Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast.
Speaker 2: Center, Jack Armstrong Show, Katty.
Speaker 3: Armstrong and Getty and now he is Armstrong and Yetty, Hey,
Speaker 3: how are you doing? Always love talking to Tim Sanderfer.
Speaker 3: We just wrapped up a conversation. If you just tune
Speaker 3: it in or whatever, grab it via podcast Armstrong and
Speaker 3: Getty on demand about his book, And I mentioned one
Speaker 3: of his previous books, The Permission Society, which he put
Speaker 3: out in twenty sixteen, was inspired by conversations on this
Speaker 3: show and honored to have inspired anything good to happen
Speaker 3: on Earth. It occurs to me if it's a perfect
Speaker 3: introduction to the freedom loving quote of the day, and
Speaker 3: not yet Michael and then Mailbank, because what we talked
Speaker 3: about at the time that launched the book was and
Speaker 3: I may have come up with this, it doesn't really matter,
Speaker 3: but never use the word permit as a noun unless
Speaker 3: you think about it as a verb. You're getting a
Speaker 3: permit from the county to do this, that or the other.
Speaker 3: And it ranges from you know, in parts of rural
Speaker 3: Texas where you don't need a permit to do anything
Speaker 3: to in your bluer states and cities, and all famously
Speaker 3: in the communist enclave where Jack makes his home, you
Speaker 3: need a permit to get a new dishwasher for your kitchen,
Speaker 3: so they make sure it's up to whatever environmental rules
Speaker 3: and REGs rule that that communist enclave. And the rules
Speaker 3: and rags and permits are often well meaning road to
Speaker 3: hell paydle good intentions, right, and some of them are
Speaker 3: probably either legitimate, even if they go a little too far.
Speaker 3: But the problem is you get this web of permissions
Speaker 3: for everything you do every day, every use of your land,
Speaker 3: every tool you use, every mode of transportation, and sooner
Speaker 3: or later that web of well meaning rules and rags
Speaker 3: traps you. It becomes the opposite of liberty. And again
Speaker 3: a lot of it's well meaning, but it tends to
Speaker 3: total up, bit by bit by bit until you're just
Speaker 3: not a free person anymore. And I certainly joined with
Speaker 3: Tim and fighting against that sort of thing, which brings
Speaker 3: us to the freedom loving quote of the day. And
Speaker 3: I'm gonna go with a series from Nikita Krushia, who
Speaker 3: was the premiere of the Soviet Union in the fifties
Speaker 3: and sixties, I think through nineteen sixty four. He took
Speaker 3: power after Stalin, and it was a huge, huge moment
Speaker 3: in the history of Russia and the Soviet Union. And
Speaker 3: though he left officer, I think he croaked before I
Speaker 3: was born. It was his doctrines that governed the Cold
Speaker 3: War to a large extent until Gorbachev and the Deytant
Speaker 3: and everything came in. Dayton was a different period, but
Speaker 3: when the Soviet Union crumbled, So Krushev was enormously, enormously influential,
Speaker 3: and he was kind of the rule giver that we
Speaker 3: Cold warriors grew up with his philosophy. And what's interesting
Speaker 3: and handy about Krushev is he was utterly clear and
Speaker 3: open about his plans. And we'll be hitting some of
Speaker 3: his quotes for the next couple of week, week or two. Anyway,
Speaker 3: we'll lead with this one. You Americans are so gullible. No,
Speaker 3: you won't accept communism outright, but we'll keep feeding you
Speaker 3: small doses of socialism until you'll finally wake up and
Speaker 3: find you already have communism. We won't have to fight
Speaker 3: you will, so weaken your economy until you'll fall like
Speaker 3: overrighte fruit fruit into our hands. Mailbag. Obviously one of
Speaker 3: the reasons that's so appropriate is socialism seems to be
Speaker 3: on the march, particularly among the young in college miseducated
Speaker 3: in America. These days, Khrushchev's wishes are coming true. And
Speaker 3: not to be over dramatic, but I will die fighting them.
Speaker 3: Drum Us note mail bag at Armstrong and Getty dot com.
Speaker 3: Let's see David and Campbell says some very nice things
Speaker 3: about the show, Thank you, my brother, and he mentions
Speaker 3: that yesterday we played a clip of AOC try and
Speaker 3: answer the question about the difference between socialism and communism,
Speaker 3: and she doesn't know the difference, and he says, essentially,
Speaker 3: and this is under Karl Marx's theory handy to know.
Speaker 3: I suppose in socialism, the workers control the state. State
Speaker 3: uses its power to take over major industries and the
Speaker 3: means of production. And as time passes that utopia ends,
Speaker 3: the conflict between the classes and the state is no
Speaker 3: longer needed and withers away. Everybody shares and shares alike.
Speaker 3: It is truly a utopia. Everyone communicates, there are no
Speaker 3: need for even rules. This is communism, the ideal state.
Speaker 3: And if you seriously think that will ever happen among
Speaker 3: human beings, you need your brain checked, or you need
Speaker 3: to get the hell out of the way and let
Speaker 3: the adults run things. It's a good explanation encapsulated there.
Speaker 3: David appreciate it. Then this from Tim, I love this.
Speaker 3: He says, Remember, there's a merit system in communism. People
Speaker 3: become really talented at telling on each other. The power
Speaker 3: is in control, controlling the systems. The people who get
Speaker 3: control of the systems, the stores, the gas stations, et cetera,
Speaker 3: have the opportunity for corruption that of course comes in communism,
Speaker 3: and these are the coveted positions. Of course, it doesn't
Speaker 3: matter whether someone's a zell At or real communists. They will,
Speaker 3: for the purposes of survival in advancement, become really good
Speaker 3: at telling on people, really good at putting people in trouble,
Speaker 3: so they can continue to have that power. That's what
Speaker 3: happens in communism. That's why it always fails. That's how
Speaker 3: Russia became a criminal gang with the toughest criminal in charge.
Speaker 3: The commissars get rich, and it doesn't matter anymore if
Speaker 3: the system fails, as long as they stay rich. The
Speaker 3: people that run the store have the food, the people
Speaker 3: that run the gas station have fuel. The people that
Speaker 3: supervise the distribution of benefits have benefits, and that's all
Speaker 3: that matters. You know, I'm going to depart from the
Speaker 3: plan here of mail bag and Michael do me a favor.
Speaker 3: Let's play Oh where is it?
Speaker 2: Ah?
Speaker 3: This is instructive. This is the late Charlie Kirk debating
Speaker 3: Hassan Piker, and to put up with them yell over
Speaker 3: each other for a minute because they get into a
Speaker 3: little bit of substance. In number forty.
Speaker 4: Four, why don't you give ninety five percent of your
Speaker 4: money away and go live on a communey?
Speaker 5: Do you really think that that's how worse?
Speaker 6: Do you really think?
Speaker 4: Why not worse? Goel? You preach because I every single
Speaker 4: pass you uninterrupted for five minutes. Hassan, Let okay, go ahead,
Speaker 4: sorry live You're right what I practice it made me
Speaker 4: free market capitalist, I employ people, I took a risk.
Speaker 4: I have my own startup business. Every single day I
Speaker 4: practice what I preach. He wants other people to contribute
Speaker 4: to what he considers to be a good idea, what
Speaker 4: he considers will make the world a better place. That
Speaker 4: you have the freedom to go live as a socialist,
Speaker 4: Go do it. Hassan, what's stopping you?
Speaker 5: Okay, So here's what we'll take it.
Speaker 7: In the last point. The last point I will make
Speaker 7: is this.
Speaker 5: Here's why that conversation is absolutely preposterous. If I gave
Speaker 5: away the measly earnings that I had and gave gave
Speaker 5: away ninety five percent, how much you make that one
Speaker 5: necessarily even pushed the needle.
Speaker 3: So Hassan Piker's next sentence ought to be so for
Speaker 3: my system to work, I needed because I know it's
Speaker 3: right to control everybody else and make them give away
Speaker 3: what they earn. My system depends entirely not on individual
Speaker 3: initiative or consent, or taking risk or investing or building something.
Speaker 3: My system depends entirely on controlling people and taking from them.
Speaker 3: And yeah, I understand taxation is a similar thing, but
Speaker 3: there's no taxation without the consent of the legislature, at
Speaker 3: least in theory in our country. But Hassan Piker, the
Speaker 3: darling and left admitted there I need to control everyone
Speaker 3: for this system to work. It's a great truism and
Speaker 3: piece of wisdom. There are only two ways to get
Speaker 3: somebody to work. Number one award or number two the
Speaker 3: fear of punishment, and because socialism eliminates reward for effort,
Speaker 3: reward for innovation, reward for risk, reward for outworking everybody else,
Speaker 3: people quickly decide, obviously, I'm not gonna work. I'm gonna
Speaker 3: get what I get whether I work or not. So
Speaker 3: I'm not going to work. Okay, So we've removed reward.
Speaker 3: What's left fear of punishment. Hassan Piker's entire system requires
Speaker 3: control and punishment of anybody who doesn't go along with
Speaker 3: his nefarious plans. Getting back to mailbag, Joe Schmoe of
Speaker 3: Bonnie Lake, Washington rights, that's how he signs it.
Speaker 6: Oh.
Speaker 3: On the topic of the WNBA and the two women
Speaker 3: who used to play in the NBA, mister Cantner and
Speaker 3: mister White, is that right, yep, yeah right, I'm miss
Speaker 3: miss miss cant and miss White. Because they say they're women,
Speaker 3: that makes them women. Trans women are women. But Joe
Speaker 3: makes a good point. All the WNBA has to do
Speaker 3: is not draft these guys or any other ex NBA
Speaker 3: player because they have to be drafted in order to play.
Speaker 3: Because they're not really presenting his trans the trans community
Speaker 3: will not be upset that they didn't get drafted, although
Speaker 3: White actually bought a really nice blonde wig. He looks
Speaker 3: very comely in it, and three granted to presenting trans
Speaker 3: female with great basketball skills. Were to try out and
Speaker 3: then not get drafted, the league would then have a problem.
Speaker 3: So how far. But again, Joe, it's like we were
Speaker 3: talking about yesterday. If they were sincerely transgender, well who's
Speaker 3: what do we go to the sincere police, the Sincerity League?
Speaker 3: Is there a medical test? The whole thing's just absurd.
Speaker 3: We're calling their bluff. Go get them, ladies. On the
Speaker 3: topic of Iran, which continues to be a mere full
Speaker 3: of quag don in San Jose writes, I don't understand
Speaker 3: what Trump keeps opening the door for negotiations quote unquote
Speaker 3: with the Ran. It only invites more nonsense requests from them.
Speaker 3: So we thought saw this last weekend. Why don't we
Speaker 3: just give them a declaration like the pot Stem Declaration
Speaker 3: of World War Two. It's simple, give up all striving
Speaker 3: for nuclear weapons, turnover existing nuclear refinement, open the straits
Speaker 3: of hermuvese. There'll be no tolls or threats against the
Speaker 3: chipping give up on all terrorism and sport terrorist groups.
Speaker 3: There should be one more recognized Israel. Maybe that's one
Speaker 3: too many. Well down, the problem isn't I have a
Speaker 3: feeling you know this? An order without a sanction is
Speaker 3: a suggestion. It's a request. What's the or else? Or else? Well,
Speaker 3: you know what? Oh, Jim wrights Jim and Houston rights
Speaker 3: the Mullahs and the IRGC or Lucy van Pelt. Trump
Speaker 3: is Charlie Brown, the dealed open Hermos is the football,
Speaker 3: over and over and over. Trump acts as if the
Speaker 3: Mulas have no cards. In fact, they have a straight
Speaker 3: Oh clever, Jim clever, get it poker reference. Very nice.
Speaker 3: It's a good point. What was the other thing I
Speaker 3: was going to say that seemed important at the time. Oh, well,
Speaker 3: we don't know what levers do. Oh oh, I was
Speaker 3: gonna say. The strategy right now appears to be just
Speaker 3: choking financially till they give out. Whether that will ever
Speaker 3: have the machine gunned forty fifty thousand of their own
Speaker 3: citizens in the street. I don't think they care if
Speaker 3: those people are a little hungry. Let's see why don't
Speaker 3: we call it good. We're going to come back with
Speaker 3: a bunch of stories, from the really impactful to the
Speaker 3: completely idiotic. Run through get you caught up on what's
Speaker 3: happening in the world. It's the Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3: Glad you're here, Stay with.
Speaker 1: Us, The Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3: Hey, Michael, Sorry, I meant to ask for this. Can
Speaker 3: you hit me with clip number twenty one? This is
Speaker 3: the flower of American womanhood known as Royce White, who
Speaker 3: played in the WNBA or in the NBA and wants
Speaker 3: to play in the WNBA.
Speaker 8: And I'm transgender. I'm a woman, I'm I identify as
Speaker 8: sometimes identifying as a woman for purposes of basketball professional basketball.
Speaker 8: So I'll be declaring for the WNBA draft in twenty
Speaker 8: twenty seven as well.
Speaker 3: So we all know that that's going on. And I
Speaker 3: want to explain something because I don't think most people
Speaker 3: understand this, and you really have to understand it. And
Speaker 3: it discourages and shocks me the lack of curiosity in
Speaker 3: a lot of the media, including the conservative media, about
Speaker 3: where this stuff is coming from, the whole transgender thing,
Speaker 3: and this is foundational to all of it. It has
Speaker 3: to do at the critical theory school of philosophy. A
Speaker 3: handful of French guys, if you know their names, you
Speaker 3: know you know them. But in the nineteen sixties who
Speaker 3: came up with this idea that we need to get
Speaker 3: Marxism in. But the Workers of the World unit didn't
Speaker 3: really work. And so the point of critical theory you
Speaker 3: have to understand is there are no truths. There are
Speaker 3: no there is no reality that we all can agree on.
Speaker 3: It's entirely cultural and entirely opinion. There is nothing you
Speaker 3: can say that critical theory won't try to tear apart.
Speaker 3: They criticize it. That's where the name comes from. They
Speaker 3: problematize it. You've heard that term. Probably They ask all
Speaker 3: these wacky, half rhetorical questions to get you to back
Speaker 3: off something as simple as only women can have babies.
Speaker 3: And you know, I was going to go into detail
Speaker 3: on something leading to it, but I'll just cut to
Speaker 3: the bottom line. So eliminating any binaries there are men
Speaker 3: there are women is at the heart of critical theory,
Speaker 3: and so they cannot admit. Why don't they just back
Speaker 3: down on the women's sports thing you're asking yourself? I mean,
Speaker 3: because anybody with half a brain can see and understand immediately,
Speaker 3: or it doesn't even need to see anything to know.
Speaker 3: The reason title line exists. The reason women's sports exist
Speaker 3: is because men, elite athletes are much bigger and stronger
Speaker 3: and faster and more violent. And if women are going
Speaker 3: to enjoy sports, it ought to be for women. And
Speaker 3: ninety eight percent of the planet, if you explain it
Speaker 3: to them, believes that. But they can't admit that there's
Speaker 3: something foundational that we all can agree on, because then
Speaker 3: critical theory collapses. And I know it seems insane, but
Speaker 3: that is what underpins all of what's going on at
Speaker 3: the teachers' colleges and has infected a radical gender theory,
Speaker 3: the genderbread man. Little boys and girls can choose whether
Speaker 3: they're boys and girls, and then they try to confuse
Speaker 3: you what's gender, what sex? And all that crap. At
Speaker 3: the heart is critical theory that says there are no
Speaker 3: universal truths. All there are are cultural truths, and or
Speaker 3: Well would leap out of his grave if he could
Speaker 3: and point out, dudes, That's what I was trying to
Speaker 3: warn you about, is that if there are no truths,
Speaker 3: the party can tell you what the truth is and
Speaker 3: you have to accept it, and you can't say, well,
Speaker 3: that doesn't square with reality, because reality is just what
Speaker 3: the party tells you it is, so critical theory and
Speaker 3: the people pushing it, whether they know they are or not,
Speaker 3: they just think they're enlightened and that these nice trans
Speaker 3: people deserve to be able to play in girls sports.
Speaker 3: They're just trying to push critical theory. The greatest example
Speaker 3: is the two plus two is five thing, which is
Speaker 3: actually straight out. In nineteen eighty four, the critical theory
Speaker 3: crowd and there was a giant Twitter war which got
Speaker 3: James Lindsay fired up to begin with, because he's a mathematician,
Speaker 3: as I recall, saying, no, two plus two doesn't equal
Speaker 3: four in every society. In some societies it equals five
Speaker 3: straight out or well, straight out of critical theory. That's
Speaker 3: why they can't give up on this crap anyway. A
Speaker 3: bunch of stuff to get to in a couple of minutes.
Speaker 3: We've got David Drucker to kind of parse some of
Speaker 3: the politics of our time. Jack's gonna check in a bit,
Speaker 3: Stay with us, don't go away.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and Getty, The Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 9: Abolishing ice, Yes, a one year data center moratorium, Yes,
Speaker 9: breaking up a big ag Yes, public grocery yes, right
Speaker 9: to repair yes, Legalizing cannabis Yes. Overturning Citizens United, Yes,
Speaker 9: a worker's Bill of Rights, yes, a free Palestine, yes, delightful.
Speaker 3: Hassan Piker interviewing and quizzing the delightful Francesca Hong, who
Speaker 3: is involved in a primary for the governorship in Wisconsin.
Speaker 3: Actually today as we speak, be interesting to see how
Speaker 3: that pans out. We're joined by David Drucker, senior writer
Speaker 3: for The Dispatch, longtime friend of the Armstrong and Getty Show,
Speaker 3: and David, I will reserve it to myself to rant
Speaker 3: that these people are lunatics and their policies will never work.
Speaker 3: But first of all, welcome, it's good to talk to you.
Speaker 6: Yeah, good to be back.
Speaker 3: And the thing I wanted to talk to you about,
Speaker 3: and I'm so interested in this, the nature of the
Speaker 3: primary system and the fact that a super energized, fairly
Speaker 3: small segment of either one of the political parties can
Speaker 3: win primary after primary for the primary. And the conventional
Speaker 3: wisdom is, yeah, that's true, because it's the hardcore that
Speaker 3: turn out, but then it makes it harder to win
Speaker 3: the general. But I've observed over and over again, and
Speaker 3: this is what I really wanted to ask you about.
Speaker 3: Folks who just just strant about how horrific these policies
Speaker 3: are in the primaries, then say, well, of course I'll
Speaker 3: support her. So is it not true that the super energized,
Speaker 3: fairly smallish base of the party now runs both parties
Speaker 3: because the districts are so polarized.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean there's something to that. I think there's
Speaker 7: some nuance there. But you know, with the proliferation of
Speaker 7: jerrymanner districts, right, we've had jerrymandered districts since the beginning
Speaker 7: of the Republic, but particularly after the mid decade redistricting
Speaker 7: that we saw over the past year, there are fewer
Speaker 7: and fewer competitive house districts, and so when you're comparing,
Speaker 7: for instance, midterm elections you know, six and twenty ten
Speaker 7: in twenty eighteen to what might happen in twenty twenty six,
Speaker 7: you have to take into account it just isn't as
Speaker 7: much competitive territory for Democrats to be in a position
Speaker 7: to flip. And so, you know, then you get to
Speaker 7: this question of how much influence therefore have the wings
Speaker 7: of the parties accrued, And they've definitely accrued some more
Speaker 7: influence than they used to have, because it's harder to
Speaker 7: make the argument that we need to nominate a pragmatist
Speaker 7: or somebody with broad appeal when the winner of the
Speaker 7: primary essentially is the winner of the general election. And
Speaker 7: then you're looking at these competitive seats and states where
Speaker 7: progressives and socialist candidates are making in roads. And I
Speaker 7: think part of that has to do with the fact
Speaker 7: that the Democratic Party is going through its own anti
Speaker 7: establishments civil war, much as the Republican Party did did
Speaker 7: during Barack Obama's presidency. And you know, these the Demograts
Speaker 7: have not gone through something like this in quite some
Speaker 7: time because they were not unified by Obama. They were, well,
Speaker 7: they were first unified by opposition to George W. Bush,
Speaker 7: which turned into NIF unification around Barack Obama, which turned
Speaker 7: into unification around opposition to Donald Trump. And now they're
Speaker 7: finally sort of going through the the sort of periodic
Speaker 7: upheaval that parties go through. I think the question though,
Speaker 7: in this case is where do they land because some
Speaker 7: of these candidates handed its unlike Democrats in the past,
Speaker 7: are rather extreme. When you just go through that checklist
Speaker 7: there where you play this the clip and and you know,
Speaker 7: usually what happens is either these things succeed with voters
Speaker 7: and therefore they get to declare victory the wing the
Speaker 7: wingers do, or they start losing some some winnable, uh
Speaker 7: coveted general elections, and it it resuscitates the so called
Speaker 7: establishment wing of the party that is focused on winning.
Speaker 7: That's what happened in large part with a lot of Republicans,
Speaker 7: at least in congressional races prior to Donald Trump, where
Speaker 7: Republicans Senate candidates in particular were blowing these winnable races,
Speaker 7: and the party got more aggressive, took more control over
Speaker 7: these primaries and started nominating broadly acceptable candidates. They started
Speaker 7: winning again, and that kind of put that thing to bet.
Speaker 3: Right now, you're a lot closer to this than we are.
Speaker 3: I see the Democratic establishment as as very old and
Speaker 3: very comfortable with their own control of the party. And
Speaker 3: what does the next generation of the Democratic establishment look like?
Speaker 7: We don't know a good question. First of all, I
Speaker 7: think the Democratic establishment doesn't quite know what to do
Speaker 7: about the insurgents in their midst. I think that they're
Speaker 7: afraid to challenge them very publicly. I think they've been
Speaker 7: challenging them subtly and quietly and in back you know,
Speaker 7: and in back rooms. Strategy sessions. And we've seen that
Speaker 7: with you know, certain pack money being spent and endorsements
Speaker 7: being made, But they still haven't reached the point where
Speaker 7: they recognize these candidates as a problem, and they haven't
Speaker 7: reached a point where fear of their own base is
Speaker 7: superseded by fear of losing and perpetuating Republican control of
Speaker 7: the White House and of Congress. And so the first
Speaker 7: step is, like, when does the party itself tre to
Speaker 7: reassert control and actually wage the kind of aggressive warfare
Speaker 7: that the progressive base and these you know, Democratic Socialists
Speaker 7: of America candidates have been waging, right, And then that'll
Speaker 7: tell us a lot about who the next sort of
Speaker 7: iteration of the democratic establishment is. Whether it's the same
Speaker 7: people they just finally got off their bus and started fighting,
Speaker 7: or whether it's somebody.
Speaker 3: New right right, let's you know, let's stay on a
Speaker 3: somewhat philosophical level. I find it more fun than the
Speaker 3: headlines of the day. So you look across at the
Speaker 3: Republican Party and Trump's enormous influence blah blahah. Everybody knows that, right,
Speaker 3: Given the fact that the Republican Party has been dealing
Speaker 3: with that, the Democrats have been dealing with what we've
Speaker 3: been describing. What is a political party anymore if it
Speaker 3: is merely the executive branch of whatever whims of the
Speaker 3: head guy is. I mean, you don't have a platform
Speaker 3: until you ask your candidate what do you want our
Speaker 3: platform to be? Are both parties getting tired of that
Speaker 3: whip sawing back and forth enough that they'll assert themselves
Speaker 3: and say, a party is a thing, here's what we are.
Speaker 7: Yeah, well that's a big it's a broader question, and
Speaker 7: I think you know, from the time being, the answer
Speaker 7: is no. I mean, I joke all the time, but
Speaker 7: I'm half serious that these parties have deteriorated and self immolated,
Speaker 7: and they're basically now in many ways, nothing more than
Speaker 7: ballid access organizations. They don't really have anything that they're
Speaker 7: willing to fight for beyond you know, whatever their philosophical
Speaker 7: region of control wants at any given time, right, and
Speaker 7: we've seen that at the presidential level in particular. You know,
Speaker 7: whoever the nominee is, that person's in charge of the party,
Speaker 7: that person determines the party's agenda, and you know, when
Speaker 7: a candidate comes along that is that is unacceptable. The
Speaker 7: line really has to cross and we see this from
Speaker 7: time to time, right where the line will be crossed
Speaker 7: and the parties will say, nope, you don't get our support,
Speaker 7: and you still see things like that. But you're right
Speaker 7: to point this out. Part of the problem, even though
Speaker 7: everybody hates political parties, is that parties have grown weaker
Speaker 7: as polarization has increased, and we probably are politics in
Speaker 7: this country. The things that people think they don't like
Speaker 7: about our polly top politics would improve if the parties
Speaker 7: actually strengthened and began to take, you know, reassert control
Speaker 7: over their platforms and their candidates and things of that
Speaker 7: nature the.
Speaker 6: Way they used to mm hmm.
Speaker 3: A little less democracy maybe, at least at the primary level.
Speaker 3: David Drucker, senior writer with The Dispatch, is with us. David,
Speaker 3: what's the most interesting story in politics going on right
Speaker 3: now that you think people ought to be paying attention to?
Speaker 7: Well, I mean, I don't know if they're probably already
Speaker 7: paying attention if you're you know, a political junkie, but
Speaker 7: I think what's going on in Michigan is probably the
Speaker 7: most interesting story in politics. And whether a duel Elsi
Speaker 7: ed gets elected Senate gets elected to the Senate in
Speaker 7: a swing state like Michigan, because it's going to have
Speaker 7: it's going to I think it's going to tell us
Speaker 7: a lot about where certain you know voters are. But
Speaker 7: also I think it's gonna if else I had wins,
Speaker 7: the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is going to
Speaker 7: have an argument to make. I don't necessarily think it
Speaker 7: would be true anyway, but they're going to be able
Speaker 7: to say, don't tell us a winger can't win the presidency,
Speaker 7: can't win the key states in the electoral college voting.
Speaker 7: We just won Michigan. And if he loses to a Republican,
Speaker 7: and a Republican hasn't won a US Senate seat in
Speaker 7: Michigan since the nineties, and of course it's a very
Speaker 7: bad environment from GOP. And if l say it loses,
Speaker 7: then you know, the the normal way the Democratic Party,
Speaker 7: in the pragmatic wing, it's going to be able to see
Speaker 7: we told you so. And I think that could have
Speaker 7: a huge influence over the course of the twenty twenty
Speaker 7: eight Democratic presidential primary. By the way, may also forestall
Speaker 7: any possibility of Democrats winning control of the Senate. If
Speaker 7: they lose a Senate seat they control in Michigan, right.
Speaker 3: Right, Final question, David, how blue is Wisconsin? Now? Is
Speaker 3: it possible Francesca hon gets the nomination?
Speaker 6: It's not blue.
Speaker 7: I mean, it's a swing state. It's a narrowly divided state.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 7: Well, she could very well get the nomination for all
Speaker 7: the reasons we just discussed, right, But then she may
Speaker 7: She may it elected governor in an environment that favors
Speaker 7: Republicans and the favors Democrats in the way that this one,
Speaker 7: you know does at the moment. But I think she's
Speaker 7: also vulnerable in a general election. And you know, and
Speaker 7: also there are plenty of Democrats still running in competitive
Speaker 7: seats and states, and they're all going to get a
Speaker 7: lot more between Elsie ed winning the Democratic nomination of
Speaker 7: Michigan and the Pong is the nominee and in wisconsin's
Speaker 7: the governor. And you've got some other DSA candidates that
Speaker 7: have succeeded in these primaries. It's a it's much more
Speaker 7: for Democrats in places that matter to answer for than
Speaker 7: just what about mom Donnie in New York City?
Speaker 3: Right right. David Drucker, Senior writer with The Dispatch, David,
Speaker 3: always stimulating, Thanks so much for the time yep, anytime.
Speaker 3: Thank you, all right, thank you, Yeah, let's stay in touch.
Speaker 6: Ay.
Speaker 3: Quick word from our friends at Blue Collar Dollar. If
Speaker 3: you're our a kind of people, frankly, you work hard,
Speaker 3: you value your family, you're a bit of a saver.
Speaker 3: You've accumulated some wealth and you're trying to figure out
Speaker 3: how to guide it all to your financial dreams. But
Speaker 3: you want somebody who gets you and is going to
Speaker 3: talk with you, not at you. We invite you to
Speaker 3: call our friends at Blue Collar Dollar. If you save
Speaker 3: five hundred thousand dollars or more, why don't you give
Speaker 3: them a call for a no cost consultation. There's no obligation.
Speaker 3: If you don't like what you hear, no harm done.
Speaker 3: But we know these people. We love their philosophy, and
Speaker 3: they are good folks, and they love this country. From
Speaker 3: your mobile phone, dial pounces you fifteen. When prompted, say
Speaker 3: the keywords blue collar Dollar once again. Just but dial
Speaker 3: pound two fifty and say blue collar Dollar just to
Speaker 3: hear them out. Advisory services offered through Talent LLC and
Speaker 3: SEC registered investment advisor. Marketing is conducted by its filia
Speaker 3: company blue Collar Dollar ll SAY registration as an investment
Speaker 3: advisor does not imply a certain level of skill or training.
Speaker 3: For more important disclosures. Visit blue Collar dollar dot com again,
Speaker 3: dial pound two fifty and say blue Collar Dollar. I
Speaker 3: thought it was interesting that The New York Times was
Speaker 3: actually pretty critical of Jessica Hong Francesca Hong rather and
Speaker 3: her various beliefs and policies. They're merciless. I wonder if
Speaker 3: that's the Democratic establishment kind of raising its head and saying, hey, hey, hey,
Speaker 3: are you people sure you're up on everything she has
Speaker 3: to say. I actually found the coverage in the New
Speaker 3: York Times more clear eyed and critical than in the
Speaker 3: Wall Street Journal, which was a head scratcher. We'll all
Speaker 3: find out today that the key primary in Wisconsin is today.
Speaker 3: I guess we'll know by tonight what's going on with
Speaker 3: that one. Jack's going to check in from the vacation
Speaker 3: trail next day with us Armstrong.
Speaker 1: Hey, the Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3: He's the co host, he's on vacation. He's annexing Canada,
Speaker 3: one delicious gravy fry at a time. He's Jack Armstrong.
Speaker 3: Hello Jack, how are you?
Speaker 6: But do you suppose we don't put gravy on Prize
Speaker 6: in the United States.
Speaker 3: We do actually in various places. It's often called poutine,
Speaker 3: which sounds like a euphemism for a lady part to me.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I don't like that word. Yeah, I've not come
Speaker 6: across it a lot, but it's everywhere I go to eat,
Speaker 6: which I have one of those little, uh motorized things
Speaker 6: to get around. Now, that's what's happened. I've only been
Speaker 6: here three days, and yes, I'm unable to power myself
Speaker 6: with my own legs anymore.
Speaker 3: What are you gonna do? You're gonna get a scooter
Speaker 3: adapted over?
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 6: Interesting. I'm in Bank. I'm a thousand miles from those
Speaker 6: fires in Washington and Oregon. Yeah, and just across the
Speaker 6: border in Canada. And it is so smoky here a
Speaker 6: thousand miles away.
Speaker 3: Oh that's too bad, because I'm told the scenery, well
Speaker 3: I've seen pictures. This is breathtaking.
Speaker 6: Oh it is, and luckily I can, you know, still
Speaker 6: see it. But it's not the same as it would
Speaker 6: be for the fires. But man, it is. It is
Speaker 6: really smoky. The scenery is breathtaking, is absolutely fantastic.
Speaker 3: Excellent, And are you mostly you guys just hiking and
Speaker 3: looking around and touristy stuff or what you got any
Speaker 3: big adventures planned so far?
Speaker 6: Yes, that's exactly well. We went to the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally.
Speaker 6: That's what we did the first two days. Oho, my
Speaker 6: youngest has no interest in that, but my oldest really
Speaker 6: is interested. And we just hung around there for like
Speaker 6: twenty four hours. And that is one of the largest
Speaker 6: gatherings of humanity. I think it's the largest non religious
Speaker 6: gatherings humanity that happens every year. It's about a half
Speaker 6: a million people that show up in this town of
Speaker 6: six thousand people.
Speaker 3: That's amazing, Like dwarfs the Indy five hundred for instance.
Speaker 6: It's many multiples, just insane. It's just so crazy. And uh,
Speaker 6: and my kids, I'm glad that he ad. They're fourteen
Speaker 6: and sixteen. They saw some things that opened their eyes.
Speaker 6: That's that's for certain. The way there is there was
Speaker 6: there was some There was some stuff to see walking
Speaker 6: the streets. No that about it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I bet there was. Well, I was just going
Speaker 3: to say for your younger son, Henry, that even if
Speaker 3: you're not at all into motorcycles or whatever, just the
Speaker 3: sheer spectacle of the thing would have to be you know,
Speaker 3: eye opening.
Speaker 6: What's interesting is, you know how it is. We've talked
Speaker 6: about this many times, how kids people are born with personalities.
Speaker 6: I mean, and they're just very, very different. But my
Speaker 6: oldest just, I mean, he just when he's around that
Speaker 6: vibe of just music and noise and people and crowds
Speaker 6: and cars, he just lights up. I mean, it just
Speaker 6: energizes him so much. And my youngest is always, can
Speaker 6: I go sit in the car until this is over?
Speaker 6: And he puts something in his ears so he doesn't
Speaker 6: have to hearing it and he doesn't like to see it.
Speaker 6: So it's just very different. So now we're doing his
Speaker 6: part of the trip more or less, where we're driving
Speaker 6: through mountains and creeks and stopping and it's perfectly quiet,
Speaker 6: and we hike and we see deer and bighorn sheep
Speaker 6: and that sort of thing.
Speaker 3: He likes that wonderful. I was going to say, yeah,
Speaker 3: it has to make vacation planning at least somewhat challenging.
Speaker 3: But what are you going to do? That's the I.
Speaker 6: Also have the you've probably had this experience. You know,
Speaker 6: I didn't go on vacations, really I didn't. I hadn't
Speaker 6: realized this until my kids got older. I didn't only
Speaker 6: go on vacations with the family once I kept turned
Speaker 6: like fourteen, fifteen years old, because I was working. I
Speaker 6: was working all the time so that the family'd go
Speaker 6: on vacation and I work. And then my brother did
Speaker 6: the same when he turned about fifteen, he stayed home.
Speaker 6: I think there's a reason for that. Teenagers they are
Speaker 6: not really thrilled about many things. They're just digging. They're
Speaker 6: not digging that much stuff, and they don't want to
Speaker 6: be with their parents. And I was thinking last vacation,
Speaker 6: but I'm thinking this vication. You know what next summer,
Speaker 6: I think, you know, I think I'll go on vacation.
Speaker 6: You stay home and work might be the answer. Yeah.
Speaker 3: One of the very few things I've ever said that
Speaker 3: was worth jotting down was when Judy and I were
Speaker 3: talking about her relationship with her oldest Kate, and I said, Honey,
Speaker 3: to leave the nest to take off, you have to
Speaker 3: push against the nest, and that process begins early. It's
Speaker 3: you know, the berg metaphor kind of fails because they're
Speaker 3: pushing for a very long time before they flap their
Speaker 3: wings and flyway.
Speaker 6: Clearly and modern society. We have probably delayed them growing
Speaker 6: up for better. I was gonna say, for better or worse.
Speaker 6: Probably almost certainly for worse. But the uh oh, like
Speaker 6: you know, I was, I was, like I said, I was.
Speaker 6: I was working and not doing vacation stuff. I was
Speaker 6: like a I was like a grown man earning money,
Speaker 6: buying myself stuff at fifteen. And I think, you know,
Speaker 6: maybe the human body in mind is prepared for that,
Speaker 6: but we don't do it much, is there? And then
Speaker 6: the whole yeah, go ahead, no, go ahead, I was
Speaker 6: gonna say. And then the smart phone thing, the smartphone thing,
Speaker 6: everything has to compete with the smartphone, right, uh, And
Speaker 6: so I have to constantly, Hey, put that away, sitting
Speaker 6: there playing video games when you got like some of
Speaker 6: the greatest scenery on the planet, maybe in the entire
Speaker 6: universe out your window. You don't need to be playing
Speaker 6: some weird game on your phone. But that's the way,
Speaker 6: you know, you know how it is. We're drawn to
Speaker 6: the next dopamine hit. You don't get a dopamine hit.
Speaker 6: It's enjoyable, but you don't get a dopamine hit from
Speaker 6: looking at a mountain.
Speaker 3: Not the same kind anyway. So we got like twenty
Speaker 3: seconds left. Is there another leg to come of the vacation.
Speaker 6: Oh? Yeah, we're driving to Vancouver. Then we're going to
Speaker 6: go over to Vancouver Island Victoria and we'll be there
Speaker 6: for a while. Seattle don a home.
Speaker 3: Excellent scenery and junkies. Best of both worlds, exactly, exactly.
Speaker 3: Enjoy that and stay in touch. We've got a great
Speaker 3: guest of the fabulous Jason Rantz coming up from Seattle.
Speaker 3: Read seven seventy am. Longtime friend of the AG Show
Speaker 3: and colleague. He's always bringing the fire. Stay with us,
Speaker 3: don't go away, Armstrong and Getty