Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong, Joe Getty, Armstrong and Getty
Speaker 1: and Key Armstrong and Getty, a handful of America hate
Speaker 1: and socialists one congressional primaries yesterday, which will factor into
Speaker 1: some of my questions for our next guest. If you
Speaker 1: read one book about the founding of this great country
Speaker 1: leading up to the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary on
Speaker 1: July fourth, it should be Timothy Sanderfer's Proclaiming Liberty, John Adams,
Speaker 1: Thomas Jefferson and the Declaration of Independence. Absolutely fantastic, and
Speaker 1: we welcome back who we used to call Tim the lawyer,
Speaker 1: Tim Sanderford to the Armstrong and Getty Show hate Tim. Hey, Jack,
Speaker 1: thanks for having me back. I'm a mood for a
Speaker 1: variety of reasons. My son was complaining about some things
Speaker 1: they had been teaching him in school. You know, we
Speaker 1: had If you're of a certain age.
Speaker 2: You kind of just assumed the the the American exceptionalism,
Speaker 2: the wonder of the founding, all the great things that
Speaker 2: came out of establishing this this.
Speaker 1: Project two hundred and fift year.
Speaker 3: Sorry, Jack, do you think that would be taught in
Speaker 3: a California public school. What in the world made you
Speaker 3: think that would be taught in the schools of California.
Speaker 1: I used to think that, and then and then I
Speaker 1: became aware that, you know, whether it's neo Marxist or
Speaker 1: whatever's going on. And then, you know, the sixteen nineteen
Speaker 1: project comes along, and the fact that at the two
Speaker 1: hundred and fiftieth birthday of our country. I'm old, So
Speaker 1: I was eleven during the bi centennial, and at least
Speaker 1: for my you know, I wasn't reading the op ed
Speaker 1: pages of the New York Times, but I don't remember
Speaker 1: anything but happiness and gratitude. Now, well, it's as if
Speaker 1: the whole idea of America is up for debate in
Speaker 1: the op ed sections of all your major newspapers about
Speaker 1: the founding of this country, and I'd like you to
Speaker 1: push back on that lot.
Speaker 3: Well, you know, I think part of that was maybe
Speaker 3: you were seeing nineteen seventy six through a child's lenses.
Speaker 1: Remember this is the post.
Speaker 3: Watergate era, and you know, the other people who are
Speaker 3: around at the time have told me that it was
Speaker 3: not as fun as it should have been, and that
Speaker 3: there was a lingering sense of disappointment and even some
Speaker 3: nihilism over the end of the Vietnam War and.
Speaker 1: Things like that.
Speaker 3: So, you know, Americans have always faced these kinds of challenges,
Speaker 3: and some of them have been even much worse than
Speaker 3: what we're facing right now. I mean, it's hard to
Speaker 3: imagine that today we're worse off than the country was
Speaker 3: in eighteen sixty one, for example. So you know, we've
Speaker 3: seen tough times. We've seen times when America's enemies have
Speaker 3: been on the ascent, and we've fought back against that. Now,
Speaker 3: the problem that we face that I think is unique
Speaker 3: is that we've fought back against that a group of
Speaker 3: people who really understood and appreciated America's ideals, and I
Speaker 3: think that is missing on the right today, and that's
Speaker 3: why the left is succeeding through default.
Speaker 1: Ah that's interesting. Yeah, well everything you said there is true.
Speaker 1: But I also don't remember ever being told that we
Speaker 1: were a bad country at any point through my K
Speaker 1: through twelve schooling, which my kids do get sometimes.
Speaker 3: Yeah. I do think that there's a a more militant
Speaker 3: left today, and I think part of that is that,
Speaker 3: you know, the teachers of today are the were the
Speaker 3: students of the previous generation, and so they've learned from
Speaker 3: people who were already on the left, and the left
Speaker 3: has gotten much more intensified, and the same is true
Speaker 3: on the right. And also I think what's happening is
Speaker 3: that the broad middle of common sense people are abandoning
Speaker 3: the typical left right dimension and as a result, those
Speaker 3: who remain in those categories, the people who's stay in
Speaker 3: the democratic and Republican parties, I think they're getting more
Speaker 3: and more ideologically intense, precisely because their numbers are shrinking
Speaker 3: as the number of independence expands.
Speaker 1: Well, this move towards socialism by by part of the
Speaker 1: crowd and the what did zoron mom Donnie say, the
Speaker 1: warm embrace of collectivism? That is there something to human
Speaker 1: nature where we don't want freedom and want to be
Speaker 1: taken care of that we need to push back against. Yeah, Oh,
Speaker 1: my goodness.
Speaker 3: Even I sometimes long for the days of my childhood
Speaker 3: when all of my bills were paid for by my
Speaker 3: parents and I didn't have to worry about responsibility. Of course,
Speaker 3: everybody and everybody feels envy from time to time, and
Speaker 3: you combine those two things, the fear of responsibility and envy,
Speaker 3: and you put those together, and what do you have.
Speaker 1: You have socialism.
Speaker 3: So of course people are attracted to that.
Speaker 1: And the problem is, you.
Speaker 3: Know, maturity means paying your own bills, and nobody wants
Speaker 3: to face that. And so as our culture rewards immaturity
Speaker 3: intellectual as well as personal immaturity, more and more you're
Speaker 3: going to see things like this. But once again, I
Speaker 3: have to say, it's not worse today than it was
Speaker 3: in say, nineteen thirty two. In the nineteen thirties, there
Speaker 3: was a socialist governor of Minnesota, and socialism was viewed
Speaker 3: as the way of the future, both by right and
Speaker 3: left because you know, the reality of the Soviet experience
Speaker 3: and things had not really been publicized very much and
Speaker 3: things like that.
Speaker 1: So you know, it.
Speaker 3: Is true that you can be pessimistic about the current
Speaker 3: environment or you can say we're going through a pendulum
Speaker 3: swing right now. And I think the pendulum is going
Speaker 3: to swing back eventually as people have enough of this
Speaker 3: anti intellectual nonsense that's been controlling our politics for a
Speaker 3: decade now.
Speaker 1: Sure, we've had presidential candidates get more traction as socialists
Speaker 1: one hundred years ago, one hundred and twenty years ago
Speaker 1: than we are getting now. So that is a good point,
Speaker 1: although we jailed them at the time.
Speaker 3: Yes, so i'm, by the way, in favor of jailing
Speaker 3: presidential candidates on principle.
Speaker 1: Yeah, anybody who wants to be president you should look
Speaker 1: side eyed at what are they up to your book
Speaker 1: proclaiming liberty? So the Founding Fathers were not worried about Well,
Speaker 1: certainly the term socialism wasn't Marx wasn't born yet, or
Speaker 1: was he born, He hadn't written yet. What were the
Speaker 1: Founding fathers pushing back against.
Speaker 3: Well, you know, it's funny because it's true that the
Speaker 3: term socialism wasn't around. It's true Karl Marx wasn't around,
Speaker 3: but socialist ideas had been around since the days of
Speaker 3: ancient Greece, right, you find it in the writings of Plato,
Speaker 3: for example. And the Founding Fathers were horrified by it,
Speaker 3: and they thought it was very obviously ridiculous that if
Speaker 3: you took wealth from people who earned it and gave
Speaker 3: it to people who do not thinking that what you're
Speaker 3: doing is justice, what you're actually doing is committing injustice
Speaker 3: and destroying people's will to work hard and improve the world.
Speaker 3: So they ridiculed the idea. Adams and Jefferson alike and
Speaker 3: all their colleagues. What they were pushing back against in
Speaker 3: the seventeen seventies, however, was somewhat different. Beginning in about
Speaker 3: seventeen sixty four, Parliament came up with this notion that
Speaker 3: it had the authority to control the colonies, that it
Speaker 3: could legislate for the colonies, not just tax, but also
Speaker 3: impose other kinds of laws in the colonies. And to
Speaker 3: the Americans, this was crazy. They had lived for one
Speaker 3: hundred and fifty years in the American colonies with the
Speaker 3: view that their laws were written by their local legislatures,
Speaker 3: by their colonial legislatures. Everybody agreed that you look up
Speaker 3: to the king. The king is kind of like what
Speaker 3: we had with our president today. The king was their
Speaker 3: executive branch, but their legislative branch was their local legislature.
Speaker 3: And all of a sudden, Parliament says, no, No, Parliament,
Speaker 3: this is a quote supreme, absolute, unlimited authority to do
Speaker 3: everything that is not naturally impossible, which means that they
Speaker 3: have absolute power. And the Americans said, this is a
Speaker 3: terrible idea, and they opposed it for you know, a
Speaker 3: decade or a dozen years, and they did that through
Speaker 3: debate and political protest and legal machinations and politics, until
Speaker 3: finally it became clear that the King was siding with
Speaker 3: Parliament in that dispute. And it was that moment in
Speaker 3: the beginning, at the beginning of seventeen seventy six, that
Speaker 3: the Americans finally said, fine, then we don't want to
Speaker 3: have any part of the British Empire anymore. We are
Speaker 3: abandoning our claims to the traditional rights of Englishmen in
Speaker 3: the British Constitution, and we are asserting our rights on
Speaker 3: the basis of the laws of nature and of Nature's God.
Speaker 1: What do you think would have happened if we lost
Speaker 1: the Revolutionary War? Uh?
Speaker 3: You know, I think the war was inevitable. I think
Speaker 3: a lot of people thought it was inevitable. Thomas Paine says,
Speaker 3: in common sense, Look, we all agree that America will
Speaker 3: be independent someday. The question is just when, you know? So,
Speaker 3: I think that it would have happened eventually, but I
Speaker 3: do think there would have been a lot of mess
Speaker 3: about it, by which I mean, you know, you look
Speaker 3: at British politics today and see how they are torn
Speaker 3: between this extreme democracy on one hand, and this anti
Speaker 3: democracy on the other hand, And nobody really can definitively
Speaker 3: say what the British Constitution is because it's unwritten, and
Speaker 3: there's these bizarre traditions and hierarchies that you have to
Speaker 3: jump through, and then socialism really becomes a parasite on
Speaker 3: all of that. And I think America would have suffered
Speaker 3: a lot more as a result of those sorts of ideas.
Speaker 3: And you know, America today is really the product of
Speaker 3: two other big things, and that's the Western experience and
Speaker 3: the Civil War, and both of those would have been
Speaker 3: drastically different if the British Empire had controlled America up
Speaker 3: any longer. So it's hard to say, but I do
Speaker 3: think we'd be I hate to say it more like Canada.
Speaker 1: Wow. I really mean it when I say that, if
Speaker 1: you read one book, or please read at least book
Speaker 1: leading up to the Founding or this summer about the
Speaker 1: Founding Proclaiming Liberty by Tim Sanderford, just because it helps
Speaker 1: you make arguments. If you end up in a backyard
Speaker 1: barbecue and somebody starts throwing around some anti American crap,
Speaker 1: you got something to say back, because it's just way
Speaker 1: too pervasive in our society right now and apparently comfortable
Speaker 1: to say that the Founding is about racism, or that
Speaker 1: the world to be better off without our push you know,
Speaker 1: dominance and all these things, and just drives me crazy.
Speaker 3: You know, Jack, I say, I must say, I had
Speaker 3: a number of scores to settle in this book, but
Speaker 3: I'd been I had been storing them away for decades
Speaker 3: whenever I'd read something about the Founding or the Declaration
Speaker 3: or something, and I was like, that's wrong. I was
Speaker 3: making a mental list, and I put that mental list
Speaker 3: into this book.
Speaker 1: That's fantastic. That is fantastic. Well, we need more of that.
Speaker 1: Got you? If you stood up in front of most
Speaker 1: public cool history classes in this country and give your
Speaker 1: little spiel about your book, the teacher in the back
Speaker 1: of the room would would be they'd be rolling their
Speaker 1: eyes with horror at what you were saying. How crazy
Speaker 1: is that?
Speaker 3: Yeah, however, I will say when I was in school,
Speaker 3: when I was a kid in school, my teachers were
Speaker 3: already rolling their eyes in horror at the things that
Speaker 3: I said, because I was already committed to freedom and
Speaker 3: they didn't like that much.
Speaker 1: Look, so what I wanted to do in the book is.
Speaker 3: I wanted to go through the declaration line by line
Speaker 3: and say what all of it really means, because you know,
Speaker 3: we're very familiar with the opening paragraphs about life, liberty,
Speaker 3: and the pursuit of happiness, but there's the list of
Speaker 3: grievances against what Britain was doing to us, and a
Speaker 3: lot of Americans today don't know what specifically it refers
Speaker 3: to because it's written in broad general terms.
Speaker 1: So I wanted to let's touch on that when we
Speaker 1: come back after the break, if we can, because I
Speaker 1: want to get into that part of the proclaiming liberty
Speaker 1: Tim's book, because I think this is so dang important. First,
Speaker 1: I want to tell you about Incogniti, with which is
Speaker 1: also important. If you get calls on your phone or
Speaker 1: text or emails like who is this from? Is this real?
Speaker 1: This looks fake? Yeah, a lot of times it is fake,
Speaker 1: or it's a scam or somebody trying to just hack
Speaker 1: into your phone, whatever it is, And Cogniti is a
Speaker 1: way to stop that. It works quietly in the background
Speaker 1: to wipe your personal data from people search sites, those
Speaker 1: things scare me, data brokers, hidden databases that you probably
Speaker 1: don't even know exist. Incognitia is busy removing my name
Speaker 1: in info from hundreds of databases, and they don't stop there.
Speaker 1: They keep sending follow up requests with the law on
Speaker 1: their side saying, you gotta get that stuff out of there.
Speaker 1: They can't scam you if they can't find you. Take
Speaker 1: your personal data back within cognity. It's like Incognito without
Speaker 1: all the letters I N. Cogni is how it's spelled.
Speaker 1: Get sixty percent off the regular price when you use
Speaker 1: the code armstrong at incognity dot com slash armstrong. That's
Speaker 1: sixty percent off when you use the code armstrong and
Speaker 1: in cognity dot com slash armstrong in cognity dot com
Speaker 1: slash armstrong. This is important stuff. Be able to argue
Speaker 1: with your college kid when they come back home, or
Speaker 1: your neighbors who are socialists or whatever it is. Learn
Speaker 1: a little from Tim sanderfer in his book Proclaiming Liberty
Speaker 1: a little more when we come back for this summer,
Speaker 1: or actually any time in our history, but with the
Speaker 1: two hundred and fiftieth anniversary coming up. The book is
Speaker 1: Proclaiming Liberty by Timothy Sander for Tim joins us. We're
Speaker 1: talking about the repainting of the the reflecting pool today. No, No,
Speaker 1: that's not what we're talking about that. We're talking about
Speaker 1: his book and the Founding and why it's important to
Speaker 1: understand it in a way that they don't teach you
Speaker 1: in school necessarily as looking at the dedication, though you
Speaker 1: got for Harry Jaffa, who I'm aware of, I'm not
Speaker 1: aware of Roger Pilon, Yes, but he's at the Cato Institute. Okay, cool, great,
Speaker 1: But then what is that foreign language thing you got
Speaker 1: underneath there?
Speaker 4: Oh?
Speaker 5: So?
Speaker 3: It's a line from a play by a playwright named
Speaker 3: Terence Radigan. It's a play called The Browning Version, and
Speaker 3: it's a story about a teacher who's having a bad time,
Speaker 3: and during the climactic scene of the play, his student
Speaker 3: gives him a book with this line inscribed in it,
Speaker 3: which means something to the effect of God looks kindly
Speaker 3: upon a good master, and it is a reward to
Speaker 3: the teacher for all that he's done. And Jaffa and
Speaker 3: Palon taught me so much about the Declaration of the
Speaker 3: American Founding that I thought it was an.
Speaker 1: Apt quotation to you. That's awesome. So right before we
Speaker 1: took a break, you were explaining what the Declaration of
Speaker 1: Independence meant, the part that you think most people don't get.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, there's this long list of grievances there, and
Speaker 3: then in each one is phrased in broad terms the founders.
Speaker 3: By seventeen thirty six, the Founding Fathers were done listing
Speaker 3: their specific objections to what Britain was doing. They had
Speaker 3: done that for a dozen years already, and nobody had
Speaker 3: listened to them. So by seventy to twenty six, they're
Speaker 3: just going to say, here's what you've been doing to us.
Speaker 1: Boom boom, boom boom.
Speaker 3: And as a result, today we look at things like
Speaker 3: he has refused his assent to laws the most wholesome
Speaker 3: and necessary for the public good, and we don't know
Speaker 3: what laws specifically they're referring to, And so I wanted
Speaker 3: to go through the whole list and explain what each
Speaker 3: one is talking about. And there's also other language in
Speaker 3: the declaration that has been overlooked, not only by the
Speaker 3: public but by scholars. For example, then the very end
Speaker 3: of the declaration, it says these United Colonies are and
Speaker 3: of right ought to be free and independent states. And
Speaker 3: that phrase of right ought to be is kind of interesting.
Speaker 3: Why is that in there?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 3: It turns out that in seventeen sixty six, a decade before,
Speaker 3: Parliament had passed a law called the Declaratory Act, in
Speaker 3: which it said that Parliament had complete authority over the
Speaker 3: American colonies.
Speaker 1: And the phrase it used.
Speaker 3: Was Parliament has and of right ought to have a
Speaker 3: full authority to legislate for the American colonies in all
Speaker 3: cases whatsoever.
Speaker 1: And so in the.
Speaker 3: Declaration, the American founders are flapped back at Parliament. They're saying, no,
Speaker 3: of right, we are free people, and we don't owe
Speaker 3: you any allegiance. So I wanted to go through all
Speaker 3: these little tidbits that I think are overlooked sometimes both
Speaker 3: by scholars and by ordinary Americans who are very familiar
Speaker 3: with the philosophy. I want I do talk about the philosophy.
Speaker 3: I think the philosophical aspects of the Declaration are not
Speaker 3: only important, but literally true. It is a literal fact
Speaker 3: of the world that all men are created equal. It
Speaker 3: is absolutely the truth that they are endowed with inalienable
Speaker 3: rights like life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Speaker 3: These are not just, you know, things that we've chosen
Speaker 3: to believe in this society as opposed to some other society,
Speaker 3: as many today's of today's relativists like to claim. And
Speaker 3: so I do want to go through all that, but
Speaker 3: I also didn't want to just be a dry philosophical book.
Speaker 3: So I also talk about all of this in the
Speaker 3: context of the friendship between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams
Speaker 3: as they were working and writing the Declaration.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and so that's the idea that we're all personally
Speaker 1: free as opposed to we're subjects of the state, whether
Speaker 1: it's a king or a collective us like socialism.
Speaker 3: Yeah, well, I mean we are inherently responsible for ourselves.
Speaker 3: There's nothing we can do about that fact. The existentialists
Speaker 3: back in the nineteen sixties used to use this phrase,
Speaker 3: used to say we are condemned to be free. Well,
Speaker 3: I wouldn't say condemned, but we definitely are inherently free
Speaker 3: because we are self responsible. Nobody else can eat for me,
Speaker 3: nobody else can breathe for me, and nobody else can
Speaker 3: think for me. And although I might point a gun
Speaker 3: at somebody's head and force them to pay my bills,
Speaker 3: that's not a just thing to do. That's not taking
Speaker 3: responsibility for myself, and everybody has this sense of self responsibility,
Speaker 3: and that means everybody has the right to make decisions
Speaker 3: for their own lives. That's what it means when we
Speaker 3: say that all people are equally free.
Speaker 1: Hey, we're out of time, Tim, and I just wanted
Speaker 1: to mention this. So George will once called you a
Speaker 1: national treasure, which I think is absolutely true. I think
Speaker 1: that you know, like we have a poet laureate, they
Speaker 1: should have spat some sort of founding laureate, and some
Speaker 1: president should make you that person to go around to
Speaker 1: universities and high schools and teach them this stuff. That's
Speaker 1: what I think we should do. I would be happy
Speaker 1: to start. Oh and you'd be so good at it.
Speaker 1: The book is proclaiming liberty. Timothy Sander for always happy
Speaker 1: to have you on, Tim, Thanks for your time today.
Speaker 6: Armstrong and getty, guys hear with this world cup Fans
Speaker 6: are taking bottles of ranch dressing at home as souvenirs,
Speaker 6: and the TSA had to issue a reminder you can't
Speaker 6: pack them in your carry ons. It's touch seeing someone
Speaker 6: at security having to quickly chug a bottle of Hidden Valley.
Speaker 1: Why does everybody love ranch dressing so much. I don't
Speaker 1: think I've ever had ranch dressing, so I don't know
Speaker 1: what it tastes like, but I understand what the appeal is.
Speaker 1: People my kids just love it with everything.
Speaker 4: I can't believe you've never had ranch dressing.
Speaker 1: I don't think I have. It doesn't look good to
Speaker 1: me anyway. I got a number of things to say,
Speaker 1: but first I want to do this. Did we win
Speaker 1: the war with Iran? Or is that undetermined? At this point?
Speaker 1: I feel like we lost. Am I just being a
Speaker 1: negative Nelly. I was watching a little clip of what
Speaker 1: Trump said last week about the rockets. What's wrong with
Speaker 1: them having rockets? You know they Israel has rockets, out
Speaker 1: of you, Arabia has rockets. Why doesn't Iran get to
Speaker 1: have rockets? That wouldn't be fair, which to me is
Speaker 1: one of the craziest things I've ever heard of. Prison say,
Speaker 1: I don't get it, and Marco Rubia is watching the
Speaker 1: clip again today. Marco Rubio was standing behind him and
Speaker 1: looked so miserable hearing the president do that whole moral
Speaker 1: moral equivalence between Israel, the United States, and Iran. It's
Speaker 1: just crazy. It's exactly like, you got a gun who
Speaker 1: went a guy who went on a shooting spree with
Speaker 1: a gun, and you've got somebody with a who's never
Speaker 1: committed a crime in their lives and saying, well, why
Speaker 1: does he get a gun and he doesn't. There's a
Speaker 1: reason for that, their history, their intentions. It's crazy anyway.
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio said this yesterday. Some people feel like this
Speaker 1: was a tell, this particular statement. I mean, he is
Speaker 1: the Secretary of State in the Trump administration, and unless
Speaker 1: he's going to resign, he's there to carry out the
Speaker 1: president's foreign policy and to stand behind him.
Speaker 5: It.
Speaker 1: I thought this was a bit of a tell yesterday.
Speaker 7: If Iran makes a decision, if it's leadership makes a
Speaker 7: decision that they want to be a country instead of
Speaker 7: a revolutionary movement that exports terror, they're going to have
Speaker 7: an opportunity to do incredible things in Iraq. I'm not
Speaker 7: promising you that that's the choice they're going to make.
Speaker 7: I'm saying that's the choice that they make, then there
Speaker 7: will be opportunity.
Speaker 1: That's the Secretary of State holding it out there that
Speaker 1: they might not be a country that wants to be
Speaker 1: a real country as opposed to a revolutionary country. The
Speaker 1: jade vance Trump signal is that, oh yeah, these are
Speaker 1: different people that that's already decided. This is a new crowd.
Speaker 1: They want to be part of the you know, the
Speaker 1: modern real world and have given up their whole revolutionary background.
Speaker 1: Marco Rubio is going with the big If Iran wants
Speaker 1: it turns out to be that, and I'm not saying
Speaker 1: they are so. I feel like that was a tell
Speaker 1: from him. But not everybody's on board. The Senate voted
Speaker 1: yesterday against this war. They voted to end the war.
Speaker 1: None of this stuff is binding. By the way, the
Speaker 1: media leaves that out all the time. There is the
Speaker 1: goes way back to the seventies. There's a statute or
Speaker 1: whatever it is, edict that Congress can shut off these wars,
Speaker 1: but there's no teeth to it. Nobody's ever actually used
Speaker 1: it to stop a war. But it is an indication
Speaker 1: that there is some turning against the war. As the
Speaker 1: Senate passed us yesterday with the help of four Republicans
Speaker 1: I think joined all the Democrats saying that the war's
Speaker 1: got to come to a close. Here's a representative, Tim Sheehy,
Speaker 1: a Republican and a pretty Maga Republican throughout the years
Speaker 1: of Montana Butt fifty four.
Speaker 8: Michael, I hope that vice was in advance, and Kushner
Speaker 8: and witkaff are successful and convincing Iran to be a
Speaker 8: normal country and to open their minds and stop trying
Speaker 8: to murder their neighbors and destroy the world. But the
Speaker 8: reality is this is a murderous regime that doesn't want
Speaker 8: a deal. They don't want six dollar gasoline. They don't
Speaker 8: want the straits to be open. They want you and
Speaker 8: your family and all of us to be killed.
Speaker 1: They want to.
Speaker 8: Wipe our civilization off the map.
Speaker 1: That's their national motto. So there's at least one Republican
Speaker 1: who does not think that they have given up their
Speaker 1: old ways, that there's still a revolutionary country who wants
Speaker 1: to destroy the United States in Israel. That's what I
Speaker 1: tend to think. Also, I think Mark Rubio thinks that
Speaker 1: the same. I would be happy to be wrong. I
Speaker 1: would be thrilled to be wrong and say, look what
Speaker 1: a numb nuts I am, huh talking out my hind end,
Speaker 1: thinking I know what's going on there. Love to be wrong,
Speaker 1: and Iran turns out to be run by people that
Speaker 1: just want to do business with the world and be
Speaker 1: peaceful with their neighbors and not kill all the Jews
Speaker 1: and attempt to wipe out America, which they could never do.
Speaker 1: But they could wipe out Israel if they had a bomb,
Speaker 1: they certainly could, and at least the old people running,
Speaker 1: the previous people running around. If they had a nuclear
Speaker 1: weapon and they could get it into New York City,
Speaker 1: they absolutely would do that without hesitation. Iran getting a
Speaker 1: nuclear weapon would be one of the biggest moments, if
Speaker 1: not the biggest moment in world history, well at least
Speaker 1: up until they set that weapon off. Destroying Israel or
Speaker 1: blowing up Los Angeles or whatever. And stopping it is
Speaker 1: very important, and I'm not sure we're going to do
Speaker 1: a good job of that, depending on how this war
Speaker 1: turns out. I look forward to talking to Mike Lyons
Speaker 1: in about a half an hour. I don't even know
Speaker 1: if he'll answer this question, but the whole did we
Speaker 1: win or lose? The Wall Street Journals got an opinion
Speaker 1: piece out today just stating that we lost the war.
Speaker 1: Who are giving them all these billions of dollars They're
Speaker 1: going to rey. They've still got their rocket program, They're
Speaker 1: gonna rebuild their nuclear program. It's not, even though we
Speaker 1: did tremendous damage to it. We did tremendous damage to
Speaker 1: lots of things in Iran, but we're giving them so
Speaker 1: much money and it looks like a free pass going forward.
Speaker 1: And Iran knows that you're never gonna put together the
Speaker 1: political will to attack us like that again, where they're
Speaker 1: gonna be screaming toward a nuclear weapon or at least
Speaker 1: enough rocket capability to overwhelm Iron DOMA and Israel. And again,
Speaker 1: I would love to be wrong, but this is huge news.
Speaker 1: This is huge news. This is on the Trump side
Speaker 1: of things on this war that maybe he and JD
Speaker 1: are right and US naysayers are wrong. Here's Tree Inks
Speaker 1: on Fox Today, clip forty five. Well, the timeline is
Speaker 1: on clear.
Speaker 5: President Trump says there is no rush getting these inspectors
Speaker 5: into the country, but told Fox News that US inspectors
Speaker 5: will join the IAEA when they ultimately go into Iran
Speaker 5: to locate this highly enriched geranium that we know is
Speaker 5: bear read deep underground, the President describing this as a
Speaker 5: mountain that collapsed on this material. After those B two
Speaker 5: bombers targeted Iran during Operation Midnight Hammer.
Speaker 1: He that left out the first part where he says
Speaker 1: the head of the IAEA, that's the inspection outfit that
Speaker 1: looks for weapons of mass destruction like nuclear weapons. Do
Speaker 1: you remember the Iraq war? That was the IAEA. They
Speaker 1: got kicked out of Iraq and what got the war going.
Speaker 1: The IAEA guy announced yesterday that yes, there is an agreement.
Speaker 1: It is in the agreement that we're going into Iran
Speaker 1: soon and starting to look for the nuclear material and
Speaker 1: verify the fact that they're not rebuilding a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 1: I thought JD was just hoping or making that up,
Speaker 1: because Iran came out immediately after JD vance said that
Speaker 1: over the weekend and said no, we didn't agree to that.
Speaker 1: We're not allowing any inspectors in. The IAEA says, yep,
Speaker 1: that's in the agreement and we'll be there. Why Iran's
Speaker 1: playing that game, I have no idea. If they just
Speaker 1: want to cause troubles, which is what they like to do,
Speaker 1: if they want to appear to the hardcore Muslim fanatics
Speaker 1: in their country like they haven't given in to the
Speaker 1: big bad Satan of the United States and done our bidding.
Speaker 1: I don't know what their goal is with lying about that.
Speaker 1: But it appears that the agreement does actually include inspectors
Speaker 1: getting in there very soon. I still think it's a
Speaker 1: bad idea to give them the billions of dollars before
Speaker 1: we confirm that the nuclear weapons program is stopped, but
Speaker 1: that discussion is ongoing. I'm still putting negative on the
Speaker 1: whole thing. Big news though, that the IAEA is actually
Speaker 1: going to get in there and on the ground soon, including,
Speaker 1: according to Trump, some American inspectors in there, because sometimes
Speaker 1: you can't trust going back to Iraq, you can't trust
Speaker 1: the IAEA. A bunch of foreigners are on the take,
Speaker 1: corrupt organization like so many of your worldwide corrupt organizations,
Speaker 1: like the un like the WHO around COVID, like lots
Speaker 1: of them. But having some Americans in there will be good.
Speaker 1: Later we'll have to talk about what a big deal
Speaker 1: is that three socialists one against mainstream Democrats in New
Speaker 1: York last night. What does that mean for our politics nationwide?
Speaker 3: Or are.
Speaker 1: The movement of is socialism on the march all across
Speaker 1: the country. Well, we'll touch on that at some point.
Speaker 1: Some lighter fare that I want to talk about got
Speaker 1: into this discussion. Does walking faster, burn more calories. Was
Speaker 1: I misled by chat gpt on my nightly walks where
Speaker 1: I walk really really fast and look kind of goofy
Speaker 1: to try to burn more calories. According to chat gpt,
Speaker 1: it doesn't help to walk faster, but somebody said groxid,
Speaker 1: it does. I have an argument between the chatbots.
Speaker 4: I think you were misled.
Speaker 1: It doesn't make sense, right, doesn't make any sense. Got
Speaker 1: to burn more calories to walk faster? Anyway, That and
Speaker 1: other things on the way stay here. I'ven't seeing a
Speaker 1: lot of reporting on the NBA draft last night. Various
Speaker 1: bad teams that drafted high picks in the first round,
Speaker 1: and a reminder that the MVP of the NBA Championship
Speaker 1: this year was the thirty third pick in the draft
Speaker 1: second round, Jalen Brunson. So don't necessarily expect to have
Speaker 1: everything turn around because you got a high pick. Doesn't
Speaker 1: always work with that one. Here's one of the dumbest
Speaker 1: things I've ever seen on the news from last night
Speaker 1: on CBS. Oh yeah, oh yeah.
Speaker 9: That's Joseph mcgrail, bit up and ac cleaner and competitive loudmouth.
Speaker 9: So to speak from Australia who recently shatted the word
Speaker 9: now at one hundred and twenty two point four decibels,
Speaker 9: which is in the range of a chainsaw or jet engine,
Speaker 9: and Guinness says it's a new world record.
Speaker 1: We have a new world's loudest man. He's the loudest
Speaker 1: man who's ever lived. They think, can you play the
Speaker 1: beginning again?
Speaker 9: Oh yeah, oh yeah, that's it Joe.
Speaker 1: So obviously that's loud. It's impossible to know unless you're
Speaker 1: standing next to him. That's louder than the average loud person.
Speaker 1: Joe always says, I'm the loudest person on earth, like
Speaker 1: whenever we have to do anything with microphones, to have
Speaker 1: my microphone like half what is so that we are
Speaker 1: even because I'm very, very loud. I don't know if
Speaker 1: I'm loud of that guy. I might have to get
Speaker 1: a decibel meter and test myself. Maybe that's my Maybe
Speaker 1: that's my future, being a really loud person who goes
Speaker 1: around to county fairs and talks really loud or yells
Speaker 1: something for the kids. I'd be fun. So I'm walking
Speaker 1: the other night. Maybe you heard this the other day,
Speaker 1: walking the other night with my son and I go
Speaker 1: I walk a mile and a half two miles every night.
Speaker 1: Make sure I do it every single night. And then
Speaker 1: I also go to the gym and do other stuff,
Speaker 1: ride my bike, whatever, But I make sure it at
Speaker 1: least I do this no matter how busy I am.
Speaker 1: And my son wanted to go with me other night,
Speaker 1: which is awesome because we get to talk. And I
Speaker 1: walk really fast. I walk really fast everywhere. I walk
Speaker 1: really fast. Down the hallway to get coffee, I walk.
Speaker 1: I'm just a fast walker. My kids complaining about all
Speaker 1: the time, Dad, why are we running? And I told him,
Speaker 1: at least on our walk. I said, well, I'm trying
Speaker 1: to burn more calories, because you know, the whole point
Speaker 1: of the walk is exercise. And he said, I don't
Speaker 1: think you burn more calories walking faster. And I thought,
Speaker 1: that makes no sense whatsoever. I said, that can't be true.
Speaker 1: So I AI did. I don't remember which chat, but
Speaker 1: I used. I think it was clawed. Actually, So I said,
Speaker 1: during my nightly walk, I walk really fast, with the
Speaker 1: understanding that will burn more calories. But if I walked
Speaker 1: farther slower, would that burn more calories or less calories?
Speaker 1: Or would it be a wash? I was wondering if
Speaker 1: it'd be better off going further rather than walking faster.
Speaker 1: The short version is the total distance is a much
Speaker 1: bigger driver than the speed that you walk. If I
Speaker 1: want to go out there and walk and burn the
Speaker 1: most calories, I should go further at a slower pace.
Speaker 1: The distance is what matters the most. You do burn
Speaker 1: a few more calories walking faster, but not much. Distance
Speaker 1: would be a much bigger deal than the speed. The
Speaker 1: calories you burn walking are mostly a function of how
Speaker 1: far you move your body weight, not how fast. The
Speaker 1: idea being I'm one hundred and eighty eight pounds moving
Speaker 1: one hundred and eighty eight pounds a mile and a
Speaker 1: half takes the same amount of energy at this speed
Speaker 1: or that speed is what Claud claimed, which still doesn't
Speaker 1: quite make sense to me, because at the end of it,
Speaker 1: walking really fast, I'm sweating and breathing hard. On days
Speaker 1: where I walk slower, like if I'm talking on the
Speaker 1: phone and not paying attention or something like that, I'm
Speaker 1: not breathing harder sweating, And isn't by definition, if you're
Speaker 1: breathing hard and sweating, meaning you're burning more calories. Doesn't
Speaker 1: that just intuitively make sense?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Anyway, so I had that result and this this might
Speaker 1: be more about Oh darn it, I didn't, did I
Speaker 1: screen capture? Yeah, this might be more about our chatbots
Speaker 1: than about the science of burning calories. Somebody said, Grok
Speaker 1: gave a different answer. They texted me yesterday. Grok gave
Speaker 1: me a different answer regarding calories and walking speed. Grog
Speaker 1: said faster pace does burn more than slower paste. Although
Speaker 1: I didn't deny that it burned more. It just said
Speaker 1: it's not significant enough to really make a difference walking
Speaker 1: real fast. I don't know. I don't know need a
Speaker 1: doctor or a physicist or the world's allowdest guy to
Speaker 1: weigh in on this on what burns the most calories?
Speaker 3: I did.
Speaker 1: I need to do more cardio. Everybody should do more
Speaker 1: cardio because it's really really good for your heart. And
Speaker 1: is that one of the things you need to do
Speaker 1: for your diabetes?
Speaker 4: Yeah, it works very well for me.
Speaker 1: Brings down the blood sugar really. Oh yeah, you test
Speaker 1: your bud blood sugar how often?
Speaker 4: Well, I've a meter actually on my arm that can
Speaker 4: look at so I have my cell phone today. It
Speaker 4: actually tells me what my blood reading is.
Speaker 1: Is that thing poking with a needle all the time. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's just it is.
Speaker 4: I put shit in the skin one time and it
Speaker 4: just goes for about two weeks.
Speaker 1: You're wearing something with a needle in your skin. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: in my elbow. Does it hurt? No, not at all.
Speaker 4: I don't even notice it.
Speaker 1: You got a needle jammed in your elbow? Yeah, that
Speaker 1: sounds awful.
Speaker 4: It's just a little little tiny thing goes right in
Speaker 4: and it's there all the time.
Speaker 1: There all the time. Okay. Anyway, so you notice when
Speaker 1: you exercise, your blood sugar goes out. Oh yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I wis y'all should have one of those. What exercise
Speaker 1: are you doing?
Speaker 4: I'll do recumbent bike, I'll do tread.
Speaker 1: And I don't know what that word is. What the
Speaker 1: hell is I mean? You don't know what a recumbent
Speaker 1: bike is? Yeah, I don't know if I've ever heard
Speaker 1: that word in my life. It's just a bike. You sit,
Speaker 1: you just sit down and pedal. It's just a bike.
Speaker 1: Sounds like a Yeah, I mean, where'd you come up
Speaker 1: with this fancy recomverbent word? Sit down bike? That's all
Speaker 1: it is. I think somebody charged you more for putting
Speaker 1: the word recumbent in front of bike. Oh, very common word. Okay,
Speaker 1: I've never heard of before. Uh, you're well, it's so
Speaker 1: it's a stationary bike. Yeah, that's all it is. Okay,
Speaker 1: But you sit down, that's all okay, as opposed to
Speaker 1: what as opposed.
Speaker 4: To like a treadmill where you're you know, walking and
Speaker 4: you know, standing upright.
Speaker 1: And you have to have your pinky up in the
Speaker 1: air when you're sitting on a recumbent bike. No, it's
Speaker 1: nice because they're fancy words.
Speaker 4: I can look at my phone, watch TV, you know,
Speaker 4: watch show or something like that.
Speaker 1: Uh huh, once you get in that. I was trying
Speaker 1: to convince my son of this, and he's been doing better.
Speaker 1: Talk about this all the time. Apologize if you heard
Speaker 1: me say it before. I didn't learn it until I
Speaker 1: was I don't know, ten years ago. But once I
Speaker 1: got into my head and I recognized it. Good habits
Speaker 1: are just as hard to break as bad habits. Habits
Speaker 1: are really hard to break. We all know habits are
Speaker 1: hard to break. You're thinking about bad habits right, chewing
Speaker 1: our fingernails or grabbing M and m's out of the
Speaker 1: dish on the corner, or whatever your bad habit is good.
Speaker 1: Habits are really really hard to break. Two you just
Speaker 1: have to establish them. And like I'm to the point
Speaker 1: now with practicing musical instruments and exercising, for instance, see
Speaker 1: you use two good things. I also stopped chewing my fingernails,
Speaker 1: thank God. But it is really difficult for me to
Speaker 1: go to bed without having exercised or practicing a musical
Speaker 1: instrument because I have it as a habit, and it
Speaker 1: just drives me nuts. It just it irks me if
Speaker 1: I don't do it. Like I'm trying to start that
Speaker 1: habit with writing, I don't have the habit of writing.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to get into the habit of writing three
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty words every day at least to get
Speaker 1: and so hopefully that will become a habit, a habit
Speaker 1: that is hard to quit, that I just need to
Speaker 1: do every day and do automatically. Right now, it's a
Speaker 1: ponderous chore. Call it recumbent if you want that. I
Speaker 1: find very difficult to do. I have to make myself
Speaker 1: do it. But if I can make myself do it,
Speaker 1: for there is actually a number they say how many
Speaker 1: times how long you have to do something before it
Speaker 1: comes a habit six weeks or something like that. I'll
Speaker 1: look that up. There's a known number for how long
Speaker 1: you have to do something for it to become a habit.
Speaker 1: But good habits are as hard to break his bad habits.
Speaker 1: I'm trying to convince my son of that if we
Speaker 1: go out and walk every single night pre soon, I'll
Speaker 1: just do it automatically. He won't be able to not
Speaker 1: do it. It'll feel weird anyway. That's one of the
Speaker 1: best lessons I've ever learned in my life. We get
Speaker 1: a lot more coming up. We'll talk to Mike Lyons
Speaker 1: about did we win the war or not? Maybe it's
Speaker 1: too early to tell. If you miss the segment, get
Speaker 1: the podcast Armstrong and Getty on demand Armstrong and Getty