Own Nothing, Drive Nowhere: Why Globalists Are Killing the Car

Eric Peters tears joins the show to discuss Trump’s betrayal on free speech, Ukraine, and Venezuela while exposing how EV mandates, emissions rules, and insurance scams are killing mobility.
Follow the show on Kick and watch live every weekday 9:00am EST – 12:00pm EST https://kick.com/davidknightshow

Money should have intrinsic value AND transactional privacy: Go to https://davidknight.gold/ for great deals on physical gold/silver

For 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to https://trendsjournal.com/ and enter the code KNIGHT

Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.com

If you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-show

Or you can send a donation through
Mail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764
Zelle: @[e-mail]
Cash App at: $davidknightshow
BTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:07):
Welcome back and joining us now is Eric Peters of
Eric petersautos dot com. Always great to have Eric on.
He has focused on liberty and mobility because you can't
have one without the other. It's kind of all what
Jefferson said about life and liberty. He said, the hand
of force can destroy life or liberty, but cannot separate them.

(00:28):
Of course, he said disjoin them. But that's a little
bit stilted for our language, but it definitely is true,
and you cannot disjoin liberty and mobility either. So I
always enjoy Eric's take on things. Eric, I was sad
to see that we were just talking about this over
the break. You wrote a piece three days ago. You said,

(00:51):
our Charlie, what happened in your family?

Speaker 2 (00:55):
Well, yeah, it's a tough thing to talk about. I
hope all the people to do this well enough. But
we had a had about a two and a half
year old mixed breed German shepherd lab and you know,
he's been my companion for that whole time and just
a very big presence.

Speaker 3 (01:11):
In our life.

Speaker 2 (01:13):
Anyway, he got hit by I guess a car truck,
I'm not sure exactly which, and it was really jarring
because as anybody who's been through having a pet die knows,
it's one thing when your pet is elderly and old
or sick, and you you know, you understand that it's
going to happen, and you have time to prepare for it.
But you know, with a with a young pet like that,
to just be gone instantly, just like that, just what

(01:36):
happened really difficult, you know, boy, For the last several
days has happened on Friday, I've been having deja vu,
you know, certain times of the day like oh, I
better put water in paces bowl, or oh, it's time
for us to go for our run. I went for
a run on Monday, and you know, one of his
things that he would do, he would carry around him.
He was a strong dog, a big log in his
mouth and he would keep it in his mouth for

(01:58):
a mile or more on our on you know, It's
just one of those things. And as I'm running by myself,
which was strange, I saw one of the logs that
he dropped off on the trail and it just really
I'm sorry, kind of really I'm being overly emotional about it.

Speaker 3 (02:12):
So I apologize.

Speaker 4 (02:13):
Oh no, I understand, absolutely understand.

Speaker 1 (02:16):
It's like you said, it's the suddenness of this, and
I think that's one of the things that really magnified
what happened to Charlie Kirk. But I think, you know,
when we look at it and how they have taken
his legacy and they have flipped it completely opposite of
what he was known for, what he ought to be
remembered for. They're doing everything they can to make a

(02:39):
saint a celebrity whatever. There in Oklahoma. They want to
put a Charlie Kirk statue on every university campus. I
think the right way to honor him is to support
free speech, but it seems like the people who agreed
with him and who followed him want to do just
the opposite of that. They want to attack free speech.

(03:00):
I think this gives them an opportunity to do what
they know the left was doing to them before.

Speaker 4 (03:05):
What do you think.

Speaker 2 (03:06):
Particular Trump, did you happen to ask the interview. It
was a couple of days after Kirk's assassination, and I
wish I could remember who the journalist was. It was
a woman, and you know she was asking Trump about
the calls to suppress what they called hate speech. Now,
it's interesting that Trump all people the right is not
even exactly what they excoriated the left for doing during

(03:28):
the twenty twenty four campaign season, and it was one
of the reasons why people voted for Trump, because they
were tired of having their differing opinions framed as hate.

Speaker 3 (03:38):
I've got a question, Oh, you're hateful.

Speaker 2 (03:40):
You know, we can't discuss that because clearly you're a
Cretan and you're you know, you're motivated by malicious motives
rather than Hey, I just have a question. Anyway, This
female reporter asked Trump about that, and Trump had the egregious,
vulgar gall to say something like, uh, well, Charlie Cook,
does he may not think that way anymore or I
can't remember that.

Speaker 1 (04:00):
Yeah, that's exactly what he said. We played that clip. Yeah,
she said, Charlie Kirch said there's no such thing as
hate speech. I probly wouldn't say that now.

Speaker 4 (04:07):
Yeah, that's yeah, basically despicable.

Speaker 2 (04:09):
Because again, everything that whether you agree with what Kirk
had to say or not, I think the one thing
that has to be universally acknowledged is that he was
willing to debate.

Speaker 3 (04:17):
He was willing to discuss practically any topic.

Speaker 2 (04:19):
Including even Israel, and you know the influence of the
Israeli government over the American government, and I think that's
ultimately what got him into trouble. You know, Trump demands
lockstep adherents and even worship of himself and his policies,
and he does it in a manner that's just so
abrasive and insulting to the people who support him. This

(04:39):
latest business of doing the parking break one eighty on Ukraine,
you know, again, it's another example. You know, if people
had been aware that he was going to do that
in twenty twenty four, I doubt many people.

Speaker 3 (04:49):
Would have voted for him.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
One of the reasons, small reasons people voted for him
was we are sick of all these wars. We're sick
of being forced to finance it through our taxes and
thereby be complicit in it. You know, the mass in Gaza,
we want no part of this stuff. It's got to stop.
That's one of the reasons why people voted for him.
And now this brazen guy just says, well, we're going
to back Ukraine. And not only that, he's saying that

(05:12):
Ukraine has a right to not only sees back every
territory that it's lost, but potentially even more than that.

Speaker 4 (05:17):
Yeah, it takes time back from Russia exactly.

Speaker 2 (05:20):
It's madness. How do they think that this is going
to be received by Putin? What do you think Putin's
response to this is going to be. I wouldn't be
surprised if he amps things up because he believes that
he's got a narrow window of opportunity now to finish
this situation before boots that go on the ground, potentially
American boots.

Speaker 4 (05:38):
That's right.

Speaker 1 (05:39):
Yeah, he is taunting Putin saying he doesn't have much
a military He could have finished this off in a
couple of weeks, you know, like we finished off Afghanistan,
right in a couple of weeks.

Speaker 2 (05:49):
I was having a conversation with a friend of mine
who stopped by yesterday about this, and we got to
talking about Putin versus Trump and the difference between a
serious person and a clown.

Speaker 4 (05:59):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (05:59):
Now, whatever you may think of Putin, you don't have
to say that you like him. You know, that's a
childish argument. It's not about whether you think he's a
nice man or a bad man. He's a serious man.
He's a serious person with serious credentials. Who is not
an idiot and who understands history. And look at Trump,
what do we have. You know, we literally have a
clown going up against a serious person, a dangerous clown.

Speaker 1 (06:21):
I believe he was installed for that very reason. You know,
he even had his first Commerce secretary, William Let's see
Webber Ross, who said that, you know, it was the
Rothschild bank that he was working for, and he said,
you know, when Trump was going bankrupt, he showed up
and he saw this big crowd around him. He said,
I contacted the Rothschild people and I said, hey, this

(06:41):
is somebody I think we could use. And I think
that's exactly why they're doing. They're using him as a clown.
They're using him to divide people, They're using him to
create chaos.

Speaker 4 (06:50):
I think that's his.

Speaker 2 (06:51):
Role and also a distraction, and maybe the worst kind
of distraction imaginable, you know, as everything falls apart internally,
and you know, potentially, let's say the Epstein thing percolates
up again, or we find new details about what may
have been involved in Kirk's murder that could have incredibly
damaging repercussions. What would be a perfect thing to get

(07:11):
people's mind off of that, well, perhaps a big war
in Eastern Europe do just that. That's right, and that's
what I have, this creepy feeling maybe in the works, and.

Speaker 4 (07:22):
I think it is absolutely capable of it.

Speaker 1 (07:24):
You know, you look at what he's doing with the
trying to make an excuse that he can blow up
ships off of Venezuela without even stopping them or verifying
that they're running drugs. And as I pointed out at
the same time that he's saying, this is an appropriate response,
and JD. Vance is saying it's appropriate. Marco Rubio and
Pete Heigseth are all saying, oh, this is what our

(07:44):
military is for.

Speaker 4 (07:46):
No, it's not.

Speaker 1 (07:46):
We had our military was stopping ships, inspecting them. If
they find drugs, they would take the drugs, they would
arrest the people. They didn't line them up on the
side of the boat and machine gun them. And so
this is an extra judicial killing. I told the audience
earlier on the program, I said, Dutarte did this in
the Philippines. He said, you know, you think it's a
drug dealer, shoot to kill. And he's now in the

(08:10):
International Criminal Court and they're looking at him for those
extra judicial killings. It's a crime. It's a war crime
that he's doing, so he's perfectly capable.

Speaker 2 (08:19):
Yeah, it's a psychopathic elaboration of that old if you
see something, say something.

Speaker 3 (08:23):
Now, if you see something, kill something.

Speaker 2 (08:25):
Yeah, these are acts of war and they're also the
acts of a coward bully in that Venezuela. It's just
another example of big old Uncle Sam throwing his weight
around and you know, extraditionally extra judicially killing foreign nationals
outside of the United States with impunity because you know,
we can do it. What's Venezuela going to do about it?

Speaker 4 (08:46):
That's right?

Speaker 2 (08:46):
You know, I think at some point Trump is going
to whack the wrong guy, and Putin could be just
the guy who's the wrong guy to whack.

Speaker 4 (08:53):
That's right, That's right.

Speaker 1 (08:54):
Yeah, it's very concerning, you know, even escalated saying yeah,
we should shoot down Russian jets if they get any
more close to the borders and things like that as well.
It's a dangerous time that we live. And of course,
very much like the Chinese curse, isn't it may you
live in interesting times. There's never a shortage of thanks
to report on it. It's like and now for something
completely different from Trump than he said yesterday.

Speaker 4 (09:15):
You know, it's like mightey Python, I'm glad.

Speaker 3 (09:17):
You brought up China. It just I happened.

Speaker 2 (09:18):
I needed a break the other day, and so I
was just watching some random YouTube videos, and I was
watching some videos of depicting scenes in China around, for example,
their train stations and their airports, their infrastructure.

Speaker 3 (09:30):
Which is immaculate and modern.

Speaker 2 (09:32):
I looked at their bullet trains, and I compared it
with what's going on in this country. You know, China
is actually concerned with China and trying to build up
its own internal society and improve itself, where it seems
that the US is de industrializing and rapidly descending from
second to third world status, you know, to the extent
we can actually see the change from.

Speaker 3 (09:51):
Day to day.

Speaker 1 (09:52):
Yeah, it's and it's by design, and it's by the
same people that are running Trump, even though he pushes
back against the climate and that I call it still
it's the deliberate de industrialization of the West. And there's
two sides of that. They want to de industrialize the
West while they give China the advantage in terms of
manufacturing and the huge advantage that they have is in

(10:15):
terms of energy costs. But as Gerald Clenti has said
many times on the show, he said, the business of
China is business. The business of America is war, and
that's not serving us well.

Speaker 3 (10:27):
And constructiveness.

Speaker 2 (10:28):
Yeah, I saw something also related to China that talked.
It was a person talking about how in China the oligarchs,
the really rich people kind of do what American.

Speaker 3 (10:36):
Oligarchs did in the late part of the.

Speaker 2 (10:38):
Nineteenth and early twentieth century when they did things like
the Carnegie Library. You know, they funded these these vast
things that were good for Americans, you know, leaving aside
the question of corporate oligarchs. At least they put me
back into the country, whereas now the oligarch class in
this country just flaunts its gratuitous, egregious theft wealth, you know,
with one mcmanson after the next, and yachts and lavish lifestyles,

(11:04):
thumbing their nose and rubbing our faces in it.

Speaker 4 (11:06):
Yeah yeah.

Speaker 1 (11:08):
And to make it clear, you know, when you look
at somebody like Henry Ford, who had his issues, he
wanted to make sure that his workers could afford to
buy the product that he has. Who's going to buy
these products when they replace all of us with robots.
That's what their goal is. They will replace everybody with robots.
And I said when Trump did his tax cut in

(11:28):
twenty seventeen, because it was all targeted towards corporations and
he was going to incentivize them to bring to onshore manufacturing,
I said, that's not going to happen until they've got
the robots to replace the workers. I said, that's why
they've got the open border immigration. And once they have
robots to that point, they'll get tough on immigration, and

(11:50):
they will pay these oligarchs a lot of money to
bring factories back, but it's not going to bring back
any jobs. They're just going to be incentivized to build
the factories and they'll brag about the fact that they've
got manufacturing in the United States, but they won't be
using it to raise the standard of living of anybody.
And I think that's really what is what is happening
and what is going to happen.

Speaker 2 (12:12):
I think so too, And I'd like to focus in
on something that you mentioned, which has to do with
that word about owning things.

Speaker 3 (12:18):
You know, they're not concerned about that.

Speaker 2 (12:19):
It's not it's not that they're you know, well, how
are people going to be able to afford these fifty
thousand dollars vehicles that they're pushing out right now? They
know that the end goal is for you to not own.

Speaker 4 (12:30):
The vehicle exactly.

Speaker 2 (12:31):
The end goal is for you to rent the ride,
to rent everything, you know, sort of like the way
that you pay for a streaming service so that you
can watch TV. That's what they want, Serial debt. They
want to completely disconnect us, you know, the typical average
American from owning anything in order to control everything.

Speaker 4 (12:51):
It isn't like they didn't tell us.

Speaker 1 (12:52):
They constantly it's like, you will own nothing, right, Yes,
you'll be happy. And I thought about you this way.
Why I wanted to get you back on because, yeah,
I haven't talked to Eric for a while. I saw
that Portia was having problems, and Portia, of course owned
by VW and the two of them are having to
pull back because they can't sell their evs. And I remember,

(13:14):
I said, and I talked to the audience, I said, yeah,
Eric's been saying this for the longest time. They should
have hired him as CEO of Portie. They wouldn't have
had this issue. Because you knew, and of course common
sense would tell us that they have a huge advantage.
These companies that have been making internal combustion engines for
a long time, they had a huge advantage to China

(13:34):
or to other potential competitors that had to be destroyed
by saying no, now we can't use internal combustion engines.
We're going to have to do the the skates of
the evs, and China's got the advantage with the battery technology.
They've also got now a manufacturing advantage in terms of
cheap available energy. Energy is so expensive in the UK
they're shutting down all their manufacturing and in Germany it's

(13:58):
very expensive. They can't be cost with it. But now
they're saying, hey, we're going to have to pull back
a little bit. We've mal invested billions of dollars in
the EV industry. Nobody wants these things, nobody's buying it,
So now we're going to have to pull back and
try to have a cottage industry of maybe being allowed
to sell some internal combustion engines. But it's going to

(14:19):
break the back if it's even allowed of these, if
they even allow them to sell a few boutique things
to the rich. It's still going to break their back.

Speaker 2 (14:29):
It will, and this is a general problem Stillantis, which
is the parent company of the Dodge, Ramjeep and Chrysler brands,
announced about a week ago that they were not going
to produce the electric version of the Ram fifteen hundred
pickup that they had planned to bring out in twenty
twenty six because they understand that it would be a disaster,
that nobody's going to buy it. And so rather than

(14:49):
just build these things and then shipping them to dealers
where they're just going to sit and then having to
give them away a fire sale prices.

Speaker 3 (14:55):
Which is what Forms had to do with the fighting.

Speaker 2 (14:57):
They figured it this one thing to do is to
cut bait. I've practically destroyed the Dodge brand already by
getting rid of the engine in the charger and getting
rid of the Challenger altogether and replacing it with this
electric charger, which has been an epic flop.

Speaker 3 (15:11):
I mean, it is.

Speaker 2 (15:11):
Even worse than the Adds, a disaster back in the fifties.
It hasn't been remarked on, but I mean it's that bad.
They can't sell these things. I have yet to see
one in the wild. I have yet to see one
on the road. They haven't even sent me one to
review yet. Because it's not just that they're short range
and all the other problems that electric vehicles have. It's

(15:32):
not well made. It's a problematic, problem prone vehicle that
suffers endless glitches such as bricking, to the point where
they have to send out a technician to try to
figure out why it won't move. Now, the other thing
is that you brought up I find this endlessly fascinating
with regard to portion these other manufacturers that are no
longer run by car people, because any car guy would

(15:53):
tell you that a Porsche there are intangibles when it
comes to a car like that. It's not just about
how quickly it goes to zero to sixty us right
the fatal error and thinking, well, we'll just basically produce
a Tesla that looks like a Porsche essentially, you know,
and somehow we'll sell that feeling. To understand that one
of the big reasons that people buy Porsches is because
they love that six cylinder boxer engine and they love

(16:16):
the sound that it makes and the emotional visceral feeling
that you get that is lost entirely. Electric vehicles are
fundamentally homogenous. Say what you will about you know, will
the reply it and this and that? But they're fundamentally
when you drive one, you've driven them all.

Speaker 4 (16:29):
Yeah, you know, and.

Speaker 1 (16:30):
Don't they does Porsche and some of these other sports
car companies when they make their evs, do they take
the Tesla approach in terms of instrumentation, because that's one
of the things that is also a part of the field.
You know, how does the controls feel? Does it feel
solid or tendsy? I hate the idea that I've got
to use a touchscreen while I'm driving. How is that safe?
You know, you're you're supposed to use hands off of

(16:53):
your phone or we'll give you a ticket. But hey,
it's a wonderful thing if we take all the controls.
Even on Tesla, you can't even adjust the direction of
the air vents without using the touchpad that is attached
to the dashboard.

Speaker 2 (17:07):
Yep, And they're all doing it now right now in
the driveway. I have a brand new twenty twenty six
Kia Sportage, which is a nothing special little crossover that
stickers for about twenty eight thousand dollars and it's got
a full width, single sheet LCD screen for everything, you know,
the main instrument cluster, and then off to its right
is the thing that you have to tap and swipe
through in order to operate functions such as, you know,

(17:29):
changing the station.

Speaker 3 (17:30):
That you're listening to. And you're right, And it's just an.

Speaker 2 (17:32):
Illustration of how disingenuous the government is because on the
one hand, they say to people, ah, you can't use
your cell phone while you're driving, because it's dangerous to
be looking at your phone and swiping and tapping a
screen while you're trying to drive. You can't keep your
eyes on the road. But it's no problem if you
build the thing into the car.

Speaker 3 (17:49):
Yeah, it's okay.

Speaker 1 (17:50):
We need to have some controls that I have to
take my seat belt off in order to use.

Speaker 4 (17:54):
Right.

Speaker 3 (17:55):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (17:55):
So one of the you know, to get back to
circle back to what we were talking about, the great disaster.
In my opinion, it's another one is that this homogeneity
of appearance in the interior of cars that has been
that has been bequeathed to us by this obsession with
reproducing the smartphone in your car, the look of a smartphone.
So now you've lost that individuality too, instead of having

(18:17):
this kind of neat array of gauge.

Speaker 3 (18:18):
Is a really good example of this.

Speaker 2 (18:19):
A couple of weeks ago, I had the latest Mini
Cooper and it used to be that one of the
cool things about the Mini Cooper, which is owned by
the Germans, it's owned by BMW, but nonetheless was that
they replicated the feel, the look and the function of
the sixties minis. You know, if you've ever been in
one of the models, they had the cool little chrome
toggle switches, you know, and it had a vibe to it,
that feel, and it was like no other car. Well,

(18:42):
they did what everybody else is doing, and they got
rid of essentially all of the physical tactile controls, the
switches and knobs, and in lieu of that, they put
one gigantic pie.

Speaker 3 (18:51):
Plate touchscreen, you know, in the middle, in the center.

Speaker 2 (18:55):
Of the and it looks cheap, it looks homogeneous, and
it's also in a way, in my opinion, it's anti human.

Speaker 3 (19:00):
It's antiseptic cold.

Speaker 1 (19:02):
You know, they shut down the last UK factory for
the Mini BMW did am I correct?

Speaker 4 (19:10):
I think they just should.

Speaker 3 (19:12):
I wouldn't be surprised.

Speaker 1 (19:13):
I saw something because again, you can't do manufacturing in
the US because hair Starmer. The Nazi doesn't want you
to have any energy, so they shut it down, I
don't think, you know. And it was an article out
of the UK UH and they were saying, you know,
this is something that was fundamentally British, as you point about,
very any idiosyncratic.

Speaker 4 (19:34):
And now it's not going to be made anymore in.

Speaker 1 (19:36):
Britain because of the cost of energy that's there.

Speaker 2 (19:40):
Yeah, if nothing survives any longer except the brand, you know,
that's what you get label.

Speaker 3 (19:45):
Well, you know, inside the same when.

Speaker 1 (19:48):
You talk about the design of these cars and how
we've lost so much of this around this area. You know,
we're not too far away from Pigeon Forge and last
week they just had big classic cars show, and that's
when it really hits home. You know, when you see
one of these cars, which it never really valued. I
mean it might have just been like a family sedan

(20:10):
or something, you know, fifty years ago, but you look
at it, it's like, wow, that's really quirky, that's kind
of interesting looking. Look at those colors, you know, and
all the rest of this stuff. Look at the colors,
look at the chrome. It really is entertaining to see
cars that were just ordinary cars or ordinary trucks half
a century ago, to see them and to see how
different they were and how.

Speaker 4 (20:29):
Unique they all were.

Speaker 1 (20:31):
And so it really kind of drives it home here
in the Pigeon Forgery. And they have these car shows
that happened frequently. The big one was last weekend they
had that. But you've got some articles at Eric Peters
Auto's dot com about some of the difficulties of keeping
these older cars running.

Speaker 4 (20:50):
Talk about ethanol blues. What's that about.

Speaker 2 (20:53):
Yeah, you know, I have to, as the saying goes
in the hood, cop to something which is barrassing for me,
because you know, I shouldn't all of all people, this
should not have happened to me. But I was lazy
one day, and this is several months back, probably about
eight months ago, when I was out driving my old
muscle car. I have a seventy six trans Am and
rather than go all the way into town where they

(21:15):
have a station that sells unadulterated pure gasoline, which is
normally what I use to fill the car up with
because it sits sometimes Fore I get preoccupied with work
and other things. Sometimes the car unfortunately, will sit for
several months before I have time to drive it. Anyway,
I filled it up with E ten, which is only
ninety percent gas and ten percent ethanol, and I left

(21:36):
it to sit, and it sat for about three months.

Speaker 3 (21:38):
God helped me. You know, I deserve to be beaten
for that.

Speaker 2 (21:41):
Anyway, I went, I went to start it, and boy,
I barely got it to run and it was going,
you know, smoke pouring out of it. A long story short,
I ended up having to take the carburetor off the
engine and completely disassemble it and clean out the ethanol
gunk inside the carburetor because the fuel had gone bad

(22:01):
over the time that I kept it in storage. Basically,
And you know, this is a problem with these older
vehicles because you know, my car was made in nineteen
seventy six, and in nineteen seventy six, when you bought gas,
you actually got gas for your money on hundred percent gasoline.
Most people don't understand that most pomp gas is ten
percent ethanol alcohol. And if you own a vehicle that

(22:21):
was made before that came into being, that vehicle was
not designed for alcohol. Alcohol is a different fuel than gasoline.
It has different properties. It attracts water, among other things.
It's corrosive.

Speaker 1 (22:33):
Does it degrade faster than pure gasoline, then I guess
it does. That's what you're saying. Any pure gasoline will
degrade as well, right, but much longer period of time.

Speaker 2 (22:42):
Yeah, anybody who has outdoor power equipment knows that the
real problem is if you put ethanol in a gas
jugglet's saying, you put it in your shed and leave it.
You know, it'll tend to accumulate water much more rapidly
than regular gasoline. And you can also look at the
color that change in the color, you know, as it
starts to go from almost translucent to sort of a
yellow and then a darker yellow color.

Speaker 3 (23:02):
And that's a clue not to use it.

Speaker 4 (23:03):
By the way, Well that's interesting.

Speaker 1 (23:06):
You also talk about oil and additives and the oil
that are different now for the older cars.

Speaker 3 (23:13):
Well, yeah, it's not just the additives.

Speaker 2 (23:14):
Again, to get circling back to the transam, after I
cleaned out the gunk from the carburetor and got it
running well again, I recognized, oh boy, it's time to
change the oil. So I went down to the autoparts
store and I looked at the rack of oil, and
the rack of oil is you know, it's the whole
with the store. They have all kinds of different oil,
but they didn't have any ten forty anymore, you know,
and my car when it was made was designed to

(23:37):
have ten forty oil. So that's what specified and that's
what I used. There's a reason why there's a specification,
you know, and generally speaking, it's sound policy to follow
what the specification is.

Speaker 4 (23:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (23:48):
Yeah, but you know, if you've been to it, if
you've been to a car parts store lately and looked
at the oil rack, you'll see all these exotic formulations,
you know, zero W fifty this and that because they
thinned out the oil because it held helps with compliance.
You know, this is again it offers the manufacturers this
incremental friction reduction which translates into slightly higher gas models,

(24:09):
not anything you would notice as a vehicle owner, but
when you factor it out over say half a million
vehicles that you build, then it helps corporate average fuel
economy with the compliance with that federal requirement, and it
also helps with emissions. And you know, this is the obsession.
Now that the manufacturers have it's compliance. Their primary customer
now is the government, not you. You know, you're sort of

(24:30):
an instidental person. I'm just wanting to buy what the
government says you're allowed to have.

Speaker 1 (24:34):
That's right, that's right, because the government put them out
of business if they don't please the government, and so
that is their primary customer. In so many cases, the
only customer that they care about is the government. That's
really what's going on with social media and with YouTube,
I think, isn't it?

Speaker 4 (24:49):
It is?

Speaker 2 (24:50):
And so long story short, I ended up having to
coot online to find a good, high quality ten forty
for my old muscle car. Now previously I'd also had
to go online to get there's an additive. It generally
it goes by the acronym ZDDP, and it's essentially a
zinc manganese additive. And it used to be president present
in all the store bought motor oils, but they began

(25:11):
to take it out and now there's a much less
of that additive in store BOUGHD motor oil. If you
have a new or late model vehicle, it doesn't matter,
the engine was designed for that. But if you have
an older vehicle, particularly an older American vehicle with what's
called a flat TAPT camshaft. So essentially, an American car
made before the early eighties with a V eight engine.

Speaker 3 (25:30):
Typically it's important that you use that additive.

Speaker 2 (25:33):
And if you're going to be somebody to go, if
you're going to go out and buy one of those
classic cars from that era, it's something to be aware
of because if you don't use that additive, you risk
valve train failure. Those the camshaft and lifters in those
engines were designed to have that anti friction additive in it,
and if you use regular oil, you're very likely to
have a problem that you don't want to have.

Speaker 1 (25:53):
What about the aftermarket, Let's say that you have some
problems because you didn't have the right oil and fuel
and things like that. How difficult is it to get
parts for these things? I'm sure it varies depending on
how rare your car is, but just something's kind of
you know, in the middle, or something maybe like a

(26:14):
you know, a fifties Chevy or something like that. Is
it really diffinitely? Do they have much of an aftermarket
for parts with that?

Speaker 3 (26:21):
Yeah, particularly with mechanical things.

Speaker 2 (26:23):
One of the great pluses of owning, say a General
Motors product or Forward product from that era is that
they shared mechanical things. Engines, you know, an engine like
a small block Chevy was used in practically every model
vehicle that Chevrolet made, you know, from the fifties through
the sixties, seventies, and eighties, and so there is a
robust and abundant aftermarket as well as used market for

(26:45):
those kinds of parts. You'll have sometimes difficulty finding trim pieces,
you know.

Speaker 3 (26:49):
For an odd ball make.

Speaker 2 (26:50):
You know, say it was a one year vehicle where
they only had that that that grill for that one year.
I have that issue because my seventy six is a
unique front end for that for that year.

Speaker 4 (26:59):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (27:00):
Sometimes, you know, these cosmetic parts will be more difficult
to find, but generally, if you pick a popular vehicle
that was made in large numbers from that era, you're
not going to have any difficulty finding the necessary parts
that you have to have in order to keep the
vehicle serviceable and running.

Speaker 1 (27:15):
That's interesting, Yeah, because I guess I certainly do see
a lot of classic cars right here. Yeah, I guess
if you had an Edsul and you got your horse
collar or a grill.

Speaker 3 (27:26):
You can keep that going.

Speaker 2 (27:27):
One of the greats Volkswagen Beetle, you know to this
day you can easily find any part that you need
to keep a beetle running. So you know, that's a
great choice if you just want a very basic, simple,
completely analog.

Speaker 3 (27:39):
Non non digital, non data mining, non.

Speaker 2 (27:41):
Connected car that anybody could service, if they're willing to
turn a screw driver or a wrench and have basic
hand tools, that's a great choice.

Speaker 4 (27:49):
Yeah. Yeah, I know.

Speaker 1 (27:50):
There's a huge aftermarket for the Mases, especially the first
generation of Maza that's out there. They're even doing full restorations,
and or at least were for a short period of time,
if they are still doing it now. It's a couple
of years ago. They're doing full factory spec restorations in Japan.
They would do it in Japan, and the factory itself

(28:10):
was doing it, Mazda was doing it. I don't know
if they're still doing that or not. Now you got
an article and I'm reaching back now. At the beginning
of August, Pontiacs were cool. I thought they were as well.
I was just so amazed that when they decided they're
going to get rid of an entire make that they
kept Buick and got rid of Pontiac I thought that
was really strange because Buick was always perceived as kind

(28:33):
of an older person's car, or it was a family car,
something like that, where as Pontiacs had kind of a
sporty panache to them.

Speaker 3 (28:42):
Right, yep, well there's a reason for that.

Speaker 2 (28:45):
For whatever reason, Buicks are immensely popular in China, and
that's where they're believe it or not, GM sells a
ton of Buicks in China, where it's considered kind of
a status vehicle to have, and all they sell here
are made in China.

Speaker 4 (28:59):
Is that right? Yeah, we used to use Buick.

Speaker 1 (29:01):
We used that as a new finism for throwing up
in the bathroom selling Buick's.

Speaker 3 (29:08):
Now.

Speaker 2 (29:08):
What's really sad though, with regard to Pontiac and Pontiac's
just one example of many, is that you had a
once distinctive brand, and in fact, Pontiac actually was literally
a car company at one time. It wasn't a marketing company.
It actually had an engineering staff and they engineered their
engines which were different than Chevy engines. So when you
bought a Pontiac, you weren't just buying a rebadge Chevy.

(29:29):
There may have been commonality of the underlying platform, but
it was a fundamentally different car. I'll again refer to
my own car. A seventy six Pontiac Transam is a
very different car than a seventy six Camaro. Even though
they share a common underthing, their drive frames are different,
and that makes it worth buying the Pontiac.

Speaker 3 (29:46):
You know. It's not that one's better or worse. It's
simply that it is different.

Speaker 2 (29:51):
And GM actually allowed Pontiac for a great deal of
time to be sort of a raucous you know, go
get them a brand you know that that had had
had performance and style and attitude, kind of like what
Dodge was before Stilantis ruined everything. Yeah, you know, they
just had this great reputation for you know, not just

(30:11):
crude muscle cars, but cool muscle cars.

Speaker 3 (30:13):
It had some panastu them, you.

Speaker 2 (30:15):
Know, like Catalinas and Grand Prixs and of course GTOs
and everything, which were a little bit more refined than
say something like a Chevelle ass which is a great car,
but it's not the same thing as.

Speaker 4 (30:25):
A Gto, right right, yeah, yeah, And they just.

Speaker 3 (30:29):
Hollowed all of this out.

Speaker 2 (30:30):
And this was, by the way, I think the first
wave of casualties from compliance the reason that Pontiac ended
up dying was because General Motors was under enormous pressure
to try to figure out how to get these different
brands Pontiac, Buick, Oldsmobile, all their different divisions that had
different engines.

Speaker 3 (30:47):
Each one of those engines had to be certified independently
by the federal government as being in compliance with the
stuff that costs a lot of money. So General Motors
made the decision, well, what we're going to do is corporatize.
We're going to just put Chevrolet built engines in pretty
much everything that we sell. They did this beginning in
the eighties, and that.

Speaker 2 (31:07):
Way they only had to certify the Chevrolet engine, which
they could put in a Pontiac and a Buick and.

Speaker 3 (31:11):
An Oldsmobile, which is what they did.

Speaker 2 (31:13):
But by doing that, they just gutted any reason for
having a Pontiac or an Oldsmobile or even a Buick.

Speaker 3 (31:19):
It's all you're getting is a Reskin Chevy with the
identical drive train.

Speaker 4 (31:23):
Over and over again.

Speaker 1 (31:24):
I tell people, you know, the real problem with industry
and manufacturing and innovation in the United States is the government.
They are the biggest obstacle. They are far more destructive
of jobs and manufacturing than any company abroad or any
country abroad. All this stuff about tariffs is a misdirection

(31:45):
away from the true source of the problem, which is
government regulation. And even when they're talking about the housing crisis,
some people are talking about how expensive houses have become
because of government regulation, but the government's not talking about
doing anything of that. They're talking about playing some financialization
games in terms of interest rates or subsidies or this

(32:06):
or that, but they're not going to do anything about
the overregulation and all the green mandates that are there.
Trump will go the un You'll say, you're destroying your
country with all this green stuff and everything, but he
won't take those regulations off of cars or homes, so
he can't have nice things anymore.

Speaker 3 (32:24):
That's correct.

Speaker 2 (32:25):
We have become as a culture so habituated to the
government being involved in these things, and really, I think
that's that's the bone of the matter. Why is the
government involved in car design?

Speaker 4 (32:36):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (32:36):
You know, a good example of this is, you know.

Speaker 2 (32:38):
The whole I wrote an article about Ralph Nader a
couple of weeks ago and the core of beer and
his allegations about the core of air being unsafe. This
is a matter for the course, if the car is
unsafe and effective in some way, that can be handled
in tortue claims. That's the way these things ought to
be handled, instead of this broad brush, one size fits
all of the federal government decreem You know, you will
have this particular safety standard. It doesn't matter what you

(33:01):
know what side effects that safety standard has, even if
it ends up being less safe. Good example of that
being in the mid seventies they imposed a roof crush
standard on the industry. You know, the vehicle had to
be able to support the weight of the vehicle if
it got turned upside down. So as a result of that,
you got these gigantic A, B and C pillars. Those
are the things that support the roof. The A pillars

(33:21):
at the basic shield be in the middle and C
in the back instead of being you know, these these
thin and graceful things that you could easily look around
and you had this expansive view of the outside world
around you.

Speaker 3 (33:33):
Now you're essentially in a tank. You know, I driving
new cars all the time feels like you're in a tank.

Speaker 2 (33:39):
You have essentially no visibility, often to the right and
to the left because of this enormous B pillar that's
there to support the weight of the vehicle if you
roll it over. The problem is now when you pull
out from a side street, you're likely to get t
boned because that thing is created that blind spot. You
didn't see the car, but it was coming at you
from the side.

Speaker 1 (33:57):
That's right, Yeah, I agree. You know, how did we
wind up still being able to keep convertibles with that?
I know, I've got all my convertibles. I got some
really huge A pillars on them, but very cleverly, like
you know, with regard to some of them.

Speaker 3 (34:11):
You know, with Maza, the audi as you know, they
built a roll.

Speaker 2 (34:14):
Bar into the backs of the seats basically, that was
one way that they did it. Uh, And some of
the manufacturers took that a step farther with pop up
roll bars. You know, Mercedes did that with some of
their highest convertibles, and they also managed to reinforce the
structure of the windshield in a way that made it.

Speaker 3 (34:30):
Supportive of the vehicle if it were to roll over.

Speaker 2 (34:33):
But you know, it's it's just the point is the
government's involvement in this stuff is just so insufferably obnoxious.

Speaker 3 (34:40):
We are and to put a finer point on it.

Speaker 2 (34:42):
You know, we talk about the government as if it's
sort of this entity out there, and I like to
I like to point out to be what you're really
talking about is a relative handful of micromanaging bureaucrats who
are the weavils within these regulatory bodies. You know, go
to the DOT or NITSA. How many people work there?
A few thousand. So you've got a few thousand people
in these regulatory bodies who are dictating to three hundred

(35:04):
and thirty million people.

Speaker 3 (35:05):
You know, the design of the cars that they're allowed
to have.

Speaker 1 (35:09):
Yeah, exactly right, I just you know, and we have
spineless politicians who let the bureaucrats rule over us and
never do anything to push back against them.

Speaker 3 (35:18):
And that's my design.

Speaker 2 (35:19):
You know, they've off loaded this, they'll say, Congress in particular,
they'll say, well, I can't do anything about it, because
you know, the bureaucracy is responsible for that's right. But
you're the ones that offloaded their responsibility under the Constitution
to legislate. You know, there's legislation and there's regulation, and
regulation has the force and effect of law, yet it's
not voted for, which means there's all accountability. You know,

(35:41):
you can't out, you can't vote out of office an
epa apparatuip.

Speaker 1 (35:45):
You know, they claim that they're not responsible for it,
even though, as you point out, they delegate this to them. Yes,
then you know something gets really bad and there's a
huge outroar uproar about that, then they can come in
and say, Okay, we're going to save you from these
bad guy as a regulator. So it's a very calculated
political ploy, isn't it.

Speaker 4 (36:05):
And I think we got do We have a couple
of comments of questions for him.

Speaker 5 (36:08):
Good to talk to you, Ra servis here got citizen
Draccaka says Eric, would he'd like you to speak on
the fact they were trying to pass legislation so you'll
be able to ensure a car that's over twenty five
years old, which is just utterly ridiculous because of course
we know that twenty five years ago all calls cars
were death traps.

Speaker 6 (36:25):
People were dying left and right.

Speaker 5 (36:27):
It's only within the past few years that the cars
have become safe at all and people can drive him
without living in constant fear.

Speaker 1 (36:33):
Yeah, and on that same line, Eric, California, just you know,
they wanted to it's missions. I think that they had
there and it was like a thirty five year moving average,
and they were trying to adjust that a little bit,
and they shut it down the huge blow. It's Jay
Leno's law. Maybe you heard about that.

Speaker 3 (36:52):
Surely, surely punitive and vindictive. Yeah, Leno, I think learned
a valuable lesson.

Speaker 4 (36:57):
You know.

Speaker 2 (36:57):
I think he, in his innocence, might have believed that
national considerations and reasonable considerations might cause the California legislature
and Regulatory apparat to agree that, yeah, you know, vehicles
that are thirty five years old are constitute a very
small minority of the vehicles that are in use as
daily transportation, and so yeah, we'll exempt them, as most

(37:19):
states do, from having to go in from emissions testing.
This is purely punitive because they want to push these
cars off the road, and it's particularly egregious in California
because it's not even a matter of whether you pass
the tailpipe sniffer test. You know, when you bring your
car into the inspection station and they put the probe
in the tailplay and in most states, if it passes

(37:39):
that you pass, and you get your sticker in California,
doesn't matter whether you pass the tailpipe sniffer test if
any of the factory original emissions equipment has been tampered with,
altered or removed. Now what that means you're talking about
the thirty five year old car, or how about a
fifty year old car, and maybe the original smog pump
or EGR system had to be replaced because it's a
thirty five year old vehicle. Thirty five year old? Well

(38:01):
what if there is no aftermarket replacement? And more finally,
in California, every aftermarket replacement has to have a California
Air Resources Board number, a certification that it's been approved
by CAR. So if it doesn't have that, even if
everything works, and even if the emissions are with inspect,
they will still fail the vehicle on the basis of
failing the visual and not having the CARB approved replacement part.

(38:23):
So this is purely, purely punitive and vindictive. And I
do see this sort of thing expanding. You know, they're
going to start targeting cars and they're going to say
we can't permit vehicles that don't have the latest advanced
driver assistance technology to be on the road, you know,
because of the threat that they present and the people
are going to die. That's the sort of thing that
I foresee that they're going to start doing in the

(38:45):
next few years.

Speaker 1 (38:46):
Oh yeah, yeah. And it's kind of interesting too, because
when I was doing modifications to Mimiada about seven years ago,
the companies I was getting the aftermarket parts on which
were taking those parts that you just mentioned and pitching
them completely. But they were based in California, and I thought,
you know, this is kind of interesting. They can't sell
their own product. Even at that time, many of their

(39:08):
things were not CARB compliant, and they couldn't sell them
and to people who lived in California, only to people
who lived outside of California.

Speaker 4 (39:15):
But it's getting much much worse, you know.

Speaker 2 (39:18):
You know onmmon thread that runs through all of this
is that there's no requirement that tangible harm.

Speaker 3 (39:24):
Be produced, in other words, a victim.

Speaker 2 (39:27):
A really fine example of this is the crucification of Volkswagen,
and I revisited that issue recently in a column. It's
been about ten years now since Volkswagen got raped over
the coals for cheating on federal emission certification tests.

Speaker 3 (39:40):
Yes, and you know.

Speaker 2 (39:41):
At the time and even to this day, I continue
to ask, well, who was hurt by any of this?
All the The only thing that happened was that the
government was affronted. You know, Volkswagen, like every other vehicle manufacturer,
programmed its vehicles to pass the test. That's the whole
points They made it so they would pass that. And
not only this is an important point, the federal emission
certification test. Nobody ever disputed these vehicles when they were

(40:04):
bought and put into service in states where people had
to go to get emissions testing, you know, at the
state level, and.

Speaker 3 (40:09):
Get the tailpipe probe put in. They all passed.

Speaker 2 (40:12):
The only kerfluffle happened after this independent lab subjected the
cars to an entirely different test that found that, under
certain operating conditions, oh my gosh, the vehicle will emit
slightly higher fractionally higher amounts of oxides of nitrogen.

Speaker 3 (40:29):
Which is a regulated emission for EPA. And the amount
was minuscule.

Speaker 2 (40:33):
It was literally a fraction of a fraction, in other words,
something that was meaningless in terms of whether it was
hurting anybody didn't matter.

Speaker 1 (40:41):
It was so draconian. You and I talked about this
many times. It was so draconian. That it was clear
that it wasn't about what they said it was about.
It was really about, as we said, getting rid of diesel.
I mean, they had criminal charges against executives. It was
something like four billion dollars if I remember correctly. It
was outrageous what they were doing, and we talked about that,
how you didn't see anything at all like that with

(41:02):
the Takata air bags that were blowing up spontaneously and
killing people, or with the Pinto you know, and the
deliberate exclusion of some devices that would keep that explosion
from happening. So it was something that we've never seen before,
even when human lives were at stake, and there was
nobody that was harmed by any of this stuff.

Speaker 2 (41:23):
Well, the reason why they did it, though, it wasn't
just that it was diesel. It was that Volkswagen uniquely
was selling a lineup of very affordable diesels as recently
as twenty fifteen.

Speaker 3 (41:35):
You know, it's ten years ago.

Speaker 2 (41:36):
Not even you could have bought a brand new Volkswagen
Jetto with a TDI engine for about twenty two thousand dollars.
Now that whole car had a seven hundred mile driving
range and would get fifty plus miles per gallon on
the highway and could probably be counted on to go
for three hundred thousand miles or more. Now, it's a
curious coincidence, isn't it, that around the same time the
Volkswagen started getting raped over the coals over this emissions

(41:59):
cheating thing. That's when the big push for evs began,
right around that time, around twenty thirteen. And I think
the reason that they went after Volkswagen was because they
could not abide the comparison. You know, on the one hand,
twenty two thousand dollars Jetta TDI seven hundred mile range,
refill it in three minutes, keep it for twenty years,
drive it for three hundred thousand miles. On the other hand,

(42:20):
Tesla Model three, fifty thousand dollars car that goes maybe
two hundred and seventy miles and is going to need
a new fifteen thousand dollars battery after eight years. It
just would have been a harder sell. So they had
to go after Volkswagen. I think, you know, if Volkswagen
had continued making engines like that, other manufacturers would have
started to do the same. In fact, Chevy did chevro Letty.
You could get a Malibu diesel for a little while there,

(42:42):
and other manufacturers would have done it because it's appealing.

Speaker 3 (42:45):
I mean, I like the idea of a.

Speaker 2 (42:46):
You know, brand new twenty two thousand dollars car that
gets fifty something miles per gallan seven hundred miles. You know,
diesel is great. You know, it's a wonderful option for
people who want a durable, long legged, long lived vehicle.
So naturally they had to take that away from us.

Speaker 1 (43:00):
Yeah, checked all the boxes in terms of competition with
the electric vehicles, as you point out, is durability, reliability, affordability, range,
It was all there.

Speaker 4 (43:10):
So I had to go. It really had to go.

Speaker 1 (43:12):
They've got an agenda, and they don't want you to
have something that you can afford. They don't want you
to have a long range because they want to keep
you on a short rope where they're smart city and
they're probably geo fencing to make sure that you can't
buy anything outside of your approved city and that type
of thing.

Speaker 4 (43:30):
It's just amazing.

Speaker 2 (43:31):
Really, it's a really important thing for people to understand,
and it's a difficult thing to understand because the undercurrent
of malevolence that's there is difficult for most people to
come to grips with, but it's almost axiomatic that you
cannot have an authoritarian system in which people are still
free to move about as they like on their own initiative,
in their own vehicle, unsupervised, unmonitored, and uncontrolled. In order

(43:54):
for them to impose a truly authoritarian system on Americans,
they have got to get control over transportation and particularly
personal transportation. And when you filter everything that's going on
through that, everything becomes comprehensible.

Speaker 4 (44:09):
That's right.

Speaker 1 (44:09):
I tell people all the time. The TSA is a
transportation security agency, right, it's not the airport security agency.

Speaker 4 (44:17):
And they want to do that.

Speaker 1 (44:18):
They want to eliminate the private vehicles so that everything
becomes like the airport. If you like that, certainly you'll
be able to keep that authoritarian government. If you like
your authoritarian government, you can keep it, or they'll keep
it for you.

Speaker 5 (44:33):
With something like geo fencing and the tesla's, they can
just simply section you off, say oh no, your car
just simply will not go there.

Speaker 6 (44:40):
You turn it that way. No, we're going to autopilot
you back into your safe zone. You're not allowed over here.
You're not allowed to go this fhe.

Speaker 1 (44:47):
And you won't have enough range really to get out
of there anyway. You know, it's fifteen minute city.

Speaker 2 (44:51):
That's about how creepy it is. And it's incredible, al Blase.
So many Americans are, they think even if they're aware
of it, they will say, oh, that would never happen,
and they would never do that to us.

Speaker 1 (45:02):
Yeah, you know, Eric, about ten years ago, I went
to an auto show in Texas. I start, yeah, a
long Star round up. It's a real big classic show,
and I think it's got to be an America made car,
and it's got to be They don't include the it's
got to be older than the Mustangs. Older than sixty four.

(45:24):
Sixty five is a cutoff, right, So they didn't want
to take it at that point.

Speaker 4 (45:29):
But there's a lot of modification to.

Speaker 1 (45:31):
Them, and a lot of rat rods that are out there,
you know, really grungy cars that people kept going and modified.
I went around and I talked to all these people
and they were all different ages. You know, people had
cars they were seventeen or eighteen years old that they
had fixed up up to people who retirees and I
asked them all, do you think the government is going
to make private cars go away and gasoline cars go away?

Speaker 4 (45:54):
Oh?

Speaker 1 (45:54):
Yeah, they all said, And to a man, they pretty
much all said, including like seventeen eight year olds, It'll
never happen in my lifetime. It's like, man, the disconnect
that was there at that time was just that was
the most you know, the cars are interesting, but the
most interesting thing was how these people had lied to
themselves about the government's intentions and its abilities to rob

(46:17):
them of their mobility. It truly is amazing.

Speaker 2 (46:21):
The intentions were always there. I think the technology has
made it much more feasible to fast track things. They
wouldn't have been able to do what they have wanted
to do for fifty years, you know, back in the
eighties and nineties, or even the early two thousands, But now,
particularly within the last ten years, they have now got
the ability to utterly and completely control vehicles to a

(46:44):
degree that most people would not believe until they have
to deal with it.

Speaker 4 (46:47):
You know.

Speaker 3 (46:48):
I give various examples.

Speaker 2 (46:49):
One is the illusion that you have in a modern
car that you're controlling how fast you drive.

Speaker 4 (46:54):
You're not.

Speaker 3 (46:55):
When you push down on the accelerator pedal.

Speaker 2 (46:57):
All you're doing is feeding data to the computer, and
you're not connected to the engine, to a cable system
and a throttle any longer. You're sending data to a computer,
and the computer then is telling the engine, okay, increase
the RPMs or to a certain amount to give you
the illusion that you're the one who's controlling the car.
I had a Ford expedition a couple of weeks ago,

(47:19):
and I was, this is a big vehicle, big SUV,
and I'm trying to back the thing up in my driveway.

Speaker 3 (47:22):
Now I've lived where I lived for twenty years. I
know my driveway. There's a big.

Speaker 2 (47:26):
Bush at the one side of my driveway, and I know,
because again I've been doing it for twenty years, exactly
how far I can back up before I hit that bush.
But the Ford slams on the brakes a couple of
feet before I get anywhere near the bush. Because again safety,
but you know, read dig down and.

Speaker 3 (47:44):
To think about what that means.

Speaker 2 (47:45):
The vehicle can decide that it's going to stop, you know,
entering your will. It's going to exercise control, and bit
by bit they're doing this. I had an article look
the other day about this speed limit assistance technology. I
love how they call it assistance technology, Like you didn't
know you were driving faster than the speed limit, and
now the car is well, oh, thank you so much
car for telling me that I'm driving faster than the

(48:07):
speed limit. And you know, first they try to shame you.
There's a little icon that pops up in the dashboard
that shows us a speed limit sign and it goes red.
You know you're driving faster than the speed limit. And
sometimes there's a chime that companies it. And this is
weirdly standard now on all the vehicles. Why is that,
you know, it's not optional for people who need assistance.
If I need assistance, oh I love that, I'll buy
some assistance. No, they're making it standard because what they're

(48:29):
doing is in classic Fabian socialist style, slowly, bit by bit,
you know, getting people used to this stuff, and the
next step will be not just assisting you to know
that you're driving faster than the speed limit, it will
be preventing you from driving any faster than the speed
limit by using the drive by wire throttle, by using
the electrically controlled braking system to prevent you from doing it.

(48:51):
And what they're doing with that is making driving such
a it's no longer fun. You feel like you're guarented.
You feel like you're a kindergartener again. And that's the
really they want you to just say, you know, the
heck with it?

Speaker 4 (49:03):
Why am I?

Speaker 2 (49:04):
Why am I signing up for a seven hundred dollars
a month loan for the next six years. I don't
even control the car. The car nags me and pesters
me all the time, it tells me what to do.

Speaker 3 (49:12):
The heck with it.

Speaker 2 (49:13):
I'm just going to get my app on my phone
and I'll tap it and I'll get my pride.

Speaker 4 (49:17):
That's right. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (49:18):
The comedian British comedian Ruin Atkinson who plays mister Bean.
He was an engineer before he became a comedian, and
he's got a lot he loves cars, and he's got
a lot of very expensive hypercards. And he said, well,
you don't really drive these so much as you manage them,
because there's so much drive by wire stuff in it.

(49:39):
And I remember when Michael Hastings was killed, and I
think he was killed. I don't think it was an accident,
and he was He had rented a late model Mercedes
when that happened, and he was he thought that people
were after him with the government because of what he
was reporting on, and he had a lot of death
threats from the government, and so he going out to

(50:00):
his car. A landlady said he you go out to
the car and you look underneath it and all this
other kind of stuff to see if there was some
kind of a bomb on it. But they you know,
when you have the when the computer is able to
control your acceleration, you're braking, you're steering, and all these
other things, it's very, very easy to assassinate somebody that way.
And they have illustrated over and over again at the

(50:24):
black Hat conference in Vegas how easy it is to
hack one of these cars as well, because they're also online,
so everything is under computer control and it's also online,
so any bad actor, especially the government, can jump into
this thing and do whatever they wish. They can shut
you down, or if they want to, they can try
to make it look like it was an accident. This

(50:44):
is the type of thing we've been seeing for a
long time. Yeah, you had your article when you're talking
about the insurance, when will people decide to stop paying?
And you talk about the fact that you've got an
antique car, you drive it three hundred miles a year
and stay within about a ten miles of your home
in rural Virginia, And why should you have to pay
insurance for that? That should be your decision for that.

(51:07):
But of course it is this corporate government fascism that
we see over and over again where they force you
to buy their product, isn't.

Speaker 3 (51:15):
It It is?

Speaker 2 (51:16):
And now they are using insurance to price people out
of vehicle ownership. Yeah, everybody you probably had this happen
to you as well, has had their premium increase by
on average twenty five to thirty percent and in some
cases fifty percent or more for absolutely no reason having
to do with anything they did in terms of having
an accident, filing a claim anything, or.

Speaker 3 (51:36):
Even a speeding ticket. You get the notice in the
mail and all of a sudden, your premium.

Speaker 2 (51:40):
Is double what it was the year prior. Why because
they can, you know, because they don't have the option
to say no. Imagine what a cup of coffee would
cost if the government said you have to go to Starbucks.

Speaker 3 (51:51):
You caucify a cup of.

Speaker 2 (51:53):
Starbucks coffee at least once a week. You know, we'd
be paying ten dollars for a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Speaker 4 (51:58):
That's exactly where we are, isn't it.

Speaker 2 (52:00):
That's essentially where we are with this. And I think,
you know, we are getting to a point. You know,
I have my ear to the ground about things like this.
And it's also my own personal opinion that everybody's feeling
pinched because of the cost of everything.

Speaker 1 (52:11):
Everything's going up and they don't include it, and the
evaluation of inflation either be.

Speaker 2 (52:15):
The this and so you know, when it comes down
to a choice between you know, obeying the law and
handing a check over to these insurance mobsters for a
large sum of money that could be used to pay
your electric bill, or you know, for your family, what's
the choice. Well, you know, probably a lot of people
are going to say, you know what, I'm going to
buy food for my family instead of sending this check
to all State or Geicoe.

Speaker 4 (52:36):
Yeah, and so what.

Speaker 2 (52:38):
You know, I mean, the illegal aliens can with impunity
because they you know, they can't they can't get blood
out of a stone, can they.

Speaker 3 (52:45):
You know, they don't have any access disease. So and
I'm not I'm really I'm not.

Speaker 2 (52:49):
I'm not disparaging people who are in that category because
I understand people are trying to improve their lives and
all of that. Just trying to make the point that
there are no consequences for those people. You know, if
if they want to go out and drive without insurance
and hit you and wreck you, they'll walk away from
it and the state will do nothing about it. But
you and I we don't hit anybody, you know, we
haven't caused any problems for anybody. But we didn't hand

(53:10):
over the money to the mobsters. They'll cancel your driver's license,
they'll cancel your registration, and if they catch you driving,
they'll know impound your vehicle and potentially arrest you for it.

Speaker 1 (53:20):
That's absolutely right. Yeah, you're absolutely right. That's the way
it works. It's a two tier standard already in many
different areas that we've got in this country. Well, well
at a time. It's always great having you on, Eric.
Anything you want to tell us about what's happening with
your website.

Speaker 3 (53:34):
Oh, well, nothing more than what's on there. You know.

Speaker 2 (53:36):
I posted an article this morning. It's more of a
thought piece about how we're all kind of in this
bad marriage situation.

Speaker 3 (53:42):
In this country.

Speaker 1 (53:43):
You know, yeah, Trump is the guy who has bad marriages.

Speaker 4 (53:46):
He specializes in that, doesn't he Well.

Speaker 2 (53:49):
Isn't it interesting that for the most part, most people
will say, okay, you know, if you have a situation
where a couple just can't.

Speaker 3 (53:55):
Work it out, they're at odds.

Speaker 2 (53:57):
You know, nobody would say, well, they have to stay
married and be miserable for the rest of their lives.
People accept that sometimes marriages don't work and you know,
there's a divorce. It's not a happy thing, but it's
better than forcing people who can't live together to live together. Well, politically,
somehow that seems to be off the table.

Speaker 4 (54:12):
Why is that?

Speaker 2 (54:13):
You know, we're at a point in this country with
the left right and just people who want to be
left alone chiefly versus those who won't leave people alone.
Why can't we just figure out a way to peacefully
separate ourselves and that way end this fractiousness, you know,
and just instead of going to blows with each other,
and that includes blows at the ballot box and trying
to constantly figure out a way to elect our guy

(54:33):
to impose our will on the other side, how about
we just figure out a way to go our own
way and live and let live.

Speaker 3 (54:40):
The problem is that probably half the country doesn't want
to live and let live.

Speaker 1 (54:43):
Yeah, I've talked about that. You know, if you look
at the Scandinavian countries, they have split apart and join
together in various combinations many times, and you know, they
would peacefully join together, peacefully break apart, and there.

Speaker 4 (54:56):
Was never a war over it. We don't have a
government like that.

Speaker 1 (54:58):
You know, when Marjorie Tail green Star talking about having
a national divorce, I said, yeah, the problem is is
that we're married to an abusive spouse who once he
finds out that we want to divorce him, he's going
to come kill us.

Speaker 3 (55:10):
You know.

Speaker 2 (55:11):
Ye that I recurrently use because I think it's very
pithy and it says it all. And it's a picture
of Abraham Lincoln and the caption reads, if you try
to leave me, I'll kill you.

Speaker 4 (55:21):
That's right, you know, the ultimate abusive of the household.

Speaker 1 (55:26):
That's exactly the case, especially in a country that was
formed over the right of secession and self government. That
was the basis of America's existence from the very beginning.
How could you deny that to somebody? I'm always all
about secession, and I would say, if at first you
don't seceed, try try again.

Speaker 4 (55:46):
That maybe my model for ever.

Speaker 3 (55:47):
It's a safety valve and everybody should be on board
with that.

Speaker 1 (55:50):
And of course there is one other thing we can do.
And people at tenth Amendment have talked center I have
talked about this a lot. There is another avenue of this,
and that is nullification. That is kind of the middle point.
You know, we say, well, we're just going tognore what
you have to say. So there is nullification and non
commandeering and short of and that effectively can allow you

(56:13):
to seceed issue by issue if you've got people at
the state level who have the backbone to do that
type of thing, and that's the big if we don't
because they're all on the take. I don't think that
we're going to get this country back until we have
a catastrophic economic system that's going to destroy the ability.

Speaker 4 (56:30):
Of our government with US dollars or reserve.

Speaker 1 (56:32):
Currency to just print money out of thin air. Until
that disappears, we're going to have the same type of situation.

Speaker 3 (56:39):
We do have one power under our control, and it
is to simply not participate, to opt out on our own.

Speaker 2 (56:45):
You know, with regard to new cars, if you don't
want to be data mined and controlled, well, don't buy
a new car.

Speaker 3 (56:50):
You eat the older car that you have.

Speaker 2 (56:52):
Get an older car, fix it up, you know, during
the pandemic, don't wear a mask, don't pull, don't comply.
If enough of us is indis, you don't have to
join an organization, just abide. It's in your own moral compass.
And you know, if this is wrong, I don't like this,
I'm not going along with it.

Speaker 4 (57:10):
That's it.

Speaker 2 (57:11):
I'm just taking my stand. I'm not going to be
a cattle and go along moving with the herd just
because that's what the herd does.

Speaker 4 (57:18):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (57:19):
I I'd been thrown out of so many different places
and restaurants in Texas. I had to move to Tennessee
because I promised these people I would never be back
because of the way that they insisted that I wear
a mask, And so I left.

Speaker 4 (57:30):
Then I said, and I won't be.

Speaker 1 (57:31):
Back, And I kept my word by moving to State.
That's the only way I could do it. It's always
great to have you on Eric Eric petersautos dot com.
Folks had great sight for liberty and mobility and a
little bit of nostalgia now as well, because that's how
the only way we're going to be able to keep
our mobility is with classic cars. Thank you, Eric, always

(57:53):
great to talk to you.

Speaker 5 (57:53):
Thank you, Travis, Thank you Eric, always a pleasure speaking
to you. And before we go, ACSA B thank you
so much that we really do appreciate it. Says so awesome.
DK and family. Thanks for everything. I wish I could
do so much more, so much.

Speaker 6 (58:07):
A CSAP, thank you.

Speaker 5 (58:08):
It really is because of your support that we're able
to continue to do this and we really cannot thank
you enough.

Speaker 4 (58:12):
Thank you very much.

Speaker 6 (58:13):
Folks, Thank you all very much. God bless you all
have a wonderful rest of your day.

Speaker 1 (58:17):
Yes, the common man. They created common Core that dumbed
down our children. They created common past, track and control

(58:37):
us their commons project to make sure the commoners own
nothing and the communist future.

Speaker 4 (58:45):
They see.

Speaker 1 (58:46):
The common man is simple, unsophisticated, ordinary. But each of
us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
That is what we have in common. That is what
they want to take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.

(59:06):
They desire to know everything about us, While they hide
everything from us, it's time to turn that around and
expose what they want to hide. Please share the information
and links you'll find at the Davidknightshow dot com. Thank
you for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't

(59:30):
support us financially, please keep us in your prayers. D
Davidknightshow dot com