@ChrisOnTheAir - Maduro, Box Office, and Why Relationships Are “Cringe”

Chris is talking about the latest with Venezuela and Maduro, PLUS there's no business like show business and Chris is getting into Avatar, Stranger Things, and MORE. AND being in a relationship is cringe? We get into that and more on KFIAM-640!

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're listening to KFI AM six forty on demand, Thy.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
Friends, Chris Merrill, can I am six forty more stimulating talk?
I did. Look, I know what you're thinking. Oh, new Year,
knew us, knew everything, knew everything. And yet it feels
an awful lot, like we're going back to some of
the old ways, like foreign interventionalism. But let's face it,

(00:32):
Venezuela was ruled by an authoritarian dictator. He was I think,
in the words of great philosopher giant pooplog, Yeah, and
so we said, enough is enough. We gotta get this
guy out. And I think it is the worst kept
secret in Washington because if you'll recall, and of course

(00:53):
you will, because you're a very smart person, if you'll recall,
we discussed this numerous times when we were uh, we
were going after drug boats, and we were, oh, we
gotta up the drug boats, gonna stop the drug boats.
This isn't about drug boats. Isn't it about oil tankers.
This is about Maduro, this is this is all about
regime change in Venezuela. He said, he's kind of obvious
what's going on right now. We're we're inching our way

(01:14):
toward doing exactly that not a big surprise to anybody,
comes as a surprise to exactly no one. And so
off we go, and so we have this this late
night raid or early morning raid, I guess, and we
pulled the guy out to pose the leader, arrested him,
pulled him out and his I guess he wasn't wearing pajamas,

(01:36):
but I'd like to think he was. I'd like to
think that he was at home sleep, maybe some snoopy
pajamas going on. That's what I have in my mind,
That's what I think it was. And so we grabbed
the guy and his wife, which was nice. You hate
to be a family record. So we brought him both
here to the United States and they're gonna face trial

(01:56):
for narco terrorism and being a giant. And again back
to the philosophical term, booplog and the people of Venezuela
rejoice generally speaking. I mean, look, if you were someone
who was profiting from Maduro, he was kind of a downer. Yeah,
it was like ah parties over. But for an awful

(02:17):
lot of people it was a very good thing. We
had reaction here locally. Katla was covering it as well.

Speaker 3 (02:21):
Yessika Baker moved to the US twenty five years ago
from Venezuela and hasn't been back since. She's the owner
of Chamo Venezuelan Cuisine in Pasadena. She says the toppling
of President Nicholas Maduro's government brings her hope of reuniting
with loved ones after years apart.

Speaker 4 (02:37):
And we don't know what is going to happiness, but Alice,
this is the first step and we are so happy.
We're waiting for this moment over thirty years.

Speaker 2 (02:49):
And then the protests.

Speaker 3 (02:52):
At the same time, many in downtown La braved the
rain to denounce the Trump administration, saying he's misused our
armed forces and could be starting an unwonted.

Speaker 2 (03:01):
War real quick, braved the rain. I always love that
turn of phrase because it's it almost feels sarcastic every
time they say it. Right, it's like when somebody says
that they're from the mean streets of Connecticut. Right, It's
like they braved the rain. Oh, the courage it must

(03:21):
have taken to stand outside. Is there was moisture falling
down on their little heads. What troopers they are? All right?
Anyway back to World War Three. What they do is
they bomb they braved the rain for World War three.
Little soldiers, little brave soldiers. What they do is they

(03:43):
bomb first and ask questions later.

Speaker 5 (03:45):
They don't keep any evidence, because that's what a good
criminal does, right, They hide the evidence.

Speaker 3 (03:50):
President Trump now promising to run Venezuela and take control
of its massive oil reserves.

Speaker 2 (03:56):
Also, have you noticed that when people say the name
of the country right, it sounds sexy as hell? It does.
Listen again, listen to how I say it, Venezuela. Listen
how she says it.

Speaker 3 (04:07):
President Trump now promising to run Venezuela.

Speaker 2 (04:10):
And take come on, Venezuela.

Speaker 3 (04:14):
Venezuela, Venezuela, Venezuela.

Speaker 2 (04:18):
That's sexy as hell, and take control of.

Speaker 3 (04:20):
Its massive oil reserves.

Speaker 6 (04:22):
California Congress, Nah, that's key.

Speaker 2 (04:24):
I know you were distracted because she sounded sexy as
hell with the whole Venezuela thing. I get it, But
it's key what she says here.

Speaker 3 (04:30):
In Venezuela and take control of its massive oil reserves.

Speaker 2 (04:33):
Take control of its massive oil reserves. Indeed, regime change
seems a lot easier to do when there's massive oil
reserves that you can take control of.

Speaker 3 (04:42):
California Congressman Brad Sherman says he can't do that without approval.

Speaker 2 (04:46):
But if you're putting the American military boots on the
ground by the thousands to occupy a country ian hostilities,
you had better involve Congress. And I'm not so sure
it's a good idea. So if we take a look
back in history, interventionalist activities in South America have always

(05:08):
turned out really well for us. It always it always
stabilizes a region, it always makes them a very safe place,
and America always wins in the end, certainly doesn't doesn't
fall into the hands of the wrong people, which President Trump,
to his credit, said, Look, we're going to run the
place until we can find somebody that we approve of,
which practically speaking makes a lot of sense. Politically speaking,

(05:33):
Doesn't that feel an awful lot like Obama? Doesn't that
feel like an awful lot like all the stuff that
MAGA hated about President Obama and the Arab Spring and
everything else that was going on. Doesn't that interventionalism seem
like America World police kind of stuff that so many

(05:54):
people spoke out against.

Speaker 7 (05:56):
No.

Speaker 2 (05:56):
Look, I'm not a neocon, but I don't hate this.
I don't hate this at all. I think that when
you have people who are being oppressed by an authoritative
cayla what was the philosopher you call him? Remember, authoritative,
addictive footlogh. When you have that situation, then I'm all

(06:22):
for helping the people. I'm all for liberating the people
the trouble I have. And this is not a criticism
of what went on in Venezulla Gonna Venezuela. This is
a criticism of our inconsistencies. If we take a look
at the oppression happening around the globe by authoritarian dictatorships,

(06:46):
we don't seem so concerned with the vast majority of them.
As I mentioned, it seems a whole lot easier for
us to liberate the people and help them out if
there are vast resources involved that we can take control of.
It does seem to be that our own monetary interests

(07:06):
supersede any sort of a and an idealistic notion that
we're going to allow people to decide the direction of
their own fate. So I think, generally speaking, great, now
we're going to protect Taiwan, Are we going to stand
up for Ukraine? I mean, we've watched an authoritarian dictator

(07:27):
slaughter people in not his country for the last three
or four years, and it looks like we're working on
a piece deal there that would just basically give Putin
what he wants if he promises not to keep invading things.
How'd that work out? After CRIMEA? Not very well? If
we see authoritarian dictatorships here, we see these we see
these madmen in Central Africa who are who are mutilating children.

(07:51):
We go, wow, that's really terrible. Somebody should do something
about that. And we go, well, why don't we do
something about it? If we're concerned about authoritarian dictators who
are crushing the people, isn't that where we intervene? And
then people go, oh, we don't want to be the
world police, but we do want to be the world police.
If they have vast resources available, then all of a sudden,

(08:12):
world policing is fine. Right. The reactions are as predictable
as the sunrise, because you've got people on both the
left and the right that are saying that if you
disagree with what the president did, those on the on
the left, excuse me, those on the right. If you
disagree with what the president did, oh, you support dictators,
you love Chairman Mao, you love Hitler, right, that's what

(08:36):
That's what I've seen this on the online today. If
you don't support what the president did in Venezuela and
and and taking down Maduro, then you love dictators. And
then I'm seeing people on the on the left, Oh,
you want to take down Maduro, but you don't want
to take care of Putin. You love dictators, You want
to take down Maduro, but you don't have any problem.
And you actually you actually praise North Korea Kim Jong Moon.

(09:00):
You love dictators, right, So now it's an argument over
who loves dictators the most. Can we just say we
don't like dictators? Is that is? That? Is it okay
that we just don't like dictators? And then if we're
gonna take action, let's let's let's take a look at
action that can help a lot of people. Or if
we're not gonna be the world police, maybe don't be

(09:21):
the world police. Just these are just I don't know.
It seems like common sense ideas to me, but what
do I know? Uh, you hear it. It's about the drugs, right,
It's about the drugs. That's about the fair elections, It's
about protecting the oppressed people. But it is weird how
the world is full of narco states. We have narco
states all over the place. Who's supplying the chemicals for fentanyl? China?

(09:45):
Authoritarian dictatorship not doing anything there are we The world
is full of narco states. The world is full of
corrupt elections, The world is full of dictators whose regimes
are abusing people on the regular, and yet we're not
invading those countries. Why the oil matters more than the
rest is next, Chris Merril.

Speaker 1 (10:03):
You're listening to KFI AM six forty on demand.

Speaker 2 (10:08):
Our conversation continued off the air here as we were
talking about what happened with Venezuela. And I think it's
not often that Cale and I agree on something, which
means one of us is definitely wrong on this, but
we're both We're both like, I don't hate the results
of having the dictator heard removed from from power in Venezuela.

(10:29):
The guy was not a good person, and I don't
think he was doing anything the best interest of the
vast majority of Venezuelans. And then at the same time,
I'm not crazy about US intervening in foreign affairs, and
especially when it seems very obvious that it's about not

(10:50):
the people, it's about the oil. In fact, President Trump
said so himself.

Speaker 8 (10:54):
Questions, of course, rising now whether Trump did this because
of drugs or whether he did this because of oil
was the main reason that the President himself gave today.
And of course he has pardoned drug traffickers in the
past rather than continue to prosecute them while now having
Nicolaus Muduro in custody.

Speaker 2 (11:12):
Yeah, I mean, this is inconsistent with what we've seen
in the past, where he's he's he's letting other people
off the hook, giving them pardons, former South American presidents
that we're we're trafficking and convicted. Yeah, but they're really
great guys, they get pardons. Okay, So what is it
about Maduro that's different. Well, first of all, the President's
had kind of a personal vendetta about the guy. He's

(11:33):
long blamed Maduro for losing the twenty twenty election. He's
blamed a lot of things. That's one of them. He's
as well, yeah, well Maduro really hosess he did it
to us, so he's got to go. All right, I
mean I'm not crazy about your logic there, But again,

(11:54):
is it a means to an end. What's the longer
term consequence though, and that's my big concern moving forward?
Was this done with the plan in mind? Marco Rubio
this week was talking about what's going on with the
oil specifically, he was talking with the ABC, But.

Speaker 9 (12:11):
How does the United States in tend to secure the
oil fields? Won't that take US troops?

Speaker 5 (12:15):
Well, ultimately, this is not about securing the oil fields.
This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come
in and out until they make changes to the governance
of that entire industry.

Speaker 2 (12:24):
Okay, So it's not about securing the oil. The president said,
it was about the oil. The President set a key
goal of the operation of Venezuela was to regain oil
rights that Venezuela had quote unquote stolen. Now, what happened
was Exon was a major player in Venezuelan oil and
in nineteen ninety eight the regime decided, we are going

(12:46):
to seize it all right, and it's now it's gonna
where it's gonna be state owned. Okay, So that's that's
what happened. And then Exon got booted. So the President
has said that that's Venezuela stealing our oil. I mean,
first of all, it's their oil. Second, it is an
American company and they did hose excellent, no doubt about it,
one hundred percent true. Is it is it our job?

(13:11):
This is a genuine question. This isn't rhetorical. Is it
our job to intervene in foreign regimes if we don't
like the way that they are treating American companies? And
maybe the answer is yes. Maybe the answer is yeah,
we don't like what they're doing, then we impose tariffs.
And we don't like what they're doing, then we put
duties on certain things. We try to flex our muscle

(13:32):
a little bit, try to bring things around. Maybe that's
the answer. Maybe it is. But what happens now is
the big concern. And this is what Rubio was saying
with the little George Stephanopolis.

Speaker 5 (13:44):
Because right now that industry is non existent in the
traditional way. These oil fields basically are pirate operations. People
literally steal the oil from the ground. A handful of
that's how they hold this regime together. A handful of
cronies benefit from this specific oil wells.

Speaker 2 (13:58):
Okayow long here, somehow we've got pirates that are stealing
oil out of the ground. No, you have Venezuelan workers
that are pumping oil out of the ground. It just
it just so happens that the people who are controlling
and telling the workers where to pump the oil are
the people who stand to benefit the most, and they
are cronies of the government. In the United States, we

(14:22):
don't have that. We don't have a bunch of wealthy
oil tycoons who are pulling the strings and telling the
government what they want the regulations to be so that
they can profit more. In the United States, we know
that what we have is a very benevolent group of
oil tycoons who pump the oil and then redistribute the

(14:43):
wealth to all Americans. Venezuela is completely not like that. Cayla,
Did you get your oil pump and check this month?

Speaker 10 (14:52):
No, I can't say I did.

Speaker 2 (14:53):
Oh, okay, I was just checking. Very good. I'm sure
it's in the mail. It is.

Speaker 10 (15:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (15:02):
They're producing at like eighteen percent capacity because the equipment
is all decrepit, and they basically pocket the money to
their benefit. They sell the oil at a discount and
global markets, you know, forty cents on the dollar, fifty
cents on the dollar, but all that money goes to them.
Those oil fields have not benefited the people of Venezuela
in over a decade. They have, but they have made
multi millionaires billionaires out of just a handful of people.

Speaker 2 (15:23):
And that's what's not like the United States. No, actually
it is where we take a bit of a moral
superior pose. However, is that with the publicly traded oil companies,
we have the option to benefit by investing in them,
and then they get the tax breaks so that we

(15:44):
make more money. It's totally different.

Speaker 5 (15:46):
Told this regime together. That's what needs to be addressed.
The way to address it to the benefit of the
Venezuelan people is to get private companies that are not
from Iran or somewhere else to go in invest in
the equipment that hasn't been invested in twenty years, because
none of the profits that have been made from the
oil has been reinvested. It's all been stolen. And that's
going to take outside companies that come in and know

(16:08):
how to do that. That the people who do this
stuff will know how to do it. But it all
begins with dramatic changes at the way that on the
way that the authorities that are in charge of that
industry behave.

Speaker 2 (16:19):
Okay, Will American oil companies go into Venezuela, fix up
all the equipment, pump the oil more efficiently, and then
give the proceeds to the Venezuelan people or are the
proceeds going to go to the American oil companies and
then investors in the American oil companies. Right, So here's

(16:42):
where my dilemma is. If this were some sort of
an altruistic act where we say we can't watch this
sort of horror go on any longer in Venezuela and
we have to depose this guy, then that would be
one thing. But we saw this play out in Iraq.
We saw Saddam Hussein get pulled out of a fox
shool and then later executed after a trial, and we said, well,

(17:05):
that was for that was to liberate the people, and
we watch Iran continue to step on their people. Although
the President did say that if Iran cracks down on
the protesters there, he's gonna he's gonna intervene, that remains
to be seen because we've seen other countries crack down
to protesters before Taiwan, So where is our line? Where's
our consistency back to Rubio.

Speaker 5 (17:26):
And until those changes happen, this quarantine will remain in place.

Speaker 9 (17:29):
Chevron is the only American company working in Venezuela right now,
only American oil company working in Venezuela right now. Have
you gotten commitments from any other US oil companies to
go in.

Speaker 5 (17:41):
I haven't spoken to US oil companies in the last
few days, but we're pretty certain that there will be
dramatic interest from Western companies. Non Russian, non Chinese companies
will be very interested.

Speaker 2 (17:52):
Nah, non Russian, non Chinese companies. That's that's what we're saying.
We're only going to allow American company are Western companies
we may I don't know. Maybe we're gonna let BEP
you in there, I don't know. But what happens if
Russia and China see this as an opportunity. This is
where things get a little bit tricky. What happens if

(18:13):
Russia says, oh, maybe we have an interest in Venezuela.
After all, so many of those sanctioned tankers we're headed
to Russia right now. We've got we've got another standoff
going on with the Russian what is now considered a
Russian tanker Russia says, you have to let him through.
What happens when China says, wait a minute, Wait a minute,
you can't just take the Venezuelan oil they were supplying us.

(18:33):
You can't just take that oil and all of a
sudden claim that it's yours. What happens when when all
of a sudden there's escalation from these other countries that
are run by authoritarian dictators. This is where it's going
to be really interesting to see. And I hope that,
I hope that Marco Rubio has a steady hand enough
to be able to work his diplomacy internationally, because it
could get up real ugly, real fast. That's my hesitation.

(18:57):
My optimism is, Okay, we got the guy out of there,
We're gonna get the oil pumping, and this is gonna
benefit everyone. That's my that's my hope. I continue to
be mildly skeptical. All Right, It's been another tough year
for the studios. We're gonnahift gears a little bit here
because I'm tired of talking about politics, but a tough
year for the studios. The latest on these slow crawl

(19:17):
back to success and how Hollywood's biggest win of the year,
anyone start as a movie. There's no business like show business.

Speaker 1 (19:25):
Nuts, you're listening to KFI AM six forty on demand.

Speaker 2 (19:32):
There's no business like show business. Ah, very good, very good, Kla.
Nice to see you, Brigitta.

Speaker 10 (19:40):
Huh hey, great to see you, guys. It's been so long.

Speaker 2 (19:44):
I know it has so people that are unfamiliar. Brigitta
is almost always with us since I mean, however, you
were doing a lot of filling during the week I
was for debor Mark, I know she was out. Yes,
they sacrificed me on the weekends, which was nice for
me but probably kind of boring for you guys. Yeah,
it was.

Speaker 10 (20:01):
I'm great.

Speaker 2 (20:01):
Yeah, that's fair. Yeah, yeah, now that's fair. That's fair.
We were kind of bummed. But you know, we're excited
that you're back and then you can play along with
us a little bit here, all right, So I'm good, good,
good here, Okay, great, Yeah, I love your enthusiasm. That's great,
keep that up. Wow. Yikes, okay, So Box Office twenty
twenty five wise bit of a stinker. Yeah, it was

(20:25):
kind of a booger. However, it was not as big
a booger as last year, so that's kind of good. Actually,
I was reporting North American box office falling short of
nine billion dollars that analysts were projecting heading into the year.
They say that as thanks to underperforming sequels and superhero
movies that stunk. Largely domestic entertainment trends do tend to

(20:49):
do very well amid inflation and economic concertainty as people
pull back from price your international travel. But while concerts
and theme parks boomed in the US this year, theaters struggled.
Signaling box office business faces unique challenges, and of course
it hurts us as much as or more than anybody
else in the country. Looking back at it looks like

(21:11):
twenty twenty three was the decent year. Ish it was
the one that was closest to hitting that nine billion
dollar mark. Most of the box office is driven by
the summer revenue. Twenty twenty three was big in the summer.
Didn't was that one of the big was that the
big Avengers thing? Probably? I don't know, I can't keep up. However,

(21:32):
the last couple of years summers were pretty flat, just
shy of four billion dollars. There were a few hits
Leelo and Stitch. Superman was solid, however, they say a
sluggis Summer and Fall dragged down the overall results, and
I believe I know why, and it has everything to
do with streaming. It's everything to do with streaming. And
I made this point when Superman came out. I said, man,

(21:56):
I want to see this movie. And I saw some
people online that I do not like James Gunn. I
thought that was really interesting because I think, I think
James Gunn is great. I love what he's done with
a lot of different things. I love what he did
with Peacemaker. I love what he's doing a Superman. I
love James Gunn. I think he's I think he's brilliant.
I saw some haters, but eyeah, yeah, hater's gonna hate.

(22:17):
So the thing is, though, is that Superman comes out
and I thought, man, I want to go see this.
I want to go see it. I want to go
see it, but I'm already paying eighteen bucks a month
for HBO and HBO Max whatever, right, And so I thought,
how long is it going to be before that is,
before it hits streaming anyway, and I can watch it
for free now. I did end up paying for it

(22:39):
ahead of time because I think it made it to
Amazon at about four weeks maybe it was six, and
then it was streaming for free like two weeks after that.
I did end up paying whatever it is, twenty twenty
five bucks to rent the thing, so I did. I
did put some money in the pockets of the people.
But I think streaming is one of one of those
things that people go, why do I need to go
to the movies when this streaming studios are putting out

(23:02):
these hits. I don't need to go. I don't I
don't need it. However, there may be there may be
a solution in the problem. And I know that sounds
very meta, but follow me on. This end of the
year comes around, box office is hurting. Oh booger, my

(23:25):
audio didn't copyright here, Kayles, So I'm just gonna have
to tell a story. Who's in charge of making sure
I don't screw up my audio? No, I'm in charge
for if you're unfamiliar, I'm in charge of my audio.
But Kaya's in charge of making sure I don't screw
it up. She didn't do that, so I blame her.

Speaker 10 (23:40):
It's okay.

Speaker 2 (23:41):
Accountability is not my strong suit.

Speaker 10 (23:43):
Kill even in the new year, It's okay.

Speaker 2 (23:46):
So get this I think that there may be an
opportunity see Stranger Things. They did that. They did that
release in the theater, the theatrical release of the season
of the series finale of Stranger Things twenty five million dollars.

Speaker 6 (24:00):
Boom.

Speaker 2 (24:01):
How's that for a nice wrap to the year. Huh
pulling an extra twenty twenty five mil. It's pretty solid.
Here's where I think it was really interesting. And I
don't know if there needs to be a new model here,
but there may need to be a new model. Get this.
According to La Times, Matt and Ross Duffer's supernatural thriller

(24:23):
debuted simultaneously on the streaming platform and six hundred cinemas
on New Year's Eve, and then held an encore showing
all throughout New Year's Day. Maybe you went and saw
it in the theater A great place to see it.
Don't give me any spoilers. I just started season five.
I went back and I started from the beginning because
I was like, I want to make sure I can
put it all together. So I just got through season

(24:44):
four and I just watched the first episode of season five.
So don't don't give me any spoilers. But seems good
so far. You know it's all I got. But here's
the deal. They couldn't charge for tickets because the cast
has terms in their contracts for residuals. And so they said, whoa,

(25:04):
we don't want to pay the cast. They're already paying
the cast. What they didn't want was for a bunch
of money to be flowing in that they had to
be able to check in the future. Blah blah blah,
whatever it is, right, So, for whatever reason they could,
they couldn't charge for tickets in the theaters, and instead
you had the theaters that theaters sold mandatory food and

(25:31):
beverage vouchers. So AMC and cinema theaters charging twenty dollars
for the concessions. Regal was charging eleven dollars for their
mandatory food and beverage vouchers. The eleven was because of
eleven the character and the show. Now here's where I
think this could be really interesting. Do first of all,

(25:53):
I don't know if this is going to end up
in court, because a mandatory food and beverage voucher is
equivalent to if it's many, I mean, that's isn't that
the same as buying a ticket and getting free food
and beverage. I mean, what's the difference is semantics? Right?
So first of all, who knows, maybe there's gonna be lawsuit.
I have no idea, But is it possible that we
start seeing a different model now where we start seeing

(26:17):
ticket prices come down, but we start seeing some revenue
sharing with the cinemas. I don't know how this is
gonna play out, but what I do know is that
the enthusiasm around this was built because of the streamer,
and so the same thing that takes so much of
the enthusiasm away from the theaters. Why am I gonna
go pay to Washington Theater and pay first concessions at

(26:39):
the theater if I can watch it at home? And
I know many of you are saying because you get
the theatrical experience and YadA, YadA, YadA. Cool. Look, I
love watching football too, and I also have a very big,
expensive TV I can watch football on and I'm closer
to the action than I am. If I get the
nosebleed seats for three hundred dollars at so fine, okay, atmosphere, everything,

(27:00):
that's great. I'm watching most of my football on TV.
I might go to a game or two a year,
I'm watching most of my movies on the streamer. I
may go to I may go to the theater a
couple of times a year. Is this a new way
to get people back into the theater? Am I just
talking to my butt? Absolutely? I don't know. I don't
know what the future is gonna hold. What I do

(27:21):
know is that the model right now is not working,
and so to see some experimentation kind of like it,
take big swings. If you're gonna strike out, strike out swinging,
take big swings. Meanwhile, it looks like next year or
this year, I guess now could be off to a really,
really good start. We'll tell you why. And real tragedy

(27:46):
striking already too early for tragedy, but it's happening. It's
not all glitz and glam Sadly, You've got an awful
lot of celebrities that have real life starting to show
signs of cracking. Tabloids are there to pounce on it.
One tragedy, one very public unravel just punched through the
fantasy of Tinseltown. The latest and the troubled Lives of
our favorite stars is next on Chris Merril.

Speaker 1 (28:07):
You're listening to KFI AM six forty on demand.

Speaker 2 (28:15):
La Fires one year later, airing Wednesday, seven pm. I
believe that's hosted by my friend Michael Monks. He's a
good dude, all right, seven pm Friday, I am six
forty more stimulating talk on Chris Merril. There's no business
like show business. Well, last year stunk as far as

(28:38):
the box office goes, barely keeping up with the year before.
We sold fewer tickets by tens of millions. However, prices
went up and so the actual money brought in was
about to break even. But if you factor in inflation,
not really. No, it's kind of a down year, kind
of a stinker. But is it possible twenty twenty six

(28:58):
is gonna be better?

Speaker 7 (28:59):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (28:59):
Maybe it is possible. Because right now you've got Avatar
Fire and Ash third straight week. They just cleared a
billion dollars worldwide. Wow, who is watching Avatar every I
guess so I it's purely anecdotal. But Avatar Fire and

(29:23):
Ash comes out and all of a sudden, it's playing,
and I went, wait, it's playing. I thought the other
one just came out like, I couldn't keep up with
this one. But it crushes, absolutely crushes the Avatar series
does so, and.

Speaker 11 (29:37):
I've heard I heard it's the same one as Part two,
just it's space or something. It's the same script. I
hear there's the same exact movie again. But hey, if
it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Speaker 2 (29:48):
Oh so you're saying it felt formulaic.

Speaker 10 (29:50):
That's what I mean.

Speaker 2 (29:51):
I haven't seen that.

Speaker 10 (29:52):
That's just what i've heard.

Speaker 11 (29:52):
Okay, but I'm going to check it out and I
will report with facts this time.

Speaker 2 (29:56):
Okay, good. I love that. Just the facts, man, just
the facts. Good effect. Yeah, we see domestic figures released Monday.
We've got estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday US
and Canadian theaters Avatar, Fire and Nash forty million. Forty
million is pretty good on your third week. That is
pretty good. Forty millions a pretty good on your first week.

(30:17):
Forty million on your third week is pretty dynamite. So
nice job, nice job, well done, James Cameron. So I
think that means he can buy another submarine, which is great.
Tragedy struck. Really sad to hear about this. You see
Tommy Lee Jones' Daughter's phone dead in a hotel in
San Francisco.

Speaker 10 (30:38):
So sad.

Speaker 2 (30:39):
This just stinks. It sounds like it might have been
an overdose too. Is that what there's saying? Yeah, that's it. Yeah.
Page six was reporting on the family and whatnot.

Speaker 12 (30:48):
Victoria Jones, the daughter of famed actor Tommy Lee Jones,
was found dead at a California hotel early on New
Year's Day.

Speaker 2 (30:56):
According to reports, she was thirty four.

Speaker 12 (30:58):
Police arrived at the Fairmont San Francisco hotel around three
fourteen am on Thursday after a report of a medical emergency.
The San Francisco Police Department told The Post Jones was
found dead on the fourteenth floor of the hotel by
a guest who thought she had passed out from drinking.
An alerted hotel staff, a source told The Daily Mail
staffers immediately began CPR and called for an ambulance, but

(31:20):
paramedics declared her dead at the scene when they arrived.
San Francisco Fire Department told Page six there were no
signs of foul play and no drug paraphernalia was found
at the scene.

Speaker 2 (31:31):
Okay so Well told The.

Speaker 12 (31:34):
Daily Mail there was also no indication to her death
was a suicide. The medical examiner will investigate the cause
of her death. It's not clear if she was a
guest at the hotel or how she wound.

Speaker 2 (31:43):
Up on the fourteenth floor.

Speaker 12 (31:45):
Jones was the daughter of the Fugitive actor and his
first wife, kimber Lea Cloughley. She acted when she was younger,
appearing alongside her father.

Speaker 2 (31:52):
And men in Black two.

Speaker 12 (31:53):
She also had a role in the TV show One
Tree Hill, and appeared in the two thousand and five
film The Three Burials of Melchiadasi.

Speaker 2 (32:00):
Strata, which that was a really good movie. She was
directed by and starred her father.

Speaker 12 (32:04):
Jones ran into some trouble with the law earlier this year,
and she was arrested at least three times, according to.

Speaker 10 (32:09):
Records obtained by the Post.

Speaker 12 (32:11):
Back in April, she was arrested in Napa County for
obstructing a peace officer, being under the influence of a
controlled substance, and possession of a narcotic controlled substance. Court
documents showed the following months, she was arrested in Santa
Cruz County, and in June, back in Napa County, she
was busted on domestic battery and domestic violence or elder
abuse charges and was later released on bail. Jones pleaded

(32:32):
not guilty in both cases out of Napa County. According
to court records, the San Francisco Medical Examiner and representatives
for Tommy Lee Jones did not immediately respond to the
Posts request for comment.

Speaker 2 (32:43):
Yeah, he the families put out a statement. It's a
it's a pretty boilerplate. It's you know, we're struggling right now.
Please respect our privacy, that kind of thing, which is
that's the right thing to put out. So two years ago,
Tommy Lee Jones petition for her to be placed under
a temporary conservatorship, arguing that she was in danger of

(33:04):
life threatening conduct and needed a drug rehabilitation. A judge
granted that request Toimi Lee Jones asked the court to
dismiss the matter months later, full accounting the case not available,
several records remaining confidential, as is pretty standard when it
comes to these sort of domestic things. The petition that
Tommy Lee Jones filed with the courts in Marine County

(33:31):
said that she was appealing her fourteen day hold there
and asked a conservator to arrange for her to be
moved to a rehabilitation facility immediately upon her release. So anyway,
she had been involuntarily held at a hospital in Green
Bray for being in danger. This is horrifying. I have

(33:54):
to be careful with what I say right now because
this one hits really close, and I want to make
sure that I respect my my own family. But I've
I've got a very similar situation going on in my life,
and right now she's doing great, dish. I still see

(34:17):
a lot of the demons that are hiding in there,
but she's staying away from the alcohol right now. But
it's just terrifying as a parent. My god, we didn't
went down the same road, went down the hole. We
got to get you. We gotta get you to rehab.
We've got to get you away from the bottle. We
got to get you out of the toxic situation. And so,
my god, I see a story like this and I go,

(34:39):
she's thirty four years old and she's still his kid.
You know, I got I got kids. My oldest is thirty,
my youngest, my younger ones are in their twenties and
they're adults. They're still my kids. And so Tommy Lee
Jones and family, I can't even imagine the pain that
you're going through. And I'm terrified. I'm absolutely terrified from

(35:00):
the bottom of my heart. I I I hope, I
hope that if there's a silver lining around this, it's
that I can bring other families into an awareness that
it doesn't just get better by hoping it gets better, right,
because that's what worries me. And I'm the kind of
person that, if I'm being honest, we'll put my head

(35:21):
in the sand and say, well, maybe she'll figure it
out tomorrow. It doesn't. It doesn't really work that way.
And so hopefully this shed some light on families it
may be struggling with something very similar. Bail out of that.
It's a Kayla out of this too much, it's too personal,
it's too much real for me right now, don't do

(35:43):
that very real.

Speaker 6 (35:43):
We don't do that.

Speaker 10 (35:44):
But we like when you get real, Christopher.

Speaker 2 (35:46):
I know, don't do it. It's okay, it's hard on
my heart, okay.

Speaker 10 (35:50):
Own a brighter note.

Speaker 11 (35:51):
One of the articles said that she was only thirty four,
So that made me feel younger.

Speaker 10 (35:56):
Yeah, because I'm like, oh my, that's great, because that's
a young age.

Speaker 11 (35:59):
I always felt all thirty four, she's yeah, only thirty four, crazy.

Speaker 2 (36:03):
Only thirty four, she's only thirty only thirty four, all right.
Imagine you've got opinions. Yeah, we all do, right, and
somebody else has money, Yeah, they all do. We never do.
Silicon Valleys decided that those two things should fight each
other for profit. Time to put your money where your
mouth is. And what has to be the most predatory
business model ever it is next time, Chris Meryl.

Speaker 1 (36:22):
You're listening to KFI AM six forty on demand.

Speaker 2 (36:28):
I had the over. I lost. What do you mean, Well,
we were betting on how long you were gonna go
on news?

Speaker 6 (36:34):
Oh did it go long? Did it?

Speaker 13 (36:35):
No?

Speaker 2 (36:36):
No? It was short? Oh? Ok No, I was betting
on the over. Yeah, I knew that with CALSI. Now
I just throw throw a little wager up there and
I say, will the KFI newscasts last more than two
and a half minutes? And I was like, oh, take
the over, Brigitta, she's been gone for a while. She
loves herself, she loves her voice.

Speaker 6 (36:55):
I don't have a.

Speaker 10 (36:55):
Lot of stuff in here tonight. I'm not gonna lie.

Speaker 2 (36:57):
I know I should have taken the under. Kaylee was smart,
she took the under. Kaela just cleared six cents k
IF I AM six forty more stimulating talk, and it
seems like you can. You can bet on just about anything.

Speaker 1 (37:10):
Now you know.

Speaker 2 (37:13):
The sports betting apps those are those are no go
in California, no go. But you can still use Calshi
and poly Market and you can still bet on sports
through those those are still legal. How might you ask
that's that's a really good question, you see, because those
aren't bets. Those are investments in the same way that

(37:38):
the stock market is basically America's casino. Calshy and poly
Market have decided that all you're doing is just you're
investing in futures. I mean, isn't that basically what you
do when you put money down. I mean, if you
wanted to bet on the Chargers, you put money down
in the future of the outcome of that game. That's

(37:59):
kind of what they're saying with these different Polymarkets and
calsh And according to the CEO of calshis to finance
financialize everything and create a tradable asset out of any
difference in opinion. This from Gizmoto popped up on the
Future of Global Marcus twenty twenty five conference held by

(38:19):
Citadel Securities last month to float the notion that everything
can be an asset if you're willing to put money
on it. And I love the way the writer said it.
It's an idea that doesn't actually make any sense if
you think about it for more than a second. The
idea that you can resolve a difference of opinion by
turning it into a financial contract where people put money
on either side of the outcome. Is it a resolution tool.

(38:40):
It's just a bet that kel she is taking a
cut of. In fact, you would have made a decent
amount of money last year as far as investments go.
You would not have kept up with the S and P,
you would not have kept up with the DOW, but
you would have beaten inflation had you simply put money
on whether or not Jesus Christ would return in twenty

(39:01):
twenty five, three point three million dollars was put on
the investment the Future's investment of whether or not Christ
would return in twenty twenty five. Most of the money
came to no. People said no, not coming back, but
there were enough people who said, yeah, I'll take a
shot at it. That the probability of his return based

(39:25):
on opinions stayed above three percent throughout most of the spring.
And if you bet no, back in April when the
second coming, speculation was that the highest you would have
turned five and a half percent. That's better than US
Treasury bills. That's not a bad return on investment. Although

(39:46):
kill it as our resident religio. So is it isn't
it fair to say that if you put money on
Christ coming back, that it guarantees that he doesn't come back?
Because it isn't it. No one would ever know the
time or the day or whatever when the return happens.

Speaker 10 (40:03):
And that's what that's what they say.

Speaker 2 (40:05):
Yeah? Or am I overreading into that? Is it? Is
it more like? Uh, well yeah, I mean you just
said he was gonna come back this year, but you
know that it was gonna be like July ninth. I'm
gonna be splitting hairs here.

Speaker 10 (40:17):
I mean if you just guess a date and then
it happens, Like what.

Speaker 2 (40:20):
If I guess a year and it happens? Is that wrong?

Speaker 10 (40:22):
I mean, I'm just guessing. I don't really do this
structure question.

Speaker 11 (40:27):
Okay, Yeah, you're going to hell if you guys.

Speaker 2 (40:32):
No, I like that. I'm just going to hell. All right, perfect,
that's outstanding, all right, very good? Uh? Polymarket cal She
often held This is from la times, often held out
as a cutting edge way to give reliable odds to
a crucial real world event like an elections result or
the outbreak of a war by tethering the power of
high stakes betting to the wisdom of the crowd. Look

(40:55):
simply because I mean Plato said this, simply because the
crowd believes it doesn't mean it's right. Isn't that the
isn't that the downfall of of democracies. Why Plato said
democracy was not a good, uh model of governance, because
that's just simply mob rule. Well, in the same way
can be mob opinion. For instance, years ago, the the

(41:21):
New England Patriots were unstoppable, literally unstoppable. They won every
game in the season. They went into the Super Bowl
and they were up against the Giants, who were a
wild card team that snuck into the playoffs and somehow
made it into the Super Bowl, and the Patriots had
heavy odds to win. The vast majority of people thought

(41:43):
the Patriots are going to mop the floor with the Giants,
and lo and behold, Eli Manning and the Giants have
a miraculous fourth down catch uh. And it was a
It was an incredible drive at the end of the
game the Giants won. So simply because a mob believes
that something is going to happen doesn't mean it's going

(42:04):
to happen. Although it is curious when you have someone
who puts a tremendous amount of money, I mean real
money down on something that isn't really on anybody's radar,
like regime change from Devin Politics, who I guess is
a podcaster talking about how the futures market, polymarket and

(42:29):
Calshi made somebody very wealthy just yesterday.

Speaker 7 (42:34):
A brand new account joined poly market in December of
twenty twenty five and instantly started placing bets on one thing, Venezuela.

Speaker 2 (42:42):
Well, they had not been poly market before then. They
joined last month started putting a bunch of money on Venezuela.
But how much money is a bunch of money? Remember
you can bet very very little, not.

Speaker 7 (42:53):
Sports or elections, only Venezuela, and these bets were very specific.

Speaker 14 (42:58):
Take a look.

Speaker 7 (42:58):
According to the publicly available data here, this account bet
heavily on outcomes that most people would consider long shots.
They all have the deadline January thirty first, twenty twenty six,
the first one being Maduro out by then, well, the
US invade Venezuela by then Trump and folks who were
powers by then US forces in Venezuela.

Speaker 14 (43:15):
By then, entry prizes were as low as six cents.

Speaker 2 (43:18):
Okay, you're throwing a nickel at it. That's one thing.
I'm gonna throw a nickel at it. Eh, I'm not
out anything if it hits. I won seventy five cents,
and I can tell everybody I want, right, Okay? Is
that what happened with this one account that just joined
polymarket and then started betting only on whether or not
there would be military intervention in Venezuela and if Maduro

(43:40):
would be deposed.

Speaker 14 (43:41):
Meaning the market thought these were extremely unlikely.

Speaker 7 (43:43):
Then within days events unfolded that matched these predictions perfectly,
and as you can tell, the account cashed out, making
over four hundred thousand dollars.

Speaker 2 (43:52):
Holy cal they're not betting six cents and clearing four
hundred grand.

Speaker 14 (43:58):
You can see right there in the top left this account.

Speaker 2 (44:00):
Joined in the SIMS I can't it's radio number of.

Speaker 14 (44:02):
Twenty twenty five.

Speaker 7 (44:03):
A lot of people think this account has some sort
of connection to Donald Trump, although that has not been proven.
But the timing alone raises a lot of questions. These
are the only four predictions they made, and they opened
the account last month. It just so happens that every
single thing they predicted was correct. If somebody had advanced
knowledge of major military decisions, profiting from that information would
raise a lot of very serious legal and ethical concerns.

Speaker 2 (44:25):
Yeah, it would. And if I had any money on
it and I just lost my money on it, I'd
be a little bummed. Because that's Okay, Let's let's look
at it this way. If we are going to say
that Calshe and Polly Market are not gambling sites. Instead,
they are futures markets in the same way that you
can bet on futures of commodities. You can bet on

(44:49):
soybean futures and corn futures. You can bet on futures
of your favorite stocks. Oh, I'm going to bet on
Tesla futures. Although wait its Tesla's public ali is Tesla
publicly traded? I didn't. I'm not back anyway, Okay, but
you can bet on the Ford futures there there, I'll
use what I know general motors futures. You can bet
out all kinds of futures. Right, So, if we're gonna

(45:11):
say that Calci and Polymarket are simply futures trading and
not gambling sites. Tesla is publicly traded. Okay, good, I
was afraid I got that wrong. I can't remember which
one's Muscus publicly trading which ones he's not. If we're
going to say that that Calci and Polymarket are not

(45:32):
gambling sites and that's why we can use them in California,
that they're simply futures trading, then wouldn't it make sense
that the SEC needs to regulate these and look into
suspicious behaviors such as some rando opening an account putting
thirty grand on long shots and then clearing four hundred
thousand dollars on military action. Somebody knew what was going on,

(45:59):
Somebody knew what the plan was going to be, and
somebody kept putting more and more money on it. And
as they continue to put money on it, knowing what
the plans were for US intervention in Venezuela, they knew
they were gonna make a killing. Now, one thing we
can we can say is dirty as they are, and

(46:20):
as slimy as they are, and as much as they
have flaunted insider trading rules in the past, even creating
new laws to prevent themselves from insider trading, still finding
ways to use insider trading. What we do no is
it wasn't anybody in Congress, because the White House has
made very clear they did not consult Congress before taking

(46:44):
action in Venezuela, which, by the way, is not unusual
if you're doing secret operations, it's not unusual opening salvo,
but then follow up would be would need congressional approval,
so that's not unusual. What I'm saying is, whoever it
is in the administration that knew what was going on
on Calshi or on Polymarket, wasn't somebody in Congress because

(47:08):
the White House gave them an alibi already that was nice.
So I mean somebody within the administration or adjacent to
it absolutely could have been an aide to Marco Rubio
something of that sort, right, knew what was going on
and cashed in bigly. So if this is not a
betting website Calci and Polymarket, if this is not a

(47:29):
betting website and it's instead a futures trading website, then
the SEC needs to investigate flat out all right, Still
to come, the Great Doctor Wendy Walsh is gonna join us.
Saw a strange headline I have to ask her about.
Is heterosexuality cringe? Oh man? Not only am I old,

(47:52):
I'm bolding. I use a bunch of terms from the
nineties now just being straight means I have another level
of cringe. I can't win.

Speaker 1 (48:02):
You're listening to KFI AM six forty on demand.

Speaker 2 (48:07):
Always a pleasure hanging out with you, and I do
appreciate you making us a part of your evening. Pretty dynamo.
We'll check with the great doctor Wendy Wallshare coming up
in just a few moments, and do you want to
say this? KFI is going to be airing a news
special and the anniversary of the La Fires La Fires
one year later is going to air on Wednesday seven
PMKFI AM six forty. Think about that a year ago.

(48:30):
Remember they're thinking the Palisades fire was the guy who
was setting off fireworks and that they didn't get the
The initial fire put out quite right right away, and
it smoldered for like a week before it kicked up again.
So at this time a year ago, there was a
disaster just looming. It was just hanging there waiting to

(48:57):
turn ugly, right, It was just that it's just creepy
when I think about that. All right, So reading this
story that I thought was really interesting, is having a
boyfriend embarrassing? Now was an article that who had this?
Vogue put it out. If someone so much as says

(49:21):
my boyfriend and social media, they get muted. There's nothing
I hate more than following someone for fun, only for
their content to become my boyfriend defied suddenly, and they
say probably because for so long it felt like we
were living in what one of my favorite substackers calls
boyfriend land, a world where women's online identities centered around
the lives of their partners. Situation rarely seen reversed. I mean,

(49:45):
I've seen it reversed. I get it. Okay, you don't
like that they're doting on their boyfriend, you don't like
it that you feel like their identity is intertwined, all right,
But can we just be fair? How many times have
you heard me talk about my family on the air?
I talk about my wife all the time, I talk
about my kids, I talk about it is part of

(50:08):
my identity. And somebody else is upset because someone else
has a boyfriend. They don't like it. So I was
reading the kind of a follow up interview that Vox
was doing. Is heterosexuality cringe? Come on? In recent months,
freelance writer noting a surprising trend under social media feeds,

(50:29):
women had stopped posting pictures of their boyfriends for a
long time. Boyfriend picks where a good social media fodder,
whether on vacation or chilling at home. These images sent
a message of heterosexual bliss, of contented couplehood, a world,
as Joseph wrote, where women's online identity centered around the
lives of their partners in a situation rarely seeing reverse.
You just heard me say that. Then the boyfriends disappeared.

(50:50):
You might see a hand or a shadow where the
back of a head, but the faces of these men
were cropped out or blurred out, as if they want
to erase the fact that they exist without actually not
posting them. And then they went on to talk about, oh,
if you're in a relationship, is that cringe? Now? If
you're in a straight relationship, if you're gonna, if you're
gonna a gay or lesbian relationship, well then you can
still go on social media and brag about being in

(51:11):
a relationship. I guess let me just tell you as
we evaluate what's happening in real terms. Clickbait, that's what's happening.
Clickbait is happening. Somebody else's feed is showing them things
that they don't like, and they're they're scrolling past it
until they find something they do like, and then they
heart that they favorite that they like that, and then

(51:34):
the algorithm picks up on it, and then they say,
there's a disturbing trend online. No, there's a disturbing trend
on your feed. You didn't like that people were posting
pictures of themselves with their boyfriends, and so you scrolled
past it. But when you saw someone posting pictures of
themselves with their same sex partner, you liked that, and
then your feed started filling up with other people because

(51:55):
the algorithm thinks you are an LGBTQ advocate.

Speaker 9 (51:59):
Cool.

Speaker 2 (52:00):
That's great, but don't tell us that all of a sudden,
the feed or that social media has changed, that it's
no longer cool to show pictures of you and your boyfriend,
or that it's no longer cool to be straight. Come on,
this is clickbait, and the idea here is let's click

(52:20):
on this so that other people will read our musings
and then they'll all think that we are cutting edge. Nah,
is it embarrassing to post online that you have a
significant other. Yes, it always has been. That's not new.
That's That's exactly why we came up with the word cringe.

(52:43):
It is cringe. We're all like, I gotta see this
person in there. They're a blissful honeymoon stage Marth. We
all feel that way. My wife still posts pictures of
her and I been together twenty one years. She puts
that crap online and people love it. They're like, you
may this, It's so cute, and I'm like, it's so cringe,
but she loves it. Okay, cool, whatever. Just let people

(53:06):
live their own lives. Yeah it's cringe. Yeah it's embarrassing.
But if you're not embarrassed by anything, go on. You
know what, this year, don't worry so much about what
other people are posting. In fact, this year, log off
every now and again. If you start seeing things you
don't like, log off. Maybe don't write your Vox article.

(53:26):
Maybe you don't write your Vogue article. Maybe just log off.
The trend, they say, is not about disliking relationships themselves,
but about discomfort with publicly performing heterosexual romance and spaces
that reward detachment and humor. Okay, you don't like public
displays of affection, and you're going to say you just

(53:47):
don't like public displays of straight affection because you feel
like you're gonna offend your friends if you say you
don't like public displays of affection, and they're gonna call
you homophobic, so instead you're gonna be heterophobic. Just don't
be phobic. You don't like public displays of affection. I
get it. I don't either, And you know what, I
married somebody that does. And you know what that means.
That means I shut up and I kiss her in public.

(54:09):
That's what it means. That's the deal. That's what I
signed up for. But I didn't like it. I saw
it online. It made me feel sad. Barf. Do you
guys get doctor? Weddy's still connecting? She cool? All right?

(54:30):
I got nothing else to say, Ali, do you have
anything else to fill up with? Here? Virginia's you want
to jump in? I got nothing else? Nothing good? Yeah? Okay,
this is great. Feel really good about this. Normally they'd say, hey, Chris,
why don't you just fill ninety seconds, and I go, yeah,
no problem, Why I just fill ninety seconds any burn
throwing one material? And the problem is when you have

(54:53):
to fill ninety seconds, then you feel like, Okay, do
I start a whole new subject. I can start a
new topic. I have lots of stories to let's go,
just start a new topic.

Speaker 10 (55:01):
Do it?

Speaker 2 (55:02):
I can, but I don't think I can knock it out.
And I don't think I can knock it out in
sixty seconds. Oh how about this doctor Wendy watsh was
joining us right now.

Speaker 6 (55:11):
I am finally.

Speaker 2 (55:13):
Because I was about to have to start talking about
real IDs and DMV software and you didn't want that.
Nobody wants to do you have.

Speaker 6 (55:18):
A problem with being heterosexual?

Speaker 2 (55:20):
No, no, no, there's people writing these articles that are like, oh,
it's not cool to show pictures of your boyfriend and
your social media feeds. It's cringe heado relationships and social
media is cringing. And I'm like, all relationship public displays
of affection are embarrassing and cringey. That's kind of the right, right,
Why that's the ritual? Yeah?

Speaker 6 (55:42):
Please, I'll tell you what.

Speaker 13 (55:43):
From an evolutionary psychology perspective and a sociology perspective. So,
right now, in our modern mating marketplace, in modern capitalist America,
we have an oversupply of successful women, and so therefore
a group of women are not going to find me,
all right, that's just the truth. They're not going to reproduce,

(56:04):
so therefore they have to validate their situation by.

Speaker 6 (56:08):
Saying, how dare you?

Speaker 13 (56:09):
But eh, you, oh, I don't want to see your boyfriend.
Single's cool, it's in because it's not their fault. I'm
not blaming any individual woman. I'm just saying the mating
marketplace is very tough. It's not that we have more
women in general. It's that we have more women who
are college educated and making more money, and they don't

(56:30):
want to their words, date down or settle. I'm out
here telling them you better look a little closer at
that power guy because he might just be a guy
who can power a stroller.

Speaker 6 (56:41):
All right.

Speaker 13 (56:41):
Oh yeah, yeah, So that's what happens is our culture
now is trying to justify normalize not having a boyfriend
because a giant chunk of successful women are not going
to get to pro create, are not going to find
a mate.

Speaker 2 (57:00):
This is why I love listening to doctor, Wendy, You're
just smart.

Speaker 13 (57:04):
And that's also why same sex relationships, especially with females,
are much more condoned than they've ever been in our.

Speaker 2 (57:13):
History, because of the the what'd you call it, the
dating market, reproduction.

Speaker 6 (57:18):
Marketing, because of the mating market place.

Speaker 13 (57:20):
I mean, relationships are so good for us, all the youngest,
a stress reducer, it's good for your health, it's good.
So if you can't find a dude, get a girlfriend.

Speaker 2 (57:32):
Yeah, well, I mean even straight guys have the same thing. Like,
I've got really good guy friends, and I find myself
to be I think myself as being very fortunate. I
have a group of guy friends that I believe I
could genuinely call if something really bad were happening, like
if I were going through a divorce, if I lost
a child, something like that. I think they would be

(57:52):
there for me, right, And I don't think I don't.
I don't know that every guy has that.

Speaker 13 (57:57):
No, there's a lot of isolation that men are suffering.
And then the other problem is there's a bunch of
even though there's this oversupply of successful women, there's a
bunch of guys who are being excluded from the mating
marketplace because the dating apps trick women into believing that
this top ten percent of alpha males are accessible to

(58:17):
all because they show their picture to them.

Speaker 2 (58:20):
Oh, I mean yeah, yeah.

Speaker 13 (58:23):
But again it's all done by technology dating apps. It's
no individual person's fault.

Speaker 2 (58:29):
Yeah.

Speaker 6 (58:29):
I want to say that there's no Yeah.

Speaker 2 (58:31):
Dating is not like door Dash. You don't just get
to order.

Speaker 6 (58:33):
What you want right exactly.

Speaker 13 (58:35):
But I do want to say there are ways to
hack the system, and I know them because it worked
for me.

Speaker 2 (58:40):
And I Ah, we're out of time. Wendy Oliver's yelling
at me, but I want the answer to that, all right,
Doctor Wendy Walsh is next. Thank you so much, Kayla,
brilliant job tonight. You busted your tail. Oliver, You've kept
this on the air for ninety minutes. Good for you
and Brigina. How did we ever get by without you?

Speaker 6 (58:59):
We miss you, miss good to be back.

Speaker 2 (59:02):
I love you all. Have a great night. Back next week.

Speaker 1 (59:04):
Chris Merril kf I A M six forty on demand