Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center. Jack Armstrong is Joe Getty Armstrong and
Speaker 1: Jetty and he Armstrong and Eddy.
Speaker 2: So the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal has
Speaker 2: a sad day for the US at the UN, the
Speaker 2: Land of the Free votes with Russia on a Ukraine
Speaker 2: war resolution. We brought that up with Tom mcclintalk last hour.
Speaker 2: If you didn't get hear that, get the podcast Armstrong
Speaker 2: and Getty on demand. But the resolution was basically calling,
Speaker 2: you know, Russia the aggressor and that they need to
Speaker 2: get out. And we didn't vote yes on that. We
Speaker 2: voted with Russia and North Korean some other scumbag countries
Speaker 2: on not wanting to call out Russia in that war.
Speaker 3: And as Tom mcclintact, the Congressman said, heal give plenty
Speaker 3: of latitude to Trump to negotiate the way he sees
Speaker 3: fit to try to end the war. It's fairly obviously
Speaker 3: to me anyway, Trump trying to avoid any antagonizing the
Speaker 3: people with whom he'll be negotiating, specifically Putin unnecessarily. I
Speaker 3: think you can manipulate Putin through flattery or leaving out
Speaker 3: criticism about as you successfully as you can negotiate with
Speaker 3: a hungry mountain lion. It's just it's a useless effort.
Speaker 3: But that's the way he does business well. But it's
Speaker 3: a completely different thing. We're not negotiating on a house
Speaker 3: or a car here.
Speaker 2: If I flatter some lying, cheating I know he's a
Speaker 2: scumbag car salesman, but I flatter him.
Speaker 1: I know he's a jerk. I know him from around
Speaker 1: the neighborhood.
Speaker 2: He's a bad guy, but I flatter him because I'm
Speaker 2: trying to do a deal with him.
Speaker 1: That's one thing. There's no ultimate harm.
Speaker 2: There really, but telling the world as the most important
Speaker 2: country on planet that no, there's nothing to criticize about
Speaker 2: what Russia did here.
Speaker 1: Is not good. Yeah, oh, I agree completely. You know that.
Speaker 3: I was just trying to, you know, express the Trump
Speaker 3: point of view. That is one of my great criticisms
Speaker 3: of Trump is he does not understand how the United
Speaker 3: States and the way it behaves echoes through history like
Speaker 3: a real estate deal doesn't. On the other hand, maybe
Speaker 3: he does, according to his defenders, or in the case
Speaker 3: of Jerry Baker, who is a great writer, happens to
Speaker 3: work for the Wall Street Journal. Most of the time
Speaker 3: he's trying to understand exactly what Trump's at And I
Speaker 3: thought it was very interesting you even if you don't
Speaker 3: agree with it. But first, as a bit of a
Speaker 3: scene setter, here's a reporter grilling the president yesterday subsequent
Speaker 3: to his meeting with Macrone, the pante wasted leader of France,
Speaker 3: talking about you in Russia and European security. And I
Speaker 3: actually I have a lot of sympathy with mccrone's point,
Speaker 3: if you at least to some extent. But the Roll
Speaker 3: forty one, Michael Lin will discuss a dictator.
Speaker 1: Would you use the same words for gold and cruising
Speaker 1: the part.
Speaker 4: I don't use those words lightly. I think that we're
Speaker 4: going to see how it all works out.
Speaker 1: Let's see what happens.
Speaker 4: I think we have a chance of a really good
Speaker 4: settlement between various countries. And you know, you're talking about
Speaker 4: Europe and you're talking about Ukraine as part of that
Speaker 4: whole situation. The other side has a lot of support also,
Speaker 4: so let's see how it all works.
Speaker 1: It might work out.
Speaker 4: Look, you can never make up lives. The one thing
Speaker 4: you can, you can make up the money, but you
Speaker 4: can't make up the lives. A lot of lives lost.
Speaker 4: I think, probably a lot more lives than people are
Speaker 4: talking about. It's been a rough war, but I think
Speaker 4: we're close to getting itself.
Speaker 2: So you think Trump thinks that there's an advantage to
Speaker 2: no calling Putin a dictator. Because he called Puttin a dictator,
Speaker 2: he's less likely to do a deal.
Speaker 3: He's yes, he is doing what you described, more or less,
Speaker 3: he's flattering all of the parties to the deal before
Speaker 3: the negotiation, because it just does not do any good
Speaker 3: to antagonize the person you're negotiating with.
Speaker 2: Generally, but as you keep pointing out, putting such a crocodile,
Speaker 2: he's gonna do a deal if he thinks it's in
Speaker 2: his best interest, and he's not going to do a
Speaker 2: deal if he doesn't. The end, with no other extraneous
Speaker 2: things mattering whatsoever.
Speaker 3: Right, exactly, he is no more throne to flattery nor
Speaker 3: threat than a crocodile.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly, in my opinion.
Speaker 3: But Trump does business the way Trump does business another
Speaker 3: explanation of and obviously he does throw the word lightly
Speaker 3: around dictator, called Zelenski a dictator, even though he's clearly
Speaker 3: not anyway.
Speaker 2: And if I was gonna, you know, back on the
Speaker 2: side of giving Trump some credit, He's done a hell
Speaker 2: of a lot more deals than practically anybody, and maybe he's.
Speaker 1: Dealt with some really bad guys before, where you know.
Speaker 2: Other people would have said, look, you can't flatter old
Speaker 2: you know whatever mob boss or whoever he had to
Speaker 2: deal with tried to get a hotel Bilt Matt turns
Speaker 2: out he did.
Speaker 1: He feels like it helped him.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I suppose. And this really gets into seven
Speaker 3: dimensional chess. Maybe he wants Putin to think he thinks
Speaker 3: he can flatter Putin. Ah, yeah, but I don't know. Anyway,
Speaker 3: This is the really really important part. I'm gonna quote
Speaker 3: Jerry Baker a bit here and there, as we discussed.
Speaker 3: But Jerry's trying to figure out Trump's strategy, and I
Speaker 3: think he may be onto something. Beneath Donald Trump's mendacious
Speaker 3: that means dishonest contempt for Ukraine and its dictator, and
Speaker 3: his cringing admiration for Russia and the genie in the Kremlin,
Speaker 3: there seems to be a kernel of strategic reasoning.
Speaker 1: Okay, I read that opening.
Speaker 3: Partly to illustrate that Baker is no fan of what
Speaker 3: Trump said recently, but he says he isn't wrong that
Speaker 3: America has born the burdens of global leadership for far
Speaker 3: too long undeniably truth. Look at NATO and their lack
Speaker 3: of spending on defense. Just that's almost the only thing
Speaker 3: you need to see. And he's not wrong that the
Speaker 3: liberal order we have led is giving way to a
Speaker 3: world in which the US must pursue a narrower definition
Speaker 3: of the national interest, and that the age of spending
Speaker 3: hundreds of billions of dollars to defend parts of the
Speaker 3: world that are no longer essential to US security and
Speaker 3: for nations that have the resources to defend themselves.
Speaker 1: That era is over. And what he says is this.
Speaker 3: Strengthens the impression that mister Trump may be leading the
Speaker 3: US toward a return of a great power approach to
Speaker 3: global strategy. Here's what that is if you're not familiar
Speaker 3: with it. As he uppends a foreign policy, there's been
Speaker 3: a lot of talk in diplomatic circles lately of.
Speaker 1: A new Yalta.
Speaker 3: That was the nineteen forty five conference on the Black
Speaker 3: Sea where the leaders of the US, the UK, which
Speaker 3: used to matter and the Soviet Union struck up a
Speaker 3: deal to carve up the planet. This is your sphere
Speaker 3: of influence. This is our sphere of influence. This is
Speaker 3: your sphere of influence. We don't mess with yours. You
Speaker 3: don't mess with ours, and we don't go to war. Now, Jack,
Speaker 3: you have been talking about how what's his face?
Speaker 1: The great reporter puts out a newsletter.
Speaker 3: Mark alperson Mark Alpern has been describing lately how Washington
Speaker 3: is a buzz with some sort of great bargain that
Speaker 3: is allegedly being crafted behind the scenes that.
Speaker 2: Includes Greenland and Taiwan and Russia and Ukraine and a
Speaker 2: whole bunch of stuff exactly as a way to make
Speaker 2: business not war in the style of Yalta. Getting back
Speaker 2: to Jerry Baker, mister Trump's apparent hunger for US territorial
Speaker 2: expansion in Greenland, Panama, Gaza, even maybe even Canada, his
Speaker 2: ambitions to tie foreign policy to the exploitation of economic resources,
Speaker 2: his seeming acquiescence to Vladimir Putin's European ambitions, and similar
Speaker 2: expressions of respect for Shijin Ping of China suggest a
Speaker 2: hard edged foreign policy realism revolving around a new big
Speaker 2: three powers, while another yalta.
Speaker 1: This is damned interesting. This is damned interesting.
Speaker 2: And you know, I don't want to get sucked into
Speaker 2: giving Trump way too much credit for the sort of
Speaker 2: thing that I don't think he's spent a lot of
Speaker 2: his life thinking about. But it's possible that he and
Speaker 2: smart people around him have decided we're into a new era. Now,
Speaker 2: we're into an era much like you know, the Soviet
Speaker 2: Union in the United States where you have to say
Speaker 2: you get that side of the world, we get this
Speaker 2: side of the world. You don't mess with us like
Speaker 2: you were just talking about. It might be where we
Speaker 2: are now. It's funny. It's easy.
Speaker 3: Even if you spend your life studying massive changes in
Speaker 3: global dynamics, it's easy to think, well, massive changes are
Speaker 3: in history books. Now we have stability and rules based
Speaker 3: blah blah blah. There will never be as Fuki Yama
Speaker 3: idiotically said, we're at the end of history. I mean,
Speaker 3: how did you get those words to come out of
Speaker 3: his mouth anyway?
Speaker 1: Ah, So, set aside.
Speaker 3: The moral indignation about the president's till to Moscow, take
Speaker 3: a take at face value. There's potentially profound shift and
Speaker 3: foreign policy. Then he gets into three potential implications, what
Speaker 3: would this new world look like? I humbly submit that
Speaker 3: we should break semi on time for once and give
Speaker 3: plenty of time for those three main potential implications.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm fascinated by this idea. I know, I know.
Speaker 3: I have accused Trump many times of not being real
Speaker 3: up on the historical significance of certain maneuvers and the
Speaker 3: presidency and the rest of it.
Speaker 2: I do think he understands power, leverage and money though, true, Dad, huh, So,
Speaker 2: we got a lot more on the way, including paying
Speaker 2: off what that would look like.
Speaker 1: We'll do that next.
Speaker 2: And has anybody had increased luminosity from their silk pillow
Speaker 2: case if you have? Our text line is four one
Speaker 2: five two nine five KFTC.
Speaker 5: And finally, doctors are warning against a new viral TikTok
Speaker 5: trend in which users are dropping heavy objects on their feet.
Speaker 5: You know, at a certain point, we just have to
Speaker 5: let evolution do its.
Speaker 1: Thing, as we've argued many times.
Speaker 2: And apparently TikTok's back is the thing everywhere and just
Speaker 2: people are using it, and China continues to spy on
Speaker 2: us and whatever.
Speaker 3: And propagandize our young people yeah, lovely. Speaking of China,
Speaker 3: we've been discussing Jerry Baker's column in the Wall Street Journal.
Speaker 3: He's talking about how Trump is showing a number of
Speaker 3: signs of going toward moving toward a great power approach
Speaker 3: to global strategy, not the rules based international order of
Speaker 3: the last fifty seventy five years whatever, and the references.
Speaker 1: Maybe we're going for New Yalta conference.
Speaker 3: That's a nineteen forty five conference where the leaders of
Speaker 3: the US, the UK, and the Soviet Union struck a
Speaker 3: deal to carve up the planet back.
Speaker 1: In nineteen forty five.
Speaker 3: And there are rumors Mark Alpern we've discussed, says the
Speaker 3: Washington's a buzz with talk of just such a giant agreement,
Speaker 3: which might indeed include Greenland and Panama and Gazan, Canada,
Speaker 3: who knows what, but almost certainly Taiwan, Which brings us
Speaker 3: to Baker's analysis. If there is a move towards this
Speaker 3: great power world and a New Yalta first, we can
Speaker 3: look forward to territorial insecurity. In a Trumpian vision of
Speaker 3: the world in which great power sees what they can,
Speaker 3: we can expect a much more fluid, muscular approach to
Speaker 3: international boundaries than the last half century's efforts at a
Speaker 3: rules based system. And then of course he name checks Taiwan.
Speaker 3: I've heard it said many times. If Taiwan goes, there
Speaker 3: will be a global depression because of the acute need
Speaker 3: for their advanced computer chips, mostly in some other technologies,
Speaker 3: but mostly the chips. There's an argument to Trump's approach
Speaker 3: to Russia. It represents a hardened approach to Taiwan, saying
Speaker 3: that cutting Ukraine loose was necessary to enable Washington to
Speaker 3: focus on China. But is this mister Trump's view? How
Speaker 3: essential does he think of free taiwan Is? And it's
Speaker 3: not clear? And then he talks about how Trump has
Speaker 3: also spoken favorably of Shijin paying is a brilliant guy.
Speaker 3: He controls one point four billion people with an iron fist.
Speaker 3: Is he just trying to flatter him?
Speaker 1: Does he mean it?
Speaker 3: Nobody's quite sure. So territorial instability definitely would come down
Speaker 3: the pike. Second, nuclear proliferation. The big difference between the
Speaker 3: great power world of the past and that of today
Speaker 3: is the thermonuclear bomb. If small nations can no longer
Speaker 3: rely on large, powerful allies to protect them against predators,
Speaker 3: they have one last option, the threat of nuclear annihilation
Speaker 3: for any country that tries to invade them. Then he
Speaker 3: goes through quite a list of countries that don't have
Speaker 3: nuclear arms because they're under the US nuclear umbrella and
Speaker 3: they are our allies, Germany, let's see Poland, Oh blah
Speaker 3: bah bah. Who else does he mat well? Bunches of
Speaker 3: countries and obviously Korea, Japan.
Speaker 2: Obviously, the more countries that have NU clear weapons, more
Speaker 2: likely that one gets used on purpose or by mistake
Speaker 2: or whatever, or gets loose.
Speaker 3: Right, Yeah, absolutely, And then the third thing to look
Speaker 3: for is geopolitical and economic realignments. If Europeans no longer
Speaker 3: view America as a dependable ally, they will seek alternatives.
Speaker 3: In the pre World War One era of Great European powers,
Speaker 3: countries shifted allegiances fairly regularly. Britain could have signed up
Speaker 3: with Germany rather than France and Russia. We may now
Speaker 3: see that kind of hard, self interested realism among powers
Speaker 3: replace attachment to sentimental ideas and values. You know, I
Speaker 3: think he almost undersells the idea of the democracy, the
Speaker 3: world banding together to defend freedom and free trade and democracy.
Speaker 3: It's more than sentimental ideals. It certainly values.
Speaker 2: If Germany was willing to go all in on using
Speaker 2: Russian gas until the invasion of Ukraine, they don't care
Speaker 2: about Russia's value. I think history will look back on
Speaker 2: Angela Merkel as a self important jackass who did all
Speaker 2: the wrong things anyway to finish a Baker's piece here,
Speaker 2: For all its frailties as a geopolitical force, Europe's economy
Speaker 2: is many times the size of Russia's, and combined with
Speaker 2: the UK's, it's on par with Americas. Europe as a
Speaker 2: whole as an economy just about as big as ours.
Speaker 2: It's already heavily dependent on China, and Europeans now see
Speaker 2: closer ties with troubling implications for American interests. In as summary,
Speaker 2: mister Trump may well like his new world's order, but
Speaker 2: it will come at a steep price. Well, at least
Speaker 2: sounded like the beginning of this article that he was
Speaker 2: kind of presenting it as that there might not be
Speaker 2: any other choice. Right.
Speaker 3: Well, I think he would probably put it, and we
Speaker 3: ought to try to talk to Gerard Baker someday.
Speaker 1: Fascinating guy.
Speaker 3: Anyway he might put it. It's not not clearly true
Speaker 3: that the old choice will work. I think he would
Speaker 3: say it can if we're super smart about it and
Speaker 3: do it in the right way. But there are those
Speaker 3: in the Trump orbit who say, hell, we get their
Speaker 3: emails all the time, say no, the old world order
Speaker 3: is broke. It's not going to work anymore.
Speaker 2: So we need to grab hold of the future and
Speaker 2: change before it changes us. If there are still human
Speaker 2: beings on the planet. A couple hundred years from now,
Speaker 2: one of the big stories in history books will be
Speaker 2: the rise of China and how it just changed the
Speaker 2: world order.
Speaker 1: Yeah from the previous century.
Speaker 2: Tom Cotton in his new book talks about how China's
Speaker 2: military rises the fastest expansion and growth of a military
Speaker 2: in world history.
Speaker 3: I think China's peak and decline is going to happen
Speaker 3: within five years, maybe maybe ten. But they'll soon be
Speaker 3: like Britain, a shrunken former power might be, you know,
Speaker 3: after we're dead. And on Europe, the coddling of Europe
Speaker 3: over the last fifty years one of the greatest mistakes
Speaker 3: ever made.
Speaker 2: Oh wow, that's some heavy, interesting stuff. We got a
Speaker 2: lot more on the way. Stay with us, Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 6: After a trans female basketball player missed her game.
Speaker 1: The team ended up.
Speaker 6: Losing by twenty six points, but on the bright side,
Speaker 6: they didn't have to shower in their uniforms afterward.
Speaker 1: That's a good joke. I'm not sure I followed that well.
Speaker 3: What was confusing about it was that Guttfeld used a
Speaker 3: trans girl and her talking about a dude, and I
Speaker 3: think we needed more setup to that joke. He was
Speaker 3: talking about a dominant basketball team whose dude couldn't play
Speaker 3: one day and got hammered.
Speaker 1: Apparently. Oh okay, a bit of missing context there, and I.
Speaker 2: Should making the point that that player made a big difference.
Speaker 2: Having having a dude on your team was a great benefit.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I have a little more gender bending madness. If you're
Speaker 3: in the mood for it, you know, why not? Michael,
Speaker 3: do you have the theme ready?
Speaker 1: We don't? You know? No, no, this you know what.
Speaker 3: Elon Musk is going to take a look at your
Speaker 3: list of five things and he's.
Speaker 2: Gonna cross it off. I've seen his list. It was
Speaker 2: playing theme songs on time and.
Speaker 1: Under bending madness.
Speaker 3: A couple of items worth mentioning. Riley Gains And if
Speaker 3: you don't know Riley, she's the great college swimmer who
Speaker 3: called out Hey, there's a full grown dude in the
Speaker 3: locker room calling himself a woman, and I'm sick of
Speaker 3: pen making me put up with it. God bless her
Speaker 3: for her current anyway, she's been a leading light in
Speaker 3: keeping men out of women's sports.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 3: The President signed in order to ban transgender athletes from
Speaker 3: school sports, and the NCAA claim to have rewritten its
Speaker 3: rules to comply. But now Riley and Texas Attorney General
Speaker 3: Ken Paxton have gotten together to say the NCAA policy
Speaker 3: has way too many loopholes to be meaningful. She says, quote,
Speaker 3: this policy is about as clear as mud, and very
Speaker 3: very much still allows men to compete on women's teams
Speaker 3: and receive women's benefits, And she says we're watching to
Speaker 3: see what they actually do. But critics of the NCAA's
Speaker 3: changes claim that the new policy bases gender on birth
Speaker 3: certificates or a doctor's certification, both of which can be
Speaker 3: changed by compliance state officials or activist doctors. Sure, and
Speaker 3: that does not comply with the Trump administration's definition, which
Speaker 3: maintains that sex is immutable and binary.
Speaker 2: Why can't they just go with if you got a penis, because.
Speaker 3: You can get your penis lopped off, then you have
Speaker 3: still have male skeleton, lungs, bone, well, I said, skeleton
Speaker 3: already muscles, et cetera. Anyway, so we're and this is
Speaker 3: it's true of the DEI stuff, it's true of the
Speaker 3: race based college admissions.
Speaker 1: They will not change.
Speaker 2: They will change the appearance of what they do to
Speaker 2: try to fool you and still get away with their
Speaker 2: nefarious radical schemes.
Speaker 3: Moving along, maybe you heard about this story. I thought
Speaker 3: it was worth mentioning Columbine High School. Yes, that Columbine
Speaker 3: High School news story recently that a female teacher was
Speaker 3: sexually grooming a free female student and the administration knew
Speaker 3: it and covered it up and allowed the girl to
Speaker 3: change her status to homeless so she could legally move
Speaker 3: out of her parents home and into the teacher home.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, they could be lovers. Wow, Holy crap.
Speaker 3: When the student's mom got w into this, she discovered
Speaker 3: thousands of phone calls and texts between the teacher, who
Speaker 3: had at minimum been making out with the student. When
Speaker 3: the student's mom went to the principal to let them
Speaker 3: know that a predator had been sexually grooming her daughter,
Speaker 3: the principal responded and I quote Ms Kearnie takes interest
Speaker 3: in helping kids.
Speaker 1: Navigate their sexuality.
Speaker 3: But again, the administration, knowing that this girl had a
Speaker 3: home and parents, helped her declare herself homeless so she
Speaker 3: could move in with her teacher. The sexualization of children
Speaker 3: in schools and trying to pry them away from the
Speaker 3: families straight out of Marxism.
Speaker 2: Well, and an adult helping a child navigate their sexuality
Speaker 2: is one hundred percent grooming.
Speaker 1: I mean one percent is the definition of grooming. Yes,
Speaker 1: it is absolutely true.
Speaker 2: And again, if you don't get this, I don't know
Speaker 2: what to do except slap you upside the head any time,
Speaker 2: any it would help me any time an adult says
Speaker 2: and hey, let's not tell your parents about this. Something
Speaker 2: awful is going on unless there is a clear and
Speaker 2: documented history of abuse or something like that.
Speaker 1: Moving along, I just wanted to get this on.
Speaker 3: We have a link at Armstrong and gedddy dot com
Speaker 3: under hot links. I'm ninety percent sure, he says, scrolling
Speaker 3: to make sure it's true.
Speaker 1: Yes, what is Sage's Law?
Speaker 3: And this is a law that is got some momentum
Speaker 3: in Virginia and people are becoming aware of it around
Speaker 3: the country schools keeping secrets from parents open the door
Speaker 3: to predators, I'm reading from their website. So do states
Speaker 3: who call it abuse to raise girls as girls and
Speaker 3: boys as boys and rip them from loving families to
Speaker 3: affirm them in state custom and both led to this
Speaker 3: person's sages trafficking.
Speaker 1: Her school affirmed her.
Speaker 3: As a boy when she was a confused adolescent afraid
Speaker 3: of puberty, etc. We've talked about this and told her
Speaker 3: to use the boy's bathroom, but kept her parents in
Speaker 3: the dark. She was terribly bullied, assaulted in the boy's bathroom,
Speaker 3: fled the threats, was caught, drugged and exploited by sex traffickers,
Speaker 3: And when the FBI found Sage, a judge withheld her
Speaker 3: from her parents over false claims of misgendering abuse and
Speaker 3: ordered her into a boy's state home, where she was
Speaker 3: raped and assaulted again. She fled and was caught again
Speaker 3: for months of horrific abuse before.
Speaker 1: She was finally rescued.
Speaker 2: So it's very simple, no secret gender transition in schools.
Speaker 2: And two, it's not abuse to raise a child according
Speaker 2: to his or her biology. We've got their web page
Speaker 2: at Armstrong and getty dot com under hot links it's
Speaker 2: called Sage's Law.
Speaker 1: Read it, know it, love it.
Speaker 2: It's a brief but important gender bending madness updates. I've
Speaker 2: noticed you have several segments that you do that have
Speaker 2: theme music. I don't have one. I should really come
Speaker 2: up with something that has theme music. I just Jack's
Speaker 2: ramblings and then there's music.
Speaker 1: I don't know. It's hard to Alman brothers rambling Man.
Speaker 2: Maybe just I haven't read this whole thing. This is
Speaker 2: in the Wall Street Journal today in the opinion section.
Speaker 2: Mike Gallagher, who we like bring warriors back to the
Speaker 2: US military recruitment campaign should frame services the ultimate test
Speaker 2: of strength, courage, and leadership. Remember when Mike Lions told
Speaker 2: us how well that worked as a recruitment tool. I
Speaker 2: know that it worked on me. I very nearly joined
Speaker 2: the military and talk to recruiters, I mean as down
Speaker 2: the pipeline, and I don't even remember why I changed
Speaker 2: my mind.
Speaker 1: But what was appealing to me about it was the
Speaker 1: idea of.
Speaker 2: I wonder if I can do this. I think I
Speaker 2: could do this, the challenge of it. And somehow we
Speaker 2: got a realizing the best version of yourself.
Speaker 1: Yeah, somehow we got away.
Speaker 2: From that in our military recruiting, and then numbers have
Speaker 2: plummeted over the years. Well they've they've gone back up
Speaker 2: a lot under Trump. Anyway, he's writing a piece about
Speaker 2: how we need to get back to, you know, push yourself,
Speaker 2: test yourself, how good can you eat? Be all you
Speaker 2: can be as a military recruiting thing, and I just
Speaker 2: I love that. I think that's a great idea.
Speaker 3: And then I think it is too. He also I
Speaker 3: read the piece and he mentions that.
Speaker 1: Enlistment.
Speaker 3: Enlistment seems to be very conditional on who's in the
Speaker 3: White House in a way that's probably not super healthy.
Speaker 1: So no, not shouldn't be that. That's not good, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: Joe was off the other day.
Speaker 2: I assume you're attending the Maha Kummele like so many
Speaker 2: other people around the world did. Oh yeah, try to
Speaker 2: keep me away. I was unaware of this thing. It's
Speaker 2: the biggest gathering that ever happens on planet Earth.
Speaker 1: Every however many years, they don't have it every year.
Speaker 1: It's in India.
Speaker 2: It's a six week ritual bathing spectacle that is visible
Speaker 2: from space. It's so large where everybody goes and bathes
Speaker 2: in the river to cleanse themselves of their sins or
Speaker 2: demons or something. I don't know.
Speaker 1: You'd have to read this. You can be troubled. Actually,
Speaker 1: you know, read into it. I four hundred million people
Speaker 1: attended this. Four hundred million. There's no close second to
Speaker 1: gather make can Mecco look like a Little League game? Yeah?
Speaker 2: Well it certainly makes you know, whatever music festival you've
Speaker 2: been to seem like nothing.
Speaker 1: I mean that's just stunning.
Speaker 2: Four hundred million people over six weeks attended this and
Speaker 2: it just wrapped up the other day. So if you
Speaker 2: didn't make it, you'll have to go, say years from
Speaker 2: now when they do it again.
Speaker 3: Yeah, keep in mind that they can hardly run the
Speaker 3: thing without a trampling or two. Sometimes it's dozens of
Speaker 3: people who get trampled.
Speaker 2: I would like to go just for the logistics of it.
Speaker 2: I don't really need to bathe in that river. God,
Speaker 2: dang it.
Speaker 3: That's gotta get a little gaming. There are secondhand bathwater
Speaker 3: is bad enough. Four hundred million people all bathing in
Speaker 3: the same river.
Speaker 1: It's people matter.
Speaker 2: Well I don't know about that, but uh, what was
Speaker 2: I gonna say? Oh, I just the logistics of it.
Speaker 2: The food stands, the porta potties, the traffic.
Speaker 1: I can't even imagine how you put something like that together.
Speaker 1: You're assuming there are porta potties. I was, do you
Speaker 1: have knowledge that there are not? Well, I don't know.
Speaker 3: India is not known for its gleaming sophistication everywhere. There
Speaker 3: are certainly amazing parts of India, but some of it's
Speaker 3: a little bit primitive by American standard.
Speaker 1: Thank you, come again. Four hundred million people, even if
Speaker 1: they have porta potties, they could get a.
Speaker 2: Little out of hand. I mean, if you've been to
Speaker 2: a music festival, you know, go early in the day.
Speaker 3: Oh oh, I don't even want to think about that.
Speaker 1: It's so horrible.
Speaker 3: I almost screamed at an innocent young woman last night.
Speaker 3: I'm fairly proud of myself that I did not. I
Speaker 3: came as close as you can come without actually erupting
Speaker 3: like an insane volcano. I will describe the circumstances in a.
Speaker 1: Moment, okay, fantastic. Among other things. On the way, Hey Michael,
Speaker 1: have we played number four yet? The Greg guttfeldt Joe.
Speaker 1: I know we haven't play it for me? Would thanks so?
Speaker 6: Over the weekend, MSNBC canceled joy Read's TV show, and
Speaker 6: according to the network, all of her wigs were quickly
Speaker 6: released back into the wild.
Speaker 3: Here they go, a loving tribute to the moron joy
Speaker 3: Read Next Hour stay with us if you can. If
Speaker 3: you can't grab it via podcast, you should subscribe Armstrong
Speaker 3: and Getty on demand some of her greatest hits through
Speaker 3: the years.
Speaker 1: What a numskull. So here's the situation.
Speaker 3: We have insurance through our jobs, and as most insurance programs,
Speaker 3: there are incentives. If you don't smoke, it costs less.
Speaker 3: If you have a primary care physician, it costs less,
Speaker 3: and you have to go to the primary care physician
Speaker 3: and get a quote unquote physical or a preventative care
Speaker 3: visit once a year. Now I have, as a guy
Speaker 3: who's successfully dealing with high blood versus hypertension in HI
Speaker 3: and stuff like that. I'm on the try not to
Speaker 3: have a heart attack variety pack.
Speaker 1: I call, you know, the.
Speaker 3: Medications I take and I exercise, bab blah.
Speaker 1: It's going great.
Speaker 2: But so I see my doctor every six months and
Speaker 2: do a rigorous, thorough preventing me from croaking visit, not
Speaker 2: every year, every six months. The blood work, although we've
Speaker 2: cut back on that to once a year because it's
Speaker 2: always good. The blood work, PSA test even for prostate cancer,
Speaker 2: blood pressure, just everything very thorough.
Speaker 1: But here's the problem. Well, I will tell you this.
Speaker 3: I checked and it said, no, you haven't had your
Speaker 3: preventative care visits, so you're going to pay more for insurance.
Speaker 3: And I said, no, I have. In fact, I do
Speaker 3: it twice a year. Well, I got on the line because,
Speaker 3: of course, the blanking website, you know what, I swore
Speaker 3: I was gonna stay calm.
Speaker 1: I'm going to stay calm during this discussion. I can
Speaker 1: do it. So the effing.
Speaker 3: Website, of course didn't. More so I got on the
Speaker 3: phone t help us know where to.
Speaker 2: Direct the anger so we can ride along with you.
Speaker 2: Are we angry at the insurance company.
Speaker 1: Or the like?
Speaker 3: I often say to my wife when she says, who
Speaker 3: is that guy while we're watching a movie that's part
Speaker 3: of the script writing, we're meant to wonder.
Speaker 2: I thought I would want to join in on the anger.
Speaker 2: I just don't know how to direct it. Okay, there'll
Speaker 2: be plenty jack plenty of anger. So anyway, so I
Speaker 2: call and say, hey, it says I haven't had this
Speaker 2: but I have. And the nice girl says, yeah, yeah,
Speaker 2: you need to make an appointment for that. I said,
Speaker 2: but I do that twice a year. It's incredibly thorough.
Speaker 2: Blah blah blah, and she says, you know what probably happens.
Speaker 2: I don't know that this is in your case, but
Speaker 2: what happens is if you go for your physical, your
Speaker 2: preventative care visit, whatever you want to call it, and
Speaker 2: then at the end of it, you say to the
Speaker 2: doctor and he says, is there anything else? And you say,
Speaker 2: my knee hurts and he says, well, you should put
Speaker 2: some ice on it. That will be coded as a
Speaker 2: diagnosis and a treatment, so it's not coded as a
Speaker 2: preventative care business. And I said, do you understand how
Speaker 2: moronic that is?
Speaker 1: What you have just explained to me.
Speaker 2: That moment, that moment there, that's what I struggle with
Speaker 2: the moment before you talked, is where when they say
Speaker 2: something that is ludicrous and then stop right And that's
Speaker 2: one who I.
Speaker 1: Had explodes like you just stopped.
Speaker 3: Like that makes sense and that bothers me and I
Speaker 3: went zero to sixty man, zero to sixty.
Speaker 1: I raised my voice.
Speaker 2: I said, this is like the Soviet effing union. What
Speaker 2: matters is not the medical care. What matters is checking
Speaker 2: the box. So it doesn't matter if you do the
Speaker 2: right thing or not, just check the box. You have
Speaker 2: conceded in the conversation that I did the right things,
Speaker 2: but because of the unchecked box, I've got to go
Speaker 2: waste everybody's time and money to do it again.
Speaker 3: And then I said, but I understand, you don't make
Speaker 3: the rules. You've been more than helpful. Thank you, goodbye,
Speaker 3: and I hung up.
Speaker 1: And then she said, I wonder why I blood pressure.
Speaker 2: But here, here is the fundamental issue here, the idiotic
Speaker 2: flaw in the system is so well known and so
Speaker 2: easy to understand.
Speaker 1: Even the girl answer in the phone said, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: I know it happened.
Speaker 2: Well, if it's that efing known, why has nobody fixed it?
Speaker 2: How is there not some method by which I say, Well,
Speaker 2: they may have coded it as put a little ice
Speaker 2: on your knee if it hurts.
Speaker 1: It was a fault.
Speaker 2: You look at the you see the blood work, look
Speaker 2: at it.
Speaker 1: Look look do you see the report of.
Speaker 2: The blood pressure which is rising as we speak. Well, sorry, no,
Speaker 2: it was coded as this other thing. That's exactly what
Speaker 2: kills socialism. Yeah, it becomes about the checking of the box,
Speaker 2: not the doing of the act. So now what Thursday,
Speaker 2: I'm gonna walk into my doctor's office.
Speaker 3: He's a terrific guy. Great doctor, I'm gonna say, doctor Jones.
Speaker 1: Not as real Dad.
Speaker 3: I said, if you want to walk in here, shake
Speaker 3: my hand and leave.
Speaker 1: That's fine.
Speaker 3: I'm only here for one reason, and for God's sake,
Speaker 3: don't ask me.
Speaker 2: If there's anything you, as a physician, can help me with.
Speaker 1: That's the one thing we must not do here. Wow.
Speaker 3: The alternative being go to the front office. And I've
Speaker 3: actually tried this and argue with the nice lady who
Speaker 3: types into the computer and codes it for billing, and
Speaker 3: explain to her, no, no, don't code it like that. Well,
Speaker 3: I'm sorry because the doctor said, put ice on your knee,
Speaker 3: So we have to.
Speaker 1: I swear to God.
Speaker 2: That moment, when you get the inex inexplicable explained nation
Speaker 2: and I'm supposed to just accept it drives me crazy.
Speaker 2: It's like when I was trying to rent the car,
Speaker 2: but I got there and they didn't have the car. Well,
Speaker 2: if you book online, sometimes the car goes before you
Speaker 2: get here, and then you just stop and I'm supposed
Speaker 2: to just say, okay, no, no, you've described to me
Speaker 2: the idiotic problem. I've already described that I need you
Speaker 2: to describe the solution. If you miss a second, we
Speaker 2: get the podcast Armstrong You Getty on the Man Armstrong
Speaker 2: and Getty