Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hunch. Looks like Trump does
Speaker 1: so far have the votes. Biden won't answer if he'd
Speaker 1: pack the Supreme Court mitt Romney looks like a yes.
Speaker 1: The CDC changes some COVID guidance who should get the
Speaker 1: vaccine first? And an NYPD officer spying for China. Buck
Speaker 1: Sexton coding the news and disseminating information with actionable intelligence.
Speaker 1: Make no mistake, American Great, You're a great American again.
Speaker 1: This is the buck Sexton Show. Former CIA analysts, I
Speaker 1: can speak to three hours without a phone call. Try
Speaker 1: doing that sometimes. No welcome friends to the bucks Sexton Show,
Speaker 1: and honor is always to have you here with me. Now,
Speaker 1: let's get right to it. Looks as of today, Blake
Speaker 1: Trump has the votes in the Senate to get a
Speaker 1: Supreme Court nominee confirmed and through to the seat recently
Speaker 1: left vacant by Ruth Bader Ginsburg's departure. So now we
Speaker 1: have to figure out what are the Democrats planning next?
Speaker 1: Because right now I understand the inclination would be for
Speaker 1: all of us to say, okay, the Republicans have every
Speaker 1: right to do this, as much as Democrats whine about it.
Speaker 1: Doesn't matter. They have a constitutional not only clear designation
Speaker 1: for this, they have an obligation. I think that's a
Speaker 1: better way of putting it. Here is the Vice President
Speaker 1: saying just that play fourteen. President Trump believes that he
Speaker 1: has an obligation under the Constitution of the United States
Speaker 1: to put forward to nominique for the Supreme Court. There've
Speaker 1: been twenty nine times that there have been vacancies since
Speaker 1: George Washington through Barack Obama. In all twenty nine cases,
Speaker 1: the president has made a nomination to the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: during an election year. And President Trump believes that it's
Speaker 1: his responsibility and his duty to do that. Again, the
Speaker 1: Senate's role is to advise and consent, and we're working
Speaker 1: already with the Republican leadership in the Senate to make
Speaker 1: arrangements for the process to move forward. But we believe,
Speaker 1: judging from history, I believe Justice Ginsberg was confirmed within
Speaker 1: forty three days of her nominations. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
Speaker 1: in less time than that. So it's been done in
Speaker 1: less time. It's been done many times under the same circumstances,
Speaker 1: and there's no rule, there's no law, there's nothing to
Speaker 1: prevent it. There's not even a president to prevent it.
Speaker 1: So the Libs are flailing right now. They're trying to
Speaker 1: come up with some argument that will turn the tide
Speaker 1: in favor for them, and they're not succeeding because we
Speaker 1: do have the ability to go back and look at
Speaker 1: what's happened in the past, and we also understand that
Speaker 1: there's the obligation of politics here too. Why do we
Speaker 1: vote for the president as Republicans? Why do we vote
Speaker 1: for these various senators if when they finally have the
Speaker 1: opportunity to do what they have been promising to do,
Speaker 1: they don't do it. How could we think they have
Speaker 1: the courage of their convictions if they refuse to take
Speaker 1: the opportunities that come to them to fulfill promises. I mean,
Speaker 1: it would be a choice to not fulfill this promise
Speaker 1: to Republican voters. Why would they do that out of
Speaker 1: some misplaced sense of fair play? I gotta tell you,
Speaker 1: I had been thinking that mitt Romney would find the
Speaker 1: first opportunity possible to try and back out of this
Speaker 1: just because of spite against Trump. But it seems perhaps
Speaker 1: mit Romney recognizes that there's no real argument here. There's
Speaker 1: no real argument against what the president's trying to do.
Speaker 1: There's the only pseudo arguments, bad faith arguments. I saw
Speaker 1: a piece by never Trumper's David French and Jonah Goldberg
Speaker 1: making the rounds about how what's best for our republic
Speaker 1: would be to cave to Democrat demands here under the
Speaker 1: promise that they then won't pack the Supreme Court, as
Speaker 1: if that's a concession to us. First of all, if
Speaker 1: anyone believes that Democrats would keep a promise not to
Speaker 1: pack the Supreme Court based upon this nomination battle, they
Speaker 1: probably also believed that Jesse Smolette was attacked by two
Speaker 1: Maga hat wearers on in Chicago at one o'clock in
Speaker 1: the morning yelling this is Maga country. If you believe one,
Speaker 1: you probably believe the other, which is not a good
Speaker 1: indication of one's intelligence. Democrats will break their word, all miss.
Speaker 1: Democrats were all the opposing side of the table in
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen. They did not or twenty fifteen, No, sorry,
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, they did not care. They simply it doesn't
Speaker 1: matter to them that they're all on the record telling
Speaker 1: us that we have of course, the president has this
Speaker 1: power in election. Of course you should be able to.
Speaker 1: That was when they thought they could strong arm us
Speaker 1: into going with Merrick Garland. That was when they believed
Speaker 1: if they had the media and enough enough whiny law
Speaker 1: professors and former prosecutors and other people that were supposed
Speaker 1: to revere. And I don't know why, but if we
Speaker 1: had enough of that, they believed that we would be
Speaker 1: able to we would cave and they'd get what they want.
Speaker 1: But it didn't happen. Didn't happen. And Mitch McConnell deserves
Speaker 1: a lot of credit because they tried the pressure campaign,
Speaker 1: then they tried all the stuff that they're making in
Speaker 1: terms of arguments now plus now you got to add
Speaker 1: to they're camping outside of people's homes. No sleep for
Speaker 1: Lindsey Graham, no sleep for Mitch McConnell. Looking for weak
Speaker 1: links in this chain. I thought Romney would be a
Speaker 1: weak links. So far, we'll see. I'm not. I'm not
Speaker 1: giving Romney an at a boy until we see whether
Speaker 1: or not he actually does his duty here to the
Speaker 1: voters of Utah, KNRS a great station out in Salt
Speaker 1: Lake City having added us to their lineup. I know
Speaker 1: the folks in Utah, not all of them love Trump.
Speaker 1: A lot of them do not all of them love Trump,
Speaker 1: but they do expect somebody who is a Republican Senator
Speaker 1: from the great state of Utah to support this most
Speaker 1: important of tasks for conservatism, for constitutionalism, and the Republican
Speaker 1: Party getting us a judge that will truly tip the
Speaker 1: balance away from what it has been for decades. You see,
Speaker 1: Democrats have gotten a little too, a little too smug
Speaker 1: and emotionally and intellectually complacent when it comes to the court.
Speaker 1: They're so used to at this point just being able
Speaker 1: to count on the court coming up with nonsense with
Speaker 1: legislation by thought of a bunch of lawyers who have
Speaker 1: been appointed as judges. And Ginsburg was one of the
Speaker 1: best examples of that. I mean, Ginsburg was using the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court as a super legislature, which is not what
Speaker 1: it is supposed to be. But it was always the
Speaker 1: stopgap against legislation. It was a stopgap against representative form
Speaker 1: of the representative form of government that we have our republic,
Speaker 1: that even if the people wanted something, voted for someone,
Speaker 1: and that leader then tried to execute on the promise,
Speaker 1: the lib Supreme Court would step in and say nope,
Speaker 1: we see a different thing. Here we see a right
Speaker 1: that no one else had been able to figure out
Speaker 1: in two hundred years. We see an interpretation of this
Speaker 1: language that's not English. But who cares. We make it
Speaker 1: up as we go along. That's what they've been doing.
Speaker 1: In fact, Mitt Romney correct when he points out, Look,
Speaker 1: Mit had his good moments back in the day. He
Speaker 1: crushed Obama in that first presidential debate. Of course, Obama
Speaker 1: went on to win, but it was an embarrassing performance
Speaker 1: for Barack Obama. Everybody knew it. And Mitt Romney does
Speaker 1: have his capabilities. I wish he hadn't marched with BLM.
Speaker 1: That was the lame, cowardly move, but he did. But
Speaker 1: here he is at least understanding what's going on with
Speaker 1: liberals and the court and their perception that what has
Speaker 1: been will always be not the case Play seventeen. Well,
Speaker 1: I think it's straightforward in terms of the qui qualifications
Speaker 1: you look for, which is someone who is an expert
Speaker 1: of the law, someone who has a record of fairness
Speaker 1: and judgment that you think is consistent with the law.
Speaker 1: I prefer choosing those folks who are, if you will,
Speaker 1: stric constructionists mean that they look at the law itself
Speaker 1: and the Constitution as opposed to sort of looking into
Speaker 1: the sky and pulling out ideas if they think be
Speaker 1: more appropriate than either of the law or the Constitution.
Speaker 1: So I recognize that we may have a court which
Speaker 1: has more of a conservative bent than it's had over
Speaker 1: the last few decades. But my liberal friends have over
Speaker 1: many decades gotten very used to the idea of having
Speaker 1: a liberal court, and that's not written in the stars.
Speaker 1: And I know that a lot of people are saying, gosh,
Speaker 1: we don't want that change. I understand the energy associated
Speaker 1: with that perspective, but it's also appropriate for nation, which is,
Speaker 1: if you will, center right to have a court which
Speaker 1: reflects center right points of view, which again are not
Speaker 1: changing the law from what it states, but instead following
Speaker 1: the law and following the Constitution. What Mit says here
Speaker 1: is correct. Truth is truth, whether it comes from it
Speaker 1: Rami or anybody else. The Libs just believe that there
Speaker 1: is some sanctified, imaginary right to always have a liberal
Speaker 1: leading Supreme Court that will give them what they want.
Speaker 1: I know, people say, oh, but Buck, what about what
Speaker 1: about you know Bush Gore in two thousand, Oh, you
Speaker 1: mean the court case where the swing vote right, this
Speaker 1: is where were the swing vote was. Like, guys, you
Speaker 1: can't just pick districts that are Democrat majority districts and
Speaker 1: only recount those and pick out the ones where you
Speaker 1: think you might be able to harvest more votes and
Speaker 1: not to recounts in other places in Florida where there
Speaker 1: have been equal Probably they were trying to scam the system,
Speaker 1: and it was obvious. But on all the major social
Speaker 1: issues and most notably abortion, gay marriage as well among others,
Speaker 1: the courts left lean has been obvious and has been unbroken.
Speaker 1: But we may enter a new era now and one
Speaker 1: in which we will see whether liberals are willing to
Speaker 1: abide by the rules that they were pretending were sacrosank
Speaker 1: when they were going in their favor. Let's all be
Speaker 1: very clear about this. Democrats are effectively at this point
Speaker 1: already telling the American people, if we don't have a
Speaker 1: Supreme Court that we can count on on the big
Speaker 1: social issues that are very emotional for us and the
Speaker 1: drive a lot of the Democrat Party's power, if we
Speaker 1: don't have a Supreme court that will do that, we
Speaker 1: will break down, subvert and destroy the system. They're they're
Speaker 1: pretty explicit about this. I mean, here's Don Lemon, who
Speaker 1: is sometimes too dumb to be subtle or to obscure
Speaker 1: his intent, but he's definitely a big lib. Here's what
Speaker 1: he's saying over at CNN play ten, everybody, We're gonna
Speaker 1: have to blow up the entire system. And you know
Speaker 1: what we're gonna have to do. I don't know. You
Speaker 1: know what we're gonna Yes, what you have to do,
Speaker 1: you just got to honestly, from what your closing argument is,
Speaker 1: you're can have to get rid of the electoral college
Speaker 1: because the people, I don't see it, because the minority
Speaker 1: in this country decides who the judges are, and they
Speaker 1: decide who the president is is. They need a constitutional
Speaker 1: amendment to do that. And if Democrats, if Joe Biden wins,
Speaker 1: Democrats can stack the courts and they can do that
Speaker 1: amendment and they can get it past well, you need
Speaker 1: to third in the Congress and three quarters of the
Speaker 1: state legislature. They may be able to do that. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: about as big a waste of time as the Convention
Speaker 1: of the States project to talk about. By the way,
Speaker 1: but here we are, here we are. That's what Democrats
Speaker 1: are promising that they're going to be able to get
Speaker 1: a constitutional amendment that they're going to change the whole system.
Speaker 1: They're going to change the whole system such that it
Speaker 1: comports with their desires. But we've listened to the system
Speaker 1: for a very long time. Right, we've been obeying. We
Speaker 1: who are pro life. We've said, okay, I mean, this
Speaker 1: is the law, even though it's immoral and wrong. But
Speaker 1: I we're gonna We're not gonna break the law, subvert
Speaker 1: the law. I mean, people aren't going to advocate The
Speaker 1: Republican Party doesn't advocate for you know, shutting down with
Speaker 1: force the way that BLM does, shutting down with for
Speaker 1: his businesses that they don't like, shutting down abortion clinics
Speaker 1: that the right has not been doing that. We've said, okay,
Speaker 1: this is the law. That's work to change the law.
Speaker 1: And now we see the little tyrannical side of the
Speaker 1: Democrats where the law is just an impediment to their desires.
Speaker 1: They don't care when the system went against the right,
Speaker 1: what did the right do. Let's rebuild, Let's let's win elections,
Speaker 1: and when the time comes and we have the legal
Speaker 1: right and authority to make certain decisions, will make different decisions.
Speaker 1: The Democrat view is when we have the power, that's
Speaker 1: what we do. When you have the power, we shut
Speaker 1: down the system and make sure that you can't use it.
Speaker 1: And people want to talk about good faith and fair
Speaker 1: play with them, I mean, are Goldberg and David French
Speaker 1: are they No, they're just never trumpers who have boxed
Speaker 1: themselves in to intellectually ridiculous positions. Now now, among many
Speaker 1: other never trumpers who have done the same thing, a
Speaker 1: lot of them are part of this Lincoln Project garbage.
Speaker 1: Now it's always you know, they can conservative case for
Speaker 1: a portion, the conservative case for undermining everything you believe.
Speaker 1: This is what never trumpers have been turned into it.
Speaker 1: It's quite sad, actually, it's really rather pathetic. That's where
Speaker 1: it is. That's what we see happening. They are telling
Speaker 1: you if they don't get their way, they're going to
Speaker 1: break things. They're going to disrespect, undermine and alter the
Speaker 1: system itself. They're going to change the rules of the game.
Speaker 1: They're not going to try to win the game with
Speaker 1: fair play. This is the Democrat approach to everything in
Speaker 1: politics now, but particularly around a judicial nomination like this.
Speaker 1: This is the same thing as saying Okay, you know
Speaker 1: you have a four quarters to win a football game.
Speaker 1: We're going to change it and now it's going to
Speaker 1: be whoever can get the most field goals in the
Speaker 1: first two quarters that's the winner. Well that's a totally
Speaker 1: different game. Oh what are you Oh, that's what they're
Speaker 1: gonna do. Or they're just going to pay off the
Speaker 1: refs and just openly cheat. Whatever they have to do,
Speaker 1: they will do. That's what you're seeing, which is why
Speaker 1: I want to tell you right now this pause where
Speaker 1: it feels like, wow, Romney is being sane, which is okay.
Speaker 1: Look when it happens, I'll say it's a good thing,
Speaker 1: and you know, credit where it's due. Truth is truth,
Speaker 1: credit where it's due. Two principles on this show. If
Speaker 1: Romney casts the right vote here, we're gonna say, hey,
Speaker 1: high Fivedmit Romney for not being a total sellout coward.
Speaker 1: Good job. But I don't think we can get there yet.
Speaker 1: Well obviously it hasn't happened. But I don't want us
Speaker 1: to become complacent at all. Remember the analogy I use right,
Speaker 1: this is a rabid squirrel that we're injecting meth into.
Speaker 1: No one really knows how this is gonna turn out.
Speaker 1: This is gonna be crazy. The Libs aren't going to
Speaker 1: just quietly allow this process to play out. They're gonna
Speaker 1: go full of Lynsky on this. Yeah, they have no
Speaker 1: parliamentary procedure to play they have no means of stopping this.
Speaker 1: It would be like trying to stop a presidential pardon.
Speaker 1: I mean, the president's allowed to pardon, we wants to pardon.
Speaker 1: But they're going to go to that level of what
Speaker 1: if we take the pen out of his hand, What
Speaker 1: if we don't allow him to you know, write it down?
Speaker 1: What if what if we prevent the president from you know,
Speaker 1: That's what we're going to see. I believe that they're
Speaker 1: going to physically block members of Congress from being able
Speaker 1: to hold a session. I think that they're going to
Speaker 1: do things that Right now, if you set out loud,
Speaker 1: people would call you a someone who's being you know,
Speaker 1: worrying too much, who's being hyperbolic. No, I think that's
Speaker 1: what we're going through. I don't know what it is yet,
Speaker 1: but always leave room for crazy, my friends, I've been
Speaker 1: saying that to you for many years. Always leave room
Speaker 1: for crazy. And these Democrats are completely nuts and will
Speaker 1: do anything that they think will be successful to stop
Speaker 1: this Supreme Court nomination. You're in the Freedom Heart. This
Speaker 1: is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Well, the Democrats are
Speaker 1: going to hang together, and I think the American people
Speaker 1: would be very interested to know that is it asking
Speaker 1: too much to have Republicans actually live up to their word? Already?
Speaker 1: Wec that Lindsay Graham. It's not that we see that,
Speaker 1: Mitch McConnell, it's not so Republicans can't be touched this
Speaker 1: to keep their word, and the American people should know
Speaker 1: that we will explore every tool that we Democrats have
Speaker 1: to keep Hitch McConnell from shoving this nominee down our fook.
Speaker 1: They're going to come up with stuff that you and
Speaker 1: I can't even think about right now because they're emotionally
Speaker 1: deranged over this. Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat George Stephanopoulos's wife,
Speaker 1: it was reported in Daily Mail, I forget her name,
Speaker 1: she's like a third third pier actress. Or was she
Speaker 1: cried for forty five five minutes? Obviously this was told
Speaker 1: of the press. Cried for forty five minutes with her
Speaker 1: whole family in the car when they heard Ruth Bader
Speaker 1: Ginsburg passed away. That's bizarre, that's not normal. You don't
Speaker 1: know this person, you don't love this person, give the
Speaker 1: relationship with her. You're gonna cry for forty five minutes
Speaker 1: with your whole family because a judge who we all
Speaker 1: know is really a political figure passes away at the
Speaker 1: age of eighty whatever it was. Really they think that's normal, folks,
Speaker 1: they think that's sane. Thanks for listening to the past.
Speaker 1: Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. Another rule for life,
Speaker 1: not just for politics, but for everything you do. Never
Speaker 1: take advice from your enemy about what's best for you. Okay,
Speaker 1: don't take advice from people who don't want to see
Speaker 1: your future your go well, who don't want to see
Speaker 1: you succeed. When they say, hey, you know what you
Speaker 1: should really do, Listen to that thing and do the
Speaker 1: other thing right, Listen to that thing that they're telling you,
Speaker 1: and then go back to whatever you know is a
Speaker 1: better option and feel even more confident in it. That's
Speaker 1: how you should feel about people like Nancy Pelosi coming
Speaker 1: out to tell you that this is bad politically for Republicans.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be like the twenty eighteen midterms. Right here
Speaker 1: here she is, Nancy Pelosi play. So people know that,
Speaker 1: and that's why the Republicans are rushing. They want to
Speaker 1: get it done so they can overturn the Affordable Care Act.
Speaker 1: And you know what, they're going to be paying this
Speaker 1: price for elections to come, elections to come. Everyone's looking
Speaker 1: at what makes a difference in these senatorial races. We'll see,
Speaker 1: But what they don't really understand is you're going to
Speaker 1: see two eighteen again and again and again. It could
Speaker 1: not be more ironclad. It could not be more clear
Speaker 1: to any of us who are paying attention to this
Speaker 1: that Nancy Pelosi telling Republicans that if they put through
Speaker 1: this Supreme Court justice, whoever it may be, we don't
Speaker 1: know yet. I think it's I think it is gonna
Speaker 1: be Amy Coney Barrett, but it could be wrong. But
Speaker 1: Pelosi telling you that this would be bad for Republicans
Speaker 1: is a is a one hundred percent certainty that Republicans
Speaker 1: will pay a terrible price if they don't do this,
Speaker 1: which we already knew anyway. But notice how shameless she is.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, sure, it's gonna be so bad for this
Speaker 1: is just whining. Republicans. You're gonna lose forever if you
Speaker 1: do this thing. A promise. No, there were probably in
Speaker 1: party would be massacred in the next election if they
Speaker 1: didn't at least do everything they can. Now, when I
Speaker 1: say everything they can, I'm worried that. You know, Democrats
Speaker 1: are going to go to a whole other place that
Speaker 1: I can't even psychologically really get there. You, I'm like, how,
Speaker 1: Remember they were willing to lie about a man who
Speaker 1: was manifestly innocent of any wrongdoing. They were willing to
Speaker 1: read into the congressional record as Kamala Harris, the current
Speaker 1: vice presidential nominee, did unsubstantiated, completely outrageous and insane and
Speaker 1: obviously false gang rape, high school gang rape allegations about
Speaker 1: now Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh. If you're willing to do that,
Speaker 1: you have no morality that will stop you from doing something.
Speaker 1: It's just a question of are you worried about the
Speaker 1: punishment for doing certain things illegal things, for example, open
Speaker 1: violence to stop this from happening. You know, one of
Speaker 1: the reasons why Democrats, I think wouldn't necessarily go the
Speaker 1: open violence route to keep the seat is because there
Speaker 1: are enough people who believe in the law law in
Speaker 1: order that they would be punished for that, because I
Speaker 1: do worry. I worry they're gonna be threats of violence.
Speaker 1: I'm sure they're already are against the very Spreme Court nominees,
Speaker 1: but that they'll become more intense and Republicans we do
Speaker 1: not do a good enough job of protecting our people
Speaker 1: who fall under this ring of hatred from the left.
Speaker 1: I mean, all of a sudden, it's like the eye
Speaker 1: of Soron pops up and is focused on one person
Speaker 1: on the right, and we all say, oh, you know,
Speaker 1: I hope they've got a nice personal security detail or
Speaker 1: something we do not do enough. Never happens in the left.
Speaker 1: When was the last time a prominent Democrat had a
Speaker 1: mob of morons outside his or her home shouting threats
Speaker 1: and epithet insanity over a political issue. We don't do that,
Speaker 1: they do. Look, not all political parties are created equal,
Speaker 1: my friends, or are equal. Not all of them are
Speaker 1: are similar in their and their aspirations, their morality, their
Speaker 1: culture of respect for rule of law, for open discourse,
Speaker 1: for human and individual freedom. They're not all the same,
Speaker 1: all right. You know, the the Bolsheviks winning in the
Speaker 1: Soviet Union was not just something that had to happen,
Speaker 1: and well, it would have been the same if anybody, No,
Speaker 1: it would not have been the same. If some other
Speaker 1: party had won, would have been better. Almost certainly. I
Speaker 1: don't see it's possible. It couldn't have been, right, you know,
Speaker 1: And then people and I don't like the Nazi analogies
Speaker 1: of Democrats to all the time, but you know, the
Speaker 1: Nazis were democratically elected. They cheated and threatened people and
Speaker 1: used coercion, but Nazis were democratically elected in Germany, so
Speaker 1: it's not like that's it, that's impossible. But they were
Speaker 1: clearly much more moral political options in Nazi in Germany
Speaker 1: before it became Nazi Germany. I'm just trying to tell you, folks,
Speaker 1: you know that when I say the Democrats have gone
Speaker 1: and saying and their party has really lost its way,
Speaker 1: I'm not exaggerating. I'm not saying it for attention. It's true.
Speaker 1: It's clear. Look at what is normal for them and
Speaker 1: it's not normal for us, and anybody can see it.
Speaker 1: Conservatives sit around saying, okay, what are the laws what
Speaker 1: really matters? How do we protect people, How do we
Speaker 1: make sure that everyone has, you know, as good and
Speaker 1: safe and prosperous and happy a life as possible. Democrats,
Speaker 1: if this makes me feel upset, and I will ruin
Speaker 1: your life because of it. That is their ethos, and
Speaker 1: they will even threaten your life because of it. Now,
Speaker 1: I mean, I always see these insane libs of things
Speaker 1: that they send me. Here's a rule. If you ever
Speaker 1: you know, and I know no one listens to the show,
Speaker 1: would ever do such a thing. But if one ever
Speaker 1: sends a threat against a person or his family because
Speaker 1: they don't like that individual's po pics, they're a loser.
Speaker 1: That person is a loser and somebody who really needs
Speaker 1: to re examine all their life choices. It's a rule. Normal, happy,
Speaker 1: well adjusted people do not do that. Okay, And we
Speaker 1: should all understand that the Democrat Party has now gone
Speaker 1: to a place where it's it's ideologically incoherent. You have
Speaker 1: all these different factions that don't really share any philosophical
Speaker 1: core other than the pursuit of power, just raw power.
Speaker 1: We'll band together so that you know, you can get
Speaker 1: what you want and I can get what I want.
Speaker 1: When the Democrat Party, that's it. There's no real philosophy
Speaker 1: other than moral relativism and whatever it takes, whenever you
Speaker 1: need to do it. So it's effectively pushing us toward
Speaker 1: a thugocracy, especially as they're openly talking about destroying the
Speaker 1: very institutions that keep this country together. They they complained
Speaker 1: from the beginning of Trump's presidency about how he's tearing
Speaker 1: how he was tearing down institutions. He did not tear
Speaker 1: down any institutions. It's not true, all right, And he did,
Speaker 1: and I would have liked you have seen him go
Speaker 1: after some things more than he did. But he didn't
Speaker 1: tear down institutions. That was a lie. But beyond that,
Speaker 1: beyond that, they now openly threatened to destroy the very
Speaker 1: institutions that they pretended to care so much about for
Speaker 1: the first few years of Trump's presidency. Again, there's just hypocrisy,
Speaker 1: flip flop, it doesn't matter. They'll say today something that's
Speaker 1: in direct contradiction to what they said yesterday or last
Speaker 1: year or ten years ago, and never explain any transformation.
Speaker 1: They're thinking, it's just well, I want this thing now. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Democratsy the equivalent of someone who says, yeah, I don't
Speaker 1: think it's fair for me to pay rent, tell the
Speaker 1: landlord that I don't want to pay, and then someone
Speaker 1: who is a renter from them turns around and says, well,
Speaker 1: I don't want to pay you rent. They say, no,
Speaker 1: I'm the landlord. You have to give me money. That's
Speaker 1: what our contract says. Is there a principle there? No,
Speaker 1: of course not. It's just they want what they want
Speaker 1: and that's the plan. That's all that matters. So we
Speaker 1: should understand that right now. And that's why it's hilarious
Speaker 1: to mean when you hear Chuck Schumer making a making
Speaker 1: a case, making an appeal to honor and decency. Oh gosh, Chuck,
Speaker 1: play nine is in the kind of country we live in,
Speaker 1: This election and this vacancy mean everything, and by all rights,
Speaker 1: by every modicum of decency and honor, Leader McConnell and
Speaker 1: the Republican Senate majority have no right to fill it.
Speaker 1: No right. In the final few weeks, sensing her failing health,
Speaker 1: Justice Ginsburg told her family that it was her quote
Speaker 1: most fervent wish that she not be replaced until the
Speaker 1: new president is installed. First of all, they have every
Speaker 1: right legally, by precedent, by history, by the system. They
Speaker 1: have every right. There is no question about this. They're
Speaker 1: breaking no law, no regulation, no constitutional norm, so they
Speaker 1: in fact have every right. What he's doing is just gaslighting.
Speaker 1: But also, and I want to really put this delicately,
Speaker 1: so the Libs in the way way back who are
Speaker 1: quietly listening to this because they know that I'm smarter
Speaker 1: than all the Libs that they listen to, and they
Speaker 1: want to understand why is this guy so much smarter
Speaker 1: than all the Democrats that are trying to feed me,
Speaker 1: you know, crap on their podcast. I don't give a
Speaker 1: blanking blank about what Ruth Bader Ginsburg told her family
Speaker 1: in the last that's for her and her family. It
Speaker 1: shouldn't even be publicly discussed. It has zero barrier in anything.
Speaker 1: Do not care would say this anywhere to anyone. Do
Speaker 1: not care at all what she said. I don't care
Speaker 1: if her last words were you know, I'm actually a
Speaker 1: space alien from the planet Zarga, or my fondest constitutional
Speaker 1: dream is that the next president and not Trump. It
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. It's the same thing, same thing in terms
Speaker 1: of it matters to me. Zero. It matters to the law,
Speaker 1: to the Constitution, to our system. Zero. But they keep
Speaker 1: repeating this. It's pathetic. It's pathetic, but let's remember who
Speaker 1: we're dealing with. While it's irrational, while it's not a
Speaker 1: real argument, it does drive an emotional response. It does
Speaker 1: go to this cult of RBG that was created over
Speaker 1: many years, and that had, as I've said to you,
Speaker 1: people who think that they're really hip and cool praising
Speaker 1: the amazing fierceness of the RBG gym workout, which is
Speaker 1: just it was a weird thing. Was it was creepy
Speaker 1: cult like thinking from people. But you're not dealing with
Speaker 1: normal adults here, my friends. You're dealing with people who
Speaker 1: now believe that with the passing of Ginsburg, the entire
Speaker 1: country is at stake, which also goes to show you
Speaker 1: how much emphasis they put on the Supreme Court as
Speaker 1: a super legislature and how much they've gotten used to
Speaker 1: this and it really unsettles them. You know, they think
Speaker 1: the foundation of this country is I get what I want,
Speaker 1: and if I don't, at least I know that at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, the Supreme Court will give
Speaker 1: me what I want. And on the issue of abortion alone,
Speaker 1: for how many decades now, if people have been raised
Speaker 1: with this it's constitutional, it's the law of the land, which,
Speaker 1: of course it is not. It is not constitutional, it
Speaker 1: never was constitutional. It is violence to the constitution to
Speaker 1: even pretend that Roe v. Wade was well decided. Honest liberals,
Speaker 1: honest legal scholars on the liberal side, we'll even say.
Speaker 1: They'll say that they think that abortion should be legal,
Speaker 1: and here's why, right, but they'll say that the reasoning
Speaker 1: in row is preposterous. Right to privacy that creates it
Speaker 1: is you can do this with anything. But that's the
Speaker 1: whole point. Libs want to be able to do whatever
Speaker 1: they want through the law and pretend that it's the law,
Speaker 1: which in fact undermines the very foundation of our legal
Speaker 1: system every time they engage in in that practice. But
Speaker 1: imagine what it's like for them to wake up and
Speaker 1: realize that, no, you no longer can just just shout
Speaker 1: people down with it's the law. It might be the
Speaker 1: law in some states, not the law in other states.
Speaker 1: There was a period of time on a profound moral
Speaker 1: question in this country. A profound evil was being done
Speaker 1: in this country, and there were some states that were
Speaker 1: legally much closer. They weren't where they of course should
Speaker 1: have been. At the time, but they were much closer
Speaker 1: to being righteous than others. There were the evil pro
Speaker 1: slavery states and the states in which a black American
Speaker 1: could live in freedom, not equal rights not. And that's
Speaker 1: what I meant by it wasn't perfect, but you know,
Speaker 1: one side was right and one side was wrong on that.
Speaker 1: And once we get away from the constitutional umbrella decision,
Speaker 1: I mean this make believe of Roe v. Wade. Now
Speaker 1: people are gonna have to say, Okay, at the state level,
Speaker 1: what should the law really be. It's not just going
Speaker 1: to be this blanket protection for the practice all nine
Speaker 1: months of a pregnancy, which is the Democrat standard right now,
Speaker 1: and it's a super right as well. You can't even
Speaker 1: block access to a clinic, and you get they create
Speaker 1: all these special exceptions and carve outs to protect this practice,
Speaker 1: a practice that is morally odious and evil. Slavery was
Speaker 1: morally odious, it was evil. Abortion is also odious and evil.
Speaker 1: And the whole, the whole lib mentality of the last
Speaker 1: fifth years, we'll get a new look. Well, all of
Speaker 1: a sudden, it'll have to defend itself. I can't just
Speaker 1: say that that's the law, deal with it. That's the law.
Speaker 1: Deal with We have been dealing with it, we may
Speaker 1: not have to keep dealing with it. And that's what
Speaker 1: the liberals really can't accept. Chuck Schumer's claims about decency
Speaker 1: and honor are laughable. He's a man with neither decency
Speaker 1: nor honor, So in that sense, he's a perfect spokesperson
Speaker 1: for the Democrat Party. Right now, you're in the Freedom
Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Sixty two percent
Speaker 1: of Americans think that the Supreme Court seats should be
Speaker 1: filled by the nominated by the new president. Sixty two
Speaker 1: percent of Americans. We're currently being ruled by minority in
Speaker 1: this country. And at Blue raised one hundred million dollars
Speaker 1: since Friday. The Democrats are mobilized against this outrage that
Speaker 1: is going on with these hypocrites in Republican leadership positions.
Speaker 1: And you know something this they are so beneath any
Speaker 1: kind of shamelessness that it's impossible to even talk to
Speaker 1: these people. So you know, you were going to show
Speaker 1: the clips of them and the stupid things that they'll hypocritics,
Speaker 1: lie things that they've been saying. Joy Behop may be
Speaker 1: the dumbest person on TV, but she understands the Democrat mindset.
Speaker 1: She gives really a really clear picture of what Democrats
Speaker 1: think right now. Republicans are beneath contempt for doing something
Speaker 1: that they are clearly and there's no question about this,
Speaker 1: clearly legally constitutionally allowed to do. And they keep referring
Speaker 1: to the hypocrisy of Mitch McConnell. That's a lie, Mitch McConnell.
Speaker 1: The Senate is not in the hands of the opposition.
Speaker 1: That's the McConnell rule. I don't know. I mean, they
Speaker 1: just they're just desperate, saying everything and anything, which is
Speaker 1: why I'm telling you they're living in an alternate universe.
Speaker 1: They have no argument here. Tough, blank is all I
Speaker 1: can say to them. Tough they have nothing. You know.
Speaker 1: It's kind of like they lost an election in a sense, right,
Speaker 1: they lost the election in twenty sixteen. The Supreme Court
Speaker 1: seats open. Too bad. Maybe they shouldn't have been all
Speaker 1: encouraging Ruth Bader Ginsburg to keep going and going and
Speaker 1: going and going. I mean, she was too old for
Speaker 1: the job. That's just reality. No one's allowed to say
Speaker 1: that for some reason. But she should have retired just
Speaker 1: for political purposes of talking about it. Now, the Democrats
Speaker 1: made it. There was a calculation here, you know, and
Speaker 1: they thought Hillary was they wanted Hillary to replace the
Speaker 1: Ginsburg seat. Or you know, well too bad, too bad libs.
Speaker 1: That's really the that's really the headline here. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcast, the iHeart Radio app, or wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. And one liberal justice nominated by a Democrat,
Speaker 1: they had their life ruined. They're talking about changing the
Speaker 1: electoral college. If they keep the House, the Senate, and
Speaker 1: the White House, this country will change fundamentally. The electoral
Speaker 1: College will be obliterated, will go to a popular vote DC,
Speaker 1: and the Puerto Rico will become states. So will be
Speaker 1: one hundred four senators. It goes on and on and on.
Speaker 1: There'll be additional members of the Supreme Court. They'll all
Speaker 1: be liberal. They're going to take the process, the rules
Speaker 1: and change them to their benefit. Now that sounds scary, right.
Speaker 1: Perhaps you could try to comfort yourself by saying, well,
Speaker 1: it's politics. Things get heated, and you know, it always
Speaker 1: gets more attention to be a catastrophist. It always will
Speaker 1: get you more attention. It's a better SoundBite to say
Speaker 1: that everything is going to be destroyed, everything is going
Speaker 1: to be ruined. But here's what I gotta say in
Speaker 1: defense of Lindsay Graham, or or just in further into
Speaker 1: what Lindsay Graham is saying. Here, he's just telling you
Speaker 1: what the Democrats are telling you. They're they're openly threatening this.
Speaker 1: They're saying they will do this. And yet when you
Speaker 1: hear Republicans say it, you think, I mean, come on,
Speaker 1: They're not really gonna do that, are they? Oh yes
Speaker 1: they will, Oh yes they will. Friends, they tried a
Speaker 1: soft coup against the president of the United States based
Speaker 1: on a lie. Some British bureaucrat loser x m I
Speaker 1: six guy asked a couple of his buddies what they
Speaker 1: had heard from other buddies about Trump. Route it up,
Speaker 1: called it a dussier and then fed it to the
Speaker 1: FBI and the American anti Trump news media and tried
Speaker 1: to engineer a coup against the president. And this went
Speaker 1: all the way to the Special Council. The entire national
Speaker 1: news media, with you know, an exception of a one
Speaker 1: network and a few or whatever five percent of the
Speaker 1: media wasn't on board for this. Everybody else went along
Speaker 1: with it. That was what they did. They've never apologized,
Speaker 1: they've never even had any sense of shame from it.
Speaker 1: In fact, their only problem with it is that it
Speaker 1: did not succeed. And we think that the Democrats are
Speaker 1: just going to let this process play out as it is.
Speaker 1: And we think that if they were to win this election,
Speaker 1: they would not do everything they could to abuse as
Speaker 1: much power as possible. They will transform the system and
Speaker 1: it would be a transformation into what they wanted it
Speaker 1: to be all along. Anyway, they don't like this bulwark
Speaker 1: against their tyranny that the Constitution provides. They don't want
Speaker 1: protections for individual rights and minority I don't mean racial necessarily,
Speaker 1: I just mean minority viewpoint rights. They don't want that.
Speaker 1: They want the power to tell you what to do.
Speaker 1: The Democrat Party is a socialist party. They are socialists.
Speaker 1: Socialists are first informists. You always hear about it as oh,
Speaker 1: making sure everyone has enough whatever. Socialism is always about
Speaker 1: the implementation of a plan. There are a bunch of
Speaker 1: people who have an idea that's going to make everything
Speaker 1: better for everyone, but they demand obedience and no check
Speaker 1: on their authority to do the thing that they need
Speaker 1: to do the plan, whether it's the Green New Deal
Speaker 1: or any number of these Democrat plots to increase their
Speaker 1: power and their ability to have a say over everything
Speaker 1: in your life. You're not allowed to push back, You're
Speaker 1: not allowed to say hold on a second. There should
Speaker 1: be some humility in government processes. Government can do a
Speaker 1: lot of damage. In fact, it does do a lot
Speaker 1: of damage to people's lives on a regular basis. We
Speaker 1: should have some agreement beforehand about what the rules are,
Speaker 1: what the government can and cannot do. Democrats want to
Speaker 1: erase all of that. They're telling you, they want to
Speaker 1: erase all that. This is not some theory that I've
Speaker 1: come up with. I'm not seeing something that nobody else thinks.
Speaker 1: Is there there open about this? Understand what the stakes
Speaker 1: are then in this presidential election year where it's effectively
Speaker 1: if we don't win, we will burn everything down, we
Speaker 1: will break the whole system. That's what these riots for
Speaker 1: months have been about. It's been it's a vent of
Speaker 1: it's a ventilation. It's a exposition of rage that has
Speaker 1: built up among Democrats under four years of Trump. They
Speaker 1: don't think they can emotionally and psychologically handle four more
Speaker 1: years and they're letting us all know. If you think
Speaker 1: you're allowed to vote for this guy again, think again.
Speaker 1: We're going to come up with a way to stop you.
Speaker 1: We're gonna come up with a way to break the
Speaker 1: very process that legitimizes this fascist dictator known as Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: These people are simply put nuts. They have lost it,
Speaker 1: and they believe that all that they hold dear is
Speaker 1: on the line right now. They're raturing this up. Republicans
Speaker 1: have for a long time now lived with a court
Speaker 1: that slaps them in the face with bad decisions. We've
Speaker 1: never we never say we're going to pack the court.
Speaker 1: We never say we're going to destroy the whole system
Speaker 1: because it did not give us a desired outcome. That's
Speaker 1: not our approach. It is the Democrat approach. There's a
Speaker 1: difference here. The two sides are not the same. There
Speaker 1: is socialist AOC talking about what she views as on
Speaker 1: the line here. If the Republicans fill this seat, play
Speaker 1: twenty one, it's extraordinarily important that we understand the stakes
Speaker 1: of this vacancy. Our reproductive rights are on the line,
Speaker 1: Our labor rights are on the line, Our right to
Speaker 1: healthcare is on the line. Labor and union protections are
Speaker 1: on the line, our climate is on the line. With
Speaker 1: an early appointment. All of our rights, the rights that
Speaker 1: so many people died for, voting rights, reproductive rights, healthcare rights,
Speaker 1: all of those rights go right, are at risk with
Speaker 1: this appointment. And so we need to make sure that
Speaker 1: we mobilize on an unprecedented scale to ensure that this
Speaker 1: vacancy is reserved for the next president. Mobilize to one end,
Speaker 1: republic This is do or die for every Republican senator's career.
Speaker 1: They know that. If you're a Republican and you don't,
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, Murkowski and Collins, they're done. People
Speaker 1: recognize who they are. You know. Maybe people would say, oh,
Speaker 1: it's a political calculation. The Republicans want them for some things.
Speaker 1: They'll let them on this because they have the votes.
Speaker 1: All right, maybe theoretically, but the part that's only because
Speaker 1: they have the votes without them. Trust me, if they
Speaker 1: were if they were too necessary votes in this process,
Speaker 1: no Republican would ever want to cast a ballot for
Speaker 1: either than Ever, again, we understand what the stakes are.
Speaker 1: She is telling you, aoc here is telling you that
Speaker 1: they're going to do an unprecedented mobilization what's the point.
Speaker 1: What's the point of that mobilization. We know what they think,
Speaker 1: we know what they want. They're not going to change
Speaker 1: our minds. It's not going to happen. But there's a
Speaker 1: I believe and implied menace to all of this. The
Speaker 1: Democrat Party has been mobilized for months. We see it
Speaker 1: on the streets, demanding people ben venet literally ben venet,
Speaker 1: demanding people profess their allegiance to a Marxist racially divisive
Speaker 1: movement known as Black Lives Matter, Demanding that people stop
Speaker 1: in their cars and quake in fear or else burning
Speaker 1: down businesses, setting fire to government buildings, attacking police officers,
Speaker 1: shooting lasers in their eyes, throwing bottles full of urine
Speaker 1: feces at them. That's what the Democrats have done for mobilization.
Speaker 1: You know, they could have had peaceful marches across the board,
Speaker 1: or they invited Republicans to come down and talk to them.
Speaker 1: They wanted to convert people they want an independence, to
Speaker 1: understand that Democrats would provide better governance, better quality healthcare,
Speaker 1: more for no. No. Instead, you've got a bunch of
Speaker 1: maniacs who justify political violence and who think that if
Speaker 1: you don't believe there are thirty seven genders. You're an evil,
Speaker 1: anti science bigot. That's the Democrat Party today. And then
Speaker 1: let's just look at a couple of the areas, a
Speaker 1: couple of the issues that AOC outlines for being under assault.
Speaker 1: Here are reproductive rights. I know we often don't put
Speaker 1: it in these terms, but given what Democrats are willing
Speaker 1: to justify as part of the abortion industry, what do
Speaker 1: you think they're really not willing to do to their
Speaker 1: fellow human beings. It's a harsh question, but I think
Speaker 1: it's an important one. Ask a Democrat politician, should you
Speaker 1: be able to abort a baby at eight nine months?
Speaker 1: Eight nine months in the womb? And they will say yes.
Speaker 1: I mean, they might try to dodge the questions that,
Speaker 1: but ultimately they will say yes. If they're willing to
Speaker 1: do that. Do you think that they have some guiding
Speaker 1: moral compass on other issues that's all of a sudden,
Speaker 1: humane and decent. Now, I'm afraid that they're they're moral compass.
Speaker 1: I'm afraid that their very souls themselves become corrupted in
Speaker 1: this process. And when somebody who has been a party
Speaker 1: to evil ideas for a long time is challenged on
Speaker 1: them and might have to face the reality of the
Speaker 1: widespread recognition of the moral deficiencies of those ideas. They
Speaker 1: become desperate. Nobody wants to think they're the bad guy
Speaker 1: or the bad girl. Nobody wants to think that sometimes
Speaker 1: the mirror shows you things you don't want to see.
Speaker 1: Climate is on the line, they believe, and I'm not
Speaker 1: exaggerating this. I'm not going beyond the most mainstream rhetoric
Speaker 1: from the most powerful Democrats in the country. They believe
Speaker 1: that climate is an existential crisis that threatens the entirety
Speaker 1: of the human race. Our species will go extinct unless
Speaker 1: you listen to people like Gavin Newsom and take shorter
Speaker 1: showers and use renewable energy that is hyper expensive and
Speaker 1: very inconvenient. Right now, that's mainstream Democrat thinking. They really
Speaker 1: believe this. I still can't get a great deal on
Speaker 1: beach run property in Palm Beach despite the science. But
Speaker 1: you're supposed to believe this, friends, You're supposed to believe
Speaker 1: twenty years, thirty years, it's all gonna be underwater. Okay,
Speaker 1: sell me those beach right, Sell me the Obama Mansion
Speaker 1: and Martha's vineyard for you know, couple one hundred grand,
Speaker 1: I'll pay a couple of hundred grand. I could probably
Speaker 1: take out a bank loan and a FOURD that. I
Speaker 1: think he paid eleven million for his house. But I
Speaker 1: thought it's all gonna be underwater. But they believe they
Speaker 1: have convinced themselves it is an existential issue for the
Speaker 1: human race. What would you be willing to do to
Speaker 1: save the human race? What would you be willing to
Speaker 1: do to protect the legacy and future of your party
Speaker 1: from the recognition of its deep moral stain with the
Speaker 1: abortion practice of the last forty some odd years. What
Speaker 1: would you be willing to do? I can't tell you.
Speaker 1: I know what their plan is, but we're about to
Speaker 1: find out. This is the calm before the storm, and
Speaker 1: it's not even that calm because we're an election cycle. Well,
Speaker 1: we've got a few days here while all that's happening
Speaker 1: is there's silence. Is the enemy, so to speak, is
Speaker 1: preparing its artillery shells and getting all of its magazines
Speaker 1: in order for an all out assault. That's where the
Speaker 1: Democrats are right now. Will it be successful? I don't know.
Speaker 1: I certainly hope we'll be able to hold the line,
Speaker 1: but They're not going to go quietly on this. Friends.
Speaker 1: They have no real legal recourse, They have no mechanism
Speaker 1: within our system to stop this. So you're effectively guaranteed
Speaker 1: they will go outside the system or break the system.
Speaker 1: That's it. There is no they sit back respectfully and
Speaker 1: allow the game to be played by the pre established
Speaker 1: and agreed upon rules. That is not an option. And
Speaker 1: for these Democrats, do not be fool You're in the
Speaker 1: freedom und This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that Donald J. Trump, Donald J. Trump
Speaker 1: People gets to name three justices to the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: The guy can't even name three branches of government, but
Speaker 1: he gets to name three justices who served for life.
Speaker 1: This is the same guy who's had to fire everyone
Speaker 1: he's hired because of how bad he isn't hiring people
Speaker 1: for life. Trump can't even pick his own partner for life,
Speaker 1: but he gets to do it for America. Wow, this
Speaker 1: country's rock and roll. Wow, this guy's not funny. Amazing,
Speaker 1: really really stunning circumstances. Situation that Trevor Noah is a
Speaker 1: comedian who focuses on American politics despite being wildly ignorant
Speaker 1: of them. Nonetheless, here we are. Yeah, the president does
Speaker 1: get to pick three crime or libs. I know what
Speaker 1: else to say? This is the system we have. You know,
Speaker 1: when Barack Obama won reelection in twenty twelve, and you know,
Speaker 1: just kick Mitt Romney's butt after kicking John McCain's. But
Speaker 1: I was annoyed. I thought the American people made the
Speaker 1: wrong decision. And then I thought, okay, let's you know,
Speaker 1: prepare to make the argument and be in political opposition
Speaker 1: of bad policies and get ready for the next election.
Speaker 1: That's what adults do. That's what serious people with principles
Speaker 1: and values and a sense of history and a need
Speaker 1: for stability and continuity within our system. That's what they do.
Speaker 1: That is not what Democrats do. And they're promising I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm not making this up. They're promising that that is
Speaker 1: not what they will do. Well, there's another issue here.
Speaker 1: Biden is not willing to tell people who he is
Speaker 1: going to put who he would put forward as a
Speaker 1: Supreme Court nominee. Isn't that an interesting one? For a second?
Speaker 1: Play clip twenty Joe Biden has refused to list the
Speaker 1: names of his potential justices because he knows they're too
Speaker 1: extreme to withstand any form of public review. If Joe
Speaker 1: Biden and the Democrats take power, they will pack the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court with far left radicals who will unilaterally transform
Speaker 1: American society far beyond recognition. Let's all really dig into
Speaker 1: this for a second. Pruser, Mark, Do we have Biden
Speaker 1: actually saying that that's all he's got to say on that.
Speaker 1: I don't know if we know that, Okay, because I
Speaker 1: know that he said, there's a clip of it. But anyway,
Speaker 1: he's just basically said, I don't want people to focus
Speaker 1: on me, Let's focus on something else. When he's asked
Speaker 1: who he would appoint or would he put forward a list,
Speaker 1: even give him some time to pull together list. Shouldn't
Speaker 1: he have a list? He wants to be president of the
Speaker 1: the United States. You don't think there are a lot
Speaker 1: of left wing legal groups out there that have already
Speaker 1: thought long and hard about which judicial activist, left wing
Speaker 1: climate change alarmist nut they're going to put on the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court. Trust me, they've thought about this. Why won't
Speaker 1: Biden tell us? Well, this gets you back to a
Speaker 1: continuing theme between Democrats and Republicans. Republicans tell people what
Speaker 1: they want to do, right, and then they try to
Speaker 1: do it in office. Sometimes they're unsuccessful. Sometimes Democrats don't
Speaker 1: want the general public to know what they're really going
Speaker 1: to do because they won't win any independent votes if
Speaker 1: people actually knew how crazy they were. So Democrats always
Speaker 1: pretend to be less Democrat when they're up for election.
Speaker 1: If anything, Republicans are often not Republican enough. They lose
Speaker 1: votes because the base doesn't believe them. You know, Republicans
Speaker 1: lose votes because people on the right think that they'll
Speaker 1: become a you know, a chicken when they get to DC,
Speaker 1: and they'll be a chrony capitalist, chamber of commerce stooge.
Speaker 1: Democrats are, We're not that crazy. No, we wouldn't do that.
Speaker 1: We're we're centrists, man, We're Joe Biden's party, man. Yeah. Sure.
Speaker 1: And then the activist class gets to make all the
Speaker 1: decisions when it actually when push comes to shove, and
Speaker 1: then the socialists are the ones who get on TV,
Speaker 1: who run the party's agenda, who pushed for the most
Speaker 1: radical I mean, look, Obama wanted single pair of healthcare
Speaker 1: and couldn't get it because they didn't have enough Democrat
Speaker 1: support for it. But that was what they were initially
Speaker 1: going for Obama wanted amnesty and Republicans almost went along
Speaker 1: with it. And Obama tried to get massive climate change
Speaker 1: regulations done, rules and laws passed. How much more left
Speaker 1: wing is he really going to be under the circumstances
Speaker 1: at the time. I know, I know that he couldn't
Speaker 1: go full Carl Marks, but certainly moving in that direction.
Speaker 1: But we're reminded here Biden won't tell people what Trump says.
Speaker 1: It is absolutely true. Biden will not tell people who
Speaker 1: he would put on the Supreme Court because it would
Speaker 1: be a left wing activist and people would get to
Speaker 1: know exactly what the Democrat plan for that seat is.
Speaker 1: Got to hide the truth. People. Thanks for listening to
Speaker 1: The bus Essen Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts,
Speaker 1: the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Back then,
Speaker 1: we were not aware that forty to forty five percent
Speaker 1: of people were asymptomatic, Nor were we aware that a
Speaker 1: substantial proportion of people who get infected get infected from
Speaker 1: people who are without symptoms. That makes it overwhelmingly important
Speaker 1: for everyone to wear a mask. So when people say, well,
Speaker 1: why did you change your stance and why are you
Speaker 1: emphasizing masks so much now when back then you didn't
Speaker 1: and in fact you even said you shouldn't because there
Speaker 1: was a shortage of masks. Well, the data now are
Speaker 1: very very clear, and that's why we have to act
Speaker 1: on the data. So we need to put that nonsense
Speaker 1: behind us about well they keep changing their minds. Masks work,
Speaker 1: physical distancing works, avoiding crowds work. Thank you Sanjay for
Speaker 1: giving me the opportunity to be on television now to
Speaker 1: say that that is the fact. So people should not
Speaker 1: worry that that's wrong or worry that that's something that's
Speaker 1: going to change. This is where we are and it
Speaker 1: is based on fact. Okay, where are the studies that
Speaker 1: show the reduction and transmission from mask wearing? I'm just wondering.
Speaker 1: I asked that question. Honestly, I'm sure there are some.
Speaker 1: There are probably some studies. Just why why don't we
Speaker 1: see them all the time? Why is it that Sweden
Speaker 1: doesn't have masks required and is now at basically zero
Speaker 1: close to zero deaths a day and very very few
Speaker 1: infections and has no plans to shut down. The UK
Speaker 1: currently is about to shut down. Wait, I thought that
Speaker 1: America was in a bad place the summer from COVID
Speaker 1: because we're such a bunch of red state Bible thumping
Speaker 1: Trump supporting morons. Right, that was what the media was
Speaker 1: telling us all summer. But now Europe is having its
Speaker 1: second wave. Oh wait, maybe maybe what you do by
Speaker 1: locking down is delay the spread of the virus in
Speaker 1: a community to a population of people. You don't stop it?
Speaker 1: Is that? Is that a theory that holds water? Someone
Speaker 1: give us some thought on your own. But Fauci here saying, oh,
Speaker 1: we didn't realize that there was all this asymptomatic There
Speaker 1: was this asymptomatic spread that was going on, and we
Speaker 1: thought there was gonna be a mask shortage. How much
Speaker 1: confidence can I have in this guy's judgment when he
Speaker 1: really thought that the United States of America was going
Speaker 1: to run out of bandanas and cloth masks. Anybody we'll
Speaker 1: get a run out? Wait? Oh yeah, I can't can't
Speaker 1: wear a mask looking out of masks. No we're not.
Speaker 1: But I don't even clue. Now they're given out. I
Speaker 1: got to places they're giving out masks. Now here you go,
Speaker 1: here's a mask. Yeah. It's the issue here, as always
Speaker 1: has been, is this aerosol eyes in a way that
Speaker 1: mask wearing is largely ineffective or largely effective. If it reduces,
Speaker 1: you know, the transmission of virus by five percent, it's
Speaker 1: not worth the hassle. It's just not for a virus
Speaker 1: that kills point zero zero one percent or point zero
Speaker 1: three percent or whatever it is now of the people
Speaker 1: who get it. But we're gonna be wearing masks forever now, folks,
Speaker 1: that's the new rule, at least for another year. And
Speaker 1: as I've been telling you, the Democrat plan is not
Speaker 1: to finally relent and let America have its have its
Speaker 1: life back. The Democrat plan is to use our fear,
Speaker 1: our frustration, and the almost un restricted powers that they
Speaker 1: now have in order to ram through policies that they
Speaker 1: want and to and to change our political culture too
Speaker 1: into one of obedience. Do it because we say so? Wait,
Speaker 1: hold on, don't I have rights? Don't I have liberties? No?
Speaker 1: You don't you have what they tell you you have? Now? Oh? Interesting,
Speaker 1: you know, the doctor fauci here is never this guy's
Speaker 1: This guy's not not honestly a person of judgment, not
Speaker 1: a person that I would want to listen to for
Speaker 1: a personal health need like I wouldn't go to doctor
Speaker 1: Fauci and be like, oh, yeah, this guy says that
Speaker 1: this is my big health problem. I got to tackle
Speaker 1: it the way that he says. Nope, no faith in
Speaker 1: this guy whatsoever. But of course Trump can't fire him
Speaker 1: because then that would seem like he's you know, political,
Speaker 1: It would just give them a narrative before the election.
Speaker 1: It doesn't really serve I think any I don't. I
Speaker 1: don't think it serves a purpose. It's a political calculation
Speaker 1: not to fire him. At this point. What I'm trying
Speaker 1: to say, they did change their minds, and the fact
Speaker 1: that here you have a scientist who is kind of
Speaker 1: smarmy about the whole mind changing issue of just goes
Speaker 1: to show you that, you know, they don't want anyone
Speaker 1: questioning them. They don't want anyone saying, hold on a second,
Speaker 1: what is this all about? You know? Sure enough? Now
Speaker 1: now now we're at we're at asymptomatic spread, so everyone
Speaker 1: has if asymptomatic spread is what they say it is,
Speaker 1: they'll have a case then that we'll have to wear
Speaker 1: masks all the time for years and years to come,
Speaker 1: because who knows if maybe it's a COVID nineteen variant
Speaker 1: now and it could come back and you don't know,
Speaker 1: you could have it. There's only one thing at this
Speaker 1: point that I want to tell Fauci and the lockdown chorus,
Speaker 1: and it's two words, and the second one is you,
Speaker 1: and the first word is I can't say it on radio.
Speaker 1: That's what I want to say to them. I'm tired
Speaker 1: of this. I'm sick of this. They've been wrong all along,
Speaker 1: and now we're getting into the politics, even of the
Speaker 1: aerosolized virus. You see this with the CDC. They changed
Speaker 1: their guidance on this. They said it was a draft,
Speaker 1: it wasn't yet ready. That's kind of a big thing,
Speaker 1: isn't it. You're the Centers for disease Control. People have
Speaker 1: been wondering for a while, like what you really do?
Speaker 1: And then COVID nineteen comes along, and oh, okay, and
Speaker 1: now we've got a purpose. And you mess up the
Speaker 1: whole thing from the start. You mess up the testing
Speaker 1: kits when it was most useful to know how fast
Speaker 1: and where the virus was spreading. And now you put
Speaker 1: out that the virus is spread through aerosol as opposed
Speaker 1: to droplets. And this is a pretty this this is
Speaker 1: an important distinction. Droplets is spit and things coming out
Speaker 1: of your mouth and including when you talk or saying
Speaker 1: or you know, do things like that. Droplets would be
Speaker 1: actual physical carriage of the virus in in fluid, even
Speaker 1: you know, very small. But and theda here is that, okay, Well,
Speaker 1: a mask will stop those droplets from being in the
Speaker 1: air aerosolize virus, which is what the CDC guidance just
Speaker 1: was temporarily and then they took it down, they changed
Speaker 1: their minds. Would be well, just by speaking, the virus
Speaker 1: is actually getting into the air in micro droplets that evaporate.
Speaker 1: But then you still essentially you have virus clouds in
Speaker 1: the air around people when they're talking, right, and viruses
Speaker 1: are all over our environment all the time, so there
Speaker 1: shouldn't be a surprise there's virus all though. There's virus
Speaker 1: right now on your hands, there is virus on your body,
Speaker 1: there's virus in your mouth, not covid but although maybe
Speaker 1: but they're you know, these viruses are in our environment
Speaker 1: just like bacteria, just like all these other you know,
Speaker 1: go back to your basic sixth grade science class. It's
Speaker 1: all over the place. But the aerosolized virus claim that
Speaker 1: was so interesting because oh, so it's can linger in
Speaker 1: the air and it's so small that it can stay
Speaker 1: suspended in the air for a couple of hours. That
Speaker 1: was what the CDC guidance was now saying. But people
Speaker 1: that are walking around with the mask down so their
Speaker 1: nose is a little bit exposed, or that have gaps
Speaker 1: above the mask and below the mask, they're totally protected
Speaker 1: from this. Right because of the magic properties of virus protection.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you this, The cloth masks that people are
Speaker 1: wearing would not work as a as a prophylactic device
Speaker 1: during amorous moments to prevent you from having children. Right,
Speaker 1: it's porous, But the cloth mask is supposed to protect
Speaker 1: you from the aerosolis droplets in the air. That now
Speaker 1: the CDC is saying, well, no, that's not really a thing.
Speaker 1: That's not really a thing I'm just putting out there.
Speaker 1: Do we think it's possible that at a time when
Speaker 1: we've already we've already heard the CDC told us that
Speaker 1: they were they were adjusting their their dictates, their guidance
Speaker 1: they call it. But it's really a dictation. We're supposed
Speaker 1: to do what they say over mask wearing because they
Speaker 1: were worried that people would that the healthcare providers would
Speaker 1: run out, so they lied to us for our own good.
Speaker 1: On that one right, they've admitted that. But now when
Speaker 1: we're about to enter the second right, when they were
Speaker 1: supposed to be finding out about a vaccine, we're getting
Speaker 1: a second wave of panic here, this is what they
Speaker 1: want to do. No, or really, no, I'm sorry, a
Speaker 1: third wave of panic about a fall winter wave of
Speaker 1: this virus, and they're shutting down their own guidance that
Speaker 1: was published, but they said it was a draft and
Speaker 1: they were ready. Yet that says that the virus is
Speaker 1: so small that it stays in the air once an
Speaker 1: infected person has been breathing there for hours. And you're
Speaker 1: supposed to believe that a loosely fitted piece of cloth
Speaker 1: over your mouth and nose is a serious means of
Speaker 1: protecting yourself from that. Okay, don't ask any questions. Don't
Speaker 1: don't ask any questions. Now does it protect you at
Speaker 1: some level? You know? Is it better to have one
Speaker 1: than I mean, maybe, under certain circumstances, maybe it's five
Speaker 1: percent fifteen percent more effective than did not have it,
Speaker 1: because yeah, maybe some of the particles are big enough
Speaker 1: that they get. But this idea that mask wearing is
Speaker 1: the panacea, which is really what we've been led to believe.
Speaker 1: Now we've gone from don't wear a mask to maybe
Speaker 1: to sometimes to oh my god, masks will cure us.
Speaker 1: All that's now the new theory. Masks will stop this
Speaker 1: thing in its tracks if only you did more and
Speaker 1: wore more mask. No, not buying it. Not buying it.
Speaker 1: This wasn't the guidance for influenza seasons in the past,
Speaker 1: when people were dying in large numbers tens of thousands,
Speaker 1: not quite two hundred thousand, but tens of thousands dying
Speaker 1: from pandemic disease during influenza season. So you know, they
Speaker 1: don't They don't want you to ask any questions. Just
Speaker 1: do just obey. That's the that's the new way forward.
Speaker 1: They'll tell you you're in the freedom mind. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show podcast. Doctor Anthony Fauci overnight may
Speaker 1: clear that he thinks we will be and should be
Speaker 1: wearing masks probably for all of twenty twenty one. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, that's that's the thing people talk about. The vaccine,
Speaker 1: which I think people are optimistic about, although we still
Speaker 1: haven't seen data on that. That's another issue that people
Speaker 1: have creating all these schedules and the sort of being
Speaker 1: optimistic about it, and I am as well, but we
Speaker 1: haven't seen the data from this Phase three trial. It's
Speaker 1: a blinded trial. No one has really seen this data yet.
Speaker 1: But I think what doctor Fauci has said, what others
Speaker 1: have said as well, is that it's not going to
Speaker 1: flip a switch even when the vaccine comes, and that
Speaker 1: wearing masks indoors, especially now at the knowledge that this
Speaker 1: can spread through aerosols, is going to be important for
Speaker 1: some time to come. Until we get to that that,
Speaker 1: you know, sixty seventy percent at least to the country
Speaker 1: being immunized and staying immunized, it's going to be hard
Speaker 1: to to let her are down telling you you're gonna
Speaker 1: be wearing masks at least in the Blue States under
Speaker 1: law until at least at least let me think this
Speaker 1: time next year, and probably beyond that. So if the
Speaker 1: Democrats have their way, you're I would say it's going
Speaker 1: to be March of twenty twenty two before they stop
Speaker 1: acting like mask psychos. I'm outside, I'm by myself. There's
Speaker 1: no more than thirty feet, I'm wearing a mask. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right, And tell me that it's not a political prop.
Speaker 1: When Joe Biden is doing interviews from his basement in
Speaker 1: his home and there's no one obviously within fifteen feet
Speaker 1: of the guy you can see on the shot, and
Speaker 1: he's wearing a mask during an interview like a moron.
Speaker 1: Oh no, no, no, there's no there's no reason. Why
Speaker 1: are people putting masks on for their profile photos on
Speaker 1: social media? Democrats are doing this in particular? Why it's
Speaker 1: a it's a prop of a sick country, a country
Speaker 1: sick by because of Donald Trump, but one that will
Speaker 1: beat this thing if we all just take the collective
Speaker 1: action dictated to us by the expert class of Faucian Company.
Speaker 1: It's unbelievable. It's it's unbelievable. I mean, never before have
Speaker 1: we had such a willingness for healthy people to live
Speaker 1: as though they are sick people because there are some
Speaker 1: people who are going to get sick no matter what
Speaker 1: the healthy people do. That's not good. That's not good
Speaker 1: quarantine policy. That's not good health policy. But that's where
Speaker 1: we are. I told you that even if if Biden wins,
Speaker 1: you're gonna get a national mask mandate. They're gonna politicize
Speaker 1: this even further. We're not done here, folks. I know
Speaker 1: people are sick of this, tired of it. Puck Mask
Speaker 1: goes to the mask. They're taking away your freedom. They
Speaker 1: are making decisions for you. They do not have the
Speaker 1: right to do. Do people care about this or not?
Speaker 1: Including in some of the writer states, And look what's
Speaker 1: been going on in Texas. This is not just a
Speaker 1: New York thing of the New York is the worst.
Speaker 1: Just remember, we're gonna be told to wear masks as
Speaker 1: we walk into a store for thirty seconds, but you're
Speaker 1: not gonna wear a masks sitting down in indoor dining.
Speaker 1: And you have been wearing masks in indoor dining all
Speaker 1: over New York State. New York City is just gonna
Speaker 1: be opening up soon. But you know, doctor Fauci wants
Speaker 1: you to know it is not true that they're putting
Speaker 1: too many restrictions on people and that there's too many
Speaker 1: costs from this. He's oh, I'm sorry, is he a
Speaker 1: policy expert? Now? This guy is really a third tier intellect.
Speaker 1: He's really not very bright, folks. I know we're not
Speaker 1: always a scientist oh, beget the and O'Neill before high
Speaker 1: priest fauci this, this guy is no squad. When was
Speaker 1: he right when it mattered? When was he right in
Speaker 1: advance of something? No? All along he's like, you know,
Speaker 1: I think we're gonna do this, and then, you know,
Speaker 1: listening to experts the data live in fear forever shut
Speaker 1: down the economy. You know, maybe one day, given a
Speaker 1: few years, it'll go away. How would we have been
Speaker 1: better off, or rather what we have been worse off
Speaker 1: without the CDC even existing. I'm just wondering what would
Speaker 1: have been better if we had no CDC. That's a
Speaker 1: question that I want to ask. But here he thinks
Speaker 1: that people who are complaining about this are you know,
Speaker 1: we're being babies played two. It really depends upon the
Speaker 1: level of virus in the community that you're in, And
Speaker 1: that's where I think we get a lot of pushback
Speaker 1: and concerned. If people think that our recommendations are being
Speaker 1: too stringent and we're interfering with people's freedom to do
Speaker 1: what they want to do or getting in the way
Speaker 1: of opening up the economy, that's not the case at all.
Speaker 1: You've got to adjust your public health measures in this
Speaker 1: context of the situation you're in. Okay, fouch five people
Speaker 1: died from COVID nineteen in New York City, which has
Speaker 1: eight point seven million people. Yesterday, five people still can't
Speaker 1: go into a restaurant, sit down and have a cheeseburger.
Speaker 1: Five And I say, oh, buck, but that's not important.
Speaker 1: It's kind of important to one hundred and fifty thousand
Speaker 1: people whose jobs, whose ability to pay their bills and
Speaker 1: have healthcare. It's kind of important to them that we
Speaker 1: can do that. But we're adjusting our health policy. He says,
Speaker 1: five hundred new cases in I'm sorry, no, no, two
Speaker 1: hundred and sixty new cases in New York City eight
Speaker 1: point five million, larger than a whole lot of entire states.
Speaker 1: That's how big New York City is. This place is vast.
Speaker 1: A few hundred people, a few hundred people of cases,
Speaker 1: of whom will be totally fine. And of the five
Speaker 1: people who died, it's very sad. Every life is precious.
Speaker 1: I'd be willing to guess, just based on the numbers
Speaker 1: we've seen that the average age was seventy five or eighty,
Speaker 1: which is to say that this is dangerous to older people.
Speaker 1: The rest of us should be able to live our lives.
Speaker 1: This is nuts, but the mask mania is increasing right now,
Speaker 1: even as cases going down in New York because it's political. Friends,
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeart Radio app, or
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. But this is what the
Speaker 1: president wants to hide from us. He's got something going
Speaker 1: with Vladimir Putin. We know that he's got a bromance
Speaker 1: with all of the dictators across the world. And it's
Speaker 1: not just Putin, but there seems to be something special
Speaker 1: regarding Putin by you talk about Urtawan, you talk about Deterto,
Speaker 1: you talk about Kim Jong Owen. He has he loves
Speaker 1: these guys. Now, this is the president who wants to
Speaker 1: be authoritarian just like them. This is why the America
Speaker 1: have a choice in this election, and we're gonna have
Speaker 1: the continuation of the Trump killos and interference with institutions
Speaker 1: that would be should be telling us American people the
Speaker 1: truth or are we gonna have a Joe Biden who
Speaker 1: will tell us the truth? You know, lying is not
Speaker 1: something that Joe Biden does, but it comes out of
Speaker 1: the President's mouth. Since the very first time he even
Speaker 1: set foot, even before them in the White House. Who
Speaker 1: and why he votes for this imbecile. I mean, I
Speaker 1: just want to know. I want to meet someone in
Speaker 1: Hawaii who who cast their vote for Maziehrono and feels
Speaker 1: good about it. You can say you don't like the
Speaker 1: Republican if you're a Democrat. I get it. You know whatever, Fine,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to win that argument. But I just
Speaker 1: want to know who's like, yeah, Mazie, that's who we
Speaker 1: want to be making important decisions for our state. Trump
Speaker 1: has a bromance with the dictators of the world. Foreign
Speaker 1: policy has been one of these areas during the Trump
Speaker 1: administration where the results are just objectively better than what
Speaker 1: you had under the very haughty Obama foreign policy team
Speaker 1: that came in and oh, we're not going to do
Speaker 1: stupid stuff, they said, and then they did really stupid stuff.
Speaker 1: It was Obama who drew the red line in Syria
Speaker 1: and then didn't do anything. Obama and Hillary Clinton really
Speaker 1: that pushed for the toppling of Kadafi and Libya without
Speaker 1: any real plan or idea of what was going to
Speaker 1: come next. The rise of Isis, which led to mass casualty,
Speaker 1: terrorist attacks on European and US soil. Things getting worse
Speaker 1: in Iraq, worse in Afghanistan, our relationship with I mean Aim,
Speaker 1: a country we had that was a place where where
Speaker 1: we were challenged beforehand, and you will have a place
Speaker 1: that Obama made things worse. But this line about how
Speaker 1: Trump loves dictators so much, it's just too much fun
Speaker 1: for the Libs to say, it's just too too easy
Speaker 1: to take this cheap shot all the time. Look, Trump,
Speaker 1: you know he tried his unorthodox approach with Kim Jong
Speaker 1: un and it has not worked. Okay, it hasn't worked.
Speaker 1: I live in reality. He tried. But the thing that
Speaker 1: the Libs never understood about North Korea diplomacy was that
Speaker 1: Trump made no concessions. There was nothing lost in this,
Speaker 1: There was no there was any other all. But he's
Speaker 1: talked to him directly. Well, how are you ever going
Speaker 1: to get a breakthrough if you don't actually have a
Speaker 1: real discussion with the leader of a country that's a
Speaker 1: true autocracy. Trump tried. Hasn't worked yet. Maybe it would
Speaker 1: work the next four years. But unlike when Obama was
Speaker 1: on the world bowing toward all the different dictators and
Speaker 1: then giving pallets of cash to the Iranians and signing
Speaker 1: that horrific or on nuclear deal. Unlike the Obama administration,
Speaker 1: there's nothing you could point to that is a problem
Speaker 1: here that has been made worse as a result of
Speaker 1: Trump's foreign policy. If anything, it's the first president in
Speaker 1: a very long time who hasn't started a war in
Speaker 1: a country it is possible, it is possible, and not
Speaker 1: to get drawn into a war or go deeper into
Speaker 1: a pre existing war as president United States. That is
Speaker 1: something that we have seen now that is not beyond
Speaker 1: the scope of possibility. And they hate the president for this.
Speaker 1: They hate him for this because foreign policies are particularly
Speaker 1: for people who worked in the news and the news media.
Speaker 1: They believe that it's a way to separate themselves from
Speaker 1: the less knowing. They think that their sophistication shows because
Speaker 1: they know the name of a foreign capital before they
Speaker 1: go on air that they just googled five minutes before that.
Speaker 1: They think that this is how they distinguished themselves from
Speaker 1: the Hoi polloi and all of this, and that's why
Speaker 1: they one of the reasons why they hate Trump so
Speaker 1: very much right now on this issue and why they're
Speaker 1: going to continue to talk about how he is a
Speaker 1: stooge for dictators, or he's got a bromance, as Mazie
Speaker 1: Harrono says, I mean Obama had a bromance with the
Speaker 1: Castro regime, with the Maduro regime in Venezuela. Obama was
Speaker 1: bowing to the Mullahs in Tehran. You know you're not
Speaker 1: gonna You're not gonna have ISIS doing what it did
Speaker 1: under Trump administration. Isis figure that Obama was going to
Speaker 1: be too risk averse to really handle the problem. And
Speaker 1: they were right. They were right, and we saw the
Speaker 1: results of that. But on foreign policy, you're not gonna
Speaker 1: hear that much about it. They're going to keep with
Speaker 1: this nonsense about the bromance, that all the rest of that,
Speaker 1: because anyone who's really watching this would say, hold on
Speaker 1: a second. Trump was supposed to be a catastrophic failure.
Speaker 1: We're gonna get World War three, they said, and instead
Speaker 1: you get Midias peace deals that none of his predecesses
Speaker 1: were able to get done. You get no new wars,
Speaker 1: and you get a confrontation on trade with China where
Speaker 1: everyone said, don't do that, don't do that. Trump did it,
Speaker 1: and he was right. He was right to do it.
Speaker 1: He was right to finally confront Chinese predatory trade policies
Speaker 1: that they were enriching the Chinese Communist Party at the
Speaker 1: expense of Americans and American companies. Obama administration didn't do
Speaker 1: a darn thing about it. They sat around, and the
Speaker 1: Republicans were in a sense also guilty on this one
Speaker 1: because they went along with it. They figured, we're all
Speaker 1: going to be more We're all gonna be more wealthy
Speaker 1: because well, at least they're gonna be not you. They
Speaker 1: were going to be more wealthy because of free trade
Speaker 1: and big corporations shoring jobs. Who needs jobs in America.
Speaker 1: We're all just gonna have really cheap stuff from Walmart
Speaker 1: made in China. That was the deal. Wasn't a good deal,
Speaker 1: was it. President understands that the Biden record, especially on
Speaker 1: foreign policy and on China and a whole bunch of things,
Speaker 1: the Biden record is a major week spot for these Democrats.
Speaker 1: Play nineteen Joe Biden should not be asking for your support.
Speaker 1: He should be begging for your forgiveness, and he should
Speaker 1: be Biden supported the disastrous Transpacific Partnership. This building wouldn't
Speaker 1: be here if you ever did that one, which would
Speaker 1: have been a death sentence for the US auto industry
Speaker 1: and other industrials. He supported the horrendous Korea deal. Okay,
Speaker 1: how about the South Korea Deal. It's a disaster. So
Speaker 1: that was a Hillary Clinton deal, I must say, not him,
Speaker 1: although I guess he had to, you know, his advice. Hey,
Speaker 1: you know what's interesting with Biden? So he always says,
Speaker 1: why didn't the president do this? And what did the
Speaker 1: President do that? And why didn't do this? Sent the
Speaker 1: guy he's been there for forty seven years, but he
Speaker 1: just left like three and a half years ago, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean? He was there, and I keep
Speaker 1: saying why didn't you do it? Why did you do it?
Speaker 1: You know, could have done it. It's not like he
Speaker 1: was twenty five years ago. They were there three and
Speaker 1: a half years ago. Why didn't you do it? Sleepy Joe?
Speaker 1: What is the big Biden accomplishment? Did anyone want to
Speaker 1: point to it? An I want to explain. It seems
Speaker 1: to me that his biggest accomplishment has been to be
Speaker 1: an intense mediocrity who's gotten reelected to the Senate over
Speaker 1: the course of several decades. That's his biggest accomplishment. He's
Speaker 1: the quintessential politician who just wants to get reelected. That's
Speaker 1: what matters to him. Wants to be in that position,
Speaker 1: get that salary, have that influence. That's it. There's been
Speaker 1: nothing else. This guy's not about public service. And he's
Speaker 1: also not about saying the pledge of allegiance correctly. Place sixteen.
Speaker 1: This was Biden yesterday, America. I've pledge of leegures to
Speaker 1: the United States of America, one nation ended his wonder
Speaker 1: God for real. Huh. It's like the truncated Biden version there.
Speaker 1: They know he's a loser, folks, but they think this
Speaker 1: time they can just make him into a winner. They
Speaker 1: can carry him across the finish line. That is the plan.
Speaker 1: And here is his promise to all of you in
Speaker 1: the meantime. Play fifteen. I'm running as a proud Democrat,
Speaker 1: but I'm not going to govern as a Democrat or president.
Speaker 1: I'm going to govern as president. Are you criticized for
Speaker 1: saying this? Sometimes so some in my party, But that's
Speaker 1: not what I'm going to do. I'm going to fight
Speaker 1: as hard for those who supported me as those who
Speaker 1: did not support me. This is not a partisan moment.
Speaker 1: For God's sake, this has to be an American moment.
Speaker 1: He's really insulting our intelligence, there, isn't he? Yeah, sure
Speaker 1: he's got How is he going to fight as hard
Speaker 1: for those who didn't vote for him? By having more
Speaker 1: government regulations on the businesses that they want to work
Speaker 1: for or start and open themselves, By increasing government intervention
Speaker 1: in a whole bunch of different ways in the marketplace,
Speaker 1: to raise the price of things, to raise taxes. Well,
Speaker 1: what exactly is Biden you gonna do that makes your
Speaker 1: life better? Hopefully he won't, as we've seen with previous
Speaker 1: Democrat administrations, come up with some humanitarian quote humanitarian reason
Speaker 1: to send your sons and daughters off to some godforsaken
Speaker 1: country to go fight a war that we don't need
Speaker 1: to fight. Look to this day, I learned quite a
Speaker 1: lesson from the Bush years, and it's one that I
Speaker 1: also learned from doing at some level, having gone to
Speaker 1: a rock in Afghanistan during the Bush years, and there
Speaker 1: was a lesson learned there about the Republican foreign policy establishment,
Speaker 1: Neo Khan interventionism and never again, folks, not something we
Speaker 1: should ever do. And the Republican party, instead of focusing
Speaker 1: on themestic policy issues that really mattered and should have
Speaker 1: mattered to the American people, did go with some foreign adventurism,
Speaker 1: if you will, foreign policy interventionism that had very negative
Speaker 1: outcomes and was not worth the was not worth the
Speaker 1: price tag, certainly in lives lost and also in treasure spent.
Speaker 1: So I think that we're past that now as a
Speaker 1: Republican party, where we're not going to go to war
Speaker 1: because some bad thing is happening in some other country
Speaker 1: and it makes Libs feel sad on their way to
Speaker 1: the farmers market in you know, Palo Alto. That that's
Speaker 1: actually not because they're not the ones who are going
Speaker 1: to be all fighting that war. By the way, just
Speaker 1: remember that the you know, the think tank interventionists and
Speaker 1: the various neo cons within the government, they're not the
Speaker 1: ones that are the ones that are pushing for these ideas.
Speaker 1: Often they're they're not signing up to fight anything sending
Speaker 1: you over there, sending your children, your grandchildren over there.
Speaker 1: So that's a big foreign policy shift too, because remember
Speaker 1: Democrats are very happy to go to war when it's
Speaker 1: not just in America's interest. They're very happy to go
Speaker 1: to war just because it makes them feel good about
Speaker 1: some issue. Right, They'll actually send people off to fight
Speaker 1: so that they feel better about what's happening in some
Speaker 1: other part of the world, which is, in my view,
Speaker 1: a grotesque betrayal of what it should mean to deploy
Speaker 1: US military force for the policy class. It should not
Speaker 1: be for the benefit of non Americans in someplace that
Speaker 1: is not as strategic and critical US national security interest.
Speaker 1: So I hope that's a lesson than we've all learned.
Speaker 1: But just on foreign policy in general, their criticisms of
Speaker 1: Trump are annoying. Oh and I forgot. There's a story
Speaker 1: today of Politico I saw about how there's a secret
Speaker 1: CIA not so secret anymore, apparently a secret CIA assessment
Speaker 1: that says that Putin is running information operations online to
Speaker 1: defame President Biden. I don't even know if if I
Speaker 1: have the the patients to go into this in any
Speaker 1: particular detail. I mean, this is just stupid beyond words.
Speaker 1: First of all, as somebody who used to write assessments
Speaker 1: for the CIA, there are a lot of things that
Speaker 1: get written in that building, and most of them are worthless,
Speaker 1: and a lot of them are wrong. I'm just telling
Speaker 1: you the truth most CIA analysis is just the process
Speaker 1: is the product. We're paying people to look at this thing,
Speaker 1: and they're writing papers that very few people who actually
Speaker 1: make any decisions. One of the reasons I let the CIA,
Speaker 1: I was like, what am I Even if I want
Speaker 1: to influence the administration, I have much more influence now
Speaker 1: than I did when I was a CIA analyst. Even
Speaker 1: when I would go on Capitol Hill or go to
Speaker 1: the White House, I mean occasionally getting to speak the
Speaker 1: President directly. I guess you have some influence as a
Speaker 1: CI analyst. That was very rare. People were shocked I
Speaker 1: was so young I was able to even do that.
Speaker 1: But you know, in general, it's a lot of just
Speaker 1: busy work, a lot of nonsense. But oh, the CIA,
Speaker 1: the same CI that had the m D assessments, right,
Speaker 1: that's CIA for the Iraq war. They're now saying that
Speaker 1: Putin They're they're not certain, They're saying that they think
Speaker 1: probably probably Putin is doing information operations to defame Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: You know what, the best information operation to defame Joe
Speaker 1: Biden is letting the man speak, letting him out of
Speaker 1: the basement. I think today they put a lid on Biden.
Speaker 1: They call it on the campaign. Sorry, liddle on Biden,
Speaker 1: let me out, Let me out. It's not like that.
Speaker 1: They put a lid on the campaign, which means that
Speaker 1: they're shut basically shutting down any public appearances or statements
Speaker 1: or thing for Biden for the rest of the day.
Speaker 1: They put it a lid on at nine am. This
Speaker 1: guy doesn't have it, folks. But they don't remember the
Speaker 1: same attitude they have about they'll burn down the system.
Speaker 1: They'll tear down the system, they'll do whatever they have
Speaker 1: to be in power. The mission here is just to
Speaker 1: get people to fool people who are not partisan Democrats
Speaker 1: into voting for Joe Biden in some swing states, and
Speaker 1: then they'll do whatever they have to do afterwards to
Speaker 1: get what they want. That they don't care beyond that right,
Speaker 1: they don't care what norms they break, and that's all.
Speaker 1: It's all nonsense. Understand the opposition here, and you will
Speaker 1: understand exactly what's really possible. So they won't feel they
Speaker 1: won't be upset if they end up, but they won't
Speaker 1: feel ashamed if six months after a Joe Biden victory
Speaker 1: they go, yeah, it looks like Joe's not feeling well,
Speaker 1: so he's gonna step aside and Kamala Harris is now
Speaker 1: the president the United States. They're gonna think they've pulled
Speaker 1: off a coup or you know, a planned transfer of power.
Speaker 1: They think they're gonna have pulled off an amazing, an
Speaker 1: amazing scheme and will have saved the country and the process.
Speaker 1: That's what they really believe. So I don't think that
Speaker 1: there's anything that's really beyond them. You're in the Freedom.
Speaker 1: This is the Buck Sex and Show podcast. One thing
Speaker 1: I just want to know from yesterday before we get
Speaker 1: into into roll call here, you had build the Blasia
Speaker 1: who's so upset. You had this DOJ designation of New York, Seattle,
Speaker 1: and Portland as zones of anarchy of the de Blasio
Speaker 1: administration because he's busy ruining New York City. Blasio administration was.
Speaker 1: It was fascinating what he had to say about this
Speaker 1: play twelve. You know, I was out in Elmer's Queen's
Speaker 1: this morning. I saw peace, tranquility. I saw people going
Speaker 1: about their business, people excited that this the first day
Speaker 1: of school. I saw anything but anarchy. So this is
Speaker 1: just another one of President Trump's games. It's thoroughly political
Speaker 1: it's part of his campaign strategy. It makes no sense.
Speaker 1: It is not based in the facts in the least.
Speaker 1: It's insulting to the people in New York City, and
Speaker 1: his effort to withhold our fund is unconstitutional. Yeah, sure
Speaker 1: it is, buddy. It's oh man, it's amazing to hear
Speaker 1: de Blasia talking about this, the guy ruining the largest
Speaker 1: city in America, and he is the really the Democrat,
Speaker 1: the Democrat epitome of poor government, a governance. Now, that
Speaker 1: is a drag of what you see happening in these
Speaker 1: major cities. This is a drag on the Democrats hopes
Speaker 1: this fall. We all know it. They're just pretending like
Speaker 1: it's not actually happening. But you know, in New York,
Speaker 1: even Governor Cromo was like it was an embarrassment. That night,
Speaker 1: the purge night I call it. When there were mobs
Speaker 1: running outside my own home here in New York. This
Speaker 1: was very real to me. I could hear them, I
Speaker 1: could I saw the shattered glass and broken windows and everything.
Speaker 1: Next morning, and this mob that was running around was
Speaker 1: effectively able to run free. Because de Blasio doesn't want riding,
Speaker 1: lawbreaking cry babies to have to do with the big
Speaker 1: bad mean mypd So they get to break stuff, ruined stuff.
Speaker 1: You had those two pampered lawyers through a Molotov cocktail
Speaker 1: into a cop car here. That happened in New York, folks.
Speaker 1: I mean this is let's not forget the insanity that
Speaker 1: this country has been through, all because of democrats, all
Speaker 1: because they didn't get their way or they feel like
Speaker 1: there's too much oppression or there's injustice, and then gives
Speaker 1: them a license to act like total maniacs, gives them
Speaker 1: a license to just ruin things for everybody else because
Speaker 1: they feel like it. Oh okay, wow, I gotta tell you,
Speaker 1: it's pretty astonishing to watch this continue. But the only
Speaker 1: way we get justice. Friends, November third, just remember that
Speaker 1: that's the only way. Thanks for listening to the buses
Speaker 1: and show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple Podcasts, the
Speaker 1: iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get your podcasts. Liberty, Truth
Speaker 1: and Great Hair. Feel those funky beats. It's time for
Speaker 1: roll Call. Roll Call Everybuddy, Facebook dot com, slash buck
Speaker 1: Sexton Team Bucket, iHeartMedia dot com. If you want to
Speaker 1: email us and remember buck Sexton dot com go check
Speaker 1: it out. You can listen to the podcast. There. We
Speaker 1: have the Best of Buck Now Daily. If you just
Speaker 1: want to listen to a forty five minute condensed version
Speaker 1: of the show, but it's about forty five producer marks
Speaker 1: that right an hour under an hour. Usually we try
Speaker 1: to keep it under an hour. We'll keep it under
Speaker 1: an hour. We'll shoot for under an hour, you know,
Speaker 1: an hour or less. I think it's what we'll try
Speaker 1: to shoot for. You know, it might be sixty two
Speaker 1: minutes one day and fifty four another or whatever, but
Speaker 1: try to keep it under an hour. But if you
Speaker 1: want to listen to condensed version of the show, you've
Speaker 1: got that option too, And that way we kind of
Speaker 1: pull the ones be thinking most because sometimes I go
Speaker 1: two or even three segments on one topic. So the
Speaker 1: condensed version of the Best of Buck Daily will be
Speaker 1: we'll move along faster into the different topics, so you'll
Speaker 1: kind of get a shorter version of the show. For
Speaker 1: those of you that like to listen on demand of
Speaker 1: the podcast, please do check that out. That's in our
Speaker 1: it's in the same feed. You don't have to write,
Speaker 1: they don't have to subscribe to anything new. It's just
Speaker 1: that's what's popping up in their feed now is that right? Yes? Okay,
Speaker 1: that is correct? Just making sure and also go to
Speaker 1: bucksextonbook dot com if you want to buy the Socialism
Speaker 1: Survival Guide dealing with the biggest issues than this election,
Speaker 1: it's really an election and beyond book looking at the
Speaker 1: economy as well, and there's some advice for my friends
Speaker 1: at Stansbury Research about financial decisions that you can make
Speaker 1: in response to these political realities that we're facing now
Speaker 1: of socialism. So bucksextonbook dot com sign up for a
Speaker 1: Stansbury newsletter. There you'll get to copy the book. Please
Speaker 1: do check that out. And with that I moved to
Speaker 1: your thoughts, your comments, your musings, and another wonderful acts
Speaker 1: of whimsy. And that's I'm kind of run out of
Speaker 1: my ability to um producer mark, where did it? Where
Speaker 1: did it go? I'm trying to I'm actually trying to
Speaker 1: find the role is it in the thing? It's the
Speaker 1: same email every day and the same emails every day? Correct?
Speaker 1: All right? Dan is up first, He writes, this is
Speaker 1: an interesting way to start one as a degenerate sports gambler.
Speaker 1: I find it quite simple to gauge the strength of
Speaker 1: one's conviction bet on it. Not long ago, my liberal
Speaker 1: friend from Boston was pontificating on the recklessness of professional
Speaker 1: sports for resuming in the US. We strongly disagree on
Speaker 1: the dangers of COVID for those younger than sixty. So
Speaker 1: I proposed a bet if anyone across all four major
Speaker 1: league sports MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, and even soccer dies
Speaker 1: of COVID it in twenty twenty, I will pay him
Speaker 1: a thousand dollars. He would owe me a thousand dollars
Speaker 1: if no one dies. Surprise, surprise, he declined. My offer
Speaker 1: still stands, and I even sweetened it to include anyone
Speaker 1: who is simply hospitalized. Forget death. Liberals don't believe any
Speaker 1: of this nonsense themselves. They enjoy whatever illusion of authority
Speaker 1: and entirely false pretense provides, as their real lives consist
Speaker 1: of no real control. My wager offer stands, and if
Speaker 1: you know anyone who would like to take me up
Speaker 1: on it, then, in the immortal words of Al Bundy,
Speaker 1: Let's rock, were you married with children? Watcher back in
Speaker 1: the day, producer Mark, I've seen episodes here and there,
Speaker 1: but I think it was a little before my time.
Speaker 1: It was a little earlier I was. I was very
Speaker 1: young when that show was on. That show I remember
Speaker 1: was really popular for a while. That show was like
Speaker 1: a phenomenon. I've definitely watched episodes in syndication on like TBS,
Speaker 1: you know, when I was a kid. Yeah, yeah, Oh. All.
Speaker 1: She went on to be in Sons of Anarchy, the
Speaker 1: who played Peggy Beal. I think is her name something
Speaker 1: Beal anyway, not Jessica Bile. I was gonna say Jessica Biale.
Speaker 1: No Mary justin Timberlake, I know, whatever. You can't be
Speaker 1: sad about that anymore. You have the snow Princess, correct, correct, Well,
Speaker 1: obviously it all worked out in the end, So there's that. Plus,
Speaker 1: she's a I think she got in some trouble for
Speaker 1: some anti vax Oh Katie Katie Katie Seagal I think
Speaker 1: is her name or Siegel Seagal, I don't know, not
Speaker 1: being confused with Steven seagal Man. I watch a lot
Speaker 1: of martial arts movies back in the day. That's actually
Speaker 1: my big complaint, my only real complaint about the Cobra
Speaker 1: Kai series. I just wish the martial arts were a
Speaker 1: little better, you know, I mean karate, you know, if
Speaker 1: you're throwing I'll throwing like high kicks in a fight.
Speaker 1: I mean, good luck to you. You're probably gonna get
Speaker 1: your face pounded in. But I'm just saying, but I
Speaker 1: know someone's gonna write be like book, I could throw
Speaker 1: a flag tornado kick that would that would take down
Speaker 1: any assailant, armed or unarmed, instantly. And I'm like, Okay,
Speaker 1: I'm glad that Taekwondo has convinced you that the spinning
Speaker 1: high kick is a high, high percentage move in a
Speaker 1: life and death self defense situation. But anyway, um, yeah,
Speaker 1: I wish I just wish the karate in. I wish
Speaker 1: the karate the Karate Kid was better. You know, Ralph
Speaker 1: Maccio never learned any karate really, I mean he did
Speaker 1: a little bit for the for the movies, but the
Speaker 1: Zabka and I'm really I'm really kind of a Johnny
Speaker 1: Lawrence fan. I'm just gonna say it. Zabka, who plays
Speaker 1: Johnny Lawrence in the in the Cobra Kai as well
Speaker 1: as the original Karate Kid movies. He became a green belt.
Speaker 1: He actually, you know, got a grounding in karate, so
Speaker 1: I gave him credit for that. I feel like if
Speaker 1: you're gonna be known for being the bad guy from
Speaker 1: the Karate Kid, like you gotta learn a little karate.
Speaker 1: But Ralph Maccio, I don't know, too busy doing other things. Uh.
Speaker 1: Fun fact producer Mark, My mother was in a bubble
Speaker 1: yum commercial with Ralph macchio. Um and it is on YouTube.
Speaker 1: Huh yeah, nineteen seventy nine, nineteen eighty something like that.
Speaker 1: My mom was was in commercials back then. And yeah,
Speaker 1: she was in a commercial with Ralph Moncio. And it's
Speaker 1: actually a good commercial too, Like it really you know,
Speaker 1: it sells that bubble gum. Tell you that it makes
Speaker 1: you really want to chew gum. Yes, it makes you
Speaker 1: really want to chew you know, to this day, I can't.
Speaker 1: I can't blow a bubble. Yeah, I can't either, and
Speaker 1: I've tried. I've been laid a car before and I've
Speaker 1: been that. My dentist wants me to start chewing gum.
Speaker 1: Because I talk so much during the day, my mouth
Speaker 1: gets dried out. It's very bad for your teeth. I
Speaker 1: don't know. If you know that, it doesn't have to
Speaker 1: talk a lot. Your mouth gets dry and then it's
Speaker 1: I probably should be drinking water instead. Of coffee, which
Speaker 1: I'm just reminded of that now, although I love my coffee.
Speaker 1: So anyway, the great Ben Scully used to chew on
Speaker 1: jolly ranchers in his mouth. Have the jolly rancher in
Speaker 1: his mouth during every game. I'm pretty sure that would
Speaker 1: turn your teeth into a rotting session. Sugar Okay, yes, yes,
Speaker 1: hard hard sugar candy is not good for your teeth.
Speaker 1: See I believe in science. Hashtag science hasta, hashtag dentists.
Speaker 1: Totally all right, Richard Buck, Hello, my friends. So at
Speaker 1: first I was on the fence with replacing the notorious RBG.
Speaker 1: The Biden rule has been around since pushed the elder right.
Speaker 1: But there's no good faith from Madams and Obama to
Speaker 1: dispose of that rule. So why should we let the
Speaker 1: Democrats dictate the rules? I think I read Carter appointed
Speaker 1: a justice during the lame duck session before Reagan. It
Speaker 1: was okay, then, what's wrong that now we should win
Speaker 1: and put a conservative in? Now the Dems are gonna
Speaker 1: writhe and rage. It's going to get crazy. Hold your
Speaker 1: gabbles and shields high well, Richard, I agree with your
Speaker 1: final assessment that we should just do this thing. I
Speaker 1: think that's the right move. And I think that all
Speaker 1: this talk about self imposed uh you know congressional I
Speaker 1: mean a congressional rule that's not really a rule, meaning
Speaker 1: it's just something that someone in Congress says. Is just
Speaker 1: a statement of politics, right, Oh, we're going to vote
Speaker 1: on this now, or we're not going to vote on
Speaker 1: this now, because we're Anything that involves discretion for these
Speaker 1: elected leaders when it comes to appointments of people to
Speaker 1: these offices is just political by its very nature. So
Speaker 1: I don't care what was said before. I don't care
Speaker 1: what they said. It was a different time, it was different,
Speaker 1: you know. I'm not gonna Yeah. Of course people left
Speaker 1: flip flop depending on which side of the issue now
Speaker 1: benefits them. And that's what I expect. These are politicians.
Speaker 1: That's what they do. They mislead. It's part of the job. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: Michael writes book, you asked, if Trump isn't reelected, will
Speaker 1: the goop survive? I've thought that many times in my life.
Speaker 1: But the gop is more like the cat came back.
Speaker 1: But we thought he was a goner, But the cat
Speaker 1: came back because he couldn't just stay away. Producer Mark
Speaker 1: Is that like a song lyric is what a song layer?
Speaker 1: The cat came back. We thought he was a goner,
Speaker 1: but the cat came back because he just couldn't stay away.
Speaker 1: What is that? What is Michael trying to? Is that
Speaker 1: some inside thing? I I'm just saying, I don't think so. Yeah,
Speaker 1: like cats just wander, I guess I always think of
Speaker 1: Cat Stevens and you got a lady over, you got
Speaker 1: you got some zema, you got a six package. There
Speaker 1: is a song I just googled, the Cat came back.
Speaker 1: There's a song in a movie there. See it's a reference.
Speaker 1: That's I could smell reference there or read it, I suppose.
Speaker 1: But yeah, God, I missed the late nineties Friends, Zema,
Speaker 1: grunge rock, or good shows like Seinfeld. Seinfeld not as
Speaker 1: good as Friends, but still. Uh. What keeps the GOP
Speaker 1: alive is it's belief and moral base and the thought
Speaker 1: where are we all going to go? Also people like Reagan, Trump,
Speaker 1: Cruise Meadows and the new up and coming people that
Speaker 1: convince us there's hope and to try once again. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: we in the GOP get stuck with the McCain's, Romney's, Murkowski's,
Speaker 1: Collins and Bushes who are more interested in their personal
Speaker 1: power and gratification and are at best chair warmers for
Speaker 1: the Democrats. They see their place and don't care about
Speaker 1: the future of this nation or their own party for
Speaker 1: that matter. Yeah. Look, there's no shortage of disappointing Republicans
Speaker 1: out there. I don't think there's any question about that.
Speaker 1: And look, I hope that the most dire prognostications about
Speaker 1: the future of the GOP if Biden were to win
Speaker 1: this thing, I hope that those are untrue. I hope
Speaker 1: that we are able to come back. But I can
Speaker 1: see a future in which it's not. It's just remember this.
Speaker 1: Let's say the GOP only goes into the political wilderness
Speaker 1: for one of your thirty years. Well, that's much of
Speaker 1: the rest of my life. So so do I really
Speaker 1: care if the GOP comes back to be a majority
Speaker 1: party in forty years? I mean, yeah, for my imaginary
Speaker 1: yet kids and grandkids maybe, But for me, is I
Speaker 1: gonna make all that much difference. So it's also why
Speaker 1: it's so important for everybody to have parts of their
Speaker 1: lives that are not political and to think about things
Speaker 1: other than politics. That's why I totally get why producer
Speaker 1: Mark just wants to watch sports and why these days
Speaker 1: I'm playing a little bit of Call of Duty on
Speaker 1: PlayStation four. I mean, you just need to give your
Speaker 1: and I really should be like, you know, praying and
Speaker 1: working out more. But you need these areas of your life.
Speaker 1: You understand where all this stuff. Ultimately, you don't want
Speaker 1: to be a nihilist like nothing matters, but can't let
Speaker 1: the politics seep into every realm of your brain. You
Speaker 1: got to have those those places where you have inner
Speaker 1: peace and you have a greater sense of purpose. That's
Speaker 1: why people of belief in God is I think so necessary,
Speaker 1: not just helpful, but necessary in life. Michael, Oh no,
Speaker 1: we already did. Michael. We'll come back with more in
Speaker 1: a sec. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sex and Show podcast TJ Wrights Buck. I agree
Speaker 1: with you and Rush that cocaine Mitch should consider foregoing
Speaker 1: the Scotus nominee Senate hearings and go straight to a vote. However,
Speaker 1: I would contend that, assuming we can still get the
Speaker 1: vote done in a short amount of time following the hearings,
Speaker 1: such hearings may actually be politically expedient for Republicans as
Speaker 1: they will show in some form or another the complete
Speaker 1: lunacy of the left, especially in regards to the anti
Speaker 1: Catholic bigotry you mentioned yesterday, that will only create a
Speaker 1: bigger divide between sensible people and the Democrat Party. With
Speaker 1: all that being said, for the sake of the future
Speaker 1: nominees integrity, the most respectable thing to do would be
Speaker 1: to forego the hearing process to avoid the libel and
Speaker 1: slender that will undoubtedly be on show for whomever Trump's
Speaker 1: nominee is. My prediction, hearings will be held and one,
Speaker 1: if not both, of Collins and Murkowski will end up
Speaker 1: voting for the nominee. Yeah, TJ, I didn't know that
Speaker 1: the Great Rush Limbaugh agreed with me on this one,
Speaker 1: So thanks for letting me know that. I think we
Speaker 1: should have a vote right now. Namer. That's gonna be
Speaker 1: a her Namer vote on her. Get it done. There's
Speaker 1: nothing to be people that say, oh, we'll see how
Speaker 1: crazy the Democrats are to m Yeah, but you're said,
Speaker 1: who knows you're taking risk? Friends? You know why, you
Speaker 1: know why even speak to the FBI if you don't
Speaker 1: have to, even if you're innocent, you're taking a risk,
Speaker 1: say nothing right, you know some of my most What
Speaker 1: are the two things of advice that I'm positive when
Speaker 1: I tell you, we're comfortable shoes, never talk to the
Speaker 1: FBI's I feel like I'm making people's lives better by
Speaker 1: just them those two things. For the for the purposes
Speaker 1: of the Bucks Exton show, We're comfortable shoes, never talk
Speaker 1: to the FBI. And I don't see I don't see
Speaker 1: the advantage here. I don't see the upside in putting
Speaker 1: or putting her through this. So there you have it.
Speaker 1: There you have it. I just think that this is
Speaker 1: all downside and I could be wrong, but we're taking
Speaker 1: a risk. Remember what the Democrats try to do with
Speaker 1: the FBI investigation of cabin They were just stalling for
Speaker 1: time to put more pressure on people. You don't know
Speaker 1: what kind of pressure they're they're gonna bring to bear.
Speaker 1: You don't know what member of the Senate all of
Speaker 1: a sudden is gonna get a you know, a phone
Speaker 1: call from some oppo research or some Republican senator. You're
Speaker 1: not even thinking of saying, hey, you know your your
Speaker 1: daughter is you know, she's a principle of this company,
Speaker 1: and we think there might be some some financial and
Speaker 1: proprietory going on there. I don't want her to be
Speaker 1: caught up in a white collar criminal thing. But you know,
Speaker 1: you really got an important vote here, Senator So and So.
Speaker 1: You know, I mean, that's the kind of pressure I'm
Speaker 1: talking about. I'm not talking about just you know, shrieking
Speaker 1: lunatics yelling at people like Jeff Flake, and then Jeff
Speaker 1: Flake soils himself and the scag. I'm talking about real pressure.
Speaker 1: You're just extending the time for them to figure out
Speaker 1: a way to get to couple Republican senators, a couple
Speaker 1: of them. It's all it takes. Julie Right here. In
Speaker 1: O Claire, Wisconsin, we have an ice rink in town
Speaker 1: by the name of Hobbes. The Liberal City, County and
Speaker 1: Health department have the homeless population housed on one of
Speaker 1: the rinks. The kids have now started hockey in other
Speaker 1: ice skating practice, they are sharing the building with the homeless.
Speaker 1: This is under approval of city management. In addition, the
Speaker 1: skaters are required to wear masks while on the ice
Speaker 1: playing hockey. This is not recommended by the CDs SEE
Speaker 1: or USA Hockey. We continue to struggle with how to
Speaker 1: stand up for our kids and make changes. Julie, I'm
Speaker 1: sorry to hear that. And you know you're seeing a
Speaker 1: lot of this. I've seen this too, that I have
Speaker 1: to wear a mask in my gym. That's not CDC guidance,
Speaker 1: that's CUOMO guidance. Why are they making this crap up?
Speaker 1: Or at least it's not World Health Organization guidance. I
Speaker 1: don't know. Maybe it is CDC guidance now, I mean,
Speaker 1: but don't ask about why they're changing. Ye're changing because
Speaker 1: it's so important. Now, Oh, okay, sure it is. Anybody
Speaker 1: who believes that crap, I don't know. That's too far
Speaker 1: gone for me to be able to save their minds
Speaker 1: at this point. But yeah, the arbitrary restrictions the use
Speaker 1: of power during this period of time very very troubling.
Speaker 1: I'm sorry about that, Julie. But just you know, keep
Speaker 1: your kids safe and just stay in the fight. We'll
Speaker 1: get through it, seem that's my message for all of us.
Speaker 1: Stay in the fight. We'll get through it. It's gonna
Speaker 1: be one heck of a ride here as we get
Speaker 1: close to the election, But understand this that the relief
Speaker 1: if the election goes our way, we'll be short lived too,
Speaker 1: so she'll tie