Speaker 1: You're listening to the Buck Sexton Show podcast, make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to the podcast on the iHeartRadio app or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. I can't say I'm surprised
Speaker 1: because I've been predicting it for how many months now?
Speaker 1: How many times have I told you that people out
Speaker 1: there who mask up do this for reasons that have
Speaker 1: either nothing to do with epidemiology, it's political, or they
Speaker 1: are suffering from an anxiety disorder, and I mean that
Speaker 1: they need help, they have some problem that would require
Speaker 1: professional attention. At this point, we're going to break this
Speaker 1: down for you today. I think it's important that everyone
Speaker 1: understands this because it's not just going away, and there
Speaker 1: are critical lessons about freedom and about our society and
Speaker 1: about the authoritarian left in all of this. This is
Speaker 1: a symbol, but it is also a central fight. It's
Speaker 1: about more than just having to wear a stupid and
Speaker 1: often useless cloth over your face. Friends. It's about more
Speaker 1: than that. So for those who are saying, oh, but
Speaker 1: what about these other we cover every topic here that
Speaker 1: I think we need to day in and day out.
Speaker 1: I'm not done with masks yet, they're not done with you.
Speaker 1: That's where We are also want to do everything I
Speaker 1: can to help small businesses across the country. And when
Speaker 1: running a business, you know that HR issues can kill you.
Speaker 1: You've got wrongful termination suits, minimum wage requirements, labor regulations,
Speaker 1: and HR manager salaries aren't cheap. You're talking about an
Speaker 1: average of seventy thousand dollars a year. Bambi spelled Bambee
Speaker 1: was created specifically for small business. You can get a
Speaker 1: dedicated HR manager, craft HR policy, and maintain your compliance
Speaker 1: all for just ninety nine dollars a month. With Bamby,
Speaker 1: you can change HR from your biggest liability to your
Speaker 1: biggest strength. Your dedicated HR manager is available by phone,
Speaker 1: email or real time chat. From onboarding determinations, they custom
Speaker 1: your policies to fit your business, and they help you
Speaker 1: manage your employees day today. And they do all this
Speaker 1: for just ninety nine dollars a month, a huge savings.
Speaker 1: We're having a full time staffer on this one. Go
Speaker 1: to Bambi dot com slash buck right now to schedule
Speaker 1: your free HR audit. That's b Ambee dot com slash
Speaker 1: buck spelled Bambee Bambi dot com slash buck right now.
Speaker 1: The Forever Maskers are among us. You're seeing them now outside,
Speaker 1: you're seeing them inside, You're seeing them all over the place.
Speaker 1: Some of us were rejoicing when the change and policy
Speaker 1: came from the CDC. As I said to you from
Speaker 1: the very beginning, I feel like somebody who was imprisoned
Speaker 1: on false charges. Very hard to feel grateful when you
Speaker 1: were let out of that prison. But I at least
Speaker 1: recognized it as a step forward. I at least recognized
Speaker 1: that this was something that needed to happen. But for many,
Speaker 1: many people, millions of them who watched too much CNN
Speaker 1: and MSNBC, who believe everything they eat in the pages
Speaker 1: the New York Times and the Washington Post. For those people,
Speaker 1: this creates a dilemma. Do I continue to show how
Speaker 1: seriously I take the virus or do I allow for
Speaker 1: people to think that maybe I'm a conservative because I
Speaker 1: don't have a mask on. This is the big concern
Speaker 1: that they have. But remember, the CDC itself is a
Speaker 1: place that is not impressive, has failed us at every
Speaker 1: stage of this, has gotten everything wrong when it needed
Speaker 1: to get it right. Maybe they figured it out eventually.
Speaker 1: And CDC chief Wilenski is a joke here. She is
Speaker 1: coming out for months? What was I arguing? What were
Speaker 1: many of us arguing that if you believe in the vaccines,
Speaker 1: if you think the vaccines are as effective as we're told,
Speaker 1: and you want to use vaccines as the primary tool
Speaker 1: to end this pandemic, you can't then turn around and
Speaker 1: tell people but you have to keep living your life
Speaker 1: as though you're not vaccinated because we're all so scared.
Speaker 1: It doesn't work. There's a cognitive dissonance there, and it
Speaker 1: also doesn't create the incentives that you need for people
Speaker 1: to want to go through the hassle and possible though
Speaker 1: there are always risks. It doesn't make you an anti vaxxer.
Speaker 1: There are always risks for any vaccine, for any drug.
Speaker 1: There are risks for taking tailanalls. I've been saying for
Speaker 1: a long time. I saw a Fox News host said
Speaker 1: the same thing recently. I've been saying it for months.
Speaker 1: Risks from all kinds of stuff out there. But it
Speaker 1: should be up to you to make determinations about what
Speaker 1: health risks you want to take. Back to Rochelle Wilenski
Speaker 1: here she is on the new Mass guidance over the
Speaker 1: weekend on Sunday. Because this looks political. Now, it's not
Speaker 1: political insofar as they made a determination that it'll be
Speaker 1: good for the Democrats if they no, no, no, that's
Speaker 1: maybe a part of it. It's political insofar as they
Speaker 1: recognize that they were looking idiots and they were losing
Speaker 1: their grip on power, and so unless they loosened the
Speaker 1: slack a little bit around our necks or our faces,
Speaker 1: as the case may be, then they were just going
Speaker 1: to have people that were noncomplying anyway. And once you
Speaker 1: have people recognizing that they can ignore the CDC and
Speaker 1: it's fine, then they ignore everything that the CDC is
Speaker 1: trying to do. So they had to adjust a little
Speaker 1: bit here. But Rachelle Wilenski of the CDC coming out
Speaker 1: now with the oh, don't worry, this is just because
Speaker 1: the science evolved. Play one. First of all, let's celebrate
Speaker 1: this moment. We're at a place in this pandemic. Cases
Speaker 1: have been coming down more than a third just in
Speaker 1: the last two weeks. We have vaccine now across this country,
Speaker 1: widely available for anyone who wants it, and we now
Speaker 1: have science that has really just evolved even in the
Speaker 1: last two weeks that demonstrates that these vaccines are safe,
Speaker 1: they are effective, they're working in the population just as
Speaker 1: they did in the clinical trials. That they are working
Speaker 1: against our variants that we have here circulating in the
Speaker 1: United States, and that if you were to develop an infection,
Speaker 1: even if you got vaccinated, that you can't transmit that
Speaker 1: infection to other people. Some of that science was really
Speaker 1: evolving as late as last Thursday, and one of the
Speaker 1: published one of the papers, the largest paper was published
Speaker 1: from the CDC just the day before yesterday. So we
Speaker 1: were actively reviewing that science during the past week. We
Speaker 1: were making decisions and moving and our subject matter experts
Speaker 1: were working just as I was testifying in front of Congress,
Speaker 1: and that was what was happening. Bull crap. Call it
Speaker 1: like it is, folks, bullcrap, No blanking way, This is
Speaker 1: not what happened. They didn't learn this in the last
Speaker 1: week or two. Everything she said has been known for months.
Speaker 1: The efficacy, the safety, the stopping transmission, this has all
Speaker 1: been known for months. But they said, oh, this is
Speaker 1: about saving lives, so we have to take it to
Speaker 1: the absolute max. We need total herd immunity before you
Speaker 1: can actually stop wearing masks. And then people said, well,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, look at what you've done. Now,
Speaker 1: aren't you saying that there is some acceptable risk in society,
Speaker 1: that there is a balance here between freedom, between individual
Speaker 1: liberties and just comfort and the right to breathe normally
Speaker 1: and the risk to society at large. Oh, you mean
Speaker 1: that there was a balance that had to be struck here,
Speaker 1: but you pretended there wasn't for over fifteen months. Because
Speaker 1: that's what's actually happened. They've been lying to you. This
Speaker 1: is all part of a giant misdirection, all part of
Speaker 1: an enormous dishonesty, which is that the science has been
Speaker 1: directing all of this, when really it's just people who
Speaker 1: call themselves scientists and then all their flax in the
Speaker 1: media making decisions for you that involve judgment and competing values.
Speaker 1: And they made many of the wrong ones, and they
Speaker 1: struck the wrong balance, and it didn't save us. And
Speaker 1: now we're seeing the end results of this now it's
Speaker 1: quite clear. But if you need it anymore evidence that
Speaker 1: I even see some people that were mocking those of
Speaker 1: us who called mask wearing a religion, people that were
Speaker 1: deriding as anti science, those of us who said this
Speaker 1: is about much more. If it's about science, at all,
Speaker 1: It's only a portion of it. Now they're seeing people
Speaker 1: who are straight up admitting I was right. You who
Speaker 1: listened to this show were right. The mask shaming lunatics
Speaker 1: running around were wrong. Their side has been gripped by
Speaker 1: a kind of mass hysteria and mental illness around this issue.
Speaker 1: And this is why you can see, for example, the
Speaker 1: mayor of Chicago, who is vaccinated, Lorie Lightfoot, who doesn't
Speaker 1: quite clearly does not listen to the science at the CDC.
Speaker 1: She's like, well, I'm just going to keep wearing a mask.
Speaker 1: Play seven. You say you will follow the CDC's guidance.
Speaker 1: What does that mean should people in Chicago wear masks?
Speaker 1: Are not well. I think we've got to get some
Speaker 1: clarification from the CDC. They roll out obviously, as the
Speaker 1: reporting has been was a bit abrupt, and I think
Speaker 1: they've got a lot of clarification that they need to do.
Speaker 1: I know, for me personally, I'm going to continue to
Speaker 1: wear a mask in public, and I'm going to encourage
Speaker 1: others to do so. We've got to make sure that
Speaker 1: people are continuing to follow the public health guidance that
Speaker 1: has gotten us this far. And mask I think are
Speaker 1: a big and important part of that to say, well,
Speaker 1: if you're if you're vaccinated, you don't have to wear
Speaker 1: a mask. That's great, But what about all the other
Speaker 1: people that are out there that aren't vaccinated? And there's
Speaker 1: no way to know that. So I think for the
Speaker 1: time and being, most people are going to continue to
Speaker 1: wear a mask outside and outside of their homes. And
Speaker 1: I think that's smart. She's telling people to follow the
Speaker 1: public health guidance while she herself is defying the public
Speaker 1: health guidance. This is why it's a mental illness for
Speaker 1: the lives that the brain circuitry is not functioning properly. Here,
Speaker 1: what does she not see? What does she not understand?
Speaker 1: And she's one of millions, He's one of so many
Speaker 1: out there who can't process this. Ah. But that's a
Speaker 1: very important point. When democrats have force on their side,
Speaker 1: when they have the state on their side, it's just
Speaker 1: the raw exercise of power. Do it because that's what
Speaker 1: they say. Do what we tell you because you must
Speaker 1: or else, no explanation, no justification. That's been their approach
Speaker 1: to everything in the COVID pandemic all along. Oh we
Speaker 1: can make you do it. We're gonna make you do it.
Speaker 1: Shut up, put that mask on, double mask, Okay. And
Speaker 1: then when they don't have the force of the state,
Speaker 1: they rely on process. Oh, we respect the system and
Speaker 1: we respect the decisions made by the CDC, but we
Speaker 1: just need more clarification. We need more time to implement,
Speaker 1: we need see. This is how leftists do it. The
Speaker 1: relativism of having no principles allows them completely way to
Speaker 1: change it as they see fit. When the force of
Speaker 1: the state is on their side, it is do it
Speaker 1: or else. When they can no longer rely on the
Speaker 1: force of the state, and in fact it's going in
Speaker 1: the opposite direction, they say, hold on a second, we
Speaker 1: need more time. Let's think this through, let's have a review,
Speaker 1: let's call a meeting, delaying that which they do not
Speaker 1: agree with, and ramming through the instant that they think
Speaker 1: they can get away with it whatever they want. This
Speaker 1: is true on masks, it's true on everything that the
Speaker 1: left deals with when it comes to government. The CDC
Speaker 1: actually said, this decision is based on science. It's based
Speaker 1: on studies that show if you are vaccinated, you are
Speaker 1: very unlikely to get sick, and that even if you
Speaker 1: get some kind of a breakthrough infection. The studies seem
Speaker 1: to be showing you are not likely in any way
Speaker 1: to pass the virus onto others. Why isn't that good enough?
Speaker 1: Because it's not. It's a couple of small studies that
Speaker 1: they looked at. It's also the fact that, as in
Speaker 1: the lead up you mentioned, it's very confusing for people.
Speaker 1: We have questions right now from our patients, from our families,
Speaker 1: from their families, from friends, and I can see why
Speaker 1: it's confusing. We've spent so long trying to redevelop the
Speaker 1: trust that people have with their government entities about what's
Speaker 1: right and what's not right. And we're not out of
Speaker 1: the woods in this Yet less than thirty seven percent
Speaker 1: of us are fully vaccinated. We still have over thirty
Speaker 1: five thousand cases a day, over six hundred deaths a day.
Speaker 1: And this is not the time to be keeping your nurses,
Speaker 1: your other frontline workers, your essential workers at risk. And
Speaker 1: we don't like making them. They've been the mask police.
Speaker 1: Now they're having to be the vaccine police. They don't
Speaker 1: want that. Wait a second, I thought that we were
Speaker 1: to listen to the science. I thought the CDC was
Speaker 1: like the god of virology, and we all had to
Speaker 1: worship at the altar. Hold on a second. Now, now
Speaker 1: you've got the president of the National Nurses United Union,
Speaker 1: Gen Ross, just saying, you know, they're not very good studies,
Speaker 1: and you know, I think there's more, and you know,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, what do you mean explain this
Speaker 1: to me? You know, more than the CDC union boss,
Speaker 1: nurse lady? Really? Okay, I think that's interesting. Now. I
Speaker 1: thought the CDC was a bunch of clowns all along,
Speaker 1: But I haven't been telling everybody that you can't even
Speaker 1: question it. Now the people that all along we're saying
Speaker 1: you can't question the CDs here are like, yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna question a little bit. I got some ideas of
Speaker 1: my own on this one. I'm sorry, what does getting
Speaker 1: rid of a mask mandate indoors? I mean, yeah, if
Speaker 1: you want to a mask mandate in the hospital. Still,
Speaker 1: I'm sure a lot of people would say, okay, fine, Oh,
Speaker 1: by by having people not have to wear a mask
Speaker 1: when they get their groceries, that's that's putting people so
Speaker 1: much more at risk shot up. So dumb, isn't it.
Speaker 1: But this is a I've told you, it's an ideological movement.
Speaker 1: Masking is an ideological movement. It is part of the
Speaker 1: Marxist authoritarian left. And that's what has happened here. It
Speaker 1: has merged into it. Don't you see mass mobilization, classic Olyinsky,
Speaker 1: Get people united, get them moving on one issue. You
Speaker 1: can use them for any issue. Everybody mask up, everybody
Speaker 1: trusts the signs. Let's push the Green New Deal. Now,
Speaker 1: that's how this works. Use the mob mentality to create
Speaker 1: visu well signifiers. This is why I care about this
Speaker 1: so much. For those you keep saying, oh, fuck enough
Speaker 1: with the mask what I'm gonna sit here and talk
Speaker 1: more about all this trainee in the leadership fight. Come on,
Speaker 1: this matters. This is a central fight in our society.
Speaker 1: This is not a minor thing at all because of
Speaker 1: what it involves, what it has done. You care about
Speaker 1: the Republican Party. We lost the election because of Fauciism
Speaker 1: and the lockdowners. They use this to beat Trump. That
Speaker 1: is what happened. So yeah, it matters a whole heck
Speaker 1: of a lot. Here's an example of what I'm talking
Speaker 1: about with the religious belief part of this. This is
Speaker 1: the New York Times. I just got to reduce some
Speaker 1: of this article. I mean it is. It is truly
Speaker 1: remarkable when you start to look at what is being
Speaker 1: said here, what is going on here? It's crazy New
Speaker 1: York Times piece. Here's what it says. Whenever Joe Glickman
Speaker 1: heads out for groceries, he places an N ninety five
Speaker 1: mask over his face and tugs a cloth mask on
Speaker 1: top of it. Okay, so he's a double masker. He
Speaker 1: then puts on a pair of goggles. He has used
Speaker 1: this safety protocol for the past fourteen months. It did
Speaker 1: not change after he contracted the coronavirus last November. It
Speaker 1: didn't budge when earlier this month he became fully vaccinated.
Speaker 1: And even though President Biden said on Thursday that fully
Speaker 1: vaccinated people do not have to wear a mask, mister
Speaker 1: Glickman said he planned to stay the course. In fact,
Speaker 1: he said he plans to do his grocery run double
Speaker 1: masked and goggled for at least the next five years. Bingo, folks,
Speaker 1: what have I told you all along? Massteria mental illness?
Speaker 1: This is broken people. They have PTSD and they've they've
Speaker 1: taken their neuroses like a club and been beating you
Speaker 1: and me over the head with it for over a
Speaker 1: year total lunacy, dogs and cats living together mass hysteria.
Speaker 1: That's what this is, the title of the piece is
Speaker 1: they're vaccinated and keeping their masks on maybe forever. I
Speaker 1: wrote a piece about forever masking and forever lockdown on
Speaker 1: BUCKSX and dot com what four months ago? Now five
Speaker 1: months ago now all kinds and oh I got fact check.
Speaker 1: It's not true. No one's saying they're gonna mask. Yeah
Speaker 1: they are, of course they are. Can I just note
Speaker 1: also that in this piece, to give you a sense
Speaker 1: of how little people actually can think for themselves and
Speaker 1: use their critical faculties, this guy double masks and this
Speaker 1: has been his safety protocol according to this piece all along.
Speaker 1: And where's goggles? Which I told you the virus can
Speaker 1: get an Aerosola's virus can get in your eyes too.
Speaker 1: So there's a whole other part of this here that
Speaker 1: they've never really been able to test. How much that happens,
Speaker 1: they don't know. But I told, as they said at
Speaker 1: one point, maybe you should think about goggles, and they're like, okay,
Speaker 1: maybe that's too crazy. Not for everybody. This guy did
Speaker 1: this and he got COVID anyway, during the big wave
Speaker 1: in the wintertime, so How could you be going through
Speaker 1: this Every day you still get sick, but you think
Speaker 1: that this is necessary to protect you from the next time.
Speaker 1: You could get sick from the same virus which you
Speaker 1: probably can't even get because of your natural immunity, and
Speaker 1: then you are very unlikely to get because of your
Speaker 1: vaccinated immunity. In addition to that, someone explained the thinking here, Ah,
Speaker 1: this was always about something else. This was always about
Speaker 1: more those of you that are worried about the rising
Speaker 1: tide of Marxism, critical race theory, far left authoritarianism in
Speaker 1: all institutions of our government, and in just every aspect
Speaker 1: of our civic, civil society, and civic life. The whole
Speaker 1: masking thing, you understand, this was the maga hat of
Speaker 1: the left, but you were forced to put it on,
Speaker 1: don't you see. Imagine if there was a rule, a
Speaker 1: regulation nationwide that said everyone has to wear a red
Speaker 1: Maga hat, liberals would completely lose their minds more than
Speaker 1: they already have. They pretended that it was all about science,
Speaker 1: but that's actually what in large part they did with
Speaker 1: these mask mandates, bend the knee to Fauciism and the
Speaker 1: left and the state. It is an amazing thing. I mean,
Speaker 1: I will just tell you, at a personal level, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry for Tatique speaking of all that in such personal
Speaker 1: terms with doctor Wilenski. But when I was talking to
Speaker 1: people today about this new guidance and what to ask her,
Speaker 1: everybody every personal feelings about it, and I realized I
Speaker 1: did too, and all these questions. Part of it is
Speaker 1: that I feel like I'm going to have to rewire
Speaker 1: myself so that when I see somebody out in the
Speaker 1: world who's not wearing a mask, I don't instantly think
Speaker 1: you are a threat, or you are selfish, or you
Speaker 1: are a COVID denier and you definitely haven't been vaccinated.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're going to have to rewire the way
Speaker 1: that we look at each other because the CDC's guidance,
Speaker 1: which she just told me we are sure, is that
Speaker 1: if you're vaccinated, you don't need to wear a mask
Speaker 1: except in very specific circumstances. And so that means as
Speaker 1: we change that as a country, we are going to
Speaker 1: look at each other differently and have to unwire our
Speaker 1: preconceptions about what a mask or a lack of a
Speaker 1: mask means, lack of a mask meant to Rachel Maddow,
Speaker 1: the MSNBC audience, and Biden voters and leftists across America.
Speaker 1: Lack of a mask meant you were a bad person
Speaker 1: who was dangerous and you wanted to kill grandma. She's
Speaker 1: telling you this on National TV. That's actually what she
Speaker 1: has thought all this time. I have not been an
Speaker 1: exaggerating I have not been you know, pushing it beyond
Speaker 1: where the facts are. This is what the left has believed.
Speaker 1: It has been used as a tool not only of
Speaker 1: manipulation and subjugation, but condemnation. If you did not do this,
Speaker 1: you were a bad person, if you weren't someone who
Speaker 1: was willing to go along with the constantly shifting Oh
Speaker 1: this is what we think, now, Oh, this is what
Speaker 1: we think. Then all this is what we think next
Speaker 1: from Fauci and the other idiots at the CDC. Fauci's
Speaker 1: a moron, you know. Now he's going on MSNBC's AKA,
Speaker 1: Oh what we really saw here was all the racism
Speaker 1: of the pandemic. You know, he's actually saying that stuff.
Speaker 1: He's been auditioning for his own show at MSNBC for
Speaker 1: the last year. That's what this guy really has been doing.
Speaker 1: In love with the fame and all the plaudits, all
Speaker 1: all the praise from leftists all across America, the fancy elites.
Speaker 1: You know, Fauci saved us. What a Fauci saved us from? Exactly?
Speaker 1: What was the upside of all this? None of it
Speaker 1: is demonstrable. You've noticed that they've switched out of Oh,
Speaker 1: we didn't have any flu. So clearly all of this works.
Speaker 1: Part of the part of the way the seasonal flu
Speaker 1: works is that you have people traveling all over the
Speaker 1: world spreading, and it usually starts in China, and then
Speaker 1: you have global travel and it moves all over the world.
Speaker 1: So certainly, a large percentage of this, and there are
Speaker 1: other ideas and theories we can talk about as well,
Speaker 1: A large percentage of this is that you did not
Speaker 1: have the global travel that actually spreads the seasonal flu,
Speaker 1: but you already had COVID spread all over the world.
Speaker 1: It was already endemic in many populations. That's one reason
Speaker 1: why you had such a difference. But if it works, so,
Speaker 1: notice the way they shift, Notice the way they you know,
Speaker 1: all of a sudden they hide the football. You say it,
Speaker 1: Wait a second, why are we talking about how well
Speaker 1: the measures worked against the flu. They were supposed to
Speaker 1: work against COVID, and they didn't work at all, folks.
Speaker 1: That's what we see in all the data. Lockdowns were
Speaker 1: a failure. California Florida side by side. Look at them,
Speaker 1: one with an extreme lockdown, one with a very minimal lockdown,
Speaker 1: if any at all. Really, what you're gonna tell me
Speaker 1: that that this works? What are you're talking? You're gonna
Speaker 1: so you're gonna lock down your society. You're gonna destroy
Speaker 1: millions of jobs and businesses for what you think might
Speaker 1: be a margin of error difference in the spread of
Speaker 1: this virus. That's called hysteria. That's called moral and intellectual cowardice,
Speaker 1: which was everywhere during this absolutely everywhere. But I think
Speaker 1: it's so important for you'd all remember what Rachel Maddow
Speaker 1: is saying here, which is she's telling her audience because
Speaker 1: that this is she knows who. She's talking to, people
Speaker 1: who live on the Upper West Side and in Brooklyn
Speaker 1: and in Santa Monica and a Northwest DC. She's telling
Speaker 1: them all, it's gonna be tough for me to start
Speaker 1: thinking about people without masks on as something other than
Speaker 1: horrible and reckless and anti science, because This was political tribalism,
Speaker 1: and what I told you about it the whole time
Speaker 1: was true. And now we're going to see that there
Speaker 1: will be movements to continue this. The federal government Joe
Speaker 1: Biden for example, they're going to say that you have
Speaker 1: to do this on trains, planes, buses, etc. For the
Speaker 1: foreseeable if you're crossing any kind of state line, state boundary.
Speaker 1: So the federal government's still going to mandate this. We
Speaker 1: have to we have to deal with the stats, the reality,
Speaker 1: because they'll seize the narrative. This is what the left does,
Speaker 1: like the little Bolsheviks they are. They will rewrite history
Speaker 1: and they'll pretend that there was great success, great success
Speaker 1: from the masks and lockdowns of twenty twenty and twenty
Speaker 1: twenty one, and it was only those Trump voting science
Speaker 1: deniers that made the virus keep spreading this. I'm telling you,
Speaker 1: this is what they're going to do, and they're going
Speaker 1: to try to bring all this back. They thought a
Speaker 1: fully compliant and terrified society was a brilliant thing for
Speaker 1: achieving the Marxist utopia that they believe it. And they
Speaker 1: got close. They felt like, oh wait, we almost had
Speaker 1: everyone just bend the knee and do what we said.
Speaker 1: Stay in your home, don't go to your business. Do this,
Speaker 1: do that you can't breathe. You have to have an
Speaker 1: obstruction between your mouth and fresh air indoors, outdoors. That's
Speaker 1: what they got away with, and they want to do
Speaker 1: it again. If you don't think they're trying to bring
Speaker 1: all of this back by leaving some of it in
Speaker 1: the background right now, if you don't think they're going
Speaker 1: to try to bring all these mitigation measures back for
Speaker 1: the winter season, you aren't paying attention. You don't really
Speaker 1: see what they're trying to do here and what they're
Speaker 1: trying to establish. It's essential, absolutely essential, that we continue
Speaker 1: on this fight and say no, not only are you
Speaker 1: morons obviously on the left, completely deranged with your openom
Speaker 1: mask forever now we take the fight to them and
Speaker 1: say this did nothing. There's a reason why we didn't
Speaker 1: do this every year for the flu. There's a reason
Speaker 1: why it didn't work as a policy. It did not
Speaker 1: function the way it was promised to function, because that
Speaker 1: was the way they got us all to do it. Oh,
Speaker 1: it'll have a seventy percent reduction in cases. It works
Speaker 1: so well. Bold crap, But we forgot, we forgot basic
Speaker 1: things we knew in all of this, and we abandoned
Speaker 1: common sense and reason because we were told to them,
Speaker 1: because people were scared. This country needs to get in
Speaker 1: touch with its desire for freedom again, and that's going
Speaker 1: to require a repudiation of the lies and the nonsense
Speaker 1: about lockdowns, about masking, about all of this. And I'm
Speaker 1: sorry I have been focused on this all along. I'm
Speaker 1: actually not sorry, and I'm going to continue to focus
Speaker 1: on it insofar as we're never going back to this.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're gonna have to consider pretty extreme measures
Speaker 1: to prevent the lunatics. We see their lunatics now. I'm
Speaker 1: gonna keep asking, even if I'm voxenate, they're crazy. I
Speaker 1: was saying all along, they're crazy. I'm telling you they're nuts.
Speaker 1: But now we really have the proof. Now anybody with
Speaker 1: their eyes open is saying, oh my god, these people
Speaker 1: are really nuts. Because they are. It's a mental disorder.
Speaker 1: They've actually had it. This is they've created a mass hysteria.
Speaker 1: I mean that as a mass mental illness because of
Speaker 1: an actual viral illness. That's what's happened here. The pandemic
Speaker 1: PTSD of millions of millions of people across the country.
Speaker 1: You're have it. One function of PTSD is people can't
Speaker 1: deal with and handle necessarily the actual concerns and the
Speaker 1: judgment necessary to understand whether you can put this into
Speaker 1: perspective or not. Right, if you have BDSD about a
Speaker 1: driving accident, let's say, which people can get, you're probably
Speaker 1: not the person who should be making highway safety standards, right.
Speaker 1: That's what's happened here. The most neurologically challenged by the
Speaker 1: pandemic have become the people that are making the determinations
Speaker 1: about federal policy on it, and they want to keep
Speaker 1: doing it, and they're really upset. It doesn't compute. What
Speaker 1: do you mean that we don't have forever to lockdown?
Speaker 1: What do you mean that we don't have forever masking scary?
Speaker 1: I'm actually I'll tell you this. I've been really concerned
Speaker 1: about how absurd and what a bunch of belligerent sheep
Speaker 1: the American people will, at least half of them turn
Speaker 1: into under the right conditions. I've been telling you this.
Speaker 1: This is a Milgram experiment. This is the authorities are
Speaker 1: saying electrocute people because it's good for them or because
Speaker 1: we tell you too, and millions of Americans do it.
Speaker 1: They do it. This is why I had a friend
Speaker 1: up in Vermont texting me that he saw a beautiful day.
Speaker 1: He had said there was a youth soccer game going
Speaker 1: on near his house. They texted me said, Bucky, you
Speaker 1: won't believe it. They're they're all the parents pretty much.
Speaker 1: I mean, he said a few exceptions, but the parents
Speaker 1: are all on the sidelines, and the coaches, oh, in
Speaker 1: the opener, they're all unmasked. The children are running around
Speaker 1: playing soccer, exerting themselves, you know, twelve year olds or
Speaker 1: whatever running around with masks on their faces. This is
Speaker 1: child abuse. These Fauci worshiping morons are abusing children because
Speaker 1: they can't understand normal risk parameters and what is reasonable
Speaker 1: and what is not. They have embraced the unreasonable and
Speaker 1: want to force it on all of you. And that's
Speaker 1: why I sit here and say I don't just want
Speaker 1: mask mandates gone. I want anti mask mandates, as in,
Speaker 1: I want red states to say it is illegal for
Speaker 1: public safe reasons to wear a covering on your face
Speaker 1: outside unless you need it imminently for a job. So
Speaker 1: construction or things where a mask is actually necessary. It
Speaker 1: helps you know dust and things like that. You know,
Speaker 1: unless you have unless you have an excuse like that.
Speaker 1: Mmmmm sorry, public health, public safety got to see who
Speaker 1: you are. Can't have you evading those surveillance cameras. Can't
Speaker 1: have you able to go into a bank and rob
Speaker 1: it because you got your little double mask on. And
Speaker 1: we don't get to know who's whom I want anti
Speaker 1: mask mandates. Now you'd say the mask is on the
Speaker 1: other foot. Our country's experienced with COVID nineteen has not
Speaker 1: only upended our own lives, but it has uncovered a
Speaker 1: stock reality and failing of our own society, the unacceptable
Speaker 1: disparities and health experience by minority groups, especially African Americans, Hispanics,
Speaker 1: and Native Americans. Many members of minority groups have a
Speaker 1: much greater risk of COVID nineteen, often because of the
Speaker 1: nature of the jobs that many of them have as
Speaker 1: essential workers in society. More importantly, when people of color
Speaker 1: get infected with saus Kobe two, they more likely will
Speaker 1: develop a severe consequence of the infection, and this is
Speaker 1: because minorities in general have a greater incidence and prevalence
Speaker 1: of underlying comorbid medical conditions including hypertension, chronic lung disease, diabetes,
Speaker 1: and obesity that lead to a multifold increase in hospitalizations
Speaker 1: and deaths. Fauci here making sure that we all transition
Speaker 1: are thinking on this COVID issue to there's so much
Speaker 1: racism that COVID has exposed. That's what he is telling us,
Speaker 1: there's so much racism. Notice though, that's from the address
Speaker 1: he gave a commencement, a virtual because of mitigation, you
Speaker 1: can't actually be in person for the virtue, you know,
Speaker 1: you got to do a virtual address. But he's saying
Speaker 1: that minority communities Native American, Hispanic and African American had
Speaker 1: that there are racial disparities that have been uncovered by
Speaker 1: all this. But he also says that it is a
Speaker 1: function of disproportionate comorbidities. And the comorbidities that he's bringing
Speaker 1: up are things like obesity, lung disease from smoking, things
Speaker 1: like that. Now, you know, I wonder what he thinks
Speaker 1: The answer to the racism of lung disease and comorbidity,
Speaker 1: as he lays it out, is in our society. What
Speaker 1: are we supposed to do about those things? Is this
Speaker 1: say an excuse for a nanny state that tells people
Speaker 1: how many calories they can eat, how much sugar they
Speaker 1: can ingest, whether they're allowed to personally smoke or not
Speaker 1: period as as a health matter, do we want prohibition
Speaker 1: of Marlboroughs like we have prohibition of other control old substances.
Speaker 1: What exactly does Bauci want to tell us here? Disparate
Speaker 1: impact as a systemic injustice. You'll notice that this logic
Speaker 1: does not hold up right. There is a disparate impact,
Speaker 1: which I'll be talking to you about on this show today,
Speaker 1: a disparate impact of standardized tests on the Asian American community.
Speaker 1: The Asian American community has a disparate impact, meaning that
Speaker 1: in this case, as a function of their outperforming other
Speaker 1: groups on standardized tests, Asians disproportionally benefit from standardized testing.
Speaker 1: So does that mean that our tests are systemically racist
Speaker 1: in favor of Asian Americans? You can do this with
Speaker 1: any number of issues. You look at a group based
Speaker 1: on racial characteristics, you say, well, it doesn't line up
Speaker 1: exactly with the statistics that I would expect with other groups,
Speaker 1: so clearly it's the fault of the system. And you say, well,
Speaker 1: what does that mean? And is it the fault of
Speaker 1: the system when a group benefits overall, when a group
Speaker 1: does well in an area, insider trading disproportionately affects wealthy
Speaker 1: white guys. Does that mean that insider trading laws are
Speaker 1: racist against white guys. No, but it disproportionately affects them,
Speaker 1: doesn't it. You can see the logic here. You know,
Speaker 1: you look at different different you know, different sports have
Speaker 1: different prevalence of one ethnic group or another. Does that
Speaker 1: mean that the sport is the sport itself is racist. No,
Speaker 1: it does not, right, But there are a whole lot
Speaker 1: of you know, multifaceted factors, a whole lot of things
Speaker 1: you can bring into it. But notice Fauci is a leftist,
Speaker 1: and so he boils down spirit disparate outcomes from COVID
Speaker 1: to racism in society, when it would really be a
Speaker 1: whole lot of things like regional and cultural approaches to
Speaker 1: diet and exercise and smoking and socioeconomic status and how
Speaker 1: that affects intake of alcohol and cigarettes overall health. And
Speaker 1: we should absolutely have discussions about overall health and health
Speaker 1: disparities with the different communities and how to address them.
Speaker 1: But screaming racism about them doesn't actually address anything, but
Speaker 1: Faucci knows that. But he's just singing the required tune
Speaker 1: as he always does. This man is a little bureaucrat leftist.
Speaker 1: He's a mediocrity sub mediocrity. Really, there's nothing impressive about him,
Speaker 1: and his tyrannical grip on the country only really comes
Speaker 1: to an end when we repudiate him for the little
Speaker 1: fascist fraud that he is. He has created a tremendous
Speaker 1: amount of division and suffering with no benefit medically to
Speaker 1: point to for the country. I'm sorry, it does not exist.
Speaker 1: No one is alive because of Fauci. Today. A lot
Speaker 1: of people lost their jobs and their sanity because of Fauci.
Speaker 1: So yes, maybe I am Ahab and Fauci is my
Speaker 1: tiny little white whale. But I'm not giving this up
Speaker 1: because the argument you see continues. The history is now
Speaker 1: being written, and they will use it to justify more
Speaker 1: of this madness if we let them get away with it.
Speaker 1: A lot of you are just starting out, right, I
Speaker 1: know what this is like. You're buying your first homes,
Speaker 1: You're having babies, building wealth, and trying to secure your
Speaker 1: family's future. Well, part of that process needs to be
Speaker 1: establishing a will or trust, and the best place to
Speaker 1: do it is at Trust and Will dot Com. At
Speaker 1: Trust and Will dot Com, setting up an a state
Speaker 1: plan is simple, convenient, and secure. For as little as
Speaker 1: thirty nine dollars. You can nominate guardian for your children,
Speaker 1: determine who gets your stuff, and plan for future medical care,
Speaker 1: all from the comfort of your home. Hiring a traditional
Speaker 1: a state attorney can cost thousands, and using a one
Speaker 1: size fits all template is not nearly specialized enough and
Speaker 1: with live customer service seven days a week, though, Trust
Speaker 1: and Will dot COM's team is available to answer any
Speaker 1: questions while setting up your plan. Customize to you and
Speaker 1: your needs. Gain peace of mind at Trust and Will
Speaker 1: dot com slash buck. That's right, Trust and Will dot
Speaker 1: Com slashbuck. You'll get ten percent off plus free shipping
Speaker 1: of your customized legal documents. I've been on the site
Speaker 1: and gone through the process. It's so easy. Once you
Speaker 1: set it up, you'll see this is something you gotta do.
Speaker 1: You know, I know this week is tax week and
Speaker 1: you're thinking about getting things off your plate. Get this
Speaker 1: taken off your plate and take ten percent off. When
Speaker 1: you go to Trust and Will dot com slash Buck,
Speaker 1: don't wait, go right now. It's important to get this
Speaker 1: one done and secure your family's future. Go to trust
Speaker 1: and Will dot com. Slash Buck a Space Force commander
Speaker 1: fired for talking about Marxism penetrating the United States military.
Speaker 1: Isn't this fascinating? You know what the problem they have?
Speaker 1: What this is partisan activity from an active duty member.
Speaker 1: Wait a second, I didn't think that Marxism was something
Speaker 1: that the United States Military was okay with. I thought
Speaker 1: we could you know, if he gave a speech about
Speaker 1: the downfalls or the or the the problems of jihadism
Speaker 1: in the United States military. Oh, No, that's probably would
Speaker 1: be an issue too. I'm sure they'd find that that's
Speaker 1: a violation of diversity and inclusion standards or something. What
Speaker 1: ideologies are you not? Can you give a speech on
Speaker 1: how you don't like Nazism? Can you be anti Nazism
Speaker 1: in the military and keep your job or is that
Speaker 1: a partisan thing? Well, apparently you can't be anti Marxist
Speaker 1: and keep your job. I think that's This is one
Speaker 1: of the reasons why the left tries so hard to
Speaker 1: whitewash the horrors of Stalinism, as well as the very
Speaker 1: clear connections between communism and national socialism. But that's another
Speaker 1: podcast for another time. But they try to pretend that
Speaker 1: Stalin was not a bloodthirsty mass murderer on a completely
Speaker 1: just mind blowing scale. Is because hold on a second.
Speaker 1: You look at the history of Marxist regimes throughout the
Speaker 1: twentieth century and you see misery, failure, mass starvation, mass murder, torture, rape,
Speaker 1: and brutality of all kinds at the hands of the state.
Speaker 1: That's what you see. Meanwhile, in the academy in social
Speaker 1: media today, Hollywood, you have people that talk about Marxism
Speaker 1: as though it's kind of a cool alternative to the
Speaker 1: evil capitalism of America on the West. Sure, how can
Speaker 1: you get in trouble in the United States military for
Speaker 1: talking about Marxism and how it's infiltrating the ranks? Because
Speaker 1: it has and because the Democrats realize that not only
Speaker 1: are they penetrated by Marxism, they are making common cause
Speaker 1: with it, they are using it. There are Marxists within
Speaker 1: the Democrat Party, just like there were Communists that infiltrated
Speaker 1: the Democrat was always Democrats that were pro Commy. You
Speaker 1: go back in history, you see it was the Democrats
Speaker 1: who were the commies. You look at Alder heyes, you
Speaker 1: look at the people who were true Soviet agents during
Speaker 1: all of this, and it was in fact democrats. Okay,
Speaker 1: important for everyone to recognize that. Let me tell you
Speaker 1: this story. This is from military dot Com. A commander
Speaker 1: of a US Space Force unit tasked with detecting ballistic
Speaker 1: missile launches has been fired for comments made during a
Speaker 1: podcast promoting his new book, which claims Marxist ideologies are
Speaker 1: becoming prevalent in the United States military. Lieutenant Colonel Matthew Lomeyer,
Speaker 1: commander of eleventh Space Warning Squadron at Buckley Air Force Base, Colorado,
Speaker 1: was relieved from his post by Lieutenant General Stephen Whiting,
Speaker 1: the head of Space Operations Command, over a loss of
Speaker 1: confidence in his ability to lead. Military dot Com has
Speaker 1: learned quote this decision was based on public comments made
Speaker 1: by Lieutenant Colonel Loemeyer in a recent podcast. A Space
Speaker 1: Force spokesperson sent an email Lieutenant General Whiting has initiated
Speaker 1: a command directed investigation on whether these comments constituted prohibited
Speaker 1: partisan political activity. Irresistible revolution, Marxism's goal of conquest and
Speaker 1: the unmaking of the American military is the book title,
Speaker 1: and this guy got fired from his job for talking
Speaker 1: about this. Isn't that interesting? Let's just do a review.
Speaker 1: He remember some years ago, lieutenant colonel. I'm sorry, I
Speaker 1: can't remember what his rank was. It might have been
Speaker 1: Captain Nidal Hassan, the Ford Hood shooter. But remember some
Speaker 1: years ago when it came out that he had given
Speaker 1: numerous speeches in which he had defended Jihata suicide bombers
Speaker 1: and talked about jihad against the West, and no one
Speaker 1: did anything about it. That was okay, right that? And then,
Speaker 1: of course later on the guy ended up being a
Speaker 1: mass murder of fellow service members, killing them in cold
Speaker 1: blood at close range in what was initially called by
Speaker 1: the Obama administration. And don't ever forget it work place violence.
Speaker 1: That was their official designation of it. Workplace violence. Yeah, sure,
Speaker 1: the guy was in touch with Anwar Alaki, the terrorist
Speaker 1: mastermind from Al Kaidi in the Arabian Peninsula. But it
Speaker 1: was workplace violence, they said, just like howly a report
Speaker 1: came out where the f behind the DOJ finally called
Speaker 1: the attempted mass assassination of Republican Conservative members of Congress
Speaker 1: by a Bernie Sanders supporter. Yeah, they finally called James
Speaker 1: Hodgkinson was his name. You don't really ever hear it,
Speaker 1: do you. They finally said that that was domestic terrorism. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you don't say. Before then they were just calling it.
Speaker 1: I forget they used some other designation for it, to
Speaker 1: say that it was like a disgruntled person or something
Speaker 1: like that. I don't know, because they hide the truth
Speaker 1: from you because they're engaged in propaganda, and they definitely
Speaker 1: don't want you to figure out that there is a
Speaker 1: Marxist wave. We can all see it. It's obvious, and
Speaker 1: you're going to see a slew of books about, you know,
Speaker 1: the Marxism that is coming and everything else, because it's
Speaker 1: all over the place. It couldn't be any more clear.
Speaker 1: And here is one of the books. But this one
Speaker 1: focusing on the military. Marxism in America is very real.
Speaker 1: And the reason I think it's important called Marxism instead
Speaker 1: of socialism is to understand the real roots of this
Speaker 1: and how division along racial instead of class lines is
Speaker 1: the primary method of separating us from one another, of
Speaker 1: undermining the history of this country and trying to take
Speaker 1: control of its future. Because in a very wealthy society
Speaker 1: like ours. Class warfare is effective, but it's not effective
Speaker 1: enough to make people hate each other. And the purpose
Speaker 1: of the racial Marxists is to create divisions rooted in disdain,
Speaker 1: in real vitriol and real nastiness and distrust of one another.
Speaker 1: You can do that with economic warfare. But the problem
Speaker 1: is the people at the top of this who are
Speaker 1: pushing the racial Marxism. The elites in this country don't
Speaker 1: want to get caught up in and they're very wealthy.
Speaker 1: So while there's some degree of hypocrisy. You know, you
Speaker 1: can have Nancy let them meet Cake Pelosi talking about
Speaker 1: how much she cares about about, you know, raising taxes
Speaker 1: and everything else, but that doesn't really that that doesn't
Speaker 1: one get her constituents that excited. And two, she's a
Speaker 1: rich old lady who lives in a mansion in San
Speaker 1: Francisco and it's worth fifty million dollars. So you know,
Speaker 1: people can eventually put two and two together. Ah, but
Speaker 1: the support of BLM, for instance, that really moves the
Speaker 1: needle on the left, that really gets people excited and angry,
Speaker 1: and you want them angry, even if you have to
Speaker 1: lie about cops as they do, even if you have
Speaker 1: to tell lies about how law enforcement is systemically and
Speaker 1: continuously murdering unarmed black men without consequence, which is the
Speaker 1: central lie of the BLM movement. But I mean, if
Speaker 1: you're wondering, has the United States military been taken over
Speaker 1: at some level by Marxism and leftist dogma, don't ever
Speaker 1: forget that. Back in February, General I'm sorry, Secretary Defense,
Speaker 1: former General Austin, Secretary Defense ordered all military services to
Speaker 1: have a one day stand down at talk about extremism
Speaker 1: in the ranks. And as part of that, and Lomier,
Speaker 1: the author of this book and the guy just got fired,
Speaker 1: said he was given a book that cited the January
Speaker 1: sixth Capital riot as extremism but did not mention the
Speaker 1: civil disobedience and riots after George Floyd. Gee, that doesn't
Speaker 1: seem partisan at all, does it. Yes, you see the
Speaker 1: efforts to paint the January sixth riot as some serious
Speaker 1: insurrection instead of a bunch of bozos running into a
Speaker 1: building taking photos of themselves in the Capitol. And I
Speaker 1: know that the American Greatness has video where they say
Speaker 1: that some of the Capitol police were essentially waving in
Speaker 1: some people to say okay, you can come in and
Speaker 1: look at stuff or whatever. The way that they're doing this,
Speaker 1: the way they're framing this is to create a perception
Speaker 1: of the extremist enemy within which transfers over into suppression
Speaker 1: efforts against Republicans, Trump supporters and conservatives. It's very obvious
Speaker 1: what they're doing, and I would just want to know
Speaker 1: while we're looking at Marxism in the military, which is
Speaker 1: a large federal government funded institution like many others, where yeah,
Speaker 1: it has in a spree of corps and a history
Speaker 1: that brings all Americans together and is one of the
Speaker 1: few institutions in American public life that people have a
Speaker 1: real love and devotion to and want to support. But
Speaker 1: it's also a large federal bureaucracy, and we know what
Speaker 1: happens to those over time. If you have enough leftist,
Speaker 1: enough Marxists, they seize control, they seize power, and they
Speaker 1: take them over. They've done this largely within the DOJ,
Speaker 1: They've done this in the CIA. I can tell you
Speaker 1: that they've done it in the intelligence community, and they
Speaker 1: are in the process of doing in the United States
Speaker 1: military as well. And that should make everybody very concerned.
Speaker 1: And when you talk about it as a military member.
Speaker 1: Now you can get fired, and we can all see that.
Speaker 1: That's because they don't want the truth to come out.
Speaker 1: Because the people that believe this want it to they
Speaker 1: believe in Marxism, they wanted to continue until it's too late. See,
Speaker 1: this is the game the left always plays. What Marxism,
Speaker 1: there's no Marxism, there's no socialism. What are you talking about?
Speaker 1: And then eventually it's yeah, that's right, we were Marxists
Speaker 1: all along. What are you going to do about it?
Speaker 1: Now we're in charge, we run things. Not only do
Speaker 1: we have all the bureaucrats, but now we've got a
Speaker 1: lot of guys with guns too. That's the game they're playing, folks.
Speaker 1: Don't forget it when you talk about him being dangerous
Speaker 1: and the way he's leading the party. And I asked
Speaker 1: this about both McCarthy and and a lastafonduc. Are they
Speaker 1: being complicit in what you consider the Trump laws? They are?
Speaker 1: And I'm not willing to do that. You know, I
Speaker 1: think that there are some things that have to be
Speaker 1: bigger than party, that have to be bigger than partisanship.
Speaker 1: Our oath to the Constitution as one of those. I've
Speaker 1: seen countries I've worked in countries around the world where
Speaker 1: you don't have a peaceful transition of power. What's happening
Speaker 1: right now with Donald Trump and his continued attacks on
Speaker 1: the constitution and the rule of law is dangerous and
Speaker 1: we all have an obligation to stand up against that.
Speaker 1: What exactly is happening right now Liz Cheney, and she
Speaker 1: says this, and I know that she thinks the words
Speaker 1: coming out of her mouth are something to be proud of,
Speaker 1: and she should feel like she's doing a great service
Speaker 1: for the country. As I've said all along, I think
Speaker 1: this is just about Liz Channey want Liz Cheney wanting
Speaker 1: the old goop back, the country club gop where you lose,
Speaker 1: but you lose gracefully and you never actually stand up
Speaker 1: for your base, and you don't take the fight to
Speaker 1: the other side. But you know, maybe there's a foreign
Speaker 1: country you can invade, and you know, you beat up
Speaker 1: on those people, and you allow the people in your
Speaker 1: own country to just get left high and dry, at
Speaker 1: least the ones who voted for you. I think she
Speaker 1: wants that old goop to come back. But if she's
Speaker 1: going to continue to rail on the big lie as
Speaker 1: they're calling it, I have to ask a question minutes
Speaker 1: of Liz Cheney, but it's also of so many other people.
Speaker 1: Is this the only big lie that has been told
Speaker 1: in American politics in recent years that would destroy a
Speaker 1: presidency or end a presidency, or alter the course of
Speaker 1: American history? Where was Liz Cheney when for four years
Speaker 1: this is not what about is and this is about principle,
Speaker 1: This is about standards and consistency, because this is the
Speaker 1: same kind of issue. Where was Liz Cheney for four
Speaker 1: years when the Democrat Party paid for opposition research, laundered
Speaker 1: it through the FBI and the intelligence apparatus of the
Speaker 1: United States government, spied on people associated with the Trump campaign,
Speaker 1: illegally manufactured evidence to do so, broke the law in
Speaker 1: the process, and then use that lie to get a
Speaker 1: special Counsel investigation going in order to throw as many
Speaker 1: people associated with the president in prison for process crimes
Speaker 1: as possible, lying under oath and not paying her taxes.
Speaker 1: Oh gosh, practically hitler. Look at what they did. And
Speaker 1: here we are being told by Liz Cheney that what's
Speaker 1: really going on here is that the Trump administration that
Speaker 1: doesn't even exist anymore, is the big ongoing threat toward democracy.
Speaker 1: I just want to know where was she when they
Speaker 1: lied about the President of the United States for four
Speaker 1: years as a traitor, as a Russian asset, When they
Speaker 1: use the apparatus of the federal government to try to
Speaker 1: go after the president, to undo the twenty sixteen election,
Speaker 1: to imprison his children if they could get away with it.
Speaker 1: Where is Liz Cheney on the prosecutorial abuse of even
Speaker 1: considering to bring state charges explicitly for political reasons against
Speaker 1: Trump and to use it as an end run, which
Speaker 1: they considered for months while he was still president, on
Speaker 1: federal pardon power. Where's Liz Chenney on all that She's
Speaker 1: so principled, she's such a fighter for conservatism. Can you
Speaker 1: I ask you this. Can you remember one time that
Speaker 1: she was standing alongside Jim Jordan, Devin Newness, any of
Speaker 1: the members of Congress who came forward to fight against
Speaker 1: the big lie, because that's what it was, of Russia collusion.
Speaker 1: Can you remember a single solitary instance of Liz Cheney
Speaker 1: speaking out against that lie which was explicitly and clearly
Speaker 1: meant to destroy the Trump presidency, to in effect undo
Speaker 1: the twenty sixteen election, and Hillary Clinton went with it.
Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi agreed with it. They were calling Trump an
Speaker 1: illegitimate president. For four years. They used the federal government,
Speaker 1: the top members of the Democrat Party used the federal
Speaker 1: government as a weapon against the administration that was supposed
Speaker 1: to be in charge of the federal government. And where
Speaker 1: was Liz Cheney. Oh, she only fights now because people
Speaker 1: got rowdy during a protest and some rioted and some
Speaker 1: took selfies inside the Capitol building. Oh gosh, what a
Speaker 1: threat to the continuation of our government. Give me a break.
Speaker 1: But here she is, standing standing just so high on
Speaker 1: her high horse eighteen. It's indefensible. I will never forget
Speaker 1: seeing the law enforcement officers, the members of the swat team,
Speaker 1: the rapid response forces, seeing them in their exhaustion, and
Speaker 1: they had been through hand to hand combat, and and
Speaker 1: you know, people died. And the notion that this just
Speaker 1: did you know, the notion that this was somehow a
Speaker 1: tourist event is disgraceful and despicable. And you know, I
Speaker 1: won't be part of whitewashing what happened on January sixth.
Speaker 1: Nobody should be part of it, and people ought to
Speaker 1: be held accountable. I mean, what a little psycho honestly,
Speaker 1: let's let's let's unpack what she just said. Maybe ask
Speaker 1: you maybe she'd get Liz Channey on the show, because
Speaker 1: she'd have a much tougher time with me than she
Speaker 1: was with Chris Wallace. I gonn assure you of that.
Speaker 1: They'd engage in hand to hand combat and people died, Okay, Liz,
Speaker 1: who died? Who died because of the hand to hand combat?
Speaker 1: Only one person died or is even seriously wounded, But
Speaker 1: she in fact died from the hand to hand combat
Speaker 1: Astley Babbitt, an unarmed protester. No police died from hand
Speaker 1: to hand combat. No police were even seriously injured by
Speaker 1: this hand to hand combat, which mirrored in the violence
Speaker 1: and in everything else what we saw day in and
Speaker 1: day out from Democrat partisans under the banner of BLM
Speaker 1: for months in twenty twenty. Where was she on that?
Speaker 1: Where is she on the threat to our democracy? The
Speaker 1: mass intimidation of the American people by Democrat leftists activists
Speaker 1: under the BLM ban or where was she on that?
Speaker 1: Oh she was, m Ia. All her big important principles
Speaker 1: were just we're forgotten on that one. Because that's a
Speaker 1: difficult fight for a member of the GOP establishment. People
Speaker 1: look at you funny at the country club. If you
Speaker 1: have a problem with left wing activist BLM protests, but
Speaker 1: trashing Trump and trashing the insurrection, oh, that gets you
Speaker 1: a pat on the head in Nantucket or wherever Liz
Speaker 1: Cheney decides to summer. You know, one of the reasons
Speaker 1: why we have so much more division it feels in
Speaker 1: our in our discourse right now, is because we're actively
Speaker 1: being divided. We're being separated. There are the people that
Speaker 1: are allowed to have their opinions and the people who aren't,
Speaker 1: and they are erased from the public square, which is
Speaker 1: the Internet, by the gatekeepers to the Internet, big Tech.
Speaker 1: This is happening every day. It's happening all the time.
Speaker 1: But I don't just want to complain about it. It's
Speaker 1: important to raise awareness about what's happening. But I also
Speaker 1: want you to take action. And that's why you need
Speaker 1: a virtual private network. With a virtual private network, you
Speaker 1: hide your IP address so big tech can't just track
Speaker 1: everything you do and then sell it all the third parties.
Speaker 1: You also encrypt your sensitive data so that if hackers
Speaker 1: do try to get access when you're on public Wi Fi,
Speaker 1: you have a layer of protection. The best VPN virtual
Speaker 1: private network on the market is Express VPN. With Express
Speaker 1: VPN on your computer your phone, you just have an
Speaker 1: app that anonymizes a lot of what you're doing online
Speaker 1: by hiding your IP address. Remember your IP address is
Speaker 1: how people can track everything you're doing. They know it's you.
Speaker 1: Express VPN encrypts one hundred percent of your network data
Speaker 1: as well to protect you from cyber criminals and eavesdroppers.
Speaker 1: That's also why I want you to have this. It
Speaker 1: covers you a multiple levels and it's so easy to use.
Speaker 1: I know, I know, VPN sounds technical and no no,
Speaker 1: Just go right now to Express vpn dot com slash buck.
Speaker 1: You'll be set up in a couple of minutes, and
Speaker 1: then whenever you have it running, you're protected. This is
Speaker 1: a must for your devices, for your smartphone, for your laptop,
Speaker 1: your iPad, whatever you use. Go to Express vpn dot com,
Speaker 1: slash buck and on a one year deal you'll get
Speaker 1: three months free Express vpn dot com slash buck. Republicans
Speaker 1: are unified in exposing the radical far left agenda of
Speaker 1: President Joe Biden and Speaker Pelosi. We want to focus
Speaker 1: every day on exposing the border crisis, the economic crisis,
Speaker 1: and the national security crisis in the Middle East because
Speaker 1: it's having an impact on everyday Americans' lives. Our focus
Speaker 1: is on safely reopening our economy, getting people back to
Speaker 1: work rather than the incentive being to stay out of work,
Speaker 1: making sure that we're addressing energy independence. We have the
Speaker 1: highest gas prices under Joe Biden in over seven years.
Speaker 1: So we have a unified message that resonates with the
Speaker 1: American people across the country. Republicans are unified, despite what
Speaker 1: the media will tell you. Republicans should be unified, and
Speaker 1: I think they are. I think that what happens here
Speaker 1: is you get such a focus on the Cheney leadership
Speaker 1: fight just to create the perception of division because it
Speaker 1: makes leftists feel better about what's going on in the
Speaker 1: country right now, all the Republicans are at each other's throats.
Speaker 1: And it's also the Loos Chaney part of it is
Speaker 1: an excuse to constantly revisit the so called insurrection, which
Speaker 1: is another reason that they're so focused in on it,
Speaker 1: because that's a place where liberals feel very morally superior.
Speaker 1: That's a place where the left feels very safe in
Speaker 1: just showing utter disdain for the other side. You know,
Speaker 1: it's something that I think we should all keep in
Speaker 1: mind here. We should all remember that they will go
Speaker 1: to that issue as much as they can. They need
Speaker 1: these ideological crutches. They had it for four years with
Speaker 1: Russia collusion. Anytime Trump had a success, anytime Trump slapped
Speaker 1: down the corporate media in a way that exposed what
Speaker 1: a bunch of hacks they are. What was the refrain
Speaker 1: Russia Russia collusion. He's a Russian agent, treason for Russia.
Speaker 1: And that's very alluring that that's very appealing to Democrats
Speaker 1: because they never have to psychologically engage with the reality
Speaker 1: of Trump being a good president, good at the job overall.
Speaker 1: And it's also a crutch now with Biden, because we
Speaker 1: can all see what a clown this guy is, what
Speaker 1: a failure he is is already and is going to be.
Speaker 1: I'm happy to see you know, Byron your catapiece that
Speaker 1: he put out, and he's a newsletter and Byron's a
Speaker 1: very smart guy at the Examiner. You're the piece that
Speaker 1: he put out on how they're not even trying. We
Speaker 1: keep talking about fixing the border crisis. Democrats don't want
Speaker 1: to fix it and aren't trying to fix it. They're
Speaker 1: not trying to stop people from coming into the country
Speaker 1: this way. That is not their goal. They just try
Speaker 1: to process them more efficiently so they aren't held in
Speaker 1: cramp quarters. That's not the same thing. So Biden is
Speaker 1: running a day facto open border when he's pretending to
Speaker 1: be shutting it down. This guy is a failure on
Speaker 1: so many levels already. And yes, the media keeps covering
Speaker 1: for him. Yes they're going to pretend that there's something
Speaker 1: else going on here. But I'm here to remind everybody
Speaker 1: of what's really happening, what's really going on, And of
Speaker 1: course the lib media absolutely hates that. And what they've
Speaker 1: done is created this psychology logical crutch for leftists where
Speaker 1: all you have, the whole hashtag resistance thing was premised
Speaker 1: on Trump Russia collusion, so we have to fight him
Speaker 1: on everything, no matter what it is. Trump wants to
Speaker 1: give everybody a million dollars no resistance, It didn't matter
Speaker 1: what it was. I know that was a silly idea,
Speaker 1: but I'm just saying it was a reflexive hatred of
Speaker 1: all things Trump. But the justification for that, right the
Speaker 1: underlying justification was because of Russia collusion. Of course, we
Speaker 1: have to oppose everything, you know. And it's a little
Speaker 1: bit like if you know, if you're going to go
Speaker 1: into if you're supposed to work with somebody in the office,
Speaker 1: you know, in your company. Let's say, and that person
Speaker 1: shakes your hand and says, here's the deal going forward
Speaker 1: on this, and then you find out that the person
Speaker 1: betrayed your trust, lie to you and says that you
Speaker 1: never had that deal. Everything else you do going forward
Speaker 1: is going to be colored, is going to be essentially
Speaker 1: determined by the fact that you look at that and say,
Speaker 1: I can't trust this person, So I don't care what
Speaker 1: they say about wanting to work with me going forward.
Speaker 1: I don't care about you know, what their ideas are.
Speaker 1: This person is not someone I should do business with.
Speaker 1: It's not someone I should trust. Now that would be valid.
Speaker 1: Imagine if you made that up. Imagine if you were told, oh,
Speaker 1: this person betrayed your trust, so you can't believe them
Speaker 1: on anything else and it was all a lie. That
Speaker 1: is essentially what the media, the Democrat Party did to
Speaker 1: the American people when it comes to Donald Trump. It
Speaker 1: didn't matter what the policy was. It didn't matter what
Speaker 1: the results of the policies even were because of the
Speaker 1: Russia collusion lie. That was all you had to know,
Speaker 1: or at least all you had to believe in in
Speaker 1: order to negate and oppose everything else about Trump. Now,
Speaker 1: in order to negate the negation, if you will, of Biden,
Speaker 1: in order to shut down all critics of Biden, all
Speaker 1: you have to say is the insurrection. The insurrection. They
Speaker 1: create a phony moral high ground from which to look
Speaker 1: down upon and spit upon all Trump supporters. Once again,
Speaker 1: this is central to how they do what they do.
Speaker 1: This is central to the creation of an anti anti
Speaker 1: Biden narrative. Right, those of us that believe in the
Speaker 1: counter revolution against the Democrat Marxism. Right now, we are
Speaker 1: being told all the time about this insurrection. We say, hold,
Speaker 1: I had nothing to do with it. I wasn't there,
Speaker 1: I didn't support it, I condemned it. And Democrats have
Speaker 1: little mini insurrections all the time, and they praise it
Speaker 1: on TV. Threatening to burn down a federal courthouse, burning
Speaker 1: down a police precinct as they did in Minneapolis. That
Speaker 1: is an active insurrection, but they don't call it that.
Speaker 1: They say it's just a protest, mostly peaceful. Sure, sure
Speaker 1: it is. But the propaganda is going to become more aggressive.
Speaker 1: It's going to become more fierce in its willingness to lie,
Speaker 1: because what we will see is a deeply incompetent Biden
Speaker 1: administration with failure pile the top failure on the domestic
Speaker 1: level and certainly on the global level. Here is Lindsey
Speaker 1: Graham Plate ten. The one thing that we haven't seen
Speaker 1: from Joe Biden is a deterrent approach. Is anybody in
Speaker 1: Russia afraid of hitting us again? The idea of graduating
Speaker 1: people to go into cybersecurity is not what I was
Speaker 1: looking for. I was looking for putting the Kremlin on
Speaker 1: notice that these people live in your backyard. We're going
Speaker 1: to hold you accountable for their misadventure. I was looking
Speaker 1: for upping our game in terms of our laws, making
Speaker 1: cyber attacks like this cyber terrorism, so that the people
Speaker 1: who did it could be get, you know, death penalty
Speaker 1: or life in jail, deterring people. I'm looking for Hamas
Speaker 1: to be deterred. They're not. I'm looking for Mexico and
Speaker 1: Central America to stop the onslaught on the border. Everything
Speaker 1: Biden is touching is going to crap. So the bottom
Speaker 1: line is there's a piling own effect all over the
Speaker 1: world because President Biden is showing weakness. Everything Biden is
Speaker 1: touching is going to crap. Lindsey Graham, I don't agree
Speaker 1: with them all the time. Sometimes I disagree them a lot.
Speaker 1: But when he's right, he's right, and this is true.
Speaker 1: There's nothing you can point to and say, this is
Speaker 1: a judgment call that Biden has made that has done,
Speaker 1: has made everything better, right, There's nothing you'd point to say, oh,
Speaker 1: that's really Republicans went along with COVID relief in twenty
Speaker 1: twenty multiple times on a bipartisan basis, So just telling me, oh,
Speaker 1: but look at COVID relief and look at the vaccination program.
Speaker 1: Those are baked into the cake. That's not Joe Biden's
Speaker 1: doing this and we said don't do it. But the
Speaker 1: things where he's actually made a decision that we opposed,
Speaker 1: it's always crap. It's always bad. You watch this play out,
Speaker 1: you can see it, you know it. And it's because ultimately,
Speaker 1: what Biden is doing is just providing cover for the
Speaker 1: more radical left wing agenda of the Democrats. That's what
Speaker 1: he actually exists to do. That's why he is the puppet.
Speaker 1: He is the puppet, and the puppeteers, the puppet masters
Speaker 1: in the background, are pushing more radical policies and saying, oh,
Speaker 1: but look at old man Biden, or just you know,
Speaker 1: I love unions and the folks. I kind of just
Speaker 1: to stare blankly into the cameras sometimes and you know,
Speaker 1: no joke, folks. You know, I'm just trying to remember
Speaker 1: where I am at time. And that's how angry can
Speaker 1: you be at a guy like that? You actually feel
Speaker 1: sorry for him sometimes. Actually I do feel sorry for
Speaker 1: Biden sometimes. You know, he's a guy who's not up
Speaker 1: for this, and he's in it for four years, folks,
Speaker 1: and it's gonna be a rough four years. It's gonna
Speaker 1: be a rough four years. But the policies around him
Speaker 1: are really the problem. Kevin McCarthy, who you know, Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's a little bit of an establishment rhino type sometimes,
Speaker 1: but it is what it is. Kevin McCarthy is right
Speaker 1: about how we're getting. It doesn't matter who the president
Speaker 1: is right now with the Democrat Party, you're getting the
Speaker 1: policies of Biden, and I'm sorry you're getting the policies
Speaker 1: of the Democrats overall. So you know, yes, there's Biden,
Speaker 1: but this is the Pelosiite left in a sense that
Speaker 1: is pushing all this stuff. Play twelve. We've got a
Speaker 1: lot of work to do, and this leadership team, we've
Speaker 1: got a lot of work to do in this confidence.
Speaker 1: The policies of Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden are destroying
Speaker 1: this nation. We got gasoline lines, we got stations that
Speaker 1: have no gas. We got gasoline in Virginia seven dollars
Speaker 1: a gallons. We got month over month core inflation we
Speaker 1: have not seen since the eighties. The gas price has
Speaker 1: not been this high nationally since the last time Joe
Speaker 1: Biden was in the White House. Now, gas prices are
Speaker 1: a very effective political tool that Joe Biden. How much
Speaker 1: effect is he had on gas prices so far? It's
Speaker 1: not good though, and it's on his watch, so fair
Speaker 1: to bring it up. But the hostility that the Democrats
Speaker 1: have there's almost the same way they have a mania
Speaker 1: about masks. There's a clear deranged hostility toward fossil fuels,
Speaker 1: which is just truly bizarre. And that's why when they
Speaker 1: talk about how they want to get the green New
Speaker 1: deal going and all the stuff we say hold on,
Speaker 1: we actually just need better, more efficient, redundant infrastructure to
Speaker 1: deliver natural gas and oil and the things that actually
Speaker 1: power our economy, and not make decisions like Biden made
Speaker 1: with the Keystone Xel pipeline, where you just make it harder,
Speaker 1: you make it less efficient, you make it more expensive.
Speaker 1: This is what he's doing. This is what's happening. The
Speaker 1: Hamas is not attacking us because they're trying to increase
Speaker 1: the welfare of Palestinians. In fact, they're taking huge sums
Speaker 1: to build the terrat tunnels, which we've been able to neutralize,
Speaker 1: to have rockets, missiles and other armaments. They're not building
Speaker 1: up Gaza, They're they're doing everything in their power to
Speaker 1: turn it into a fortified terror camp in order to
Speaker 1: destroy Israel. And they openly say their goal is to
Speaker 1: destroy Israel. They're not interested in any kind of any
Speaker 1: kind of coexistence, any kind of the kind of peace.
Speaker 1: The four peace treaties that I've made with Arab countries.
Speaker 1: They're changing the Middle East. They're trying everything in their
Speaker 1: power to avoid the path of peace and reconciliation. So
Speaker 1: I think any any objective observer understands that Hamas is
Speaker 1: out to destroy the State of Israel, and they're not.
Speaker 1: They're not a partner as far as the citizens of
Speaker 1: Israel Arabs. I've done more than any other prime minister
Speaker 1: and spend billions and billions of dollars in Israeli shekels
Speaker 1: uh and five times more than all the previous governments
Speaker 1: combined to ensure the the that are Israeli Arab citizens.
Speaker 1: All that can be part of the Israeli miracle, the
Speaker 1: great economic success story. You know, first, the first law
Speaker 1: of or the first thoughts you should have about foreign
Speaker 1: policy are who were the bad guys? Who were the
Speaker 1: good guys? Do they know the difference? Does it matter?
Speaker 1: Those are the things you just can as a very
Speaker 1: basic framework for approaching foreign policy issues. Hamas are the
Speaker 1: bad guys. I don't even care. I don't have to
Speaker 1: get into and I know, oh enormous complexity and the
Speaker 1: historical components of this and the status of each Jerusalem
Speaker 1: in nineteen sixty seven and UAN Resolution two four two
Speaker 1: and UAN Resolution three three eight and all. You could
Speaker 1: get into this all day long and just endlessly spin
Speaker 1: your wheels. Hamas is the government of Gaza and it
Speaker 1: is just like the Taliban was when it was running Afghanistan,
Speaker 1: an evil, sadistic enemy entity period. Hamas are the bad guys. Now,
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean that everything that the good guys do
Speaker 1: is good. It doesn't mean that there's nothing to talk
Speaker 1: about here in terms of how we get to a
Speaker 1: better future and how we're you know, bringing people together
Speaker 1: in the region and all that. No, no, no, I
Speaker 1: want a future where you have you know, Israelis able
Speaker 1: to go about their lives, go about their business, go
Speaker 1: to the beach, go to cafes, go to work, send
Speaker 1: their children to school, and you know, think about a
Speaker 1: future where there's no rockets raining down on them. And
Speaker 1: I actually want Palestinians to be able to go about
Speaker 1: their lives in Gaza without the bloodthirsty monsters of Hamas
Speaker 1: decide who they're gonna lock up, who they're going to execute,
Speaker 1: you know, and what fights are gonna start with Israel
Speaker 1: that are specifically meant to immiserate everyone. They offer nothing positive.
Speaker 1: They just Hamas just gives, just gives an option for
Speaker 1: people who have a tremendous amount of hatred for Israelis,
Speaker 1: and by that we mean hatred of Jews and gives
Speaker 1: hamas or rather gives people a way to just vent
Speaker 1: their rage. You know, That's that's what. There's nothing productive,
Speaker 1: nothing constructive about hamas. So we can at least have
Speaker 1: clarity on that. We can at least all be very
Speaker 1: clear on that. Except in this country. Unfortunately, you will
Speaker 1: hear from some Democrats the opposite of clarity on that point.
Speaker 1: Here is Representative Cory Bush about how she feels about hamas.
Speaker 1: Play eleven. Well, we fund when our government sends our
Speaker 1: tax dollars to the Israeli military. Sat Louis send me
Speaker 1: here to save lives. Basm's loved ones and his community.
Speaker 1: Our Saint Louis community sent me here to save lives.
Speaker 1: So that means we oppose our money going to fund militarize, policing, occupation,
Speaker 1: and systems of violent oppression and trauma. We are anti war,
Speaker 1: we are antioccupation, and we are anti Aparthei period. If
Speaker 1: this body is looking for something productive to do with
Speaker 1: three million dollars instead of funding a military that polices
Speaker 1: and kills Palestinians, I have some communities in Saint Louis
Speaker 1: City and in Saint Louis County that where that money
Speaker 1: can go where we desperately need investment, where we are hurting,
Speaker 1: where we need help. Let us prioritize funding there. Prioritize
Speaker 1: funding life, not destruction. So today we remember basm We
Speaker 1: remember his resistance in the face of militarized police occupation
Speaker 1: as a Saint Louis and St. Louis and and a Palestinian.
Speaker 1: We lost him to a health crisis, but we remember
Speaker 1: his words today. Until all our children are safe, we
Speaker 1: will continue to fight for our rights in Palestine and
Speaker 1: in Ferguson. We stand with you in solidarity, solidarity between
Speaker 1: Ferguson and Palestine. What so I mean other than the
Speaker 1: geographical the major geographical and religious and ethnic separations that
Speaker 1: we're talking about here between Ferguson, Missouri and Palestine and
Speaker 1: Badashi means Gaza. I assume there is no state of Palestine,
Speaker 1: as you know. What is this this leftist victimology connection
Speaker 1: that's always being made here with the Palestinians. Our problem
Speaker 1: is with hamas a terrorist organization that needs to be
Speaker 1: met with lethal force. The IDF is doing that. Why
Speaker 1: is this confusing to leftists? Harsani time, our friend David
Speaker 1: Harsani from National Review in the mix right now, go
Speaker 1: to National Review dot com for his latest David, let's
Speaker 1: talk about what's going on in Israel and with Gaza
Speaker 1: and Hamas right now. I want to throw this to
Speaker 1: you first. Are we really to believe that the Israelis
Speaker 1: level the building that they gave notice of beforehand, that
Speaker 1: the Associated Press was using as its headquarters. The AP
Speaker 1: claims that they didn't know that Hamas was using the building?
Speaker 1: Are they serious? What do you make of this? Actually,
Speaker 1: I don't think they're serious. I think they knew that
Speaker 1: Hamas was in the building. I think it. Hamas has
Speaker 1: a long history of using journalists and hospitals and kids
Speaker 1: and you know, civilians as human shields, and AP has
Speaker 1: had a long history of not reporting on it. So
Speaker 1: it seems very unlikely to me that they didn't know.
Speaker 1: You to believe that Israel did that, you'd have to
Speaker 1: believe they were wantonly destroying buildings or going after journalists,
Speaker 1: which is simply not the way that they act, no
Speaker 1: matter how often you know, mainstream journalists reported that way. David,
Speaker 1: we have this this moment here where it seems very clear,
Speaker 1: and I've actually I've I've looked at and even spoken
Speaker 1: to a leftist or two about the way that somehow
Speaker 1: we're supposed to think that there's any moral equivalency going
Speaker 1: on here, or we're supposed to focus on the you know,
Speaker 1: the left wants to focus on the condemnation of Israeli overreaction.
Speaker 1: They keep saying, I mean, I keep asking this basic question,
Speaker 1: why did Hamas start sending now thousands it's it's over
Speaker 1: a thousand, it's it's probably in the low thousands now
Speaker 1: of rockets into into you know, inhabited territory where it
Speaker 1: could kill children, babies, old women, whoever. I mean, they're
Speaker 1: just trying to kill whoever they can hit with these rockets.
Speaker 1: I say, well, why do they The latest spasm of
Speaker 1: violence is over what exactly here from their side, And
Speaker 1: I'm told that the police were a little too a
Speaker 1: little too are at a Palestinian protest and there's six
Speaker 1: houses in East Jerusalem that are supposed to be demolished
Speaker 1: or something. And I want to ask the people making
Speaker 1: this case, you can't be serious, right, Like, you don't
Speaker 1: think that firing thousands of rockets in response to that
Speaker 1: is reasonable? But that's what I'm told. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: there's a few questions in there. First of all, I
Speaker 1: can't speak to Hamas's thought process because I think they're
Speaker 1: a death cult. And I don't just say that flippantly.
Speaker 1: I mean I think they want people to die. I
Speaker 1: think they want juice to die. I think they want
Speaker 1: their own civilians to die as martyrs. And so why
Speaker 1: they start these things that they can't win, I'm not sure.
Speaker 1: I think they just want the reaction they're getting right
Speaker 1: now from leftists. Basically, no houses were going to be demolished.
Speaker 1: There was a long standing case in the courts, adjudicated
Speaker 1: by an independent court over property rights for I think
Speaker 1: it was five properties or five houses that has been
Speaker 1: in the course for almost fifty years, and the decision
Speaker 1: was going to come down. And you know, it's just
Speaker 1: a pretext to start throwing rocks and rioting. Because he
Speaker 1: was also coincided with what's called Jerusalem Day where where
Speaker 1: where Israeli celebrate the reunification of Jerusalem in nineteen sixty seven. Um,
Speaker 1: that's why this happened. Uh. You know, they're probably underlying
Speaker 1: reasons why the Palestinian authority wants to you know, who
Speaker 1: just canceled elections for you know, Abbas is now in
Speaker 1: his I think sixteenth year of a four year term
Speaker 1: um to deflect from that and to start something like this,
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, I don't know that there's any
Speaker 1: rational reason why how Mos gets involved in these things,
Speaker 1: but it's you know, obviously it's very serious. Like you said,
Speaker 1: I think the rockets are up to a thousand and
Speaker 1: six hundred and they're aimed at civilians and are you know,
Speaker 1: people don't like to hear it, but has a right
Speaker 1: to defend itself like any other sovereign nation. I keep
Speaker 1: telling everybody that you know, when they they I'll bring
Speaker 1: this up. And I, like I said, whenever I engage
Speaker 1: leftists on this issue and Arab Israeli issues, which is
Speaker 1: what it used to be referred to as. Now, I
Speaker 1: think it's people will say Israeli Palestinian because a lot
Speaker 1: of it has been decoupled from the broader Arab world
Speaker 1: as it actually should be. U really to think of
Speaker 1: this as like it's everything hinges. All problems in the
Speaker 1: Middle East come down to Israel and the lack of
Speaker 1: mean this is what this was a game that the
Speaker 1: autocratic Muslim majority regimes in the Arab world. We're playing
Speaker 1: for for decades actually, and I think now that has shifted,
Speaker 1: so that's that's in the right direction. But I try
Speaker 1: to explain to folks, and I wanted to ask you
Speaker 1: how the media doesn't get this. I don't care what
Speaker 1: someone did to or what my ancestors did to somebody
Speaker 1: else's ancestors, or what happened fifty years ago, or what
Speaker 1: my government did or whatever. If someone is pointing a
Speaker 1: gun at me and I have a gun, I'm going
Speaker 1: to use it. If if someone is firing rockets, if
Speaker 1: somebody were flying rockets into New York City nearby, I
Speaker 1: would want the you know, New York National Guard or
Speaker 1: whatever it was, to respond with lethal force to stop
Speaker 1: the threat. I don't care about anything else. It seems
Speaker 1: like the media can understand that very basic reality here.
Speaker 1: There's always this well, but I don't like what the
Speaker 1: Israelis are doing right. So on one level they want
Speaker 1: to so one level, they want to rewind history to
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty seven, which is, you know, ridiculous. The Israelis
Speaker 1: were attacked by Jordan and they want a war, and
Speaker 1: they took back territory, and they've offered much of that
Speaker 1: territory initially, they offered it back on numerous occasions for peace,
Speaker 1: and we're rebuffed. And then and let's say they're wrong,
Speaker 1: as you mentioned, I mean, not that you're saying they're wrong,
Speaker 1: but let's just say that that they're wrong. So what
Speaker 1: does that mean? Does that mean that it's okay to
Speaker 1: launch two thousand rockets at civilians and that the Israelis
Speaker 1: shouldn't react? How? How what people here want to react?
Speaker 1: And then of course Hamas hides behind civilians and then
Speaker 1: the Israelis do what they can. Now, if you really
Speaker 1: think about it, Kamas essentially is located within a dense
Speaker 1: civilian area, which is, you know, which is a war crime. Basically,
Speaker 1: so Israel with quite a bunch of proceedings. Not not
Speaker 1: to say they never had, they were never civilians hurt
Speaker 1: or killed, but the amount is very low when you
Speaker 1: consider that almost all of Hamas's military grade equipment is
Speaker 1: hidden within schools, among civilians, et cetera, in hospitals. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure. I always want to know what is Israel's
Speaker 1: supposed to do about this? Just let them shoot rockets,
Speaker 1: shoot them down. We didn't have the iron if they
Speaker 1: don't have an iron dome, there, what would have what
Speaker 1: would happen? You know, how many civilians would be dead?
Speaker 1: Did you see the Washington Post piece, by the way,
Speaker 1: that referred to the Iron Dobe as problematic? Yeah? Yeah,
Speaker 1: because you know why, because that you know, the Palastinians
Speaker 1: aren't strong enough, and that's the sort of they transpose
Speaker 1: this idea they have about strength, meaning simply because you're
Speaker 1: stronger doesn't mean that you're morally wrong. Terror we were
Speaker 1: stronger than al Qaeda, didn't make al Qaeda right, But
Speaker 1: yet this is you know, and then they transpose the
Speaker 1: color stuff on there. It's just simply not how it works.
Speaker 1: Israel's many Jews from Arab nations who were kicked out
Speaker 1: in nineteen forty eight as well. It's not a color
Speaker 1: thing in Israel. It's a much more complicated. Yeah, there
Speaker 1: were Ethiopian Jews. I met some and talked to them
Speaker 1: what I was visiting ussela many years ago. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, they're the complexity of that situation also and
Speaker 1: the way that the you know, the way that we
Speaker 1: in this country are told to think about this and
Speaker 1: where we're speaking of David Harsanyi, who is at nationalview
Speaker 1: dot com about what's going on right now with Israel
Speaker 1: and Gaza. M I prefer to say it that way
Speaker 1: because people say Israel and Palestine, and there is no
Speaker 1: country of Palestine, so this is not a nation to
Speaker 1: nation issue in that in that way, But I also see,
Speaker 1: and this this keeps coming up, David, there's a desire.
Speaker 1: I mean, we had We've got Corey Bush, for example,
Speaker 1: who talks about Ferguson and Gaza and the connections they're
Speaker 1: in and I sit here and I'm just like, this
Speaker 1: is this is just like a fabrication of the leftist mind.
Speaker 1: What are they even talking about? Well, that's not a
Speaker 1: fair question. I don't know what they're talking about. I
Speaker 1: will tell you this. I know that from Karl marks On,
Speaker 1: the leftists had a problem with Choose and the the
Speaker 1: in the nineteen seventies, the PLO and it was just
Speaker 1: a full blown terrorist organization. Uh, you know, make common
Speaker 1: cause with left or leftist terrorist group, make common cause
Speaker 1: with them. Leftist nations made common cause with them. The
Speaker 1: Soviets sent weapons to all Israel's enemies. It's not new.
Speaker 1: I think they view Israelis as colonizers there, even though
Speaker 1: the towns they're talking about have Hebrew names from before
Speaker 1: Jesus's birth, and and they just you know, sometimes they
Speaker 1: want to talk about history and sometimes they don't. Well,
Speaker 1: Jews have been there for thousands of years. I'm not
Speaker 1: saying it was filled whichers, but there's been a continuous
Speaker 1: Jewish presence there. They have, they have a historical claim
Speaker 1: to that land. Now, how it's divided up and stuff
Speaker 1: like that that has to be worked out. But the
Speaker 1: idea that they that they're colonizers there, which is how
Speaker 1: the left typically portrays them, is just historically absurd and also,
Speaker 1: as you mentioned before, kind of irrelevant. At this point
Speaker 1: the wars are over and they were lost by the
Speaker 1: Arab nations. Yeah, well, this is where I get to
Speaker 1: the selective application of history to justify transfers and wealth
Speaker 1: and wealth and power today. You know, if if I
Speaker 1: wanted to go into if I wanted to go into
Speaker 1: you know, international court and sue Algeria and Tunisia for
Speaker 1: enslaving my ancestors, which this is something that's not even
Speaker 1: really talked about ever, but it was reality and it
Speaker 1: was happening to people in Western Europe. Was happening actually
Speaker 1: in the early day we fought our first foreign war.
Speaker 1: Folks to the shores of Tripoli because of this issue.
Speaker 1: Everyone would say, well, I mean, no one in Tunisia
Speaker 1: is going to start writing checks to you or start
Speaker 1: apologizing to you, because you know, three hundred years ago
Speaker 1: they were taking or you know two hundred plus years
Speaker 1: ago they were taking people off of American and British
Speaker 1: ships and enslaving them and everything. I mean, we could
Speaker 1: tell Turkey that they have to give they have to
Speaker 1: give back all of all of what was constantinople to.
Speaker 1: You know, you go through these historical moments in time
Speaker 1: you say, look, we got to deal with the world
Speaker 1: as it is today. And it just feels like there's
Speaker 1: this in transigence that comes to thee to the forefront
Speaker 1: with particularly the Palestinian issue, where they're just not willing
Speaker 1: to live in reality. I guess, I mean, that's that's
Speaker 1: really what it feels like here. And when you have
Speaker 1: that mentality, you're willing to embrace things like mass violence
Speaker 1: against civilians, which I mean we're talking about David the
Speaker 1: Rockets now. I remember when I started studying this issue
Speaker 1: and I worked at the Washington Institute for Dennis Ross,
Speaker 1: who was Clinton's peace negotiator and the Clinton administration, and
Speaker 1: I mean Hamas was sending people into crowded pizzerias and
Speaker 1: discotheqs with you know, shrapnel bombs on them and blowing
Speaker 1: up everybody, and they thought that was resistance. So I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm with you that it's a death cult. I guess that.
Speaker 1: What sits in my head is I can't really understand
Speaker 1: why is the media ever confused about this in this
Speaker 1: country I'm talking about, Well, I don't know. I'm again
Speaker 1: I'm not sure why, but I think it has to
Speaker 1: do with, you know, viewing Israelitis as colonizers as you know, Westerners,
Speaker 1: things like that. But you know, just going back to
Speaker 1: a couple of things you mentioned. One is I will
Speaker 1: believe that this isn't about the Jewish people when I
Speaker 1: see coverage of the hundreds or at least scores of
Speaker 1: other ethnic minorities in this world who are just as
Speaker 1: numerous as Palestinians who don't have a nation, the Kurds,
Speaker 1: let's say, or you know, or when they start talking
Speaker 1: about the Hungarian minority in Transylvania, which it doesn't have
Speaker 1: its own nation or whatever, they don't there are forty
Speaker 1: I believe it could be more forty full time like
Speaker 1: ap reporters. I think in Israel and Gaza and West
Speaker 1: Bank covering it. How many people are covering the Kurds
Speaker 1: in Iran? How many people are covering the Muslim minorities
Speaker 1: in China who are in concentration camps? How many maybe one? Two?
Speaker 1: I don't even know. And so there's that imbalance. And
Speaker 1: you know, in the history is all wrong too, by
Speaker 1: the way, you know, they make it sound like, you know,
Speaker 1: Jews came in there and just you know, took everyone's
Speaker 1: home and took the land. No, they were willing to
Speaker 1: buy by the UN partition plan, and I think six
Speaker 1: Arab countries attacked and they won that. You know, they
Speaker 1: won that war. Then again in sixty seven, they won
Speaker 1: that war again in seventy three. I don't understand what
Speaker 1: they think this is. This isn't tenant. You can rewind
Speaker 1: history and go back and live, you know, live in
Speaker 1: the past simply because you lost wars you started. This
Speaker 1: is the new reality. It's the reality all over the world.
Speaker 1: And for some reason, Israel is supposed to live by
Speaker 1: different rules than any other country lives when it's you know,
Speaker 1: dealing with terrorism and dealing with potentially a mini terror
Speaker 1: state on its border. I mean, I don't understand if
Speaker 1: people want Israel to give Hamas a state, do they
Speaker 1: want to give the PA estate? So when it has
Speaker 1: an election, Hamas takes over. I mean, what then then
Speaker 1: Israel has to invade this country constantly. It's just it's
Speaker 1: not a tenable plan. David, just before we let you go,
Speaker 1: how much of this do you think is tied to
Speaker 1: the Biden administration versus just this was a tinderbox that
Speaker 1: Hamas lit the match once again. I think that I
Speaker 1: think Biden has been better to some extent than Obama
Speaker 1: would have been or was in my opinion. But I
Speaker 1: think part of it is is Iran also is part
Speaker 1: of this, you know. I mean, I don't know where
Speaker 1: they get these rockets from, but it's probably Iran where
Speaker 1: they get the parts and things to put it together.
Speaker 1: So and then they opened up the funding to the PA.
Speaker 1: So I mean that I think, you know, in some sense,
Speaker 1: they were probably testing Biden. But I think Abbas is
Speaker 1: pretty incompetent, so I doubt he planned it to be
Speaker 1: this big of a deal. I think he was just
Speaker 1: maybe trying to push the Biden administration into you know,
Speaker 1: starting talks again for the state at etc. And then
Speaker 1: it just blew up. But that's just my theory, David.
Speaker 1: I'll be writing on this this week at nash Review
Speaker 1: dot com. Check got David Harsani's latest there. David, thanks
Speaker 1: so much anytime. Thank you. The Israelian government has he
Speaker 1: evolved over the years into a pretty strong right wing government,
Speaker 1: and their coalition now includes people who are over race
Speaker 1: and when you have the United States of America Alie
Speaker 1: putting almost four billion dollars a year into Israel, we
Speaker 1: have the right to demand that they respect the human
Speaker 1: rights of all people, including the Palestinians. What we need
Speaker 1: now is an even handed policy which protects the security
Speaker 1: of Israel. They have a light right to live in
Speaker 1: peace and security without terrorist attacks. But the people in
Speaker 1: the Palestinian territories also have a right to live in
Speaker 1: peace and dignity. And anyone who takes a look at
Speaker 1: what's going on in Gaza right now, where youth unemployment
Speaker 1: is seventy percent, and I'm talking about before this current war,
Speaker 1: and the terrible things that have happened in the war,
Speaker 1: where youth unemployment is sky high where people can't get
Speaker 1: electricity and clean water on a regular basis. This is
Speaker 1: a territory control by Israel. So we got to deal
Speaker 1: with the corruption of the Palestinian authority. We got to
Speaker 1: deal with that, but we have also got to create
Speaker 1: us where the people in the Palestinian territories are respected
Speaker 1: as well. How are we going to do any of that?
Speaker 1: I mean, I know, I let you, he had to
Speaker 1: listen to that whole thing with Bernie Sanders were even
Speaker 1: hand the approach. How do we do any of that? Well,
Speaker 1: what does he really think our capability is here? We're
Speaker 1: gonna make the Palestinian authority not corrupt or even try
Speaker 1: to push them toward that. M good luck with that.
Speaker 1: I think this is fascinating because you hear these things
Speaker 1: and it sounds okay. I mean, look, he agrees at
Speaker 1: least that Bernie Sanders is an American, is a Jewish American,
Speaker 1: and and you'd think that he would have understanding and
Speaker 1: appreciation for what's going on in Israel right now. I
Speaker 1: just though, I try to note that he says all
Speaker 1: this stuff. Um, he says all this stuff, and you say, okay, well,
Speaker 1: so what do we do? What are we supposed to.
Speaker 1: What is America's position and all this role in all
Speaker 1: of this. You know, ultimately this is an issue for
Speaker 1: Israeli security and the security and the safety of the
Speaker 1: Israeli people and attacking and dealing with an enemy, which
Speaker 1: Hamas is an enemy, It's an enemy combatant. And you
Speaker 1: have these very desperate circumstances that result from all these
Speaker 1: dynamics when the West Bank and the Gaza stripper and
Speaker 1: Gaza and why is it so messed up there? You
Speaker 1: have to ask that question, what is leading to this? If,
Speaker 1: for example, Gazins did not elect Hamas, if they had
Speaker 1: people in place who were willing to negotiate in good
Speaker 1: faith with the Israelis about return of territory that Israelis
Speaker 1: have talked about many times and offered many times in
Speaker 1: the past, wouldn't things get a lot better? There are
Speaker 1: some fundamental problems here, fundamental disconnects from unfortunately, I think,
Speaker 1: from reality on the Palestinian side, and that is meaning
Speaker 1: the cold hard realities of you're not going back to
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty seven borders. You're you're not about to have
Speaker 1: the dissolution of the Israeli state. You know, no one's
Speaker 1: coming along to kick Israel into the sea. It's not happening.
Speaker 1: And you know Hamas tells everybody that's going to happen.
Speaker 1: They're not interested in coexistence, they're not interested in making
Speaker 1: anything better for people. And so you know this is
Speaker 1: just these rallies are dealing with it. This will end
Speaker 1: soon and then it'll be up to the Palestinian people
Speaker 1: to try to create a better future. That's really what
Speaker 1: you know, We're not going to do it. As my
Speaker 1: point of what Bernie Sanders says, that America is not
Speaker 1: fixing this. The show ain't over yet, folks. It's time
Speaker 1: for roll call. First, check it in on our buddy
Speaker 1: producer Mark. How are you? How is your weekend? How's
Speaker 1: everything going? How's missus? Mark? Everything's going well. I'd say
Speaker 1: we're about to nine five percent unpacking, you know, just
Speaker 1: the last bit. It's stuff toothbrushes and the like. Well,
Speaker 1: we have blood right did you did you? Did you? Close? No?
Speaker 1: And is this taking forever? So you're all packed? Basically,
Speaker 1: we're all moving. We know we're removing. We just have
Speaker 1: to you know, close sign the papers, move in all
Speaker 1: that stuff. Okay, okay, all right, well let us let
Speaker 1: us know how it goes. He watched anything new and
Speaker 1: fun this weekend? Oh yeah, the NHL playoffs started this weekend.
Speaker 1: That was fun. Who who is? Who are the top contenders?
Speaker 1: There's I mean, every team's a contender in the NHL.
Speaker 1: It's not like some other sports where you know who's
Speaker 1: gonna win the beginning of the year. The NHL, you
Speaker 1: have no clue. It's a I'd say the Avalanche, the
Speaker 1: Colorado Avalanche, or my pick. I'll tell you I'd never
Speaker 1: heard of that team before real, So that's a new
Speaker 1: thing I learned today. You didn't even know there was
Speaker 1: a team in Colorado, did you? Yeah? I did one
Speaker 1: of our biggest market. I'm sure I know our wonderful
Speaker 1: Enver audience listens to they They probably think, Buck, how
Speaker 1: could you not know about the Colorado Avalanche? But the
Speaker 1: now I do? It is an avalanche of knowledge. Friends
Speaker 1: on the Buck Sexton Show every day. So sometimes the
Speaker 1: Avalanche hits me. Sometimes i'd push it to other people.
Speaker 1: So learning something new, all right, let's get to it.
Speaker 1: A guy named King Wait, is that really his name?
Speaker 1: That's the name he gave him roll Call. That's kind
Speaker 1: of an awesome name. Isn't it. Yeah, I would like
Speaker 1: to be named King. Sure, why not? That would be cool.
Speaker 1: I've never met anyone named King before. That's I mean,
Speaker 1: you gotta you gotta be bold if that's your name.
Speaker 1: But I'm getting the sense from a quick scan of
Speaker 1: this roll call producer Mark that our friend mister King
Speaker 1: is in fact quite bold. I think that's I think
Speaker 1: that's fair to say. As I was listening to today's show,
Speaker 1: I heard you devote quite a few minutes to discussing
Speaker 1: nudity before a roll call. The reason why I'm writing
Speaker 1: to you today is because I am a nudist and
Speaker 1: I listen to your show. It sounds to me like
Speaker 1: your neighbor was just enjoying life while being naked. Of course,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to endorse any criminal activity that he
Speaker 1: was doing, but it doesn't sound like he was involved
Speaker 1: in any just getting some sun. Nudist principles hold that
Speaker 1: there's nothing wrong with the nude human body, and so
Speaker 1: arbitrarily mandating that people covering the body is just as
Speaker 1: wrong as manding that people wear a mask to protect
Speaker 1: against the virus. Nudism is not about seeing people naked
Speaker 1: or being seen naked, but enjoying life while being nude.
Speaker 1: Even though you may have a stereotype of nudists in
Speaker 1: your head, nudists are all over the spectrum, including politically,
Speaker 1: and there are many nudist parks in Red States. They
Speaker 1: may even listen to your show already. There are many
Speaker 1: nudists who are supporters of MAGA. As nudists are all shape, sizes,
Speaker 1: and colors. There are at least six nude groups in
Speaker 1: New York. Florida has thirty three in addition to plenty
Speaker 1: of nude beaches that are available. If you went to
Speaker 1: one of the resorts in the US, you'd be surprised
Speaker 1: how many conservatives are there and how many people want
Speaker 1: to listen into your show. Your show can reach more
Speaker 1: nudists too. You have reached me, and I want to
Speaker 1: let you know that you did a good, great job
Speaker 1: discussing nudism today. You do a great job in general.
Speaker 1: I am in Florida and I am a MAGA nudist. Well,
Speaker 1: first of all, let me say King thank you for
Speaker 1: writing in with one of our favorite role calls we've
Speaker 1: had in quite some time. And I want to be
Speaker 1: very clear I was not passing any judgment on nudism
Speaker 1: or nudity or nudists. I just happened to catch a
Speaker 1: guy who was on his rooftop and it was a
Speaker 1: private section. So I don't believe it. I'm not. I
Speaker 1: never said he was breaking any laws or anything. And
Speaker 1: I could barely see him from where I was. I said,
Speaker 1: it might have. He might have been in a in
Speaker 1: a kind of beige mancini if you will. But at
Speaker 1: then he turned around and I said, oh, I think
Speaker 1: he's got it. And I look, it was sunny in
Speaker 1: New York and he's enjoying it. Yeah, I've got uh.
Speaker 1: I'm sure I have nude nudist Team Buck followers. We got.
Speaker 1: We got all kinds of Team Buck folks out there,
Speaker 1: and you know it, as long as they're in line
Speaker 1: with applicable local statutes. I mean, fine, you know you
Speaker 1: want to get out there, and you want to you
Speaker 1: want to go naked. Remember what wasn't Snapple's model for
Speaker 1: a while go naked? Yeah? Because I think they were
Speaker 1: organic and was saying no sugar or anything. Right, Well,
Speaker 1: they have a lot of sugar, but yeah, but they
Speaker 1: didn't have high food those corn syrupe or something, right.
Speaker 1: Do you remember that they'll go naked. Wasn't that U
Speaker 1: the slogan for staff Familiar? Yeah, I think that's what
Speaker 1: it was, or it might have been some other beverage company.
Speaker 1: That was one thing that in the nineties. I will say,
Speaker 1: I think Mark and I talked to this before, but
Speaker 1: there was an acceptance of drinking like sixty grams of
Speaker 1: sugar in a twelve ounce beverage or something that's was
Speaker 1: just terrible. You know, Sugary drinks really overtook the world.
Speaker 1: I feel like in the eighties and the nineties, and
Speaker 1: then people started realize is not is not good, it
Speaker 1: is not a good thing for you. So Snapple is
Speaker 1: a very New York thing though, I know. Yeah, so
Speaker 1: other people outside of the outside of New York will
Speaker 1: be might be like, what is a Snapple? Oh you
Speaker 1: mean it's you mean it's not known in other parts
Speaker 1: that come Like I used to live in Florida when
Speaker 1: I was a child, and there was no such thing,
Speaker 1: or it was harder to find. Like you know how
Speaker 1: in every supermarket every seven to eleven there's a whole
Speaker 1: snapple section. Maybe there's like a row what is the
Speaker 1: weird what is the weird soda that you would bring
Speaker 1: back into common into common usage if you could weird soda, yeah,
Speaker 1: like like like you know random soda. I mean, you
Speaker 1: know what tab doctor pepper, you know these things. I
Speaker 1: would say. My favorite that isn't commonly which I would
Speaker 1: never commonly drink it because it's full of sugar and
Speaker 1: it's not commonly produced anymore. Is mountain dew. Code read.
Speaker 1: I knew you were going to see mountain dew. I
Speaker 1: do it. The code red one is the cherry mountain dew,
Speaker 1: which is delicious, terrible for you. You could taste the sugar,
Speaker 1: but it's delicious. I've never had or even seen this,
Speaker 1: so it's basically mountain dew, but red. I mean you're
Speaker 1: ordering like a you know, like a like a creamsicle,
Speaker 1: shasta or something here, like I've never even I've never
Speaker 1: even heard of this mountain dew though I went through
Speaker 1: a phase or dank little mountain dew. You know what.
Speaker 1: Actually I used to go to a summer camp for
Speaker 1: years and years and years when I was a kid,
Speaker 1: and we would, believe it or not, we would go.
Speaker 1: They would get like the cheapest tickets possible. We would
Speaker 1: be in the absolute top row and they'd send, you know,
Speaker 1: thirty or forty campers at a time to like a
Speaker 1: Mets game. So I went to a few Mets games
Speaker 1: growing up, and I remember drinking r C cola and
Speaker 1: it was like a hot day and and you know,
Speaker 1: I just remember thinking r C cola was the best
Speaker 1: stuff ever. Do you remember this. I don't remember the
Speaker 1: Mets having arc cola. I remember them being pepsi for
Speaker 1: the longest time. Oh yeah, no, So I'm considerably older
Speaker 1: than you, and that you could get RC cola, which
Speaker 1: I don't even know if that exists anymore. But I
Speaker 1: also think it's funny. Do you realize that other people
Speaker 1: and we're about to, we're about to, you know, get
Speaker 1: into a big fight here with a big chunk of
Speaker 1: our audience. But you realize that in a lot of
Speaker 1: the rest of the country they call it pop. What
Speaker 1: is this? What is this pop of which they speak
Speaker 1: or a grinder is a sub in other parts of
Speaker 1: the country. I mean, I've I've actually I guess I
Speaker 1: have heard that, but I didn't. But I mean, if
Speaker 1: you go to I'm pretty sure if you go to
Speaker 1: you know, Georgia or Ohio, and they call it pop
Speaker 1: and just soda They probably make fun of us Northeasterners
Speaker 1: though for going soda. Yeah, I'm gonna drink some soda.
Speaker 1: It's a little weird when you say it out loud
Speaker 1: enough times. But to call it pop is my dad.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't think you call soda pop,
Speaker 1: but then I guess. I guess they're soda pop. So
Speaker 1: how you if you come to New York and visit,
Speaker 1: don't order a pop. I think that'd be my advice. Yes,
Speaker 1: that's I don't know what you're gonna get. You never
Speaker 1: know what you're to get depending on what part of
Speaker 1: New York City you're in. That's true too. All right,
Speaker 1: we'll continue on with rocal anyway. For my maga nudists
Speaker 1: out there, I just want to say honor to have
Speaker 1: you in the Freedom Hut. And when you listen to
Speaker 1: this show, if you want to listen buck naked, go
Speaker 1: for it. Don't don't think that that's ever a problem
Speaker 1: because this is audio, baby, So you do whatever you want.
Speaker 1: I have a question for the COVID about COVID and
Speaker 1: the nudists. What's that? Did the nudist resorts make people
Speaker 1: wear masks? So was there like a sign genitals? Okay, required,
Speaker 1: It's almost like it's almost if you're a nudist and
Speaker 1: you had to wear a mask, it would be almost
Speaker 1: it would kind of look like you had put your
Speaker 1: thong in the wrong place, you know what I mean exactly.
Speaker 1: I'm just curious if that was enforced at resorts where
Speaker 1: you're allowed to be nude. Hmm. That's an interesting one,
Speaker 1: as I don't know. That's what we call a thinker, producer, Mark,
Speaker 1: that's a that's a stumper thinker. All right, Uh, Scott,
Speaker 1: great hour on masksteria bucking Mark. But Biden is president?
Speaker 1: Should we expect those suffering from mass PTSD to be
Speaker 1: eligible for Social Security disability checks? Scott, I know what
Speaker 1: you're saying here, and I've got to tell you the
Speaker 1: answer is no. But I know you're not really asking.
Speaker 1: It's rhetorical, and I'll just say this mask PTSD, it
Speaker 1: is a very real thing, and I'm just so excited
Speaker 1: that I think it looks like where are we in
Speaker 1: New York on masks? Mark? As of Wednesday? They're saying,
Speaker 1: do we know exactly am I gonna be able to
Speaker 1: walk out of my building let a mask on on Wednesday? Yes?
Speaker 1: I believe so according to Governor Cuomo, as Wednesday, everything
Speaker 1: gone other than public transportation, hospitals and schools. Okay, all right,
Speaker 1: that's yeah, all right, Eric, here we go right it
Speaker 1: up next year. I wish more people would take time
Speaker 1: to learn about the fall of the Roman Republic. I
Speaker 1: recently listen to Dan Carlin's hardcore history on the subject.
Speaker 1: I like him as a historian, his analysis of current
Speaker 1: events Blaze, betrays his leftist slant. Sadly, there are many
Speaker 1: parallels to our current state of affairs. Some corrupt courts,
Speaker 1: elections being bought, mobs used for politically motivated violence, collusion
Speaker 1: among politicians to consolidate their power to use against the people,
Speaker 1: a generation of young people who disdain their history and
Speaker 1: their elders, unsustainable economic policies, the squashing of political adversaries,
Speaker 1: and so on. And here we are repeating the same
Speaker 1: mistakes that were made twenty one hundred years ago. I
Speaker 1: can tell you I read a pretty good book on
Speaker 1: this years ago, called How Rome Fell by Adrian Goldsworthy,
Speaker 1: who's clearly a leftist. But it's a good enough book,
Speaker 1: enough history in it that I think it's worth it. Anyway.
Speaker 1: Not a lot of you can find plenty of conservative
Speaker 1: And it's so weird, isn't it that historians even have
Speaker 1: to be thought of in this way? But it's true.
Speaker 1: You could find plenty of good World War two historians
Speaker 1: who are conservative in their outlook, and and also you
Speaker 1: can find a fair number of conservative history historians of
Speaker 1: the American Revolutionary period. But beyond that, you know, you
Speaker 1: get a lot of leftists, a lot of leftists historians
Speaker 1: was telling you the truth. That's where it is. So
Speaker 1: as for Dan Carlin's Hardware History, one or two of
Speaker 1: them I thought were pretty good. It's a little long,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't know. I'm not as you know,
Speaker 1: I like doing I like history. I see, I was
Speaker 1: as a history podcast before Dan Carlin came along. So
Speaker 1: I listened to some of the enthusiast history podcasts from
Speaker 1: way back in the day early on it podcasting. Carlin, though,
Speaker 1: I appreciate that he popularized history as a as a
Speaker 1: and yes, I know, Siege of Malta, let's not talk
Speaker 1: about it. I got it. I got a migraine over
Speaker 1: the weekend. Otherwise I was gonna do it. It's gonna happen.
Speaker 1: But Carlin, you know, some of the stuff is really good.
Speaker 1: Some of the stuff I haven't liked as much, let's
Speaker 1: be honest with you. But you know that's my opinion, man.
Speaker 1: And he's been very successful, and I like overall that
Speaker 1: someone's do history stuff and some of it has been
Speaker 1: really good. Aaron, Hey, Buck, want to get your thoughts
Speaker 1: on the colonial pipeline ransomware attack. How can the US
Speaker 1: government not hold the Russian government accountable for harboring cyber terrorists?
Speaker 1: Is this similar to Taliban harboring al Qaida in Afghanistan?
Speaker 1: Obviously not the same devastation, but still an impact on
Speaker 1: our home front. What's the best way to respond? I
Speaker 1: appreciate your insights, Aaron, you ask a very good question.
Speaker 1: You ask a very good question. I don't know what
Speaker 1: the answer is to it, and that there's no clear,
Speaker 1: straightforward response that one could offer. I don't think that
Speaker 1: it's fair to say that Russia and this hacker group
Speaker 1: is inherently like the Taliban and Alqaeda, because the Taliban
Speaker 1: were a symbiotic organism with al Qaeda. Al Qaeda was
Speaker 1: funding and working directly hand in glove with the Taliban
Speaker 1: at the time of nine to eleven, And you know,
Speaker 1: we don't know if the hacker collective or whatever is
Speaker 1: working at the behest of the Russian government or just
Speaker 1: Russia turns a the Russian government turns a blind eye
Speaker 1: to it. But then the I think the even more
Speaker 1: complicated part of the question. What you're asking is what
Speaker 1: is proportional response? And really what you start to get
Speaker 1: to is to have a proportional response, what you'd have
Speaker 1: to do is start holding governments responsible, and therefore we
Speaker 1: shut down, you know, the power grade or something in
Speaker 1: a part of Russia. And now you start to get
Speaker 1: what does escalation of that look like? And also does
Speaker 1: the American government You know, we don't we won't actively
Speaker 1: punish civilians through military strikes on purpose, right, we won't.
Speaker 1: We don't do that, but or at least you know,
Speaker 1: we don't intend to do that. If you start shutting
Speaker 1: down through cyber attacks critical infrastructure and foreign countries, even
Speaker 1: in a reprisal, aren't you punishing civilians for the actions
Speaker 1: of their government. There's there's very interesting philosophical questions this raises,
Speaker 1: and I don't think anyone's really worked out the answers yet, Aaron,
Speaker 1: so good question that we'll continue to think about here
Speaker 1: all right. Continuing on with roll Call here, Marcial writes
Speaker 1: in Buck, please tell producer Mark to not insult seven
Speaker 1: time All Star Dom DiMaggio, member of the Red Sox
Speaker 1: Hall of Fame who would have had a shot at
Speaker 1: Cooperstown if he hadn't served in the Navy for three
Speaker 1: years during World War Two. Sure he was no Joe,
Speaker 1: but he was much better than the oldest brother, Vince,
Speaker 1: who only made two All Star teams. Marcial dropping baseball
Speaker 1: bombs on producer Mark's doorstep. Producer Mark, how doth you respond?
Speaker 1: I have one question for you, Buck. First, do you
Speaker 1: know what Cooperstown means? I know where the Baseball Hall
Speaker 1: of Fame is? Wise? Guys? Sure? And I mean, yes,
Speaker 1: I understand. Dom DiMaggio was a human being. He was
Speaker 1: a baseball player, but he wasn't Joe DiMaggio. That was
Speaker 1: what I was saying to you the other day. I mean,
Speaker 1: seven time All Star though, Producer Mark, But he's still
Speaker 1: not the Demaggio you think of when you say the
Speaker 1: name DiMaggio. But I mean, is this kind of like saying, well,
Speaker 1: Scottie Pippen is not a great player because he's not
Speaker 1: Michael Jordan. It's like Scottie Pippen might be the best
Speaker 1: two men of all time ever in the NBA. If
Speaker 1: it was Michael Jordan and Scottie Jordan, which Jordan would
Speaker 1: you think of? M that's my point. I see your point. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: Andrea High, Team CNN seems to be back pedaling with
Speaker 1: their frenzied covid LINGO. It's no coincidence when you note
Speaker 1: the dive in their viewership. News is a business and
Speaker 1: they're trying to recapture their customers the sheep shields high. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Andre at CNN, you know CNN is a bad place
Speaker 1: with bad people. So other than just to tell you
Speaker 1: the absolute truth about CNN, bad place, bad people, and
Speaker 1: it's a shame. But that's that's where it is. So
Speaker 1: I wish I could tell you something else was going
Speaker 1: on there, but it is not. And team That's didn't
Speaker 1: be it for today, although I got one here. Hey Buck,
Speaker 1: I love your show, your particular sense of humor. It's refreshing.
Speaker 1: Just heard the comment about subar us and how the
Speaker 1: average Blue state voter may have one. I love my
Speaker 1: subar Ru and I'm extremely conservative. It's a sturdy vehicle
Speaker 1: with high mileage but I stupidly wrecked it. I'll buy
Speaker 1: another one, take care, and she'll tie. Jeah. Thank you
Speaker 1: for writing again. I know not all to Team Bucks
Speaker 1: Subaru we love you. I know not all subar Us
Speaker 1: are owned by leftists. Just mostly. That's it for today's show.
Speaker 1: Everybody back tomorrow she'll tie