Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio, the George
Speaker 1: Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong, Joe, Katty.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and get Katie and he.
Speaker 1: Armstrong and Yetty.
Speaker 3: How grateful I am for the opportunity to participate in democracy.
Speaker 4: And my family immigrated to this country from place where
Speaker 4: there is not democracy.
Speaker 1: You cannot just put your hand up and run.
Speaker 4: And the ability to do this, to have our voices heard,
Speaker 4: to select our leaders.
Speaker 1: It is. It is a gift that sometimes we take
Speaker 1: for granted. So I participated means so much.
Speaker 3: Part of the I won speech from ELSI ed today
Speaker 3: as they finally counted the votes there in Michigan. And
Speaker 3: he is going to be the Democratic nominee for the
Speaker 3: US Senate running against Mike Rodgers. Did he get voted
Speaker 3: in because he talks about affordability and getting big money
Speaker 3: out of politics? Or did he cross the finish line
Speaker 3: because he hates.
Speaker 1: Jews, which I think he does.
Speaker 3: And which of those two things is he going to
Speaker 3: emphasize now that the general election stuff has begun.
Speaker 1: He's a savvy, savvy guy. I recognize the lauding of
Speaker 1: democracy as a good old technique of Islamists when they're
Speaker 1: out of power, big big fans of democracy. To themit it,
Speaker 1: they get power. Andrew styles of the Free Beacon with
Speaker 1: a great headline, al sayed socializes the Intafada. I thought
Speaker 1: that was pretty clever.
Speaker 2: That is pretty.
Speaker 1: Masquerading as a socialist technique.
Speaker 3: So will know today maybe is he going to distance
Speaker 3: himself from this Hassan Piker character. If you were a
Speaker 3: republic as tied to Candae Owens or Tucker Carlson, as
Speaker 3: Elsa is to this Hassan Piker influencer character, you would
Speaker 3: have to answer for it until you finally disavowed them entirely.
Speaker 1: Mm hmm.
Speaker 3: Every You couldn't do an interview about anything anywhere until
Speaker 3: you disavowed. Do you believe Tucker Carlson is right? That
Speaker 3: you know and go into whatever crazy belief? But El
Speaker 3: Sad was on stage with Hassan Piker night before the election,
Speaker 3: two nights ago, on stage, holding hands in the air,
Speaker 3: cheering stuff like that, this Hassan Piker guy is a
Speaker 3: crazy person, I mean or he I don't. I think
Speaker 3: he's a grifter. I think he's more of a Tucker's
Speaker 3: I don't think he's crazy. I think he's figured out. Okay,
Speaker 3: I understand how the world works. Now you say crazyes
Speaker 3: and you become a gazillionaire. I'm gonna say crazy yes
Speaker 3: for my side, But he says crazyes. Man, uh mertle
Speaker 3: white people in the streets. That's how we get housing,
Speaker 3: for instance.
Speaker 1: Right. Yeah, And I would like to add to the
Speaker 1: list of things you ought to answer for the various
Speaker 1: radical imams that have lent him his their support, that
Speaker 1: he's appeared on stage with hands held in the air,
Speaker 1: people who have vowed to, you know, wipe out Israel,
Speaker 1: wipe out the Jews. Nine to eleven was a good thing,
Speaker 1: you know, that sort of thing. He has regular associations
Speaker 1: and a good deal of his family does too, with
Speaker 1: organizations that have been branded by the State Department is
Speaker 1: terrorist organizations and terrorists supporting organizations.
Speaker 3: He was on stage the other night with Hassan Piker
Speaker 3: and they were talking about, with the crowd screaming in approval,
Speaker 3: why does anyone still listen to James Carvel?
Speaker 2: He said, one smart thing once so.
Speaker 3: One of the most legendary strategists in democratic politics history.
Speaker 2: But that was a long time ago.
Speaker 3: Bill Clinton ran on ending welfare for people who aren't
Speaker 3: willing to work. Bill Clinton ran on, and I think
Speaker 3: capital punishment's a good idea. I mean, there's all kinds
Speaker 3: of examples. I mean, that's that's a long time ago.
Speaker 3: So the party's moved on from that by a lot.
Speaker 3: But the fact that that big break is occurring in
Speaker 3: one of the two major parties is again. Is he
Speaker 3: going to do the classic tack toward the center, you know,
Speaker 3: cut off some of these crazy people that have got
Speaker 3: him the nomination, or is he going to double down it.
Speaker 3: He seems like a double down guy to me. That's
Speaker 3: a good question. I assume it'll be the former.
Speaker 1: He will tack toward the center and claim that anybody
Speaker 1: who claims, for instance, that he's an Islamist is a bigot.
Speaker 2: Wouldn't you have earlier? If so?
Speaker 3: It ended up being a very very close race, but
Speaker 3: nobody was predicting that. It was predicted that he was
Speaker 3: going to win by ten to fifteen points. So why
Speaker 3: are you on stage with Hassan Piker the night before
Speaker 3: the election if you're going to win by fifteen points.
Speaker 1: That's a really good question, totally legitimate point. This guy
Speaker 1: is clever and insidious. He is a socialist who happens
Speaker 1: to be well into the top one percent in Michigan.
Speaker 1: He owns rental properties, he's a landlord in three different countries,
Speaker 1: has a collection of luxury watches, and is married too.
Speaker 1: As he pitches medicaid for all, a rich psychiatrist who
Speaker 1: won't take medicaid at all, and yet he gets over
Speaker 1: because he's very, very clever. This is a guy not
Speaker 1: to be underestimated. Oh and one more thought about your
Speaker 1: a point you made just a couple of seconds ago.
Speaker 1: This reminds me a great deal of situation in Great Britain.
Speaker 1: The Muslim vote in certain parts of Michigan is big
Speaker 1: enough and important enough that you do not use the
Speaker 1: eye word if you can possibly avoid it, islamister or
Speaker 1: anything like that. It's they're afraid of that voting block.
Speaker 1: I would love to see. I almost don't need to
Speaker 1: see what percentage of Muslims in Michigan votvoted for this guy.
Speaker 1: And what does that tell you?
Speaker 3: Well, he's got some pretty to call him controversial is
Speaker 3: not even right, un America. Radical radical, There you go,
Speaker 3: He's got some radical points of view. And so I
Speaker 3: watched Mark Alprin's live newscast last night after the votes
Speaker 3: were starting to come in, and that the mainstream Democrat
Speaker 3: that he ran.
Speaker 2: Against what was her name again, I forgot her name.
Speaker 1: But.
Speaker 3: She apparently knew she was going to lose, and you know,
Speaker 3: they have their own county voting and they know all
Speaker 3: that sort of stuff. So she was she was The
Speaker 3: people inside the room were reporting basically that it was over,
Speaker 3: and they knew she was going to lose.
Speaker 2: And so she went on stage and she did not.
Speaker 3: She she did the we're gonna come together and stop
Speaker 3: a Trump nominee Mike Rogers. And Mark Alprin said that's
Speaker 3: a big deal because there was a chance that the
Speaker 3: Democratic part, she and Chuck Schumer who backed her, and
Speaker 3: Gretchen Whitner, the governor who backed her, and everybody else,
Speaker 3: was going to say, we can't elect this guy. He
Speaker 3: is he is too far out there. He's anti Israel.
Speaker 3: He believes in killing white people in the street to
Speaker 3: make sure we get more housing for BIPOC people and
Speaker 3: all that sort of stuff.
Speaker 1: Again, but odd is a landlord with properties in three countries.
Speaker 2: But she did not do that.
Speaker 3: She said, we're gonna come together and defeat Mike Rogers.
Speaker 3: So that gives you an idea where things are going.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think you can't underestimate what mobsters these people are.
Speaker 1: I think they are thinking, look, we got to get
Speaker 1: the seats, so we'll get the seat. We'll see if
Speaker 1: we can rain this guy in, and if not, we'll
Speaker 1: decap him. It's we want the seat.
Speaker 3: It's really an astounding win. If you haven't been following
Speaker 3: this closely, he was outspent eleven to one, twelve to one,
Speaker 3: sixty two million dollars against him, and thirty million coming
Speaker 3: from APAC and various other pro Israel lobbies who are
Speaker 3: really worried about this guy getting an US Senate thirty
Speaker 3: million dollars and he won.
Speaker 1: Right. Right says something about him, and it says something
Speaker 1: about the primary system. Hey, as long as we're on
Speaker 1: the topic, Michael, give us clip number sixty five. This
Speaker 1: is Hassan Piker recently. Poor people that they can they
Speaker 1: they can afford housing in Berkeley. I don't know how much.
Speaker 3: Well, my understanding is that the property owners who have
Speaker 3: properties there too, just not to rented at all.
Speaker 1: Yeah, kill them, killed those murder those mothers in the.
Speaker 4: Street, Let the streets, Let the streets soak in their
Speaker 4: red capitalist bloods.
Speaker 2: He was on stage.
Speaker 3: He was on stage with that guy the night before
Speaker 3: the election. How it's not question numbers one through ten.
Speaker 3: To what extent is this guy gonna have no contact
Speaker 3: with you going forward anytime he's interviewed.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 2: I mean, well, we're up.
Speaker 1: Against an utterly biased media and an utterly blind media
Speaker 1: too utterly politically correct. It's uh, it's not good.
Speaker 3: They pushed him some one morning, Joe this morning on MSNBC.
Speaker 2: I watched it.
Speaker 3: I mean, they didn't they they didn't treat him like
Speaker 3: if she had won the mainstream Democrat where it would
Speaker 3: just be a congratulations. So what's your message for making
Speaker 3: sure Donald Trump doesn't continue to be a dictator. They
Speaker 3: pushed him on lots of stuff, but not as pointedly
Speaker 3: as I would like. But he did say he said
Speaker 3: on MSNBC this morning, this lsad guy. He said, antyah,
Speaker 3: who is a bloodthirsty killer.
Speaker 2: Oh my god, that's the hell of a thing to
Speaker 2: say for the Democratic Party that used to be the
Speaker 2: Party of the Jews.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Bernie Sanders has actually denounced one of the emoms
Speaker 1: that endorsed L Sied just a couple of days ago.
Speaker 1: As being just way out there and too dangerous. But L.
Speaker 1: Saiad is still buddies with them. So again if if
Speaker 1: you know, again, we'd got to remind ourselves the number
Speaker 1: of people vote in primaries, even like even hotly contested,
Speaker 1: highly publicized primaries, is discouragingly small, in fact, was it.
Speaker 1: Charles C. W. Cooker, one of the guys at the
Speaker 1: National Review, made the point the other day if you
Speaker 1: don't like the primary system, I mean, we could completely
Speaker 1: restructure it as political parties. They could do that, or
Speaker 1: turn out everybody vote in the primaries. Everybody pay attention
Speaker 1: and show up and vote for sane people.
Speaker 3: Well that's the election. Now, we haven't gotten that through
Speaker 3: our heads. The primary day is the election.
Speaker 1: Yes, well said, and it didn't use to be right.
Speaker 1: If you don't want to be handed a pilot crap
Speaker 1: to vote for on the actual election day and think,
Speaker 1: oh my god, I'm supposed to be excited about this,
Speaker 1: you've got to participate in the primaries. Yeah.
Speaker 3: Total, I don't know what the total ended up being,
Speaker 3: but when I went to bed last night, it was
Speaker 3: like five fifty five fifty, so about a half a
Speaker 3: million votes each there in Michigan.
Speaker 2: That's not a ton of votes.
Speaker 3: No, we're picking a guy that's radical.
Speaker 1: That's pretty distant turnout actually for a primary, but it's
Speaker 1: still very, very low. And I haven't heard anybody else
Speaker 1: say this.
Speaker 2: I think it's true.
Speaker 3: I think he's the most radical candidate for one of
Speaker 3: the two major parties in my lifetime. If I'm missing somebody,
Speaker 3: let me know who it is who actually got the
Speaker 3: nomination to be a US Senator as a.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, absolutely true. Yeah, And I would argue that
Speaker 1: you are right based only on the part of the
Speaker 1: iceberg that's above water. The associations he's made, the endorsements
Speaker 1: he's accepted, the things that I've said have proved your case.
Speaker 1: But if you know anything about you know, the Red
Speaker 1: Green Alliance and Islamanism and that sort of thing, the
Speaker 1: part that's below the water is far far beyond the
Speaker 1: part that's above the water.
Speaker 3: So this is a really big deal. It could be
Speaker 3: control of the US Senate. Normally, all the big guns
Speaker 3: would come out when you get close to election day.
Speaker 3: Does this guy ever share a stage with Barack Obama?
Speaker 1: I'll bet no. Maybe for the reasons I said earlier,
Speaker 1: they're going to get the seat. Then they're gonna see
Speaker 1: if they can control him or co opt him, and
Speaker 1: if they can't, they'll they'll ncap him, or they'll try. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: I say Obama does appear with them.
Speaker 2: That's a lot.
Speaker 1: There you go.
Speaker 3: Maybe at the very end he's rehearsing his speech right now, Michael, Wow,
Speaker 3: this is something, though, the most radical nominee by one
Speaker 3: of the two major parties for a big office ever
Speaker 3: maybe ever, certainly in modern history. You know, you can't
Speaker 3: say it because you get back into the Civil War
Speaker 3: and people that want to continue slavery.
Speaker 1: And stuff like that.
Speaker 2: It gets kind of complicated.
Speaker 1: But sure, yeah, fair enough.
Speaker 2: Wow, that is something, well, be crazy to watch.
Speaker 1: We're not a Defcon two yet. I'm sorry, we're not
Speaker 1: at def Con one yet, but we're at deaf Con
Speaker 1: two in terms of a dangerous political movement. Wow, that
Speaker 1: is really something.
Speaker 3: A little bit later this hour, Ross dou thought of
Speaker 3: the New York Times, who made a bunch of news
Speaker 3: last week, because he's leaving the New York Times, he's
Speaker 3: going to be a correspondent At sixty minutes, a conservative
Speaker 3: columnist from the New York Times is going to work
Speaker 3: for sixty minutes. Barry Weiss's sixty minutes. Anyway, he did
Speaker 3: an interview with a nut job academic that is getting
Speaker 3: a lot of attention.
Speaker 1: Speaking of nutjobs, one of your foremost longevity hacker guys,
Speaker 1: who's been draining his son's blood what has announced that
Speaker 1: maybe he's gone too far? Gee? In what way? Sir?
Speaker 3: Well?
Speaker 1: What talk about that? Coming up? Stay with us?
Speaker 3: I want to hear that next there, Ken should raise themselves.
Speaker 3: According to one ademic, nut job and bad news. Fresno
Speaker 3: concert goers, if you were going to see Air Supply
Speaker 3: and Little Riverband, it has been canceled.
Speaker 1: Oh no, are you ready to soft rock?
Speaker 2: Do you know?
Speaker 1: Brian Johnson he was a tex zillionaire. He's become one
Speaker 1: of those like leading lights of ault. No no different,
Speaker 1: Brian Johnson. He this guy is not back in black.
Speaker 1: He's maybe back to sanity. Forty eight years old's got
Speaker 1: more money than he could ever spend in fourteen lifetimes.
Speaker 1: He's invested in least ten million dollars of his own
Speaker 1: money in various methods of longevity and longevity research, health
Speaker 1: monitoring protocols, injecting himself with his son's blood plasma. Whoa
Speaker 1: while following a strict regiment of supplements. Yes, he's even
Speaker 1: referred to his teenage son as his blood boy.
Speaker 2: Well, I was about to ask, is his son an
Speaker 2: adult or not?
Speaker 3: I mean, does he get a say in whether or
Speaker 3: not Dad sucks vital juices.
Speaker 2: Out of him?
Speaker 1: Well? I don't know what the laws consent for that are,
Speaker 1: but he's a minor child.
Speaker 2: Hold still, son, what are you doing dad?
Speaker 1: I need some of your blood. Yes. His other stunts
Speaker 1: include sharing sharing detailed reports about his wife's vijj I
Speaker 1: can't imagine. Why tell me more about your wife's and
Speaker 1: the val volume of microplastics in his sperm on social media.
Speaker 1: He's his obsession with his own bodily fluids aims to
Speaker 1: preserve the fertility levels, et cetera, et cetera. He claims
Speaker 1: to have eliminated ninety five percent of the microplastics from
Speaker 1: his issue by spending twenty minutes daily in dry saunas
Speaker 1: while applying an ice back to his groinal area. That's all.
Speaker 1: There's more. Wait, there's more. He also claimed a week
Speaker 1: or so ago that he cloned himself as a newborn
Speaker 1: baby to harvest the organs. Just clone myself as a newborn.
Speaker 1: This might be scared to some people, a dystopian future.
Speaker 3: No offense to your journalism, but I feel like you
Speaker 3: should have led with that. That's a he cloned it
Speaker 3: leads to it as a baby, and he's going to
Speaker 3: use the organs.
Speaker 1: I didn't know whether it was a countdown or a
Speaker 1: count top anyway. And there's other stuff that does isn't
Speaker 1: wait a minute, right exactly? Wait a minute, Wait a minute,
Speaker 1: Wait a minute. Yeah, you could have led with that.
Speaker 1: I agree, But but and here's the twist. He made
Speaker 1: the confession the other day on x formerly Twitter that
Speaker 1: he he says, well, he's developed an autoimmune disease, and
Speaker 1: he says, been thinking things over, and I wonder if
Speaker 1: I've taken this whole longevity thing too far. You drink,
Speaker 1: built an infant clone of yourself to harve it its organs,
Speaker 1: and you drain your son's blood.
Speaker 2: Having babies to use their organs is not a thing.
Speaker 1: Uh No, you are what is the word monster? You're
Speaker 1: a monster, sir, Sorry about your autom immune disorder.
Speaker 3: As people live longer, and especially among the rich, this
Speaker 3: this longevity thing is gonna get nuttier and nuttier.
Speaker 1: I've known some people. Yeah, speaking of nutty an idea
Speaker 1: so in insane, only a respected intellectual could hold it.
Speaker 1: Coming up next hour, don't miss this seriously, I'm sorry.
Speaker 1: Next half hour Armstrong and Geeddy. We didn't talk.
Speaker 2: Much about the media move that was made last week.
Speaker 2: Ross doubt that.
Speaker 3: If you know him of the New York Times, he's
Speaker 3: been a columnist for a while. They're conservative columnists. He
Speaker 3: got hired at the New York Times when he is
Speaker 3: in his twenty Still he's a he's not your typical
Speaker 3: like mainstream media, especially New York Times or Washington Post
Speaker 3: or whatever columnists. He's practicing Roman Catholic, very religious, but
Speaker 3: he's not a bomb chucker sort of like a conservative.
Speaker 3: He's like a I was going to describe him as earnest. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 3: very much so. And his some of religious books that
Speaker 3: I've read or listened to him talk about are really
Speaker 3: really interesting in that sort of stuff.
Speaker 2: But anyway, he's leaving the New York Times.
Speaker 3: Barry Weiss hired him over at sixty Minutes to try
Speaker 3: to balance out their coverage.
Speaker 1: Good.
Speaker 3: I'm happy to see that, man. I saw some pushback
Speaker 3: on that online last week. That was just oh yeah,
Speaker 3: insane about this religious nut job will have had his way,
Speaker 3: we'd be living in a theocracy, being hired by Barry
Speaker 3: Weiss to further blah.
Speaker 2: Blah blah blah blah.
Speaker 1: Well not only that, but they're afraid that sixty minutes
Speaker 1: might become biased. I mean, can you imagine.
Speaker 3: Oh, that's right, I'd forgotten he wrote The Decadent Society.
Speaker 3: I loved that book, with a different kind of view
Speaker 3: of what the word decadent means than we usually use.
Speaker 3: And that's where we are culturally. But anyway, well maybe
Speaker 3: we'll talk about that at a different time.
Speaker 1: But sorry, I'm making a note that is number eight
Speaker 1: hundred and six on books I need to read back
Speaker 1: to you.
Speaker 3: So who is this nut We're about to hear Ross
Speaker 3: talking to Oh lord Jack.
Speaker 1: So Ross does these interview podcasts, and this one happens
Speaker 1: to be with a fellow by the name of Samuel Moyne,
Speaker 1: who is the Kent Professor of Law and History at
Speaker 1: Yale University, where he also serves as head of one
Speaker 1: of the colleges within the University of Yale. He is
Speaker 1: an academic super heavyweight and an important law school professor.
Speaker 1: Why don't we just go ahead and play the audio,
Speaker 1: then we will discuss. You may drive off the road,
Speaker 1: so prepare yourselves.
Speaker 4: I've gotten in some hot water for proposing we consider
Speaker 4: overweighting the votes of younger people or a.
Speaker 1: Saint Michael, stop it for just a second. I've got
Speaker 1: to point out this guy went to the same voice
Speaker 1: coach as the guy with the worst voice in America,
Speaker 1: kind of that Northeast intellectual, very ef feminine vocal fry
Speaker 1: e voice. Anyway, you got to get past that to
Speaker 1: listen to his ideas well.
Speaker 3: And I know we're not getting in to the content yet,
Speaker 3: but he just talked about overweighting the votes of young
Speaker 3: people like they are the votes would count more if
Speaker 3: you're young.
Speaker 1: That is his premise. That's correct. Listen to this, would you.
Speaker 4: I've gotten in some hot water for proposing we consider
Speaker 4: overweighting the the votes of younger people. Are assigning the
Speaker 4: youngest eligible voters proxy votes for the unrepresented children of
Speaker 4: our country, so those are edgy, why not assign them
Speaker 4: to those children's parents? Well, because there's there's a divergence
Speaker 4: of interest between parents and children, and I think it's
Speaker 4: likelier that young people, not people who are raising families
Speaker 4: will have the best insight into the interests of children,
Speaker 4: whereas you, if you were awarded five I think that exact.
Speaker 4: I think it's absurd to imagine that a twenty four
Speaker 4: year old recent college graduate has a better assessment of
Speaker 4: the interests of my own children than I do. And
Speaker 4: I say this with all due respect to twenty four
Speaker 4: year old recent college graduates.
Speaker 2: Of whom I hope to be the parent of in
Speaker 2: nine years or so.
Speaker 4: I think parents generally confuse the interests of their family
Speaker 4: with the interests of their children. And part of our goal,
Speaker 4: I think is parents, but also as a society, is
Speaker 4: trying to make sure that children aren't the hostages of
Speaker 4: their parents as much as we rely on parents to
Speaker 4: raise them.
Speaker 2: Well, there's a sentence for you. Wow, there's a sentence
Speaker 2: for you.
Speaker 3: We don't want children to have to be the hostages
Speaker 3: of their parents, right, and that.
Speaker 1: Children have a better grasp of their needs and self
Speaker 1: interest than their parents do. Therefore, we should give the
Speaker 1: youngest people more votes. Is there any society like you
Speaker 1: get two votes because you're voting for the children who
Speaker 1: can't vote as a nineteen year old.
Speaker 2: Is there any society in the history of planet Earth.
Speaker 2: That has ever thought that. I mean, you know, you
Speaker 2: picture Native Americans and elders and Asian called no f No.
Speaker 2: I did like what he said.
Speaker 3: Often the desires of the children diverge from those of
Speaker 3: her parents.
Speaker 2: Oh really, I hadn't noticed that as a parent.
Speaker 3: Did he say desires or well, it doesn't matter. Yeah,
Speaker 3: but what your kids want? Oh really, you want to
Speaker 3: go to Disneyland and eat cake all day? I hadn't noticed.
Speaker 1: That that diverges from my idea of your best interest.
Speaker 1: There are some ideas so insane only an intellectual could
Speaker 1: have them. There is a Yale law professor saying that
Speaker 1: young people should get extra votes. He is in including children.
Speaker 1: He children are the hostage of the family.
Speaker 3: Our education system, I mean, I feel like we say
Speaker 3: this every day, but it needs to be said with
Speaker 3: like exclamation marks and underlined and highlighted and circled. Our
Speaker 3: education system is so out of control.
Speaker 1: Yes it is.
Speaker 3: This guy is one of the most influential law voices
Speaker 3: on Earth, oh, the most prestigious law universities in the
Speaker 3: country on the planet.
Speaker 2: And he believes the craziest thing I've ever heard.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he is something close to I doubt he is
Speaker 1: textbook mentally ill. There are probably some plain spoken, common
Speaker 1: sensical descriptions for this somebody who's gotten so swept away
Speaker 1: by their ideology they're now completely unmoored from reality.
Speaker 3: Well, getting back to his first sentence, he wants to
Speaker 3: overweight the votes of young people, so the you know,
Speaker 3: two young people could outvote three older people or something,
Speaker 3: because they they're smart, they're wiser than us.
Speaker 1: And indeed children children should be in charge of children's
Speaker 1: lives because they know better than their parents. You know,
Speaker 1: how long was that. Let's listen to that again.
Speaker 2: There's a lot there, There is a lot there.
Speaker 4: God, I've gotten in some hot water for proposing we
Speaker 4: consider overweighting the the votes of younger people. Are assigning
Speaker 4: the youngest eligible voters proxy votes for the unrepresented children
Speaker 4: of our country. So those are edgy, why not assign
Speaker 4: them to those children's parents. Well, because there's there's a
Speaker 4: divergence of interest between parents and children, and I think
Speaker 4: it's likelier that young people, not people who are raising families,
Speaker 4: will have the best insight into the interests of children,
Speaker 4: whereas you, if you were awarded five I think that
Speaker 4: I think it's absurd to imagine that a twenty four
Speaker 4: year old recent college graduate has a better assessment of
Speaker 4: the interests of my own children than I do. And
Speaker 4: I say this with all due respect to twenty four
Speaker 4: year old recent college graduates of whom I hope to
Speaker 4: be the parent of in nine years or so. I
Speaker 4: think parents generally confuse the interests of their family with
Speaker 4: the interests of their children, and part of our goal,
Speaker 4: I think is parents, but also as a society, is
Speaker 4: trying to make sure that children aren't the hostages of
Speaker 4: their parents as much as we rely on parents to
Speaker 4: raise them.
Speaker 1: Actually makes the witticism that was partially cut off saying,
Speaker 1: in my experience the parents are more the hostage of
Speaker 1: the children, which is a funny thing to say. The
Speaker 1: learned Professor has no children as far as I can tell,
Speaker 1: No way will I know. It's surprising, isn't it, given
Speaker 1: his incredible insight. You know, I gotta admit I'm ed
Speaker 1: an r uf in kidding me. Spot yeah, mentally, emotionally
Speaker 1: right now, I can't believe this guy is gainfully employed,
Speaker 1: much less employed as one of the head guys at
Speaker 1: Yales Law School.
Speaker 3: Well, I came across astonished. I came across that clip
Speaker 3: a bunch of different places, being retweeted by people I like,
Speaker 3: like Joanah Goldberg said, congratulations on Ross and Ross for
Speaker 3: engaging him in the conversation. I think I would have
Speaker 3: just hit him in the head with the microphone, you know,
Speaker 3: just like you are a numbnuts. But so that thing
Speaker 3: at the end distracted me. We don't want kids to
Speaker 3: be the hostages of their parents. But that sentence before that,
Speaker 3: with the the kids understand their interests better than the
Speaker 3: people in charge of the family or whatever it is.
Speaker 2: But what what does that even mean?
Speaker 3: So that's that thing you always talk about with college
Speaker 3: professors who think the nuclear family is a negative.
Speaker 1: So it's an it's an organ of oppression.
Speaker 2: So most of us.
Speaker 3: The family unit is, you know, that's kind of the
Speaker 3: highest everything, and he thinks that gets in the way
Speaker 3: of the best interests of the kids, which is so weird.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, I could parse more of what he said,
Speaker 1: but at this point I feel like I'm listening to
Speaker 1: the rantings of a madman and my uh my patience
Speaker 1: is limited.
Speaker 3: Well, I wouldn't be bothered really at all if he's
Speaker 3: just I don't know, he's just some online guy that
Speaker 3: you know, got a PhD in something weird.
Speaker 2: But he's one of the most important law schools in the.
Speaker 1: World, number one law school in America.
Speaker 3: It's our nobody like him should be able to be
Speaker 3: running anything ever teaching kids, and.
Speaker 2: He's at like the highest level of it.
Speaker 1: Look, I'm not gonna I'm not gonna tell you to
Speaker 1: say I told you so. But if any of you
Speaker 1: thought old Joe Getty ranting about how completely insane our
Speaker 1: university systems have become, you know what, a riten apology
Speaker 1: would be great.
Speaker 3: God, that's crazy.
Speaker 1: I know it's crazy. You know what else is crazy? Jack?
Speaker 1: You love your dog, but you don't give them everything
Speaker 1: they need. Nutritionally speaking, their food is probably okay, but
Speaker 1: it's not great. And that's why thousands of dog lovers
Speaker 1: have added rough greens on top of what they're already feeding.
Speaker 1: Their dogs has live probiotics, enzymes, omega oils, and over
Speaker 1: twenty vitamins and minerals.
Speaker 3: Well, that's why I think dogs votes should count more
Speaker 3: than people's votes, because there's a divergence between what the
Speaker 3: dog wants and what the owners of the dogs want.
Speaker 1: The dog knows its needs better than you do, right
Speaker 1: as it eats and other animals crap in the yard
Speaker 1: for instances.
Speaker 3: I don't know how many enzymes are in that, but
Speaker 3: if you get rough Greens and sprinkle it on your
Speaker 3: current dog's food, there'll be all kinds of good stuff
Speaker 3: that will be healthy for your dog life. Probatics, enzymes,
Speaker 3: omego Oil's that sort of stuff, and you can try
Speaker 3: it for free. Jumpstart trial bag free, just cover the shipping.
Speaker 3: Go to our Roughgreens dot com Roughgreens dot co com
Speaker 3: and use the code Armstrong's America's number one dog supplement.
Speaker 3: All natural maid in the USA are uff Greens dot com.
Speaker 3: Use that discount code Armstrong. Roughgreens makes any dog food better.
Speaker 3: Where did we have the common sense conversation? Now or
Speaker 3: two kind of fits in with that. So this is
Speaker 3: a guy that's got so much education that he ignores
Speaker 3: what he sees around him, because I would think that
Speaker 3: he would look around him and realize that twenty one
Speaker 3: year olds often have really distorted wrong views of the
Speaker 3: world because of their lack of life experience, not their fault.
Speaker 1: I did too.
Speaker 3: Whereas somebody who's fifty years old and has had multiple
Speaker 3: jobs and raised kids and paid taxes. All this sort
Speaker 3: of stuff has all kinds of insights that a twenty
Speaker 3: year old does not have.
Speaker 1: Friends did seen every scam, political and otherwise that's come
Speaker 1: down the pike and recognizes them and thinks, oh, I
Speaker 1: know that one. No, a twenty something, you know, Ross
Speaker 1: does that. At one point said with all due respect
Speaker 1: to twenty four year old recent college graduates. And I
Speaker 1: thought that was one of the most ironic uses of
Speaker 1: that phrase I've ever heard. How much respect is do
Speaker 1: them exactly? Not? Anyway? Yeah, you know, one of the
Speaker 1: reasons I soured on academia, and it had some role
Speaker 1: in me not going to law school, was that I
Speaker 1: realized in academia you you spin a line of bull crap,
Speaker 1: and it's sometimes it's it's truth and exploring science or
Speaker 1: coming to great you know, you know, realizations about humankind,
Speaker 1: but often it's just crap. And your career depends on
Speaker 1: you reinforcing your bull crap and making it more complicated,
Speaker 1: writing books about it, selling it to other people, convincing
Speaker 1: your undergrads, having grad assistants who help you perpetuate your
Speaker 1: bull crap, which when if it is exposed to the
Speaker 1: real world for like a day, it would wither because
Speaker 1: it's crap. Here's crap, it's crap, It's crap. That's my
Speaker 1: point precisely. And this guy has spun one of the
Speaker 1: more ridiculous lines of bull crap I've ever heard in
Speaker 1: my life. He has attained great heights of academia. People
Speaker 1: probably tremble in his presence. He's so important and he
Speaker 1: is completely divorced from reality.
Speaker 3: Oh, I'm sure if he gives you the nod for
Speaker 3: a job or a position in another college or something
Speaker 3: like that, it's among the most important things that could
Speaker 3: happen to you.
Speaker 1: Well, if he writes your letter of recommendation as you're
Speaker 1: applying for law jobs, as my daughter is right now, Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: Okay, here's everybody do an experiment this weekend.
Speaker 3: Let your kids be in charge of everything, what you do,
Speaker 3: where you go, how you spend your money, what you eat.
Speaker 2: Then see how it goes.
Speaker 1: They know better than you do. You a presser, get
Speaker 1: out of their way.
Speaker 2: Stay tuned.
Speaker 1: I must correct the record. I have done further research.
Speaker 1: Professor Moyne does have two daughters. That doesn't make him
Speaker 1: less crazy. That makes him more crazy. So he is
Speaker 1: clinging to his academic ideas in the face of all reality. Wow.
Speaker 1: If you didn't hear last segment, grab it via podcast.
Speaker 1: I'm Strong and Getty on demand.
Speaker 3: So I did my first ever emotional investing yesterday. I've
Speaker 3: never invested emotionally. I've only invested kind of spread everything
Speaker 3: out or this seems like a good idea. I went
Speaker 3: with some SpaceX stock just because I like Elon, I
Speaker 3: like the things he's talking about. It's purely emotional. I mean,
Speaker 3: if I were going to sit down and if I
Speaker 3: was only interested in making max money, I probably this
Speaker 3: wouldn't be the decision I'm making. This is purely a
Speaker 3: I'm rooting for you sort of thing, right, And I'll
Speaker 3: see if I think it was a good idea ten
Speaker 3: years from now, if it was a dumb idea or whatever.
Speaker 2: And not a lot. But anyway, So I was looking
Speaker 2: at some of the.
Speaker 3: Big wins that have happened in recent years with some
Speaker 3: of these tech companies, and I wish i'd recognizes the time.
Speaker 3: For instance, Apple, when the iPhone came out, I remember
Speaker 3: talking about it, you and I both talking about it.
Speaker 2: It's like, this is amazing.
Speaker 3: So why did nine ers so if you had to
Speaker 3: put ten k into Apple two thousand and seven when
Speaker 3: the iPhone came out.
Speaker 1: La la la la, la, la la la.
Speaker 2: In ten years, it increased fifteen times. She'd had one
Speaker 2: hundred and fifty grand.
Speaker 3: I mean, and what an obvious game changing product, right Tesla.
Speaker 3: Loved Tesla when I first got when I thought this
Speaker 3: is really really something. Who knows where it's going now
Speaker 3: that it's a robot company. But if you'd done that
Speaker 3: when it first came on the season scene and got
Speaker 3: going twenty one times in ten years, so your ten
Speaker 3: grand turns into you know, twoenty grand. Amazon similar sort
Speaker 3: of amazing thing once it got going, although I don't
Speaker 3: know when you would have picked the start date for
Speaker 3: that one, not as clear because Amazon was a But Nvidia,
Speaker 3: if you had jumped into Nvidia ten years ago, twenty sixteen,
Speaker 3: right at the AI boom when they were talking about
Speaker 3: being the best chip out there, one hundred and fifty
Speaker 3: times your investment over the last decade, your ten grand
Speaker 3: to be you know somewhere between a million four and
Speaker 3: a million five, depending on when you cash out on
Speaker 3: one of these days, because it goes up and down
Speaker 3: a lot, and that something good Lord, people can and
Speaker 3: do lose money. What Now you know SpaceX is either
Speaker 3: going to turn into something great and he's gonna put
Speaker 3: those data centers in the sky and AI is going
Speaker 3: to rule the world.
Speaker 2: And he's the one that thought of it first.
Speaker 3: And we're gonna get the Mars and I'm I'm more
Speaker 3: into the like I invested in us getting to Mars
Speaker 3: than I am any money turn around early. But or
Speaker 3: he's gonna decide, you know what, I'm more interested in.
Speaker 3: Who knows what he'll deciet he's interested in, and he'll
Speaker 3: abandon SpaceX and put all his thoughts into Twitter, you know,
Speaker 3: another social media account.
Speaker 2: Now I care about entertainment news. Elon's kind of flighty
Speaker 2: like that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. Uh, the Elon effect is
Speaker 1: real things stock experts talk about. If he's involved in it,
Speaker 1: people think I'll better, it'll work out, right. He had
Speaker 1: a Warren buffett Ish faith in him. Well it's a
Speaker 1: different sort, but yeah, it's I'm a big fan. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: I was just daydreaming about back when if you add
Speaker 1: a tesla, people will say, well, you liberal pussy, and
Speaker 1: then a few years later it's you conservative fascist.
Speaker 2: What's the matter with you.
Speaker 3: Can everybody just chill the hell out. I have had
Speaker 3: that experience myself. Yes, driving a Tesla. I went from
Speaker 3: being a liberal wooss, I thought you were a better
Speaker 3: guy than that, to a Nazi fascist.
Speaker 2: I thought you were a better guy than that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, driving the same product. Yeah, Yeah, that's kind of
Speaker 1: hilarious in a way. Yeah, or terrifying. The voice. I
Speaker 1: remember I was a teenager when I first heard the
Speaker 1: expression about the voice of reason and the howling mob
Speaker 1: and how the voice or reason doesn't have a chance,
Speaker 1: and I thought, oh, that's probably true and horrifying, and
Speaker 1: it is true. So why populism is such a complicated thing? Anyway?
Speaker 1: More on that and many other things.
Speaker 2: We do four hours of this every day.
Speaker 3: If you've ever missed a segment at the podcast Armstrong
Speaker 3: and Getty on demand, you should subscribe will be fed
Speaker 3: to you automatically.
Speaker 1: Armstrong and Getty