June 9, 2026 • 18 mins
(June 09, 2026)
“Fraud” is the word of the day, and apparently, the strategy leading into the Fall mid-terms. Is political violence ever justified? Apparently, 35% of people say yes. A Minneapolis café owner decided to stop charging for food, and profits are… UP. Gen Z are arriving to college unable to read.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty KFI.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
AM six forty Bill Handle Here, good morning, it's a Tuesday.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
It is June ninth. Today. We have a modified group here.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
That is Amy is out for a couple of weeks,
Neil comes back on Monday, and comes back on Monday,
Nobody filling in for Neil, Heather filling in for Amy,
and Michelle filling in for Ann.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Okay, that pretty much is it, isn't it? All right?
Speaker 2 (00:37):
As I said prior to the break, I have an
equation for you, and it's not that complicated.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
And may want to write this down.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
This is a mathematical equation in the world of politics,
and here it is Democrats when equals fraud, Republicans win
equal fair election. And if you don't think that's the case,
let's just look at what just happened in our primary
(01:09):
with three people running, three major players running for mayor.
One Karen Bass who won the primary. She's up in
the general election as one of the finalists because we
have two in California, and the top two vote getters,
notwithstanding party, get in. All right, the real fight was
(01:31):
Nithia Rahman, Democrat, communist, let's just say, very left wing progressive, socialist, progressive.
She calls herself Spencer Pratt, independent but mainly Republican, who
had the backing, not the endorsement, the backing of President Trump.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
So here's what happens. The day of the election.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Spencer Pratt was ahead Suspanchia substantially, and all of a sudden,
as the mail in ballots come in and the vote changes,
there is fraud when the Democrat gets more votes. Because
the way it works in California, it's probably the easiest
(02:16):
place in the country to vote. First of all, mail
in ballots are available and are sent out to everybody
who is registered to vote. You have to show idea
to vote or to register but not to vote. And
the time that can be spent or the time that
is allowed for the vote vote to be counted is
(02:37):
pretty expansive. If, for example, a mail in ballot is
postmarked by midnight the election day, is what happened to me.
I sent it out very late, and this state or
in this case, the city, gets it within seven days.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
Guess what that vote counts.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
And then there are a few other ways that votes
can be repaired or fixed. And therefore because of the
expansiveness of the way California votes, it is automatic fraud,
even though there's absolutely no evidence. Those that are advocating fraud,
that are against mail in ballots or certainly in the
expansiveness want more restriction of a mail in ballots are
(03:19):
arguing there is fraud, and when asked to, okay, fine,
and I would love to hear about fraud, I have
no problem with that. Show me just show me. Well,
we don't have We just know it's true. Show me no, No,
we just know it's true. The whole system is flawed,
but only if Democrats win, mind you, if a Republican wins.
(03:40):
There has not been one allegation of fraud in any
election in which a Republican has won, not one, certainly
not by the Republican side. Only when Democrats win. So
the president was going, how could dith Oraman win when Pratt.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Was head election day? Where do they come up with
the votes? They came up with the votes because of
mail in balloting.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
That's how Democrats vote, mail in much more than Republicans do.
Republicans go to the polls much more than do Democrats,
and so the argument is the Republicans ahead the day
of the voting and the Democrats somehow catches up or
surpasses the Republican is fraud.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
How could you lose this many votes? Well, it's easy.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
It's because of California's mailing system, California's vote gathering and
vote counting system. And the argument is that is inherently fraudulent. Fine,
give us an example. I just want to hear it.
It's the same thing that happened during the twenty twenty
election when President Trump lost the election.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
Fraud, fraud, fraud, rigged, rigged, rigged. And I was saying,
I got it. You know, I'm on your side. Just
prove it.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
We don't actually have any proof, or the proof that
was presented was completely flawed on its face, And so
I said, I made this analogy yesterday. How about this. Okay,
no evidence. You're now arrested. You're tried for some crime
of which there is no evidence to prove you committed
the crime. But the judge of the jury knows that
(05:25):
you did it. We sort of know you did it
in our heart of hearts. We know you did it,
and you're guilty. And you get convicted with no proof.
Welcome to America and That's exactly the argument that's being
argued on this one.
Speaker 1 (05:40):
It is this has made up stuff.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
This is to try to overturn an election in the
presidential and it's you know what it actually does, I mean,
is it going to go anything? The argument that Pratt
should have won or he did win and Nythia Rahman
did not really win. Here's the problem with it is
not that the vote and they can count and recount
(06:03):
and count again. Georgia, for example, in the presidential had
three recounts and the Republicans are still screaming that was fraudulent. Okay,
And certainly in the case of the LA election, this primary,
where you can go to court all you want argue
that Spencer Pratt actually won, Okay, Mazel tov, enjoy yourself.
(06:25):
Knock your socks off. You're not going to come up
with any allegations because there aren't any. You're not gonna
come up with any proof because there isn't any widespread
faud It just doesn't exist. The problem is it puts
into jeopardy our belief in democracy because what it says
is we do not have fair elections in this country anymore.
Back to the equation, if a Democrat wins, it is
(06:49):
fraud on his face, even though there's no proof to prove.
There's nothing to prove the fraud. If a Republican wins,
there is fraud. Don't even bother arguing fraud because that's
a fair election.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
Are we really going there? We have. Unfortunately, we have
gone there.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
And now those people that are arguing our democracy is
at stake, I agree, not in the sense that we're
overturning our election process. The democracy is our belief in
our election system. And if you cease believing, then where
are we going with that? All right, moving into a
(07:32):
political statement that's being made. Guy but named Dilvan Alberson
owns a restaurant right near where George Floyd was killed
in South Minneapolis, and he's run it for fifteen years
and he has he actually started this free and donation
(07:54):
based restaurant.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
It was a regular restaurant up to the.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
Immigration aids and he said, no, no, we're going to
make a donation based restaurant. And that's to avert sales tax.
Because the government is so corrupt. He averts on his
side that you can't have as long as the government
is the way it is. It has to be completely corrupt. Okay, whatever,
another crazy person.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
But in the meantime, so.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
Then as a political move, he went to a donation
a free based restaurant where people go in, they eat
for free, and then just donate the money.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
About forty to fifty percent just take the free food.
The other.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Fifty sixty percent. They put in enough money to keep
the restaurant not only going, but doing better than it
ever has.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
And that is you know, what, does that prove.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
That people are wonderful, that people donate a lot of money. No,
I think it proved that people who do go to
that restaurant have for at least a political viewpoint that
they agree that the immigration raids, they agree that the
government is a fascist government, I mean, on and on
(09:15):
their position. So it has become a political statement as
well as eating food as well as buying food. And
so what he did is his business increased dramatically, as
you can imagine. He cut down the menu, making easier
for the kitchen staff.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
He had to.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Bring in more people, and it looks like he's paying
them decent wages. People who are there have gotten raises
and this whole issue, and by the way, that's not
new there have been donation or there been donation paid
restaurants for a long time. I remember going there was
a pop up restaurant that my daughter took me to
(09:57):
that it's should have been one hundred dollars a meal
and you pay whatever you want, you pay nothing, and
they after about a year said, okay, we're done. It's
one hundred and twenty bucks ahead because we're not getting
any money. But it looks like in many we're not
getting enough, but it looks like in Minneapolis it works.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
And so have you seen those? And I'm seeing fewer.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
And fewer of those those honor kiosks in businesses in
various locations where you have these open boxes of snacks,
of energy bars and potato chips, and then there is
a please put money in. Usually there's a price, but
sometimes there isn't. And not only are they empty of money,
(10:43):
because I used to go and of course grab as
much as I possibly can not put money in, but
if there was money in there, I took out the
money in addition to getting a energy bar. And unfortunately
there's more people like me than there aren't, or fortunately,
depend on how you look at it. But as a
(11:04):
political statement, this restaurant is actually doing well. But keep
in mind this is in Minneapolis, South Minneapolis where the
immigration raids took where just were inforced and of course
George not only was Judge George Floyd killed there, but
then the immigrations afterwards started in that area and it
(11:24):
had become a poster child of anti governmental, pro immigration philosophy. Okay,
so much for that free food. And by the way,
it's gotten pretty good reviews. You know, they make their
own homemade bread and soups, et cetera. That hasn't changed.
Speaker 1 (11:38):
All right. Coming up, we're going to end the hour
with jen Z.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
Now we've talked about what AI is doing to the
education system, why students are not studying as hard as
they should and cheating. Let me tell you about what's
going on on a level so much deeper than that.
All right, Coming up the top of the hours, Tech
Tuesday with Micah Dubuski, today ABC News reporter out of
(12:08):
New York who talks to us on occasion about the
world of finance, actually the world of tech. So it's
a Tech Tuesday segment coming up at day o'clock. In
the meantime, let me give a quick story a little
bit of history here, and that is going to UCLA.
And my ex went to UCLA and in the days
when she went, I don't even know if they have
(12:29):
that anymore.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
You would have to.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Take a test English test, and otherwise you have to
take you would have a student would have to take
bonehead English as that was known with and couldn't move
forward without bonehead English and passing that basic English because
not enough students knew enough English to move.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
Forward, at least at UCLA.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Well, since then, the students have become more bonehead in
the sense that fewer students come in with writing and
analytical skills. We've talked about that many times, and especially
now that AI is around. AI deals with punctuation, puts
things in a logical order, and you can literally just
(13:16):
scramble your words, throw disjointed concepts on a piece of
paper and AI will clean it all up. Well, it's
gotten even worse than that, because study has just came
out that students are coming into college not being able
(13:36):
to read. Now you go, how possible is that, Well,
it is for a couple of reasons.
Speaker 1 (13:45):
One technology. Two, the.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Bar of education, the bar of literacy has dropped so
low that almost anybody can go into college except for
the very very few high end rare colleges, the UCLA,
the SC's certainly Stanford, Harvard, Yale. I mean, those obviously
(14:10):
demand some pretty rarefied air. But for the most part,
junior colleges and state colleges, it just isn't there anymore.
Yesterday we talked about analytical thinking, how that's not around
anymore because of AI. And I'm looking at the study
that was just done and it talked about literally the
(14:30):
ability of students to come in and read and write
basic concepts.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
I mean an interview.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
There's a theology professor in the University of Notre Dame,
Timothy O'Malley with a shocker, and he typically in his
early career assigned twenty five to forty pages of reading
per class in theology. And he said today, if you
assigned that amount of reading, they don't know what to
do with it. Students use AI act. He missed the
(15:00):
point of the assigned reading. So it's not just a
question of being unable to cope and look at fairly
complex concepts and just literature now reading Mark Twain, reading
Charles Dickens and understanding it. It's literally, the ability to
(15:23):
enter society.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
What it needs to what needs to be done.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
Now here's the other side of that coin is maybe
because of AI and its ability to do what it's
going to do, you never have to read, literally, you
won't even have to read. You'll simply talk into a
microphone and say, Siri, tell him, tell me about what
happened during the civil war.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
Outcomes an entire paper.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Well and even not an understanding what is the civil
war about? And here you go, you pull off the
computer and students don't know what what civil war? The
revolutionary war? I know it's the start of the country. Well,
who were some of the founding fathers? Well, let me
(16:15):
ask Siri, let me ask Claude, let me ask these
various programs. Again, we're seeing we're doing more than that,
more and more showing up, and it is simply a
way that we're looking at the future. And I've not
(16:36):
been afraid of the future. Frankly, I kind of thought
the future was going to be neat. I always have.
I thought we would live like the Jetsons live, and
we're moving in that direction pretty quickly. With the air
taxis and the cars, the automated cars self driving cars.
But I mean when it comes to intellectual thinking, when
(16:57):
it comes to analyzing, when it comes to simply trying
to figure out and doing any kind of analytical thinking
at all, it's just not happening. It's going to get
worse and worse. And college professors are spinning. And I
wonder know if they still have Bonehead English at UCLA.
(17:19):
I'm just curious about that and the number more students,
many more students had to take Bonehead English before they
could move on.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
All right, we are done.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Coming up Tech Tuesday with Mike Dubuski, a little bit
about Apple next generation of its AI program, its improvements,
and then a brand new electric vehicle that Mike tested
in New York and it's not a car even so
that's coming right up.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
This is KFI AM six forty. You've been listening to
the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
Catch my show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on Man on the iHeartRadio app.
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
six forty KFI.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
AM six forty Bill Handle Here, good morning, it's a Tuesday.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
It is June ninth. Today. We have a modified group here.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
That is Amy is out for a couple of weeks,
Neil comes back on Monday, and comes back on Monday,
Nobody filling in for Neil, Heather filling in for Amy,
and Michelle filling in for Ann.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
Okay, that pretty much is it, isn't it? All right?
Speaker 2 (00:37):
As I said prior to the break, I have an
equation for you, and it's not that complicated.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
And may want to write this down.
Speaker 2 (00:46):
This is a mathematical equation in the world of politics,
and here it is Democrats when equals fraud, Republicans win
equal fair election. And if you don't think that's the case,
let's just look at what just happened in our primary
(01:09):
with three people running, three major players running for mayor.
One Karen Bass who won the primary. She's up in
the general election as one of the finalists because we
have two in California, and the top two vote getters,
notwithstanding party, get in. All right, the real fight was
(01:31):
Nithia Rahman, Democrat, communist, let's just say, very left wing progressive, socialist, progressive.
She calls herself Spencer Pratt, independent but mainly Republican, who
had the backing, not the endorsement, the backing of President Trump.
Speaker 1 (01:48):
So here's what happens. The day of the election.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
Spencer Pratt was ahead Suspanchia substantially, and all of a sudden,
as the mail in ballots come in and the vote changes,
there is fraud when the Democrat gets more votes. Because
the way it works in California, it's probably the easiest
(02:16):
place in the country to vote. First of all, mail
in ballots are available and are sent out to everybody
who is registered to vote. You have to show idea
to vote or to register but not to vote. And
the time that can be spent or the time that
is allowed for the vote vote to be counted is
(02:37):
pretty expansive. If, for example, a mail in ballot is
postmarked by midnight the election day, is what happened to me.
I sent it out very late, and this state or
in this case, the city, gets it within seven days.
Speaker 1 (02:52):
Guess what that vote counts.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
And then there are a few other ways that votes
can be repaired or fixed. And therefore because of the
expansiveness of the way California votes, it is automatic fraud,
even though there's absolutely no evidence. Those that are advocating fraud,
that are against mail in ballots or certainly in the
expansiveness want more restriction of a mail in ballots are
(03:19):
arguing there is fraud, and when asked to, okay, fine,
and I would love to hear about fraud, I have
no problem with that. Show me just show me. Well,
we don't have We just know it's true. Show me no, No,
we just know it's true. The whole system is flawed,
but only if Democrats win, mind you, if a Republican wins.
(03:40):
There has not been one allegation of fraud in any
election in which a Republican has won, not one, certainly
not by the Republican side. Only when Democrats win. So
the president was going, how could dith Oraman win when Pratt.
Speaker 1 (03:56):
Was head election day? Where do they come up with
the votes? They came up with the votes because of
mail in balloting.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
That's how Democrats vote, mail in much more than Republicans do.
Republicans go to the polls much more than do Democrats,
and so the argument is the Republicans ahead the day
of the voting and the Democrats somehow catches up or
surpasses the Republican is fraud.
Speaker 1 (04:26):
How could you lose this many votes? Well, it's easy.
Speaker 2 (04:31):
It's because of California's mailing system, California's vote gathering and
vote counting system. And the argument is that is inherently fraudulent. Fine,
give us an example. I just want to hear it.
It's the same thing that happened during the twenty twenty
election when President Trump lost the election.
Speaker 1 (04:52):
Fraud, fraud, fraud, rigged, rigged, rigged. And I was saying,
I got it. You know, I'm on your side. Just
prove it.
Speaker 2 (05:04):
We don't actually have any proof, or the proof that
was presented was completely flawed on its face, And so
I said, I made this analogy yesterday. How about this. Okay,
no evidence. You're now arrested. You're tried for some crime
of which there is no evidence to prove you committed
the crime. But the judge of the jury knows that
(05:25):
you did it. We sort of know you did it
in our heart of hearts. We know you did it,
and you're guilty. And you get convicted with no proof.
Welcome to America and That's exactly the argument that's being
argued on this one.
Speaker 1 (05:40):
It is this has made up stuff.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
This is to try to overturn an election in the
presidential and it's you know what it actually does, I mean,
is it going to go anything? The argument that Pratt
should have won or he did win and Nythia Rahman
did not really win. Here's the problem with it is
not that the vote and they can count and recount
(06:03):
and count again. Georgia, for example, in the presidential had
three recounts and the Republicans are still screaming that was fraudulent. Okay,
And certainly in the case of the LA election, this primary,
where you can go to court all you want argue
that Spencer Pratt actually won, Okay, Mazel tov, enjoy yourself.
(06:25):
Knock your socks off. You're not going to come up
with any allegations because there aren't any. You're not gonna
come up with any proof because there isn't any widespread
faud It just doesn't exist. The problem is it puts
into jeopardy our belief in democracy because what it says
is we do not have fair elections in this country anymore.
Back to the equation, if a Democrat wins, it is
(06:49):
fraud on his face, even though there's no proof to prove.
There's nothing to prove the fraud. If a Republican wins,
there is fraud. Don't even bother arguing fraud because that's
a fair election.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
Are we really going there? We have. Unfortunately, we have
gone there.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
And now those people that are arguing our democracy is
at stake, I agree, not in the sense that we're
overturning our election process. The democracy is our belief in
our election system. And if you cease believing, then where
are we going with that? All right, moving into a
(07:32):
political statement that's being made. Guy but named Dilvan Alberson
owns a restaurant right near where George Floyd was killed
in South Minneapolis, and he's run it for fifteen years
and he has he actually started this free and donation
(07:54):
based restaurant.
Speaker 1 (07:55):
It was a regular restaurant up to the.
Speaker 2 (07:59):
Immigration aids and he said, no, no, we're going to
make a donation based restaurant. And that's to avert sales tax.
Because the government is so corrupt. He averts on his
side that you can't have as long as the government
is the way it is. It has to be completely corrupt. Okay, whatever,
another crazy person.
Speaker 1 (08:18):
But in the meantime, so.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
Then as a political move, he went to a donation
a free based restaurant where people go in, they eat
for free, and then just donate the money.
Speaker 1 (08:33):
About forty to fifty percent just take the free food.
The other.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Fifty sixty percent. They put in enough money to keep
the restaurant not only going, but doing better than it
ever has.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
And that is you know, what, does that prove.
Speaker 2 (08:55):
That people are wonderful, that people donate a lot of money. No,
I think it proved that people who do go to
that restaurant have for at least a political viewpoint that
they agree that the immigration raids, they agree that the
government is a fascist government, I mean, on and on
(09:15):
their position. So it has become a political statement as
well as eating food as well as buying food. And
so what he did is his business increased dramatically, as
you can imagine. He cut down the menu, making easier
for the kitchen staff.
Speaker 1 (09:34):
He had to.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Bring in more people, and it looks like he's paying
them decent wages. People who are there have gotten raises
and this whole issue, and by the way, that's not
new there have been donation or there been donation paid
restaurants for a long time. I remember going there was
a pop up restaurant that my daughter took me to
(09:57):
that it's should have been one hundred dollars a meal
and you pay whatever you want, you pay nothing, and
they after about a year said, okay, we're done. It's
one hundred and twenty bucks ahead because we're not getting
any money. But it looks like in many we're not
getting enough, but it looks like in Minneapolis it works.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
And so have you seen those? And I'm seeing fewer.
Speaker 2 (10:20):
And fewer of those those honor kiosks in businesses in
various locations where you have these open boxes of snacks,
of energy bars and potato chips, and then there is
a please put money in. Usually there's a price, but
sometimes there isn't. And not only are they empty of money,
(10:43):
because I used to go and of course grab as
much as I possibly can not put money in, but
if there was money in there, I took out the
money in addition to getting a energy bar. And unfortunately
there's more people like me than there aren't, or fortunately,
depend on how you look at it. But as a
(11:04):
political statement, this restaurant is actually doing well. But keep
in mind this is in Minneapolis, South Minneapolis where the
immigration raids took where just were inforced and of course
George not only was Judge George Floyd killed there, but
then the immigrations afterwards started in that area and it
(11:24):
had become a poster child of anti governmental, pro immigration philosophy. Okay,
so much for that free food. And by the way,
it's gotten pretty good reviews. You know, they make their
own homemade bread and soups, et cetera. That hasn't changed.
Speaker 1 (11:38):
All right. Coming up, we're going to end the hour
with jen Z.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
Now we've talked about what AI is doing to the
education system, why students are not studying as hard as
they should and cheating. Let me tell you about what's
going on on a level so much deeper than that.
All right, Coming up the top of the hours, Tech
Tuesday with Micah Dubuski, today ABC News reporter out of
(12:08):
New York who talks to us on occasion about the
world of finance, actually the world of tech. So it's
a Tech Tuesday segment coming up at day o'clock. In
the meantime, let me give a quick story a little
bit of history here, and that is going to UCLA.
And my ex went to UCLA and in the days
when she went, I don't even know if they have
(12:29):
that anymore.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
You would have to.
Speaker 2 (12:30):
Take a test English test, and otherwise you have to
take you would have a student would have to take
bonehead English as that was known with and couldn't move
forward without bonehead English and passing that basic English because
not enough students knew enough English to move.
Speaker 1 (12:50):
Forward, at least at UCLA.
Speaker 2 (12:53):
Well, since then, the students have become more bonehead in
the sense that fewer students come in with writing and
analytical skills. We've talked about that many times, and especially
now that AI is around. AI deals with punctuation, puts
things in a logical order, and you can literally just
(13:16):
scramble your words, throw disjointed concepts on a piece of
paper and AI will clean it all up. Well, it's
gotten even worse than that, because study has just came
out that students are coming into college not being able
(13:36):
to read. Now you go, how possible is that, Well,
it is for a couple of reasons.
Speaker 1 (13:45):
One technology. Two, the.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Bar of education, the bar of literacy has dropped so
low that almost anybody can go into college except for
the very very few high end rare colleges, the UCLA,
the SC's certainly Stanford, Harvard, Yale. I mean, those obviously
(14:10):
demand some pretty rarefied air. But for the most part,
junior colleges and state colleges, it just isn't there anymore.
Yesterday we talked about analytical thinking, how that's not around
anymore because of AI. And I'm looking at the study
that was just done and it talked about literally the
(14:30):
ability of students to come in and read and write
basic concepts.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
I mean an interview.
Speaker 2 (14:39):
There's a theology professor in the University of Notre Dame,
Timothy O'Malley with a shocker, and he typically in his
early career assigned twenty five to forty pages of reading
per class in theology. And he said today, if you
assigned that amount of reading, they don't know what to
do with it. Students use AI act. He missed the
(15:00):
point of the assigned reading. So it's not just a
question of being unable to cope and look at fairly
complex concepts and just literature now reading Mark Twain, reading
Charles Dickens and understanding it. It's literally, the ability to
(15:23):
enter society.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
What it needs to what needs to be done.
Speaker 2 (15:28):
Now here's the other side of that coin is maybe
because of AI and its ability to do what it's
going to do, you never have to read, literally, you
won't even have to read. You'll simply talk into a
microphone and say, Siri, tell him, tell me about what
happened during the civil war.
Speaker 1 (15:51):
Outcomes an entire paper.
Speaker 2 (15:54):
Well and even not an understanding what is the civil
war about? And here you go, you pull off the
computer and students don't know what what civil war? The
revolutionary war? I know it's the start of the country. Well,
who were some of the founding fathers? Well, let me
(16:15):
ask Siri, let me ask Claude, let me ask these
various programs. Again, we're seeing we're doing more than that,
more and more showing up, and it is simply a
way that we're looking at the future. And I've not
(16:36):
been afraid of the future. Frankly, I kind of thought
the future was going to be neat. I always have.
I thought we would live like the Jetsons live, and
we're moving in that direction pretty quickly. With the air
taxis and the cars, the automated cars self driving cars.
But I mean when it comes to intellectual thinking, when
(16:57):
it comes to analyzing, when it comes to simply trying
to figure out and doing any kind of analytical thinking
at all, it's just not happening. It's going to get
worse and worse. And college professors are spinning. And I
wonder know if they still have Bonehead English at UCLA.
(17:19):
I'm just curious about that and the number more students,
many more students had to take Bonehead English before they
could move on.
Speaker 1 (17:29):
All right, we are done.
Speaker 2 (17:31):
Coming up Tech Tuesday with Mike Dubuski, a little bit
about Apple next generation of its AI program, its improvements,
and then a brand new electric vehicle that Mike tested
in New York and it's not a car even so
that's coming right up.
Speaker 1 (17:50):
This is KFI AM six forty. You've been listening to
the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
Catch my show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on Man on the iHeartRadio app.
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
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