June 20, 2025 • 26 mins
Final Thoughts of the Week: Alex Padilla * Protests and America * Amazon and AI * US V. Iran
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Lad with most And there are some things you just
don't do. There are some things you just do not
(00:22):
ever do. And I like to use relationships because everyone's
been in a relationship. Not everyone has worked for an
elected official, or been to a press briefing in a
professional capacity, or attended a city council meeting. Not everyone
has those experiences to draw upon. But as surely as
you can hear me, Sam Carnesia Tawala, Stephan, even Mark,
(00:43):
everyone you know who is not a child, well, Mark
is kind of a child. But outside of that, everyone's
been in a relationship. And there are some things you
just don't do, Like, for example, you don't invite excess
to your wedding, you don't date excess of your friends.
And they're not hard and fast rules, but you know,
(01:04):
like put it this way, it's like put on a
wedding invitation right next to formal attire reception at four pm.
No kids are people who you've previously slept with with
the bride or groom. It's not a hard and fast rule,
but what is it. It's a courtesy, it's a level
of respect, it's a norm. It's a tradition that most of.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Us kind of know.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Don't need to be told, And let me stay with
weddings for a second. Women pretty much know that you
don't wear white to someone else's wedding, and Carnecia shaking
her head, she knows what I'm talking about. You don't
try to upstage the bride and oh, yes, I've seen
it doesn't make it any less cringey. There are some
things you just don't do. And if the expected attire
(01:43):
on that invitation I told you about says formal or
semi formal attire.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
That doesn't mean show up in a bikini or speed up.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Why because there are some things said with me you
just don't do, because you respect either the person, the tradition,
or both. This country, and I'm getting to the point,
does not have any more dignity, decency, or decorum, and
does not see any value in it.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
There used to be a time that.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
We would laugh at like the South Korean National Assembly
or the British Parliament, and how members would openly jeer
and physically confront each other, sometimes even coming to blows.
Remember we used to laugh at that. We the United
States of America used to laugh at other countries and
their incibility because we and our haughty arrogance saw ourselves
(02:31):
above such indignity, indecency, and in decorum, because that would
never happen here, so we thought, and I remember a
very young Congressman by the name of Lindsey Graham back
in nineteen ninety eight, during the Bill Clinton impeachment, made
this appeal to our higher beliefs about what we expect
out of the Oval Office, our institutions, talking about, you know,
(02:52):
we had a moral responsibility. We need to bring respect
back to the institution of the of the presidency.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
We need to cleanse.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
The Oval office, talked about cleansing, honor, integrity, these high
minded ideals.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing
the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to
the office.
Speaker 1 (03:21):
But we're not in that country anymore, even though many
of those same people in office then are in office now.
Back in nineteen ninety eight, I'm sure that the incident
between the Secretary of Homeland Security Christy Nolan and Senator
Alex Padilla.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
That would have never happened.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
It would never have happened, It would have been unthinkable
and unconscionable. It would have never risen to the perceived
need to forcibly remove a senior senator from a room
and place him in handcuffs. It would have never happened.
But you know what, we're not that country anymore. We
are a shameless nation, lacking the self awareness to best
(03:59):
a preciate the value of shame. Shame is valuable. Let
me go back to that wedding analogy I keep talking about.
Imagine you're a guest at a wedding for a close
family member, a friend. Let's say you're a groomsman or
a bridesmaid, and you get into a fistfight with someone
on the dance floor. Shame would remind you that it
(04:20):
should have never happened, regardless who may have been right
or wrong.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
That was that was a solution available other than a fight.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
But now you've embarrassed yourself, you've embarrassed your spouse, you've
embarrassed your date, your family, your friend's colleagues, and ruin
somebody's wedding. But when you don't have any shame, none
of that matters. Here's the problem. When you no longer
have any shame, there is no bottom. There is no bottom,
there is nothing off limits. Why not have a fistfight
(04:49):
on the congressional floor. Why not arrest any member of
Congress who asked the question at your press conference that
you don't approve of because they walk forward somewhat aggressively.
Why not man handle anyone you want anywhere because nothing
matters anymore. Imagine standing up at the State of the
Union and then yelling out a question at the president,
whoever the president is, and then forcibly removed and handcuffed
(05:11):
in congressional chambers.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
I can't love this country more than it is willing
to love itself. Impolitic and uncomfortable questions happen at every
single town hall, every single council meeting, every elected official
or appointees press conference, every single one. I've covered them.
They happen every single time. Because if what happened today,
the physical manhandling of Senator Padea with no self reflection, is.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
Deemed okay and acceptable.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Then we've lost our way as a country, and I
don't think there's any way back. There is no then
shining city on a hill. There is no American exceptionalism.
If that is who we are right now, there is
no great America to get back to or make ourselves
back into, because if today, just today is a supposed
step closer to making America great again, then in fact
(06:06):
we were never great and just another one of those
countries we used to laugh at because we would then
be no better than them, you know, the same countries
which have since passed us in education, passed us in healthcare,
passed us in technology, and most importantly in economic strength.
We used to laugh at them, but now we're behind
(06:28):
them and all those leading indicators. I can't care about
this country more than it does itself, and you cannot
shame those who have no shame. You may now kiss
the bride for kay. If I am six forty, I'm
mo healthy. America is such a fickle place. It is
(06:59):
a place founded on protest, In fact, founded on a
violent protest. Truth be told, Boston Tea Party, American Revolution,
War of eighteen twelve, Civil War, YadA, YadA, YadA, blah
blah blah. All were varying levels of violent protests, and
every major move forward in this country's bid to form
(07:20):
a more perfect union has been thanks to say it
with me protest, and in every single instance, the status
quo at the time, resisted it every single time.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Here are just a few examples.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
I'm talking to you on a Monday, after a weekend
in which we did what we wanted, including protests, celebrated
Father's Day, went to the movies, whatever. The modern concept
of the weekend Saturday and Sunday off primarily arose from
the Industrial Revolution in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Initially,
factory of workers, many of whom were former farmers, disliked
(07:56):
the whole idea of a seven day work week. When
the nineteenth twenty nine stock market crash crippled the world economy,
the resulting Great Depression led to mass strikes in response
to rising unemployment and poverty, among other things. Strikes, of course,
are protests by another name. Long story short. President FDR
signed the Fair Labor Standards Act into law in nineteen
(08:19):
thirty eight. Imagine that protests women all around the country
mostly either voted for Donald Trump or Kamala Harris in
twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
But the women's suffrage movement included.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Peaceful protests, lobbying, civil disobedience, and it took decades of agitation.
In other words, protests to get the Nineteenth Amendment to
the US Constitution in nineteen twenty. Women's suffrage was a
wildly unpopular movement. In the beginning, women voting America was
(08:51):
not having it. But here we are today, protests and
the status quo resisted. It was uncomfortable for the country.
But when it's uncomfortable, it means the constitution is doing
its job. The modern civil rights movement, you've heard me
reference it many times. Lots of marches, protests, civil disobedience,
(09:11):
even riots, the height of constitutional discomfort in America. I
would argue the status quo resisted every step of the way.
Most people don't know the Civil rights and ending segregation
was not supported by the majority of Americans when the
Civil Rights Act was passed in nineteen sixty four. Most
(09:31):
people were not down with that cause. You should sense
a theme here. Protests have never been popular, never, because
if they were, we would need them in the first place.
Just about everything we called normal today was wildly unpopular yesterday.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
The people who.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Are not protesting are never appreciative of those who protest
or their methods. That's just a fact. In every instance.
The mass protests against the Vietnam War didn't end the war,
but it surely shaped American foreign policy. The more unpopular
the war became, the more prevalent the protests became, the
(10:12):
more it hastened our withdrawal at the end. Maybe you're
old enough to remember how uncomfortable it was in America
during the late nineteen sixties and early nineteen seventies. Let
me keep going. The gay rights movement another great example.
Pride Month, as in like right now and how far
We've come, does not happen without the protests, the riots
(10:35):
and backlash to the police, raids of gay bars, and
the denial of service to openly gay people. The fifty
sixth anniversary of the Stonewall riots is just days away.
Protests and American discomfort have historically gone hand in hand.
Twenty twenty five no different. It's a continuation of what
I would call an American tradition. Now, that's not just
(10:57):
to say that because you protest, you'll eventually succeed, or
that every issue is worthy of support.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Not at all.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
I am saying, though, that protest is what makes America America.
It's affirmation that the Constitution is doing its job. And
that's assuming that the three branches of our government all
do their jobs. Otherwise the constitution means nothing. Everybody's got
to pull their own weight. And I say all this
to say, against the backdrop of what we were all
(11:26):
watching and seeing and experiencing on the weekend, protest is
never bad for America or a sign that were on
our way to Hell in a handbasket. It says to
me that America and Americans remember where they came from,
and the country is continuously evolving relative to the issues
(11:47):
of the day. The people originally denied human rights now
have human rights in this country. The people who were
once denied citizenship now have citizenship. The people who could
not vote can now vote. The people who could not
own land or buy property in any neighborhood as other
Americans now can. The people who could not marry whoever
(12:10):
they wanted can now marry whoever they want. And it's
been a process. Don't act like America doesn't have further
room for improvement or where somehow we've arrived, because that's
not true. Women now really pay attention to this. Women
only gained the right to open a checking account without
their husband's permission in nineteen seventy four. That's within my lifetime.
(12:36):
I remember nineteen seventy four. The Godfather Part two came
out in nineteen seventy four. Hold on to your butts
on this one. Mississippi didn't ratify the Thirteenth Amendment, which
abolished slavery, until twenty thirteen. Twenty thirteen, that was during
Obama's second term. So oh, yes, protest still has a
(12:59):
role in TWI and yes it will be uncomfortable, just
as the Constitution promises, because if you know that first Amendment,
this country was never great.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Without protest, only thanks to it.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
For KFI AM six forty, I'm Moe Kelly. Amazon chief
executive Andy Jassey told employees in a memo earlier today
that he expects artificial intelligence to thin their ranks, reducing headcount.
(13:37):
If you didn't know, Amazon is the country's second largest employer.
I don't know if you caught that, but Jasse just
virtually told everyone at the company that they were expendable
and many jobs will be gone forever due to AI,
and that Amazon is actively planning to incorporate it at
all levels of their business.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
Here's from the memo.
Speaker 1 (13:58):
This is Jasse the CEO, to quote in the next
few years, we expect that this will reduce our total
corporate workforce as we get efficiency gains from using AI
extensively across the company.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Close quote.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
So when I say that AI is going to recalibrate
our economy and take away some jobs forever, Mark, you
didn't want to believe me. This is in fact inevitable,
even though you don't like hearing that.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
Mark.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
This isn't a marketing strategy. It is a business holy
grail for them. What was the saying you can have
two of the three, You can get faster, get better,
you can get cheaper, but only two of the three. Well,
AI potentially means you can have all three while permanently
eliminating complete employee classifications. No more paying employees, no more
(14:46):
payroll taxes, no more benefits, no more paying out vacation time. Hell,
no more loss of productivity to vacations. No more overtime
or weekends off. No more four to one K matching funds,
no more disability leave, no more costly Christmas parties, no
more uncomfortable conversations about raises, no more strikes. There is
(15:07):
literally no downside for a company to integrate AI, and
presumably it gets better and better at any job it
is given because it learns with more data input. But
don't lose the plot. Andy Jasse is just saying the
quiet part out loud. Your company is doing the same
thing right now, maybe it just hasn't announced it yet.
Any service industry is looking to decrease employee related expenses,
(15:31):
their largest expenditure, their largest variable costs. You thought Amazon
didn't pay its employees enough before, Wait until Amazon gets
a hold of how nine thousand or mother from the nostromo.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
That's an alien reference.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
He probably thought it was all fun and games when
IBM's Watson was winning on Jeopardy. What you failed to
see was that AI wasn't just about winning digital chess
games or answering trivia. It has always been about rendering
a workforce obsolete.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
That's it now.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Mark probably disagrees with this When I say that there
are benefits, I can't help but wonder what AI will
do in the field of medical research and curing diseases.
We're seeing in real time what it is doing for
transportation in the form of autonomous vehicles, but even that
means the end of cab drivers, truck drivers, ride share drivers,
(16:24):
delivery drivers.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
As we know them.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Yes, Amazon will eventually replace their delivery drivers. You bet
your ass they will. Those plans are already in place,
they just haven't been shared publicly because AI is the
answer to every sordid capitalistic dream connected to corporate greed.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
That is where Mark is right. He can't have it
both ways.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
You can't assail capitalism because of its greed and not
know that AI is the answer to all of their problems.
Whereas economies have always evolved with the introduction of technology,
for example, there are no more long distance operators, no
more elevator operators, no more traffic light operators. People found
other jobs to do in other industries. But that was then.
(17:09):
This is about eliminating the labor force today as we
know it. The moment that AI and robotics get on
the same page, there will not be enough jobs for
this country. They just don't want to tell you that
uncomfortable truth because the truth would panic markets and destroy
any semblance of economic stability. How do you tell the
(17:29):
American labor force, which numbers around one hundred and seventy
million people right now in twenty twenty five, that a
high percentage of all their jobs will not exist in
thirty years, probably fewer now if you're my age or
Mark's age, that doesn't really impact us.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
We'll be out of the labor force in thirty years.
One way or the other. We will be out.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
But your kids, your grandkids, your great grandkids, they're in
school right now. It will be life to defie. Amazon just
told you what is on the horizon. Wait, check that,
Amazon just told you what is already here. And your
jobs will not be long for this world because AI
isn't about creating new jobs, it's creating new ways to
(18:17):
eradicate your jobs altogether. That's the uncomfortable truth. Mark says,
it's inevitable, but it doesn't mean we have to just
roll over and accept it and just lay back and
enjoy it or something like that. Some crude sexual reference,
But I get his point.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
We should put.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
Up a fight, absolutely, but there's some fights you can't win,
and this would be one of them. Now, is there
a way that we can better integrate it so we
don't all lose our jobs at the same time.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Maybe?
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Possibly, But AI in and of itself may not be real,
but believe me, its impact is very much so real,
and that's not going to change anytime soon. And it
doesn't matter if I want to fight it, if Nick
wants to fight it, Mark wants to fight it. Twala,
name any one the job that we have right now,
(19:08):
Whatever it is, there's a good chance it's not going
to be here in thirty years. Radio show hosts AI
will make sure it will not exist in thirty years,
probably fewer. And I hate to break it to you, Mark,
news anchors won't be here either.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
I am the John Conner of news anchors, and I
will fight it to the end.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
For k If I am six forty, I'm Okelly.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
I remember it vividly.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
I'm old enough to remember the Iran hostage crisis November fourth,
nineteen seventy nine, when Iranian militant seized the US embassy
in Tehran and took sixty six Americans hostage. Fifty two
eventually remained for the total four one hundred and forty
four days. I remember the great Paul Harvey giving news
updates along the way. He was a magnificent newsman and storyteller.
(20:09):
Growing up, talk radio was my only real reference point
as to US and Iranian relations. By the time I
got to high school, I learned a little bit more
of the fullness of the history. How we, as in
the United States, helped stage a coup in nineteen fifty
three overthrowing get this, an Iranian democratically elected prime minister,
(20:31):
with the goal of installing a US friendly dictator. Imagine
that we overthrew the United States, overthrew an actual democracy
to instead put in a dictator. Isn't it supposed to
work any other direction? Weren't we supposedly in the business
of exporting democracy? Not in nineteen fifty three, we weren't.
But it was then that we we as in the CIA,
(20:52):
along with the British MI six, installed the Shaw of
Iran and Shaw is Persian four King sam Shaw, who
was eventually overthrown in nineteen seventy nine during the Iranian Revolution.
The reasoning was that a US friendly dictator better served
our interests wink wink. In the Cold War against the
(21:12):
Soviet Union. We'd have a puppet friend in the region,
and it would be a bulwark against further Soviet expansion,
which was a thing back then Iran borded the Soviet Union.
The newly installed Shaw was only twenty two years old.
Imagine that the plan was that he would provide stability
for possibly fifty to sixty years, and by stability, I
(21:35):
mean the constant flow of oil. But long story short,
when anyone should talk about the history between the US
and Iran, it is most definitely complicated, and it traces
all the way back to nineteen fifty three, not nineteen
seventy nine, because there's no seventy nine without fifty three.
But then there's also nineteen eighty when the US back
(21:56):
sawd Them Hussein in the Iraq Versus Iran war. Yes,
that very same Sodom Hussein. That was our way of
getting back of the new Iranian leadership, the Ayatola Komani,
because we couldn't do it directly. We couldn't go at
Iran directly. Here's why the Algiers Accords of January nineteenth,
nineteen eighty one, and if you know your history, that
(22:17):
was one day before Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as president. Well,
the accords were signed to formally end the hostage crisis,
but it had stipulations. Chiefly, the US would not intervene
politically or militarily in Iranian internal affairs going forward, at
least not directly. Heins the backing of Sodom Hussein in
(22:38):
that proxy war. Heins the freezing of Iranian assets in
the US and sanctions for various reasons then and since
over the decades. What has often overlooked in the telling
of the US Iran history is that Iran's nuclear program
originally began in the nineteen fifties under the SHAW and
(22:59):
its chief support or say it with me, the United States.
We helped start Iran's nuclear program back then. As I said,
Iran shared a border with the Soviet Union. The US
couldn't put nukes in Iran. That would be like putting
nukes in Cuba, like the Soviet Union did years later,
and that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. But if
(23:20):
Iran were to wink wink developed nuclear weapons on its own,
the geopolitical benefits at that time of a Western supporting
SHAW installed by the US having nuclear weapons had all
sorts of short term and long term benefits.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
But that same nuclear program.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
That was started in the nineteen fifties is now the
chief item of contention a half century later.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
I know, I know it's complicated.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
So when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyah, who says and
has been saying that Iran is on the verge of
a nuclear weapon. Uh. Yeah, they've been at that doorstep
for decades. It's not an exaggeration. But here's the thing
that they leave out. With a lot of help from US,
that's one uncomfortable truth. Iran didn't have to start from scratch.
Their original reactors were ordered shut down after the nineteen
(24:09):
seventy nine Iranian Revolution, but the program was restarted in
secret in the nineteen eighties during the Iran Iraq War.
Now you tell me, do you really think it takes
forty five plus years to get a nuclear bomb when
you've been working on it since maybe nineteen eighty. So
when Iran says publicly that its nuclear ambitions are directly
tied to the eradication of Israel, it's fair to say
(24:33):
Israel's concerns are warranted. But the US helped create this
Frankenstein monster. That's what's always left out. We didn't become
geopolitical enemies in nineteen seventy nine out of nowhere, and
Iran didn't start working on a bomb in the nineteen nineties.
Speaker 2 (24:49):
It was well before that. Both are lies. So here's
the truth.
Speaker 1 (24:52):
The bombing of Iran by Israel that we're talking about
today was a long time coming. It was always leading
to this moment. The involvement of the US in this
bombing was also inevitable because of the history leading up
to this moment. There was never a scenario in which
a war with Iran was not also going to include
the US on some level. And Donald Trump is going
(25:15):
to jump at the chance. I don't care what he
said while he was campaigning. He wants this. Our involvement
may not include boots on the ground, but we have
been headed in this direction since nineteen seventy nine, and
we're sure as hell not going to stop now.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
Now you know the rest of the story for k
Speaker 1 (25:36):
I am six forty I'm Moe Kelly
Lad with most And there are some things you just
don't do. There are some things you just do not
(00:22):
ever do. And I like to use relationships because everyone's
been in a relationship. Not everyone has worked for an
elected official, or been to a press briefing in a
professional capacity, or attended a city council meeting. Not everyone
has those experiences to draw upon. But as surely as
you can hear me, Sam Carnesia Tawala, Stephan, even Mark,
(00:43):
everyone you know who is not a child, well, Mark
is kind of a child. But outside of that, everyone's
been in a relationship. And there are some things you
just don't do, Like, for example, you don't invite excess
to your wedding, you don't date excess of your friends.
And they're not hard and fast rules, but you know,
(01:04):
like put it this way, it's like put on a
wedding invitation right next to formal attire reception at four pm.
No kids are people who you've previously slept with with
the bride or groom. It's not a hard and fast rule,
but what is it. It's a courtesy, it's a level
of respect, it's a norm. It's a tradition that most of.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
Us kind of know.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Don't need to be told, And let me stay with
weddings for a second. Women pretty much know that you
don't wear white to someone else's wedding, and Carnecia shaking
her head, she knows what I'm talking about. You don't
try to upstage the bride and oh, yes, I've seen
it doesn't make it any less cringey. There are some
things you just don't do. And if the expected attire
(01:43):
on that invitation I told you about says formal or
semi formal attire.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
That doesn't mean show up in a bikini or speed up.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Why because there are some things said with me you
just don't do, because you respect either the person, the tradition,
or both. This country, and I'm getting to the point,
does not have any more dignity, decency, or decorum, and
does not see any value in it.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
There used to be a time that.
Speaker 1 (02:11):
We would laugh at like the South Korean National Assembly
or the British Parliament, and how members would openly jeer
and physically confront each other, sometimes even coming to blows.
Remember we used to laugh at that. We the United
States of America used to laugh at other countries and
their incibility because we and our haughty arrogance saw ourselves
(02:31):
above such indignity, indecency, and in decorum, because that would
never happen here, so we thought, and I remember a
very young Congressman by the name of Lindsey Graham back
in nineteen ninety eight, during the Bill Clinton impeachment, made
this appeal to our higher beliefs about what we expect
out of the Oval Office, our institutions, talking about, you know,
(02:52):
we had a moral responsibility. We need to bring respect
back to the institution of the of the presidency.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
We need to cleanse.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
The Oval office, talked about cleansing, honor, integrity, these high
minded ideals.
Speaker 3 (03:06):
Because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing
the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to
the office.
Speaker 1 (03:21):
But we're not in that country anymore, even though many
of those same people in office then are in office now.
Back in nineteen ninety eight, I'm sure that the incident
between the Secretary of Homeland Security Christy Nolan and Senator
Alex Padilla.
Speaker 2 (03:36):
That would have never happened.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
It would never have happened, It would have been unthinkable
and unconscionable. It would have never risen to the perceived
need to forcibly remove a senior senator from a room
and place him in handcuffs. It would have never happened.
But you know what, we're not that country anymore. We
are a shameless nation, lacking the self awareness to best
(03:59):
a preciate the value of shame. Shame is valuable. Let
me go back to that wedding analogy I keep talking about.
Imagine you're a guest at a wedding for a close
family member, a friend. Let's say you're a groomsman or
a bridesmaid, and you get into a fistfight with someone
on the dance floor. Shame would remind you that it
(04:20):
should have never happened, regardless who may have been right
or wrong.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
That was that was a solution available other than a fight.
Speaker 1 (04:29):
But now you've embarrassed yourself, you've embarrassed your spouse, you've
embarrassed your date, your family, your friend's colleagues, and ruin
somebody's wedding. But when you don't have any shame, none
of that matters. Here's the problem. When you no longer
have any shame, there is no bottom. There is no bottom,
there is nothing off limits. Why not have a fistfight
(04:49):
on the congressional floor. Why not arrest any member of
Congress who asked the question at your press conference that
you don't approve of because they walk forward somewhat aggressively.
Why not man handle anyone you want anywhere because nothing
matters anymore. Imagine standing up at the State of the
Union and then yelling out a question at the president,
whoever the president is, and then forcibly removed and handcuffed
(05:11):
in congressional chambers.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (05:14):
I can't love this country more than it is willing
to love itself. Impolitic and uncomfortable questions happen at every
single town hall, every single council meeting, every elected official
or appointees press conference, every single one. I've covered them.
They happen every single time. Because if what happened today,
the physical manhandling of Senator Padea with no self reflection, is.
Speaker 2 (05:39):
Deemed okay and acceptable.
Speaker 1 (05:41):
Then we've lost our way as a country, and I
don't think there's any way back. There is no then
shining city on a hill. There is no American exceptionalism.
If that is who we are right now, there is
no great America to get back to or make ourselves
back into, because if today, just today is a supposed
step closer to making America great again, then in fact
(06:06):
we were never great and just another one of those
countries we used to laugh at because we would then
be no better than them, you know, the same countries
which have since passed us in education, passed us in healthcare,
passed us in technology, and most importantly in economic strength.
We used to laugh at them, but now we're behind
(06:28):
them and all those leading indicators. I can't care about
this country more than it does itself, and you cannot
shame those who have no shame. You may now kiss
the bride for kay. If I am six forty, I'm
mo healthy. America is such a fickle place. It is
(06:59):
a place founded on protest, In fact, founded on a
violent protest. Truth be told, Boston Tea Party, American Revolution,
War of eighteen twelve, Civil War, YadA, YadA, YadA, blah
blah blah. All were varying levels of violent protests, and
every major move forward in this country's bid to form
(07:20):
a more perfect union has been thanks to say it
with me protest, and in every single instance, the status
quo at the time, resisted it every single time.
Speaker 2 (07:33):
Here are just a few examples.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
I'm talking to you on a Monday, after a weekend
in which we did what we wanted, including protests, celebrated
Father's Day, went to the movies, whatever. The modern concept
of the weekend Saturday and Sunday off primarily arose from
the Industrial Revolution in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Initially,
factory of workers, many of whom were former farmers, disliked
(07:56):
the whole idea of a seven day work week. When
the nineteenth twenty nine stock market crash crippled the world economy,
the resulting Great Depression led to mass strikes in response
to rising unemployment and poverty, among other things. Strikes, of course,
are protests by another name. Long story short. President FDR
signed the Fair Labor Standards Act into law in nineteen
(08:19):
thirty eight. Imagine that protests women all around the country
mostly either voted for Donald Trump or Kamala Harris in
twenty twenty four.
Speaker 2 (08:28):
But the women's suffrage movement included.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
Peaceful protests, lobbying, civil disobedience, and it took decades of agitation.
In other words, protests to get the Nineteenth Amendment to
the US Constitution in nineteen twenty. Women's suffrage was a
wildly unpopular movement. In the beginning, women voting America was
(08:51):
not having it. But here we are today, protests and
the status quo resisted. It was uncomfortable for the country.
But when it's uncomfortable, it means the constitution is doing
its job. The modern civil rights movement, you've heard me
reference it many times. Lots of marches, protests, civil disobedience,
(09:11):
even riots, the height of constitutional discomfort in America. I
would argue the status quo resisted every step of the way.
Most people don't know the Civil rights and ending segregation
was not supported by the majority of Americans when the
Civil Rights Act was passed in nineteen sixty four. Most
(09:31):
people were not down with that cause. You should sense
a theme here. Protests have never been popular, never, because
if they were, we would need them in the first place.
Just about everything we called normal today was wildly unpopular yesterday.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
The people who.
Speaker 1 (09:50):
Are not protesting are never appreciative of those who protest
or their methods. That's just a fact. In every instance.
The mass protests against the Vietnam War didn't end the war,
but it surely shaped American foreign policy. The more unpopular
the war became, the more prevalent the protests became, the
(10:12):
more it hastened our withdrawal at the end. Maybe you're
old enough to remember how uncomfortable it was in America
during the late nineteen sixties and early nineteen seventies. Let
me keep going. The gay rights movement another great example.
Pride Month, as in like right now and how far
We've come, does not happen without the protests, the riots
(10:35):
and backlash to the police, raids of gay bars, and
the denial of service to openly gay people. The fifty
sixth anniversary of the Stonewall riots is just days away.
Protests and American discomfort have historically gone hand in hand.
Twenty twenty five no different. It's a continuation of what
I would call an American tradition. Now, that's not just
(10:57):
to say that because you protest, you'll eventually succeed, or
that every issue is worthy of support.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Not at all.
Speaker 1 (11:05):
I am saying, though, that protest is what makes America America.
It's affirmation that the Constitution is doing its job. And
that's assuming that the three branches of our government all
do their jobs. Otherwise the constitution means nothing. Everybody's got
to pull their own weight. And I say all this
to say, against the backdrop of what we were all
(11:26):
watching and seeing and experiencing on the weekend, protest is
never bad for America or a sign that were on
our way to Hell in a handbasket. It says to
me that America and Americans remember where they came from,
and the country is continuously evolving relative to the issues
(11:47):
of the day. The people originally denied human rights now
have human rights in this country. The people who were
once denied citizenship now have citizenship. The people who could
not vote can now vote. The people who could not
own land or buy property in any neighborhood as other
Americans now can. The people who could not marry whoever
(12:10):
they wanted can now marry whoever they want. And it's
been a process. Don't act like America doesn't have further
room for improvement or where somehow we've arrived, because that's
not true. Women now really pay attention to this. Women
only gained the right to open a checking account without
their husband's permission in nineteen seventy four. That's within my lifetime.
(12:36):
I remember nineteen seventy four. The Godfather Part two came
out in nineteen seventy four. Hold on to your butts
on this one. Mississippi didn't ratify the Thirteenth Amendment, which
abolished slavery, until twenty thirteen. Twenty thirteen, that was during
Obama's second term. So oh, yes, protest still has a
(12:59):
role in TWI and yes it will be uncomfortable, just
as the Constitution promises, because if you know that first Amendment,
this country was never great.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
Without protest, only thanks to it.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
For KFI AM six forty, I'm Moe Kelly. Amazon chief
executive Andy Jassey told employees in a memo earlier today
that he expects artificial intelligence to thin their ranks, reducing headcount.
(13:37):
If you didn't know, Amazon is the country's second largest employer.
I don't know if you caught that, but Jasse just
virtually told everyone at the company that they were expendable
and many jobs will be gone forever due to AI,
and that Amazon is actively planning to incorporate it at
all levels of their business.
Speaker 2 (13:57):
Here's from the memo.
Speaker 1 (13:58):
This is Jasse the CEO, to quote in the next
few years, we expect that this will reduce our total
corporate workforce as we get efficiency gains from using AI
extensively across the company.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Close quote.
Speaker 1 (14:12):
So when I say that AI is going to recalibrate
our economy and take away some jobs forever, Mark, you
didn't want to believe me. This is in fact inevitable,
even though you don't like hearing that.
Speaker 2 (14:23):
Mark.
Speaker 1 (14:24):
This isn't a marketing strategy. It is a business holy
grail for them. What was the saying you can have
two of the three, You can get faster, get better,
you can get cheaper, but only two of the three. Well,
AI potentially means you can have all three while permanently
eliminating complete employee classifications. No more paying employees, no more
(14:46):
payroll taxes, no more benefits, no more paying out vacation time. Hell,
no more loss of productivity to vacations. No more overtime
or weekends off. No more four to one K matching funds,
no more disability leave, no more costly Christmas parties, no
more uncomfortable conversations about raises, no more strikes. There is
(15:07):
literally no downside for a company to integrate AI, and
presumably it gets better and better at any job it
is given because it learns with more data input. But
don't lose the plot. Andy Jasse is just saying the
quiet part out loud. Your company is doing the same
thing right now, maybe it just hasn't announced it yet.
Any service industry is looking to decrease employee related expenses,
(15:31):
their largest expenditure, their largest variable costs. You thought Amazon
didn't pay its employees enough before, Wait until Amazon gets
a hold of how nine thousand or mother from the nostromo.
Speaker 2 (15:43):
That's an alien reference.
Speaker 1 (15:44):
He probably thought it was all fun and games when
IBM's Watson was winning on Jeopardy. What you failed to
see was that AI wasn't just about winning digital chess
games or answering trivia. It has always been about rendering
a workforce obsolete.
Speaker 2 (16:01):
That's it now.
Speaker 1 (16:03):
Mark probably disagrees with this When I say that there
are benefits, I can't help but wonder what AI will
do in the field of medical research and curing diseases.
We're seeing in real time what it is doing for
transportation in the form of autonomous vehicles, but even that
means the end of cab drivers, truck drivers, ride share drivers,
(16:24):
delivery drivers.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
As we know them.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
Yes, Amazon will eventually replace their delivery drivers. You bet
your ass they will. Those plans are already in place,
they just haven't been shared publicly because AI is the
answer to every sordid capitalistic dream connected to corporate greed.
Speaker 2 (16:42):
That is where Mark is right. He can't have it
both ways.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
You can't assail capitalism because of its greed and not
know that AI is the answer to all of their problems.
Whereas economies have always evolved with the introduction of technology,
for example, there are no more long distance operators, no
more elevator operators, no more traffic light operators. People found
other jobs to do in other industries. But that was then.
(17:09):
This is about eliminating the labor force today as we
know it. The moment that AI and robotics get on
the same page, there will not be enough jobs for
this country. They just don't want to tell you that
uncomfortable truth because the truth would panic markets and destroy
any semblance of economic stability. How do you tell the
(17:29):
American labor force, which numbers around one hundred and seventy
million people right now in twenty twenty five, that a
high percentage of all their jobs will not exist in
thirty years, probably fewer now if you're my age or
Mark's age, that doesn't really impact us.
Speaker 2 (17:49):
We'll be out of the labor force in thirty years.
One way or the other. We will be out.
Speaker 1 (17:53):
But your kids, your grandkids, your great grandkids, they're in
school right now. It will be life to defie. Amazon just
told you what is on the horizon. Wait, check that,
Amazon just told you what is already here. And your
jobs will not be long for this world because AI
isn't about creating new jobs, it's creating new ways to
(18:17):
eradicate your jobs altogether. That's the uncomfortable truth. Mark says,
it's inevitable, but it doesn't mean we have to just
roll over and accept it and just lay back and
enjoy it or something like that. Some crude sexual reference,
But I get his point.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
We should put.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
Up a fight, absolutely, but there's some fights you can't win,
and this would be one of them. Now, is there
a way that we can better integrate it so we
don't all lose our jobs at the same time.
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Maybe?
Speaker 1 (18:46):
Possibly, But AI in and of itself may not be real,
but believe me, its impact is very much so real,
and that's not going to change anytime soon. And it
doesn't matter if I want to fight it, if Nick
wants to fight it, Mark wants to fight it. Twala,
name any one the job that we have right now,
(19:08):
Whatever it is, there's a good chance it's not going
to be here in thirty years. Radio show hosts AI
will make sure it will not exist in thirty years,
probably fewer. And I hate to break it to you, Mark,
news anchors won't be here either.
Speaker 2 (19:22):
I am the John Conner of news anchors, and I
will fight it to the end.
Speaker 1 (19:26):
For k If I am six forty, I'm Okelly.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
I remember it vividly.
Speaker 1 (19:44):
I'm old enough to remember the Iran hostage crisis November fourth,
nineteen seventy nine, when Iranian militant seized the US embassy
in Tehran and took sixty six Americans hostage. Fifty two
eventually remained for the total four one hundred and forty
four days. I remember the great Paul Harvey giving news
updates along the way. He was a magnificent newsman and storyteller.
(20:09):
Growing up, talk radio was my only real reference point
as to US and Iranian relations. By the time I
got to high school, I learned a little bit more
of the fullness of the history. How we, as in
the United States, helped stage a coup in nineteen fifty
three overthrowing get this, an Iranian democratically elected prime minister,
(20:31):
with the goal of installing a US friendly dictator. Imagine
that we overthrew the United States, overthrew an actual democracy
to instead put in a dictator. Isn't it supposed to
work any other direction? Weren't we supposedly in the business
of exporting democracy? Not in nineteen fifty three, we weren't.
But it was then that we we as in the CIA,
(20:52):
along with the British MI six, installed the Shaw of
Iran and Shaw is Persian four King sam Shaw, who
was eventually overthrown in nineteen seventy nine during the Iranian Revolution.
The reasoning was that a US friendly dictator better served
our interests wink wink. In the Cold War against the
(21:12):
Soviet Union. We'd have a puppet friend in the region,
and it would be a bulwark against further Soviet expansion,
which was a thing back then Iran borded the Soviet Union.
The newly installed Shaw was only twenty two years old.
Imagine that the plan was that he would provide stability
for possibly fifty to sixty years, and by stability, I
(21:35):
mean the constant flow of oil. But long story short,
when anyone should talk about the history between the US
and Iran, it is most definitely complicated, and it traces
all the way back to nineteen fifty three, not nineteen
seventy nine, because there's no seventy nine without fifty three.
But then there's also nineteen eighty when the US back
(21:56):
sawd Them Hussein in the Iraq Versus Iran war. Yes,
that very same Sodom Hussein. That was our way of
getting back of the new Iranian leadership, the Ayatola Komani,
because we couldn't do it directly. We couldn't go at
Iran directly. Here's why the Algiers Accords of January nineteenth,
nineteen eighty one, and if you know your history, that
(22:17):
was one day before Ronald Reagan was inaugurated as president. Well,
the accords were signed to formally end the hostage crisis,
but it had stipulations. Chiefly, the US would not intervene
politically or militarily in Iranian internal affairs going forward, at
least not directly. Heins the backing of Sodom Hussein in
(22:38):
that proxy war. Heins the freezing of Iranian assets in
the US and sanctions for various reasons then and since
over the decades. What has often overlooked in the telling
of the US Iran history is that Iran's nuclear program
originally began in the nineteen fifties under the SHAW and
(22:59):
its chief support or say it with me, the United States.
We helped start Iran's nuclear program back then. As I said,
Iran shared a border with the Soviet Union. The US
couldn't put nukes in Iran. That would be like putting
nukes in Cuba, like the Soviet Union did years later,
and that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis. But if
(23:20):
Iran were to wink wink developed nuclear weapons on its own,
the geopolitical benefits at that time of a Western supporting
SHAW installed by the US having nuclear weapons had all
sorts of short term and long term benefits.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
But that same nuclear program.
Speaker 1 (23:38):
That was started in the nineteen fifties is now the
chief item of contention a half century later.
Speaker 2 (23:44):
I know, I know it's complicated.
Speaker 1 (23:46):
So when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyah, who says and
has been saying that Iran is on the verge of
a nuclear weapon. Uh. Yeah, they've been at that doorstep
for decades. It's not an exaggeration. But here's the thing
that they leave out. With a lot of help from US,
that's one uncomfortable truth. Iran didn't have to start from scratch.
Their original reactors were ordered shut down after the nineteen
(24:09):
seventy nine Iranian Revolution, but the program was restarted in
secret in the nineteen eighties during the Iran Iraq War.
Now you tell me, do you really think it takes
forty five plus years to get a nuclear bomb when
you've been working on it since maybe nineteen eighty. So
when Iran says publicly that its nuclear ambitions are directly
tied to the eradication of Israel, it's fair to say
(24:33):
Israel's concerns are warranted. But the US helped create this
Frankenstein monster. That's what's always left out. We didn't become
geopolitical enemies in nineteen seventy nine out of nowhere, and
Iran didn't start working on a bomb in the nineteen nineties.
Speaker 2 (24:49):
It was well before that. Both are lies. So here's
the truth.
Speaker 1 (24:52):
The bombing of Iran by Israel that we're talking about
today was a long time coming. It was always leading
to this moment. The involvement of the US in this
bombing was also inevitable because of the history leading up
to this moment. There was never a scenario in which
a war with Iran was not also going to include
the US on some level. And Donald Trump is going
(25:15):
to jump at the chance. I don't care what he
said while he was campaigning. He wants this. Our involvement
may not include boots on the ground, but we have
been headed in this direction since nineteen seventy nine, and
we're sure as hell not going to stop now.
Speaker 2 (25:32):
Now you know the rest of the story for k
Speaker 1 (25:36):
I am six forty I'm Moe Kelly
Later, with Mo'Kelly News
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.