Speaker 1: Broadcasting live from the Abraham Lincoln Radio Studio of the
Speaker 1: George Washington Broadcast Center, Jack Armstrong Show, Getty.
Speaker 2: Armstrong and get Cat and now he Armstrong and Getty. Hey,
Speaker 2: how you doing.
Speaker 3: I always love talking to Timo Sanderfer.
Speaker 4: We just wrapped up a conversation if you just tune
Speaker 4: it in or whatever a grab it via podcast Armstrong
Speaker 4: and Getty on demand about his book, and I mentioned
Speaker 4: one of his previous books, The Permission Society, which he
Speaker 4: put out in twenty sixteen, was inspired by conversations on
Speaker 4: this show and honored to have inspired anything good.
Speaker 3: To happen on Earth.
Speaker 4: But it occurs to me if it's a perfect introduction
Speaker 4: to the freedom lovely quote of the and not Yet
Speaker 4: Michael and then Mailbag, because what we talked about at
Speaker 4: the time that launched the book was and I may
Speaker 4: have come up with this, it doesn't really matter, but
Speaker 4: never use the word permit as a noun unless you
Speaker 4: think about it as a verb. You're getting a permit
Speaker 4: from the county to do this, that or the other.
Speaker 4: And it ranges from you know, in in parts of
Speaker 4: rural Texas where you don't need a permit to do anything,
Speaker 4: to in your bluer states and cities, and all famously
Speaker 4: in the communist enclave where Jack makes us home. You
Speaker 4: need a permit to get a new dishwasher for your kitchen,
Speaker 4: so they make sure it's up to whatever environmental rules
Speaker 4: and rags rule that that communist enclave. And those the
Speaker 4: rules and rags and permits are often well meaning road
Speaker 4: to hell, paid with good intentions.
Speaker 3: Right, and some of them are.
Speaker 4: Probably either legitimate, even if they go a little too
Speaker 4: farm But the problem is you get this web of
Speaker 4: permissions for everything you do every day, every use of
Speaker 4: your land, every tool you use, every mode of transportation,
Speaker 4: and sooner or later that web of well meaning rules
Speaker 4: and REGs traps you. It becomes the opposite of liberty.
Speaker 4: And again a lot of it's well meaning, but it
Speaker 4: tends to total up, bit by bit by bit until
Speaker 4: you're just not a free person anymore. And I certainly
Speaker 4: joined with him and fighting against that sort of thing,
Speaker 4: which brings us to the freedom loving quote of the day.
Speaker 4: And I'm gonna go with a series from Nikita Khrushyev,
Speaker 4: who is the premiere of the Soviet Union in the
Speaker 4: fifties and sixties.
Speaker 3: I think through nineteen sixty four.
Speaker 4: He took power after Stalin, and it was a huge,
Speaker 4: huge moment in the history of Russia and the Soviet Union.
Speaker 4: And though he left officer, I think he croaked before
Speaker 4: I was born. It was his doctrines that governed the
Speaker 4: Cold War to a large extent until Gorbachev and the
Speaker 4: Detante and everything came in. Daytime was a different period,
Speaker 4: but when the Soviet Union crumbled, so Khrushev was enormously,
Speaker 4: enormously influential, and he was kind of the rule giver
Speaker 4: that we Cold warriors grew up with his philosophy. And
Speaker 4: what's interesting and handy about Krushchev is he was utterly
Speaker 4: clear and open about his plans. And we'll be hitting
Speaker 4: some of his quotes for the next couple of week,
Speaker 4: week or two. Anyway, we'll lead with this one. You
Speaker 4: Americans are so gullible. No, you won't accept communism outright,
Speaker 4: but we'll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until
Speaker 4: you'll finally wake up and find you already have communism.
Speaker 4: We won't have to fight you will, so weaken your
Speaker 4: economy until you'll fall like overwrite fruit fruit into our hands.
Speaker 3: Mailbag. Obviously, one of.
Speaker 4: The reasons that's so appropriate is socialism seems to be
Speaker 4: on the march, particularly among the young in college and
Speaker 4: miseducated in America.
Speaker 3: These days, Kruschev's wishes are coming true.
Speaker 4: And not to be over dramatic, but I will die
Speaker 4: fighting them. Drum's note mail bag at Armstrong you get
Speaker 4: ay dot com. Let's see David and Campbell says some
Speaker 4: very nice things about the show, Thank you, Barbro, and
Speaker 4: he mentions that yesterday we played a clip of AOC
Speaker 4: try and answer the question about the difference between socialism
Speaker 4: and communism, and she doesn't know the difference, and he says, essentially,
Speaker 4: and this is under.
Speaker 3: Karl Marx's theory.
Speaker 4: This is handy to no I suppose in socialism the
Speaker 4: workers control the state. State uses this power to take
Speaker 4: over major industries and the means of production. And as
Speaker 4: time passes, that utopia ends, the conflict between the classes
Speaker 4: and the state is no longer needed and withers away.
Speaker 4: Everybody shares and shares alike. It is truly a utopia.
Speaker 4: Everyone communicates, there are no need for even rules. This
Speaker 4: is communism, the ideal state. And if you seriously think
Speaker 4: that will ever happen, among human beings. You need your
Speaker 4: brain checked, or you need to get the hell out
Speaker 4: of the way and let the adults run things. It's
Speaker 4: a good explanation encapsulated there. David appreciate it. Then this
Speaker 4: from Tim, I love this. He says, Remember there's a
Speaker 4: merit system in communism. People become really talented at telling
Speaker 4: on each other. The power is in control, controlling the systems.
Speaker 4: The people who get control of the systems, the stores,
Speaker 4: the gas stations, etc. Have the opportunity for corruption that
Speaker 4: of course comes in communism, and these are the coveted positions.
Speaker 4: Of course, it doesn't matter whether someone's a zel At
Speaker 4: or real communists. They will, for the purposes of survival
Speaker 4: and advancement, become really good at telling on people, really
Speaker 4: good at putting people in trouble, so they can continue
Speaker 4: to have that power. That's what happens in communism. That's
Speaker 4: why it always fails. That's how Russia became a criminal gang.
Speaker 4: With the toughest criminal in charge. The commissars get rich
Speaker 4: and it doesn't matter anymore if the system fails, as
Speaker 4: long as they stay rich. The people that run the
Speaker 4: store have the food, the people that run the gas
Speaker 4: station have fuel. The people that supervise the distribution of
Speaker 4: benefits have benefits, and that's all that matters. Now, I'm
Speaker 4: going to depart from the plan here of mail bag
Speaker 4: and Michael do me a favor.
Speaker 3: Let's play Oh where is it? Ah da da da.
Speaker 3: This is instructive.
Speaker 4: This is the late Charlie Kirk debating Hassan Piker. And
Speaker 4: put up with them yelling over each other for a
Speaker 4: minute because they get into a little bit of substance.
Speaker 3: In number forty four, why.
Speaker 5: Don't you give ninety five percent of your money away
Speaker 5: and go live on a communey?
Speaker 6: Do you really think that that's a worse Do you
Speaker 6: really think?
Speaker 3: Why not worse?
Speaker 5: Go preach because I every single business you uninterrupted for fiveness, Hassan.
Speaker 3: Let me go ahead, sorry live.
Speaker 7: You're right?
Speaker 5: What I practice free market, capitalist, I employed people, I
Speaker 5: took a risk. I have my own startup business. Every
Speaker 5: single day. I practice what I preach. He wants other
Speaker 5: people to contribute to what he considers to be a
Speaker 5: good idea, what he considers will make the.
Speaker 3: World a better place.
Speaker 5: That you have the freedom to go live as a socialist,
Speaker 5: Go do it, Hassan. What's stopping you Okay, So.
Speaker 6: Here's what we'll take.
Speaker 7: The last point, the last point I will make is this.
Speaker 6: Here's why that conversation is absolutely preposterous. If I gave
Speaker 6: away the measly earnings that I had and gave gave
Speaker 6: away ninety five percent, how much you make it necessarily
Speaker 6: even pushed the needle.
Speaker 4: So Hassan Piker's next sentence ought to be so for
Speaker 4: my system to work, I need, because I know it's right,
Speaker 4: to control everybody else and make them give away what
Speaker 4: they earn. My system depends entirely not on individual initiative
Speaker 4: or consent, or taking risk or investing or building something.
Speaker 4: My system depends entirely on controlling people and taking from them.
Speaker 4: And yeah, I understand taxation is a similar thing, but
Speaker 4: there's no taxation without the consent of the legislature, at
Speaker 4: least in theory in our country. But Hassan Piker, the
Speaker 4: darling and left admitted there.
Speaker 3: I need to.
Speaker 4: Control everyone for this system to work. It's a great
Speaker 4: truism and piece of wisdom. There are only two ways
Speaker 4: to get somebody to work. Number one award or number
Speaker 4: two the fear of punishment, and because socialism eliminates reward,
Speaker 4: for effort, reward for innovation, reward for risk, reward for
Speaker 4: outworking everybody else. People quickly decide, obviously, I'm not gonna work.
Speaker 4: I'm gonna get what I get whether I work or not.
Speaker 4: So I'm not going to work. Okay, So we've removed reard.
Speaker 4: What's left fear of punishment. Hassan Piker's entire system requires
Speaker 4: control and punishment of anybody who doesn't go along with
Speaker 4: his nefarious plans. Getting back to mailbag, Joe Schmoe, Bonnie Lake,
Speaker 4: Washington rights, that's how he signs it.
Speaker 3: Uh oh.
Speaker 4: On the topic of the WNBA and the two women
Speaker 4: who used to play in the NBA, mister Cantner and
Speaker 4: mister White, Is that right?
Speaker 3: Yep, yeah right.
Speaker 4: I'm miss miss ms cant and miss White because they
Speaker 4: say they're women, that makes them women.
Speaker 3: Trans women are women. But Joe makes a good point.
Speaker 4: All the WNBA has to do is not draft these
Speaker 4: guys or any other ex NBA player, because they have
Speaker 4: to be drafted in order to play. Because they're not
Speaker 4: really presenting his trans the trans community will not be
Speaker 4: upset that they didn't get drafted. Although White actually bought
Speaker 4: a really nice blonde wig, he looks very comely in it,
Speaker 4: and three granted to presenting trans female with great basketball
Speaker 4: skills for to try out and then not get drafted.
Speaker 3: The league would then have a problem. So how far.
Speaker 4: But again, Joe, it's like we were talking about yesterday.
Speaker 4: If they were sincerely transgender, well, who's what do we
Speaker 4: go to the sincere police, the Sincerity League? Is there
Speaker 4: a medical test? The whole thing's just absurd. We're calling
Speaker 4: their bluff. Go get them, ladies. On the topic of Iran,
Speaker 4: which continues to be a mire full of quag don
Speaker 4: in San Jose, right, So I don't understand what Trump
Speaker 4: keeps opening the door for negotiations quote unquote with the Ran,
Speaker 4: it only invites more nonsense requests from them.
Speaker 3: So we thought saw this last weekend.
Speaker 4: Why don't we just give them a declaration like the
Speaker 4: pot Stem Declaration of World War Two. It's simple, give
Speaker 4: up all striving for nuclear weapons, turnover existing nuclear refinement,
Speaker 4: open the straits of hermuvese. There'll be no tolls or
Speaker 4: threats against the chipping give up on all terrorism and
Speaker 4: sport terrorist groups. There should be one more recognized Israel.
Speaker 4: Maybe that's one too many. Well down, The problem isn't
Speaker 4: I have a feeling you know this? An order without
Speaker 4: a sanction is a suggestion. It's a request. What's the
Speaker 4: or else?
Speaker 3: Or else? Well?
Speaker 4: You know what, Oh, Jim wrights Jim and Houston rights
Speaker 4: the Mullahs and the IRGC or Lucy van Pelt.
Speaker 3: Trump is Charlie Brown.
Speaker 4: The dealed open, her moves is the football, Over and
Speaker 4: over and over.
Speaker 3: Trump acts as if the Mulas have no cards.
Speaker 4: In fact, they have a straight Oh clever, Jim clever,
Speaker 4: get it Oka reference, very nice, it's a good point.
Speaker 4: What was the other thing I was going to say?
Speaker 4: Seemed important at the time. Oh, well, we don't know
Speaker 4: what levers do. Oh oh, I was gonna say. The
Speaker 4: strategy right now appears to be just choking financially till
Speaker 4: they give out. Whether that will ever have the machine
Speaker 4: gunned forty fifty thousand of their own citizens in the street.
Speaker 4: I don't think they care if those people are.
Speaker 3: A little hungry. Let's see why don't we call it good.
Speaker 4: We're going to come back with a bunch of stories,
Speaker 4: from the really impactful to the completely idiotic. Run through.
Speaker 4: Get you caught up on what's happening in the world.
Speaker 4: It's the Armstrong and Getty Show.
Speaker 3: Glad you're here, stay with us.
Speaker 4: Hey, Michael, Sorry, I meant to ask for this. Can
Speaker 4: you hit me with clip number twenty one? This is
Speaker 4: the flower of American womanhood known as Royce White, who
Speaker 4: played in wn or in the NBA and wants to
Speaker 4: play in the WNBA.
Speaker 3: Well, I'm transgender, I'm a woman.
Speaker 8: I'm I identify as sometimes identifying as a woman for
Speaker 8: purposes of basketball professional basketball. So I'll be declaring for
Speaker 8: the WNBA draft in twenty twenty seven as well.
Speaker 3: So we all know that that's going on.
Speaker 4: And I want to explain something because I don't think
Speaker 4: most people understand this, and you really have to understand it.
Speaker 4: And it discourages and shocks me the lack of curiosity
Speaker 4: in a lot of the media, including the conservative media,
Speaker 4: about where this stuff is coming from, the whole transgender thing,
Speaker 4: and this is this is foundational to all of it.
Speaker 4: It has to do with the critical theory school of philosophy.
Speaker 4: A handful of French guys, if you know their names,
Speaker 4: you know you know them. But in the nineteen sixties,
Speaker 4: who came up with this idea that we need to
Speaker 4: get Marxism in but We're of the world unit didn't
Speaker 4: really work. And so the point of critical theory you
Speaker 4: have to understand is there are no truths. There are
Speaker 4: no there is no reality that we all can agree on.
Speaker 4: It's entirely cultural and entirely opinion. There is nothing you
Speaker 4: can say that critical theory won't try to tear apart.
Speaker 4: They criticize it. That's where the name comes from. They
Speaker 4: problematize it. You've heard that term. Probably They ask all
Speaker 4: these wacky, half rhetorical questions to get you to back
Speaker 4: off something as simple as only women can have babies.
Speaker 4: And you know, I was going to go into detail
Speaker 4: on something leading to it, but I'll just cut to
Speaker 4: the bottom line. So eliminating any binaries there are men
Speaker 4: there are women is at the heart of critical theory,
Speaker 4: and so.
Speaker 3: They cannot admit.
Speaker 4: Why don't they just back down on the women's sports
Speaker 4: thing you're asking yourself, I mean, because anybody would have
Speaker 4: a brain can see and understand immediately, or it doesn't
Speaker 4: even need to see anything to know. The reason title
Speaker 4: line exists. The reason women's sports exist is because men
Speaker 4: elite athletes are much bigger and stronger and faster and
Speaker 4: more violent, and if women are going to enjoy sports,
Speaker 4: it ought to be for women. And ninety eight percent
Speaker 4: of the planet, if you explain it to them, believes that.
Speaker 4: But they can't admit that there's something foundational that we
Speaker 4: all can agree on, because then critical theory collapses. And
Speaker 4: I know it seems insane, but that is what underpins
Speaker 4: all of what's going on at the teachers' colleges and
Speaker 4: has infected a radical gender theory, the genderbred man. Little
Speaker 4: boys and girls can choose whether they're boys and girls,
Speaker 4: and then they try to confuse you what's gender, what sex?
Speaker 4: And all that at the heart is critical theory that
Speaker 4: says there are no universal truths.
Speaker 3: All there are are cultural truths.
Speaker 4: And or Weell would leap out of his grave if
Speaker 4: he could and point out a dudes, That's what I
Speaker 4: was trying to warn you about, is that if there
Speaker 4: are no truths, the party can tell you what the
Speaker 4: truth is and you have to accept it, and you
Speaker 4: can't say, well, that doesn't square with reality, because reality
Speaker 4: is just what the party tells you.
Speaker 3: It is so critical theory and the people.
Speaker 4: Pushing it, whether they know they are or not, they
Speaker 4: just think they're enlightened, and that these nice trans people
Speaker 4: deserve to be able to play in girls sports. They're
Speaker 4: just trying to push critical theory. The greatest example is
Speaker 4: the two plus two is five thing, which is actually
Speaker 4: straight out of nineteen eighty four the critical theory crowd,
Speaker 4: and there was a giant Twitter war which got James
Speaker 4: Lindsay fired up to begin with. Because these mathematician, as
Speaker 4: I recall saying, no, two plus two doesn't equal four
Speaker 4: in every society. In some societies it equals five straight
Speaker 4: out or well, straight out of critical theory. That's why
Speaker 4: they can't give up on this crap anyway. A bunch
Speaker 4: of stuff to get to in a couple of minutes.
Speaker 4: We've got David Drucker to kind of parse some of
Speaker 4: the politics of our time. Jack's gonna check in a bit,
Speaker 4: stay with us, don't go away.
Speaker 3: Armstrong and Getty.
Speaker 9: Abolishing ice yes, a one year data center moratorium, yes,
Speaker 9: breaking up a big ag yes, public grocery stores yes,
Speaker 9: right to repair yes, legalizing cannabis yes. Overturning Citizens United yes,
Speaker 9: a worker's bill of rights yes, a free Palestine yes.
Speaker 3: Delightful.
Speaker 4: Hassan Piker interviewing and quizzing the delightful Francesca Hong, who
Speaker 4: is involved in a primary for the governorship of Wisconsin.
Speaker 4: Actually today as we speak, be interesting to see how
Speaker 4: that pans out. We're joined by David Drucker, senior writer
Speaker 4: for The Dispatch, longtime friend of the Armstrong and Getty Show,
Speaker 4: and David, I will reserve it to myself to rant
Speaker 4: that these people are lunatics and their policies will never work.
Speaker 4: But first of all, welcome, it's good to talk to you.
Speaker 7: Yeah, good to be bad.
Speaker 4: And the thing i wanted to talk to you about,
Speaker 4: and I'm so interested in this the nature of the
Speaker 4: primary system and the fact that a super energized, fairly
Speaker 4: small segment of either one of the political parties can
Speaker 4: win primary after primary primary.
Speaker 3: And the conventional.
Speaker 4: Wisdom is, yeah, that's true because it's the hardcore that
Speaker 4: turn out, but then it makes it harder to win
Speaker 4: the general. But I've observed over and over again, and
Speaker 4: this is what I really want to ask you about.
Speaker 4: Folks who just just rant about how horrific these policies
Speaker 4: are in the primaries then say, well, of course I'll
Speaker 4: support her. So is it not true that the super energized,
Speaker 4: fairly smallish base of the party now runs both parties
Speaker 4: because the districts are so polarized.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean there's something to that. I think there's
Speaker 1: some nuance there. But you know, with the proliferation of
Speaker 1: Gerrymander districts, right, we've had Jerrymander districts since the beginning
Speaker 1: of the Republic, but particularly after the mid decade redistricting
Speaker 1: that we saw over the past year, there are fewer
Speaker 1: and fewer competitive house districts. And so when you're comparing,
Speaker 1: for instance, midterm elections, know six in twenty ten, in
Speaker 1: twenty eighteen, to what might happen in twenty twenty six,
Speaker 1: you have to take into account there just isn't as
Speaker 1: much competitive territory for Democrats to be in a position
Speaker 1: to flip. And so, you know, then you get to
Speaker 1: this question of how much influence therefore have the wings
Speaker 1: of the parties accrued, And they've definitely accrued some more
Speaker 1: influence than they used to have, because it's harder to
Speaker 1: make the argument that we need to not dominate a
Speaker 1: pragmatist or somebody with broad appeal when the winner of
Speaker 1: the primary essentially is the winner of the general.
Speaker 3: Election, and then you're looking at.
Speaker 7: These competitive seats and states.
Speaker 1: Where progressives and socialist candidates are making inroads. And I
Speaker 1: think part of that has to do with the fact
Speaker 1: that the Democratic Party is going through its own anti
Speaker 1: establishment civil war, much as the Republican Party did during
Speaker 1: Barack Obama's presidency. And you know, these the Democrats have
Speaker 1: not gone through something like this in quite some time,
Speaker 1: because they were not unified by Obama. They were, well,
Speaker 1: they were first unified by opposition to George W. Bush,
Speaker 1: which turned into unification around Barack Obama, which turned into
Speaker 1: unification around opposition to Donald Trump. And now they're finally
Speaker 1: sort of going through the the sort of periodic upheaval
Speaker 1: that parties go through. I think the question though, in
Speaker 1: this case is where do they land because some of
Speaker 1: these candidates, candidates, unlike Democrats in the past, are rather extreme.
Speaker 1: When you just go through that checklist there where you
Speaker 1: played the clip, and you know, usually what happens is
Speaker 1: either these things succeed with voters and therefore they get
Speaker 1: to declare victory the wing the wingers do, or they
Speaker 1: start losing some some winnable coveted general elections and it
Speaker 1: resuscitates you know, so called establishment winging a party that
Speaker 1: is focused on winning. That's what happened in large part
Speaker 1: with a lot of Republicans, at least in congressional races
Speaker 1: prior to Donald Trump, where Republicans senate candidates in particular
Speaker 1: were blowing these winnable races, and the party got more aggressive,
Speaker 1: took more control over these primaries and started nominating broadly
Speaker 1: acceptable candidates. They started winning again, and that kind of
Speaker 1: put that thing to bet.
Speaker 3: Right now, you're a lot closer to this than we are.
Speaker 4: I see the Democratic establishment as as very old and
Speaker 4: very comfortable with their own control of the party. And
Speaker 4: what does the next generation of the Democratic establishment look like?
Speaker 3: We don't know why. Good question.
Speaker 1: First of all, I think the Democratic establishment doesn't quite
Speaker 1: know what to do about the insurgents in their midst.
Speaker 1: I think that they're afraid to challenge them very publicly.
Speaker 1: I think they've been challenging them subtly and quietly and
Speaker 1: in back you know, and in back rooms strategy sessions.
Speaker 1: And we've seen that with you know, certain pac money
Speaker 1: being spent and endorsements being made, but they still haven't
Speaker 1: reached the point where they recognize these candidates as a problem,
Speaker 1: and they haven't reached a point where fear of their
Speaker 1: own base is superseded by fear of losing and perpetuating
Speaker 1: Republican control of the White House and of Congress. And
Speaker 1: so the first step is, like, when does the party
Speaker 1: itself try to reassert control and actually wage the kind
Speaker 1: of aggressive warfare that the progressive base and these you know,
Speaker 1: Democratic Socialists of America candidates have been waging, right, And
Speaker 1: then that'll tell us a lot about who the next
Speaker 1: sort of iteration of the democratic establishment is. Whether it's
Speaker 1: the same people they just finally got off their butts
Speaker 1: and started fighting, or whether it's somebody.
Speaker 4: New right right, let's say, you know, let's stay on
Speaker 4: a somewhat philosophical level. I find it more fun than
Speaker 4: the headlines of the day. So you look across at
Speaker 4: the Republican Party, in Trump's enormous influence, bl Obama. Everybody
Speaker 4: knows that, right, given the fact that the Republican Party
Speaker 4: has been dealing with that, the Democrats have been dealing
Speaker 4: with what we've been describing, what is a political party
Speaker 4: anymore if it is merely the executive branch of whatever
Speaker 4: whims of the head guy is? I mean, you don't
Speaker 4: have a platform until you ask your candidate what do
Speaker 4: you want our platform to be? Are both parties getting
Speaker 4: tired of that whip sawing back and forth enough that
Speaker 4: they'll assert themselves and say, a party is a thing,
Speaker 4: here's what we are.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well that's a big it's a broader question, and
Speaker 1: I think you know, for the time being, the answer
Speaker 1: is no. I mean, I joke all the time, but
Speaker 1: I'm half serious that these parties have deteriorated and self immolated,
Speaker 1: and they're basically now in many ways, nothing more than
Speaker 1: ballid access organizations. They don't really have anything that they're
Speaker 1: willing to fight for beyond you know, whatever their philosophical
Speaker 1: region of control wants at any given time, right, and
Speaker 1: we've seen that at the presidential level in particular. You know,
Speaker 1: whoever the nominee is, that person's in charge of the party,
Speaker 1: that person determines the party's agenda, and you know, when
Speaker 1: a candidate comes along that is that is unacceptable. The
Speaker 1: line really has to cross. And we see this from
Speaker 1: time to time, right when a line will be crossed
Speaker 1: and the parties will say, no, you don't get our support.
Speaker 3: And you still see things like.
Speaker 7: That but you're right to point this out.
Speaker 1: Part of the problem, even though everybody hates political parties,
Speaker 1: is that parties have grown weaker as polarization has increased,
Speaker 1: and we probably are politics in this country the things
Speaker 1: that people think they don't like about our polities. Top
Speaker 1: politics would improve if the parties actually strengthened and began
Speaker 1: to take, you know, reassert control over their platforms and
Speaker 1: their candidates and things of that nature the way they used.
Speaker 4: To m a little less democracy, maybe at least at
Speaker 4: the primary. David Drucker, senior writer with the Dispatch, is
Speaker 4: with us. David, what's the most interesting story in politics
Speaker 4: going on right now that you think people ought to
Speaker 4: be paying attention to.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, I don't know if they're probably already
Speaker 1: paying attention if you're you know, a political junkie, but
Speaker 1: I think what's going on in Michigan is probably the
Speaker 1: most interesting story in politics, and whether a duels I
Speaker 1: d gets elected, gets elected to the Senate in a
Speaker 1: swing state like Michigan, because it's going to have it's
Speaker 1: going to I think it's going to tell us a
Speaker 1: lot about where certain you know, voters are. But also
Speaker 1: I think it's gonna if else I had wins, the
Speaker 1: progressive wing of the Democratic Party is going to have
Speaker 1: an argument to make. I don't necessarily think it would
Speaker 1: be true anyway, but they're going to be able to say,
Speaker 1: don't tell us a Winger can't win the presidency, can't
Speaker 1: win the key states in the electoral College voting.
Speaker 7: We just want Michigan. And if he.
Speaker 1: Loses to a Republican, and a Republican hasn't won a
Speaker 1: US Senate seat in Michigan since the nineties, and of
Speaker 1: course it's a very bad environment from the GOP. If
Speaker 1: l say it loses, then you know, the normal way
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, in a pragmatic way, it's going to
Speaker 1: be able to see we told you so. And I
Speaker 1: think that could have a huge influence over the course
Speaker 1: of the twenty twenty eight Democratic presidential primary. By the way,
Speaker 1: may also forestall any possibility of Democrats winning control of
Speaker 1: the Senate if they lose a Senate seat they control
Speaker 1: in Michigan.
Speaker 4: Right right, final question, David, how blue is Wisconsin?
Speaker 3: Now? Is it possible Francesca Hang gets the nomination? It's
Speaker 3: not blue. I mean it's a swing state.
Speaker 1: It's a narrowly divided state.
Speaker 3: Right.
Speaker 1: Well, she could very well get the nomination for all the.
Speaker 3: Reasons we just discussed, right, but then she may she may.
Speaker 1: Get elected governor in an environment that favors Republicans, I mean,
Speaker 1: the favors Democrats in the way that this one you
Speaker 1: know does at the moment. But I think she's also
Speaker 1: vulnerable in a general election. And you know, and also
Speaker 1: there are plenty of Democrats still running in competitive seats
Speaker 1: and states. And I're all going to get a lot
Speaker 1: more between Elsie ed winning the Democratic nomination of Michigan
Speaker 1: and the Pong is the nominee, and in wisconsin's the governor.
Speaker 1: And you've got some other DSA candidates that have succeeded
Speaker 1: in these primaries. It's a it's much more for Democrats
Speaker 1: in places that matter to answer for than just what
Speaker 1: about mom Donnie in New York.
Speaker 3: City, right right.
Speaker 4: David Drucker, senior writer with The Dispatch, David, always stimulating,
Speaker 4: Thanks so much.
Speaker 3: For the time, anytime, Thank you, all right, thank you, Yeah,
Speaker 3: let's stay in touch.
Speaker 7: Ay.
Speaker 3: Quick word from her friends at Blue Collar Dollar.
Speaker 4: If you're again to people, frankly, you work hard and
Speaker 4: you value your family. You're a bit of a savior.
Speaker 4: You've accumulated some wealth and you're trying to figure out
Speaker 4: how to guide it all to your financial dreams. But
Speaker 4: you want somebody who gets you and is going to
Speaker 4: talk with you, not at you. We invite you to
Speaker 4: call her friends at blue Collar Dollar. If you save
Speaker 4: five hundred thousand dollars or more, why don't you give
Speaker 4: him a call for a no cost consultation. There's no obligation.
Speaker 4: If you don't like what you hear, no harm done.
Speaker 4: But we know these people. We love their philosophy, and
Speaker 4: they are good folks, and they love this country.
Speaker 3: From your mobile phone, dial pound.
Speaker 4: Two fifteen and when prompted, say the keywords blue collar
Speaker 4: Dollar once again. Just but dial pound two fifty and
Speaker 4: say blue collar dollar, just to hear them out.
Speaker 3: Advisory services offered through.
Speaker 4: Talent LLC and SEC registered investment advisor Marketing is conducted
Speaker 4: by its filia company, blue Collar Dollar ll SAY. Registration
Speaker 4: as an investment advisor does not imply a certain level
Speaker 4: of scale or training. For more important disclosures, visit blue
Speaker 4: Collar Dollar dot com. Again, dial pound two fifty and
Speaker 4: say blue collar Dollar. I thought it was interesting that
Speaker 4: The New York Times is actually pretty critical of Jessica
Speaker 4: hong A, Francesca hong Rather and her various.
Speaker 3: Beliefs and policies. They're merciless.
Speaker 4: I wonder if that's the Democratic establishment kind of raising
Speaker 4: its head and saying, hey, hey, hey, are you people
Speaker 4: sure you're up on everything she has to say. I
Speaker 4: actually found the coverage in the New York Times more
Speaker 4: clear eyed and critical than in the Wall Street Journal,
Speaker 4: which was a head scratcher. Well, well, I'll find out
Speaker 4: today that the key primary in Wisconsin is today. I
Speaker 4: guess we'll know by todight what's going on with that one.
Speaker 4: Jack's gonna check in from the vacation trail next day
Speaker 4: with us. He's the co host, he's on vacation. He's
Speaker 4: annexing Canada, one delicious gravy fry at a time. He's
Speaker 4: Jack Armstrong. Hello Jack, how are you?
Speaker 7: But do you suppose we don't put a gravy on
Speaker 7: prize in the United States?
Speaker 4: We do, actually in various places. It's often called poutine,
Speaker 4: which sounds like a euphemism for a lady part to me.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't like that word.
Speaker 7: Uh yeah, it's funny. I have not come across it
Speaker 7: a lot, but it's everywhere I go to eat, which
Speaker 7: I have one of those little, uh motorized things to
Speaker 7: get around.
Speaker 3: Now, that's what's happened.
Speaker 7: I've only been here in three days, and yes, I'm
Speaker 7: unable to power myself with my own legs anymore.
Speaker 3: What are you gonna do? You're gonna get a scooter?
Speaker 3: I go adapted over.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 7: Interesting, I'm in band I'm a thousand miles from those
Speaker 7: fires in uh Washington and Oregon. Yeah, and just across
Speaker 7: the border in Canada. And it is so smoky here
Speaker 7: a thousand miles away.
Speaker 4: Oh that's too bad, because I've told the scenery well,
Speaker 4: I've seen pictures. It is breathtaking.
Speaker 7: Oh it is, and luckily I can, you know, still
Speaker 7: see it. But it's not the same as it would
Speaker 7: be for the fires. But man, it is. It is
Speaker 7: really smoky. The scenery is breathtaking, is absolutely fantastic.
Speaker 3: Excellent.
Speaker 4: And are you mostly you guys just hiking and looking
Speaker 4: around and touristy stuff.
Speaker 7: What you got any big adventures planned so far? Yes,
Speaker 7: that's exactly well. We went to the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally.
Speaker 7: That's what we did the first two days. Oh, my
Speaker 7: youngest has no interest in that, but my eldest really
Speaker 7: is interested. And we just hung around there for like
Speaker 7: twenty four hours. And that is one of the largest
Speaker 7: gatherings of humanity. I think it's the largest non religious
Speaker 7: gatherings humanity that happens every year. It's about a half
Speaker 7: a million people that show up in this town of
Speaker 7: six thousand people.
Speaker 3: It's amazing, like dwarfs the Indy five hundred, for instance.
Speaker 3: It's many multiples, just insane.
Speaker 7: It's just so crazy. And uh, and my kids, I'm
Speaker 7: glad that the ad they're fourteen and sixteen, they saw
Speaker 7: some things that opened their eyes. That's that's for certain.
Speaker 7: The way there is there is there is some There
Speaker 7: is some stuff to see walking the streets, no doubt about.
Speaker 4: Yeah, I don't bet there was. Well, I was just
Speaker 4: going to say for your younger son, Henry, that even
Speaker 4: if you're not at all into motorcycles or whatever, just
Speaker 4: the sheer spectacle of the thing would have to be,
Speaker 4: you know, eye opening.
Speaker 7: What's interesting is I know how it is. We've talked
Speaker 7: about this many times, how people are born with personalities,
Speaker 7: I mean, and they're just very, very different. But my
Speaker 7: oldest just I mean, he just when he's around that
Speaker 7: vibe of just music and noise and people and crowds
Speaker 7: and cars, he just lights up. I mean, it just
Speaker 7: energizes him so much. And my youngest is always, can
Speaker 7: I go sit in the car until this is over?
Speaker 7: And he puts something in his ears so he doesn't
Speaker 7: have to herinate it and he doesn't like to see it.
Speaker 7: So it's just very different. So now we're doing his
Speaker 7: part of the trip more or less, where we're driving
Speaker 7: through mountains and creeks and stopping and it's perfectly quiet,
Speaker 7: and we hike and we see deer and bighorn sheep
Speaker 7: and that sort of thing.
Speaker 3: He likes that wonderful.
Speaker 4: I was going to say, yeah, it has to make
Speaker 4: vacation planning at least somewhat challenging.
Speaker 3: But what are you going to do? That's I also have.
Speaker 7: You've probably had this experience.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 7: I didn't go on vacations, really didn't. I hadn't realized
Speaker 7: this until my kids got older. I didn't only go
Speaker 7: on vacations with the family once I kept turned like
Speaker 7: fourteen fifteen years old, because I was working. I was
Speaker 7: working all the time. So the family go on vacation
Speaker 7: and I work, and then my brother did the same
Speaker 7: when he turned about fifteen.
Speaker 3: He stayed hob. I think there's a reason for that.
Speaker 4: Teenagers they are not really.
Speaker 7: Thrilled about many things. They're just right, they're not digging
Speaker 7: that much stuff, and they don't want to be with
Speaker 7: their parents. And and I was thinking last vacation, but
Speaker 7: I'm thinking this becaution. You know what next summer, I think,
Speaker 7: you know, I think I'll go on vacation. You stay
Speaker 7: home and work might be the answer.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: One of the very few things I've ever said that
Speaker 4: was worth shotting down was when Judy and I were
Speaker 4: talking about her relationship with her oldest Kate, and I said, Honey,
Speaker 4: to leave the nest to take off, you have to
Speaker 4: push against the nest, and that process begins early. It's,
Speaker 4: you know, the Berg metaphor kind of fails because they're
Speaker 4: pushing for a very long time before they flapped their
Speaker 4: wings and flyway.
Speaker 7: Clearly, and modern society we have probably delayed the them growing.
Speaker 3: Up for better. I was gonna say for better or worse.
Speaker 7: Probably almost certainly for worse. But the uh, like, you know,
Speaker 7: I was, I was, like I said, I was, I
Speaker 7: was working and not doing vacation stuff. I was like
Speaker 7: a I was like a grown man earning money, buying
Speaker 7: myself stuff at fifteen. And I think, you know, maybe
Speaker 7: the human body and mind is prepared for that, but
Speaker 7: we don't do it much. And then the whole yeah,
Speaker 7: go ahead, no go ahead, I was gonna say. And
Speaker 7: then the smart fit phone thing, the smartphone thing. Everything
Speaker 7: has to compete with the smartphone, right uh, and so
Speaker 7: I have to constantly, hey, put that away, just sitting
Speaker 7: there playing video games when you got like some of
Speaker 7: the greatest scenery on the planet, maybe in the entire
Speaker 7: universe out your window. You don't need to be playing
Speaker 7: some weird game on your phone. But that's the way,
Speaker 7: you know, you know how it is. We're drawn to
Speaker 7: the next dopamine hit. You don't get a dopamine hit.
Speaker 7: It's enjoyable, but you don't get a dopamine hit from
Speaker 7: looking at a mountain.
Speaker 4: Not the same kind anyway. So we got like twenty
Speaker 4: seconds left. Is there another leg.
Speaker 3: To come of the vacation.
Speaker 7: Oh yeah, we're driving to Vancouver. Then we're going to
Speaker 7: go over to Vancouver Island, Victorian. We'll be there for
Speaker 7: a while. Seattle do home.
Speaker 4: Excellent scenery and junkies best of both roles exactly. Enjoy
Speaker 4: that and stay in touch. We've got a great guest
Speaker 4: of the fabulous Jason Rantz coming up from Seattle Red
Speaker 4: seven to seventy am. Longtime friend of the AG Show
Speaker 4: and colleague. He's always bringing the fire. Stay with us,
Speaker 4: don't go away, Armstrong and Getty