Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunt. Ran says, we will
Speaker 1: pay for the strike on Kasum Solomani. Meanwhile, the media
Speaker 1: is weeping many tears over the death of this terrorist.
Speaker 1: We'll also talk about the ways that Democrats are trying
Speaker 1: to constrain President Trump's power as commander in chief. That
Speaker 1: and more coming up on the Buck Sexon Show. This
Speaker 1: is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission
Speaker 1: is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Make
Speaker 1: no mistake American, Great, Great American Again the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show begins. No, you don't see anyone standing up for
Speaker 1: I Ran. You're not hearing any of the golf members.
Speaker 1: You're not hearing China, You're not hearing Russia. The only
Speaker 1: ones that are mourning the loss of Solomoney or our
Speaker 1: Democrat leaderships and our Democrat presidential candidates, no one else
Speaker 1: in the world, because they knew that this man had
Speaker 1: evil veins, they knew what he was capable of, and
Speaker 1: they saw the destruction and the lives lost base from
Speaker 1: his hands. Nikki Haley is totally spot on here. Welcome
Speaker 1: to Buck Saxon Show. Everybody. I am somewhat a gas
Speaker 1: I mean I always expect it from these democrats, so
Speaker 1: I can't say that it's a surprise. But just because
Speaker 1: you know it's coming from these leftist socialist loons, it
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that it's any less jarring when you have
Speaker 1: to see it. They're trying to find all these ways
Speaker 1: to do a couple of things here, I mean, and
Speaker 1: I want to walk you through the propaganda mill, and
Speaker 1: I want to show you the machinery of what it
Speaker 1: is that they're trying to accomplish with all this as
Speaker 1: much as I can today. And one of the things
Speaker 1: they're doing is making it seem as though the Iranian
Speaker 1: people are all absolutely horrified at this united against the regime,
Speaker 1: and that this was the killing of The killing of
Speaker 1: Costam Solomani was like we killed Abraham Lincoln, George Washington,
Speaker 1: and Elvis Presley all at the same time. That's how
Speaker 1: much they love this guy. That's how much the Iranian
Speaker 1: people love Kastam Solimani. Do any of them stop to
Speaker 1: think for a moment about what just happened in Iran
Speaker 1: In the last six weeks or so, the Iranian regime
Speaker 1: killed hundreds, perhaps a few thousand, murdered protesters in the
Speaker 1: streets and for all the protesters murdered in the streets,
Speaker 1: who are overwhelming the young people who hate this corrupt
Speaker 1: sclow adic regime. For all of those people, there are
Speaker 1: also those who are being extra judicially, which is kind
Speaker 1: of in Iran. I mean, it's all extraally. It might
Speaker 1: as well be extra judicial everything. But who are being
Speaker 1: covertly taken from their families, homes and perhaps in the
Speaker 1: middle of the night, tortured and maybe never seen again.
Speaker 1: Because there are opponents of the regime that is happening
Speaker 1: in Iran, you see, because the media was so desperate
Speaker 1: to prop up the Obama administration's decision disastrous decision on Iran,
Speaker 1: and because the media hates Trump so much, they are
Speaker 1: willing to elevate the Iranian regime far out of the
Speaker 1: axis of evil. Remember we used to call it a
Speaker 1: member of that Iraq, Iran, North Korea. Only two left
Speaker 1: in that axis, at least as they used to be constituted.
Speaker 1: And it's worth sitting here and asking the question, well,
Speaker 1: hold on a second, hold on a minute, would it
Speaker 1: be normal in the eyes of the Democrats if let's
Speaker 1: just say, hostilities became active with North Korea in some
Speaker 1: third Party countries not in South Korea. And let's say
Speaker 1: there's there's some North Korean backed insurgency in some country,
Speaker 1: and a North Korean general was involved in the murder
Speaker 1: of American soldiers trying to engage in peacekeeping operations stability
Speaker 1: operations in that country, and that North Korean general was
Speaker 1: then actively plotting another round of murder of American soldiers
Speaker 1: in this country that North Korea is operating in, and
Speaker 1: we took him out, would they then be saying, oh
Speaker 1: my gosh, But the people of North Korea, they're all
Speaker 1: weeping and staring into the cameras and crying. They're so
Speaker 1: upset about this. It is so hard now for me
Speaker 1: to separate out how much of what we are seeing
Speaker 1: from our own media. This is their job, supposed to
Speaker 1: be their calling, to bring us the truth, tell us
Speaker 1: what's really happening in these places, that's what they're supposed
Speaker 1: to do instead. I don't know if they are just
Speaker 1: wildly dishonest hacks, if they're primarily driven by that, they're
Speaker 1: propagandists entirely the Democrats they know what they're doing, or
Speaker 1: and I don't know if this is more upsetting or
Speaker 1: more concerning if they're deeply, deeply stupid people. It could
Speaker 1: be either one, it could be both. It's most likely
Speaker 1: a combination thereof for exhibit A today, and there could
Speaker 1: be so many. I bring you Michael McFall now, those
Speaker 1: of you who follow me on Twitter, no that I
Speaker 1: don't hold back on Twitter, but I also I try
Speaker 1: never to be personal about things that aren't an issue
Speaker 1: of public concern, right. I never I don't make fun
Speaker 1: of anyone, you know, I never make fun of anyone's appearance.
Speaker 1: I don't. I don't make jokes about you know, their
Speaker 1: family members or anything. I mean, I I keep it
Speaker 1: as on the subject matter as I can, and I
Speaker 1: try not to ever act like a jerk on Twitter,
Speaker 1: even though it's a great way to get attention. A
Speaker 1: lot of conservatives actually do that. Michael McFall is someone
Speaker 1: who is celebrated and still giving a tremendous amount of
Speaker 1: credibility on the left. Oh, Rachel Matta will have him
Speaker 1: on to talk Russia, Russia, Russia, you know, all these
Speaker 1: different people, and he was really the architect of Obama's
Speaker 1: Russia policy for a few years and is known as
Speaker 1: a as a you know, a critic of Putin and
Speaker 1: guys like Stanford, Stanford, Stanford, Oxford, Stanford. You know, a
Speaker 1: stack of fancy degrees. I couldn't even fit them on
Speaker 1: top of this desk. And also at some point I
Speaker 1: have to wonder, you know, these people that spend so
Speaker 1: much time in academia, how many years, how many years
Speaker 1: just studying and not doing do you have to do?
Speaker 1: You're not You're not a neurosurgeon here, you know. Maybe anyway,
Speaker 1: you know, lots and lots of books and PhD research
Speaker 1: and books and okay, and that can be great, maybe
Speaker 1: because the ideas that you're supposed to achieve all that wisdom,
Speaker 1: this is what our elites in the academia and journalism, journalism,
Speaker 1: of course, I mean, come on, no one thinks journalists
Speaker 1: are smart, but they like you to think that if
Speaker 1: they have a certain kind of resume. Even though forget
Speaker 1: about the fact that Trump went to Wharton, arguably the
Speaker 1: best business school in the world, certainly the top three.
Speaker 1: That George Bush went to Harvard Business School, arguably the best.
Speaker 1: You know, those guys don't count. But the degrees and
Speaker 1: the and the fancy titles that liberals have, you're supposed
Speaker 1: to show deference. Ben Venee. Okay, McFall tweeted out last night,
Speaker 1: and this just this just ticked me off. This is
Speaker 1: the former and US ambassador to Russia who is treated
Speaker 1: as a real foreign policy wise elder on the left. Okay,
Speaker 1: he's treated as somebody who's this is he is the
Speaker 1: diplomatic establishment, if you will, He tweeted out, I do
Speaker 1: not support many of Trump's policies, but if Iran killed
Speaker 1: General Millie or Vice President Pence and then threatened to
Speaker 1: destroy the Statue of Liberty or the Lincoln Memorial, I
Speaker 1: would march passionately with Trump's supporters to denounce the Islamic
Speaker 1: Republic of Iran. There's so much stupid in here that
Speaker 1: I could spend the entire hour trying to just unpack
Speaker 1: it is he he can't be serious. Vice President Pence
Speaker 1: is Vice President Pence a uniformed military operating in a
Speaker 1: theater of hostilities, designated as a terrorist, involved in covert
Speaker 1: arming and training of globally designated terrorist organizations, and then
Speaker 1: directing personally the maiming and murdering of US servicemen that
Speaker 1: he is not at war with. By the way, Iran
Speaker 1: has not declared war on United States, has been waging
Speaker 1: war against US for decades now, it's just been a
Speaker 1: one way war. You see, here's the genius of Trump.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna I'm gonna just put this out there for everybody.
Speaker 1: Trump doesn't like one way wars. He doesn't like the
Speaker 1: one way trade war with China. He's like, I think
Speaker 1: enough of this. I think we've suffered enough. I think
Speaker 1: we as the good guys just allowing them to get
Speaker 1: away with all this. We've had enough of that. So
Speaker 1: he does something about it. And Trump comes in without
Speaker 1: all the stack of fancy Stanford International Relations degrees and says,
Speaker 1: hold on a second. We've been doing what we've been
Speaker 1: doing in Iran for decades, really sanctions, angry diplomacy, sanctions,
Speaker 1: but we always are a little hands off. Oh we don't.
Speaker 1: We don't want to, We don't want to provoke the Iranians. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: the Iranians are provoking us day in and day out.
Speaker 1: Finger in the eye. What are you gonna do about it, America?
Speaker 1: And let's be serious, what have we really done about it? Well,
Speaker 1: under the Obama administration, as though we were like an
Speaker 1: Uber eats delivery service for cash, we showed up and
Speaker 1: said here's here's billions and billions of dollars. And you
Speaker 1: could keep your nuclear program, but we need to be
Speaker 1: able to see what you got so far. You don't
Speaker 1: have to dismantle. Let destroy it and prove that you
Speaker 1: keep it the way it is, and then we'll let
Speaker 1: you get rich, keep your terrorism going, keep your conventional
Speaker 1: ballistic missile program going, do whatever you gotta do on
Speaker 1: that stuff. Okay, fine, one way war with China on trade.
Speaker 1: Trump says, no one way war with Iran throughout the
Speaker 1: Middle East. Trump says, I don't think so. But instead
Speaker 1: we have people like or on the other hand, we
Speaker 1: have people like Michael McFall who are telling us that
Speaker 1: you know, he's effectively taking the Iranian side of this argument.
Speaker 1: This is, my friends, this is crazy. I mean, how
Speaker 1: far removed is this really from saying, well, killing Abu
Speaker 1: Bakhar al Baghdati, that's really going to destabilize the region,
Speaker 1: because at least then there was somebody that the Syrians
Speaker 1: and the Turks could talk to as the leader of ISIS.
Speaker 1: And I mean, okay, you could say, buck, the Democrats
Speaker 1: wouldn't do that. Really, really you're sure about that? I mean,
Speaker 1: how far removed is this. Kasam Solamani is different in
Speaker 1: that he is a known and named and uniformed service
Speaker 1: member of a military that is part of the access
Speaker 1: of evil and a the biggest state sponsor of terror
Speaker 1: in the world. So that gives him a cloak of invincibility.
Speaker 1: We're not. We're not, well, obviously not, but we were
Speaker 1: supposed to accept that. I've got to tell you, there
Speaker 1: are there are a few times when I just become
Speaker 1: I just have to wonder how these people can look
Speaker 1: in the mirror sometimes. You know, you have journalists from
Speaker 1: the most the most storied. I mean, these these pampered, overpaid,
Speaker 1: pompous journalists at you know, CNN and ABC in these places,
Speaker 1: and they're all look at the size of the of
Speaker 1: the processions in the morning, and the oh my, the
Speaker 1: Iranian people are also, how many of you have seen,
Speaker 1: for example, reports from those same I mean, Martha Raddats
Speaker 1: was over there. I was saying, you know, look at
Speaker 1: the size of these protests. The Iranian people are all
Speaker 1: united against us. Now, really, if you're Iranian, and you
Speaker 1: know because you're one of you're part of that youth
Speaker 1: bulge that I talked to you about yesterday. Because of
Speaker 1: all the people that died because of the war that
Speaker 1: did not need to be fought between Iraq and Iran,
Speaker 1: the vicious stupidity of the Mulas in that war. Okay,
Speaker 1: But if you happen to be a person who is
Speaker 1: just mourning the loss of a family member, if you
Speaker 1: happen to be a person who lost your father, your brother,
Speaker 1: your sister, your mother in these protests, are you now
Speaker 1: all of a sudden switching things around saying whoa hold
Speaker 1: on a second, Yes, the regime is a totalitarian theocracy,
Speaker 1: but they killed customs, sole money, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln,
Speaker 1: and Elvis compared to compiled into one. I don't think so.
Speaker 1: No critical questions being asked by the press here, no
Speaker 1: honest attempt to get to hold on a moment. Are
Speaker 1: Iranian school children being told that they have to show
Speaker 1: up in protest? They're emptying out the school's kind of
Speaker 1: like what democrats do here, of course, you know, climate change,
Speaker 1: emptying out the school sending people on the streets, grabbing
Speaker 1: people on the street, come join the protest or else.
Speaker 1: Here's what you have to see from the reality of
Speaker 1: the way our own press is treating this issue. They
Speaker 1: are credulously covering Iranian state propaganda, which is what this is.
Speaker 1: Protests that are done under threat of force are not
Speaker 1: an expression of the will of the people. But they're
Speaker 1: credulously covering this. Oh, we're just showing you man. We're
Speaker 1: not you know, we're just showing you the facts here
Speaker 1: and are in fact, willfully complicit in the propaganda of
Speaker 1: a terrorist regime. This is our own press. They get
Speaker 1: so huffy when Trump says that they are the enemies
Speaker 1: of the people. I've been calling them the enemies of
Speaker 1: truth for a long time because they are. How could
Speaker 1: they How could they justify this? How can they not
Speaker 1: start every report with these are very large protests. We
Speaker 1: do have substantial reporting, firsthand reporting from people who are
Speaker 1: telling us that these much of these protests are forced.
Speaker 1: And then even beyond that, for a second, why are
Speaker 1: we supposed what exactly are they trying to achieve with this?
Speaker 1: Why should we care how large the size of the protests? Sir,
Speaker 1: I got news for you. If we took out Kim
Speaker 1: Jong un tomorrow, and you have to make this North Korea,
Speaker 1: by the way, North Korea run buddy, buddy, work together
Speaker 1: on a whole lot of stuff. If if Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un was taken out tomorrow, do you think that there
Speaker 1: would be journalists all all upset covering and look at
Speaker 1: the protests, Look at the people in this country. They're
Speaker 1: so upset about the laws of Kim. And by the way,
Speaker 1: there would be a lot of people who are upset
Speaker 1: about it because they've been brainwashed. You have to ask
Speaker 1: the question, whose side are these liberal, multi millionaire empty
Speaker 1: suits in our media. Whose side are they on? What
Speaker 1: exactly are they trying to convey with all of this.
Speaker 1: We don't need them to stand there, you know, faces,
Speaker 1: you know, ashen faced, all sad. Oh my gosh, look
Speaker 1: at these protests. What's going to happen to now? They're
Speaker 1: chanting death to America. Guess what Eugenius is. They've been
Speaker 1: chanting death to America since before I was born, literally,
Speaker 1: but not now. We're all supposed to be so scared
Speaker 1: about this. Now we're all supposed to worry. Here's what
Speaker 1: I'm scared about. What we see here is yet another
Speaker 1: instance of our own press putting their anti Trump ferocity
Speaker 1: ahead of the honest presentation of facts in their job,
Speaker 1: and also doing things in such a way that you
Speaker 1: do have to wonder. You do have to sort of
Speaker 1: question some of their ideological loyalty. Do they think that
Speaker 1: it is an Iranian general, is someone who works for
Speaker 1: the Iranian regime in military uniform, engage in the activities
Speaker 1: that Constam Solimani was really similar to General Millie is
Speaker 1: really similar to our Chamber of the Joint Chiefs of
Speaker 1: Staff or all these ridiculous comparisons you're hearing all the time.
Speaker 1: So we're no better than the Iranians? Is that really
Speaker 1: what the journalists were? No better than the Iranian regime?
Speaker 1: That's what they think. You have to wonder. The answer
Speaker 1: is yes, but it's particularly yes to the journals because
Speaker 1: Trump is our president and so therefore this Trump regime
Speaker 1: is every bit as terrifying and scary, and really more
Speaker 1: so to them than anything the Mullus could ever. Do
Speaker 1: we need a new media, folks, We need to tear
Speaker 1: down their journalistic establishment as it exists right now and
Speaker 1: build something new. If it wasn't clear before, it's certainly
Speaker 1: clear now. But I think it's been clear for a
Speaker 1: long time. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sex and Show podcast. In just about every foreign
Speaker 1: policy area of President Trump touches. We're worse so often
Speaker 1: we were before he started with it. Looking at the
Speaker 1: president's chaotic and rudderless foreign policy in hotspots around the globe,
Speaker 1: it's hard to conclude that any of the situations are
Speaker 1: better off than when the president took office three years ago.
Speaker 1: His policy seemed to be characterized by erratic, impulsive, and
Speaker 1: often egotistical behavior with little regard to a long term
Speaker 1: strategy that would advance the interests of the United States.
Speaker 1: It's Chuck Schumer talking about the Obama administration there, because
Speaker 1: he should be. Let's get in the specifics here of
Speaker 1: what Trump has done on the world stage so far.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts. All Right, I can't just let
Speaker 1: this go. Democrats are out there pretending that Trump is
Speaker 1: so bad on foreign policy. I notice how finn they
Speaker 1: are on any supporting details. This should be easy to do.
Speaker 1: I mean, if I were to point to, for example,
Speaker 1: the Obama administration started twenty I'm sorry, started two thousand
Speaker 1: and eight and end in twenty sixteen, and show them
Speaker 1: it point to a country in the world that matters
Speaker 1: to our geopolitical standing, international relations, trade, national security. You
Speaker 1: name it, Point to an important country, not some like
Speaker 1: you know, little country no one cares about. I'm sure
Speaker 1: you know Obama's you know, diplomat did great work in
Speaker 1: the in Micronesia or something. Who cares, but an important country.
Speaker 1: By the Micronesia was in fact part of the Coalition
Speaker 1: of the Willing back in the day. I'll never forget that.
Speaker 1: It was not the Bush administration's finest moment. I think
Speaker 1: they sent one guy, actually one guy. But the Obama administration,
Speaker 1: whether it was Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Russia, China
Speaker 1: worse in every singlecase, every single instance, we were And
Speaker 1: now you have to also look at it based on
Speaker 1: our position visa v. Those countries. I'm not just saying
Speaker 1: that the country was worse. I don't know, I care
Speaker 1: about our interests. It was worse. But Chuck Schumer, you're
Speaker 1: saying that everything Trump does on foreign policy is wrong.
Speaker 1: Really has he been wrong on China? Because our economy
Speaker 1: is booming in China has had the worst economy it's
Speaker 1: had in thirty years. I mean, it hasn't yet gotten
Speaker 1: the grand bargain that Trump was hoping for on trade.
Speaker 1: But they have gotten the beginnings of a phase one
Speaker 1: trade deal, it seems, and at least they're doing something.
Speaker 1: We're not just suffering in silence. One way trade war,
Speaker 1: Trump says, no, no, now it's going to be a
Speaker 1: two way trade war. And with the Iranians. People keep
Speaker 1: assuming because they want to believe this, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is the problem, because they want to believe everything Trump
Speaker 1: does is terrible. Seemingly intelligent people all of a sudden
Speaker 1: become utter morons because they insist their brain has been
Speaker 1: condition to think that. Because Trump, who yeah, is blustery,
Speaker 1: and you know it is a little loose with the
Speaker 1: words sometimes, I mean, yeah, I get it, But I
Speaker 1: look at what he does. I look at the essential
Speaker 1: characteristics of how he uses the power of his office,
Speaker 1: the decisions, the core decisions, the critical decisions he's been making.
Speaker 1: I keep saying, I mean, this guy's certainly the best
Speaker 1: president since Reagan, and he's making gains on Reagan's like
Speaker 1: I mean, Reagan did, let's not forget to defeat the
Speaker 1: evil empire of the Soviet Union. But I mean trade Trump,
Speaker 1: give him four more years we'll see. I mean the
Speaker 1: first I didn't even come into office thinking he was
Speaker 1: going to be as adept and have the kind of
Speaker 1: results that he's had so far. It's not perfect. The border,
Speaker 1: the wall, there are things that happened, But does anyone
Speaker 1: really think that perfect is going to be the way
Speaker 1: that we would judge this. But going back to Chuck
Speaker 1: Schumer's statement, I just find it. I find it stunning
Speaker 1: that they are so willing to make total fools of
Speaker 1: themselves here in their anti Trump zelotry. Oh wait, speaking
Speaker 1: of making a complete fool of oneself, Bernie Sanders on
Speaker 1: oh guess what on CNN, which is the worst and
Speaker 1: most dishonest of the propaganda networks, now on US Soil,
Speaker 1: CNN had on Anderson Cooper Show, the very serious show.
Speaker 1: You know that that's the real journalism. Stuff happened there.
Speaker 1: Here's what Bernie Sanders said about the Trump decision. This
Speaker 1: is this You gotta hear this one. This is amazing
Speaker 1: play forty four. But this guy is you know, was
Speaker 1: as bad as he was an official of the Iranian government,
Speaker 1: and you unleash then if China does that, you know,
Speaker 1: if Russia does that, you know, Russia has been implicated
Speaker 1: on the Putin with assassinating dissonance. So once you're in
Speaker 1: the business of the Sassa nation, you unleash some very
Speaker 1: very terrible forces. A couple of things here a truly
Speaker 1: idiotic comment from the number two guy in the polls
Speaker 1: for the Democrats. Right now, you're gonna make him commander
Speaker 1: in chief. What he says is absurd, he goes, He goes, Okay,
Speaker 1: So the guy was a uniformed Iranian so what so
Speaker 1: what does that mean that we could he show could
Speaker 1: he partake in an assassination plot on a US official
Speaker 1: in Iraq himself? But oh no, we can't touch him. Guys,
Speaker 1: uniformed Irani in general, where's the line? What? At what point?
Speaker 1: And this is what you have to ask you ask liberals.
Speaker 1: I mean, I know you guys already know this. At
Speaker 1: what point for the Libs would would cost him? Solimani
Speaker 1: be a legitimate target? Didn't him inside Iranian borders, not
Speaker 1: on his own soil, not in international territory, not at war,
Speaker 1: He's in a conflict zone, engage an active hostilities against
Speaker 1: the United States and its interests. Administration says there was
Speaker 1: an imminent threat to US personnel that he's directing. At
Speaker 1: what point are we allowed to hit this guy? Never?
Speaker 1: That's amazing? Do we do you think that we have that?
Speaker 1: Do they do the Iranians, as any country in the world,
Speaker 1: would they allow somebody to be effectively the CIA director
Speaker 1: and a four star general at the same time and
Speaker 1: show up in a war zone and be engaged in
Speaker 1: active hostilities against another country and they be like, whoa
Speaker 1: hold on? A second American uniformed American uniform soldier. The
Speaker 1: Iranian regime wanted to kill the Saudi ambassador in DC
Speaker 1: at a fancy Italian restaurant that I actually happen to
Speaker 1: like in Georgetown, but the always wears a uniform of
Speaker 1: the Iranian regime. I mean, I'm just wondering, you know,
Speaker 1: if if back in the day, you know, one of know,
Speaker 1: if if Himmler ran out of the bunker with Hitler
Speaker 1: we've been I'm like, oh, this guy, this guy's a
Speaker 1: major player in the Nazi regime. We can you know,
Speaker 1: can't hit him with a bomb. We should have tried
Speaker 1: to bomb, and we tried to take them out as
Speaker 1: fast as we could. So I'm just trying to establish
Speaker 1: what exactly are the lines supposed to be, And why
Speaker 1: doesn't the media seem curious at all about what's really
Speaker 1: happened here, what the reality of the threat is. They
Speaker 1: just assume that Trump and the administration's line. They've already
Speaker 1: been saying this all administration stories, not straight, all the
Speaker 1: administration stories. They have so much more willingness to show
Speaker 1: opposition to their own government and think that they're being
Speaker 1: tough and being strong and being honest. That's what the
Speaker 1: journos do here. Really, they're just pandering to the left
Speaker 1: wing Trump haters in this country, who are just a
Speaker 1: bunch of morons at this point. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: you can criticize Trump, but you can think that Trump
Speaker 1: does bad things, and he certainly is worthy of criticism
Speaker 1: in a lot of ways. But the people that have
Speaker 1: just embraced TDS Trump arrangement syndrome, can't even talk to
Speaker 1: them anymore. It's not even worth it everything Trump does.
Speaker 1: I had just I talked to a very you know,
Speaker 1: close friend and advisor recently. He said that he had
Speaker 1: lunch with a friend who was talking about how how
Speaker 1: terrible the Trump economy is, and you just want to
Speaker 1: want to throw your hands up in the air. And
Speaker 1: be like the biggest problem in the economy right now
Speaker 1: for anybody who understands anything in this country is is
Speaker 1: it sustainable? Can these good times last? By the way,
Speaker 1: It's probably not sustainable because of our dad. It's another conversation.
Speaker 1: But no serious person's walking around saying, oh, Trump economy
Speaker 1: is who? This is a tough one. Nobody thinks that. Okay,
Speaker 1: no honest person thinks that. A lot of Trump deranged
Speaker 1: loons do. And yet here we are. Bernie Sanders brings
Speaker 1: up on CNN's answer Cooper go, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: you know, Senator Sanders, that was really that was a
Speaker 1: little bit and and dig into this little more too.
Speaker 1: What does killing it? What does Russia killing dissidents have
Speaker 1: to do with this situation? Kasam Solimani is not a
Speaker 1: US citizen saying mean things about President Trump? How did
Speaker 1: he even make that comparison? Bernie Sanders isn't is a
Speaker 1: third tier intellect, my friends. This is what everyone needs
Speaker 1: to remember. This is not a very smart guy. He's
Speaker 1: been saying the same wrong, stupid stuff for over forty years.
Speaker 1: Never figured it out that never seemed to understand that
Speaker 1: the stuff he believes is bad and wrong. He's an
Speaker 1: old guy, not a lot of wisdom. But do you
Speaker 1: think if China and Russia thought that they had imminent
Speaker 1: danger to their own military or perhaps their own diplomats,
Speaker 1: or who knows what the target set was from a
Speaker 1: person who had orchestrated the killing of hundreds of their
Speaker 1: soldiers in a place where they weren't you think the
Speaker 1: Chinese the Russians would hesitate for a second to take
Speaker 1: that person out. The only way they might hesitate would
Speaker 1: be if it was a country that was considerably more
Speaker 1: powerful than them, and by the the only place where
Speaker 1: that would be the case would be US or each other,
Speaker 1: maybe China and Russia. They would they would do it
Speaker 1: in a second. You think they wouldn't take out in
Speaker 1: a running You think that Shiji and things like whoa,
Speaker 1: and they're going to kill a few hundred Chinese in
Speaker 1: a strike. But you know, cats, some soleimani wears a
Speaker 1: uniform so we can't hit him. He's absurd. But this
Speaker 1: is the this is what you're getting from the so
Speaker 1: called smarts that we're getting from the diplomats out there
Speaker 1: from the Obama administration. You know, there, Michael mcfasso that
Speaker 1: I blocked me because I said I called I didn't
Speaker 1: call him a name. I hear, what did I this
Speaker 1: just just to close the loop on this one, to
Speaker 1: use a DC phrase, um, I said to the guy.
Speaker 1: He so he said his thing about, you know, the
Speaker 1: dumb thing about how he doesn't support Trump but he
Speaker 1: would march with him if if the Iranians killed General
Speaker 1: I mean killed General Miller or Vice President Pence. I responded.
Speaker 1: The Obama administration pulled this guy out of the faculty
Speaker 1: lounge and made him the architect of Obama's failed Russia policy.
Speaker 1: That should be a reminder to all of us. No
Speaker 1: matter how many fancy degrees and government titles you have,
Speaker 1: it doesn't mean you know. You're asked from your elbow.
Speaker 1: I think that's totally fair. That's not name calling. The
Speaker 1: guy doesn't know one that body part from the other
Speaker 1: body part. I mean, I don't know what to say.
Speaker 1: I don't care how long, I don't care any book
Speaker 1: he's written, how many degrees you have, just just not
Speaker 1: that smart. I don't know what else to say. It's
Speaker 1: not possible to believe this, to make this comparison and
Speaker 1: be somebody who you should be deeply impressed by. It's
Speaker 1: just not feasible. It doesn't work that way. And so
Speaker 1: here we are. But of course they don't they don't believe.
Speaker 1: They don't believe what Trump has said. They don't believe it.
Speaker 1: I don't think that the commander in chief would even
Speaker 1: be honest with us about this one. And then they
Speaker 1: just continue to babble on about what they would do.
Speaker 1: You're in the Freedom hid this is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. Well, there's no question they're going to respond.
Speaker 1: There are lots of questions about how, But we have
Speaker 1: some questions to ask of our own president. Look, there
Speaker 1: is no question that Suleimany had American blood on his hands,
Speaker 1: that he was a bad actor in the region. But
Speaker 1: if there is anything that we have learned in the
Speaker 1: last twenty years about the Middle East, it's that taking
Speaker 1: out a bad guy is not necessarily a good idea.
Speaker 1: And what we've seen here is no evidence that there's
Speaker 1: been proper consultation with Congress, and more importantly and more dangerously,
Speaker 1: no evidence that they've really thought about the consequences. Right now,
Speaker 1: my mind is with the troops who are moving to
Speaker 1: the Middle East and having known what it's like to
Speaker 1: be in the inside of one of those airplanes. You
Speaker 1: need to be able to trust that everybody up your
Speaker 1: chain of command has fought through what's ahead, and we're
Speaker 1: just not seeing a lot of indications of that. Taking
Speaker 1: out a bad guy is not necessarily a good idea. Gee,
Speaker 1: I'm so glad we have Rhodes scholar mayor Pete here.
Speaker 1: By the way, McFall is also a rhodescholar. I keep
Speaker 1: telling Rhodes scholars are generally just people that are kiss
Speaker 1: ups and do whatever they gotta do to get the
Speaker 1: Rhodes give all. I know a lot of friends, a
Speaker 1: lot of people that are RhoD scholars who Bill Clinton
Speaker 1: was a Rhodes scholar, Rachel Matta was a Rhodes scholar.
Speaker 1: Oh man, it's a very politicized process. But that's a
Speaker 1: whole other thing. How could you even tell one school
Speaker 1: another school. Everyone's getting straight a's at all these schools
Speaker 1: because everyone gets as because once you get into these
Speaker 1: elite institutions, they just they just push you through with, oh,
Speaker 1: look at us smart. Everybody is from here. But if
Speaker 1: everybody's that smart, how smart is anybody really? Right? These
Speaker 1: places are a joke. At Yale, the little cry babies
Speaker 1: can't even hear ideas they don't like. They can't hand
Speaker 1: to watching Toddler's walk around in you know, a Pocahona's
Speaker 1: costume because it's so offensive and yeah, here we are,
Speaker 1: may or Pete doesn't have any solutions, doesn't have any answers,
Speaker 1: just knows that they can't think this is the right
Speaker 1: move because Trump did it. That's all that you have
Speaker 1: to know about it. The media can't take a critical
Speaker 1: view of the Iranian regimes forced demonstrations out in the streets,
Speaker 1: and also even if even if they weren't forced at all, Okay,
Speaker 1: the Iranians don't have a free press, the people don't
Speaker 1: have the right of assembly, don't have the right to organize.
Speaker 1: So is public sentiment and its totalitarianism is not something
Speaker 1: that I get particularly weepy about because the people are
Speaker 1: being brainwashed at the end of a bayonet. Does the
Speaker 1: media ever think about this, They ever take any time
Speaker 1: to consider the reality of and of course not too busy,
Speaker 1: you know, making sure that their hair looks perfect. They're
Speaker 1: gonna get invited to, you know, fancy party at Richard
Speaker 1: Branson's private island or whatever it's really it has been
Speaker 1: an amazing circumstance here to see what the But the
Speaker 1: good news for the Democrats is that as dumb as
Speaker 1: they look talking about this issue, which I think a
Speaker 1: part of this that gets lost is the need to
Speaker 1: re establish deterrence as a real thing that has come
Speaker 1: back into the four. Maybe that changes the calculation on
Speaker 1: the Iranian side. Maybe all of a sudden they'll realize, okay,
Speaker 1: we're not going to that that there's not immunity for
Speaker 1: actions against us through proxies. That's been the sort of
Speaker 1: the secret sauce of the Iranian anti US action for
Speaker 1: the last however many years now decades. If they if
Speaker 1: an Iranian military officer isn't the one who pulls the trigger,
Speaker 1: if he just gives the terrorists that he has trained
Speaker 1: and funded and directed to go kill somebody the gun,
Speaker 1: we're not gonna go. You know, I want to touch
Speaker 1: the Cama's with Iran. They're so scary. Iran is a
Speaker 1: little timpot dictatorship run by Mulla's with a tiny little economy.
Speaker 1: It's it's running out of foreign currency reserves. We could
Speaker 1: we could annihilate their infrastructure if we wanted to, and
Speaker 1: I'm not saying we should. But I mean, let's get
Speaker 1: real here, walking around, Oh what are we gonna do
Speaker 1: and blowing up a bunch of stuff in Iran if
Speaker 1: we have to do in retaliation for whatever they do
Speaker 1: to us, doesn't mean we're doesn't mean we're going to war.
Speaker 1: We're already in a state of war with the Iranians.
Speaker 1: You know. You know what keeps the Iranians from engaging
Speaker 1: in a mass casualty terror attack not any sense of
Speaker 1: morality or international law or anything else. The only thing
Speaker 1: that stops Iran from killing a lot of Americans and
Speaker 1: including American civilians anywhere in the world is the implied
Speaker 1: threat from the United States that we will crush them
Speaker 1: in response. That's the only thing they would if they
Speaker 1: thought they could do it and it was in their interests.
Speaker 1: They do it in a heartbeat. This is an evil regime.
Speaker 1: The people who run this country. They hang people from cranes,
Speaker 1: They murder gaze. Does the media forget all of this stuff?
Speaker 1: Oh no, they're going to compare Kasam Samani is you know,
Speaker 1: just like our own, Just like our own Chamber of
Speaker 1: the Joint Chiefs of Staff, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and
Speaker 1: Elvis all at Once and producer Mark's favorite baseball player,
Speaker 1: Jude 'maggio. I don't know whoever the most of all time?
Speaker 1: Is that right? Something like that? All all the same?
Speaker 1: Is he the greatest ever? Babe Ruth? Babe Ruth? Probably Okay, yeah,
Speaker 1: Babe Ruth, Elvis, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, all in one,
Speaker 1: Kassam Sulamani, How could we ever have touched this amazing person?
Speaker 1: That's the that's the premise you get from the media.
Speaker 1: He's just like one of ours, really, don't I don't
Speaker 1: think so. Of my friends, I don't think so. Um,
Speaker 1: and I have lost my patience for dealing with the
Speaker 1: dishonesty and the stupidity of those in the mainstream media. UM.
Speaker 1: I no longer just vehemently disagree with them. I think
Speaker 1: they are worthy of contempt and disrespect in many cases,
Speaker 1: and I don't say that lightly. That's where we are
Speaker 1: now on this Iran thing, just like it's where we
Speaker 1: were on the cabin all thing too. Thanks for listening
Speaker 1: to the Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember to subscribe on
Speaker 1: Apple podcast, the I heart rate app, befoor, wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. There's a really important cultural dynamic playing out.
Speaker 1: Political dynamic playing out as well across the country right
Speaker 1: now that you're not hearing very much about that, I
Speaker 1: want to spend some time talking to you about today,
Speaker 1: and it has to do with the polarization of states
Speaker 1: right where we increasingly now have states that are single
Speaker 1: party strongholds. We'll talk more about California later on in
Speaker 1: the show today, but there are these states out there
Speaker 1: where they've decided that they're just going to forget about
Speaker 1: the fact that they have many, right a large percentage
Speaker 1: of residents who would not agree with a certain action.
Speaker 1: They're going to enact deeply progressive, left wing policies where
Speaker 1: they can. And you've seen a little bit of this
Speaker 1: in red strongholds recently, but really just around some issues
Speaker 1: like you know, trying to restrict abortion, which would be
Speaker 1: a good thing for humanity, but nonetheless there have been
Speaker 1: these these efforts that are ramping up. I've seen him
Speaker 1: particularly in a lot of these blue states, because you've
Speaker 1: had over the last three years while Trump's in office,
Speaker 1: four hundred state lawmaker seats that were held by Republicans
Speaker 1: have gone to Democrats. So this also occurred. Would I
Speaker 1: would have you remember this occurred during the Obama years
Speaker 1: in the other direction, where Obama he was very popular
Speaker 1: and he did very well as president. Of course, won
Speaker 1: eight years in office, very popular Democrats, not very popular
Speaker 1: with Republicans, but he won big, big electoral victories both
Speaker 1: times around. Well, people forget is that he also presided
Speaker 1: over a Democrat party that was that lost power in Congress,
Speaker 1: and you know, he lost control of the House the
Speaker 1: Tea Party wave in twenty ten, then lost control later on.
Speaker 1: The Democrats lost control of the Senate, and all along
Speaker 1: there were enormous losses, enormous losses having to do with
Speaker 1: the state legislatures where Republicans were control a lot of
Speaker 1: the state legislatures. Now, this is very, very important for
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of reasons. One of them, though I
Speaker 1: wanted to get this out right away, is that in
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, there'll be many states that are up for
Speaker 1: their districting. Redistricting they determine what the congressional congressional districts are. Democrats,
Speaker 1: as they tend to do, have been fighting this when
Speaker 1: they don't like the outcome. When they don't like the outcome,
Speaker 1: the process is suspect. When they do like the outcome.
Speaker 1: The process is sacrosanct. That's how they approach everything, right.
Speaker 1: But it's certainly the case with districting and redistricting or
Speaker 1: I keep using those two words meaning the same thing. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, there have been some court challenges. Virginia is
Speaker 1: a very good example of this, where they say, sorry,
Speaker 1: you're not allowed to do that in this way in
Speaker 1: this district. It's it's two favorable for the side that
Speaker 1: I don't like. That's the only real standard, because any
Speaker 1: congressional district is inherent. It's like drawing the borders of
Speaker 1: a country on a map. What should the border between
Speaker 1: the US and Canada really be? Well, kind of just
Speaker 1: some people in charge had a map and they drew
Speaker 1: a line on a map, and that's kind of what happens.
Speaker 1: That's it. There's no Yeah, sometimes you have some natural barriers,
Speaker 1: you know, the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific Ocean. Those are
Speaker 1: our borders with Europe and Asia respectively. I mean there's
Speaker 1: something the Rio grand is kind of a border, but
Speaker 1: not really. You have some areas where there's a natural border,
Speaker 1: but usually it's just lines on a map. That's true
Speaker 1: of congressional districts, and so what you have now are
Speaker 1: Democrats who are very upset, and they keep saying that
Speaker 1: it's cheating, it's unfair because Republicans have drawn districts that
Speaker 1: are more favorable to their political prospects. Then I guess
Speaker 1: what the Democrats would want. By the way, we all
Speaker 1: know that everyone who complains about that now and any
Speaker 1: judge who even in a state like Virginia would overrule
Speaker 1: that as has happened. They do that, And I think
Speaker 1: we all know that if it were advantaging Democrats and
Speaker 1: disadvantaging Republicans, then all of a sudden, the districts are fine,
Speaker 1: no problem, Hey, what are you gonna do? It's all
Speaker 1: kind of subjective, you know, they would. This is what
Speaker 1: the root the foundation of liberalism today is hypocrisy and
Speaker 1: double standard. Right though, those are the two the twin
Speaker 1: pillars of contemporary Democrat liberalism socialism, hypocrisy and double standards
Speaker 1: all across the board. But the Democrats have flipped eight
Speaker 1: legislative chambers just since twenty eighteen, and they have both
Speaker 1: chambers in nineteen states. Virginia is the most you know,
Speaker 1: the most most sort of battleground focus one because Virginia
Speaker 1: is a state with a lot of Republicans and a
Speaker 1: lot of Democrats. It's a purple state that I think,
Speaker 1: unfortunately is now. I think Virginia is a blue state
Speaker 1: for presidential election purposes, and I don't think it's going
Speaker 1: to change anytime soon. It's really become dominated by the
Speaker 1: expansion of DC suburbs, notably Arlington, Virginia and Loudon County
Speaker 1: and all these other counties that are in Virginia that
Speaker 1: are very, very wealthy by the way, but these different
Speaker 1: Fairfax County they've become huge population centers and they have
Speaker 1: a big sway on Virginia going blue. And so now
Speaker 1: they're trying to push all this legislation through where they
Speaker 1: want to. They call it expanding voting access, which is
Speaker 1: always a very vague. What do they call it expanding
Speaker 1: voting access? I mean you should not be able to
Speaker 1: voteor you shouldn't be able to vote. Why are how
Speaker 1: are they expanding voting access? Oh, we'll get into some
Speaker 1: of this, putting in protection state protections for abortion rights.
Speaker 1: Keep in mind, I think it was Jeffrey Tubin, who
Speaker 1: is CNN's chief legal analyst, who was a garbage legal analyst.
Speaker 1: I mean not good. You would not want this guy.
Speaker 1: You would rather if you were being held in a
Speaker 1: prison in Alabama for a murder you did not commit,
Speaker 1: you would rather not just have my cousin Vinnie. You'd
Speaker 1: rather actually have Joe Peshi, all five foot two of
Speaker 1: him defending your rights and trying to keep you out
Speaker 1: of prison. Then I think you would have Jeffrey tub
Speaker 1: And Jeffrey Tuban had some tweet that after Kavanaugh was
Speaker 1: in After Kavanaugh was confirmed, he tweeted out that their
Speaker 1: abortion will be illegal in like a dozen states or
Speaker 1: something within eighteen months, And it had been. It was
Speaker 1: eighteen months last month, and abortion is illegal statewide in
Speaker 1: zero states. But other than that, great prediction, Jeffrey Tuban.
Speaker 1: But Democrats are showing us what the plan is here,
Speaker 1: which is that if there is any reduction in the
Speaker 1: absolutest right to abortion, Remember abortion is a very is
Speaker 1: not just very important right to Democrats because also if
Speaker 1: you ever start to move away from I mean, they
Speaker 1: inherently to have to think, they have to believe abortion
Speaker 1: is a good thing. Now they say that it's not
Speaker 1: that they want it safe, legal and rare. They've tried
Speaker 1: them in the past, but the the public admission through
Speaker 1: law that you want less abortion, even though about seventy
Speaker 1: to eighty percent of the population depending on the poll
Speaker 1: you're talking about, opposes late term abortion. They understand there's
Speaker 1: some problems and some abortion procedures if that is ever
Speaker 1: enshrined in laws, if there or if there are limitations
Speaker 1: restrictions on abortion at the state level, if some states
Speaker 1: say sorry, we think this is unethical and this is immoral,
Speaker 1: then you would have a circumstance where Democrats would have
Speaker 1: to come face to face with they think that a
Speaker 1: right that there can be a right to do something
Speaker 1: that is bad. Find me another right to do something
Speaker 1: that is bad, that is immoral. That is, you have
Speaker 1: a right to do something that is immoral and bad
Speaker 1: and wrong and not like subjectively bad as in well,
Speaker 1: you know, speech can be mean offensive. No, No No, I
Speaker 1: mean you have a right to do something that is
Speaker 1: that is a wrong. It can never be right to
Speaker 1: do a wrong. It's actually one of the preferred sayings
Speaker 1: from my old mentor and amorous professor Hadley Archy's. He
Speaker 1: used to say that all the time. He was right,
Speaker 1: by the way, But Democrats are showing us what the
Speaker 1: plan is, which is to protect abortion across the board
Speaker 1: in as many states as possible, and they protected as
Speaker 1: an absolutist right. You know, they're special. You can't even
Speaker 1: you know, stand in the doorway of an abortion clinic
Speaker 1: and try to pass out literature against it. You know,
Speaker 1: there's all these things. It's this they create all this
Speaker 1: additional legislation and regulation so that abortion access they call it,
Speaker 1: now becomes so and they say abortionist healthcare. So really
Speaker 1: it should be paid for by the state, which means
Speaker 1: you should pay for it. This is a right that
Speaker 1: now exists. They say that cannot be restricted, that you
Speaker 1: should pay Forget the High Demendment. They've abandoned that. I mean,
Speaker 1: they've become extremists on abortion even here to where they
Speaker 1: were twenty years ago, ten years ago. Now they're like, nope,
Speaker 1: not only should you should have to pay for it,
Speaker 1: the government should fund it, and you should have no
Speaker 1: say in this. You cannot try to, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: stand in the way of the doorway of an abortion clinic.
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, if if an illegal alien
Speaker 1: comes into the country, that person's abortion should be paid
Speaker 1: for with taxpayer dollars too. That's where we are. So
Speaker 1: states are not trying to make sure they already have
Speaker 1: legislation in place in case Trump judges are are in
Speaker 1: fact the difference maker here. And then I say this
Speaker 1: and people I had people kind of push back on this,
Speaker 1: you know, Conservatives when I brought it up with them.
Speaker 1: But for all of Trump's imperfections and his personal his
Speaker 1: personal failings, I think you could say in his personal life,
Speaker 1: which I know, you know again, look, it's fair game,
Speaker 1: but it's also I don't wanna be too harsh on
Speaker 1: this stuff. But for all of that, how would we
Speaker 1: judge it? Speaking of judge kind of a sloppy transition here,
Speaker 1: but this President Trump is better on judges than any
Speaker 1: Republican president in my lifetime. I think you could argue
Speaker 1: probably any Republican president for as long as we've had
Speaker 1: the political issues at hand that we do. So, I
Speaker 1: mean you go back a couple of generations, he's the
Speaker 1: best Republican president for the appointment of Supreme Court judges
Speaker 1: in a hundred years easily, I mean, if you want
Speaker 1: to go before that, but it was kind of different stuff.
Speaker 1: So he's unbelievable. I mean, he's been fantastic with the
Speaker 1: federal judges he's appointed, and Mitch McConnell, give him credit
Speaker 1: to cocaine, Mitch getting the job done. He's putting people
Speaker 1: into positions, lifetime lifetime positions, appointments across the federal judiciary
Speaker 1: that's going to have a really major impact for a
Speaker 1: very long time. And you know, Trump has been excellent
Speaker 1: on these judges. If, in fact, a another opening comes
Speaker 1: up in the next suming Trump wins re election, which
Speaker 1: we know we don't. We're not counting our chickens before
Speaker 1: they hatch. Assuming Trump wins the next election, though, and
Speaker 1: he manages to appoint someone along the lines of a
Speaker 1: Gorsitch or a Kavanaugh, although we don't know how. We
Speaker 1: don't know how conservative and constitutionals Cavanaugh really is yet,
Speaker 1: we don't know. We know he didn't run a secret
Speaker 1: gang rape ring back in the day, unless you're a
Speaker 1: total lunatic in a moron who believes that. Still, but
Speaker 1: you know, we don't know how good he is on
Speaker 1: some of these issues. But if Trump's election and his
Speaker 1: appointment results in a change in abortion law at the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court level, and that then means that it becomes
Speaker 1: a state's issue, which is what these states are all
Speaker 1: doing to prepare for it meaning that the blue legislatures
Speaker 1: even in states like like Virginia that are kind of purple. Right,
Speaker 1: the California is a separate issue where it's just blue
Speaker 1: and there's no hope of changing anytime soon. We'll talk
Speaker 1: about that later. But in Virginia, where it's it's a
Speaker 1: purple state trending blue, they're trying to put these these
Speaker 1: laws in place while they can. You know, this is
Speaker 1: kind of like what the Democrats did with Obamacare. Oh,
Speaker 1: we have a kind of an anomaly here. We have
Speaker 1: control everywhere. I just forget about the other side. Just
Speaker 1: do it to just do it to them, just ram
Speaker 1: your progressivism down their throats. And but on abortion specifically,
Speaker 1: they're preparing for this because if Trump's judges do anything
Speaker 1: that restricts abortion or just no longer has this this
Speaker 1: writ from on high of the Supreme Court that abortion
Speaker 1: is the law of the land and there can be
Speaker 1: no state restrictions on it. You know, and Planned Parenthood v.
Speaker 1: Casey isn't even is really where this could happen where
Speaker 1: you have the special category of abortion in our law.
Speaker 1: Never I mean, the Rovyway decision is a horrible decision,
Speaker 1: but just based on the legal aspects of it, never
Speaker 1: mind the moral. But then you look at plan Parenthood v. Cacy,
Speaker 1: where you added all of this. Now, abortion is a
Speaker 1: right that must be protected along the lines of how
Speaker 1: people think of, you know, voting rights. It's not just
Speaker 1: you have a right to be able to vote, but
Speaker 1: you know, it's like, well you can't you know, you
Speaker 1: can't have a polling place moved from here to there.
Speaker 1: And there's all these other things that get added into
Speaker 1: it to make it a right that is ineffective, right, right,
Speaker 1: So if you have some of those restrictions that come
Speaker 1: as a result of a change from the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: because of Trump judges, and this is what I'm really
Speaker 1: trying to get to you here, but no one really thinks,
Speaker 1: for this way, how many lives will Trump have saved?
Speaker 1: How many lives will Donald Trump be directly responsible for
Speaker 1: saving if the judges that he appoints, specifically judges that
Speaker 1: he has appointed the Supreme Court are the deciding factor
Speaker 1: in rolling back the current regime of abortion this country,
Speaker 1: such that not every state will of course outlawed. Some
Speaker 1: states or California will have it exactly as it is
Speaker 1: right now, but there will be states where it's still practiced,
Speaker 1: where all of a sudden it will be endowed or
Speaker 1: perhaps be eliminated entirely. How many lives will he be
Speaker 1: responsible for saving. I think that's a very real calculation
Speaker 1: that we should keep in mind as the president. People say, oh, my, judges,
Speaker 1: this is a line you'll here like conservatives and you know, evangelicals,
Speaker 1: for example, I've been getting so much heat recently because
Speaker 1: they overwhelmingly, I think eighty to ninety percent of them
Speaker 1: support Donald Trump. And people say, oh, well, that's so hypocritical,
Speaker 1: because evangelicals are supposed to care about character, and they're
Speaker 1: supposed to care about you know, this and the other thing.
Speaker 1: And to that, I just say, well, hold on a second.
Speaker 1: Evangelicals care about the president United States, defending their interests,
Speaker 1: their rights, and pushing moral policy. And you know, I
Speaker 1: take it in the other direction. I say, Catholics that
Speaker 1: support people like Nancy Pelosi as a Catholic, which is
Speaker 1: what she loves to say, of course, even though she's
Speaker 1: pushing for the policies that I think would make Beelzebub grin.
Speaker 1: I don't know how Catholics are okay with what the
Speaker 1: stuff the Democratic parties doing and still consider themselves to
Speaker 1: be in any reasonable or any meaningful way of believing Hatholic.
Speaker 1: So that's that's a part of this. But then there's
Speaker 1: the issue of guns, which I wanted to transition us too.
Speaker 1: You're in the Freedom Hud. This is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. Virginia is a state that I've spent a
Speaker 1: lot of time and I have a family still in Virginia,
Speaker 1: and I used to spend one or two major holidays
Speaker 1: a year, usually is either Thanksgiving or Fourth of July.
Speaker 1: We're both in Virginia seeing my grandmother down there. And
Speaker 1: you know, we've always had this connection to Virginia as
Speaker 1: a family as a result, and I mean meaning my
Speaker 1: immediate family, and you know, we think of it as
Speaker 1: the South, and obviously you go back and you know,
Speaker 1: the history of history of this country had clearly you know,
Speaker 1: you know, Richmond's role in the South and everything on.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're very aware of Virginia as the South,
Speaker 1: but you know, it's starting to feel a lot less
Speaker 1: like the South in the sense that it's gone bluer
Speaker 1: and bluer in recent years. And that's where you have
Speaker 1: this situation now. And this is by the way, also
Speaker 1: why I talk about hypocrisy and the way the Democrats
Speaker 1: will abandon principles they pretend to care about for political expedience.
Speaker 1: Governor Northam the guy who was wearing black face in
Speaker 1: the photo, but he couldn't remember if he was in
Speaker 1: the clan robe or if he was the black face guy,
Speaker 1: or how many times he did it, and he lied
Speaker 1: about it. That guy is the governor of a state
Speaker 1: where right now you have Democrats in control of both
Speaker 1: parts of the state legislature, and so he was very
Speaker 1: necessary for the plan of trying to push very aggressive
Speaker 1: progressive policies in a state where there's certainly a large
Speaker 1: contingent of Republicans conservatives who are not on board for
Speaker 1: this at all and they just don't care. Democrats have
Speaker 1: now taken it, and it's part of this, I think,
Speaker 1: is a reflection also of the polarized era were in
Speaker 1: when it comes to Trump. Democrats have taken an attitude
Speaker 1: in these states of we're just going to do as
Speaker 1: much as we can, as fast as we can when
Speaker 1: we have power, irrespective even really of the possible long
Speaker 1: term political risks. And that is where we get to
Speaker 1: this plan in Virginia, which I've mentioned it a couple
Speaker 1: of times in the show. We haven't gotten into all
Speaker 1: that much detail about it, but there is this plan
Speaker 1: in Virginia to ban semi automatic rifles that are deemed
Speaker 1: assault rifles. And you may have a situation where it
Speaker 1: mean depends on how this isn't forced, but you may
Speaker 1: have a situation where you have law enforcement going to
Speaker 1: people's homes and under the law, I mean, if it's banned,
Speaker 1: it's banned. If it's illegal, it's illegal. And now people
Speaker 1: are going to be arrested in the state of Virginia.
Speaker 1: I mean, this isn't you know, this isn't Massachusetts or
Speaker 1: California or some of these places that you would expect
Speaker 1: might be arrested for having a semi automatic rifle that
Speaker 1: a certain cosmetic characteristics that liberals find scary. That's what
Speaker 1: we're heading for. And that also then brings me to
Speaker 1: sanctuary jurisdiction. Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts.
Speaker 1: Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeartRadio app, or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. All right, so, what is
Speaker 1: a sanctuary jurisdiction in the context of you you have
Speaker 1: this this Democrat control of both parts of the legislature
Speaker 1: for Virginia, and you have a governor. I remember they
Speaker 1: thought maybe for a while, okay, we're gonna push the
Speaker 1: governor out. But then you had I think, justin Fairfax,
Speaker 1: just below the governor, who was accused by two different
Speaker 1: women of sexual assault, and so that then all of
Speaker 1: a sudden and this all happened roughly at the same time.
Speaker 1: And then if he also stepped down or couldn't take
Speaker 1: over the governor's role. For Northam, you had Mark Harring
Speaker 1: who had his own like blackface issue in his past
Speaker 1: where and he initially called for Northam to stepped down.
Speaker 1: So you could have had you know, one, two, three,
Speaker 1: the top three of the state of Virginia on the
Speaker 1: executive branch side effectively stepped down or pushed out or
Speaker 1: gone whatever, resign. So that's why they're like, all right,
Speaker 1: we're just gonna keep Northam. You got Northam still in place.
Speaker 1: Nor remember Northam's the guy not only had the blackface
Speaker 1: situation in his past, but also talked far too openly
Speaker 1: and honestly, I think is what you'd have to say about,
Speaker 1: how you know, if if if a child of an
Speaker 1: abortion was born alive, you know, you'd want to like
Speaker 1: be nice to it and comfort it, beore before you
Speaker 1: kill it. This is what he said. He said it
Speaker 1: on radio. You can all hear it for yourself. Democrats
Speaker 1: pretend that this is scaremongering, or this isn't a real thing,
Speaker 1: or guy said it, he meant what he said. He hasn't.
Speaker 1: And also no one has ever said that that that's
Speaker 1: not the reality of the law on Virginia, and Democrats
Speaker 1: are trying to make that now they're trying to enshrine
Speaker 1: that as the law at the state level. And then
Speaker 1: that brings me to this this gun issue and the
Speaker 1: notion of sanctuary jurisdictions. Now here's where the standard set
Speaker 1: by liberals, which and it's really a standard of we
Speaker 1: have no standards other than we want power, we will
Speaker 1: achieve power, will do what is necessary. The standards set
Speaker 1: by liberals here is more or less being replicated by Republicans.
Speaker 1: Liberals do it with immigration, they've just decided, you know,
Speaker 1: they've just decided on their own for whatever reason, that
Speaker 1: they are in a position to not enforce immigration law right.
Speaker 1: Sanctuary cities, as you know, and there's hundreds and hundred
Speaker 1: of them across the country, and what they're saying is
Speaker 1: that they will not stay in local law enforcement, will
Speaker 1: not be a part of federal law that mandates that
Speaker 1: you can't be in the country illegally, and that has,
Speaker 1: of course other provisions that come into play as well.
Speaker 1: They will not be a part of it, and they
Speaker 1: will in fact do what they can to make it harder.
Speaker 1: They will not extend courtesy assistance to federal law enforcement
Speaker 1: immigration customs officers. They will not honor detainer requests. So
Speaker 1: when someone's already in prison who's an illegal alien in
Speaker 1: sanctuary jurisdictions, they will not hold them until ice can
Speaker 1: show up and take custody of them. They won't even
Speaker 1: do that. They will not even notify in some cases
Speaker 1: they have an illegal alien and custody. And there's the
Speaker 1: fight underwear right now. This administration, the Trump administration, has
Speaker 1: been waging this battle trying to say, hey, hold on
Speaker 1: a second, you know, you can't just you can't just
Speaker 1: do this. You can't just pretend that the law is
Speaker 1: in the law, and the law enforcement, even at the
Speaker 1: state and local level, has no role to play in
Speaker 1: assisting the federal government. Of course, the states, the Democrats
Speaker 1: have all of a sudden established or have discovered states rights,
Speaker 1: which we know has a very negative connotation in many
Speaker 1: contexts for other reasons. But Democrats have established or have
Speaker 1: figured out that their states rights, such as in this case,
Speaker 1: would make it impossible or not a legal duty for
Speaker 1: them to do what federal law enforcement wants them to do. Okay, now,
Speaker 1: let's get back to the sanctuary gun situation here. What
Speaker 1: that is is that you have people in sheriffs in
Speaker 1: certain towns cities of Virginia who have already said, look,
Speaker 1: we're just we're not going to do this thing that
Speaker 1: you want us to do, where we're going to start
Speaker 1: arresting people and enforcing US law against assualt rifles where
Speaker 1: it's not going to do it, which is going to
Speaker 1: be very interesting. Now that is keep in mind it's
Speaker 1: a little different than sanctuary cities. In sanctuary cities, it's
Speaker 1: state and local law enforcement saying we will not assist
Speaker 1: or in any way enforce federal immigration law. Now you
Speaker 1: have people at the state level who are law enforcement
Speaker 1: officers paid by the state, working for the state, who
Speaker 1: are saying, sorry, not going to do it. This is
Speaker 1: nullification of the people in charge, nullification of the laws
Speaker 1: of the people in charge of enforcing the laws. Now,
Speaker 1: I understand why they would do this, because it's outrageous
Speaker 1: that the Virginia State legislature and this sort of progressive
Speaker 1: frenzy wants to ban So I'm sure there are other
Speaker 1: things they're planning on doing. Two in the realm of
Speaker 1: gun control, there's more specifics that they're going to try
Speaker 1: to throw in the mix here and do other things
Speaker 1: that would be particularly owners for gun owners. Because remember,
Speaker 1: much of the gun control agenda is really about agitating
Speaker 1: and other rising people who believe in the Second Amendment
Speaker 1: who own guns. Much of what they are really trying
Speaker 1: to accomplish with some of this legislation is just to
Speaker 1: thumb their nose at to spit in the faces of
Speaker 1: people who are their political opponents who tend to be
Speaker 1: Second Amendment support orders. But what happens, my friends, what
Speaker 1: happens when you have a circumstance where now Democrats decide
Speaker 1: that certain state laws will just not be enforced. Now,
Speaker 1: the drug thing, by the way, is another another situation,
Speaker 1: but the federal government has kind of said, okay, but
Speaker 1: we have a lot of laws in this country right
Speaker 1: now that you start to say what exactly is the law?
Speaker 1: Where does the law stop and start? You've got immigration
Speaker 1: law that is not enforced by state and local governments
Speaker 1: and sanctual jurisdictions, and that the federal government seems unable
Speaker 1: to enforce. And when you're unable to enforce a law,
Speaker 1: there's certainly an argument made that it has ceased to
Speaker 1: be a law. So the federal government has fallen down
Speaker 1: on the job in this regard. So then you have
Speaker 1: to ask, okay, well, where else do we have laws
Speaker 1: that are not being treated as law. Look, I'm and
Speaker 1: some of you get very mad at me on this one,
Speaker 1: and I understand. I know that there are very strong
Speaker 1: feelings around marijuana legalization and whether it's a good thing
Speaker 1: or a bad thing. I mean, the states that have
Speaker 1: made it de facto legal although it's not legal. I mean,
Speaker 1: the federal government still has under the Controlled Substances Act
Speaker 1: under their first section of it, right Schedule one controlled
Speaker 1: substances marijuana is still on there, so it's still very
Speaker 1: much illegal, but states are allowed. But you see, I
Speaker 1: understand that this it starts to get a little confusing
Speaker 1: in this tangle of all these different laws. But you
Speaker 1: can understand how anybody to look at this would say, okay,
Speaker 1: so is the law just no longer a law when
Speaker 1: some people decide that it doesn't count anymore? Don't we
Speaker 1: have legislatures that are supposed to repeal things and mend things,
Speaker 1: change things. Is this just turning into Because what really
Speaker 1: separates America from a lot of other countries that have,
Speaker 1: you know, a lot of natural resources, good weather? You
Speaker 1: know what exactly separates us from places? What separates us
Speaker 1: from most of Latin America, for example, that's a that's
Speaker 1: a good place to start. What separates America from Latin America. Well,
Speaker 1: we have rule of law. And anybody who spend any
Speaker 1: time in Mexico or a whole bunch of other countries
Speaker 1: in Central and South America would tell you very assuredly
Speaker 1: that rule of law in those countries is kind of
Speaker 1: a non existent to our barely existent. It's one of
Speaker 1: the most important things that separates us from those countries,
Speaker 1: and it contributes to our security, our prosperity, you know,
Speaker 1: our our freedom. Rule of laws very much about freedom.
Speaker 1: If you understand what the laws are in a country,
Speaker 1: you can operate accordingly, and you can have an expectation
Speaker 1: that your freedom will be respected and the state will
Speaker 1: protect your freedoms because you know what those laws are.
Speaker 1: When it's just to kind of sometimes yes, sometimes know,
Speaker 1: how can you even make a real determination about that?
Speaker 1: So while I understand the impulse from sheriff, look, you know,
Speaker 1: the other part of it is it's not even necessarily
Speaker 1: nullification of laws for sheriffs. Then it just turns into
Speaker 1: prosecutor a form of prosecutorial discretion, which all law enforcement has.
Speaker 1: You know, if a cop on the scene thinks, you know,
Speaker 1: if you were speeding, but a cop thinks that you know,
Speaker 1: you're actually trying to get your wife to the hospital,
Speaker 1: he has he has, He's completely within his rights to
Speaker 1: say I'm going to give you warning. You're welcome to go, right.
Speaker 1: I mean, ken a sheriff just say hey, you know
Speaker 1: I saw you at the range with you know, if
Speaker 1: this is sheriff pulls up the range to do a
Speaker 1: you know, his own target practice, and I'm sure he
Speaker 1: has his own range. You get what I'm saying. See
Speaker 1: somebody in Virginia after with this law and effect, now
Speaker 1: I'm banning assault rifles assuming but they're trying to do
Speaker 1: this in the next sixty days. So it hasn't hasn't
Speaker 1: happened quite yet. That's why I can't give you that
Speaker 1: many specifics on exactly what's going on here. But if
Speaker 1: a sheriff see somebody can't just say, hey, buddy, be
Speaker 1: careful with that because you know it's technically illegal, but
Speaker 1: you know, take it home with you, don't worry about it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: of course, So is that is that a dangerous nullification
Speaker 1: of lall? No, it's not. But we need to understand
Speaker 1: here that you have a Democrat impulse in a state
Speaker 1: where there are a lot of people that very much
Speaker 1: disagree with what is trying to be what they're trying
Speaker 1: to accomplish here, there's a Democrat impulse to make criminals
Speaker 1: of Republicans, to criminalize their Second Amendment rights, and to
Speaker 1: institutionalize as much as possible the furthest left parts of
Speaker 1: their agenda. And this is resulting in a state by
Speaker 1: state polarization where there's you know, I keep talking about
Speaker 1: the eradication of good faith in the era of Trump
Speaker 1: in our politics. I really mean it. It's a real thing.
Speaker 1: You know, you can't trust that your fellow Americans who
Speaker 1: are liberals or who are Democrats are willing to defend
Speaker 1: your free speech rights anymore? Because there's a really large
Speaker 1: movement within the left. I would say it's the dominant
Speaker 1: force in Democrat politics today to say no, sorry, certain
Speaker 1: things you can't Certain things are too mean, You're not
Speaker 1: allowed to say them, Certain things are too controvers know
Speaker 1: how to say them? In the Second Amendment? What do
Speaker 1: you if if the Bloomberg's of the world got their way.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, Bloomberg is very opposed to um guns.
Speaker 1: Um if they got their way, what exactly would what
Speaker 1: would you be allowed? You'd be allowed to maybe get
Speaker 1: a special permit to have a double barreled shotgun that
Speaker 1: you could use to go you know, sporting clay shooting.
Speaker 1: You know they go trap shooting sometime. That's that's the
Speaker 1: full extent. I mean, what would your Second Amendment rights
Speaker 1: really be? Oh yeah, you can defend your home with
Speaker 1: a double barreled shotguns. That's all you need. This is
Speaker 1: this is taking us down to a a scary place.
Speaker 1: What you're seeing in Virginia, if this is a harbinger
Speaker 1: of things to come, and other purple states across the
Speaker 1: country where Democrats have legislative control for a period of time.
Speaker 1: You know, it's one thing to pass aloll that says
Speaker 1: the tax rate the state tax is seven percent. No,
Speaker 1: it's actually nine percent, or it's eight percent. Okay, I
Speaker 1: mean you could switch that back and forth. But you're
Speaker 1: going to start going door to door and sending law
Speaker 1: enforcement to go arrest people for this. And if you're
Speaker 1: not going to do that, why would you ban assault rifles?
Speaker 1: What does that mean? You're just gonna ban new sale
Speaker 1: of assault rifles. There are I'm sure a few million
Speaker 1: assault rifles currently in circulation in Virginia. I even, I mean,
Speaker 1: I can't No one even really knows the number. So
Speaker 1: you're just going to make sure that everyone's and you're
Speaker 1: still gonna have legal sale of them in other in
Speaker 1: other states. So if possession of them is not illegal,
Speaker 1: and you're just going to ban new sales, you're just
Speaker 1: making it a lot more expensive for people to get
Speaker 1: in aar in Virginia. So if you're going to really
Speaker 1: try to get rid of them, you're gonna have to
Speaker 1: arrest people for them. You have to criminalize them. Are
Speaker 1: democrats at the state Legislature of Virginia willing to do that?
Speaker 1: In this crazy period we're in, it seems the answers, Yes,
Speaker 1: it's very troubling. It should put everybody on edge. You're
Speaker 1: in the freedom Hud. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 1: During the run up to the passage of Obama President Obama,
Speaker 1: Prow's wife father that if he lies his plan, he
Speaker 1: can keep his plan, and that's insurance will be cheaper
Speaker 1: after passage's planning his own allowed and it's insurance costs
Speaker 1: double since he supported the plan. Were he lying with
Speaker 1: my dad? Or did you not understand the ability's supported
Speaker 1: the lion dog face pony shoulder. No. Look, there's two
Speaker 1: ways people know when something is important. One when it's
Speaker 1: so clear when it's passed that everybody understands it. And
Speaker 1: no one didn't understand Obamacare, including the way it was
Speaker 1: rolled out, and the gentleman's right. He said you could
Speaker 1: keep your doctor if you wanted to, and you couldn't
Speaker 1: keep your doctor if you wanted to. Necessarily he's dead
Speaker 1: right about that, you know. Joe Biden makes these two
Speaker 1: admissions here, and it's all you really have to know
Speaker 1: about the Democrats today is that this is this is
Speaker 1: their best This is the guy that they're putting up
Speaker 1: to set everything right and make everything great in this country.
Speaker 1: And Joe Biden's a buffoon, a buffoon, but he just
Speaker 1: kind of blithely in sousion in sousion lee, I don't
Speaker 1: know if that's really a word, but in sousion manner,
Speaker 1: it's a fancy French word for like cool as a cucumber.
Speaker 1: Says that nobody understood Obamacare when it was rolled out
Speaker 1: and you couldn't keep your plan. And I just want
Speaker 1: to point out that I was saying that at the time.
Speaker 1: Conservatives really across the board, we're saying this at the time,
Speaker 1: and what we were saying was absolutely true, and yet
Speaker 1: Democrats shouted us down, DemoGod the issue, ram it through
Speaker 1: and still pretend like Obamacare was was great. An Obamacare
Speaker 1: is effectively an expansion of Medicare, I'm sorry, an expansion
Speaker 1: of medicaid healthcare welfare in a whole bunch of states,
Speaker 1: which adds dramatically to the deficit, but that's what it is,
Speaker 1: and also then does a little bit of shifting where
Speaker 1: some people get a little bit of subsidy to have
Speaker 1: kind of, you know, not so great insurance, and other
Speaker 1: people don't get subsidies pay a little more, pay more
Speaker 1: than they should and are strained in order to try
Speaker 1: to pay the insurance. And this is what this did.
Speaker 1: We have this huge fight. Democrats just just did everything
Speaker 1: went to the mat used reconciliation kind of a budgetary
Speaker 1: maneuver that's not supposed to be meant for major legislation,
Speaker 1: to get the last piece of Obamacare, last parts of
Speaker 1: Obamacare through these budget reconciliation and all for what exactly
Speaker 1: I mean. Now we're still here. We are right, It's
Speaker 1: been three years since Obama, the Obama administration was in power,
Speaker 1: and we're talking about healthcare all and now we've got
Speaker 1: a whole new healthcare thing. You would think that maybe
Speaker 1: there could be some humility from the central planners as
Speaker 1: a result of this. Maybe they would take a moment
Speaker 1: to think, hold on a second. We thought we were
Speaker 1: these geniuses last time, We're going to figure this all out,
Speaker 1: and we completely messed the whole thing up. Maybe this
Speaker 1: time around we should have a little bit more of
Speaker 1: a collaborative approach with the people that have real concerns
Speaker 1: about this and try to make things better. You think
Speaker 1: that the fact that Joe Biden has to say you
Speaker 1: couldn't keep your plan even though we said you could
Speaker 1: keep your plan. That's a big deal because that was
Speaker 1: a huge part of getting the buy in, and it
Speaker 1: was never a particularly strong buying, but getting the buying
Speaker 1: the American people, they figure, Okay, this won't affect me
Speaker 1: that much in the individual market. I can I can
Speaker 1: keep my plan if I like my plan. And it
Speaker 1: turned out it was a big lie. Here's the problem
Speaker 1: I have with them. With a lot of problems with this,
Speaker 1: but here's one of the big problems I have, folks.
Speaker 1: Democrats never learn the lesson. They never learned the lesson.
Speaker 1: They refused to accept that We've run this experiment where
Speaker 1: they just did exactly what they wanted to do. It
Speaker 1: was all Democrats on a single Republican vote that exactly
Speaker 1: they wanted to do. They lied about what they were
Speaker 1: doing in order to get it done. Now Here we
Speaker 1: are of Democrats running what's their primary rallying cry against
Speaker 1: Trump as a policy matter other than Trump as hitler.
Speaker 1: They want Medicare for all, or some vast expansion of Medicare,
Speaker 1: or you know, some enormous add onto Obamacare that would
Speaker 1: be maybe a public option. They never figure out that
Speaker 1: we've already seen. They don't have the ability to do
Speaker 1: what they think they can. They will mess things up.
Speaker 1: They will make your healthcare worse, they will make it
Speaker 1: more expensive, it guaranteed, and yet they never step back
Speaker 1: and say, hold on a second, maybe we should learn
Speaker 1: a lesson from how we've already messed this. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. So some states are coming up with a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of these new progressive laws. California, though, is
Speaker 1: the laboratory of liberal insanity. As you know, California, which
Speaker 1: is I like to point out to you used to
Speaker 1: be a Republican stronghold, which people completely forget now when Gabel,
Speaker 1: we had you know, President Nixon, President Reagan. These came
Speaker 1: from California, the California political system. California was a red
Speaker 1: state until basically the nineties in presidential elections reliably read
Speaker 1: not every time, but usually. And now I mean it
Speaker 1: is the belly of the blue beast. I mean, California
Speaker 1: is liberalism distilled down to its most insane parts. By
Speaker 1: the way, I think I'm actually going to be in
Speaker 1: California in a couple of weeks, so I'll come back
Speaker 1: with some stories from the front lines of liberal insanity there.
Speaker 1: Although I'm New York City, which is basically as bad,
Speaker 1: we just have a slightly more capitalist outlook, I guess.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I'm not even sure we do. Actually
Speaker 1: in New York is probably in some ways as bad
Speaker 1: as California. We have Staten Island, though at least Republican
Speaker 1: stronghold of Staten Island. Yeah. But there's all kinds of
Speaker 1: new laws in California that are going into effects, some
Speaker 1: that will have a real, a real impact on things.
Speaker 1: And here is one, for example. This is just amazing, Prilla.
Speaker 1: Play a clip one, ducer Mark. This is a new
Speaker 1: water use law in California. Play one, all right, this one.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure how I feel about this. You're not
Speaker 1: going to be allowed to shower and do a load
Speaker 1: of laundry in the same day. I had the same misgivings. Um,
Speaker 1: doing a load of laundry takes about forty to fifty
Speaker 1: gallons of water. Taking a shower for about eight minutes
Speaker 1: takes about seventeen gallons of water. Well, there's a limitation
Speaker 1: on your daily use of water a fifty five gallons
Speaker 1: per day. So that means if you are taking a
Speaker 1: shower and doing a load of laundry, you can't do
Speaker 1: both without being in violation of the law. Um. There
Speaker 1: are some exceptions about this. There are some caveats. For instance,
Speaker 1: if you have a multi person household, if you have
Speaker 1: four people in your household, there are three people in household,
Speaker 1: that fifty five gallon limit per day applies for each person,
Speaker 1: so you could do a load of laundry. Um, if
Speaker 1: you have a multi person household, and okay, yeah, well
Speaker 1: you can actually see your your water uses on a
Speaker 1: day rate with your water meter a thousand dollars a day. Folks,
Speaker 1: if you were to take a shower and do a
Speaker 1: load of laundry in California as a single person, so
Speaker 1: I'll have more than fifty five gallons of water usage
Speaker 1: in that they estimate, and they already have these water
Speaker 1: you know, water meters set up. You're gonna see your
Speaker 1: water usage. This is what they've done. This is what
Speaker 1: liberal left wing socialist policy has done to a state
Speaker 1: that in many ways is the most blessed piece of
Speaker 1: land of you know, anywhere in the United States, California,
Speaker 1: the California coastline is incredible. It's gorgeous. It has amazing weather.
Speaker 1: And California has all these different climates. You get you know,
Speaker 1: you go up in the north San Francisco area, it's
Speaker 1: great for wine growing. Go down south you have like
Speaker 1: sunny weather. That's you can wear, you know, board shorts
Speaker 1: and a T shirt, ear round if you want, or
Speaker 1: socks with birkenstocks if you want to rocket, like producer
Speaker 1: Mark does do you do you ever do the socks? No,
Speaker 1: he just he's not like these and he's not on
Speaker 1: board for that. That was a thing for a while.
Speaker 1: People used to wear socks with birkenstocks to remember that hippies.
Speaker 1: So California is gonna start finding you a thousand dollars
Speaker 1: a day if you use too much water. You'd have
Speaker 1: to wonder why is there such a precarious condition for
Speaker 1: water usage in the state. Well, it's because a lot
Speaker 1: of it has to do with the management of water
Speaker 1: by the authorities. Thing just like they don't manage their forests, well,
Speaker 1: they don't manage their water. Well. You'd think a state
Speaker 1: where they're obsessed with environmentalism would be a little bit
Speaker 1: better at this. You'd think that a state where there's
Speaker 1: so many people that's been so much time, so much
Speaker 1: of their time thinking about all these issues would be
Speaker 1: in a position to be better at dealing with them.
Speaker 1: But that is sure enough not the case. That is
Speaker 1: not what ends up happening. They are not good at
Speaker 1: dealing with this at all because they take a statist,
Speaker 1: collectivist approach to these issues, and they believe the looney
Speaker 1: climb change Left's rhetoric. They put it into action. Um,
Speaker 1: and here here's this. This was This was a local
Speaker 1: California TV station. They're having this and you can tell
Speaker 1: the anchors are like, wait, what this new law is
Speaker 1: going to effect in twenty twenty. Play clip two. Now
Speaker 1: there are actually fines available for this as well. Your
Speaker 1: your first your violation is one thousand dollars per each
Speaker 1: day that you're in violation. Wait, who made this a law.
Speaker 1: Let's just let me talk to that. It's a state legislature.
Speaker 1: The governor signed this into effectos in effect January first.
Speaker 1: Now there's also another caveat. If we're in drought conditions
Speaker 1: and the governor declares an emergency, that fine can go
Speaker 1: up to ten thousand dollars to a day, so be careful.
Speaker 1: You know, you could change your word to serenity to anchor. Now, wow,
Speaker 1: you're not gonna be able to shower in twenty twenty.
Speaker 1: You know what, I'm gonna pick doing laundry ever, showering.
Speaker 1: So all of a sudden, I can smoke marijuana as
Speaker 1: much as I want, but I can't take a shower. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's it's unbelievable. Yeah, absolutely, It's like, get smoked marijuana
Speaker 1: as much as I want, I can't take a shower.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's kind of true. That's California. The streets
Speaker 1: are governing FECs, the middle class is fleeing, the taxes
Speaker 1: are too high, the crime rate is rising. You can't
Speaker 1: take a shower, but you can smoke all the weeds
Speaker 1: you want. Well, I'm looking forward to my trip there
Speaker 1: and feelings I was gonna say, I'm heading out there,
Speaker 1: so I'll let you guys. And no plastic straws. I
Speaker 1: hate that. Do you know what the percentages of plastic
Speaker 1: in the oceans that comes from the United States, It's
Speaker 1: like less than two percent. We basically put nola. We
Speaker 1: have stopped using plastic in this country for things that
Speaker 1: are useful under the idea that we are somehow trying
Speaker 1: to stop like sea turtles from choking, which I like
Speaker 1: sea turtles don't with them a choke. But the plastic
Speaker 1: is not coming from us, you know. The plastic is
Speaker 1: coming from is actually a lot of it is driven
Speaker 1: by major river systems into the ocean. And those major
Speaker 1: river systems are in Asia and Africa. That is where
Speaker 1: a vast majority of the plastic that is making its
Speaker 1: way in the oceans is coming from. Do you think
Speaker 1: are like, we're going to stop using plastic straws? This
Speaker 1: is what I mean. They don't. They don't think they're
Speaker 1: identify the problem, figure out the solution, see if the
Speaker 1: cost benefit analysis is worth it. They don't do this.
Speaker 1: They just go, oh, my gosh, there's a thing. And
Speaker 1: I have these preconceived notions about how I view the world,
Speaker 1: and then there's this problem. And I'm not going to
Speaker 1: look at whether the problem would actually even be addressed
Speaker 1: by the way I'm going to approach it. But it'll
Speaker 1: make me feel good because the problem is so scary.
Speaker 1: Climate change a perfect sample. It's but plastic in the oceans.
Speaker 1: Another one I tell them. I would tell libs, hey,
Speaker 1: you're not making things any better by doing this thing
Speaker 1: you're doing. And they would say, why do you want
Speaker 1: sea turtles to choke on plastic? And I'd say I don't.
Speaker 1: But they don't care. They don't care. There's no one is.
Speaker 1: It's getting harder and harder, folks. You know, I wish
Speaker 1: that there was even a place where you could have
Speaker 1: a reasonable, interesting debate with liberals on these issues. But
Speaker 1: you can anymore, because how do you debate with somebody who,
Speaker 1: when presenting with this, is just going to say, well,
Speaker 1: we have to show leadership. I mean liberalism today, progressivism
Speaker 1: is just drowning in its own sanctimony all the time,
Speaker 1: and it's just just as heaps of it, all of it. Oh,
Speaker 1: I'm so great, I'm so amazing. Why well it makes
Speaker 1: you so great and so amazing? Oh? Because I do
Speaker 1: these things that liberals do. Mmm, not good enough, not
Speaker 1: good enough. But then again they don't care because it
Speaker 1: feels so good. You're in the U. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show podcast. California's obviously got some very very
Speaker 1: bad ideas, but I wanted to just say that we're
Speaker 1: at the point now where maybe we should create a
Speaker 1: just a recurring segment on the show. Which is really
Speaker 1: bad ideas from Democrats running for president right now, like
Speaker 1: the things that they say that are not not just
Speaker 1: the things that are untrue run for it, but just
Speaker 1: the fact that they don't even really understand what the
Speaker 1: consequences would be of some of the things that they
Speaker 1: are very much pushing for. You have, for example, minimum
Speaker 1: wage is another great, a great example of this. Keep
Speaker 1: saying minimum wage is very popular, even conservatives or Republicans,
Speaker 1: you know, people like it. But minimum wage is something
Speaker 1: that does not work as advertised for most people. For
Speaker 1: some people, some people will make more money who are
Speaker 1: workers because of minimum wage. Some people have their hours
Speaker 1: cut back, some people will lose their jobs. Some people
Speaker 1: will have automation instituted that will either limit or cut
Speaker 1: back their arm. I mean, there's all these different ways
Speaker 1: of dealing with the imposition of cost via central planning,
Speaker 1: which is in fact what you have through the minimum wage.
Speaker 1: Senator Bernie Sanders does not care, and so he runs
Speaker 1: around saying that we need a what he calls a
Speaker 1: living minimum wage. Please play producer brand producer Mark, pardon me,
Speaker 1: clip eleven bottom line here is that we need a
Speaker 1: federal minimum wage for every state in this country, which
Speaker 1: is a living wage at least fifteen dollars an hour. Now,
Speaker 1: fifteen dollars an hour is not a lot of money,
Speaker 1: but it is better than seven and a quarter or
Speaker 1: nine or ten dollars an hour. Second thing we need
Speaker 1: to establish in America is that women must earn equal
Speaker 1: pay for equal work. All right, let's deal with both
Speaker 1: of these bad democrat ideas. Shall we equal pay for
Speaker 1: equal work? You have a fifteen dollars minimum wage? And
Speaker 1: we have to keep returning to this because people, it's
Speaker 1: I understand, there's an emotional So much of central planning,
Speaker 1: so much of socialism is push not by what works,
Speaker 1: but by what feels good or sounds good to people.
Speaker 1: And I understand why so many would say, look, can
Speaker 1: we get a little more money to people who are
Speaker 1: If you're working for in an hourly job, you know
Speaker 1: chances are I mean, yeah, there are people at law
Speaker 1: firms that are making eight hundred dollars an hour. Although
Speaker 1: usually they don't get to keep a big piece of that.
Speaker 1: They get to keep a small percentage of it. If
Speaker 1: they're working at a big firm. But usually if you're
Speaker 1: an hourly worker, tend not to be making a very
Speaker 1: high wage. And so you know, when you're talking about
Speaker 1: hourly workers, anybody who's making minimum wage, or rather who's
Speaker 1: affected by minimum wage legislation is going to be someone
Speaker 1: who benefits from this. And you want to help those people, right.
Speaker 1: You want people they're shown up doing a job, being productive,
Speaker 1: doing what they're supposed to do. You want them to
Speaker 1: have what they need and to be able to get ahead.
Speaker 1: Of course, getting ahead financially also involves decision making and
Speaker 1: planning and some degree of luck. These are all things
Speaker 1: that people don't talk about on the left. They just
Speaker 1: pretend that there's a way that we can all be
Speaker 1: living in some glorious future where there's no deprivation, there's
Speaker 1: no economic insecurity, there's no want or need that is
Speaker 1: not met by the dictates of the state. Fifteen dollar
Speaker 1: minimum wage, let's deal this one real quick. Why not thirty?
Speaker 1: Why not fifty? Because and then they would say, oh,
Speaker 1: that's absurd. It's say, okay, it's absurd. Why it's absurd
Speaker 1: Because at some point the cost is too high for
Speaker 1: the business to even be able to function at all.
Speaker 1: And so then you say, well, and I haven't even
Speaker 1: brought up how well, in some cases maybe they it'll
Speaker 1: be good for workers, But then you're just passing the
Speaker 1: costs on to the consumer. So I mean, the money
Speaker 1: is coming from somewhere, because ultimately the cost is the cost. Ultimately,
Speaker 1: the market has determined what the cost of labor is
Speaker 1: for a certain kind of job in a certain place.
Speaker 1: And you know, you're either going to accept that and
Speaker 1: let the market determine it, or you're going to make
Speaker 1: a determination external to those market forces, based upon what
Speaker 1: you think is fair, what you think is right, based
Speaker 1: upon you know, what people feel really, which is what
Speaker 1: this is. Bernie Sander fifteen dollars an hour. You know,
Speaker 1: that's just a number that he's picked out of out
Speaker 1: of the air. I mean, you could do this with
Speaker 1: any number of things. What would happen if you said,
Speaker 1: you know what, guys, let's just make let's just make
Speaker 1: all you know, you can't have a in a part,
Speaker 1: or you can't have a house that is you know,
Speaker 1: two bedrooms are less that cost more than one hundred
Speaker 1: thousand dollars. Okay, well, in some places maybe that wouldn't
Speaker 1: be such a big deal. But in most places it
Speaker 1: will be a huge problem across the country. And what
Speaker 1: would happen if you set that artificial price for housing?
Speaker 1: You would have massive housing shortages. Builders wouldn't be able
Speaker 1: to you know, wouldn't be able to make a profit.
Speaker 1: They wouldn't be able you know, you get on the
Speaker 1: whole list. Right. There are all these There are forces
Speaker 1: that are at work beyond just the dictates of the
Speaker 1: government when it comes to decisions like this. And yet
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders pretends that it can just be a decision
Speaker 1: made by government in this way. Yeah, I'm not saying that.
Speaker 1: You know that they raise a minimum wage, everything, everything's
Speaker 1: gonna be catastrophic and then everyone's gonna go out of business. No,
Speaker 1: of course not. But there will be problems that come
Speaker 1: from this. And it doesn't also deal with some of
Speaker 1: the underlying issues of well if somebody, if someone's labor
Speaker 1: is worth seven fifty an hour and we start paying
Speaker 1: them fifteen dollars an hour, it doesn't deal with you, well,
Speaker 1: what about the fact that labor is only worth seven
Speaker 1: dollars and fifty cents an hour? This is what pushes
Speaker 1: people to automation companies. I mean to automation. This is
Speaker 1: what has other forces that are at work that you
Speaker 1: don't necessarily see, just based on the take home pay
Speaker 1: of certain people that are affected by minum wage. Anyway,
Speaker 1: this is it's another one democrat idea. But people like
Speaker 1: this one minimum wage. You gotta have a minimum wage,
Speaker 1: all right, and then there's equal pay. I don't know
Speaker 1: how to really deal with this other than just say
Speaker 1: it's a lie. They know it's a lie. They don't care.
Speaker 1: They keep saying that, you know, equal pay is a
Speaker 1: problem that needs to be dealt with via legislation. They
Speaker 1: keep saying that equal pay is something that the government
Speaker 1: must take action on. The reality is that whenever you
Speaker 1: look at a study of this, whenever you see people
Speaker 1: really crunching the numbers, women are not paid less for
Speaker 1: doing the same work as men. That's just not how
Speaker 1: that's not how employment works. There's not the reality of
Speaker 1: the employment market. Because if you had, first of all,
Speaker 1: you have more women graduating from college right now, for example,
Speaker 1: and you do men. So there's already an enormous influx
Speaker 1: of college educated females into the workplace all across the country.
Speaker 1: If you line up the comparison, so that's apples to apples.
Speaker 1: You'll see that this just isn't there's no, it is
Speaker 1: not rooted in reality. But you can also just look
Speaker 1: at it and say, well, if I could save thirty percent,
Speaker 1: this is the quickest way, the same way that I
Speaker 1: know that climate change is nonsense, the way the Libs
Speaker 1: talk about it and set it up, because they're not
Speaker 1: going to sell me. They're not going to sell me
Speaker 1: a house in Malibu for a fraction of the cost
Speaker 1: right now because of climate change right on the beach, man,
Speaker 1: that water is gonna be rising really fast. If we're
Speaker 1: gonna be all dead or are starting in well, not
Speaker 1: all dead quite in twelve years, but if we're on
Speaker 1: a path to the eradication of the species in twelve years,
Speaker 1: that's not very long. You're gonna be along the coastline.
Speaker 1: That's gonna be a big problem. Right. No, when it
Speaker 1: comes down to it, when the truth of what they
Speaker 1: say is a disadvantage to them, they ignore what they
Speaker 1: are saying. When you take it to its logical lens,
Speaker 1: it no longer matters. With equal pay, you can have
Speaker 1: a similar experiment. All you do is say, okay, well,
Speaker 1: if I can save thirty percent of my labor costs.
Speaker 1: And I'm a aggressive capitalist, somebody who wants to make
Speaker 1: a lot of money, who wants my business to behind
Speaker 1: the effective. You know what I do. I just hire
Speaker 1: only women. They're doing the same work. It'd be great.
Speaker 1: I mean, I love producer Mark, but if we could
Speaker 1: cut thirty percent of the labor costs by getting somebody
Speaker 1: just who happens to be the female producer Mark to
Speaker 1: come in here, and we cut thirty percent of the salary,
Speaker 1: that would be a pretty enticing thing for executives. By
Speaker 1: the way, we Marquette, what would we call her? I'm
Speaker 1: not sure. Yeah, do I have to get a gender
Speaker 1: reassignment to keep my job? Now? I'm just telling you,
Speaker 1: man that if we could save thirty percent, you'd fire
Speaker 1: me in a second. I mean, I'm not saying I would,
Speaker 1: but somebody would. If we could save thirty percent on
Speaker 1: you you know, and it's true of me too. If
Speaker 1: they could have female Buck doing the radio show, same show, true,
Speaker 1: same host, same numbers, you know, same same sponsorships and
Speaker 1: money coming in the show, they say thirty percent, of
Speaker 1: course they would find you know, it would be crazy nuts.
Speaker 1: Just get a male or female worse than us us. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but people don't do this, And the reason they don't
Speaker 1: do this is because the underlying premise is not true.
Speaker 1: I don't like premise being that, you know, women are
Speaker 1: just paid less because they're women, because there's this patriarchy
Speaker 1: and all this stuff. But it's something that sounds good
Speaker 1: at Democrats, so they keep saying it even though the
Speaker 1: reality is not what they offer up. The reality is
Speaker 1: not what they say. And at some point, you know,
Speaker 1: we just have to look at this and say, when
Speaker 1: is when is the meeting? Was? When is the meeting?
Speaker 1: In the met is never gonna call them out of this.
Speaker 1: I'm never gonna say, oh, we we've finally, we finally
Speaker 1: figured out that we should stop being so dishonest about this.
Speaker 1: No, no no, no, of course, not because they have an agenda, folks.
Speaker 1: They're activists, not journalists. Thanks for listening to The Bus
Speaker 1: Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Hey, team Buck,
Speaker 1: it's time for roll call. It is indeed time for
Speaker 1: roll call, as the gentleman announced there for us, which
Speaker 1: we always appreciate. So let's get right to it Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com, slash buck Sexton to have your your voice
Speaker 1: heard here on the show, or Team Bucket. iHeartMedia dot com.
Speaker 1: We do want to do a merch store. We want
Speaker 1: to do more Shields High podcasts on History. We're gonna
Speaker 1: set up a YouTube channel. I got a book that's
Speaker 1: coming out. We gotta have more people. Watch Pluto TV
Speaker 1: Channel two forty Channel two forty eight, the first. The
Speaker 1: first is the best channel on Pluto TV. There there's
Speaker 1: a lot of channel on Pluto TV. You could check out.
Speaker 1: You should be watching the first on Pluto TV. It's
Speaker 1: just because I had a break and I've been sick
Speaker 1: for like ten days. I'm finally now you can hear
Speaker 1: my voice is pretty normal. I had a cold that
Speaker 1: just would not would not stop, and went through these
Speaker 1: phases where I thought I was like almost better, and
Speaker 1: then something else would hurt and be bad, and ugh,
Speaker 1: I know, woe is me. Jane kicks it off here.
Speaker 1: Hey Buck, I love you and wish we had lots
Speaker 1: more little Bucks. Whoa hey, oh spicy in the Freedom Hunt.
Speaker 1: But I keep Christmas decorations up until Twelfth Night, which
Speaker 1: is January sixth, the time the King's visited Jesus in
Speaker 1: the manger. I think this is about the same time
Speaker 1: the Greek Orthodox celebrate Christmas. Jane I had my I
Speaker 1: had a little mini Christmas tree, which some people say
Speaker 1: it might be sad, but it's not sacks. In New
Speaker 1: York City, you're in a mini apartment, you gotta have
Speaker 1: a mini Christmas tree. I had a mini tree. And
Speaker 1: the tree came down yesterday, so you know, I kept
Speaker 1: it for a while. I kept it into the New Year,
Speaker 1: but a little bit. But it started to get to
Speaker 1: the point where it was dried out and all the
Speaker 1: little um a little pine needles were falling off of
Speaker 1: it all over the place. So that's no fun. Can't
Speaker 1: can't have a messy a messy freedom hunt. So we
Speaker 1: had to get rid of it. But good, good things
Speaker 1: all around, good things, good things, Mike, Nancy Pelosi is
Speaker 1: going to sit on the impeachment paperwork until she knows
Speaker 1: for sure that Trump is going to win the election.
Speaker 1: Then she'll pull out the impeachment paperwork and attempt to
Speaker 1: keep him from serving another term. What do you think?
Speaker 1: Check out Memories of the Alhambra. It's on Netflix from
Speaker 1: Mike um Mike I don't know. I don't know if
Speaker 1: that's I gotta think about that a little bit. That's possible,
Speaker 1: It's possible. I think she look, I still obviously have
Speaker 1: made my made my bet, made my bed, so to speak.
Speaker 1: I think that she's going to have to transmit them
Speaker 1: at some point. I don't think she can trans meet them.
Speaker 1: It sounds like Vladimir trans meet this to Vladimir from Medvedev.
Speaker 1: It seems to me like she has no choice eventually.
Speaker 1: But maybe I'm wrong. Usually when I say that though
Speaker 1: I'm not as you guys know, so like the sort
Speaker 1: of false humility of maybe I'm wrong, it usually works
Speaker 1: out of my favor. Boo. Yeah, uh, let's see what
Speaker 1: we have next in the mix here, Oh in Alhambray.
Speaker 1: I'll check that out on Netflix, you know to do that.
Speaker 1: Kenneth south Front ran a story on the Ukrainian Armed
Speaker 1: Forces back in December. When the discussing the Javelin anti
Speaker 1: tank guided missiles, they stated that these have yet to
Speaker 1: be used in combat and seen to be held in reserve. Well, Kenneth,
Speaker 1: this has come up before they are held in reserve
Speaker 1: because now there's an understanding with the Russian with the
Speaker 1: Russian provision of armored personnel carriers and tanks and things
Speaker 1: that they will be destroyed if they are used in
Speaker 1: an offensive capacity. So it's kind of like the assurance
Speaker 1: of destruction from knowing that they have and can deploy
Speaker 1: these missiles to destroy armor has neutralized the advantage, the
Speaker 1: clear advantage that the Russian backed Ukrainian separatists had from
Speaker 1: having Russian provided armor, if that makes sense. So just
Speaker 1: knowing that they are there is a has now been
Speaker 1: an impediment to their use. So that has been highly
Speaker 1: highly effective in that regard. Let's see here we have
Speaker 1: Kyle Buck. I appreciate Joe Biden simply for the comparison
Speaker 1: he allows us to make look a President Trump is
Speaker 1: actually being impeached for basically nothing. Now imagine what actually
Speaker 1: happened was the FBI, on Trump's watch, used a false
Speaker 1: foreign source as a predicate to get a secret visor
Speaker 1: warrant to wiretap Hunter Biden's associates, and by virtue of
Speaker 1: the two hop rule, listening on Joe Biden himself, heads
Speaker 1: would explode. Great show is always merry Christmas, Thanks Kyle,
Speaker 1: and indeed appreciate your analysis on that one. And yeah,
Speaker 1: we have a more roll call for your listening enjoyment.
Speaker 1: Here in just a moment, you're in. This is the
Speaker 1: buck Sexton Show podcast, all right. And now here we
Speaker 1: are with our continuation of the role call, which is
Speaker 1: the best call and it's producer Mark's favorite call, becus
Speaker 1: it means the show is almost over, which means he
Speaker 1: gets to go back to Long Island and his new bride.
Speaker 1: He gets to hang out, which is great. I of
Speaker 1: course disappear to my my actual freedom hunt, which is
Speaker 1: definitely a hut and not a castle, is a cozy, little,
Speaker 1: cozy little joint. All right. We're doing the Facebook here,
Speaker 1: Facebook dot com slash buck Sexton. That that's if you
Speaker 1: want to send me your thoughts, you want to send
Speaker 1: me what you got going on, please do. And we
Speaker 1: get to it with Wendy, who writes, used to be
Speaker 1: somebody voted for Dams like Carrie. No more. Now I'm
Speaker 1: solidly a Trump supporter. Well, the good news, Wendy is
Speaker 1: that we all make mistakes, but also we should all
Speaker 1: be able to achieve some degree of forgiveness. Dare I
Speaker 1: say some degree of you know, making amends. So I'm
Speaker 1: glad you're a Trump supporter now God bless thank you
Speaker 1: for sharing your thoughts here. We do appreciate it. And
Speaker 1: um Buck on Friday's podcast, you had an echo on
Speaker 1: your voice for the entire podcast and the iHeart app
Speaker 1: shield high. Well, that sounds like shields low to me
Speaker 1: at Producer Mark, What is going on here? Do we
Speaker 1: know that this happened? I mean I can go back
Speaker 1: and listen, but nothing changed, nothing changed on it. I
Speaker 1: don't know, man, we gotta because I didn't hear that
Speaker 1: from anybody else. So usually I will I take listen,
Speaker 1: I will listen. We should actually have like a little
Speaker 1: what we do. Want to set up a camera here
Speaker 1: so you guys can see a producer Mark. That's that's
Speaker 1: that's a Christmas present. I haven't given him yet, but
Speaker 1: we're working on it. But we all want to set
Speaker 1: up a little producer Mark complaint jar And every time
Speaker 1: we get with these emails, you get a drop like
Speaker 1: you know, drive a quarter in there or something. At
Speaker 1: the end of the you know, we'll go out, we'll
Speaker 1: get a lot of quotes, we'll go we'll get gluten
Speaker 1: free Chinese food together at the end of the year
Speaker 1: with the with the brucer Mark free Chinese food is
Speaker 1: that it's good. It's just Chinese foods that doesn't have
Speaker 1: But I can't think of anything Chinese food other than
Speaker 1: like general so chicken or something. Chinese food is all gluten. Like,
Speaker 1: it's all glutena soy sauce. Okay, So everything has either
Speaker 1: flour or soy sauce or both. A lot of it
Speaker 1: has both. But if you just replace the flour and
Speaker 1: replace the soy sauce, then like nothing in Chinese food
Speaker 1: has gluten because of the ingredients because rice rice is fine.
Speaker 1: I was thinking like chicken and brocoli, but I forgot
Speaker 1: about the soy sauce. Yeah, the soy sauce, and that's
Speaker 1: where you get nailed um. So yeah, all but tamari sauce.
Speaker 1: I've it tastes just like soy sauce. I cannot tell
Speaker 1: the difference. And that's all. You change that and you're
Speaker 1: good to go. It looks like soy sauce. Taste like
Speaker 1: soy sauce. People think that they're like they think gluten
Speaker 1: free is like fat free. Fat free is gross. Fat
Speaker 1: free food is bad when they take the fat out
Speaker 1: of food, very bad when they use fake sugar and
Speaker 1: things very bad. Gluten free is just different. It's just different.
Speaker 1: I would try gluten free Chinese food. No gluten free
Speaker 1: pizza other than calif flower pizza not happening. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: well we'll make it happen. Richard Buck Happy, who's your hellos?
Speaker 1: From the third shift? I would be at a great
Speaker 1: Christmas and happy New Year's in a birthday. I want
Speaker 1: to start to try and get your show added to
Speaker 1: local talk radio show local talk radio station here in Raleigh.
Speaker 1: Do you have any pointers on what to say or
Speaker 1: who to talk to you at a radio station? Right now?
Speaker 1: Nine pm to midnight slot is all podcasts, which would
Speaker 1: be good if they were only your podcast? Is there
Speaker 1: a certain person who decides radio programming? Keep up the
Speaker 1: awesome work and shields high Well, Richard, You're certainly welcome
Speaker 1: to write into you the local radio affiliate and request
Speaker 1: that the person would be called the program director or
Speaker 1: sometimes it's a station manager, depends on the station. But yeah,
Speaker 1: the program director is usually the one who determines what
Speaker 1: shows go where. And I would certainly love Raleigh's a
Speaker 1: great town. I would love to be added to any station.
Speaker 1: I don't are we on a station or Raleigh already though, No,
Speaker 1: we're not, okay, So yeah, put us in Raleigh. That'd
Speaker 1: be great, you know, Richard, get some of your buddies
Speaker 1: to send an emails too, at least get us on
Speaker 1: the radar of the folks there. But there you go.
Speaker 1: Michael writes in with this has your name written all
Speaker 1: over it. Wow. He sent a photo of big strips
Speaker 1: of chocolate covered bacon. You know, we're just talking yesterday
Speaker 1: about bacon bar in New York and how bacon can
Speaker 1: even be mixed into ice cream. I have had at
Speaker 1: I think it was Voodoo Donut in Portland, Oregon. I
Speaker 1: had a maple glazed donut with bacon topping, which was
Speaker 1: and this is when I used to eat luten. This
Speaker 1: is right before I figured out I had Celiac disease.
Speaker 1: It was amazing. I will say so when it's when
Speaker 1: it's done properly, it's really good. I recently went to
Speaker 1: a Brazilian steakhouse and you know how they have like
Speaker 1: the salad bar, which isn't really salad. At a Brazilian steakhouse,
Speaker 1: they had maple glazed bacon. Oh yeah, it was. That's amazing. Oh,
Speaker 1: it's amazing. The best thing at the Trump International Hotel
Speaker 1: in DC, which is actually a great hotel. It's really nice.
Speaker 1: The best thing there is the bacon that they pull
Speaker 1: out and they have it hanging almost like on a
Speaker 1: clothes line, like you're getting your clothing to dry out
Speaker 1: back in the day. And they take a little flame gun,
Speaker 1: a little flamethrower like thing, and they in front of
Speaker 1: you they sort of flamed the bacon, um, I guess
Speaker 1: also known as cooking it. But no, there they flame
Speaker 1: it and it's already been glazed with some sweet sauce.
Speaker 1: It's worth the like twenty five bucks or whatever is
Speaker 1: expensive that is. That is not a cheap hotel. Roger, Right,
Speaker 1: it's looking forward another year, Buck, Roger. So are we man,
Speaker 1: We're still here, Brucer Mark, producer Buck, we are still employed.
Speaker 1: We got a producer Nick doing Overwatch for us. He's
Speaker 1: kind of like our sniper from like, you know, from
Speaker 1: behind the front assault team. You know, he's making he's like, oh,
Speaker 1: doing Overwatch for us, making sure. Producer Mark is clearly
Speaker 1: the machine gunner of this fire team. And you know,
Speaker 1: I guess I'm the guy on point with the with
Speaker 1: the M four by Producer Mark he's he's he's a
Speaker 1: he's a heavy gunner, you know what I mean. We
Speaker 1: got producer Nick doing the sniper situation and I'm I'm
Speaker 1: a sault team kicking to the door. Taylor rights, How
Speaker 1: is PBR? I've been to one. It's the best event
Speaker 1: I've ever been to. It was constant entertainment and the
Speaker 1: best of the best performers. UFC events are a close
Speaker 1: second with the PBR stands out above the rest, you know, Taylor.
Speaker 1: I mean, I talked to this a little bit yesterday,
Speaker 1: but I'd say that, you know, PBR one of the
Speaker 1: great things that has going for it is that the
Speaker 1: people involved in it are like everyone's just there to
Speaker 1: like have everyone's very support, everyone's there to have a
Speaker 1: good time. It's a very unpretentious thing, very pretentious crowd.
Speaker 1: You know. You go to a lot of these events now,
Speaker 1: and I went to a Knicks game recently, and you
Speaker 1: go to events and you'll see people and they're all
Speaker 1: everyone's in like their corporate suites and there's people are
Speaker 1: spending so much money on these events and so much
Speaker 1: money to be there, and I mean, like PBR, it
Speaker 1: just had a much more relaxed atmosphere. You know, the
Speaker 1: security guards the more like it's PBR, go for it.
Speaker 1: You know, you kind of move around, take photos. They
Speaker 1: weren't checking your ticket stub every five seconds. It's just
Speaker 1: a it's a very welcoming atmosphere because they just want
Speaker 1: people to be there and check it out. And you know,
Speaker 1: they got the guy who's the I don't know if
Speaker 1: you call him the head clown, I don't know. My
Speaker 1: dad is a wealth of knowledge about PBR, watches a
Speaker 1: lot of PBR. Knows the riders. He actually gets very excited.
Speaker 1: He knows quite a bit about the bulls I'm producing Mark.
Speaker 1: I will tell you know that the bulls get a
Speaker 1: score that the highest scores fifty points for the rider,
Speaker 1: fifty points for the bull. The bull gets a score
Speaker 1: as well. What kind of reward does the bull get? Um,
Speaker 1: I don't know, actually that's a good question. But there
Speaker 1: are bulls that are like the most formidable of the bulls,
Speaker 1: So like do they advertise like see this bull and
Speaker 1: Madison Square guard. People know that the bulls have cool names,
Speaker 1: you know, and they there are bulls like horse racing,
Speaker 1: like you're going to Belmont to see a specific horse. Now,
Speaker 1: the horse is obviously the superstar, and the jockey no
Speaker 1: one knows. I we know the jockey's names really big
Speaker 1: into horse racing. People get I mean those are the
Speaker 1: only people, but people will know because the horses also
Speaker 1: get these cool names, like you know, I don't know Secretariat,
Speaker 1: Yeah exactly, thank you for pulling one up there because
Speaker 1: I was blanking out. But they have cool would you
Speaker 1: recently had a triple crown winner? I could not tell
Speaker 1: you the name of it. The horse, Yeah, it would
Speaker 1: just be interesting to see, like what are the coolest
Speaker 1: names that the horses have happened? They're very cool names. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the bulls are. The riders are certainly more famous than
Speaker 1: the bulls are. But the bulls get a they get
Speaker 1: a score, and you know, there's a little bit also
Speaker 1: of like there there is a certain degree of risk
Speaker 1: and danger in this whole process too, and so when
Speaker 1: sometimes the people get the riders get stomped on. You know,
Speaker 1: there's a big background in of Brazilian riders. There's a
Speaker 1: lot of Brazilians in PBRs. I think it is interesting.
Speaker 1: They just have a culture of it there. I guess
Speaker 1: it's kind of the almost like I know, Gauchos are
Speaker 1: Argentine Argentine cowboys, but the gaucho and Brazilian version of
Speaker 1: that whatever it's called. Um, they have a big tradition
Speaker 1: it there. I did not know that. It's not just
Speaker 1: a texting. Was not aware of that. Milliwauke A, which
Speaker 1: means the good Land. Um so yeah, Well, Milwaukee's had
Speaker 1: its fair share of visitors. Uh so, Yeah, I mean
Speaker 1: PBR is really cool. I highly recommend you guys go
Speaker 1: check it out. I had a great time there, and
Speaker 1: it's if it's something you've never done, it's an experience
Speaker 1: you should definitely have at some point. It's just fun.
Speaker 1: It's fun to get, fun to go see. I've really
Speaker 1: been making an effort recently to go see more stuff,
Speaker 1: to go do more than in New York City. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean I'm just burning through like whatever,
Speaker 1: you know, retirement money I would have right now going
Speaker 1: to see like PBR and things like that. Just PBR.
Speaker 1: You haven't seen any shows lately, you don't you live
Speaker 1: right in that general? Oh I saw, I went, I
Speaker 1: saw Mulin Rouge at about that. That is not what
Speaker 1: I was expecting. That was, you know, I took a friend,
Speaker 1: I meant like dear Evan Hansen, you know, come from
Speaker 1: away stuff like that. Oh, like like what the prophisticated
Speaker 1: like fancy, Well, Mulan Rouge is on Broadway. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: that's what I'm talking about. Oh, it's the Broadway production
Speaker 1: of it. Yeah, oh yeah, I didn't. I didn't ow.
Speaker 1: I was like sitting there by myself taking notes. Seem
Speaker 1: if I lived in Manhattan, I would just be doing
Speaker 1: all the lotteries constantly and like just trying to win
Speaker 1: stuff so I could get cheap show. How do you
Speaker 1: do that? There's online services where you sign up online
Speaker 1: and if you win the lottery, you get an email
Speaker 1: and you got twenty dollars tickets or however. It's different
Speaker 1: for every show, but really like the Hamilton lottery is
Speaker 1: the cheapest but hardest to win. Huh. I haven't seen Hamilton.
Speaker 1: I haven't either. I kind of want to see it,
Speaker 1: just because I have a feeling that I may not
Speaker 1: like it, and I don't think you're gonna like it
Speaker 1: very much. I have a feeling I'm probably not going
Speaker 1: to be that just given all the hype around here.
Speaker 1: History buff so you would get the stuff you get it? Yeah? Correct?
Speaker 1: I also, you know, I saw The Book of Mormon,
Speaker 1: which people thought was so so funny. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: clever in some parts, but it was like, there's so
Speaker 1: much cursing. It was so profane. And I'm not somebody
Speaker 1: who you know, cursing like anything else. You know, it's
Speaker 1: like explosions in movies, Like I can handle some cursing.
Speaker 1: I can handle some explosions in movies. When every three
Speaker 1: seconds it's another boom bang boom, you know, it just
Speaker 1: turns into any come up, you know what you expected? Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: there's just a lot of I don't know. It was
Speaker 1: not really as good as I thought. Have you seen
Speaker 1: Come from Away? No, that was a story of the
Speaker 1: Canadian city that got all the planes on nine to
Speaker 1: eleven when they grounded everyone, and they made it into
Speaker 1: like like they were amazingly hospitable and like it's a musical.
Speaker 1: One of the best shows overseen. I teared up at
Speaker 1: the end, and you know, I'm a yeah, yeah, I
Speaker 1: gotta check that out. Come from Away, Come from Away.
Speaker 1: I think it won the Tony for Best Musical a
Speaker 1: couple of years ago. All Right, I gotta like I
Speaker 1: gotta find the future and missus Sexton and take her
Speaker 1: too if I gotta find her first, But then I
Speaker 1: gotta come from away. Okay, Okay, I know there's options there.
Speaker 1: We'll figure it out. Producer Mark, you're you're a trouble baker.
Speaker 1: All right, that's gonna be it for today's show. I
Speaker 1: hope you've all enjoyed everything going on here in the
Speaker 1: Freedom Hunt as always, and we'll be back with you tomorrow,
Speaker 1: same time, same place. Tell us somebody about the show.
Speaker 1: Pass the buck please, she'll tie