November 6, 2025 • 21 mins
(November 06, 2025)
California republicans file federal lawsuit over new US House map. New California law could change the way all Americans browse the internet. Mayor Bass lifts State of Emergency on homelessness. Volunteers race to preserve U.S. history.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
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 kf I
AM six forty Give.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
A lot KFI AM six forty Bill Handle here and
the Morning Crew on Thursday morning, November sixth Hey, coming
up day after tomorrow, which is Saturday, Neil and I
are going to be uh well. Neil is of course
broadcasting his show Fork Report from two to five, but
it will be a remote broadcast at the Wildfire Store.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
In wild Fork.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Wow, I say Wildfire, wild Fork, wild Fork Foods and
a yeah, that's where it is.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Okay, there you go.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
I'll be there trying to figure out how to pronounce
the name of the store.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
You'll be there eating.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
I will be there, fantastic, come on out. We'll be
doing giveaways. Handle is going to be co hosting. The
whole time.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Will be fun.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Yeah, come on bye, say hello. It's thanksgrilling. So there's
serious appetizers. Some chefs out there right Zelman's will be there.
They'll be free samples with their new spearmint flavored They're
going to come out. Everybody gets to try that and
just have a great time. So calendar that one. It
is Saturday, This Saturday, two to five at the wild Fork.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
Food is a big door. Yeah, from two to five o'clock.
And we'll just mentioned we just wanted to double mention
my name. You get free food.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Well, last year there was like fifteen sixteen hundred people.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Let's double that. Let's pack the place. And there's lots
of food too.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
I mean, this is not the you know, crappy little
Costco appetizer size appetizers that it's not. It's almost not
even worth at my Costco shoving the old Korean ladies
out of the way to get to the front of
the line. This is going to be phenomenal. Okay, moving on,
(01:52):
Thank Jesus, Okay, you got it all right. As everybody knows.
Prop fifty passed overwhelmingly here in at California. I mean,
we knew it was going to pass, we just didn't
know it was going to pass with these kinds of numbers.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
And there's all kinds of political issues on that one.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
But what I wanted to do was talk about the
lawsuit that was filed because California Republicans literally only have
one way to go. They're not going to win this
one on the ballot. So what they have done, and
of course is redistricting. It's enabling the state legislature to redistrict,
to draw new congressional districts, moving in this case, more
(02:29):
Democrats in various other areas and moving Republicans into one area,
so that district, Okay, it's a Republican district, let's go
for the other ones. That's what redistricting does. There is
a commission that was created during Schwarzenegger's time and it
(02:50):
took redistricting and took it out of the hands of
the legislature because of the political considerations, and it put
it into the hands of an independent commission.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
So what the Prop.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Fifty does is we're taking it back because it was
a direct challenge to what they did in Texas by
creating by redistricting, creating effectively five new Republican district especial
means five new congressional Congressional members of Congress Republican one.
And they Republicans want to stay in power and the
(03:25):
Democrats want to take it.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
No surprise there, all right.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
So now the Prop fifty has been passed, what are
the California Republicans doing.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Well, they're looking for an excuse to shut it down.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
And what they've done is file the federal lawsuit to
block the imposition of Prop.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Fifty. Here is the basis of the lawsuit.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
This is the only one they have, and that is
that race is used as a factor to favor Hispanic voters.
So it's really not about Democrats and Republicans, it's about Hispanics.
It's about race, and that's why they are redistricting and
(04:08):
Supreme Court is rule states may not without a compelling reason,
backed by evidence that was in fact considered, that separate
citizens into different voting districts on the basis of race
is allowed. Bottom line is, you can't redistrict based on race. Well, okay,
that's the argument. Hey, I've got a counter argument. How
(04:30):
about Hey, it has nothing to do with Hispanics. It
has to do with the Republicans and Democrats, the fact
that Hispanics are part of these districts. So what it's
about politics, that's it, And what the Republicans are saying,
Oh no, no, it really doesn't have anything to do
with politics.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
It really has to do with race.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
Guess what, I don't think that's going to fly at all,
not even close.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
And so it's real simple.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
I mean, the states have the ability to create their
own districts because there's a state issue. Elections are controlled
by the states, and if there is any kind of
reasonable reason for redistricting, the courts are going to have
it happen. Now, if California were to pass Prop fifty
(05:19):
and say that this is only about Hispanics, that's it,
that politics have nothing to do with it, that's the
only way I think they would win. I think they're
going no place with this. So there it is. It's
over and Texas. And this was Texas doing it at
the quote suggestion or some would say the order of
(05:42):
President Trump in order to keep more Republicans in Congress.
And he's a Republican and I can see that. I mean,
you have I think a democratic president would do the
same thing if the advantage I mean they have.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
The margin is razor thin.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
I think it's four or eight Congress people and it's
going to be well, based on what we're going to say,
we'll talk about the midterms for between now and the midterms.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
There's so much.
Speaker 2 (06:10):
Okay, all of us browse the internet, right, I get
a little bit of trouble when I browse the internet,
you know the various Well, I'm not going to get
in there. Let's just say I do it for research
purposes only fair enough. Now, okay, let's talk about the Internet. Wow,
(06:32):
we don't talk about the Internet very much. And there
is a new law. It's a California law, but it's
gonna affect everybody in the country. I'll tell you why
in a second. And it literally changes the way that
we browse the Internet. And this is a privacy change.
Web browsers will be required under this new California law
(06:55):
that Americans Californias. But therefore Americans are literally changing how
we control our data when using the Internet. Assembly Bill
five sixty six, signing a law by Newsome requires companies
that make web browsers to offer users and opt out
signal that automatically tells websites not to share or to
(07:17):
sell personal information. Now, if you don't have some kind
of an opt out, and you just go on to
the Internet, and let's say you're searching whatever you're searching,
and for some reason this morning I was searching OJ
Simpson and when he died and what happened, I don't
know why, but I did well. And I think I
use Safari well. Through Safari, they know who I am,
(07:40):
what I'm doing. Why there's no such thing as privacy? Well,
this tries for privacy, and it automatically with one toggle right,
one click tells websites.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
Not to share or sell personal information. Isn't already available?
Speaker 2 (08:02):
Yes, if you're coughing through with this, yeah, that is available.
Most browsers have that, but you have to go individually
to each one. And if you're looking at several different
browsers and you're clicking through each one with the privacy
of people are saying this is basically a pain in
the ass that makes it difficult.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
This legislation.
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Sponsored by the California Privacy Protection Agency, which is a
state agency, as well as several consumer groups that push
for this, that browsers like Google's Chrome, Microsoft's Edge have
until the beginning of twenty twenty seven. They have a
year to create a way for consumers to select that signal.
(08:44):
They have to be able to we have to be
able to simply push the equivalent of a button, a
click through, and all of a sudden that information is private,
and it's private on any browser that you use.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Shouldn't they assume we want our privacy and then you
could opt in if I would use some sort of
you know.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
You know, but here's the problem. You're talking about some
of the most powerful lobbies that exist. This alone probably
was a huge fight. I feel that way about organ transplants.
We've talked about this before. They could clear up the
organ transplant issue in one day by doing on your
driver's license. Do you want to opt out where automatically
(09:29):
you're an organ donor and unless you don't want to
do it, and there are certain people that don't believe that,
you've got.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
Anybody that drives, anybody who rides a motorcycle should absolutely
be a donor. Yeah, by yes, nurses call them donor cycles.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
That no joke.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Yeah, because so many accidents happen.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
And yeah, gang bangers are really good too, because occasionally
they get shot in the head, which leaves the rest
of them in pretty good shape. Now, as much as
we make fun of this, it is it is a
serious thing. But opting in, opting out is really important.
So we are going to see, well, now it's law.
And by the way, there's other states too, Texas, New
(10:07):
Jersey are doing the same thing. And now we get
to it's a California law. How does it affect the
rest of the country. And the analogy here I'm going
to make with the manufacturer and the sales of automobiles,
that our emission standards in California are stronger than in
(10:30):
any place else in the country.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
We have literally the.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Most restrictive and the most powerful I guess you'd use
that word emission standards. So you buy a car in Arkansas,
where they don't have those emission standards. You buy a
car in Tennessee, where new cars are put in your
front lawn on cinder blocks without wheels, why do they
(10:57):
have different standards? They really don't, you know. Because California
is such a huge market for cars, such an enormous
market for cars, all the manufacturers are saying, Okay, we'll
just do it across the country, so the emission standards
for the rest of the country follows California. Same thing
with this philosophy, and that is there are other states
(11:20):
that don't have this restriction. California has this new restriction
with internet browsing. But the browsing companies, the firms that
do this, all the major browsers, will say, you know what,
we have to do it for California, we might as
well do it for everybody else. California is ten percent
of the population of the United States anyway, so it's.
Speaker 3 (11:40):
Just easier to do that.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
When we talk about California being at the forefront of
a lot of entitlement issues, social issues, it's not just
that we are at the forefront in terms of planning,
in terms of liberalism. Yeah, I don't care which side
of the coin you're on now, you believe, don't believe.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
It doesn't matter.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
It's not just the philosophy that controls these laws being passed.
It's just the nature of the number of people we
have here that has enormous influence, just the sheer number
of people. When you control ten percent of the population
of a country, you have a lot of influence. I mean,
(12:24):
you know, New Hampshire is six people. You know what
kind of influence in New Hampshire haves although two senators
just like we do.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Uh huh, what is that? Do you know that? I
think it's Maryland.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
Maryland has two senators and one congress person. Because of
the population, you're better off running for the US Senate
than you are running for Congress. We, on the other hand,
I have forty million people. I don't even know how
many congress people fifty three something like that.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Okay, we're done with that. In baths.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
Mayor of Los Angeles first day she came into office,
declared the state of emergency over homelessness. And now she
has undone it. There's no more homelessness, or at least
a state of emergency. What is a couple of days ago,
three years after she became mayor. Homelessness is trending down,
(13:23):
two years in a row, and as she said to
the city Council, we have begun a real shift in
our city's decades long trend of rising homelessness.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
How many are dying each day? Yeah, they give that number.
I know they don't.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
The other thing they don't do is we don't really
know who is homeless and who is not. I mean,
think about this for a moment. If you're CouchSurfing right
or part of the time, let's say you're homeless, and
part of the time you have the money to buy
a rent a sleeves ball hotel downtown LA, Well, for
those two weeks or three weeks you are home, you're
(13:57):
not homeless. And if the homeless population is being counted
at that time, you're not homeless. But a week later,
you're on the street. So it's not just a number
that's thrown out. It's a lot more complicated than that.
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Well, I watched an eighty year old, at least an
eighty year old woman the other day pull down her
pants on Beverly Boulevard and take a crap right in
front of me, So I'm pretty sure she was not
homed You know what, my mother is dead. No, no, no,
but really it was.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
I no, I understand that.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
I was like, that's the whole issue about mental illness,
like right on the street, I know, and thirty percent
they figure of the homeless are mentally l thirty yeah, probably,
if not more, but then you also have got to
be more.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Yeah, we don't know. I mean the figure I don't
think the city goes out.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
Thirty percent of city hall is mentally Dad's true.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
But the point of this is that that she has
declared that we are doing much better and the inside Safe.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Program is being curtailed. That was her claim to fame.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
That was her pet project, and what's happening is that's true.
As of September, the INSI Safe program, for example, that
she had has moved five thousand people into interim housing,
which is pretty good. More than twelve hundred been moved
into permanent housing, which is pretty good. Another sixteen hundred
(15:25):
are in interim housing, which is pretty good. And as
of right now, this is the city counting. And I
just told you the counting is weird because at what
point is it. It's a snapshot of the homeless at
any given time, and if you count them three weeks later,
it is a different snapshot because some are now out
on the street, some are back into housing, CouchSurfing, if
(15:48):
you will. So according to the number of homeless people
living in shelters, according to the Mayor's office, that's dropped
three point four percent.
Speaker 3 (15:57):
So it's a huge success.
Speaker 4 (16:00):
Time.
Speaker 3 (16:00):
LA County has a.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Population of sixty thousand homeless people. I'm thrilled to twelve
hundred in the city of La Well, okay, they've lucked out.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
But when you talk about any kind of success.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
You know the Union Rescue Mission, which Amy and I
participate in every year, with over one thousand people just them.
One organization does over one thousand. The city of La
is bragging about five thousand.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
Yep, all right, all right, so much for that, all right, Now,
this is one of those. And yeah, you know, I
have an issue with Donald Trump, and I try to
give him credit when credit is due. I do, although
a lot of people don't think so. But here's one
that I have a really hard time with, and that
is the president. And that's just the president. It's his
(16:54):
go ordered the institutions we're talking about, schools, museum to
remove content that disparage Americans. This was an executive order
entitled Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History and arguing
that over the past decade, signs and displays, a museums
(17:17):
and parks across the country have been distorted by a
widespread effort to rewrite our nation's history and replace the
facts of our nation's history with revisionist history, with liberal ideology.
And under this revision revisionist history, our nation's unperiled. This
(17:38):
is Trump talking our nation's unperiled legacy of advancing liberty,
individual rights, human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexists, oppressive,
or otherwise irredeemably flawed.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
Well, here's the problem.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
First of all, he ordered National Park Service and the
Smithsonian scrub the of content that quote inappropriately disparages Americans
living or dead and replace it with language that celebrates
the nation's greatness.
Speaker 3 (18:11):
I'm going to argue the greatness of slavery, that was
great stuff.
Speaker 2 (18:18):
Slaves are good, fisher friends, Slaves are good.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
And by the way, I'm not joking.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
You know that one iconic photo of the slave whose
back is so riddled with those whip marks.
Speaker 3 (18:32):
I mean they're just the whole thing is.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
Just covered gone, And that was the most iconic photo
I think of slavery that existed. And so this network
is now moving ahead with a vengeance. Historians, librarians, volunteers
racing to document those museum displays and records that they
(18:56):
fear the Trump administration is simply going to say remove them.
A museum has an exhibit that in any way disparages America,
out it goes because we are only interested in having
museum exhibits that talk about the greatness of America, which,
by the way, I'm fine, because there's a lot of
(19:17):
greatness in America. But the reality is we did have slaves,
and it's the great sin of this country. It is
the original sin of the United States is slavery. The
first black to put it was him put his feet
on American soil on what the North American continent was
was a slave boy, that tells you something.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
We removed that.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
How about removing the record of the Japanese Americans who
were interred one hundred and twenty thousand of them that
were interred throughout the country, particularly California during World War
two because of the fear they were spies and they
were somehow advocating the of the Japanese government that the
United States was at war with. We're talking about third
(20:05):
generation Japanese. You know how many times, you know how
many people were actually convicted of any kind of espionage
or sabotage of the Japanese ancestry during World War two zero.
In the meantime, Germans, who were white, we were riddled
(20:27):
with German spies, riddled. There was the German American Bund,
which was a pro Nazi organization, I mean Swastikas and
Hitler and zig Heiles.
Speaker 3 (20:41):
But the Japanese, no, you know what, it was a vacation.
Give me a break.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
They got camp for free. We have to pay for
our kids to go to camp. They got it for free.
Speaker 3 (20:55):
You know that. That's how crazy this is.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
That's the saying that if you don't remember history, you're
gonna repeat it or something like that.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
Yeah, if you don't remember history, you don't remember history.
What's that? I don't remember?
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Repeat it? Hello, Dustined Dustined Still. I was just wondering
where are you going with that? But I mean, it's
just it is truly crazy making.
Speaker 3 (21:21):
I mean, it just is.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
I I just why don't we accept the fact that
in our greatness, which the United States is, there are
a couple of points in our history.
Speaker 3 (21:30):
Maybe not so great. How about facts?
Speaker 2 (21:33):
What do you think? This is kf I am sixty.
Speaker 3 (21:38):
You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Catch My Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from kf I
AM six forty Give.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
A lot KFI AM six forty Bill Handle here and
the Morning Crew on Thursday morning, November sixth Hey, coming
up day after tomorrow, which is Saturday, Neil and I
are going to be uh well. Neil is of course
broadcasting his show Fork Report from two to five, but
it will be a remote broadcast at the Wildfire Store.
Speaker 3 (00:33):
In wild Fork.
Speaker 2 (00:34):
Wow, I say Wildfire, wild Fork, wild Fork Foods and
a yeah, that's where it is.
Speaker 3 (00:41):
Okay, there you go.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
I'll be there trying to figure out how to pronounce
the name of the store.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
You'll be there eating.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
I will be there, fantastic, come on out. We'll be
doing giveaways. Handle is going to be co hosting. The
whole time.
Speaker 3 (00:52):
Will be fun.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
Yeah, come on bye, say hello. It's thanksgrilling. So there's
serious appetizers. Some chefs out there right Zelman's will be there.
They'll be free samples with their new spearmint flavored They're
going to come out. Everybody gets to try that and
just have a great time. So calendar that one. It
is Saturday, This Saturday, two to five at the wild Fork.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
Food is a big door. Yeah, from two to five o'clock.
And we'll just mentioned we just wanted to double mention
my name. You get free food.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Well, last year there was like fifteen sixteen hundred people.
Speaker 3 (01:28):
Let's double that. Let's pack the place. And there's lots
of food too.
Speaker 2 (01:31):
I mean, this is not the you know, crappy little
Costco appetizer size appetizers that it's not. It's almost not
even worth at my Costco shoving the old Korean ladies
out of the way to get to the front of
the line. This is going to be phenomenal. Okay, moving on,
(01:52):
Thank Jesus, Okay, you got it all right. As everybody knows.
Prop fifty passed overwhelmingly here in at California. I mean,
we knew it was going to pass, we just didn't
know it was going to pass with these kinds of numbers.
Speaker 3 (02:05):
And there's all kinds of political issues on that one.
Speaker 2 (02:07):
But what I wanted to do was talk about the
lawsuit that was filed because California Republicans literally only have
one way to go. They're not going to win this
one on the ballot. So what they have done, and
of course is redistricting. It's enabling the state legislature to redistrict,
to draw new congressional districts, moving in this case, more
(02:29):
Democrats in various other areas and moving Republicans into one area,
so that district, Okay, it's a Republican district, let's go
for the other ones. That's what redistricting does. There is
a commission that was created during Schwarzenegger's time and it
(02:50):
took redistricting and took it out of the hands of
the legislature because of the political considerations, and it put
it into the hands of an independent commission.
Speaker 3 (03:02):
So what the Prop.
Speaker 2 (03:03):
Fifty does is we're taking it back because it was
a direct challenge to what they did in Texas by
creating by redistricting, creating effectively five new Republican district especial
means five new congressional Congressional members of Congress Republican one.
And they Republicans want to stay in power and the
(03:25):
Democrats want to take it.
Speaker 3 (03:26):
No surprise there, all right.
Speaker 2 (03:28):
So now the Prop fifty has been passed, what are
the California Republicans doing.
Speaker 3 (03:35):
Well, they're looking for an excuse to shut it down.
Speaker 2 (03:38):
And what they've done is file the federal lawsuit to
block the imposition of Prop.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
Fifty. Here is the basis of the lawsuit.
Speaker 2 (03:47):
This is the only one they have, and that is
that race is used as a factor to favor Hispanic voters.
So it's really not about Democrats and Republicans, it's about Hispanics.
It's about race, and that's why they are redistricting and
(04:08):
Supreme Court is rule states may not without a compelling reason,
backed by evidence that was in fact considered, that separate
citizens into different voting districts on the basis of race
is allowed. Bottom line is, you can't redistrict based on race. Well, okay,
that's the argument. Hey, I've got a counter argument. How
(04:30):
about Hey, it has nothing to do with Hispanics. It
has to do with the Republicans and Democrats, the fact
that Hispanics are part of these districts. So what it's
about politics, that's it, And what the Republicans are saying,
Oh no, no, it really doesn't have anything to do
with politics.
Speaker 3 (04:48):
It really has to do with race.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
Guess what, I don't think that's going to fly at all,
not even close.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
And so it's real simple.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
I mean, the states have the ability to create their
own districts because there's a state issue. Elections are controlled
by the states, and if there is any kind of
reasonable reason for redistricting, the courts are going to have
it happen. Now, if California were to pass Prop fifty
(05:19):
and say that this is only about Hispanics, that's it,
that politics have nothing to do with it, that's the
only way I think they would win. I think they're
going no place with this. So there it is. It's
over and Texas. And this was Texas doing it at
the quote suggestion or some would say the order of
(05:42):
President Trump in order to keep more Republicans in Congress.
And he's a Republican and I can see that. I mean,
you have I think a democratic president would do the
same thing if the advantage I mean they have.
Speaker 3 (05:57):
The margin is razor thin.
Speaker 2 (05:59):
I think it's four or eight Congress people and it's
going to be well, based on what we're going to say,
we'll talk about the midterms for between now and the midterms.
Speaker 3 (06:08):
There's so much.
Speaker 2 (06:10):
Okay, all of us browse the internet, right, I get
a little bit of trouble when I browse the internet,
you know the various Well, I'm not going to get
in there. Let's just say I do it for research
purposes only fair enough. Now, okay, let's talk about the Internet. Wow,
(06:32):
we don't talk about the Internet very much. And there
is a new law. It's a California law, but it's
gonna affect everybody in the country. I'll tell you why
in a second. And it literally changes the way that
we browse the Internet. And this is a privacy change.
Web browsers will be required under this new California law
(06:55):
that Americans Californias. But therefore Americans are literally changing how
we control our data when using the Internet. Assembly Bill
five sixty six, signing a law by Newsome requires companies
that make web browsers to offer users and opt out
signal that automatically tells websites not to share or to
(07:17):
sell personal information. Now, if you don't have some kind
of an opt out, and you just go on to
the Internet, and let's say you're searching whatever you're searching,
and for some reason this morning I was searching OJ
Simpson and when he died and what happened, I don't
know why, but I did well. And I think I
use Safari well. Through Safari, they know who I am,
(07:40):
what I'm doing. Why there's no such thing as privacy? Well,
this tries for privacy, and it automatically with one toggle right,
one click tells websites.
Speaker 3 (07:53):
Not to share or sell personal information. Isn't already available?
Speaker 2 (08:02):
Yes, if you're coughing through with this, yeah, that is available.
Most browsers have that, but you have to go individually
to each one. And if you're looking at several different
browsers and you're clicking through each one with the privacy
of people are saying this is basically a pain in
the ass that makes it difficult.
Speaker 3 (08:19):
This legislation.
Speaker 2 (08:22):
Sponsored by the California Privacy Protection Agency, which is a
state agency, as well as several consumer groups that push
for this, that browsers like Google's Chrome, Microsoft's Edge have
until the beginning of twenty twenty seven. They have a
year to create a way for consumers to select that signal.
(08:44):
They have to be able to we have to be
able to simply push the equivalent of a button, a
click through, and all of a sudden that information is private,
and it's private on any browser that you use.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Shouldn't they assume we want our privacy and then you
could opt in if I would use some sort of
you know.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
You know, but here's the problem. You're talking about some
of the most powerful lobbies that exist. This alone probably
was a huge fight. I feel that way about organ transplants.
We've talked about this before. They could clear up the
organ transplant issue in one day by doing on your
driver's license. Do you want to opt out where automatically
(09:29):
you're an organ donor and unless you don't want to
do it, and there are certain people that don't believe that,
you've got.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
Anybody that drives, anybody who rides a motorcycle should absolutely
be a donor. Yeah, by yes, nurses call them donor cycles.
Speaker 3 (09:43):
That no joke.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
Yeah, because so many accidents happen.
Speaker 2 (09:46):
And yeah, gang bangers are really good too, because occasionally
they get shot in the head, which leaves the rest
of them in pretty good shape. Now, as much as
we make fun of this, it is it is a
serious thing. But opting in, opting out is really important.
So we are going to see, well, now it's law.
And by the way, there's other states too, Texas, New
(10:07):
Jersey are doing the same thing. And now we get
to it's a California law. How does it affect the
rest of the country. And the analogy here I'm going
to make with the manufacturer and the sales of automobiles,
that our emission standards in California are stronger than in
(10:30):
any place else in the country.
Speaker 3 (10:32):
We have literally the.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Most restrictive and the most powerful I guess you'd use
that word emission standards. So you buy a car in Arkansas,
where they don't have those emission standards. You buy a
car in Tennessee, where new cars are put in your
front lawn on cinder blocks without wheels, why do they
(10:57):
have different standards? They really don't, you know. Because California
is such a huge market for cars, such an enormous
market for cars, all the manufacturers are saying, Okay, we'll
just do it across the country, so the emission standards
for the rest of the country follows California. Same thing
with this philosophy, and that is there are other states
(11:20):
that don't have this restriction. California has this new restriction
with internet browsing. But the browsing companies, the firms that
do this, all the major browsers, will say, you know what,
we have to do it for California, we might as
well do it for everybody else. California is ten percent
of the population of the United States anyway, so it's.
Speaker 3 (11:40):
Just easier to do that.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
When we talk about California being at the forefront of
a lot of entitlement issues, social issues, it's not just
that we are at the forefront in terms of planning,
in terms of liberalism. Yeah, I don't care which side
of the coin you're on now, you believe, don't believe.
Speaker 3 (12:01):
It doesn't matter.
Speaker 2 (12:02):
It's not just the philosophy that controls these laws being passed.
It's just the nature of the number of people we
have here that has enormous influence, just the sheer number
of people. When you control ten percent of the population
of a country, you have a lot of influence. I mean,
(12:24):
you know, New Hampshire is six people. You know what
kind of influence in New Hampshire haves although two senators
just like we do.
Speaker 3 (12:32):
Uh huh, what is that? Do you know that? I
think it's Maryland.
Speaker 2 (12:36):
Maryland has two senators and one congress person. Because of
the population, you're better off running for the US Senate
than you are running for Congress. We, on the other hand,
I have forty million people. I don't even know how
many congress people fifty three something like that.
Speaker 3 (12:57):
Okay, we're done with that. In baths.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
Mayor of Los Angeles first day she came into office,
declared the state of emergency over homelessness. And now she
has undone it. There's no more homelessness, or at least
a state of emergency. What is a couple of days ago,
three years after she became mayor. Homelessness is trending down,
(13:23):
two years in a row, and as she said to
the city Council, we have begun a real shift in
our city's decades long trend of rising homelessness.
Speaker 3 (13:32):
How many are dying each day? Yeah, they give that number.
I know they don't.
Speaker 2 (13:36):
The other thing they don't do is we don't really
know who is homeless and who is not. I mean,
think about this for a moment. If you're CouchSurfing right
or part of the time, let's say you're homeless, and
part of the time you have the money to buy
a rent a sleeves ball hotel downtown LA, Well, for
those two weeks or three weeks you are home, you're
(13:57):
not homeless. And if the homeless population is being counted
at that time, you're not homeless. But a week later,
you're on the street. So it's not just a number
that's thrown out. It's a lot more complicated than that.
Speaker 1 (14:10):
Well, I watched an eighty year old, at least an
eighty year old woman the other day pull down her
pants on Beverly Boulevard and take a crap right in
front of me, So I'm pretty sure she was not
homed You know what, my mother is dead. No, no, no,
but really it was.
Speaker 3 (14:28):
I no, I understand that.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
I was like, that's the whole issue about mental illness,
like right on the street, I know, and thirty percent
they figure of the homeless are mentally l thirty yeah, probably,
if not more, but then you also have got to
be more.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Yeah, we don't know. I mean the figure I don't
think the city goes out.
Speaker 1 (14:47):
Thirty percent of city hall is mentally Dad's true.
Speaker 2 (14:51):
But the point of this is that that she has
declared that we are doing much better and the inside Safe.
Speaker 3 (15:00):
Program is being curtailed. That was her claim to fame.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
That was her pet project, and what's happening is that's true.
As of September, the INSI Safe program, for example, that
she had has moved five thousand people into interim housing,
which is pretty good. More than twelve hundred been moved
into permanent housing, which is pretty good. Another sixteen hundred
(15:25):
are in interim housing, which is pretty good. And as
of right now, this is the city counting. And I
just told you the counting is weird because at what
point is it. It's a snapshot of the homeless at
any given time, and if you count them three weeks later,
it is a different snapshot because some are now out
on the street, some are back into housing, CouchSurfing, if
(15:48):
you will. So according to the number of homeless people
living in shelters, according to the Mayor's office, that's dropped
three point four percent.
Speaker 3 (15:57):
So it's a huge success.
Speaker 4 (16:00):
Time.
Speaker 3 (16:00):
LA County has a.
Speaker 2 (16:02):
Population of sixty thousand homeless people. I'm thrilled to twelve
hundred in the city of La Well, okay, they've lucked out.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
But when you talk about any kind of success.
Speaker 1 (16:16):
You know the Union Rescue Mission, which Amy and I
participate in every year, with over one thousand people just them.
One organization does over one thousand. The city of La
is bragging about five thousand.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
Yep, all right, all right, so much for that, all right, Now,
this is one of those. And yeah, you know, I
have an issue with Donald Trump, and I try to
give him credit when credit is due. I do, although
a lot of people don't think so. But here's one
that I have a really hard time with, and that
is the president. And that's just the president. It's his
(16:54):
go ordered the institutions we're talking about, schools, museum to
remove content that disparage Americans. This was an executive order
entitled Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History and arguing
that over the past decade, signs and displays, a museums
(17:17):
and parks across the country have been distorted by a
widespread effort to rewrite our nation's history and replace the
facts of our nation's history with revisionist history, with liberal ideology.
And under this revision revisionist history, our nation's unperiled. This
(17:38):
is Trump talking our nation's unperiled legacy of advancing liberty,
individual rights, human happiness is reconstructed as inherently racist, sexists, oppressive,
or otherwise irredeemably flawed.
Speaker 3 (17:53):
Well, here's the problem.
Speaker 2 (17:55):
First of all, he ordered National Park Service and the
Smithsonian scrub the of content that quote inappropriately disparages Americans
living or dead and replace it with language that celebrates
the nation's greatness.
Speaker 3 (18:11):
I'm going to argue the greatness of slavery, that was
great stuff.
Speaker 2 (18:18):
Slaves are good, fisher friends, Slaves are good.
Speaker 3 (18:23):
And by the way, I'm not joking.
Speaker 2 (18:24):
You know that one iconic photo of the slave whose
back is so riddled with those whip marks.
Speaker 3 (18:32):
I mean they're just the whole thing is.
Speaker 2 (18:34):
Just covered gone, And that was the most iconic photo
I think of slavery that existed. And so this network
is now moving ahead with a vengeance. Historians, librarians, volunteers
racing to document those museum displays and records that they
(18:56):
fear the Trump administration is simply going to say remove them.
A museum has an exhibit that in any way disparages America,
out it goes because we are only interested in having
museum exhibits that talk about the greatness of America, which,
by the way, I'm fine, because there's a lot of
(19:17):
greatness in America. But the reality is we did have slaves,
and it's the great sin of this country. It is
the original sin of the United States is slavery. The
first black to put it was him put his feet
on American soil on what the North American continent was
was a slave boy, that tells you something.
Speaker 3 (19:41):
We removed that.
Speaker 2 (19:43):
How about removing the record of the Japanese Americans who
were interred one hundred and twenty thousand of them that
were interred throughout the country, particularly California during World War
two because of the fear they were spies and they
were somehow advocating the of the Japanese government that the
United States was at war with. We're talking about third
(20:05):
generation Japanese. You know how many times, you know how
many people were actually convicted of any kind of espionage
or sabotage of the Japanese ancestry during World War two zero.
In the meantime, Germans, who were white, we were riddled
(20:27):
with German spies, riddled. There was the German American Bund,
which was a pro Nazi organization, I mean Swastikas and
Hitler and zig Heiles.
Speaker 3 (20:41):
But the Japanese, no, you know what, it was a vacation.
Give me a break.
Speaker 2 (20:48):
They got camp for free. We have to pay for
our kids to go to camp. They got it for free.
Speaker 3 (20:55):
You know that. That's how crazy this is.
Speaker 1 (21:00):
That's the saying that if you don't remember history, you're
gonna repeat it or something like that.
Speaker 3 (21:06):
Yeah, if you don't remember history, you don't remember history.
What's that? I don't remember?
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Repeat it? Hello, Dustined Dustined Still. I was just wondering
where are you going with that? But I mean, it's
just it is truly crazy making.
Speaker 3 (21:21):
I mean, it just is.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
I I just why don't we accept the fact that
in our greatness, which the United States is, there are
a couple of points in our history.
Speaker 3 (21:30):
Maybe not so great. How about facts?
Speaker 2 (21:33):
What do you think? This is kf I am sixty.
Speaker 3 (21:38):
You've been listening to the Bill Handle Show.
Speaker 2 (21:40):
Catch My Show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
and anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
The Bill Handel Show News
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
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.