Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio of the
Speaker 1: George Washington Broadcast Center.
Speaker 2: Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty arm Strong and get Katie
Speaker 2: and he Armstrong and Getty and I'm going you're going
Speaker 2: to go.
Speaker 3: I do believe because I have listened to this argument
Speaker 3: for so long. And this is not about Chinese billionaires
Speaker 3: or billionaires from other countries who all of a sudden
Speaker 3: have seventy five children, or fifty nine children in one case,
Speaker 3: or ten children becoming American citizens. This was about slaves.
Speaker 1: Talking about the birthright citizenship Supreme Court case. The oral
Speaker 1: arguments are today and Trump has a riven.
Speaker 2: He is there.
Speaker 1: Do you fancy I'm looking at the cable news channels.
Speaker 1: He's there at the sup Supreme Court. First time ever
Speaker 1: a sitting president has gone to take in the oral arguments.
Speaker 1: What the President was talking about in the and that
Speaker 1: is interesting and we'll talk about about it. But what
Speaker 1: he was talking about in that clip we played was
Speaker 1: the fourteenth Amendment. It was not about Chinese billionaires popping
Speaker 1: out surrogate kids to have US citizens, probably as a
Speaker 1: spy army. It was about the children of slaves. When
Speaker 1: the fourteenth amendment was passed. More on that no moment,
Speaker 1: there's Brooks Schaffer from The News Nation explaining that not
Speaker 1: everybody agrees with.
Speaker 4: The potus this order, though it has faced a lot
Speaker 4: of criticism, particularly among Democrats and immigration advocates. They warned
Speaker 4: that if upheld, it could impact millions of immigrants already
Speaker 4: living here and hundreds of thousands born each year. This
Speaker 4: order so check of the neighbor impeatedly blocked by lower
Speaker 4: courts across the country. Some legal experts believe the Supreme
Speaker 4: Court will do the same.
Speaker 1: I don't understand the way the left works looks at
Speaker 1: the world. That will affect a whole bunch of people. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so what it's either the right policy or not the
Speaker 1: right policy at the end, however many people it affects
Speaker 1: now or in the future is irrelevant.
Speaker 2: It's either right or wrong.
Speaker 5: I think you've quite skillfully highlighted one of the main
Speaker 5: features of leftist thinking. It's not about principle, it's about
Speaker 5: outcome anyway. So here's what we're arguing about, essentially, and
Speaker 5: the administration its lawyers agree that, yeah, we're asking for
Speaker 5: a change in the interpretation from the way it's gone,
Speaker 5: but The reasoning behind the way it's been interpreted for
Speaker 5: a long time is very very thin.
Speaker 2: To wit. The fourteenth Amendment was.
Speaker 5: Ratified right after Civil War, well ratified in eighteen sixty eight.
Speaker 5: It begins quote, all persons born or naturalized in the
Speaker 5: United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens
Speaker 5: of the United States.
Speaker 2: The question is, does this.
Speaker 5: Language confer us citizenship on babies who whose parents are
Speaker 5: in the country illegally or very temporarily, and that was
Speaker 5: traditional understanding is yes. Trump says no, But that was to.
Speaker 1: Make sure sure that you know, in the most racist
Speaker 1: states Alabama or Mississippi, hey, those people are citizens. Whether
Speaker 1: you like it or not. They are right and they
Speaker 1: get all children the rights.
Speaker 5: But that just because they're slave parents weren't quote unquote citizens,
Speaker 5: doesn't mean the kids ain't. That's the whole reason for it. Now,
Speaker 5: I'm shooting from the hip here. I've not read deeply
Speaker 5: on this, But if the intention was that, and you're
Speaker 5: an originalist, I would think you'd go back to their
Speaker 5: original thinking and think, Okay, everybody who could conceivably be
Speaker 5: the child of a slave was gone by I don't
Speaker 5: know whatevery.
Speaker 2: Year nineteen twenty.
Speaker 1: I mean unless you live to be one hundred and fifty,
Speaker 1: so it no longer applies period.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you've gotten way ahead of me, but you're one
Speaker 2: hundred percent right. Yeah.
Speaker 5: So the constitutional provision has come before the Supreme Court before.
Speaker 5: In a case called Wong kim Ark in eighteen ninety eight,
Speaker 5: the justices recognized the citizenship of a man born to
Speaker 5: Chinese parents in San Francisco. The majority said, and I
Speaker 5: quote the fourteenth and affirms the ancient and fundamental rule
Speaker 5: of citizenship by birth within the territory. All children here
Speaker 5: born of resident aliens. Now, the few exceptions, and this
Speaker 5: is where it gets interesting, because they absolutely recognized that
Speaker 5: there are exceptions. They included children of foreign diplomats because
Speaker 5: you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.
Speaker 5: You have diplomatic immunity enemies during hostile occupations. You can't
Speaker 5: have Poncho vin as boys invade the US have a
Speaker 5: bunch of kids and say they're US citizens, and particularly
Speaker 5: Native American tribal nations which were considered self governing, their
Speaker 5: children are not automatic US citizens under that you know
Speaker 5: at that time. But the Trump administration is arguing that
Speaker 5: the Court has not answered the question the current question
Speaker 5: not directly. Congress did not pass the first modern immigration
Speaker 5: law until eighteen seventy five, so for much of our history,
Speaker 5: migrants could free enter the United States and take up
Speaker 5: permanent residence. The government points out, and Wong kim ark
Speaker 5: concerned children of aliens with a lawful domicile in the
Speaker 5: United States, not children of temporarily present aliens or illegal aliens,
Speaker 5: a concept that was practically unknown until you know closer
Speaker 5: to the modern era. So the crux of the dispute
Speaker 5: is what does it mean to be subject to US jurisdiction.
Speaker 5: The opponents of the Trump administration say this simply refers
Speaker 5: to people who are under the government's authority, including illegal aliens.
Speaker 5: If you murder somebody's an illegal alien, well not in
Speaker 5: Chicago or or La or New York, but you get
Speaker 5: arrested and tried and punished, so clearly you're under the
Speaker 5: jurisdiction of the United States government. But people on our
Speaker 5: side of it argue that birthright citizenship covers only people
Speaker 5: completely subject to US political jurisdiction, meaning those who will
Speaker 5: direct an immediately allegiance to the nation may claim its
Speaker 5: protection Its rating excludes babies born to temporary viaseholders, as
Speaker 5: well as illegal migrants who lacked the legal capacity to
Speaker 5: form a lawful domicile, not to mention birth tourists for
Speaker 5: goodness sakes.
Speaker 1: So there are thirty three countries, according to Claude, that
Speaker 1: grant unconditional birthright citizenship, many of them in the Americas.
Speaker 1: But these are go way back for a variety of
Speaker 1: reasons that they did. That people have been getting rid
Speaker 1: of this over recent decades. I didn't know this. Notable
Speaker 1: examples of countries that ended unrestricted birthright citizenship in recent
Speaker 1: decades include the UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, India. In Ireland,
Speaker 1: for instance, they ended it in two thousand and four,
Speaker 1: with eighty percent of voters backing a constitutional amendment in
Speaker 1: the modern world for all the modern reasons. You don't
Speaker 1: want to do this, so you're not some sort of
Speaker 1: Trump racist and you think, unless you think all the
Speaker 1: Irish are racists or Great Britain or whatever, you don't
Speaker 1: have to be some sort of Trump races to want
Speaker 1: to end birthright citizenship.
Speaker 2: It's a, to me, a stupid way to run your country.
Speaker 1: I would agree, Yeah, especially if you're not here lawfully
Speaker 1: and especially cuckoo. Not especially if you have a welfare
Speaker 1: state the way modern countries do and you allow chain migration. Yeah,
Speaker 1: the era of wide open immigration had no welfare stake. No,
Speaker 1: so you came, you would work harder, you'd starve. Yeah,
Speaker 1: either came here and made your way, or you went
Speaker 1: back home, or you starved to death.
Speaker 2: Those are your options.
Speaker 5: Or leaned on your family, who would soon tell you
Speaker 5: go back to the old country, you suck. I want
Speaker 5: to quote a Randy Barnett, who's the director of the
Speaker 5: Georgetown Center for the Constitution, co author of a book
Speaker 5: entitled The Original Meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, It's Letter
Speaker 5: and Spirit, which is pretty authoritative. His piece is entitled
Speaker 5: Trump is right on birthright Citizenship. The Fourteenth Amendment authors
Speaker 5: would exclude illegal and visiting aliens from US quote unquote jurisdiction.
Speaker 5: And he agrees that dispute is over the meaning of
Speaker 5: the subject of jurisdiction that phrase in each of the categories.
Speaker 5: He mentions children of diplomats, soldiers from an invading army,
Speaker 5: American Indians maintaining tribal relations. In each of these categories,
Speaker 5: the status of the child depended on the status of
Speaker 5: the parent, and then he gets into the temporary or
Speaker 5: unlawfully thing.
Speaker 2: Before Trump's executive order, what.
Speaker 5: Originalist scholarship existed on the original meaning of subject to
Speaker 5: the jurisdiction?
Speaker 2: That keyphrase was sporadic and lightly tested, if at all.
Speaker 5: This past year has produced an explosion of originalist scholarship
Speaker 5: on both sides. This is where Jack preciently got a
Speaker 5: couple of minutes ago. The justices are now in a
Speaker 5: good position to decide which side has presented the stronger
Speaker 5: originalist case. Kurt Lash University of Richmond has examined the
Speaker 5: congressional debates over the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights
Speaker 5: Act of eighteen sixty six. By the way, the Fourteenth
Speaker 5: Amendment was like to constitutionalize the Civil Rights Act of
Speaker 5: eighteen sixty six, it was to say, hey, this is
Speaker 5: not a law that can come and go.
Speaker 2: This is permanent. Please.
Speaker 5: And that act declared what we said already about to
Speaker 5: not subject to any foreign power, blah blah blah. The
Speaker 5: Fourteenth Amendment, Oh, I already said that. But the drafters
Speaker 5: of the Fourteenth Amendment saw need for constitutional language that
Speaker 5: more clearly excluded the children of tribal Indians. Lyman Trumble
Speaker 5: of Illinois managed the citizenship clause in the upper chamber
Speaker 5: in the Senate explained that subject subject to the jurisdiction
Speaker 5: meant not owing allegiance to anyone else, whether to a
Speaker 5: tribe or foreign power. This is the guy who managed
Speaker 5: that clause in the fourteenth Amendment. John Bingham, a Congressman
Speaker 5: from Ohio, the moving force behind the fourteenth Amendment. He
Speaker 5: was a Republican, of course, used the same framework, referring
Speaker 5: after ratification to persons born in the US quote and
Speaker 5: not owing allegiance to any foreign power. These statements and
Speaker 5: others mister lash identified demonstrated how leading Republicans explained the concept.
Speaker 5: The text was meant to capture birth plus full political membership.
Speaker 5: And I could go more into detail on some of
Speaker 5: the precedents that have come and gone, but they only
Speaker 5: scratched the surface of the key question.
Speaker 2: This is an old.
Speaker 5: Interpretation of the fourteenth Amendment based on virtually no serious thought.
Speaker 5: It again, it was like drive by interpretations that addressed
Speaker 5: a specific question at a specific point in history, but
Speaker 5: did not take on the bigger question. It's practically been unexamined, so.
Speaker 1: What do you think is going to happen if you
Speaker 1: watch I don't know about mainstream media, but certainly lefty
Speaker 1: leaning media, which is mainstream media they're presenting. It is
Speaker 1: just an incredibly unconstitutional overreach by Trump too.
Speaker 2: It's very clear in the Constitution what is supposed to happen.
Speaker 1: That's not true at all. What do you think is
Speaker 1: going to occur? I'm gonna find out till June. By
Speaker 1: the way, the arguments are today and Trump is there
Speaker 1: to listen to them, but they probably won't release their
Speaker 1: decision until June.
Speaker 5: Well, Jack is gonna cuss me for this, folks, But
Speaker 5: I think it's something close to a coin flip.
Speaker 2: Really, I don't know.
Speaker 5: It's it would definitely be a c change in the
Speaker 5: interpretation of the fourteenth Amendment, and to my mind, a
Speaker 5: completely appropriate one.
Speaker 1: It's it's a great case of I just I mean,
Speaker 1: I'm not a lawyer, and you know I can't. I
Speaker 1: can't look at it this through the lens of the
Speaker 1: way you argue this in the Supreme Court. But just
Speaker 1: on the face of it it at the surface level,
Speaker 1: it just seems so insane to continue to use something
Speaker 1: meant for a and now it applies only to B,
Speaker 1: but we're going to keep it around because it was
Speaker 1: there originally.
Speaker 5: What right right, Well, it's it's a perfect example, as
Speaker 5: I started to say, of how sometimes the constitution of
Speaker 5: the amendments are a bit vague because the people people
Speaker 5: who whether frame the Constitution and the bill rights, etc.
Speaker 5: Or came along later, like the fourteenth Amendment, the world
Speaker 5: they existed in was very, very different in terms of immigration, population,
Speaker 5: that sort of thing than the world exists that exists today,
Speaker 5: and so their wording was absolutely adequate to the situation
Speaker 5: of the time. But now the situation has changed so completely.
Speaker 5: You've got to dig and this is what the MSNBC's
Speaker 5: The World are not doing. You've got to dig behind
Speaker 5: the vague wording and look at the reasoning behind it.
Speaker 5: Be an originalist. What did they mean? What were they
Speaker 5: trying to get to? And you answer that question and
Speaker 5: if then you decide, well that's wholly inadequate to the
Speaker 5: modern world, well that's when Congress steps up and you
Speaker 5: clarify it, or you amend the amendment or whatever, which
Speaker 5: you can absolutely do. We need to do this though
Speaker 5: right now. A word from our friends that simply save
Speaker 5: home security. This is such a great deal, such a
Speaker 5: great system. I think we've all a lot of us
Speaker 5: have had like old time security systems with all the
Speaker 5: wires and stuff, and they didn't work right, and they
Speaker 5: were incredibly expensive and you had to sign a three
Speaker 5: year contract. Simply Safe is none of those things. It's
Speaker 5: super advanced AI technology, live monitoring agents, no locked in contracts.
Speaker 1: I have it myself. I got to sign in front
Speaker 1: of my house. That reminds me as much as anybody else.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, as I'm pulling away from my house right now,
Speaker 1: I got to simply Safe setup with the sensors and
Speaker 1: the cameras and all the different sort of stuff. And
Speaker 1: then there's also the fact that I'm not locked into
Speaker 1: I'm not doing it just because I signed a couple
Speaker 1: of year contract and I got no choice.
Speaker 2: No, they earn your business.
Speaker 1: All the time by being good, and lots and lots
Speaker 1: of people, five million people like me trust simply Safe
Speaker 1: every day.
Speaker 5: And they prevent break ins. They don't just go off
Speaker 5: after the breakings occurred. It's great and right now you
Speaker 5: good people can get fifty percent off your new simply
Speaker 5: Safe system. It's simply Safe dot com slash or I'm
Speaker 5: strong fifty percent off simply safe dot com slash or
Speaker 5: I'm strong there's no safe like simply safe.
Speaker 1: The giant headline on the front of the New York
Speaker 1: Post what a boob. We all learned a word yesterday.
Speaker 1: Bimbofication is a kink and Christy Nomes husband has it.
Speaker 1: Apparently that and other story is on the way. I
Speaker 1: don't know if I saw any news coverage yesterday of
Speaker 1: the Christy Nomes husband bimbification story. Apparently we still have
Speaker 1: some decorum and standards where we just don't get into
Speaker 1: stuff like that on the serious shows, because I didn't
Speaker 1: see it anywhere, did you.
Speaker 5: I don't think it's of any great significance other than
Speaker 5: being interesting from sexual kink perspectives.
Speaker 1: There's lots of stuff that makes the news of no
Speaker 1: great significance, like most of oh my gosh, yeah, almost
Speaker 1: all of it. Yeah, so I just was surprised nobody
Speaker 1: did it. So apparently the meme is going around the
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio finding out meme that has been going for
Speaker 1: quite some time. Marco Ribio finding out he's now the
Speaker 1: quarterback of the you know, the Green Bay Packers in New.
Speaker 2: York Jasey sitting on the couch in his uniform.
Speaker 1: We're not finding out he's the new Shaw of Iran
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio finding out he's now Christy Noms's husband. But
Speaker 1: it's a picture of him in pink spandex looking at
Speaker 1: a giant bra Confused.
Speaker 5: I've seen a couple of different versions of that.
Speaker 2: Yeah, uh, bimbofication.
Speaker 1: So Christy Nome, who was the Department of Homeland Security
Speaker 1: secretary up until a couple of weeks ago, Ice Barbie,
Speaker 1: and there are all the rumors, which seem to be
Speaker 1: pretty fact based, that she was having an affair with
Speaker 1: Corey Lewandowski, which was Trump's original campaign manager that got him.
Speaker 2: Elected way back in twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1: Any who, and then you had the weird thing and
Speaker 1: Christy Nome being grilled by Congress and her husband sitting
Speaker 1: right behind her as Congress asked her about the affair. Well,
Speaker 1: she he had left at that point to catch a
Speaker 1: plane to probably a bimboification conference.
Speaker 2: More on that stay with us.
Speaker 1: And that's why we know anything about Christy Nome's husband
Speaker 1: really is that he was sitting behind her at that grilling.
Speaker 1: She's awkward all the way around, anyway, story breaks yesterday,
Speaker 1: and whether or not Christy Nomme knew about it herself,
Speaker 1: I'm still skeptical. She's claiming the family had no idea.
Speaker 1: They were completely blindsided when all these pictures came out
Speaker 1: of him dressed in really tight tops with giant, giant
Speaker 1: balloons or something under his shirt to look like enormous
Speaker 1: boobs and his tiny little shorts. And it's some sort
Speaker 1: of kink called bimblification, which I don't know that I'd
Speaker 1: ever heard of. And he corresponded hundreds and hundreds of
Speaker 1: messages with adult performers with massively augmented breasts to achieve
Speaker 1: a Barbie dial like appearance. No, it's Barbie dial like it.
Speaker 1: It doesn't begin to describe it now. And he didn't
Speaker 1: try to hide who he was at all, And he
Speaker 1: sort of claimed he coveted huge, huge, ridiculous boobs, that's
Speaker 1: a quote. He was willing to share these pictures with
Speaker 1: his face well lit and very clear who he was
Speaker 1: with all kinds of random people who are into bimbification.
Speaker 2: Jack.
Speaker 5: His face is fully visible in several of the photos,
Speaker 5: one with a completely straight visage and others making a
Speaker 5: flirtatious kissy face with purse limps back to you.
Speaker 1: I feel like the tiny little pink shorts are more
Speaker 1: offensive than the giant bazoombas guy's successful insurance executive.
Speaker 5: He sent some of these performers over twenty five thousand
Speaker 5: dollars via cash app and PayPal as tips as they
Speaker 5: would do whatever he bid or engage in whatever conversation.
Speaker 1: He and Kirstyd been married for thirty four years, like
Speaker 1: high school sweetheart sort of couple. He traded selfies with
Speaker 1: one woman he pledged to worship like a goddess, telling
Speaker 1: her quote, you turned me into a girl, before asking
Speaker 1: if he should put on leggings.
Speaker 2: He's wished. He's straight as far as we can tell.
Speaker 2: I don't know. It doesn't matter.
Speaker 6: Really a straight guy thing to do.
Speaker 1: Those little pink shorts don't seem very straight, but I
Speaker 1: don't I might not fully understand bimblification, if you know.
Speaker 6: Texas Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 7: Finally, some potential good news here for oil markets, for
Speaker 7: stock markets, and really for the American consumer that's been
Speaker 7: hit by this impact to oil, you know, trickling down
Speaker 7: to prices at the pump. We've actually seen over the
Speaker 7: last twenty four hours, the oil futures move as low
Speaker 7: as four percent just around one hundred hours of bell orrow,
Speaker 7: just falling under that threshold. We are starting to head
Speaker 7: in the right direction, and there's more optimism that this
Speaker 7: could be a sustained pullback for the oil markets, as
Speaker 7: the President, of course has signaled that the end of
Speaker 7: this conflict could be near within the next.
Speaker 2: Couple of weeks.
Speaker 1: All Right, I just wanted to play that to make
Speaker 1: the point. This determining on a twenty four hour by
Speaker 1: twenty four hour period whether policy these are good or
Speaker 1: bad based on tiny movements in various commodities is not.
Speaker 5: I was going to ask, is that nice lady familiar
Speaker 5: with roller coasters and how they work?
Speaker 2: Whyes?
Speaker 1: We today we went up, look ahead, just ahead, See
Speaker 1: that twisty thing. Both sides do it though all the time,
Speaker 1: and quit making your argument for anything based on one
Speaker 1: day of movements and markets.
Speaker 2: It's a verrazy song. Everything is click pait. It's very
Speaker 2: very complex.
Speaker 1: There's all kinds of reasons things can go up and
Speaker 1: down for one day.
Speaker 5: Oh yeah, people who want good news for reasons political
Speaker 5: or financial will click like crazy on those headlines. Those
Speaker 5: who despise Trump and are convinced this war was about
Speaker 5: our idea will click like fiends on anything that's negative.
Speaker 2: So I want to mention this.
Speaker 1: I tweeted this out yesterday afternoon, and it's kind of
Speaker 1: interested to see what the responses would be.
Speaker 2: Got quite a few responses.
Speaker 1: Partially because I've lived in California for so long now
Speaker 1: that I don't know what the rest of America does
Speaker 1: and how much has changed along with California or as
Speaker 1: different California. Anyway, this is what I tweeted out. I
Speaker 1: had to take my son to the doctor for his physical.
Speaker 1: He was due for his tea DAP also booster, which
Speaker 1: used to be for me anyway, just all about the
Speaker 1: tetanus and then you know that other stuff that they
Speaker 1: throw in there. Well, since I had the p in
Speaker 1: the tea DAP whooping cough last year, and you don't
Speaker 1: want to get whooping cough. But anyway, he had to
Speaker 1: get that shot and just regular physical and I tweeted out,
Speaker 1: I don't think anything makes me angrier at the doctor's
Speaker 1: office than being asked to step out of the room
Speaker 1: so they can talk to my kid alone. And some
Speaker 1: of the responses I thought were interesting from people who
Speaker 1: said move here. They don't make us do that here. WTF?
Speaker 1: So I even and it does. It makes me insanely angry,
Speaker 1: and I try to control my boiling rage. I don't
Speaker 1: know how good a job I did it. I made
Speaker 1: it clear to the nice young woman who is a
Speaker 1: assistant of some sort who asked me to leave the room,
Speaker 1: how angry it makes me. And I made it clear
Speaker 1: that it's not your fault. I realize you don't make
Speaker 1: the policy. I'm just registering how outrageous I think this is.
Speaker 1: And I do think it's outrageous. And then, well, first
Speaker 1: of all, do you have any concepts of how common
Speaker 1: it is around the country for this? Is this the
Speaker 1: sort of thing they do mostly in California, you know, Taxachusetts,
Speaker 1: and not in Oklahoma and.
Speaker 2: Nebraska, or I don't actually know.
Speaker 5: I don't I would like to dig into that. It's
Speaker 5: an interesting question.
Speaker 1: I know it didn't happen when I was a kid,
Speaker 1: and the physician's assistant she said, you know, I actually
Speaker 1: underst I'm not sure if I had a kid, I
Speaker 1: would like that either. But the idea that I said,
Speaker 1: is it the does the government make you do this?
Speaker 2: Is it the hospital and she said, it's kind of bopen.
Speaker 1: The idea that I, as the parent of a kid,
Speaker 1: who have sole responsibility for everything in that kid's life,
Speaker 1: I'm asked to leave though now I'm asked, well, that's
Speaker 1: what they're trying to get to. I'm asked to leave
Speaker 1: the room so that some other entity can come between
Speaker 1: me and that kid, because we're making the assumption here
Speaker 1: that whatever conversation they're gonna have with my kid is
Speaker 1: at a higher plane than what I'm gonna do.
Speaker 2: That it is the authority.
Speaker 1: It's the let us check in to see if we
Speaker 1: think what's going on in this household is right or wrong.
Speaker 2: Because we know what's right or wrong, he might not.
Speaker 2: We're just checking.
Speaker 5: In important clarification, not as a backstop if something's gone
Speaker 5: terribly long wrong like abuse or neglect, No, but as
Speaker 5: an on going higher authority for that child's life and
Speaker 5: well being.
Speaker 1: Right, you're making the statement that we the state, or
Speaker 1: we this institution at the behest of the state, know
Speaker 1: what's best. We're just checking to make sure you're following
Speaker 1: our rules. And what indication do you have that their
Speaker 1: rules have been very good throughout history?
Speaker 5: Well, I will tell you this, and this is the
Speaker 5: bedrock of all of it.
Speaker 2: I've told this story in.
Speaker 5: Various forms many times, but I encountered a professor in
Speaker 5: college who was a Marxist, and I was at that
Speaker 5: point completely unfamiliar with some of the sociological aspects of
Speaker 5: Marxist thinking. And her point was that the nuclear family
Speaker 5: is an organization, an institution of oppression, and that the
Speaker 5: state should raise children. She actually espoused this in class,
Speaker 5: and I'm sitting there like, wait what. And that was
Speaker 5: my introduction to that Marxist belief that the state should
Speaker 5: raise the child, because that way you can indoctrinate them
Speaker 5: into becoming a good little Marxist or just you know,
Speaker 5: automaton or what have you. And it's right there in
Speaker 5: the It takes a village philosophy, and it's absolutely the
Speaker 5: unholy bloom of that weed right now is hey, Yeah,
Speaker 5: I'd be happy to call you Jenny Johnny.
Speaker 2: And let's not tell mom and dad.
Speaker 5: They don't need to know because they're probably going to
Speaker 5: abuse you or whatever. The teachers, radicalizing the children and
Speaker 5: getting between the parent and the child, it's all the
Speaker 5: same thing. And yes, it's leached its way into medicine.
Speaker 5: Some of our medical schools, like UCLA Medical School. It's
Speaker 5: one of the most woke institutions in America.
Speaker 2: It's horrible.
Speaker 1: Some of the questions they asked too, How did this
Speaker 1: become part of a physical Why are you asking about
Speaker 1: all this stuff for physical Yeah.
Speaker 2: My kids both know that that. We don't answer the
Speaker 2: gun question. None of your effing business.
Speaker 1: Why are you freaking asking me if I've got a
Speaker 1: gun in my house at the doctor's office.
Speaker 2: That's a big yes. Oh yeah, no kidding, right what?
Speaker 2: And so I it's interesting.
Speaker 1: A lot of the responses on Twitter to that were
Speaker 1: that when people saying I don't, I just say no,
Speaker 1: which I left the room because I don't want to
Speaker 1: embarrass my kid. I mean, if it's me, I'm willing
Speaker 1: to get into all kinds of an uproar. I don't
Speaker 1: care if they have to bring in guards because they're
Speaker 1: worried I'm about to twist off. I'm perfectly fine with
Speaker 1: bringing that upon la Vie, but I don't want to
Speaker 1: put my kid in awkward position. And we talked about
Speaker 1: it later and he said, I'm fine with you doing that.
Speaker 1: So from now on, I'm just gonna say no, just no.
Speaker 1: I'm not leaving the room anything. You got to ask
Speaker 1: me and ask them for me. Of course, in the so,
Speaker 1: I bring this up to some people and they look
Speaker 1: at me like, why would that be a problem?
Speaker 2: What sort of crazy? What are you hiding?
Speaker 1: What awful thing are you doing to your child that
Speaker 1: you want to hide that you no, no.
Speaker 2: No, no no no. Do you not understand?
Speaker 1: They're declaring that they know what's best and you don't.
Speaker 2: That's the statement they're making.
Speaker 5: And there's a presumption that they they are justified in
Speaker 5: coming between you and your child and say, all right,
Speaker 5: what's what's the deal with him?
Speaker 2: What's going on? Right?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I remember it, and this one was tough and
Speaker 1: it blindsided me. And you know, Katie's trying to stay calm.
Speaker 6: Oh go ahead, Katy, Oh boy, I'm just thinking, you know,
Speaker 6: I've got a kid on the way, and I would
Speaker 6: blow a gasket.
Speaker 2: Where is that? What to happen?
Speaker 1: Well, you're gonna be doing dealing with it really soon,
Speaker 1: probably because the first time it hit me was when
Speaker 1: Sam was born and I was asked to leave the
Speaker 1: room so they can talk to mom without me there,
Speaker 1: Like what.
Speaker 6: See, that's when I'm going to demand no, Drew is staying,
Speaker 6: you can talk to both of us.
Speaker 2: Well, I don't under this is bizarre, feel free, They can't.
Speaker 1: I don't know what they do if you say that,
Speaker 1: but they probably just make a note on a form.
Speaker 2: Probably it's an unholy confluence.
Speaker 5: I think of what I was describing, and like insurance
Speaker 5: companies and liability, and maybe greater awareness of certain issues,
Speaker 5: like every time I register to go to my usual
Speaker 5: let's try not to have a stroke appointment with my doctor,
Speaker 5: I've got to fill out the pre thing, the pre
Speaker 5: form which includes do you ever feel like life is
Speaker 5: pointless and you take no joy in the things you do?
Speaker 5: And I want to fill in only when I'm filling
Speaker 5: out this form.
Speaker 2: Yes, actually, you know what.
Speaker 6: I've had to fill out two of those a week
Speaker 6: for the last.
Speaker 2: Month, and I'm gonna have to do it again today.
Speaker 6: I will be writing that only when you guys ask
Speaker 6: me this question, oh, I and over again.
Speaker 5: I appreciate the greater awareness of mental illness issues, but
Speaker 5: is there anybody who's so completely unaware of depression and
Speaker 5: what it is and where you might get help that
Speaker 5: they'll fill out that form and the doctor will say,
Speaker 5: say Jim, It sounds like depression to me, and they'll
Speaker 5: be like, what doc, the fact that I'm hopeless all
Speaker 5: the time and take no joy in anything, and that
Speaker 5: will be the pipeline, that will be the connection that's
Speaker 5: leave them.
Speaker 2: It just strikes me as I don't know, dopey.
Speaker 5: Yes, Michael, there are so many people out there though,
Speaker 5: that actually think they do know best and they will
Speaker 5: follow right along.
Speaker 2: Oh, they think that the authorities no best. Absolutely. What's
Speaker 2: your indication of that, COVID? I hate to bring it up, but.
Speaker 1: Now I'm talking to people who believe that the the
Speaker 1: the the the government's view or an institution's view of
Speaker 1: how to raise your kids is better than yours.
Speaker 2: What what's your your your data that led you to that?
Speaker 5: Excuse me, Jack, while I interview this sheep and ask
Speaker 5: it why it runs with the herd.
Speaker 2: That's just the nature of that sort of beast.
Speaker 1: And I live in a state where it's certainly on
Speaker 1: the table for somebody to say to your kid behind
Speaker 1: closed doors, do you ever feel like a girl or
Speaker 1: a boy?
Speaker 5: Except except the activists are much more insidious. They'll say,
Speaker 5: do you ever feel like you know, being a tough
Speaker 5: guy is not who you really are right, They'll find
Speaker 5: some universal like that and then shove that wedge and
Speaker 5: that's what they do.
Speaker 2: I've seen it happen.
Speaker 1: I feel like the questions were at least half like
Speaker 1: social sciences as opposed to all medical stuff like blood pressure, weight,
Speaker 1: you know, all those sorts of things. Do you do
Speaker 1: it a physical get the right vaccinations? Ok, it's just
Speaker 1: I don't know. The modern world is not for me.
Speaker 1: Oh that makes me insanely angry though, I mean just
Speaker 1: like I can't hardly control.
Speaker 5: Myself angry right right, because you understand the greater symbolism
Speaker 5: of it and the intent behind it.
Speaker 1: Right, And as a full time single parent, the responsibility
Speaker 1: I have of raising kids and how much work it is.
Speaker 1: And now you've just stepped in to say we're really
Speaker 1: the ones in charge here.
Speaker 2: Oh oh oh my god. Yeah.
Speaker 5: I know them intimately and love them on a level
Speaker 5: that the greatest greatest poets couldn't even describe. But you,
Speaker 5: having just walked into the room, are going to take control.
Speaker 2: Now, right, That's exactly it. You put it better than me.
Speaker 1: That's exactly the feeling I hear all day today, for instance,
Speaker 1: doing nothing but trying to make sure his life is okay.
Speaker 1: And now you're going to put me out of the
Speaker 1: room because you're the wheel.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you're gonna take the wheel. Yeah, Oh my god.
Speaker 5: Next time they ask you about the guns in the home,
Speaker 5: say yes, six. I mean they're not in the home.
Speaker 5: They're on my person right now. Take out six of them.
Speaker 5: One in my left sock, one in the back of
Speaker 5: my pants. I guess two one here and mag gotta
Speaker 5: be careful with that one.
Speaker 2: Am I wrong?
Speaker 3: Then?
Speaker 5: Of course both of my holsters on either hip and
Speaker 5: then the one tucked in my back in case you know,
Speaker 5: things get really hairy.
Speaker 2: On each side like you use somebody. Sam. Oh, I've
Speaker 2: got one of those drop down machetes too. Do you
Speaker 2: need to know about that?
Speaker 1: It's in my sleeve here, Ah boy, got a barrel
Speaker 1: of antracks in the garage. I'm just let me go
Speaker 1: through the listener, any thoughts on any of this? Being
Speaker 1: asked to leave the room? Text line four one five
Speaker 1: two nine five KFTC.
Speaker 5: Yeah, man skied across an asphalt parking lot at sixty
Speaker 5: nine miles an hour, not intentionally. He'd just been clipped
Speaker 5: by Tiger Woods this suv.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we got to get to Tiger Wood's statement yesterday
Speaker 1: in which I found bad news for Tiger. Actually, so,
Speaker 1: I was just talking about how angry it makes me
Speaker 1: when they say at the doctor's office, I'm there for
Speaker 1: my kid's physical. Can you step out of the room now?
Speaker 1: We need to talk to him alone. And I just
Speaker 1: can't restate what I just said. If you missed it,
Speaker 1: get the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand. But what's
Speaker 1: the message it sends to the kid? This twenty two
Speaker 1: year old woman is the authority, not your parent, right.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, I hate everything about that. I'm never
Speaker 1: doing it again. I'm never doing it again. You hold
Speaker 1: me off in cuffs if you want to. I will
Speaker 1: never leave the room again. And I'm just gonna see
Speaker 1: what happened. We got this text, Katie, you like this
Speaker 1: since you were with child Jack and oh I just
Speaker 1: had a kid. In the state of California, if you
Speaker 1: go to a baby checkup as the husband when she
Speaker 1: is pregnant, they will tell you in the lobby that
Speaker 1: they have to talk to her first before you're allowed
Speaker 1: to come into the baby checkup, the prenatal baby checkub.
Speaker 1: They bring her back there and ask her if everything
Speaker 1: is okay in the home life. Then the nurse comes
Speaker 1: out and grabs you in the lobby.
Speaker 5: What in the hell did we decide this was okay,
Speaker 5: that the intrusion into the coherence of the family, the
Speaker 5: cohesion of the family is justified by the interests of
Speaker 5: the state and protecting women or something.
Speaker 2: When did the trade office work?
Speaker 1: We are sheep well that we allowed it to even
Speaker 1: get going, that we all just sided it, that the
Speaker 1: first time it ever happened. We all just thought, well,
Speaker 1: I suppose i'd better because they asked me to. But
Speaker 1: it's freaking outrageous anywhile, let you react gate.
Speaker 2: Well, okay, and so what if you say no, what
Speaker 2: do they.
Speaker 1: I don't know, actually, and I suppose I doubt they
Speaker 1: can say, well, then you can't have a baby here.
Speaker 6: I doubt they do that, because I mean, that's got
Speaker 6: to be some kind of protocol that they're following.
Speaker 1: Sure, but I mean we are She and I are
Speaker 1: grown ups, adult citizens of this country. We willingly decided
Speaker 1: to get married and have a kid together.
Speaker 2: All you need to know, right, your job as a.
Speaker 1: Medical professional is to facilitate this birth in the healthiest
Speaker 1: way possible.
Speaker 2: Yeah, check on my baby. Not my marriage. I'm fine.
Speaker 5: Yeah, you know, there's I always harp on the Marxist
Speaker 5: thing that the postmodernist way lefties, but there's a lot
Speaker 5: of paternalism and nanny statism among the left and center
Speaker 5: left too, that they just think the government is here
Speaker 5: to solve all problems, and they don't. They don't see
Speaker 5: it as a trade off. They see it as an
Speaker 5: unmitigated good.
Speaker 2: No, no, no.
Speaker 5: All the husband has to do is leave the room
Speaker 5: for like a minute or two. We make sure the
Speaker 5: wife's not being abused or the girlfriend or the partner
Speaker 5: or whatever, and then the man comes in. What's There's
Speaker 5: no cost there other They just don't see the world
Speaker 5: the way we do.
Speaker 1: I know you're not making that argument for yourself, but
Speaker 1: there's no cost other than an infentele makes us all infants.
Speaker 2: In that way, you know, completely.
Speaker 1: We need to be taken care of by again, the
Speaker 1: twenty three year old the doctor's office, because we're not
Speaker 1: as adults capable of, you know, handling our own lives.
Speaker 2: Right here, they come to the rescue. Yeah, exactly, exactly. Anyway, well,
Speaker 2: that twenty three year old is an agent of the state.
Speaker 5: Literally, They and I a bureaucrat to whom you must answer.
Speaker 1: And I'll say it again because I know this will
Speaker 1: get back. It always does. I realize you're doing your job.
Speaker 1: You're just doing your job. You're doing what you're told
Speaker 1: to do. You're making your living. Not a problem with you,
Speaker 1: it's the policy, not you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right here here.
Speaker 5: As most of you may have heard by now, Judy
Speaker 5: and I lost our buddy Baxter the dog this last
Speaker 5: week Backsi taxi, codependent boyfriend, mister underfoot. He went by
Speaker 5: many names. There's been another loss in the world of dogs.
Speaker 5: This Sugar the Surfing Dog, the first canine inducted into
Speaker 5: the Surfer's Hall of Fame. You may have seen a surfer,
Speaker 5: Sugar the Surfing Dog, who hung out at hunting And Beach,
Speaker 5: California and was a very very famous surfing dog. Sixteen
Speaker 5: year old rescue dog from Huntington Beach, five time dog
Speaker 5: surfing World Champion, passed away. When Sugar was not surfing,
Speaker 5: she was a what's the proper term, A counseling dog,
Speaker 5: a comfort dog for veterans. This is a Dog Hall
Speaker 5: of Famer, Sugar the Dog, and just reminds us it's
Speaker 5: funny how much good will a dog brings in a room,
Speaker 5: hospital with kids or whatever. Man are our canine companions.
Speaker 5: They have a special, special role.
Speaker 2: She was sixteen sixteen.
Speaker 6: Wow, she's like a kind of a lab Ish. That's
Speaker 6: pretty old for that kind of a dog. A therapy
Speaker 6: dog was the term I was looking for. Yeah, sixteen
Speaker 6: year old lab mix, I believe. And how recently was
Speaker 6: the dog surfing?
Speaker 2: Till toward the end she.
Speaker 1: Had like the equivalent of like an eighty five year
Speaker 1: old human out there surfing.
Speaker 5: That's pretty impressive winning championships. In twenty twenty four, her
Speaker 5: paw Prince joined the hand and footprints of many other
Speaker 5: renowned surfers immortalized at the Surfing Hall of Fame.
Speaker 2: That's sweet, that's awesome.
Speaker 1: Yeah, we do a lot of stuff, been wide ranging.
Speaker 1: If you ever miss anything, want to catch it, get
Speaker 1: the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 2: Subscribe Armstrong and Getty