Speaker 1: You are entering the freedom hug Bernie Sanders doubles down
Speaker 1: on his support for the literacy program the Castro regime implemented.
Speaker 1: We'll get into that. The rise of open authoritarianism in
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party. What does this mean for the Democratic primary?
Speaker 1: There is a debate tonight among Democrats. It's going to
Speaker 1: help determine who wins in South Carolina, and a whole
Speaker 1: lot more coming up. This is the bus Sexton Show,
Speaker 1: where the mission or mission is to decode what really
Speaker 1: matters with actionable intelligence. Make no mistake Grant American again.
Speaker 1: The buck Sexton Show begins. Analyst. Remember so the Democrats
Speaker 1: will say, you don't say good things about Fidel Castro.
Speaker 1: He destroyed freedoms in that country. He played picks, winners
Speaker 1: and losers and killed them and put them in prison forever.
Speaker 1: You don't give him a pat on the back for anything. Don't.
Speaker 1: It's not a quite truth? Is truth? All right? Now?
Speaker 1: If you want to disagree with me that somebody wants
Speaker 1: to say that, and badly, all of those congress people
Speaker 1: that you mentioned just so happened to be supporting other
Speaker 1: candidates just accidentally, no doubt incidentally. But you know the
Speaker 1: truth is the truth, and that's what happened in the
Speaker 1: first he is of the Castro regime. Truth is truth
Speaker 1: is the answer you get from Bernie Sanders there, Welcome
Speaker 1: to the Buck Sexton Show, everybody. You would think that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders might take the offer amp here that CNN
Speaker 1: was clearly clearly providing him right that he could walk
Speaker 1: away from his comments about the literacy program. By the way,
Speaker 1: the literacy of the Cuban people went from somewhere in
Speaker 1: the mid seventy percentile range to like maybe ninety percent.
Speaker 1: And that was at the cost of the enslavement of
Speaker 1: the entire island, the appropriation of not just rich people,
Speaker 1: but middle class people's property, indoctrination programs, massed attention, mass executions, torture, brutalization,
Speaker 1: and o yes, huge numbers of people risking death. As
Speaker 1: a Cuban immigrant to this country, now a proud American
Speaker 1: had explained it to me, Always remember that people were
Speaker 1: not just willing to risk their own lives, but fathers,
Speaker 1: mothers were willing to get on rickety rafts, homemade homemade rafts,
Speaker 1: and risk the possibility of watching their children drowned before
Speaker 1: them or their children could eaten by sharks. That's how
Speaker 1: desperate they were to get off of this island that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders thinks had a great literacy program. Now we're
Speaker 1: not overstating this. This is no longer that point in
Speaker 1: conservative media where you say, come on, is this meant
Speaker 1: to just get a rise out of people or is
Speaker 1: there a little bit of media exaggeration going on here?
Speaker 1: We have a socialist who is now on a glide
Speaker 1: path to becoming the Democrat nominee for the presidency. And
Speaker 1: not only does he not hide the fact that he's
Speaker 1: a socialist, is quite open about it, obviously, but he
Speaker 1: won't even repudiate his previous warm comments about some of
Speaker 1: the most awful totalitarian regimes on the planet. And this
Speaker 1: guy wants to be in charge of the executive branch
Speaker 1: of the United States government in less than a year.
Speaker 1: I think it's a big deal. I think we can
Speaker 1: all view this as something that is worthy of our
Speaker 1: attention in our time and just remember this as scary
Speaker 1: as it is. The Democrat corporate media, the CNN, MSNBC,
Speaker 1: New York Times, Washington Post industrial complex, dope, I'll find
Speaker 1: some way to push Sanders on us. They don't care
Speaker 1: anybody but Trump, anyone who they think will give them
Speaker 1: some of what they want, even if it means a
Speaker 1: complete abandonment of some of the core principles of this
Speaker 1: country for now, well really since the beginning. I mean,
Speaker 1: if you look at individual rights and constitutional constitutional restraint
Speaker 1: on government, and then you look at what the Sanders
Speaker 1: administration is already proposing to do, it's effectively at war
Speaker 1: with the founding principles of this country. It wants to
Speaker 1: turn us into a Oh that's right, kind of like
Speaker 1: what Obama said, fundamentally transform the country. That was his promise,
Speaker 1: and now Sanders looks to finish finish that process. This
Speaker 1: is troubling, to say the least. It's something that we
Speaker 1: should take very seriously. We have to take it very seriously.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders also takes all the wrong lessons from history
Speaker 1: and from other model rolls around the world, all of
Speaker 1: the wrong models. He somehow has managed to spend his
Speaker 1: entire adult life distilling the incorrect lessons of state control, authoritarianism,
Speaker 1: intervention by government authorities into markets, all the wrong lessons.
Speaker 1: That's really his magic power is to always he's like
Speaker 1: Joe Biden on foreign policy, to always get it wrong.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders on the market and on what creates wealth
Speaker 1: and prosperity for all people always gets it wrong. All
Speaker 1: he knows how to do is class warfare agitation. He
Speaker 1: doesn't even know how to implement that class warfare agitation.
Speaker 1: You have to remember that he hasn't even had experience
Speaker 1: at the controls. He's just a loud voice on the
Speaker 1: corner yelling about millionaires and billionaires and oligarchus, and you're
Speaker 1: gonna have free this and free that, and they're all
Speaker 1: gonna be paid for by the rich. Except we know
Speaker 1: everyone's going to pay for it. There aren't enough people
Speaker 1: to pay for the things that Bernie said. Sanders says
Speaker 1: that he wants. I've had a number of jobs in
Speaker 1: the private sector, and the people that I have worked for,
Speaker 1: at least the owners that the companies I've worked for,
Speaker 1: they have been wealthy. I've never had a I've never
Speaker 1: had a job that Bernie Sanders would offer me. Right,
Speaker 1: I've never worked for somebody who Bernie Sanders would be
Speaker 1: able to do anything other than extract from. So his
Speaker 1: demonization of the people that are actual job creators is counterproductive.
Speaker 1: In the most clear and the most the most evident ways.
Speaker 1: He simply does not care though he's going to continue
Speaker 1: with this, and he also knows that he has to
Speaker 1: bow to the wokeness of the left, which I suppose
Speaker 1: is unsurprising. Here's what he says about who is vice president,
Speaker 1: for example, will be plick clip ten. But your question
Speaker 1: is about a vice presidential part of the ticket, and yes,
Speaker 1: the answer is we will do that. But it's a
Speaker 1: little bit presumptuous right now. I will tell you one thing, though,
Speaker 1: you know, is that person will not be an old
Speaker 1: white guy. That I can say defend in all seriousness
Speaker 1: that our cabinet and our administration will very intentionally look
Speaker 1: like America. I think it's important that all of our
Speaker 1: people see themselves reflected in the administration of the president
Speaker 1: of the United States, and we will absolutely do that.
Speaker 1: This from a guy who is really the oldest of
Speaker 1: white guys running for the presidency from what is I believe,
Speaker 1: the whitest single state in the United States. But now
Speaker 1: he's mister diversity because he thinks he has to be
Speaker 1: in the Democratic primary. So the media can go along
Speaker 1: with all this and look like they're not out whatever
Speaker 1: principles they pretend to have How's he going to pay
Speaker 1: for all this? We'll figure it out. I mean this
Speaker 1: has really become a common talking point on the left.
Speaker 1: How are you gonna pay for a hundred trillion dollars?
Speaker 1: It'll come from somewhere. Keep in mind, right now people
Speaker 1: might have to consider the possibility that we are facing
Speaker 1: because of because of manufacturing, manufacturing stoppages and supply chain shortages,
Speaker 1: a change in global GDP as a result of coronavirus.
Speaker 1: That's a that's a real concern. I don't know if
Speaker 1: it will have him, and that's a real concern. And
Speaker 1: you also have twenty three trillion dollars or so of
Speaker 1: US debt already piled up. There are economic ramifications that
Speaker 1: are happening all the time from that, and Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: is just saying, let's just make it one hundred trillion dollars.
Speaker 1: I mean, he is walking into a room full of
Speaker 1: flammable material and he's got a blamethrower in his hands,
Speaker 1: and he's just saying, what could go wrong? This is
Speaker 1: really something that we all have to take very seriously.
Speaker 1: I did not think if Joe Biden became president, you
Speaker 1: weren't going to have you know the massive destruction of
Speaker 1: wealth that you would have under a Sanders presidency. Let's
Speaker 1: understand this. I mean Biden would have you know, he
Speaker 1: would have done some bad Democrat things, and I wouldn't
Speaker 1: certainly would have been as good as Trump nowhere near it,
Speaker 1: but you know, he'd sort of go with what the
Speaker 1: corporate interests and the Democrat donor class wants on some things.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders, it's not clear that the corporate donor class
Speaker 1: can control him at all. And it's also not clear
Speaker 1: that he even really understands the ramifications of what he
Speaker 1: says he wants to do. He's claiming, for example, that
Speaker 1: we'll just figure out how to pay for things when
Speaker 1: we decide that we're gonna pay for them. Play twelve mark.
Speaker 1: There's a lot of detail in here. You can look
Speaker 1: forward for yourselves on the website. It is not matching
Speaker 1: the price tag that some put it about thirty trillion
Speaker 1: dollars for the Medicare for All transition. You do have
Speaker 1: lots of different ideas in here. I'm not saying you don't,
Speaker 1: but you get about halfway. There's the question becomes, how
Speaker 1: do you get the rest of the world You know
Speaker 1: there was a slutty Chris. I don't know if you
Speaker 1: have to see it. I don't know. If that hatie
Speaker 1: trillion over ten years, how do you get there? The
Speaker 1: math doesn't add up. He can pretend that it adds
Speaker 1: up as much as he wants to. I mean, Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders in a saner era where the left has not
Speaker 1: had the ability to organize and galvanize via digital and
Speaker 1: social media, and where the corporate media hasn't just become
Speaker 1: a bunch of absolutely spineless cowards who just don't want
Speaker 1: to be called you know, don't want to be called racist,
Speaker 1: don't want to be called sexist, and we'll play along
Speaker 1: with his class warfare game. I mean, that's the funniest
Speaker 1: thing about about the CNN and MSNBC, an ABC same deal,
Speaker 1: that that these networks have all these people that go
Speaker 1: on TV who are multi multi millionaires getting paid to
Speaker 1: do a job. A thousand other people could replace them
Speaker 1: in tomorrow and do just as good of a job.
Speaker 1: But they're friends with the right people, and they like
Speaker 1: their little privileged positions, and they act like Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: is not crazy because their audience, or a substantial portion
Speaker 1: of their audience now wants to believe that, so they'll
Speaker 1: just play along. I thought journalists are supposed to speak
Speaker 1: truth to power. I thought, especially if you're super rich
Speaker 1: journalist who's been in the game a long time, shouldn't
Speaker 1: he be willing to take a stand. Why haven't you
Speaker 1: seen a single anchor at cn whos when it come
Speaker 1: out and spell, Look, Bernie Sanders is a commy and
Speaker 1: he's going to destroy the US economy. We all know
Speaker 1: that they won't say it. They're cowards. They're cowards. What
Speaker 1: do they risk, Oh, their readings won't be as high.
Speaker 1: Oh maybe they won't get invited to the fanciest parties
Speaker 1: in the Hamptons this summerse people are the worst. They
Speaker 1: really are. I mean, at least the the trolls that
Speaker 1: work at some of these other you know, the Salon
Speaker 1: dot Com and some of these other places, you know, Slate.
Speaker 1: You know, they're all all these writers living in Brooklyn
Speaker 1: who think that they're changing the world by being snarky
Speaker 1: idiots all day long. At least you can say for them,
Speaker 1: they gotta they gotta keep the hustle going so they
Speaker 1: can pay the bills. But some of these people you
Speaker 1: see in the big the big three letter news agency
Speaker 1: and corporate media that they got no excuse. There's there's
Speaker 1: no reason for them to be such whims except that
Speaker 1: they're they're they like their privileged positions, and they won't
Speaker 1: speak the truth. Not only do the American people forget that,
Speaker 1: they will not speak the truth to their Democrat audience.
Speaker 1: You know, there have been all these editorials about how
Speaker 1: about how journalism and the era of Trump means taking
Speaker 1: oppositional positions? They really write this. This has been a
Speaker 1: common theme, oppositional positions to Donald Trump, because that's what
Speaker 1: truth is. To be true, you must be opposed to Trump. Well,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, but if you are any of the mainstream
Speaker 1: journal Darling's out there and you don't know that Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders would wreck the US economy, you're a more on.
Speaker 1: But what's worse is I think most of them recognize it,
Speaker 1: but they're too cowardly, They're too wimpy to possibly alienate
Speaker 1: some of their audience by saying, now, look, say what
Speaker 1: you will about conservatism. There are a lot of people
Speaker 1: that were willing to speak out incorrectly it turned out
Speaker 1: about Donald Trump. But they during the primary, they said
Speaker 1: their peace these Democrats, these big journals. They're just going
Speaker 1: along for the ride. Man. They're just like, yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: you know, maybe it's gonna be Sanders. We know they're
Speaker 1: all activists. So what I'm trying to say is that
Speaker 1: they are accessories. They are accomplices in the socialism surge
Speaker 1: of the Democratic Party is going through right now. They
Speaker 1: could do something to try to slow it down, but
Speaker 1: they won't. So just remember that they've been pretending for
Speaker 1: years that they're so concerned about authoritarianism. They're so concerned
Speaker 1: about an overly powerful executive branch official. And Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: is walking around saying I'm I'm gonna take your money,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna make you do things. I'm gonna be in
Speaker 1: charge of everything. And it's just gonna be executive order.
Speaker 1: Where's the where's the outrage? Where is it? No? Instead,
Speaker 1: they give him the Chris Quomo. You know, come on,
Speaker 1: come on, hey, it's pro cuomo. Come on, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, you know, really you're not really gonna be
Speaker 1: you know, you're really gonna be like doing that thing
Speaker 1: you said you're gonna do about the thing, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: come on, you don't really think that, like, you know,
Speaker 1: Cuba Castro. I mean, come on, right, it's not it's
Speaker 1: not it's not great. Just tell us it's not great
Speaker 1: and we can talk about how great you are. He's like, Nope,
Speaker 1: literacy program equals could Truth is truth. This is what
Speaker 1: you're up against. He's a radical. He's a radical. And
Speaker 1: keep in mind, I mean, and I'm not trying to
Speaker 1: say this in a way that's you know, ungallant or anything,
Speaker 1: but I mean, he's Bernie Sanders feels like he got
Speaker 1: he's got nothing to lose. Remember this. I mean, he
Speaker 1: either you know, he either wins this race and is
Speaker 1: in a position to fundamentally transform America or he gets
Speaker 1: to go down fighting. I mean, Bernie Sanders is not
Speaker 1: planning to have what I'm what I'm saying here is
Speaker 1: he's not gonna have another twin years of political career.
Speaker 1: So he's a guy who thinks he's playing with house money,
Speaker 1: your money. You're in the freedom hunt. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show podcast. I happen to believe that Debaclissy
Speaker 1: not authoritarianism, but you know, you can't say. China is
Speaker 1: another example, all right, China is an authoritarian country becoming
Speaker 1: more and more authoritarian. But can anyone deny. I mean,
Speaker 1: the facts are clear that they have taken more people
Speaker 1: out of extreme poverty than any country in history. Oh boy,
Speaker 1: this is what I mean. He doesn't even know the basics.
Speaker 1: How has China been able to do that? Was was
Speaker 1: Mao able to do that? I mean was a communist,
Speaker 1: He was a collectivist, a socialist, and forty to sixty
Speaker 1: million people starved because of his great ideas greatly forward,
Speaker 1: forty sixty million people atrocities so horrific because hunger became
Speaker 1: weaponized as a tool of state control during that period
Speaker 1: of the Great Famine. And what Bernie Sanders takes from
Speaker 1: the lesson of China is not Wait a second. The
Speaker 1: Chinese authoritarian regime said, let's actually introduce free market reforms
Speaker 1: and have state sponsored capitalism, which is what China is
Speaker 1: engaged in, right, state control, state control of free market
Speaker 1: based activity. I mean that the Chinese government is trying
Speaker 1: to allow people to run big companies sell their stuff
Speaker 1: on the global market so that there is wealth. The
Speaker 1: wealth creation mechanism is the market. This is what Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders doesn't understand. The Chinese government didn't it wasn't able
Speaker 1: to lift people out of poverty by instituting a higher
Speaker 1: tax rate. That's not how it worked. Or by promising
Speaker 1: free healthcare for everybody. That's not how it worked. So
Speaker 1: he doesn't even in these models that he brings up.
Speaker 1: He doesn't even And by the way, we always get
Speaker 1: into this thing of okay, you know, there's the USSR, Venezuela, Cuba,
Speaker 1: North Korea, and then those are the really really bad
Speaker 1: socialist countries. And then you look at what happened in
Speaker 1: or the left that Bernie Sanders folks will bring up
Speaker 1: Denmark and Sweden and which are not socialist countries, but
Speaker 1: they have some socialist sectors in the countries, and they
Speaker 1: have a large welfare state and high taxation even though
Speaker 1: they are free market economies. What about I mean, you
Speaker 1: get on the list of all the other socialist experiments,
Speaker 1: socialist countries all throughout Africa and Latin America, and all disasters,
Speaker 1: all of them are disasters economically basket cases across the board,
Speaker 1: dozens and dozens of them. Ones you don't even think
Speaker 1: about it. Who sits around thinking about oh, like, how
Speaker 1: did socialism work out in Albania? Pretty badly? Ask in Albanian?
Speaker 1: You know, I mean, either are all these places where
Speaker 1: we've run the experiment, it's a bad idea. And not
Speaker 1: only is it a bad idea, Sanders doesn't understand the
Speaker 1: places where it was run poorly. And then they started
Speaker 1: to make things better. Why things got better? Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to The bus Essen Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your podcasts. So what we are calling for is universal childcare.
Speaker 1: How are you going to pay for this? We have
Speaker 1: a tax on wealth to pay for them. For all
Speaker 1: the people who like the idea of it, they're gonna
Speaker 1: be a lot of Democrats again who are saying, well,
Speaker 1: wait a minute. Yet again, this is another program that
Speaker 1: it's not clear how it's going to get paid for.
Speaker 1: It's just going to add which is clear how it's
Speaker 1: going to be paid for it look and to say
Speaker 1: more taxes, it's taxes on billionaires. You know, you know,
Speaker 1: I get a little bit tired of hearing my opponents saying, gee,
Speaker 1: how are you going to pay for a program that
Speaker 1: impacts and helps children or working class families or middle
Speaker 1: class families. How are you going to pay for that?
Speaker 1: And yet where are people saying, how are you going
Speaker 1: to pay four of a seven hundred and fifty billion
Speaker 1: dollars on military spending? How are you going to pay
Speaker 1: for a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the one
Speaker 1: percent of large corporations, which was what Trump did when
Speaker 1: you helped the billionaires and you help Wall Street. Hey,
Speaker 1: of course we can pay for That's what America supposed
Speaker 1: to be about. Well, I disagree all demagoguery, I mean,
Speaker 1: just all blather. That's what this guy is. He's a
Speaker 1: blather machine. By the way. Don't even get me started
Speaker 1: on if we had to sit down and I tried
Speaker 1: that this guy wants to be commander in chief and
Speaker 1: Democrats they were so upset that Trump wasn't the genius
Speaker 1: scholar that they pretended Obama was. Do we really think
Speaker 1: that Bernie Sanders could have an intelligent discussion about Oh,
Speaker 1: I don't know, why did we win the Cold War?
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders? Why did the Soviet Union fail? Somebody should
Speaker 1: ask Bernie Sanders if we had a real press corps,
Speaker 1: which we don't. We don't. We have activist Democrats who
Speaker 1: just like they've taken over universities and faculty lounges. At
Speaker 1: colleges across the country. They also completely turned journal journalism
Speaker 1: him into a province of the left. But while they
Speaker 1: hate talk radio so much, because it was a format
Speaker 1: where audience got to determine what they were listening to,
Speaker 1: not a bunch of corporate executives who, with FCC assistance,
Speaker 1: are able to determine who gets their time where, and
Speaker 1: you know what cable channels exist. Who thinks that Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders would be able to explain what went wrong in Venezuela.
Speaker 1: I mean he would just say things like, you know
Speaker 1: there was corruption, and you know they didn't do a
Speaker 1: good job, and okay, but why didn't it work? I'm
Speaker 1: telling you, he could not explain. He couldn't even begin
Speaker 1: to explain it. What's scary years that Bernie Sanders isn't
Speaker 1: even a smart socialist. This is this is what I
Speaker 1: really feel like I have to say say to you.
Speaker 1: There are very clever socialists. In fact, for most of
Speaker 1: his adult life and probably close to up until the end.
Speaker 1: You know, Christopher Hitchins, who was one of my favorite writers,
Speaker 1: even though he's a rabbit atheist and unfair to the
Speaker 1: Catholic Church, and there was a lot of stuff that
Speaker 1: I didn't agree with them on. But in terms of
Speaker 1: writing talent, the guy was exceptional. He was really good
Speaker 1: at the craft of writing and was also very engaging
Speaker 1: at argument and would and would argue with whomever wanted
Speaker 1: to argue. And I mean he wasn't you know these
Speaker 1: other people, these these CNN anchors and the MSNBC talking heads,
Speaker 1: these people are cowards. They never actually put themselves in
Speaker 1: a position to have a real argument. But Higins was
Speaker 1: a socialist. He's a very smart one, though, so he
Speaker 1: would explain to you why, and he would get it.
Speaker 1: He was He would consider himself a Trotskyite, which I
Speaker 1: don't even know how much Bernie Sanders could explain to
Speaker 1: you about the difference between let's say, Trotsky versus being
Speaker 1: a Leninist and the split there and what happened, although
Speaker 1: that is probably his favorite part of history, so maybe
Speaker 1: he does know a bit about it. Does Bernie Sanders?
Speaker 1: Is he somebody who could speak about what's in Dusk Capital.
Speaker 1: I'm not even sure what I'm saying to you that
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders understands the foundation of the ideology that he
Speaker 1: is now the single most powerful representative of in the
Speaker 1: United States, and with that, in a sense, among the
Speaker 1: most powerful socialists in the world. He is representing a
Speaker 1: resurgence of this ideology. And I think that we're in
Speaker 1: the midst of this resurgence in part because of the
Speaker 1: great success of the opponents of socialism, the capitalist impulse
Speaker 1: that has been on display in this country for well,
Speaker 1: depending on how you want to define it, let's just
Speaker 1: say in the post World War two era, because socialism
Speaker 1: was ascended during the Great Depression. That was when all
Speaker 1: of a sudden the storyline and journalists were favorable to it.
Speaker 1: By the way, man, I mean the most elite journalists
Speaker 1: in the country. Lots of journalists thought that the Soviet
Speaker 1: Union had figured all this out. They bought into the propaganda.
Speaker 1: The same dumbasses who write for the biggest newspapers that
Speaker 1: are on the biggest cable news shows in the country today,
Speaker 1: who think that Jesse Smollett was telling the truth or
Speaker 1: they did think that. You know, you go back to
Speaker 1: Walter Duranti, you go back to the famine Ukraine and Nope,
Speaker 1: nothing going on there. They just believe they're either lied
Speaker 1: or believe the propaganda about there not being a faminine.
Speaker 1: I think it was nineteen thirty four to nineteen thirty five.
Speaker 1: The Ukrainians called it the Whole of the Moor or
Speaker 1: Just and it was another weaponized famine, talk about state control,
Speaker 1: enforced deprivation and desperation. Sanders is not even a clever socialist.
Speaker 1: He's a pure demagogue, the same way that Joe Biden
Speaker 1: has been just repeating, almost like a robot, whatever he
Speaker 1: thinks he has to say at any point in time
Speaker 1: to have the greatest appeal to voters. In that sense,
Speaker 1: he's a He's a pure cynical politician. And that's Biden's
Speaker 1: whole career. What I have to say to keep getting
Speaker 1: elected in the state of Delaware, What do I have
Speaker 1: to say to be in the good grace of the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party? That's what I will say. I mean, the
Speaker 1: man doesn't seem to stand for anything other than Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders is what do I have to say that
Speaker 1: will appeal to the class warfare instincts and the underlying
Speaker 1: socialist impulse that has always existed in America but now
Speaker 1: is ascended. I was saying before it was ascended and
Speaker 1: after the Great Depression, because there was a sense that
Speaker 1: there was the narrative. The storyline was that capitalism has
Speaker 1: failed and that that's why the Great Depression. The capitalism
Speaker 1: was a failure and we were going to enter a
Speaker 1: new phase. And they looked around, they saw all the
Speaker 1: desperation and figured, well, the government must be able to
Speaker 1: save us. So they wanted to turn to government. And
Speaker 1: the Soviet Union was pretending if things are much better
Speaker 1: there than it was. Okay, now we're in a different
Speaker 1: position where capitalism has created so much abundance. We are
Speaker 1: so blessed in this country right now. We're so full
Speaker 1: of the riches and the wages of a free market
Speaker 1: system that rewards individual ingenuity and hard work and dedication
Speaker 1: and yes, luck, to be sure, all all good things
Speaker 1: in life requires some degree of luck. But we have
Speaker 1: a system where we walk around now with greater ability
Speaker 1: to communicate, to buy things, have our our health taken
Speaker 1: care of. I mean, food is orders of magnitude better,
Speaker 1: and I mean everywhere, everywhere you go food is better
Speaker 1: than it was even when I was a kid. This
Speaker 1: stuff we eat is better are the I mean you
Speaker 1: walk into a grocery store anywhere in America and the
Speaker 1: variety and abundance and quality is mind blowing, especially compared
Speaker 1: to what you would have seen not a hundred years ago,
Speaker 1: but circa nineteen ninety in Moscow. You know, go you
Speaker 1: go online to see photos of it. You know, there's
Speaker 1: like one type of pickled beet and one kind of can,
Speaker 1: and then a lot of empty shelves. I mean that's
Speaker 1: what and you know maybe some some powdered milk that
Speaker 1: you're not sure if it's been around since you know,
Speaker 1: Cruise Shovel was in office. I mean, that's what people
Speaker 1: were dealing with there. What was the difference that we
Speaker 1: didn't have enough socialism? Was that? Was that? Is that
Speaker 1: why we have so much more? We didn't have enough socialism?
Speaker 1: Or is that socialism is a bad idea? Everybody should
Speaker 1: be very concerned about this. But the Democrats, you see,
Speaker 1: they're so obsessed with power, and they're so deluded in
Speaker 1: their Trump hatred that they'll go along with this. They'll
Speaker 1: go along with that, they have to a lot of
Speaker 1: the Democrat establishment is still hoping that there'll be some
Speaker 1: you know, late surge from Biden or we'll get into
Speaker 1: Biden in a second. I really mean Biden is he's
Speaker 1: not up for this. He's not up for it. They
Speaker 1: can keep pretending, but it is now clear that campaign
Speaker 1: is a crucible. I mean, the campaign is an obstacle
Speaker 1: course for physical and mental endurance for the people that
Speaker 1: want to be the next commander in chief and chief
Speaker 1: executive the United States government. And Biden is falling into
Speaker 1: the mud pit and walling around and not going to
Speaker 1: make it to the end. And everybody who's being honest
Speaker 1: sees it. But there's this situation right now. Is it
Speaker 1: going to be Is it going to be Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: really be Sanders? Huh? He talked about childcare there you
Speaker 1: know who else had. And by the way, this is
Speaker 1: not an unfair comparison, because I want to I want
Speaker 1: to tell you what I think the real goal should be.
Speaker 1: The real goal of the US economy should be something
Speaker 1: that even Elizabeth Warren wrote about years and years ago,
Speaker 1: which was the two parent income trap. The two parent
Speaker 1: income trap is something that means you have two parents
Speaker 1: that feel like they have to go out of the workplace.
Speaker 1: Now it's too difficult because there has been I know
Speaker 1: there are problems. I know this is not perfect. You know,
Speaker 1: I did not get an advanced degree because it was
Speaker 1: too expensive. I got into fantastic places, gooding out. A
Speaker 1: master's degree would have been great, actually, all kinds of
Speaker 1: different master's programs. I thought about getting a Security Studies
Speaker 1: masters at one point too, and I basically have walked
Speaker 1: into from the CIA to any program I wanted. But
Speaker 1: the point is I didn't do it because it was
Speaker 1: too expensive. Healthcare, housing, housing where there are jobs, and
Speaker 1: education have become too expensive. These are also some of
Speaker 1: the most regulated, government intensive sectors of the economy. Somehow
Speaker 1: we have government backing student loans and now college that's
Speaker 1: more and more and more expensive. These universities are just
Speaker 1: just fattening themselves up. I mean, they're bloated with multi
Speaker 1: billion dollars Dowmonds. It's beyond belief what's going on. And
Speaker 1: healthcare is supposed to get better and cheaper for us,
Speaker 1: and really a lot of healthcare all you see is
Speaker 1: it's getting more expensive and less access, more expensive and
Speaker 1: less access because they keep intruding on the market. Mechanisms
Speaker 1: that would the same thing that makes your iPhone a
Speaker 1: supercomputer that would have more power to do computation than
Speaker 1: every computer put together in the NATO Alliance, you know,
Speaker 1: circa nineteen sixty your iPhone has more in it than
Speaker 1: all all of the countries of NATO combined. And then
Speaker 1: you know, fifty years ago that same mechanism of the
Speaker 1: free market, we suppressed that when it comes to healthcare.
Speaker 1: We don't want that to happen. We don't think that
Speaker 1: anybody can come up with better ways to cure people,
Speaker 1: to treat people if there was a financial incentive for them. No,
Speaker 1: we'd rather have keep pushing down. The healthcare companies are
Speaker 1: making too much money. The pharmaceutical companies are making too
Speaker 1: much money. Well, pharmaceutical companies the people that go to
Speaker 1: work for them, they could do something else too. But
Speaker 1: I want to bring you into back to this daycare
Speaker 1: that Bernie Sanders is promising for an everybody, because this
Speaker 1: is important. You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the
Speaker 1: Buck Sexton Show podcast. So I was I mentioned to
Speaker 1: you the daycare from the daycare proposal from Bernie Sanders,
Speaker 1: And what we really should want in this country is
Speaker 1: the ability for a person who is in the has
Speaker 1: a what we consider a middle class job, to be
Speaker 1: able to live in a in a metro area where
Speaker 1: there are jobs, because that's now where the greatest concentration
Speaker 1: of new jobs tends to happen not in the city necessarily,
Speaker 1: but around the city, and be able to support a
Speaker 1: family on one salary. That would be because we fight
Speaker 1: against this now. And I'm probably going to start introducing
Speaker 1: some of the Marxist attacks on the family, because the
Speaker 1: Marxists have always believed in separating the family, because the
Speaker 1: family stands in place of the ultimate goal of a
Speaker 1: true socialist, a true Marxist, which is not just radical
Speaker 1: equality when you're talking about economics, but a radical equality
Speaker 1: of all individuals without familial ties interfering with the relationship
Speaker 1: with the state. The true socialists believe in the state
Speaker 1: in place of God. This is at the heart of
Speaker 1: socialist philosophy. We want a society in this country where
Speaker 1: people are able to raise their own children, where you
Speaker 1: don't have to have two parents going to work. And
Speaker 1: then there's also this other issue of single parenthood in
Speaker 1: this country. And how I know that things happen and
Speaker 1: people make mistakes or things, you know, go against them,
Speaker 1: but single parenthood has been glorified in this country and
Speaker 1: the realities of it based on the numbers. Now, that
Speaker 1: doesn't mean any individual case is good or bad. But
Speaker 1: based on the numbers, single parenthood is very difficult for
Speaker 1: the long term prospects for children. And there's it's just
Speaker 1: it's it's irrefutable, more likely to have a substance abuse problem,
Speaker 1: the kids more likely to go to prison, less likely
Speaker 1: to finish high school. Let's lend me every metric. Let's
Speaker 1: less income, so you get into okay. Well, but also,
Speaker 1: I mean if you're at a single parent household, or rather,
Speaker 1: you know, if Bernie Sanders is advocating for this, you're
Speaker 1: going to have situations now where people are spending even
Speaker 1: less time. Now, now no parent will be spending most
Speaker 1: of the day with the child. It'll be the state.
Speaker 1: This is a story from The New York Times back
Speaker 1: in nineteen seventy four. In the Soviet Union, daycare is
Speaker 1: the norm. Zoya Edenko is the model of the young
Speaker 1: Soviet mother, liberated by a local daycare center that permits
Speaker 1: her to hold a job with her three year old
Speaker 1: son and a state nursery. She works as a guide
Speaker 1: for in tourist and sometimes also teaches English at night school.
Speaker 1: Onto the highly subsidized Soviet daycare system, missus Edenko pays
Speaker 1: a modest thirteen dollars a month, about one tenth of
Speaker 1: her pay for six days a week of childcare. She
Speaker 1: drops her boy off at eight am and picks him
Speaker 1: up at seven pm. He gets three meals and a
Speaker 1: snack daily. Child rearing never had much attraction for missus Edenko.
Speaker 1: I mean it goes on even more here. She actually
Speaker 1: throws some shade at America. Quote. Don't American women want
Speaker 1: to get out of the house, she asked, Don't you
Speaker 1: want to work? Don't you want to earn money and
Speaker 1: get some independence. But privately, many educated Soviet mothers take
Speaker 1: a much more skeptical view of the Soviet daycare system
Speaker 1: and regard the competence of most daycare workers as below
Speaker 1: desirable standards. You don't say the Soviets, who you know,
Speaker 1: had glass factories that only made broken glass. I'm sure
Speaker 1: they did a great job educating your kid and taking
Speaker 1: care of them or her, and making sure that that
Speaker 1: child felt loved and supported and was getting all the
Speaker 1: developmental needs they had met. I'm sure, I'm sure they
Speaker 1: weren't dropped off in austere, cinder block Soviet style buildings
Speaker 1: with a bunch of bureaucrats who could care less about
Speaker 1: anything going on with these kids, and felt like as
Speaker 1: long as they made their way, you know, as long
Speaker 1: as at the end of the day no kids left
Speaker 1: the classroom, you know, in a tiny body bag, they'd
Speaker 1: pretty much done their deal for the day. Good job,
Speaker 1: good job Soviet Union. But notice the trend people have
Speaker 1: been let you know, we see this deterioration, deterioration in
Speaker 1: the family, in intact family units. It is. You can
Speaker 1: read about this all the honor. Social scientists will tell you.
Speaker 1: Intact families are critical for the development of a child.
Speaker 1: You want to spend time with your children. And I'm
Speaker 1: not even getting into the paying for this. I'm getting
Speaker 1: into we really think that everyone should drop off their
Speaker 1: their one year old. That's state daycare. That's now going
Speaker 1: to be What about fami? What about family members? You know, grandparents, uncles, cousins,
Speaker 1: whatever it is, people that are invested in the child.
Speaker 1: This state is not invested in anything other than taking
Speaker 1: your money and indoctrinating your children. The same way that
Speaker 1: adults make a huge error when they think that the
Speaker 1: state wants to hold them close and keep them safe
Speaker 1: and warm at night, the same wrong thinking applies when
Speaker 1: you're talking about dropping off your children in this state
Speaker 1: daycare program where by the way, if you don't like
Speaker 1: the state daycare program near you, what do you think happens? Then, Oh,
Speaker 1: you're gonna go complain to somebody. Yeah, good luck with that.
Speaker 1: I'm sure the local daycare commissar under the Sanders administration
Speaker 1: is really going to care what you think about the
Speaker 1: fact that the people in charge could give a crap
Speaker 1: about your children. They just want to get paid with
Speaker 1: your tax dollars. Thanks for listening to The Bus Sesson
Speaker 1: Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcast, the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: or wherever you get your podcasts. And I don't want
Speaker 1: to live in a democracy where it's outside you're born
Speaker 1: power and attorneys who my leaders are. And that's going
Speaker 1: to happen more and more, not just in the United States,
Speaker 1: but you've had experiences here in Germany, experiences across Europe. Come,
Speaker 1: let's let's face up to the reality that if we
Speaker 1: don't protect our democracy, we're slowly but steadily surrendering it
Speaker 1: and the losing control of it. You know what politics
Speaker 1: is a context for it. I mean people say all
Speaker 1: sorts of things, because they certainly said all sorts of
Speaker 1: things about me. Also, we're than many of our party
Speaker 1: because blather from Hillary Clinton. She is shameless, utterly shameless.
Speaker 1: She'll say anything. The fact that Democrats think that she
Speaker 1: would have been some great choice for the presidency, that
Speaker 1: she would have been this this ethical paragon, this virtuous leader,
Speaker 1: is laughable. She could not be more corrupt. You know,
Speaker 1: it couldn't be more obvious that there was an effort
Speaker 1: to suppress what we could all see, which was at
Speaker 1: the Clinton Foundation was a massive slush fund created for
Speaker 1: the sole purpose of enriching and empowering the Clintons while
Speaker 1: pretending to do charitable work. You haven't heard a lot
Speaker 1: about the Clinton Foundation lately, have you. Those donations all
Speaker 1: dried up real fast, and Hillary wasn't gonna be presdent anymore.
Speaker 1: That's so weird, isn't it. Hm. And it's not like,
Speaker 1: oh no, it is true that I was at I
Speaker 1: was at CNN, and I was saying to people on air,
Speaker 1: we all know the Clinton Foundation is like a fake charity, right,
Speaker 1: and that the donations will see where they are after
Speaker 1: the election. And of course I was right. But I
Speaker 1: don't know, I don't know what's going on. But she
Speaker 1: calls the president a First, she repeats the talking points
Speaker 1: about Russia, which is just now, that is the hallmark
Speaker 1: of a reckless, stupid, or dishonest person or all of
Speaker 1: the above. Russia is not picking our leaders. No one
Speaker 1: really thinks Russia's picking our leaders. This is this is ridiculous.
Speaker 1: And if you look back in history, the KGB was
Speaker 1: involved in paying for our newspapers, involved in information operations
Speaker 1: against the United States, had high level did have high
Speaker 1: level penetrations of the United States government, including Alger Hiss,
Speaker 1: who was a Harvard trained lawyer, that the establishment in
Speaker 1: this country flocked around. I mean they circled the wagons
Speaker 1: to defend Alger Hiss and Whittaker Chambers, as he writes
Speaker 1: about beautifully in the book Witness, which I recommend to
Speaker 1: all of you, Whittaker Chambers is like, this guy is
Speaker 1: a Soviet spy and he works at a senior level
Speaker 1: of United States Government's a Soviet spy because the left
Speaker 1: has always had a little bit of They've always had
Speaker 1: this special fondness and familiarity with totalitarians and communists. They
Speaker 1: always have had this because their mentality, their mindset is
Speaker 1: that if the government only had more power, it would
Speaker 1: make the problems go away. And they're the smart good people.
Speaker 1: So if you take the smart good people and you
Speaker 1: put them in power, then all of a sudden everything
Speaker 1: gets better. Whereas conservatives, people like me and those of
Speaker 1: your listening who are conservative, which is pretty much all
Speaker 1: of you, we think, no, no, no, we want individual rights,
Speaker 1: individual liberty to be protected under law, and we want
Speaker 1: there to be clear restraints on what the government can
Speaker 1: do because they're also our areas. The government should not
Speaker 1: do things. It's not even just that we we don't
Speaker 1: like the idea. There would be negative consequences from government action.
Speaker 1: And this is the constant struggle that we have, Dani
Speaker 1: and in our politics. But for Hillary Clinton to say
Speaker 1: the Russia stuff, oh, she's she's just atrocious. She's atrocious
Speaker 1: and we all know it, and they pretend that she well,
Speaker 1: now they don't really care anymore, but they for years
Speaker 1: we are told how smart and how capable and how
Speaker 1: great she is the worst, she is the worst. Okay, no,
Speaker 1: I gotta retract that Sanders is probably even worse. So
Speaker 1: we've we've gone from bad to worse or the worst
Speaker 1: with Hillary Clinton saying that Trump is a clear and
Speaker 1: present danger to our demoxy in our future. You know
Speaker 1: I'm focusing in so much todayn Senators, I want to
Speaker 1: talk about some of the other Democrat candidates. We have
Speaker 1: this debate tonight in South Carolina, but the crazy has
Speaker 1: spread far and wide the Democratic Party. This is not
Speaker 1: limited to one candidate or one candidate. Supporters Tom Steyer,
Speaker 1: he is a billionaire, Which just goes to show you
Speaker 1: that if you're really lucky in the right place at
Speaker 1: the right time, you two, even if you have no judgment,
Speaker 1: no wisdom whatsoever, and really no self awareness, you two
Speaker 1: can be a billionaire. I suppose this is what a
Speaker 1: voter or a Democrat obviously in South Carolina said to
Speaker 1: Tom Steyer and his response, I just I want to
Speaker 1: give you more evidence that the Democratic Party has spun
Speaker 1: off of the planet and they're living in crazytown. Now
Speaker 1: play a seven. I'm twenty seven years old and I
Speaker 1: staw buying a house, getting married, and having kids ahead
Speaker 1: of me. What do you say to people my age
Speaker 1: and those who are younger, who are frankly terrified of
Speaker 1: what climbing climate change will due to this planet and
Speaker 1: our features. So in God on, thank you for asking
Speaker 1: that question. Look, I am the only person running for
Speaker 1: president who will say that climate is his or hurt
Speaker 1: number one priority, the only one. Go ask him, the
Speaker 1: only one. And I've said that. I will declare just
Speaker 1: you know now, a state of emergency on climate on
Speaker 1: the first day of my presidency, and I will use
Speaker 1: the executive emergency powers of the presidency to tell companies
Speaker 1: how they can generate electricity, what kind of cars they
Speaker 1: can build on what schedule, what kind of buildings we're
Speaker 1: going to have, how we're going to use our public lands,
Speaker 1: how the government, which is the biggest buyer fossil fields
Speaker 1: in the world, is going to move to clean energy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's a lot, a lot to unpack there. Let's start
Speaker 1: with a voter, a twenty seven year old woman saying
Speaker 1: she is terrified of climate change. Be terrified of, you know,
Speaker 1: making the wrong life choices, Be terrified of pandemic disease,
Speaker 1: be terrified of the possibility of a major war with China.
Speaker 1: I mean, there are things to really be concerned about.
Speaker 1: To be terrified of climate change is to surrender to
Speaker 1: a mental illness. Climate change is not coming for us.
Speaker 1: It's not going to destroy us. It's not going to
Speaker 1: kill us. This is insane. This really is not reasonable.
Speaker 1: It's not rational at all. And I think that, you know,
Speaker 1: they have to assume that I'm I'm somehow the crazy
Speaker 1: one because I don't think the world is going down.
Speaker 1: This is what American politics has done to people. The
Speaker 1: guy who sits around saying no, no, the human race
Speaker 1: will not go extinct unless we destroy essentially all the
Speaker 1: major economic progress we've made in the last hundred years
Speaker 1: or so. The human race will not go extinct if
Speaker 1: we don't just give back all of those gains at
Speaker 1: productivity and life, life expectancy and health and everything. I'm
Speaker 1: the crazy one because I say that that's not going
Speaker 1: to happen. So I feel almost I feel badly, but
Speaker 1: I also feel very concerned when I hear things like this,
Speaker 1: because there are things to worry about, and climate change
Speaker 1: is not one of them. For a young woman to
Speaker 1: say she's terrified of climate change, what exactly is she terrified?
Speaker 1: Somebody should ask. I mean, I feel like I should
Speaker 1: sit down and we could do a like a Sigmund
Speaker 1: Freud like, So tell me all of your secrets and
Speaker 1: your thoughts. What are you terrified of? Telling me about
Speaker 1: your parents. You know, like this is this is where
Speaker 1: you'd have to get into some buck pretending to be
Speaker 1: a shrink, some psychotherapy. You're terrified of a thing that's
Speaker 1: not going to hurt you in any way, shape or form,
Speaker 1: of the global temperature changing. That's what worries you so much.
Speaker 1: But this is like people that used to worry that
Speaker 1: there was going to be you know, we're gonna run
Speaker 1: out of food. We're gonna run out of food. That
Speaker 1: was a belief. You know, you read airlics, the population bomb.
Speaker 1: You know, we're going to reach a certain population growth
Speaker 1: and then we're gonna have huge contraction. Not everyone's going
Speaker 1: to die, but a huge contractions because we won't be
Speaker 1: able to sustain it. And now the biggest problem we
Speaker 1: have globally is people eat too many calories. That's a
Speaker 1: much bigger concern than people not getting enough calories globally. So, okay,
Speaker 1: she's terrified of climate changers, the bizarre. But then the
Speaker 1: even more concerning part of this, other than that that
Speaker 1: poor woman's emotional instability, is that Tom Steyer is just
Speaker 1: saying that he's going to if he becomes president, which
Speaker 1: I know is never going to happen. But I'm just
Speaker 1: we're exploring a mentality here that's not just Biden. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: not just Bernie, although Biden's got his own problems. The
Speaker 1: mentality is that once you become president, you just start
Speaker 1: doing things. Obama did this, and the media was largely
Speaker 1: silent about it or encouraged it. You know, Obama's mantra became,
Speaker 1: Congress won't do what I want, So I'm just going
Speaker 1: to do with myself as president with an executive order
Speaker 1: and see if the courts will will stop you. And
Speaker 1: the courts did a number of times and overturned him
Speaker 1: for doing unconstitutional things. That was the reality of obama aministration.
Speaker 1: But you never heard the same thing though, with Trump
Speaker 1: is waging war on journalists. Meanwhile, Obama took real action
Speaker 1: against journalists and use the Espionage Act more than every
Speaker 1: other president before him combined. But you know, the journalists
Speaker 1: rowed like one or two editorials they're like, this is
Speaker 1: a concerning situation. They say that Trump is endangering journalists lives.
Speaker 1: But oh, this is a concerning situation with Obama with
Speaker 1: actual trying to prosecute people as co conspirators under the
Speaker 1: Espionage actuard journalists. Journalists are frauds. I mean, really, it's funny.
Speaker 1: I'm in this media profession and I'm not a journalist,
Speaker 1: and I my contempt for mainstream journalists grows every day.
Speaker 1: Every day. I feel like I'm more fed up with
Speaker 1: what a bunch of just total jokes and jerks. They are.
Speaker 1: Very few of them provide any real value. They all
Speaker 1: they all just parrot each other, and they're all just
Speaker 1: struggling to get more attention for their boring repetition of
Speaker 1: the talking points of the Democrat Party in the American left.
Speaker 1: That that's what they're doing all the time. I mean,
Speaker 1: the ones who are valuable, the ones who are like
Speaker 1: here's the traffic, here's the weather. Hey, here's a video
Speaker 1: of some ducks that were saved at the pond by
Speaker 1: the fire department. Yeah, like that's you know, okay, that's
Speaker 1: provide people with something. The ones that just carry the
Speaker 1: water for the Democratic Party all the time, we don't
Speaker 1: need that. Just go just go go to the DNC website.
Speaker 1: But Bernie, but does Styre here saying that he wants
Speaker 1: to use executive power to con I mean basically to
Speaker 1: control everything. What kind of cars they can build, what
Speaker 1: kind of buildings we're gonna have, how we generate electricity.
Speaker 1: So when I say things to you like climate change
Speaker 1: is an excuse for socialist authoritarians to enact policies to
Speaker 1: control every aspect of your life. That's not you. I'm
Speaker 1: not coming up without out of thin air. That is
Speaker 1: what they're doing. That is the idea, that is the approach.
Speaker 1: So you end up asking yourself, Okay, these people are nuts,
Speaker 1: and if they're in charge, they're going to just do
Speaker 1: things forget about the Congress. They're just gonna do things
Speaker 1: based on their crazy ideas. This is broader in the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party. This is not just a problem of Bernie Sanders.
Speaker 1: That's what I want to do, make sure that we
Speaker 1: are all on the same page about. And then there's Biden. Oh,
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. He's probably gonna win in South Carolina. And
Speaker 1: then the Biden the Bidenistas out there in the media
Speaker 1: will says, see here's the front runner. No, and we
Speaker 1: start to get it into this place where I don't
Speaker 1: want to be mean about Joe Biden's condition, but health
Speaker 1: and mental faculties are a legitimate area of discussion for
Speaker 1: the person who wants to be the president of the
Speaker 1: United States. And this is not a one off. I mean,
Speaker 1: this is becoming increasingly. The expectation around Joe Biden is
Speaker 1: that he's going to have these what you would I
Speaker 1: think call senior momentum, and this is an example of that.
Speaker 1: Here's Joe Biden on the stump doing what he does.
Speaker 1: Play clip five. You're the one's the same Barack Obama
Speaker 1: in the presidency and I have a simple opposition here.
Speaker 1: I'm here to ask you for your help. Where I
Speaker 1: come from, you don't get far unless you ask. My
Speaker 1: name's Joe Biden. I'm a Democratic candidate for the United
Speaker 1: States Senate. Look me over, you're like, we see, help out,
Speaker 1: and now vote for the other Biden. Give me a
Speaker 1: look though. Okay, that's all I really got to say
Speaker 1: to you, running for Senate, and if you don't like me,
Speaker 1: vote for the other Biden. That was in one sentence.
Speaker 1: I mean, if it were one of those things, and
Speaker 1: he corrected it right away, I mean I misspeak. I
Speaker 1: do extemper in his radio for four hours a day. Now,
Speaker 1: I'm going to stumble, I'm going to say things incorrectly.
Speaker 1: But if I ever said you know my name is
Speaker 1: Bob Sexton. I promise you I would change that, I
Speaker 1: would edit that, I wouldn't say it and then go, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's good to be Bob. You know, Bob's hanging out. No,
Speaker 1: you would catch that unless something else is going on.
Speaker 1: And it wasn't one little slip. It was he's running
Speaker 1: for president, he's not running for Senate, and there's no
Speaker 1: other Biden in the race. Yeah, and he just kind
Speaker 1: of went on with it. But then again, there's a
Speaker 1: part of me that feels like maybe the greatest service
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party the Democrat media can do right now,
Speaker 1: he used to say, the Democratic Party from a Bernie
Speaker 1: Sanders nomination. I mean, maybe they're much more cynical about
Speaker 1: this than I had I had really given them credit
Speaker 1: for or anticipated. I think that's also possible that they
Speaker 1: recognize what a disaster Bernie Sanders would be for the party,
Speaker 1: and so perhaps some of them, somewhere in their minds
Speaker 1: feel like if they have to prop Biden up some more,
Speaker 1: then that's what they're gonna do. That's the best thing
Speaker 1: they can do for the party. We'll see about Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: There was a funny me making the rounds today well,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry. It wasn't a meme. Wasn't a meme? Pardon me,
Speaker 1: it was a I'm Joe Biden, I'm running for president.
Speaker 1: It was a screenshots of the Los Angeles Times, one
Speaker 1: of the homepages in Los Angeles Times for one of
Speaker 1: their sections, and the thing that it looked like the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg twenty website. I mean, just Bloomberg ads all over it.
Speaker 1: I don't think it was photoshop. That can't I can't
Speaker 1: tell you right off the bat, but it certainly seemed
Speaker 1: like it would be real. I mean, Bloomberg is just
Speaker 1: blanketing coverage everywhere. I think that one of the one
Speaker 1: of the nice side effects of a Bloomberg the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: run for president, is that he is really trying to play.
Speaker 1: It's almost like he's setting this up as an experiment,
Speaker 1: can you buy the presidency? And when he is not
Speaker 1: successful in doing so, when people on the left, because
Speaker 1: they always democrats, always pretend like big money is just
Speaker 1: a Republican thing, when they say we're run money out
Speaker 1: of politics and you can't buy you know, he's trying
Speaker 1: to buy this office without office, we can say no, no,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg tried to buy it. And you can't just do that.
Speaker 1: The candidate still matters. If you have effectively unlimited funds,
Speaker 1: you still can't buy the presidency. But the thing about this,
Speaker 1: we're in a situation where somebody who is worth fifty
Speaker 1: billion dollars is spending billions of dollars on a presidential candidacy,
Speaker 1: and there are still journalists out there, Hillary Clinton, we'll
Speaker 1: say it too, many of many of the Democrats, that
Speaker 1: Russia is interfering in the election, and maybe Russia is
Speaker 1: going to cost one side or the other. We'll make
Speaker 1: Trump win. If that's what they're really saying. Even with
Speaker 1: the billions of dollars being spent by Americans on an
Speaker 1: American presidential election, if the Russians were able to sway
Speaker 1: this election outcome, we should just quit tomorrow. We should
Speaker 1: stop having elections because we'll never be able to have
Speaker 1: a free and fair election. Again. This is lunacy. This
Speaker 1: is utter lunacy. You're in the freedom hunt. This is
Speaker 1: the Buck Sexton Show podcast. David. One of the things
Speaker 1: that's so we're interesting and I think sinister about this
Speaker 1: stuff is that it really does have the impact of
Speaker 1: trying to increase cynicism and apathy that that's part of
Speaker 1: its goal to sort of muddy the waters, tell us
Speaker 1: a little bit about about your insights into that. Well
Speaker 1: it has it has an effect also on people's affirmative ideas.
Speaker 1: One of the things that Donald Trump tried to spend
Speaker 1: spread in twenty sixteen was the idea that Hillary Clinton
Speaker 1: was sho physically incapable of managing the presidency. Audacious. Donald
Speaker 1: Trump was the oldest president ever, one of the fattest
Speaker 1: presidents ever, the least physically capable of president since Franklin
Speaker 1: Delano Roosevelt was in a wheelchair. I mean that he
Speaker 1: can't pick up a ball, never mind throw it. But
Speaker 1: he was able to put into the minds of tens
Speaker 1: of millions of people the idea that Hillary Clinton, who's
Speaker 1: a very vigorous woman in good health, was somehow too
Speaker 1: sick to be president. Thanks never Trump for more stupidity.
Speaker 1: David frum over there who runs away from it. He
Speaker 1: actually does have some correct positions on things like immigration,
Speaker 1: immigration where he's thought about a little bit. But Trump
Speaker 1: is one of the fattest presidents ever. I think it's interesting.
Speaker 1: I mean, we're going to start talking about that now, Huh.
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton flopped into the back of a van on
Speaker 1: video right before the election, I think, and they pretended
Speaker 1: initially like there was nothing going on. She just stumbled, no,
Speaker 1: she flopped into the back of a van. All Right,
Speaker 1: you're allowed to wonder what's going on there? That wasn't
Speaker 1: you know that it wasn't some huge conspiracy from Trump.
Speaker 1: But as you see here, never Trump. They're so dug
Speaker 1: in in their hatred for this guy because they feel
Speaker 1: like they've bet their careers, they've bet their paychecks or
Speaker 1: you know, their their fame and their importance. Their ego
Speaker 1: is so tied into anti Trump is m that they
Speaker 1: can't even c straight anymore. Thanks for listening to The
Speaker 1: Bus Sesson Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe on Apple podcasts,
Speaker 1: the iHeart Radio app before wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: I was wondering do you think justice was served in
Speaker 1: the Harvey Weinstein case? So I was never a fan
Speaker 1: of Harvey Weinstein, as you know. In fact, he said
Speaker 1: he was going to work hard to defeat me in
Speaker 1: the election. How did that work out? By the way,
Speaker 1: I'm trying to figure that he was a person I
Speaker 1: didn't like, I like. I don't know too much about
Speaker 1: the case. Between traveling and ken being at meetings almost
Speaker 1: every hour of the day, every minute of the day,
Speaker 1: I haven't been able to really see too much of it,
Speaker 1: but I was just not a fan of his. I
Speaker 1: knew him a little bit, not very well. I knew
Speaker 1: him because he was in New York. Not a person
Speaker 1: that I like. I will say the people that liked
Speaker 1: him with the Democrats, Michelle Obama loved him, loved him,
Speaker 1: Hillary Clinton loved him, and he gave tremendous money to
Speaker 1: the Democrats. And I guess my question is will the
Speaker 1: Democrats be asking for that money back? Not going to
Speaker 1: hear that from a lot of the main three mallets
Speaker 1: right now that are celebrating the Weinstein verdict as a
Speaker 1: huge win for women, which I think there's there's some
Speaker 1: there's some truth to that, but there's also some concerning
Speaker 1: follow on legal implications, I believe, and I don't know.
Speaker 1: No one really seems to want to talk about this
Speaker 1: right now, and I'll get into that part of it
Speaker 1: in the second. But journalists running arond patting themselves in
Speaker 1: the back for the Weinstein verdict saying see journalism still
Speaker 1: is important. No journalists covered up for this guy and
Speaker 1: did his bidding for decades, and then when he got
Speaker 1: a little old and a little less powerful, a little
Speaker 1: less useful, then all of a sudden it was time
Speaker 1: to write the big expose, the Ronan Pharaoh piece. But
Speaker 1: I can't help but remember that Ronan Faroh, who I
Speaker 1: think won a Pulitzer for this and became the celebrated guy.
Speaker 1: I still remember. He had the worst. I mean, it
Speaker 1: really was all time the worst cable news commentary show
Speaker 1: ever put on the air in my lifetime, the worst.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think Alec Baldwin's show was better. Ronn
Speaker 1: Faro would sort of sit there and yes, I'm going
Speaker 1: to do an interviewed out. Yeah, did I tell you
Speaker 1: I've worked at the State Department for like three months
Speaker 1: and was really important at wrote Scaler and you know,
Speaker 1: it was just horrible. And then he came out and
Speaker 1: he wrote this piece, and he took some heat, and
Speaker 1: he was willing to take the risk here. But he
Speaker 1: had the goods on wins and he knew he did.
Speaker 1: I mean, the fact that NBC didn't want to run
Speaker 1: with it initially is an interesting part of the story.
Speaker 1: But he knew he had him. There was no there
Speaker 1: was no like wiggling out when you got all these
Speaker 1: people on the record everything else. I give him credit,
Speaker 1: you know he did, he did publish a story at first.
Speaker 1: But I also can't forget that that credibility in the
Speaker 1: Meto movement that Ronan Faraoh built by going after Harvey
Speaker 1: Weinstein was then weaponized for political purposes during the Kavanaugh
Speaker 1: hearing with that just appallingly flimsy and obviously false story
Speaker 1: about Deborah Ramirez at Yale that he went with. Where
Speaker 1: he you know, the people that did know about it
Speaker 1: or didn't did you know, know about her, didn't believe
Speaker 1: that it had happened, And I mean it just you
Speaker 1: go back into it and they just were They were like, Ronan,
Speaker 1: we need you here. It's about Rove Wade. You gotta
Speaker 1: do what you gotta do, step in there and take
Speaker 1: down Kavanaugh. So I remember that. I'm not going to
Speaker 1: forget that. So as far as I'm concerned, he's just
Speaker 1: another hack. He threw away his credibility with that. He
Speaker 1: didn't have to do that. I think it was with
Speaker 1: Jane Jane Mayer too. I mean, they just they thought
Speaker 1: they had an opportunity to take down Kavanaugh and it
Speaker 1: was a hit. It was a dirty political hit. It
Speaker 1: was a lie. I'm sorry. You don't take a week
Speaker 1: to get counseling on your memories to remember if some
Speaker 1: guy in college hit you in the face with his genitalia,
Speaker 1: you know, you don't it doesn't take it. And if
Speaker 1: you're so traumatized by it, it wouldn't take you a
Speaker 1: week to remember this, which is what happened with Debora Ramira.
Speaker 1: I mean, the whole thing was but you know, it's
Speaker 1: like all these other stories that came out, Julie Sweatnick,
Speaker 1: you know, the gang rape, cruise, everything, this was. It
Speaker 1: was all just everything you can It was really the
Speaker 1: weaponization of gender against Kavanaugh. That was what was going on,
Speaker 1: and thank god, and it was close, but thank god
Speaker 1: Kavanaugh was able to withstand it. And the United States
Speaker 1: Senate did do the right thing. I mean, you got
Speaker 1: to remember, at least the Republicans did so. Okay, now
Speaker 1: we look at what Trump is saying here about Weinstein.
Speaker 1: Weinstein wasn't just a guy who was friends with Democrats.
Speaker 1: Weinstein was close to the most powerful Democrats in the country,
Speaker 1: which he used and leveraged in order to frighten women
Speaker 1: and anyone who would speak about what he was doing
Speaker 1: to women into silence. So that's something that should get
Speaker 1: more attention, should get looked at more. I mean, here
Speaker 1: is for example. Remember there were stories. Everybody knew the
Speaker 1: stories about Harvey Weinstein being a guy who was very
Speaker 1: aggressive with women, very difficult to do. I actually just
Speaker 1: spoke to somebody recently who had done business with him
Speaker 1: back when he was a concert promoter. That's how we got.
Speaker 1: Started out as a concert promoter and then he moved
Speaker 1: into doing the Hollywood studio stuff, and just said he
Speaker 1: was impossible to deal with, a nasty, dishonest guy. So
Speaker 1: Democrats love him, powerful, rich, influential in the culture. But
Speaker 1: a nasty, a moral, predatory, left wing lib. Hey, that
Speaker 1: fits right into the Democrat you know. The Democrats think
Speaker 1: that's all great. And I mean, here's for example, and
Speaker 1: Trump said, Trump said that Harvey Weinstein was liked by
Speaker 1: these different very powerful figures. Here's Michelle Obama talking about
Speaker 1: Harvey Weinstein. Play clip three. I want to start by
Speaker 1: thanking Harvey Weinstein for organizing this amazing day. This is
Speaker 1: possible because of Harvey. He is a wonderful human being,
Speaker 1: a good friend, and just a powerhouse and the fact
Speaker 1: that he and his team so that the time to
Speaker 1: make this happen for all of you should say something
Speaker 1: not about me or about this place, but about you.
Speaker 1: All right, everybody here here because of you a wonderful
Speaker 1: human being. And this was just I don't know, probably
Speaker 1: this was during the Obama presidency, just a few years
Speaker 1: ago that that SoundBite was we pulled that sound bite.
Speaker 1: And if you believe all of the women who testified
Speaker 1: against Harvey Weinstein, he's been raping women since the nineties.
Speaker 1: But here you have probably the single most popular Democrat
Speaker 1: figure in the United States. It's always kind of it's
Speaker 1: Oprah or Michelle Obama. You know, there's only a few
Speaker 1: people that are as universally beloved and all the polling
Speaker 1: and everything else saying that he's a wonderful human being.
Speaker 1: Do you think anyone in that power structure will be
Speaker 1: held to account for this. Journalists didn't want to cover
Speaker 1: this story, and now they pat themselves in the back.
Speaker 1: Journalists didn't want to cover Epstein, who was also connected
Speaker 1: to all of these very powerful Democrats. Democrats are the
Speaker 1: ones that Epstein was. They focused so much on Prince
Speaker 1: Andrew because he's at least external to American politics. The
Speaker 1: media is all look at the Prince Andrew situation. Epstein
Speaker 1: spent a lot of time with Bill Clinton, spent a
Speaker 1: lot of time with some other prominent Democrats. They didn't
Speaker 1: want to touch that. Look, I understand that the pressures
Speaker 1: that come up in the media business, it's very uncertain,
Speaker 1: it's very unfair. I just have a problem with people
Speaker 1: pretending to be brave when they're actually just sniveling cowards.
Speaker 1: And most journalists on these issues have been sniveling cowards.
Speaker 1: There's there's no question about that. Now I go to
Speaker 1: the why, Okay, yeah, Harvey Weinstein. Do I think that
Speaker 1: he has forced himself on women? Based on the testimony
Speaker 1: of yeah, I do. I think he has. I think
Speaker 1: he's I think he has actually assaulted women. I do
Speaker 1: believe that. But here's what I do have a problem with,
Speaker 1: and I think the jury had a bit of a
Speaker 1: problem with this too, because they did not go for
Speaker 1: the highest counts of predatory sexual assault. Now we don't
Speaker 1: know exactly why that is, but it now there's now
Speaker 1: been at a very high pro and the highest profile
Speaker 1: case you could really think of for this kind of issue.
Speaker 1: There has been a standard set whereby a woman can
Speaker 1: have an interest in having a sexual relationship with a
Speaker 1: man and can claim that there was an attack, a
Speaker 1: felonious rape occurred, and then after that felony, after that
Speaker 1: criminal act that could send that man to prison for
Speaker 1: twenty five years, as we see now, at least that's
Speaker 1: what it is in New York. After committing a crime
Speaker 1: that could send you a prison for twenty five years,
Speaker 1: that woman could, of her own volition, not married to him,
Speaker 1: doesn't live with him, not you know, in fear of
Speaker 1: her life or physical abuse constantly. That woman can then
Speaker 1: continue a long term, ongoing not just relationship, sexual relationship
Speaker 1: with that man by her own choice, and then at
Speaker 1: a later date say, but but that one time he
Speaker 1: raped me, so he should go to prison for the
Speaker 1: rest of his life. I'm just telling him, maybe you
Speaker 1: believe in this case that is exactly what happened. And okay,
Speaker 1: maybe maybe that is exactly what happened in this case.
Speaker 1: This is a precedent now though, the same way that
Speaker 1: I knew that ronand Farrow, after all the accolades about
Speaker 1: breaking the meat too story, just give it time. He's
Speaker 1: going to go after a big Republican It was very
Speaker 1: obvious they were going to use this to go after
Speaker 1: and they use it in the biggest, the biggest form
Speaker 1: they could. They took the biggest shot they had against Kavanaugh,
Speaker 1: and he was a part of that. You will now
Speaker 1: see this story of a case will return where a
Speaker 1: woman will claim that a very powerful man that she
Speaker 1: had a long term sexual relationship with, at some point
Speaker 1: during that relationship, forced himself upon her or you know,
Speaker 1: she felt physically violated, and even though after that she's all,
Speaker 1: you know, I love you, which is what they were
Speaker 1: saying to Harvey. Were two of the women were saying,
Speaker 1: I love you, Harvey Weinstein. They would say, please spend
Speaker 1: more time with me, Please have sex with me again.
Speaker 1: There will be a cases now where, going forward, a
Speaker 1: woman will have that same kind of ongoing emotional and
Speaker 1: sexual relationship with a man, but all of a sudden
Speaker 1: she will decide that no, there was I was actually raped,
Speaker 1: and I wanted to press charges and I want that
Speaker 1: this person should be destroyed by the criminal justice system
Speaker 1: for what they did to me. Now, if they did
Speaker 1: actually force themselves on her, and you know, rape is
Speaker 1: a serious crime and it's a felony, and that should
Speaker 1: be the case. As we know, there are false race
Speaker 1: out there are false rape accusations that occur. This does happen,
Speaker 1: And now this makes it much more probable in my
Speaker 1: mind that you'll have an even more sort of gray
Speaker 1: area accusation download. I'm not talking about Harvey Weinstey. I'm
Speaker 1: talking with the precedent of the sets now where I
Speaker 1: don't know, what if what if a woman feels like
Speaker 1: she is scorned by an individual, what if a woman
Speaker 1: feels like, you know, oh, he went out and had
Speaker 1: an affair with the maid. You know, I'm going to
Speaker 1: say that ten years ago, that one time when we
Speaker 1: were both a little drunk and he thought it was
Speaker 1: all fun, that he actually raped me. You no longer
Speaker 1: would be able to say, but I mean, we've been
Speaker 1: in a relationship for ten years and you didn't seem
Speaker 1: to think that I was a rapist for any of
Speaker 1: those years. Right, that doesn't matter anymore. That's this is
Speaker 1: a new thing. And in an era where we're being
Speaker 1: told you have to get videotape consent. Oh no, even
Speaker 1: that's not enough, or you have to get you consent
Speaker 1: on an app. Oh that's not enough and where we're
Speaker 1: always told that you women must be believed, even though
Speaker 1: we know that there are some women who lie. In fact,
Speaker 1: lying about rape is much more common than lying about
Speaker 1: other felony crimes. Just a fact. And the statistics about
Speaker 1: ten percent, that means ninety percent of women who are
Speaker 1: sexually assaulted are telling the truth. So nine out of
Speaker 1: ten women, based on the numbers, aren't telling the truth.
Speaker 1: And those scummy guys should be thrown in prison for
Speaker 1: a very very long time. But there are going to
Speaker 1: be these other cases. There are going to be Kavanaughs,
Speaker 1: my friends. And you will see now that this has
Speaker 1: changed the standard by which a man's actions can be
Speaker 1: judged by a jury such that he will have to
Speaker 1: he will have to be able to do to prove
Speaker 1: that every act, every time over a long period with
Speaker 1: a woman when there was a lot of if there
Speaker 1: was one time where consent was in doubt, maybe he
Speaker 1: has to go to prison for a long time. That's
Speaker 1: a standard that we're going to go back and look
Speaker 1: at and say, how is this really workable in a
Speaker 1: criminal justice system in a way that's going to be fair.
Speaker 1: You're enough freedom, hud. This is the buck Sexton show podcast.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to follow up on my colleagues question
Speaker 1: about Russian interference. Can you pledge to the American people
Speaker 1: that you will not accept any foreign assistance in the
Speaker 1: upcoming election? And on this idea of a purge in
Speaker 1: your administration, there was recently the departure of your Acting
Speaker 1: d and I, Joseph McGuire. You replaced him with your
Speaker 1: Ambassador to Germany, Rick Ronell. Some of your critics have
Speaker 1: pointed out that Ambassador Barnell has no intelligence experience. How
Speaker 1: can you justify to the American people having an acting
Speaker 1: DNI with no intelligence Okay, prisoner, I want no help
Speaker 1: from any kind and I have been given help from
Speaker 1: any country. And if you see what you see, an
Speaker 1: endor wonderful network said. I guess they apologized in a
Speaker 1: way for didn't they apologize for the fact that they
Speaker 1: said different things that weren't chair. Tell me what was
Speaker 1: their apology yesterday? What did they say this President? I
Speaker 1: think our record on delivering the truth is a lot
Speaker 1: better than your Sometimes, let me tell you about your record.
Speaker 1: Your record is so bad you ought to be ashamed
Speaker 1: of yourself. Yeah. Probably, I'm not ashamed of anything. You
Speaker 1: probably the history of broadcasting. Love it. I'm gonna I'm
Speaker 1: gonna miss this man, I mean whatever. I think we
Speaker 1: got four more years of it, hopefully, but thank god,
Speaker 1: I mean Jimmy cause is a joke and a a
Speaker 1: complete and utter mockery of what journalism is allegedly supposed
Speaker 1: to be. Um, but here you have the usual you know,
Speaker 1: when did you stop eating your wife? Question from the media,
Speaker 1: Will you pledge now that you will not take foreign interference? Yeah,
Speaker 1: of course he's not gonna take foreign interference. It's it's
Speaker 1: such a dirty maneuver to even ask a president about
Speaker 1: this foreign interference wouldn't even help him. It's stupid. It's
Speaker 1: a dumb idea. Remember the president told me this himself.
Speaker 1: He's like, it doesn't even make any when I was
Speaker 1: sitting in the ople off as a president. Doesn't even
Speaker 1: make any sense. Well, what we we're gonna do? What
Speaker 1: we spread some memes on Facebook about Hillary and then
Speaker 1: possibly have all this you know, to think about all
Speaker 1: that's come from a special counsel and all this election
Speaker 1: stuff that's led nowhere because it was all based on lies.
Speaker 1: But imagine if it was based in the truth. So
Speaker 1: it's it's not even a good plan, But the people
Speaker 1: that have pushed this are still fixated on it because
Speaker 1: otherwise they have to look in the mirror and realize
Speaker 1: they are a bunch of dopes, a bunch of idiots,
Speaker 1: and they've done a lot of damage to the country
Speaker 1: as a result of this. The truth is that the
Speaker 1: likeliest place that you will see foreign interference, I'm sorry, interference,
Speaker 1: it is interference in our election comes from inside the
Speaker 1: intelligence community itself. Inside the intelligence community, you will see
Speaker 1: people who leak information. That's the entire latest round of
Speaker 1: Russia collusion insanity resulted really almost directly resulted directly from
Speaker 1: a briefing given to members of Congress, a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of them, by the intelligence community, in a way that
Speaker 1: if you were designing a meeting that you knew would
Speaker 1: have details that would leak, that's what it would be get.
Speaker 1: A whole bunch of members of Congress together put out
Speaker 1: the explosive allegation that Russia's still helping Trump and then, oh,
Speaker 1: there are so many people in the room. I don't
Speaker 1: know who told the press because it's classified, it's illegal
Speaker 1: to leak that information to the press. But guess what
Speaker 1: it leaked very quickly. There'll be more of this. You know,
Speaker 1: Marie Ivanovitch just got a seven figure book deal. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. It's got over a million dollars to write
Speaker 1: a book. Book's gonna suck. No one's gonna read it.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be boring. That's not the point. It's a
Speaker 1: payoff for her being a good little soldier of the
Speaker 1: deep state against Trump. The left does this, they're far
Speaker 1: better at it than we are. We have you know,
Speaker 1: we got a handful of conservative billionaires. I love to
Speaker 1: write checks to like boring think tanks. They don't really
Speaker 1: do anything. We need to start having outlets and platforms
Speaker 1: for people who are soldiers for conservatism where you can
Speaker 1: go well, where you'll be taking care of you know,
Speaker 1: we need publishing imprints. We need these things because we're
Speaker 1: at a huge disadvantage in the information war against the
Speaker 1: left when they know that if you stand up against
Speaker 1: Trump and you get fired, doesn't matter what you do,
Speaker 1: doesn't matter. As long as you were standing up against Trump,
Speaker 1: you're gonna get a book deal, speaking, circuit board seat,
Speaker 1: all all this great stuff. Because the left takes care
Speaker 1: of their soldiers on the right, We're like, yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: go start a business, find a job. Sorry, your career's ruined.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Bus Sesson Show podcast. Remember
Speaker 1: to subscribe on Apple podcasts, the iHeartRadio app, or wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts. Why does your current climate chame
Speaker 1: proposal involved phasing out nuclear energy when it currently accounts
Speaker 1: for twenty percent of all US energy and fifty percent
Speaker 1: of our carbon free energy. Okay, all right? And the
Speaker 1: answer is that right now, we do not know how
Speaker 1: to get rid of the nuclear waste that is out there,
Speaker 1: waste that is going to be around for a very
Speaker 1: very very long time. As you know, the Congress thought
Speaker 1: about yucka Mountain and Nevada. I don't believe that that
Speaker 1: is going to happen. So right now, all over the country,
Speaker 1: including my own state of Vermont, we have nuclear waste
Speaker 1: alongside a plant that has since been shut down right
Speaker 1: wide the Connecticut River not a good place for it.
Speaker 1: And all over this country you have nuclear waste which
Speaker 1: is stored in ways in places that are not particularly safe.
Speaker 1: So I don't know how we can build more nuclear
Speaker 1: plants when we don't know how to get rid of
Speaker 1: the waste that we have. Second of all, in terms
Speaker 1: of the construction of new nuclear plants. You may or
Speaker 1: may not know that they all fall fall far more
Speaker 1: expensive than investing in wind, solar and other sustainable energies.
Speaker 1: I just wanted to play this for you as a
Speaker 1: reminder that what I'm telling you about Bernie Sanders is true.
Speaker 1: He's not very smart, doesn't know very much, doesn't have
Speaker 1: a lot of knowledge about anything. He's just a demagogue.
Speaker 1: He spouts the same nonsense you'd hear from any self
Speaker 1: described Marxist professor at any third tier college in the country.
Speaker 1: It's just that he happens to be in the right
Speaker 1: place at the right time now for the rise in
Speaker 1: socialist sentiment the Democratic Party. But he's not particularly good
Speaker 1: at this. He doesn't have some special skill, and I
Speaker 1: think it's important that everybody remembers that Bernie Sanders isn't
Speaker 1: a guy that you would turn to even to give
Speaker 1: you a good explanation of many of the policies that
Speaker 1: he now advocates for. Nuclear power is something that the
Speaker 1: left gets very touchy about because they used to be
Speaker 1: obsessed with how nuclear power was something that had to
Speaker 1: be opposed on environmental grounds. It's particularly true the anti
Speaker 1: nuclear power movement in the nineteen seventies. It actually led
Speaker 1: to the beginning of what we now call the Black
Speaker 1: Block movement. There were these black block protests about nuclear
Speaker 1: power in Germany in the seventies, and then you had
Speaker 1: all these environmentalists that latched onto the stories about how
Speaker 1: nuclear power of nuclear meltdowns would happen, what we're going
Speaker 1: to do at the waste. It turns out that nuclear
Speaker 1: power is the safest, cleanest, best option for having the
Speaker 1: advanced economies we want to have and does not have
Speaker 1: the CO two emissions that other power has. But then
Speaker 1: I want that. They want wind, they want renewable, and
Speaker 1: it's not efficient. Solar and wind are not going to
Speaker 1: power the economy that we want to be living in.
Speaker 1: But it's just also reminded me of this is one
Speaker 1: of my favorites is you know, I hate recycling. I
Speaker 1: find it to be a little taste of tyranny every day.
Speaker 1: It's it's incredibly stupid. Recycling is not good for the environment.
Speaker 1: They when they look at this, honestly, it is very
Speaker 1: difficult to reprocess and clean products. To you know that
Speaker 1: that you are recycling and put them back into it's
Speaker 1: very bad This is not a good This is not
Speaker 1: a good thing, and in fact, a lot of what
Speaker 1: ends up happening, especially with plastics, when you think you're
Speaker 1: recycling plastics, we just ship our plastic to third world
Speaker 1: countries like China. I mean not China's not a third
Speaker 1: world country really, but we shipped them to third world
Speaker 1: countries and places like China. But they don't care about
Speaker 1: where the plastic ends up, and that's how it gets
Speaker 1: back into the ocean. So we think we're recycling, we
Speaker 1: really just send it to these other places. And there's
Speaker 1: a story over the weekend about how when they look
Speaker 1: at really what goes on with plastic bag bands, which
Speaker 1: drive me insane. I mean, producer, Mark, have you have
Speaker 1: you had the experience yet of overloading a paper bag
Speaker 1: trying to get into the car and into the bottom
Speaker 1: just falls out. Now you feel like you look at
Speaker 1: an idiot, even though it's not your fault, and you're like,
Speaker 1: why can't I just have a plastic bag? You know
Speaker 1: that's happening March first in all of New York, right,
Speaker 1: I know, Yeah, this is why I'm talking about it
Speaker 1: right now. Okay, that's just no no, but I understand,
Speaker 1: But I'm just channeling my frustration here, buy some reusable bags.
Speaker 1: At how unbelievably stupid this is going to be. It's
Speaker 1: let me explain why it turns out. It turns out
Speaker 1: that plastic bags are incredibly lightweight, versatile, reusable, and when
Speaker 1: you look at the transportation cost and the environmental cost
Speaker 1: of paper bags, for example, there is very clear evidence
Speaker 1: that they are in fact worse for the environment. Here's
Speaker 1: a piece in the Wall Street Journal just a couple
Speaker 1: days ago. Why do politicians want to take our plastic
Speaker 1: bags and straws away? This moral panic is intensifying, even
Speaker 1: as evidence mounts that banning plastic is both a waste
Speaker 1: of money and harmful to the environment. If you want
Speaker 1: to protect dolphins and sea turtles, you should take special
Speaker 1: care to place your plastic plastic in the trash, not
Speaker 1: the recycling bin. During the nineteen seventies, environmentalists wanted to
Speaker 1: restrict the use of plastic because it was made from petroleum.
Speaker 1: When the energy crisis abated, they denounced plastic for not
Speaker 1: being biodegradable in landfills. They blamed it for littering the landscape,
Speaker 1: clogging sewer drains. In global warming, plastic from our throwaway
Speaker 1: society was killing vast numbers creatures, according to a twenty
Speaker 1: seventeen BBC documentary series. The series prompted Queen Elizabeth a
Speaker 1: Second to ban plastic straws and bottles from the Royal Estates,
Speaker 1: and it galvanize so many other leaders that Greens celebrate
Speaker 1: what they call the Blue Planet effect, named for the series.
Speaker 1: More than one hundred countries now restrict single use plastic bags,
Speaker 1: and Pope Frances has called for global regulation of plastic.
Speaker 1: Popular misconceptions have sustained the plastic panic. Environmentalist frequently claimed
Speaker 1: that eighty percent of plastic in the oceans come from
Speaker 1: land based sources, but a team of scientists from four
Speaker 1: continents reported in twenty eighteen that more than half of
Speaker 1: plastic in the Great Pacific garbage Patch comes from fishing boats,
Speaker 1: mostly discarded nets and other gear. More than eighty percent
Speaker 1: of the plastic bottles that wash up on the shores
Speaker 1: of inaccessible island and uninhabited extinct volcano in the South
Speaker 1: Atlantic originated in China. Of the plastic carried into oceans
Speaker 1: by rivers, a twenty seventeen study in Nature Communications estimated
Speaker 1: eighty six percent comes from Asia and virtually all the
Speaker 1: rest from Africa and South America. Some plastic in America
Speaker 1: is littered on beaches and streets, but researchers have found
Speaker 1: that laws restricting plastic bags have do not reduce litter.
Speaker 1: The resources wasted on these anti plastic campaigns, we better
Speaker 1: spent on programs to discourage all kinds of littering. I mean,
Speaker 1: it just goes on, It goes on and on. It's
Speaker 1: just a horrible idea. It's stupid. I mean, I've been
Speaker 1: dealing with it whenever I go to California. I'll be
Speaker 1: in California this weekend. It's so dumb and yet people
Speaker 1: it's just virtue signaling. It takes over this part of
Speaker 1: the brain. People can't think for themselves anymore. They're incapable
Speaker 1: of looking at what's really going on. Instead, they replaced
Speaker 1: it with what they wish was going on because it
Speaker 1: makes them feel good. This piece continues quote Single use
Speaker 1: plastic bags aren't the worst environmental choice of the supermarket.
Speaker 1: They're the best. High density polyethylene bags are a marvel
Speaker 1: of economic engineering and environmental efficiency. They're cheap, convenient, waterproof,
Speaker 1: strong enough to hold groceries, but thin and light enough
Speaker 1: to make and make and transport using scan energy, water,
Speaker 1: or other resources. Though they're called single use, most people
Speaker 1: reuse them, often as trash can liners. I do that
Speaker 1: when governments banned them, Consumers buy thicker substitutes with a
Speaker 1: bigger carbon footprint once discarded that take up a little
Speaker 1: room in landfills. That they aren't biodegradable is a plus
Speaker 1: because they don't release greenhouse gases like decomposing paper and
Speaker 1: cotton bags. The plastic bags, tiny quantity of carbon extracted
Speaker 1: from natural gas goes back underground where it can be
Speaker 1: safely sequestered from the atmosphere and ocean in a modern
Speaker 1: landfill with sturdy lining. Plastic I mean plastic bands are
Speaker 1: a modern version of medieval sumptuary laws, which forbade merchants
Speaker 1: and other commoners from wearing clothes or using products that
Speaker 1: offended the sensibilities of aristocrats and clergyman. Green activists have
Speaker 1: the power to impose their preferences now that environmentalism is
Speaker 1: essentially the state, religion and progressive strongholds. This is by
Speaker 1: this guy Tyranny, who's the editor of City Journal for
Speaker 1: the Wall Street Journal. We're gonna we have a plastic
Speaker 1: band coming into effecture in New York City. The uh,
Speaker 1: these different progressive strongholds, you cannot penetrate their environmentalist nonsense
Speaker 1: with reality. But you know what's worse than the bags?
Speaker 1: What the straws? Oh, the straws. Paper straws are disgusting.
Speaker 1: I actually prefer reusual banks as they hold more and
Speaker 1: I don't have to carry as many bags. That's not
Speaker 1: been an environmental thing. Yeah, but you got to carry
Speaker 1: it with differings, which you know, sometimes you want to
Speaker 1: go to the store, you don't have a bag on you,
Speaker 1: you don't have a car, so yeah, exactly, it's a
Speaker 1: different deal. But the straws, if somebody puts a paper
Speaker 1: straw on my drink, I'm done. I don't go to
Speaker 1: at least I'm right. Yeah. But the thing is they're
Speaker 1: doing this and they're not. It doesn't even do what
Speaker 1: they think it's going to do. All it does is
Speaker 1: annoy everybody. Yes, this is like the the liberal mentality
Speaker 1: is now. If it makes them feel good to annoy
Speaker 1: you and has no other purpose, they will use state
Speaker 1: power and coercion to do That drives me insane. Yeah,
Speaker 1: plastic band bags to be banned in New York second
Speaker 1: statewide band. I mean, this is this is idiocy, idiocy.
Speaker 1: You know, recycling has dumb all this stuff. You know,
Speaker 1: you want people to not litter, which, by the way,
Speaker 1: there's some cultural things about littering, like some cultures are
Speaker 1: more likely to litter, they litter a lot, and others don't.
Speaker 1: And you know that's you go to more developed countries
Speaker 1: and there's a lot less littering. I mean, there's a
Speaker 1: whole the way. If you want to know how economically
Speaker 1: developed a country as, all you have to do is
Speaker 1: see how they handle their trash. And you pretty much know.
Speaker 1: If you know how they handle refuse, you you know
Speaker 1: how advanced the country is. You know, you're not going
Speaker 1: to see a lot of trash all over the streets
Speaker 1: of Tokyo, even though it's an incredibly dense urban area.
Speaker 1: You will see a lot of trash in other parts
Speaker 1: of the world where median wages are far lower and
Speaker 1: there's far less economic development. You know, in the Middle
Speaker 1: East and some some of those cities, you'll see trash
Speaker 1: all over them. And you go to some parts of
Speaker 1: Cairo's trash everywhere. So I mean, just for an example here,
Speaker 1: I'm annoyed to see that New York is going to
Speaker 1: be following California's footsteps. But you know, maybe New Yorkers
Speaker 1: just have to get some good doses of liberalism to
Speaker 1: wake up. I don't know, though, then we never learned
Speaker 1: a lesson here. I mean, those of you that don't
Speaker 1: live in progressive strongholds, you're so lucky because by the
Speaker 1: time it's clear that the policies they are implementing are
Speaker 1: bad and are damaging, it's too late. And you know,
Speaker 1: people have already fled, and I mean New York is
Speaker 1: hemorrhaging people to Florida right now, just because of the
Speaker 1: changes in the taxes. The plastic bag plastic bag, sorry
Speaker 1: New York plastic bag banit. Go out Hangle, produce a
Speaker 1: mok and run Konkoma patch jog one of those places,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean? What is your what is
Speaker 1: the favorite of the South Shore destinations in general? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I mean Long Beach because I live there and there's
Speaker 1: a beach that sounds nice. Yeah. Yeah, there's no beach
Speaker 1: and run Konkoma, right. I'd just like to say that
Speaker 1: there might be one. Is there one about Jericho? No,
Speaker 1: there's no beach. There no beach in Jericho, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: like Jericho of all the fun ones. Yeah, I don't know,
Speaker 1: it's very long. I'm trying to think of the most
Speaker 1: long island long island place. Jericho has got to be
Speaker 1: high on the list. I don't know. Ronkonkom is up there. Babylon. Oh,
Speaker 1: I guess that people will come visit the city on
Speaker 1: the weekends when I was in high school from Babylon,
Speaker 1: where I was like, ah, yes, the Babylon crew is here.
Speaker 1: You're just naming routes on the Long Island railroad, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: but this is very we refer to this as bridge
Speaker 1: and tunnel. Back in the day, people coming in the
Speaker 1: city from outside of the Five Boroughs and Babylon were
Speaker 1: frequent frequent visitors. Yeah, and this is long. That's why
Speaker 1: I know them from taking the train. Now. So the
Speaker 1: out east, as they say, out east where there's such
Speaker 1: a Manhattan, Yeah, such a that's a very Manhattan thing
Speaker 1: going out east. Me out east is like Montauk or
Speaker 1: like all the way on the end of Montalk's great.
Speaker 1: Montalk's very trendy. Now though you probably Wine country of course. Yeah,
Speaker 1: north shore of Long Islands very nice. So anyway, man,
Speaker 1: they're gonna have a plastic band here and it's on
Speaker 1: Long Island's gonna be affected by This is why I'm
Speaker 1: thinking about. I mean, every all over New York State
Speaker 1: we have this plastic bag and in effect, it's stupid.
Speaker 1: It's kind of productive, but the libs don't care. If
Speaker 1: it makes them feel good, they will ram their stupidity
Speaker 1: down your throat and do it with a paper straw
Speaker 1: that disintegrates within like two minutes of being in your drink.
Speaker 1: You're in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton
Speaker 1: Show podcast. I haven't talked too much about coronavirus today
Speaker 1: I've seen now we've got eighty thousand confirmed cases. Stock
Speaker 1: market did not have some huge rebound today after a
Speaker 1: three percent drop in the what was the SNP yesterday?
Speaker 1: So it's it's concerning and there are gonna be there's
Speaker 1: now I think a consensus emerging that it is going
Speaker 1: to hit the United States, but we have an advanced
Speaker 1: health system. The fatality rate is two percent, which is
Speaker 1: a lot higher than the flu. The flu is something
Speaker 1: like point zero one percent. But we are going to
Speaker 1: get hit with coronavirus. I don't know. There's something I
Speaker 1: don't have. This isn't a completely formulated theory yet, but
Speaker 1: I'm getting it, just getting a feeling. You know, you
Speaker 1: have this rise of socialism in Sanders and now you've
Speaker 1: got this coronavirus something something's going to happen here, meaning
Speaker 1: that there's going to be some big change in our
Speaker 1: perception of what's going on in the country. And I'm
Speaker 1: a little worried about how this could how this could
Speaker 1: evolve to help the Democrats in the fall, you know,
Speaker 1: the economy might hit a real slowdown, and all of
Speaker 1: a sudden we start hearing about how Trump isn't such
Speaker 1: a good Stuarty. Even though it'll be the result of
Speaker 1: a it looks like it would be the result of
Speaker 1: a disease of a virus that is spreading all over
Speaker 1: the world. This is where I start to say, this
Speaker 1: is where you start to feel like there's a fat
Speaker 1: tail incident, which is one way referring to or a
Speaker 1: black swan incident, where that's the low probability, high impact
Speaker 1: scenario that to me seems like it's possible. Now that
Speaker 1: we're entering this phase of what's going to be a
Speaker 1: it is going to be a global pandemic, and it
Speaker 1: has already killed a lot more people than stars did.
Speaker 1: It's the incubation rates on coronavirus. I don't have a
Speaker 1: lot of good news here on this right now. I
Speaker 1: don't have good news to share. The incubation rates on
Speaker 1: it are longer than thought. There's some people that are
Speaker 1: going now for almost thirty days before they show symptoms,
Speaker 1: which means that during that period you are still possibly contagious,
Speaker 1: so you don't know you you know, you could not
Speaker 1: know that you have coronavirus and be spreading it to
Speaker 1: people and it won't be until two or three weeks
Speaker 1: goes by before you start to actually show symptoms. There
Speaker 1: are much more dangerous strains of virus out there. They're
Speaker 1: much more dangerous influenza influenzas, for example, to have really
Speaker 1: high fatality rates. But the thing about those influences is
Speaker 1: that they tend not to be easily spread because the
Speaker 1: symptoms set on very quickly and people are not interacting
Speaker 1: with a lot of other people and basically fighting for
Speaker 1: their own fighting for their own lives very quickly. The
Speaker 1: way that coronavirus incubates and the way that it is
Speaker 1: spread means that the likelihood of this thing becoming a
Speaker 1: disease that we all have to be at least aware of,
Speaker 1: even in this country, I think it is very very high.
Speaker 1: I will also say, though, I remember I was in
Speaker 1: Puerto Rico when Zico was considered a huge concern and
Speaker 1: there were these maps the CDC put out about how
Speaker 1: zeco was going to spread everywhere, and it was, you know,
Speaker 1: going to be and if pregnant women were terrified of it,
Speaker 1: and all this stuff. Now you don't hear, you don't
Speaker 1: even hear about zeke anymore. I remember I read a
Speaker 1: CDC analysis before I went to Puerto Rico. When I
Speaker 1: was there, Puerto Rico is one of the one of
Speaker 1: the islands that was worst hit by it. That up
Speaker 1: to fifty percent of the Caribbean and like the northern
Speaker 1: half of South America and a big chunk of the
Speaker 1: southern United States, up to fifty percent or forty or
Speaker 1: fifty percent of people might be infected with ZCO within
Speaker 1: you know, a few years time. And turned out now
Speaker 1: zeca wasn't killing people. The big fear about zeko was
Speaker 1: that it was going to cause microcephaly, which is a
Speaker 1: super small essentially creates a super small head and it's
Speaker 1: a terrible birth defect that was and people saw photos
Speaker 1: of it, and you know, they were very very concerned
Speaker 1: about it, understandably, but you don't even really hear about
Speaker 1: Zeke anymore. I remember West Nile virus was going to
Speaker 1: be something that you know, you'd just be walking around
Speaker 1: the park in some city in the US and you
Speaker 1: get West nil virus from mosquito bite. You know, there
Speaker 1: have been these moments where we're all supposed to be really,
Speaker 1: really scared. I'm not at the I'm not at the
Speaker 1: panic button phase of coronavirus, but I am at the
Speaker 1: it's gonna hit the United States. We're gonna have, in
Speaker 1: my opinion, we're gonna have corona spreading through US cities
Speaker 1: here within within a month or two. And that's gonna
Speaker 1: shake a lot. But first of all, it's scary, right,
Speaker 1: it's scary for you, believen with a two percent fatality rate,
Speaker 1: that's that's higher than a lot of other things that
Speaker 1: we've gotten used to having in the environment. How does
Speaker 1: this also play politically though, I mean, this will have
Speaker 1: pandemics have political implications, make no mistake about it. You know,
Speaker 1: you get socialists promising government healthcare. You get the governments
Speaker 1: supposed to protect us. I'm worried about this. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening to The bus Sexton Show podcasts. Remember to subscribe
Speaker 1: on Apple podcast at the iHeartRadio app, or wherever you
Speaker 1: get your podcasts. The show ain't over yet, folks, keeping
Speaker 1: it real, It's time for roll call, all right, Team
Speaker 1: Buck at iHeartMedia dot com if you want to email
Speaker 1: us Facebook dot com slash Buck Sexton, and please do
Speaker 1: pass the buck. Tell somebody when you get a chance
Speaker 1: about the Buck Sexton Show. Listen on Apple podcasts or
Speaker 1: on the iHeart Radio app. We are growing every month
Speaker 1: in the digital realm as well as in the terrestrial
Speaker 1: radio realm, and that's all because of you and your
Speaker 1: word of mouth. So please please do tell somebody. It's
Speaker 1: the single biggest favor, the single biggest solid you can
Speaker 1: do if you believe what we do here in the
Speaker 1: Freedom hund is to get somebody new to start listening
Speaker 1: to the show. Elena write s in Hey Buck, thanks
Speaker 1: for all you do. I think I've told you before
Speaker 1: that I live in Albania. I teach English using the Bible.
Speaker 1: One of my students has said that he'd like to
Speaker 1: get an American history book to read because he just
Speaker 1: wants to know more about America's history. Could you recommend
Speaker 1: a title that I could get for him that would
Speaker 1: not be a liberal treatise and would give him what
Speaker 1: he wants to know. PS. He's already read The Residence,
Speaker 1: an American history book to read to know about American history.
Speaker 1: I mean, I honestly can't think, off the top of
Speaker 1: my head of it a really good overview of US
Speaker 1: history that's in one book. I can think of different
Speaker 1: periods of history where there are good books, but I
Speaker 1: can't think of one book that covers all that. So
Speaker 1: let me get back to you on that, Atlanta. I wish,
Speaker 1: I wish I had a better a better answer for
Speaker 1: you on this. Oh Man also slipped on my neck
Speaker 1: wrong last night? Is brutal? Who you got to do
Speaker 1: a radio show for three hours? Your neck? Hurst sucks? Bill? Hey, Buck,
Speaker 1: I haven't already discussed the fact that China manufactures the
Speaker 1: majority of our pharmaceuticals. It seems to me. That seems
Speaker 1: to me that with them in a position to control
Speaker 1: our most basic antibiotics, we could be greatly hurt as
Speaker 1: a nation. Especially with a possible coronavirus pandemic. What are
Speaker 1: your thoughts, Well, Bill, antibiotics don't do anything against viruses.
Speaker 1: They only do things against bacteria, So it's not going
Speaker 1: to mean anything that they manufacture antibiotics. If in fact
Speaker 1: there was a vaccine that had to be manufactured, I'd
Speaker 1: wonder where that would be done. I think that in
Speaker 1: the past, for example, the flu vaccine, some of the
Speaker 1: I think we got it from a company in Switzerland.
Speaker 1: Is it ABV or something I forget, But anyway, there's
Speaker 1: some big pharmaceutical companies that are not based in trying
Speaker 1: to do some of this stuff too. Right now, though,
Speaker 1: we really do need a at least a treatment protocol
Speaker 1: to bring down the fatality rate. That would be really helpful,
Speaker 1: because a two percent fatality rate doesn't sound that bad
Speaker 1: until you realize that a few hundred thousand people getting
Speaker 1: infected means a few thousand people are dying of this disease,
Speaker 1: and that's that's very that's that's a lot of casualties
Speaker 1: for us today. That's a lot of very tragic circumstances occurring.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I just wish the scientific community would stop,
Speaker 1: you know, stop messing around with the climate change garbage
Speaker 1: and focus in on real stuff like this. Stop telling
Speaker 1: us the band plastic bags too. Let's see here, Andy,
Speaker 1: Hi Buck, you rock, Andy, Thank you, you rock too.
Speaker 1: I do want to play Devil's advocate here. You mentioned
Speaker 1: a couple of days ago that Bernie voted Bernie voters
Speaker 1: voted for Trump, possibly costing what happened the election. I
Speaker 1: looked at some of the states that Trump lost by
Speaker 1: just a couple percentage points, and the difference there was
Speaker 1: Gary Johnson. I have to think if he wasn't in
Speaker 1: the race, a decent majority of his votes would have
Speaker 1: gone to Trump. Assuming this is correct, If Johnson wasn't in,
Speaker 1: Trump would have won four or five more states. I
Speaker 1: haven't looked. I've only looked at the Bernie numbers in
Speaker 1: those states where there were Bernie was a write in.
Speaker 1: I have not looked at the Gary Johnson numbers. So
Speaker 1: if you have done that analysis, I would defer to you.
Speaker 1: Assuming your numbers are correct, that certainly seems possible. So
Speaker 1: good on you for doing the work doing the homework yourself.
Speaker 1: I do appreciate it. Michelle, Hey Buck, I'm a new
Speaker 1: listener and a conservative millennial. Love your show so much.
Speaker 1: I listen to the shows in reverse chronological order. When
Speaker 1: you start selling freedom hot t shirts, please use Tribe blend.
Speaker 1: What is that, producer or what's tribe blend? I believe
Speaker 1: it's like a polyester cotton blend. Oh okay, So when
Speaker 1: we get our gear, when we get our gear up
Speaker 1: and running, maybe we can do that. We'll have plenty
Speaker 1: of options available. I'm sure. Yeah, when we actually get
Speaker 1: around to it, we'll get him. You know, we do everything.
Speaker 1: We just slog. It's just me and producer market here. Man,
Speaker 1: we're like a two man army. That's that's really what's
Speaker 1: going on here. You know, we got producer Nick sometimes
Speaker 1: gives us a little close air support. You know, he
Speaker 1: comes in, but he's not here located with us. He's
Speaker 1: like the sniper who's set up in a sniper's nest
Speaker 1: that can help us out. But we're kicking in the
Speaker 1: doors by ourselves. M. David, Hey, Bucking team. I listen
Speaker 1: to your radio broadcast on my way home from work,
Speaker 1: and hearing of California's attitude toward federal offt units ago,
Speaker 1: a solution occurred to me. I'm not sure if it's
Speaker 1: legally possible, But could President Trump issue executive orders suspending
Speaker 1: all federal aid to California until they comply with federal law.
Speaker 1: I believe there is precedent for this. If so, that
Speaker 1: would certainly alter the dialogue and force California into compliance
Speaker 1: with laws they agreed to support as a condition of
Speaker 1: receiving aid. Almost poetic in its elegance, is it not.
Speaker 1: I enjoy the show and learn a lot from it
Speaker 1: and has a different angle of attack from other talk shows,
Speaker 1: and that's refreshing you folks. Keep up the good work
Speaker 1: and I'll keep listening. I haven't been listening long, but
Speaker 1: I'll say it anyway. She's high. David, welcome man. Great
Speaker 1: to have you as part of Team Buck. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much for your note, and we appreciate all the
Speaker 1: kind words. As for using federal dollars to force compliance,
Speaker 1: that can be tricky. That's something that would certainly go
Speaker 1: through the courts. You know. The Obama administration, for example,
Speaker 1: even when Obamacare was upheld the first time, the Obama
Speaker 1: administration was not able to get the part of Obamacare
Speaker 1: that would have said to states, you either expand your
Speaker 1: Medicaid roles which states had to pay into as well
Speaker 1: as the federal government, or we're going to pull all
Speaker 1: federal funding. The Supreme Court, even the same Supreme Court
Speaker 1: breakdown that upheld Obamacare, said that that degree a federal
Speaker 1: coercion of the states was too much. John, I support
Speaker 1: the First Amendment one hundred percent, and I think any
Speaker 1: infringement is an erosion of our republic. But for a
Speaker 1: thought exercise, what if it was illegal for corporations to
Speaker 1: own news organizations and the news organizations had to operate
Speaker 1: all on their own without the backing of billion dollars
Speaker 1: media conglomerates. Do you think reporters would take more accountability
Speaker 1: and even act as true journalists if they actually had
Speaker 1: to tell the truth to thrive rather than pander and
Speaker 1: read the daily DNC talking points. This wouldn't be an
Speaker 1: infringement the first, but a regulation on the business model.
Speaker 1: What are some other ways you think we the people
Speaker 1: the FEDS could take action against the media for their
Speaker 1: countless lies that doesn't infringe on the first John, No,
Speaker 1: I don't think provide. I don't think stopping corporate ownership
Speaker 1: of media corporations would make media corporations more honest because
Speaker 1: the reason the media corporations engage in advocacy under the
Speaker 1: guise of journalism is because they are ideologically predisposed to
Speaker 1: do that. They're going with what they themselves believe anyway.
Speaker 1: And also their audiences are very much all of that
Speaker 1: left wing mindset, and so they're pandering to their audience.
Speaker 1: So they're pandering to their own sensibility and to their audiences,
Speaker 1: something that I think you will continue to see happening
Speaker 1: no matter what kind of regulations we try to put
Speaker 1: in place, David writes Buck. Oh ah, Prouncer Mark got
Speaker 1: some news for you to Chief Buck. I totally agree
Speaker 1: with you about the Avenger movies. Some of them were okay,
Speaker 1: but Endgame was awful. They crammed in way too many
Speaker 1: cliche storylines. Oh nothing I hate more than time loss
Speaker 1: sitting through a bad movie. I also agree with you
Speaker 1: about movies staying around ninety minutes. Shield say, what do
Speaker 1: you got to say now, Producer Mark uh Well, first
Speaker 1: of all, that is a parallel opinion and gave one
Speaker 1: listener down Eric. Endgame is one of the few movies
Speaker 1: that I got like an actual emotional like having cry
Speaker 1: or anything when I go, and an actual reaction out
Speaker 1: of me. Well, you did, Kim, I didn't realize other
Speaker 1: like ten of them. So you've convinced me. I'm actually
Speaker 1: even go back to the very what is the first one?
Speaker 1: I believe it's the first Iron Man, and so then
Speaker 1: what comes after that? Maybe the Avengers. I don't know
Speaker 1: about original Avengers. Yes, I think I saw that there
Speaker 1: is the way to watch in chronological order war in
Speaker 1: way they were released order. Is Ragnarok a part of
Speaker 1: this or is that a different thing? Agnrock is a
Speaker 1: part of it? Yeah, because that I saw Marvels a
Speaker 1: part of it. The Ragnarrock thing was actually kind of entertaining.
Speaker 1: I kind of liked that you liked, Yeah, that I
Speaker 1: kind of liked. If you watch them in water there
Speaker 1: a little bit better, all right, David producer Mark said,
Speaker 1: also on you, that's one listener out of hundreds of thousands. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's true, but that's one. And I think I think
Speaker 1: we're about I want to say ten to one. It
Speaker 1: might be more like fifty to one in favor of
Speaker 1: Avengers versus against but at least I'm not alone. Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's there's a couple of you that are in there.
Speaker 1: There's a couple of us weirdos, out there that they're
Speaker 1: like the Avengers. All right, that's fair enough. Well, David,
Speaker 1: you and producer Mark can pick a place to fight
Speaker 1: after school. Use violence, that's true. Producer Mark fights with
Speaker 1: his mind. TJ. Buck. I hate to be a catastrophist,
Speaker 1: but I can't help but notice the dow fell a
Speaker 1: thousand points on the opening day after the realization that
Speaker 1: Bernie will be the Democrat nominee. They say it's because
Speaker 1: of the coronavirus, but I'm skeptical of that reasoning regardless
Speaker 1: of what the dial fell. I can't help but wonder
Speaker 1: what Bernie will do to the market confidence by being
Speaker 1: by just being the nominee, not even by being elected president.
Speaker 1: Most conservatives will admit the Trump will not say much
Speaker 1: of a chance if the market tanks for November. So
Speaker 1: how does Trump keep market confidence high with the inevitability
Speaker 1: of Bernie becoming a Democrat nominee. By the way, this
Speaker 1: don't tell anybody else. I said that this is the
Speaker 1: smartest audience and talk radio listens to this show. I'm
Speaker 1: just gonna say it. We got this. The team Buck
Speaker 1: is the smartest. The other audiences are gonna yell at me.
Speaker 1: I don't care Team Buck is the smartest audience on radio.
Speaker 1: Just listen to the stuff that people are writing in
Speaker 1: all the time. I'm like, that's an that is an
Speaker 1: excellent point, very well thought out in reason, Sir or madam. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think that Bernie Sanders does scare Wall Street, and
Speaker 1: he should. I think Bernie Sanders scares anybody who owns property,
Speaker 1: and he should. Anybody who has built up assets, anybody
Speaker 1: who has worked very hard for whatever they have, just
Speaker 1: understand that Bernie Sanders, he's not a friend to you.
Speaker 1: Continuing on with that, prosperity, Bernie Sanders is a concern
Speaker 1: that you should have and if you were to win.
Speaker 1: You know, it's funny they pretended that and Trump won,
Speaker 1: that the stock market would tank, and it's been the
Speaker 1: exact opposite. I'm here to tell you if Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: does win the presidential I mean, first he has to
Speaker 1: win the primary, which is not in the bag yet.
Speaker 1: It's not done. But if Bernie Sanders wins the presidency,
Speaker 1: be prepared for a stock market crash the next day.
Speaker 1: I mean, be prepared for, you know, a twenty percent
Speaker 1: market correction. I really think that could happen. Just all
Speaker 1: of a stuff all you know, all the gains from
Speaker 1: the last year to just erased, and maybe we even
Speaker 1: go into you know, pre Trump in the red in
Speaker 1: terms of where the market has gone in the Trump era,
Speaker 1: and then Bernie Sanders comes in, because it's just it's
Speaker 1: wealth destroying government coming in and taking from people and
Speaker 1: inefficiently allocating capital and spending money on programs that don't work,
Speaker 1: and taking money from people that are growing wealth and
Speaker 1: that are doing good things and that are providing services
Speaker 1: and employing people. The Bernie Sanders model is wealth destroying.
Speaker 1: It does not It does not make the economy stronger
Speaker 1: in any way. And that's why it's it's such a
Speaker 1: concern and it should continue to be a concern. You're
Speaker 1: in the Freedom Hunt. This is the Buck Sexton Show podcast.
Speaker 1: All right, roll call continues here with Eric write again,
Speaker 1: I hope you heard Adam Schiff's question, what is to
Speaker 1: stomp a president from using the intelligence community to investigate
Speaker 1: political rivals? Sitting here waiting on GOP senators to challenge
Speaker 1: him on this response and believe we should hit him
Speaker 1: hard on this one. Yeah, they've already done that. I mean,
Speaker 1: the most astonishing presidential political scandal of my lifetime. It's
Speaker 1: already happened. Democrats have already done it to us. They
Speaker 1: used the intelligence community, they abused intelligence operations in order
Speaker 1: to spy on a presidential campaign. That is what happened.
Speaker 1: But because we live in such a dishonest media environment,
Speaker 1: they were use to make that well, they refuse to
Speaker 1: not only just agree that that's what happened, but you
Speaker 1: make any amends for it. Let's see we have next
Speaker 1: up here. Okay, here it is. It seems that producer
Speaker 1: Mark is good and I like him. Okay, thank you, Carla.
Speaker 1: We like producer Mark too. I don't even want to
Speaker 1: know what the rest of that message said. Buck, Yeah,
Speaker 1: we bailed on it all right, Yeah, producer Hey, Prucer
Speaker 1: Mark can be a little grouchy sometimes, but he's my grouch.
Speaker 1: This is what happens when you go rogue Buck. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I know, Stephen Buck original Saturday squad here an army vet,
Speaker 1: always doing my best to spread the word about the show,
Speaker 1: and a bunch of my friends now follow. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much, Steven, as I always say, that's a single
Speaker 1: most helpful thing. You can do that and also check
Speaker 1: out our sponsors on the show. With our sponsors. Remember
Speaker 1: you're getting you're getting great products. I know the companies,
Speaker 1: I know the products of the people that are behind them.
Speaker 1: You know everything that I that I use, I do use.
Speaker 1: I mean every time I tell you that I believe
Speaker 1: in them, I do. And it also every time you're
Speaker 1: using our code and doing that, you're supporting this show.
Speaker 1: You're keeping the show on the air. Would like to
Speaker 1: see the return of the History Deep Dives, Lepanto and
Speaker 1: Dracula being my favorites, PS new one for you to use,
Speaker 1: Sanctor Romney Shields high Well, Stephen, I would love to
Speaker 1: get back to the the History Show. It's gonna be tough
Speaker 1: to do it in an election year because we're so busy,
Speaker 1: but at some point we'll get that go and we'll
Speaker 1: get that crack of lack and I've certainly thought about it.
Speaker 1: And yeah, thank you so much. I'm glad you enjoyed
Speaker 1: Lepanto and Dracula. I do want to go back to those.
Speaker 1: Those were a lot of fun. Noah, hey buck, it's
Speaker 1: been in a few years since I quit following politics
Speaker 1: so closely. Let's see who we get and would it
Speaker 1: be at all possible for you to take a mintage
Speaker 1: on the podcast and do a recap of the last
Speaker 1: four years, just to get people like me some sort
Speaker 1: of timeline that would be much appreciate it. I hope
Speaker 1: you hear something on this thanks from a true Freedom
Speaker 1: Hut original squad. Noah, Noah. I don't know if I'll
Speaker 1: be able to do anytime soon a full four year
Speaker 1: retrospective on what's happened to American politics. Maybe at the
Speaker 1: end of this year, after the election. But I appreciate
Speaker 1: you coming back into the Hut. You are always welcome,
Speaker 1: and thank you very much for being here. Aaron, I
Speaker 1: hear you tried yoga. That is fantastic. After I left
Speaker 1: the United States Marine Corps, I went to school and
Speaker 1: enrolled in yoga with a friend, mostly going to meet women,
Speaker 1: but to my surprise, it was a lifesaver I had
Speaker 1: to do. I had to deal with some residual stuff
Speaker 1: from the Corps, and it helped a lot with that. However,
Speaker 1: I'm also a goalie in hockey and it was amazing
Speaker 1: for flexibility. In the end, I took every yoga class
Speaker 1: I could keep doing it. Yeah, Aaron, I have been
Speaker 1: doing more yoga. I am going to go back to it.
Speaker 1: I did feel very good. It hurts me a lot
Speaker 1: as I'm doing it, which probably means I need to
Speaker 1: do more of it because I'm very not flexible and
Speaker 1: I sit here with a tremendously painful neck from being
Speaker 1: hunched over doing tech snack all the time. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna do more yoga for sure, and I'm glad man.
Speaker 1: I'm yeah. Hey, if Aaron from the Marine Corps is
Speaker 1: yoga is good, producer, Mark and I have to check
Speaker 1: it out. So that's where we got. All right, everybody
Speaker 1: the show today, I hope you agree it's been fantastic.
Speaker 1: If not, tomorrow's would be fantastic because it usually is.
Speaker 1: Please do pass the buck, tell somebody about it. To
Speaker 1: subscribe to The Buck Sexton Show podcast, even if you
Speaker 1: listen on your local radio affiliate. It's great to have
Speaker 1: more subscribers. You can listen on demand whenever you want,
Speaker 1: and we'll be back here, same time, same place tomorrow
Speaker 1: in the Hut Shields High