He does concerts, concerts withyeah playing the instrument. So five
six, six nine zero text numberthree at eleven, twelve and eighteen seconds
by our clocknot yours. Will wina pair that is two count them dragon
one four two tickets to see SteveMartin and Martin Short tonight at Red Rocks

(01:15:01):
and then a little later in theshow. I'm gonna have another pair of
tickets to give away for you tomeet Jack Carr and me next Friday.
So okay, so there's that wait, they get to meet you, they
get to meet me. That's notvery important, but they do get to
meet Jack Carr, which is prettyfantastic. All right, So as long
as we're wasting people's time, letme do a couple of minutes on another
thing. I asked people earlier,what's your oldest T shirt? This T

(01:15:25):
shirt that I'm wearing right now isnot my oldest T shirt, but it's
one of my older T shirts.Did you already answer this question? I
have not answered this one yet.Okay, let me just sow this shirt
that I'm wearing. I don't knowif you can read it from there,
dragon, Can you read it?It's a Jackson Brown solo Acoustic Australia two
thousand and four, right, twothousand and four. So I saw Jackson
Brown in Melbourne, Australia in twothousand and four, and it's the only

(01:15:47):
rock concert I've ever seen outside thecountry. But it's not my oldest T
shirt. My oldest T shirt isI think nineteen ninety two and it says
Ross for Boss and it's from whenRoss Perot was running for president. But
that that shirt is very small,Like even if I lost a lot,
it's just too small. Maybe it'sjust from being washed over the years,
so I don't really wear that onemuch. In any case, what is

(01:16:09):
your people don't text in early?Okay, we said, we said eleven,
twelve and eighteen seconds, and Igot a whole bunch of people texting
in now. No, No,you got the right answer, but no,
except we're one person anyway, Solet me just do a couple of
these, because we did have someexcellent answers. Obviously, a lot of

(01:16:29):
these things are concert t shirts,right, Lots and lots of people have
concert t shirts. Eagles at RedRocks nineteen seventy five still fits. Hold
on, I need to pause thisthing so I can keep reading and without
the thing moving on me. OldWest Point Cadet Athletic t shirts from nineteen
seventy eight and at WPLJ AM Radioin New York City t shirt from the

(01:16:51):
same year. Eric Clapton in Londonnineteen ninety five, Desert Shield First Gulf
War nineteen ninety seventy six from Breckinridgenineteen sixty three, Leonards skinnerd Wow and
a few people have some t shirtsfrom the Marines. One guy has a

(01:17:13):
T shirt that he says is fromthe late sixties from his ski bomb days
and Aspen that's pretty fabulous. Nineteenseventy four a T shirt from second grade
with the name of my hometown onit, a small town in Nebraska.
Second oldest T shirt nineteen seventy ninefrom junior high school, Junior Olympics track
and field ross. Monday is theone year anniversary of the Titans submersible implosion.

(01:17:35):
Can we get a shout out forStockton Rush? Super interesting? Dude,
Rest in peace. I'll try toremember to do something about that on
Monday. Anyway, I do,I do enjoy all these all these I
wish the shirt. I wish Icould take part in these T shirt discussions.
So do you have an answer?I have the oldest style, the

(01:17:57):
big shirt with the dragon on it, that style of shirt when I was
in middle school, so we're talkingearly nineties. But since I had dropped
one hundred and fifty plus pounds,yeah a few years back, and kept
it off. Yeah, I didn'tkeep any of my fat guy clothes,
right, So the oldest shirts thatI have are like two years old,

(01:18:18):
right, Okay, no, that'sa good answer. Nineteen seventy seven Orange
Crush defense, you know, Broncosdefense T shirt, not the soda.
That's pretty good. All right.I'm guessing that somebody's got a lot of
people have the right answer. Infact, since we're already well past the
time, I think I will letyou know that the answer to the trivia
question, and Dragon will be intouch with you if you're the winner.

(01:18:39):
But the answer to the trivia question, what instrument does Steve Martin play is
the banjo. We'll take a quickbreak. We'll be right back on kaway.
Just one more little inside baseball thing. Because Ralph texted in and said,
well, I texted after, youknow, eleven twelve and eighteen seconds,
and you know, because I hadsaid a lot of people are texting

(01:18:59):
into and I texted back to Ralphand I said, your text came in
eleven twelve and twenty nine seconds,all right, So we were eleven twelve
and eighteen We said text number threeand eleven twelve and eighteen seconds. And
I told Ralph if you remember,because texting isn't like calling, right,
text you hit a button is gone, right, even if you're dialing a

(01:19:21):
phone, even when you like,let's say you were doing it old school,
when you're trying to get in ona radio contest like I did when
I was a kid. You woulddial the first six numbers, right,
and then you try to time itand wait, just tell the what you
think is the exact last moment,the proper moment to hit the seventh digit,
But then the system has to processand you don't really know when that

(01:19:41):
call is going to go through.But texting is much more exact normally.
So when we said third text ateleven twelve and eighteen seconds and your text
came in at eleven twelve and twentynine seconds, you weren't even close.
You're so far, so far awaythat I think you don't quite understand.
So I just want to give peoplejust a little sense of what we're dealing

(01:20:03):
with here. Our winner, ScottYep, texted in at the exact time
eleven twelve and eighteen seconds, right. There were two other texts prior to
him, so because we were lookingfor number three and they were all at
that same time. So Dragon,you don't go look because I don't want
you to hold on. I wantto I want to make sure I'm counting

(01:20:25):
this right now. Maybe there's yeah, okay, I think you said that
already. I think there were therewere another there were six. There were
six texts that came in at exactlyeleven, twelve, and eighteen getting good,
and then in the next eight seconds, which is kind of a lot
in our game, but in thenext eight seconds or fifteen more texts,

(01:20:47):
right, So you really basically unlessDragon comes up with his thing like text
or number seventeen right, which hedoes from time to time, any single
digit number, you're they're going tohave to be right there on the second
or one second after. If you'remore than one second after whatever the time
is, you're probably not gonna win. You can set up the text earlier.

(01:21:10):
You can be like Panjo and thenjust wait, yeah, wait,
just like Ross was talking about withthe you dial the first six numbers and
you wait for the seventh, Sotype in banjo and then just wait wait,
hold, yeah, waitld and thenhit the button. You could m
h all right. I want totake literally one minute here just to talk
about the Supreme Court story that you'veheard on k Way News and maybe you've

(01:21:31):
heard another news about the bump stockthing. It want to spend too long
on it. But I've been aroundguns my whole life. I've never seen
a bump stock. I never heardof a bump stock until that madman used
a bump stock to kill a lotof people and injure a lot more people
shooting from a hotel window in LasVegas into a music festival. So I've

(01:21:53):
never heard of these things, andthey strike me as kind of stupid.
Part of the reason being that whenI'm shooting a firearm, one of my
goals is to hit the target thatI'm aiming at. And again, this
is gonna I want. This isgonna sound a little bit insensitive, maybe
I just but just go with mehere. So, if you're a lunatic
shooting into a crowd, you mightnot be aiming that much because, sadly,

(01:22:18):
in this case, there are alot of targets, right, So
it all as long as sort ofpointing, you might hit something and it
that's the tragedy of that situation.Right. For me, I want to
hit what I'm aiming at, andI'm not hit I'm not shooting at lots
of targets. I'm shooting at atarget. And typically when you're shooting something
that is automatic or close to automatic, is very very hard, Dame.

(01:22:43):
So what what a bump stock doesis it uses the recoil of the gun
to allow the device or your fingerto pull the trigger again. And so
every time the trigger gets pulled,a bullet fires around right, A bullet
is fired out of the gun timethe trigger is pulled. It is not
the same as a machine gun whereyou pull the trigger once and hold it.

(01:23:05):
The government, which had always saidthat bump stocks cannot be regulated under
the National Firearms Act of nineteen thirtyfour after that terrible mass shooting, changed
their mind and said we're gonna banbump stocks by calling the machine guns.
But the National Firearms Act says thatsomething is a machine gun if it can

(01:23:26):
if it can fire multiple rounds witha single action on the trigger. It's
very clear. And the Supreme Courtruled sorry atf but the bump stock is
clearly not functioning as a single actionon the trigger. It literally bumps the
trigger time after time after time aftertime. That is multiple bumps on the

(01:23:50):
trigger, and that's right. Andso I'm very glad that the Supreme Court
threw out the bumpstock ban, butnot because I care about bump stocks.
I don't. I think they're stupid. I mean, maybe someone has one
and doesn't think it's stupid. Ithink it's kind of stupid. What's but
what we have to defend against isallowing government agencies to rewrite laws to say

(01:24:15):
what whoever's in charge of that agencywants the law to say at that time,
when it's not the law that Congresswrote. And that's why I'm so
happy about this decision, and that'swhy I'm so disappointed that the three liberals
did what they did in their descent, because what they want to do,
and what leftists always want to do, is to let the bureaucracy write the

(01:24:36):
laws, and that is not whathappens in a free country. That catastrophe
at the end of yesterday's show wasmy fault for not understanding how hard it
was to grab music out of theout of the system. I'll take the
blame for it for that one.Dragon, I wasn't on you. Oh
good. I mean, your nameis on the show. It's about time
you take something. It's only onthe show because you insist on it being

(01:24:58):
on the show. We all knowwho's in charge Uh, So I want
to just briefly react to one listenertext and then I'm going to go on
to some other topics. And Iwas just talking about the bump stock thing,
and I said, I'm very happywith the Supreme Court decision, and
I thought I made clear, andI certainly made clear also the other time
I talked about it that my issueis not whether bump stocks are good or

(01:25:23):
bad. I thought that I thinkthey're dumb, but rather that we can't
let government agencies rewrite laws. Congresshas to write the law. And this
listener, this listener said that,let's see where is it. Hey,
Ross, you saw the result ofthe bump stocks. You saw how great
they are for massacring people, notgood for accuracy, something totally something we

(01:25:46):
should have available to everybody, noproblem. So again you're you're missing the
point, but you're missing the pointin a way that people on the left
always miss the point. And Ireally and I'm not I'm not saying this
to to badge your you for beingon the left or something. For me,
this is about a particular principle thatdoesn't have anything directly to do with

(01:26:11):
the bump stock right. And sothis is the point I want to make
the law as it is written.The law as it is written does not
allow bump stocks to be banned underthe existing law, because the existing law

(01:26:33):
says that under the NFA of nineteenthirty four that a weapon can be banned
or regulated or whatever if it canfire multiple rounds via a single action on
the trigger. And a bump stock, even though it does it very quickly,

(01:26:56):
requires because they're attached to a semiautomatic weapon, which by definition requires
the trigger to be pulled for everyshot, and the bump stock, you
could kind of sort of say thebump stock does it automatically, even though
that's not exactly true. But still, even if you want to say it
did it sort of automatically, itstill requires a separate action of the trigger

(01:27:17):
every time there's a shot. Now, again, that's not even the main
point. We could be talking aboutanything. My point is that the government
said for years, years and yearsand years that bump stocks cannot be regulated
under that law, and it's obviousthat they can. And then they didn't
like what happened in Las Vegas,and no, of course it was horrific.

(01:27:39):
And then the government said, andI mean the bureaucrats said not Congress,
We're gonna change our mind and nowwe're gonna regulate it this way,
and we can't allow that. Andso what I don't know if I said
it the second time I talked aboutthis, I know I said it the
first time. I don't really careone way or another if the government were
to ban bump stocks. Look,I'm not the guy who's into government banning

(01:28:01):
things. All else being equal,I prefer most I prefer pretty much everything
being legal. But living in thereal world, you know, if the
government went to if Congress wrote anew law that banned bump stocks, then
Congress write a new law that bansbumpstocks. That's different, but that would

(01:28:23):
be that would be probably okay.Someone might have a Second Amendment argument,
but I actually think, I actuallythink Congress could constitutionally write a lot of
band bump stocks. They're not firearms. And so I didn't say that bump
stocks should be available to everybody.And what I really don't like. What

(01:28:45):
I really don't like is what Icall consequentialist arguments, which is to say,
we are going to support or opposea court ruling or and a law
that isn't constitutional based on whether welike the outcome of it. And I

(01:29:06):
refuse to operate that way because thatis the road to political hell. If
we just allow people to make upstuff, whether it's an unconstitutional law or
even worse, a bureaucracy just makingstuff up because they want to, even
if you like the outcome. Onceyou let these people start making up laws,

(01:29:32):
you can rest assured that they willstart making up laws where you don't
like the outcome. And then whatare you going to say about it,
Oh, the bureaucrats made up alaw and I don't like it, so
we better assume them. Well,what about this other time where the bureaucrat
made up a law and you didlike it, so you said nobody should
sue them. It's got to beit's got to be about the principle.

(01:29:58):
It's got to be about the principlebecause and I'm not saying this to be
high minded, I promise you I'mnot saying this to sound above it all
or condescending or whatever. The reasonthat it has to be about principle is
that's the only way to maintain arule based system. You've got to always

(01:30:19):
play by the rules and the rulesallow some of the other rules to be
changed by a process. And that'sfine that you can write new laws,
you could amend the Constitution, butyou got to do it the right way,
because as soon as we start lettingpeople who do not have the authority

(01:30:40):
to make law to nevertheless make law, than you have lost any limiting principle.
By the way, that's why Iwas against roe v. Wade.
I'm pro choice, not saying Ilike abortion, but I'm for freedom and
I'm pro choice, and I knowthat piss. I know I have a
lot of pro life listeners and theydon't like it when I say that.

(01:31:02):
But we're not not looking to debatethat right now. Let me just make
my point. I'm pro choice andwas aggressively aggressively against Roe v. Wade,
even though I liked the outcome.And I think that actually makes me
more credible than most people on thatargument. Roe v. Wade was bad
law. It was known to bebad law then the moment it was done.

(01:31:23):
Ruth Vader Ginsberg knew it was aproblem. And I've always said,
if I let them write an unconstitutionallaw, or if I let the court
do something that is illegal just becauseI like the outcome. Then what happens
the next time when they do somethingthat is illegal or unconstitutional? I don't

(01:31:44):
like the outcome. How am Igoing to complain about it? Where's going
to be my terra firma my firmground to stand upon to push against this
illegal stuff? When at some pointI said, yeah, that's illegal,
but I like what it did,I'm gonna go along with it. I
will not do that. I willnot do that. And if you want

(01:32:06):
to b ban bump stocks, Iwon't care. Right. I think if
the legislature went to the state legislatureor Congress went to pass a law to
ban bump stocks, I think Iwouldn't have an opinion on it. I
just I don't care. They're dumb, they're not guns. I don't think

(01:32:31):
there would be a violation of theSecond Amendment to ban them. But the
point is that current federal law doesn'tban them. All right, enough on
that? Enough on that, Ijust wanted to I think there was a
key point. I wasn't just lookingto disagree with that listener. I wanted
to make that key point. Iwant to remind you that my voter guide

(01:32:51):
is up. My twenty twenty fourColorado primary election voter guide is up at
Ross Kaminski dot com. You'll seea link up near the top. Along
with all that other stuff about thelistener trip, you'll see the voter guide.
I cover all of the Republican primariesfor Congress. I cover several Republican
and Democratic elections primary elections for StateHouse and State Senate. There was a

(01:33:16):
listener yesterday who texted in to sayI did not make an endorsement in the
Tim Hernandez race against Tim Hernandez.But that listener was wrong. It was
already in there. It's the veryfirst recommendation under the state House races,
and so if you find that helpful, then there it is. I also
wanted to mention because we heard iton KOA News that Governor Jared Polis has

(01:33:41):
made some endorsements, and I actuallydidn't go through and look at them,
but I did note in our inthe news that Governor Poulas endorsed the challenger
to Elizabeth Epps, and Elizabeth Eppsis in House District six, and Governor

(01:34:06):
Polis endorsed a guy named Sean SeanCamacho, and I endorsed Sean Camacho too.
In my Voter Guide. Now,Shawn Comacho, I believe he's former
military, but don't let that makeyou think he's any sort of conservative.
He's pretty far left. But ElizabethEpps is a raving lunatic who hates America

(01:34:30):
and hates Jews and has no businessbeing in any elected office anywhere. She
is a blight on the state legislature. She's ineffective, and she needs to
go. And that's it. That'sit. And so I also note,

(01:34:51):
by the way, Governor Polis isJewish, and he's probably not all that
pleased, although I'm sure there's plentyof non Jews who are also pretty pissed
off with Elizabeth Epps, like supportof Hamas. But I haven't talked to
Jared about this, but it wouldn'tsurprise me if the fact that he's Jewish
was something of a factor here inany case. In any case, I

(01:35:16):
just wanted to I don't think itwas necessarily clear in the previous reporting that
you might have heard here on KOAabout what's so egregious about Elizabethpps, and
if you don't know the state politicsthat well, and she's in Denver,
in a very very blue area.So whoever wins the Democratic primary is going
to win the election. No Republicanhas a chance. I don't even know
if there's a Republican gonna run inthat House district, but no Republican would

(01:35:40):
have a chance there, So it'sall about the primary. And I do
think there's a very very strong chancethat Elizabeth Epps will will lose. She's
terrible. Everyone knows she's terrible.There's not enough Jew haters for her to
win, and there are actually plentyof Jews, I believe in that district,
So hopefully she will lose. Butif you are wondering why Jared Pulled
would come out against an incumbent,it's because she's just an egregious, horrific

(01:36:06):
person. So let me do somethingcompletely different. There was a story in
the Wall Street Journal three days agothat I thought was partly interesting for its
content and partly interesting for its timing. And here's the headline, Elon Musk's

(01:36:29):
boundary blurring relationships with women at SpaceX, and the subhead is the billionaire founder
had sex within an employee and aformer intern and asked a woman at his
company to have his babies. Wow, I'll just share a little just to
give you a flavor of the article. So they're talking about a particular young

(01:36:51):
woman. She spoke with excitement toher friends about a high profile problem solving
role at SpaceX, a dream forsomeone a few years out of college.
She and Elon Musk had met afew years earlier during her internship, when
she was still in college. Sheapproached him with ideas for improving SpaceX.
Her outreach led to a date,which led to a kiss and eventually sex,

(01:37:12):
she told friends. The year afterher internship, the billionaire had the
fresh college grad flown out to aresort in Sicily before they ended things.
According to documents reviewed by The WallStreet Journal, Musk, who was more
than twenty years her senior, attemptedto restart their relationship, but she rejected
his advance. They remained close asshe tried to establish herself in a new
job. He texted her often andinvited her to come over to his mansion

(01:37:35):
at night. Sometimes she accepted,but friends said she told him at the
time that his behavior made her jobharder. She eventually moved off of Musk's
executive team. According to friends shetold and to people familiar with her time
at SpaceX and the woman left thecompany in twenty nineteen. Now there's more
stories like that in this very verylong article. And I don't care all

(01:38:00):
that much about Elon Musk's private life. And he is an odd dude,
and he's a billionaire, not justa bill is the richest guy on the
planet. And I'm sure plenty ofwomen, including very attractive and younger women,
would be would go for that,right, And and uh, I
don't care as long as it's alllegal, right, as long as they're

(01:38:23):
not like, right, right,As long as it's all legal, that's
fine. What was interesting to mewas the timing of this piece, because
this came out at the beginning ofthis week. This came out on Tuesday,
and yesterday was the shareholder vote toreinstate Elon Musk's pay package that had

(01:38:45):
been tossed out by a Delaware judge. Was either early this year or late
last year. That pay package atthe time that the judge threw it out
was worth are you ready for thisfifty six billion dollars now? Because Tesla
stock is lower now than then,it's only worth about forty six billion dollars

(01:39:09):
now, But they passed it.One of the interesting things about Tesla.
That's different from a lot of bigcompanies is that it has a huge number
of individual investors. Huge most bigcompanies, very few individual investors own lots
of shares. Mostly it's owned byFidelity in Vanguard and black Rock and institutions
and so on. But Tesla iskind of a cult, the same way

(01:39:32):
that cryptocurrency is kind of a cult. And so he's got all these culty
people who own his shares, andthey voted by wide wide margins to reinstate
the pay package that the judge hadtossed out. I don't think the lawsuit
is done. I think the judgein Delaware if she can still hear it

(01:39:55):
because the company is now moving toTech or moved to Texas. But somebody's
going to I sue and try toget this thrown out too, because it's
forty six billion dollars of of dilutioneffectively to everybody who's a shareholder already.
In any case, I just wantedto share that with you because there's two
interesting stories there. The shareholders reinstatedthis insanely large pay package, and the

(01:40:19):
Wall Street Journal had a hit piecejust two days before the vote, which
seemed to me I was wondering ifthey were trying to turn if somebody planted
this to try to turn that voteagainst Elon Musk. I was a little
conspiracy ish, but there you go. Hey folks, if you're listening on
the podcast right now, that's theend of today's show. Thank you so

(01:40:42):
much for listening. Don't forget youcan catch us every day on the podcast
as you are right now, onyour smart speaker, on your iHeartRadio app,
even on the computer at Koa,Colorado, and the good old fashioned
way on your radio. Thanks somuch for listening to the show.