End The War In Afghanistan

Buck Sexton Show. This is the Buck Sexton Show, where the mission or mission is to decode what really matters with actionable intelligence. Mag no mistake, American. You're a great American. Again, the Buck Sexton Show begins. He's a great guy. Now, welcome to the Buck Saxon Show. Everybody. I hope you had a great weekend. Thank you so much for being here.

I want to start the show off with some good news, but of course we're talking about politics and what's going on in the country, so it's always going to be somewhat mixed. But we do have some good news to speak of and good news at the border. No less, it will be mixed with some not so good news. But let's start with what's good. The numbers are in and according to CBP Commissioner at Mark Morgan, immigration authorities apprehended sixty four thousand people at the southwest border in August.

Now that's a drop for three months running, a huge drop from May, a sixty percent decrease from May when you had over one hundred and thirty thousand who are apprehended at our southern border. And this is the result

of a few things. One is that it seems President Trump's threat to shut down trade at our southern border with Mexico and to do what he can to get some improved compliance from our Mexican counterparts, and trying to stop all these caravans, these discontinued infiltration through Mexico of predominantly, but not entirely, Central American legal aliens in the United States. The Mexican government has deployed soldiers to its border with Central American countries, and that may have had it seems

to have had a real effect here. It seems to have mattered. There's another thing that the administration has done, and that is the remain in Mexico policy. I'm sorry it was tariffs, by the way, with the southern border that the President was really talking about putting tariffs. At one point he said he was going to shut it down, but then it moved on to tariffs. The remain in Mexico policy, Well, this is interesting. What is the remain in Mexico policy. It's really just the implementation of what

is called a safe third Country agreement. Safe third country And by the way, this is all this is all gonna make a lot of sense. It I'll be very important in a second. There's a reason why I'm getting into this. Of course, the Democrats oppose this, showing us who they are, showing us that we've been right about them all along, etc. Etc. But a Safe Third Country Agreement means that while somebody is waiting for their asylum claim to be adjudicated, because we do, in fact have

a a process for this. It's not just oh, I want asylum, so I get asylum. And this isn't This isn't shopping for milk in the grocery store. You don't just take it and leave. But while you're waiting for that to be adjudicated, you're supposed to be able to, or we're supposed to believe that you will show up for your hearings and then abide by whatever is decided

by the system. Problem for the Central American migrants, which we have known from the beginning, which I have been telling you from the beginning, is that nine plus of them will not get asylum. So why were they all showing up at the southern border saying they want a symble? Because based on the Floras Settlement Agreement from nineteen ninety seven that says that you can't hold a minor more

than twenty days. Unaccompanied miners who show up at the southern border get transferred into the Office of Refugee Resettlement actually under HHS, and they're given to adult relatives or an adult guardian of some kind, so they get into the country easily. But then adults that bring a minor a thumb, because again Floraz twenty days, you have to

release them rapidly. That means they're obviously not going to get in front of a judge in that time, So they're let into the interior of the United States, never to be seen again in a court, or if they are seen in a court, never to be seen again. What it's time for them to get sent home after they've had their judicial process. Deportation comes after that judicial process,

and guess what, they don't show up for that. And we don't have the political will in this country to enforce the laws in the books and say no, you're not really allowed to just stay in the country because you want to. So the Safe Third Country Agreement, or rather the Remainder in Mexico policy that we have tells people that show up at the border who cross illegally surrender, so they're not waiting at a port of entry. They're breaking the law. And then they surrender. They say they

want asylum. The Trump administration says no, no, Now you have to wait in Mexico and when it's time for you to have your hearing, then you show up at the border, present yourself. And what a shock to nobody. All of a sudden, the numbers are dropping. Wait a second, I thought that people from Central America were fleeing murderous thugs and gangsters. I thought they were fleeing for their lives. I thought they needed asylum. This wasn't just a backdoorway

to skip through the immigration process. Oh but you mean when you have to wait in Mexico for your hearing and therefore don't just get released to establish yourself and do whatever you want to do in the United States with a handshake agreement, you're going to show up for a hearing later. All of a sudden, a lot less

people are showing up at the border. It's almost like all along this was about pretending that they were going to go through the asylum process when really they just wanted to get waved into the country, knowing that they would be no enforcement afterwards and that the Democrats would stop any enforcement efforts every step of the way. Oh but then, what have we seen? This is the This is where things get more mixed, that this is the good story down sixty four to sixty four thousand. I

know that it's the summertime. You're going to expect fewer crossings than just because of the heat and the environmental factors that make a crossing more difficult, more dangerous. But keep in mind they're generally not these surrenders are not

occurring in the remote areas of the border. They're showing up at well patrolled areas of the border that in places like the Tijuana San Diego separation, that fence line where you're going from one urban area to another, you just show up and say all right, I want to claim asylum. So I don't know how much the weather really is impacting those It's the people that are going out into the desert and trying to evade border patrol entirely.

That's where you be. We're concerned, I think about the weather, but we should have what would be a win across the board here. Now you have a more orderly immigration process for asylum seekers from Central America. They still get their day in court, they still get their due process, but they don't just get to come into America and then we ask politely that they will show up when it's time for their hearing. They get to stay in

Mexico until the hearing happens. And guess what Democrats hate this. In fact, there's a story in the Washington Examiner that makes a very explosive claim that there have been some members of a House staff House Oversight Committee staff looking at what's going on at our southern border and deciding that they would have some staffers who would interview and even try This is Congresswoman Escobar's team, I believe, as quote sought interviews with six thousand people who are returned

last month. According to CBP, officials. The Union learned from intelligence unit within CBP that those doing the interviews are wearing recording devices. They went through and interviewed everybody, cherry picked them, brought them back, and now are using them as taglines. They're going over there and manufacturing a lot of these issues. This is all according to Customs in Border Patrol. This is a US congresswoman's office is going down there and trying to tell people how to get

through the system. This was published in the Washington Examiner. Quote. By opposing a system that assists migrants and speeds wait times, these individuals are exposing a cause that looks more like a cover for their political motivations. Any efforts to subvert and obstruct federal law enforcement operations should receive a full federal review. The piece here is the Democratic congresswoman secretly

sending staff into Mexico to coach asylum seekers. That's right, Democrat member of Congress has staffers going down to Mexico to tell people waiting for their day in court. Oh, here's how you can get there more quickly. Here's what you say. And now people are showing up and claiming

to Customs and Border Patrol or Border patrol agents. Oh well, I shouldn't have to wait because I have a learning disability, or I shouldn't have to wait because I don't speak Spanish and I'm stuck in Mexico Spanish speaking country or whatever. They're trying to help them find loopholes. That's right. This is just encouraging fraud and lawlessness from Democrats because they never wanted the process to work better. They always knew what was going on here. They were completely lyne about

this from the start. They said, Oh, we don't want illegal immigration, we just want a side least to have their day in court. Will Now they're getting their day inn court, but they just can't run the scam anymore. I've told you what the scam is. The scam is you say you're gonna show up in court, you don't. You're in America, You're good to go. So this clearly has had an effect. You have a huge drop in

illegal crossings over the last few months. Some of it due to Mexican government efforts, I'm sure, but a lot more of it. It It is just less people showing up because guess what, the loophole is a lot smaller now, it's a lot harder to pull this off. What are democrats doing actively doing? Oh, that's right, subverting this, subverting the rule of law. And then they get an assist from a federal judge. I don't want to guess where

this federal judge is. Where is he located. It's kind of remarkable, isn't How many times does the Trump administration take action, right, action, just action on immigration, only to have it overturned by some judge somewhere? Where do these judges tend to be from? Let's write a federal judge

in California, what a surprise? Restored a nationwide injunction today that blocks the Trump administration from enforcing restrictions designed to curb asylum claims by Central Americans seeking entry into the US. So even when we win, folks, federal judge comes along, Even when the rule of law looks like it has

some glimmers of life, glimmers of hope. All it takes is one Obama or Carter or Clinton appointee to come along and say, yeah, no, I'm in charge of federal immigration policy now, not you, not the federal government, not President Trump, not the White House, not the Executive branch. Just one lowly federal judge somewhere can decide that we

can't secure our southern border. And this is where I say to you, one We've seen now without question, you have the hashtag judiciary, the hashtag resistance judiciary, rather working against the rule of law, which is, if there's anything that undermines our court system, it's the lawlessness of libs in these black robes sitting on judges benches right that

undermines the rule of law. And now we see the truth of both what these so called asylum seekers and the Democrats knew all along, which was that this was never really about asylum, was always about using asylum as a pretext, as a scam to get into America illegally, to break faith and trust with the American people, and

just do it. Because people want access to our markets, they want access to our welfare benefits, they want, you know, a better economy, and yes, they want to live in a country that actually has rule of law, unlike some

of these Central American states we're talking about. But we're not going to have rule of law for very long if people can violate it with impunity systematically, hundreds of thousands of them, with a complicit Democrat party That is what we face right now, Make no mistake about it. I was an undercover CIA operative. My assignment was preventing rogue states and terraces from getting nuclear weapons. You name a hotspot, I lived it. Then Dictainey's chief of staff

took revenge against my husband and leaked my identity. His name Scooter Livy. Guess who pardoned him last year. I come from Ukrainian Jewish immigrants. Dad was in the Air Force. My brother almost died in Vietnam. My service was cut short when my own government betrayed me. We left Washington to raise our kids in New Mexico, one of the best places on Now. I'm running for Congress because we're running backwards on national security, healthcare, and women's rights. We

need to turn our country around. Yes, the CIA really does teach us how to drive like this. You've probably heard my name, and mister President, I've got a few school Okay. Yeah. We get the idea of Valerie Plaie running for Congress as a Democrat, of course, which we've known all along, is what she was. That was her campaign at her campaign launch. It's an utter absurdity, full

of outright lies, silly exaggerations and make believe badassery. I had the same driving training that she did, folks, and let me tell you it's not nearly as impressive as she wants to pretend. It is that same a lot of training as she did. And I would never run around doing all this like whoa look at me? It

shuts ridiculous, ridiculous. And yet here we are, she's inflating her resume, lying about Scooter libby lying about what happened there, which is that Armitage accidentally leaked her name to a journalist and felt horrible about it and told and told people about it right away. But the special counsel, though, that's right, Fitzgerald, Oh, Patrick Fitzgerald, Do you mean James Comey's lawyer and close friend that guy. Yeah, he knew who leaked the name, and guess what, he decided to

have a special counsel investigation to just find somebody. Democrats understand this game. We never learn our lesson, folks. They used the special counsel or just trying to jam up anybody who's close to the Republicans in power with nonsense, trumped up charges Assi like Valerie plan there was I'm

the what are the send of Ukrainian Jewish immigrants or something. Okay, so we're supposed to forget about the whole retweeting of the anti Semitic, nasty article that she shared, right clear, some clear anti semitism that was supposed to just get swept aside. Now, journalists are all very very much invested in this narrative, though, the Valerie play narrative, because they they ran this. This was the Russia collusion story of

its day. My friends, this was Bush and Cheney are traitors who would out a CIA officer, as we know, not agent, we don't say agent, a CIA officer to get back at her because her husband was writing editorials the New York Times. I mean, the story was ridiculous. It was ridiculous. And now all this, oh, I learned how to do cool driving, and I'm a badass. I mean, give me a break, folks, I don't know. Some of you say, oh, you know, but she's an operative, Folks.

The operatives sit around and drink a lot of coffee and read a lot of reports. I hate to be the one that actually tells you this, but this is the truth. All right. Here's a fun fact for you. Nine nine out of ten operatives that I met in my day, you would rather have had Buck at your side in a bar fight or a gunfight, trust me, okay, And that's not saying much about me. It's like a

nerd society anyway. Valerie playing giant, fraud, nasty person and Democrat hero though, and the media loves her, or at least they did. We'll see if she can resurrect herself here. They're dead. They're dead, as far as I'm concerned. They're dead. They thought that they had to kill people in order to put themselves in a little better negotiating position. When they did that, they killed twelve people. One happened to be a great American soldier, a wonderful young man from

Puerto Rico. Families from Puerto Rico. And you can't do that. They can't do that with me. So they're dead as far as I'm concerned. And we've hit the Taliban harder in the last four days, and they've been hidden over ten years. So that's the way it is. President Trump has shut down the plant talks with the Taliban in at Camp David. You're gonna be the Taliban leadership at Camp David. This was gonna be done in secret, but came out of the week and the President said no more,

not gonna happen. After there was a large terror attack by the Taliban, and I think that was the right move. Now, I'm just gonna say this to you because I always tell you what I really think. I think it was a mistake. I think it was a mistake for President Trump to have ever invited the Taliban to Camp David. Yeah, I know, people say, what about aarra Fat bucket. Okay, it's a different situation at a different time. Just because that was done then doesn't mean this should be done now.

And by the way, I'd be open to maybe Aara Fat wouldn't be invited to Camp David didn't work, by the way, But here we have a situation where our enemy in active hostilities is being invited to a place that I think is generally reserved for more civilized discussions with a more civilized enemy. The Talent Band is a disgrace. It is a terrorist organization. We I don't have to go through all the things that it does that offend

the conscience of any decent human being. They kill women and children on purpose, they mutilate, they torture, they engage in the worst kinds of battlefield atrocities, and now we're supposed to think that President Trump should invite them to Camp David. Look, I think that Trump on the main issue here is correct, which is end this war. And this war it's just we need to stop. I don't know what it's going to take to get some it's fellow conservatives in many cases that disagree with me on this,

but no more. And people will say that let me work through a few of the objections here. They say, well, Buck, if we if we don't leave a presence there, then it will be used again as a platform for mass casualty attacks. I can tell you this. If the Taliban decides that they're season territory and then they're going to use that as training camp areas and areas for plotting and all that for al Qaeda, then I think that they should understand that the first time it doesn't have

to be on a nine to eleven scale either. The first time there's an attack planned off of Afghan soil. I mean, we're going in and they're just going to be a carpet bombing campaign. We're just gonna lay waste to places. And I know right now that might sound a little bit oh my gosh, buck, but what about the we're done with this. We're done with this. You know, at some point when you're gonna have to fight wars the way wars used to be fault, which is break

the other side until they submit. That's what you gotta do. We fight wars very differently now because we are a just and honorable and kind society. But if the Taliban plots another or allows I should say, and it's complicit in another mass casualty terror attack against Americans against our interests, working with al Qaeda, ay, any external terrorist plotting like that that gets after us or our people, the plan should be to lay absolute waste to whatever they're at

control of. I mean, it would be what we did before, except this time around there would be very little mercy. So we can just tell them. We make this very clear, you guys, they learned the hard way the first time. It's worth noting they were not expecting us to do

what we did after nine to eleven. They did not think that we would have special forces on the ground in a matter of weeks, and that we would with our air power, just turn the tide of war against them, and that was not the expectation, and I think that that did rattle them. But this time around it wouldn't just be that. So that's one part of this. Now that's not a perfect solution, but I think that that's real.

Keep in mind that there are also plenty of places, unfortunately far too many places around the world where gee hottests already have the ability to plot, train equip There are safe haven areas certainly in Yemen, in Sinai Peninsula, in Syria, in Iraq, in well in Iroq, not as much, but certainly in Syria. And there are places, you know, Nigeria, Somalia, places where there's external plotting going on on the global ge hottest attacks being planned. So we're not invading every place,

you know. We have this sense that Afghanistan is the place where all the terrorists want to plan the attacks, but they can plant attacks from inside Pakistan. They can plant attacks from inside a basement in New Jersey. They've done that. So keep that in mind as well. That the set mission, the counter terrorism mission, was accomplished a long time ago in Afghanistan. We are not really there

primarily now in a counter terrorism function. We are there rebuilding a country that is from a civil society, infrastructure and just developmental perspective, about a hundred years behind the First World at Afghanistan from an infrastructure and development perspective is probably somewhere in the nineteen twenties or nineteen thirties. And some of you might say that's being kind, but

that's the truth. We're going to rebuild this country, rebuild it into what and then we get into, okay, well, what's acceptable when it comes to negotiation with the Taliban. This is really this is really where this gets uncomfortable, folks. The truth is, we don't have to negotiate anything with

the Taliban. We could just leave. All we're doing is trying to get assurances and put in place measures trip wires, if you will, for our diplomacy, to make them think twice before doing what I am almost certain they are going to do, which is, as soon as they think that they have a clear path, try to take over the rest of the country. Again, I won't be easy. There are still the remnants of the old Northern Alliance and then the non Pashtun northern reaches of Afghanistan would

still resist that. And you know, there's there is an Afghan National Army, there is an Afghan National Police that have received a lot of training, and how much better are they now they were then? I know that's that's a complicated discussion of itself, but there's no future in which we leave in Afghanistan that does not have a Taliban. And there is no future in which when we deal with the Taliban we can be dealing with people who

are honorable and who are decent. Because they're not, they're not. That's never going to change. So where does that leave us, Well, do we want to end this war or not? Do we want to stop having responsibility for holding this place together? Or are we just going to say that this is now. It's been almost twenty years, almost twenty years of US troops in this country, and people who say, oh buck, what about Germany and South Korea and Japan? Those are

stable societies. We're not getting, you know, suicide bombers driving into our barracks in Japan and South Korea. This is different. This is US soldiers deployed in an active combat zone, taking casualties, taking the fight to the enemy. And I mean it's good to hear that. As President Trump was pointing out they have been fighting the Taliban even while these talks are ongoing, so we're they're taking battlefield casualties. But here's the other part of this. Taliban doesn't care

about battlefield casualties. They use young people as cannon fodder. Tell them they're mujahideen, and they're you know, they're badasses, they're tough, go out there, fight some Americans do a suicide attack. Whatever. They don't care. Every life is cheap to the Taliban. They they'll lose people fighting and not thing twice about it. So that's not We're not gonna We're not gonna shoot our way out of the out of the Taliban or out of dealing with the Taliban.

It's not gonna happen. So then there became this big media frenzy, not just around the strategy and what should be done here, because the meetia would usually you would think, be in favor of what the administration is trying to do, which is get us out of a war zone. But get us out of a war zone is a secondary consideration to the media's favorite thing to consider and think about here, which is how does this make Trump look bad?

And that's why they're pushing him on who, well, who called for this meeting and who canceled this meeting and how did all of it go? No, Actually, in terms of advisors, I took my own advice. I liked the idea of meeting. I've met with a lot of bad people and a lot of good people during the course of the last almost three years, and I think meeting is a great thing. I think that meeting with you know,

you're talking about war, there are meetings with war. Otherwise wars would never end, you'd have them go on forever. We had a meeting schedule. It was my idea, and it was my idea to terminated. I didn't even I didn't discuss it with anybody else. When I heard, very simply that they killed one of our soldiers and twelve other innocent people, I said, there's no way I'm meeting on that basis. There's no way I'm meeting. They did

a mistake. And by the way they are telling people they made a big mistake, they're saying it loud and clear that they made a big mistake. A president made the right move here by canceling the talk. So I agree with him on that. I just think the talks never should have been scheduled for Camp David on US

soil in this way. I think, if anything, you meet them in some third party venue, in some third country, maybe Europe, in the Middle East, have discussions there, but not invite them as guests of the administration on the US soil. I started to get worried. I hope Trump isn't gonna do this with Kim Jong Own. I see here in North Korea is also saying they're ready to resume nuclear or talks with President Trump. You know, he

does need a win here at some point, folks. I'm not saying that we have passed that, we have passed a phase where if he doesn't get a win, it's he's he's clearly already failed. But you know, whether it's China or North Korea or the Taliban, we do need some We do need the ball to move here. It's not enough to just keep saying, well, give him time, give him time, give him time. He's got four years to make something happen to get us to another four years. And I think that right now on you know, our

chief negotiator, the pressure is definitely getting stronger. There's more pressure now because he has not yet delivered on any of these very high stakes negotiations. And I also think that we need to be just psychologically prepared as a country for things too. If we do end the war in Afghanistan, we do so, we should do so knowing that things may be very bad. It might get very bad very quickly there, and that's still the choice that

we're making. Otherwise, we just have troops there that are keeping this country from boiling over forever, and that should not be our role. That's not what our military should be doing, and it's not a mission set that we should take on. Whereas Press sees this, all is just an opportunity to bash Trumps. No surprise there. They see this as Oh, in the days leading up to nine to eleven, the President of the United States was going to hold a meeting at Camp David with the Taliban.

It's so outrageous that he would do this. I think it was a bad move. I don't think it was an outrageous move. I think it was the wrong decision. I don't think it was a decision made for the wrong reasons. I do have this for you, though, as a thought. If the President's stance on this, because I don't always agree with Trump, especially on some foreign policy areas.

I think that he goes back and forth. Right if the president is correct, and I think he is in this regard, that it was the right move to shut down talks with the Taliban after they killed innocent people in a terror attack in order, in their own words, to gain more leverage for these talks, essentially to show us, see, we still can kill a dozen people at will. We still the Taliban can murder and maime and cause death

and destruction. So you know, you better do what we want and take o take our concern seriously in these negotiations. That is the mentality of a group that is never going to be decent, It's never going to be honorable. Why should we think that the Taliban is going to wake up in six weeks, six months, six years and be an entity that would keep its commitments, that would engage honorably in diplomacy and negotiations. It's not going to It's just not going to happen. So I would prefer

that we all prepare for that reality. Understand the enemy that we are dealing with and what they're going to do as soon as they can as soon as they have the opportunity. It is very likely that they're going to try to make a run on the rest of the country or ways we can help, but we're not helping by having our men and women in uniform in that country doing the fighting that afghan should be doing. It has been almost twenty years. What do we really think is going to change this time. I was in

Afghanistan a decade ago, my friends. I can tell you I saw the highest level assessments and information in that country for the military, for the intelligence community just wasn't going to happen. Then we cannot create a stable, peaceful Afghanistan for the Afghan people. We can't and we don't want to because the US would be too high for us. It's not our fight. And if we leave, and we should, and that means that bad things happen. We need to understand that. So be it bad things happen, I'll be

right back. It's just another example of the president treating foreign policy like it's some kind of game show. This isn't a game show. These are terrorists. Yeah, Democrats now lecturing everybody on taking terrorism seriously. That's right, Democrats that have so many times in the past, taking the position that what we are doing to fight against terrorists, that's the cause of terrorism. You know, it's our fighting back against this that creates it all in the first place.

But I suppose, even in these very clear areas of what should be some degree of if not bipartisan agreement, at least bipartisan respect and the air of Trump, anything anything goes now. Insult him on foreign policy, insult the commander in chief, Say he's a traitor, Say he's a more on Sai coward. I mean, here, here's Joe Biden getting in on it too. Our president isn't up to this moment. We all know that where he lacks the moral authority of the league. This president has more in

common with George Wallace than George Washington. A disgusting smear said by an idiot who will repeat whatever smear as somebody else tells him to. That's all you really need to know about Joe Biden. Guy is just intellectually worthless and doesn't seem to have a backbone to speak of either. But this Horowitz thing is important when you think about what Jim Comey did. He's the guy solely responsible for putting the country through three years of this saga we

have now lived through. Jim Comey's a guy who started the Trump Russia investigation. Jim Comey's the guy who put Peter Struck, the guy with this bias against the president, the guy who ran the Clinton investing, the guy who put him in charge. Jim Comey's the guy who's responsible for the dossier being used to go get a warrant to spawn a fellow American citizen. And Jim Comey's the guy who linked the information to the New York Times through his friend to get the special counsel in the

first place. So he's the guy who created this hol darned mess. And yet we're not going to bring him in after the scathing report by Michael Horrors, We're not going to bring in the Inspector General to answer questions. That's ridiculous. So they're so focused on impeachment they're missing I think the important things that we should be that we should be addressing. Remember when the Russia collusion story was the most important thing in the world to about

ninety percent of the media. It's important to go back and just take a little trip down memory lane. Here. It was the biggest story in the world, according to the press, the most important thing. Best sellers were written about how Trump was a pawn of the Russians working with them to steal an election. Careers were built on this fraud, this outright fraud, and now we're supposed to just walk away from it because Democrats can't make it stick.

People simply who normal people, I should say, I mean, the media still believes that they can make it go of this. Normal people don't care. Normal people don't want to be put through this, don't want to listen to this, don't want to hear about how there's a new theory of Trump Russia collusion, or there's some other level of

this that we haven't seen before. I think that one of the underlying premises that many people who are in the positions of authority and power our society, who hate Trump, who think that people like you and me that support Trump do so out of ignorance or bigotry or hatred or whatever it is, because we're just not smart, you know, whatever it is that they say. I think they haven't figured out yet that it's never going back to what

it was. We're not going back to a point in time where oh yeah, CNN, they're kind of a moderate down the middle journalistic enterprise. Whether you believe that was ever true or not, no serious well informed person couldn't believe that anymore, and no serious well informed person could

believe that going forward. You know, is the Democratic Party really just concerned with working people and believes in many of the same fundamental americanisms that the rest of us do, but they just have a different a different approach to get us there. Or are they really a bunch of socialists? We all know the answer is number two, and that's never going to change. That's not We're not going back

to a time before that. We're not going to a period in history when all of a sudden we're gonna We're not going back to a period of history where we can have a conversation with them and we say, Okay, we want the same thing, So let's just start from that assumption. I don't think we do want the same thing as the Democratic Party. I don't want them in

charge of everything in my life. I don't want them making huge decisions about winners and losers, about the trajectory of the economy, about everything, anything about how America is not really any better than any other country, and we should probably just fall in line let the UN call the shots. I'm not on board for that. I do not believe that that's a good idea. But they still think that we're going back to this other place there, that pre Trump America is just one election away, and

it's not true. It's not true. I do wonder still what we're supposed to make of all that, all that wasted breath, all that bullcrap about impeachment that we heard from them so many times, so much of it. Where did that all go? The Michael Cohen hearing didn't work out the way they wanted, the John Dene hearing didn't work out the way they wanted, and of course the Bob Muller hearing and that investigation did work out the

way they wanted. But that doesn't stop them. They're going to continue to push this ridiculous impeachment narrative at the cost of I mean, one of the first things you learn in college economies class one on one is opportunity costs. So when they're focused on this warrantless impeachment inquiry, you're not getting done the things we need to be doing, like fixing the border situation, dealing with the intellectual theft of intellectual property, theft of China, things we're supposed to

deal with on the Judiciary Committee. And they're also not going back and saying, you know what, we were wrong. We were wrong about some of this stuff. We probably shouldn't have chased down these things the way that we did. But Democrats can't change who they are. I suppose they still really believe that this is something the American people

want to see. They still really believe that this is something that could be of the I should say, they haven't decided yet is it of political benefit to them? And that's what we'll make the final termination as to whether or not there is an impeachment hearing. I think if they impeach Trump, they guarantee his reelection because it

shows that this all along was fixed. Now they're saying that the reason they want to impeach him is there's a well, you know, it's a combination and now it's the combo platter, it's the Emolument's clause, the twenty fifth Amendment, Russia collusion, racism, didn't show his tax return, There's all these things. It's like, no, just because you don't like him doesn't mean that he should be impeached. But that's where the Democrats are. They can't get beyond their their

anti Trump emotions. They've gone truly pathological with this stuff now, right now, they hold everybody in line with this one kind of a piece of doctrine about abortion, right, which is obviously a tough issue for a lot of people to think through morally. Then again, you know, there's a lot of parts of the Bible to talk about how life begins with breath, and so even that is something

that we can interpret differently, and me too. But I think no matter where you think about the kind of cosmic question of how life begins, most Americans can get on the board with the idea of all right, I might draw the line here, you might draw the line there, But the most important thing is the person who should be drawing the line, is the woman making the decision. Nope, wrong,

ethnically wrong, morally morally wrong, spiritually wrong, doctrinally wrong. I don't I don't know how much more wrong he could get bringing up life begins at breath? Is he serious? That is such a a's a barbaric and utterly stupid and I have been deeply unimpressed with Mayor Pete, who went to fancy schools and has a road that was a road school. I've tolbably the RhoD scholarships are very political, and you know Bill Clinton was a RhoD scholar, and

people get all excited about this. It's really a lot, a lot of nonsense. Mayor Pete has been very unimpressive to me this entire time, and I just like to call him Mayor Pete really because I don't his last name is complicated. Otherwise I would just refer to him as Buddha judge. It's hard to say. What he said there though, is barbaric. And it's interesting that he doesn't defend the position, but he puts it out there. He kind of floats this, Well, maybe life begins at at breath, huh.

I wonder how Mayor Pete would feel if he had, let's say, a great aunt who was on a respirator. Otherwise totally fine, and somebody went and just said, you know what, can't breathe on your own life? Life requires breath, and you can't breathe on your own. So we're just gonna pull the plug. Yeah, she's gonna make a full recovery, but don't worry about that. We're gonna pull the plug because life begins at breath or life continues at breath.

Anybody who believes in medical ethics or just ethics period would have to hear what may Or Pete said and think that this is horrific and this is barbaric. This isn't even an area where we would have a good faith disagreement. We're not having an argument with may or Pete here about whether life begins at conception, which some would say, there's a oh okay, well what is the conception? And when you know, there's all this is an implantation,

and people get into this. I mean, I think life the only consistent position is that life begins a conception. But at least you could see that there's a discussion to be had, maybe to explain to the other side that life begins at conception. But I don't want to sit around and have a conversation about how a baby that has its own heart, its own brain, its own central nervous system, its own genetic material, its own everything, but it's just waiting to be brought out into the

world is not really a baby. I don't know how we can have an honest, good faith discussion with the other side about this, because if they won't concede this, then they're just living in a fantasy. The left has really lost its mind. We see this. Now they've lost their mind on climate change, they've lost their mind on open borders, they've lost their mind on socialism, and now they've lost their mind on abortion too. This is not in the gray area. This is not oh, what are

we going to do? How do we handle this? This is complicated. This isn't complicated at all, and it's not a moral stance to say, oh, well, it's just up to the choice of the individual involved. Should mean an ancient Rome, for example, I mean I could I can tell you this, as you know, I like history. In ancient Rome, the head of household, the father, had the power of life and death over everybody in his household, could kill a slave. You know, Slavery was widespread throughout

the Roman Empire. We often think of slavery in this country because of things like the New York Times sixteen nineteen project. We think it's a uniquely American institution, when in fact, we fought a very large war to end slavery, and we're part of the revolution in world affairs away from slavery, which had been the norm for societies stretching back for millennia around the globe. Obviously wrong on ethical I mean, you know, murder and pillaging your neighbor's village

was also the norm. Doesn't mean it's okay, but it just this was the way it was and then it changed. But to say that, to say that Pope Pete here has some moral high ground is stunning. And I think that he must be a panderer because he can't be this intellectually inept the things that he said when he goes to the Bible to justify his things. He loves

to do this. He's obsessed with talking about Mike Pence and obsessed with the Bible says this, and the Bible says that, you know, the Bible says some things that I'm sure Mayor Pete really doesn't like, well, like thou shalt not kill, for example. And if we have any question about whether or not this is a real you know what we were told when you had that the mayor who not the mayor, the governor Northam who wore the black face, but of course it's still the mayor,

still the governor. Rather, he said that did make an infant comfortable before they killed an infant outside the womb if the mother didn't want it. And then we were told, oh no, but that's not a real thing, that's not a real concern. That doesn't really happen. No, no, it does, it does. Here's a story from the Associated Press, as mainstream of news outlet as you'll find, about a woman who got to be twenty eight weeks pregnant without realizing that she was pregnant, and then chose to go across

state lines to have an abortion. This story is supposed to be a sympathetic tale of a woman who had trouble getting access to her constitutional right to an abortion, which just I choke on the words, because only a moron thinks that the constitution gives somebody a right to an abortion. But we have to live in a moronic society because of people's choice to pervert the law and morality.

But here's here's what the Associated Press quotes, or here's what they talk about in this piece where this woman is going to have an abortion at twenty eight weeks into a pregnancy. What I would learn the hard way is when you first started taking first control, the first couple of weeks, that first like a few days, you're your most fertile. So I got pregnant in early February, and I wouldn't know have the suspicion I was pregnant until about late July. I wasn't really talking to my

family and so there wasn't any support there. I was feeling pretty isolated, pretty pretty panicky. I was housing insecure at the time, like I had just started a job. I didn't have any support, and so she then had to in her mind find a way to relieve herself of this burden, the burden of bringing life into this world. And here is what she said happened thereafter. I said that they would be able to help me, but I had to get there before I turned twenty eight weeks,

and so I had less than ten days. And they said that my procedure would cost about ten five hundred dollars, so they know who's going to pick them up. It's not a decision to be made lightly because on top of or like I didn't make it lightly because it was on top of a large emotional like turning point, like decision to make in my life. It was a large financial decision to make. When I started to put my story out there, it's then people started reaching out

to me. They're like, oh, I'm so glad you said, like you you're open about this because I went through something similar and I've never known anyone else. This is right here. What makes it worth it Because if I can give back to people the one thing that I wanted more than anything when I was going through this, then my work is then I've done what I've set up to do it like my work is done. This is a very sad story. It's very sad that she chose just shy, what was it a few days shy

of twenty eight weeks then you have an abortion. It's very sad that she has been convinced by leftists here in America and by liberals, by the abortion lobby, by you know, nay rowl and planned parenthood and all the rest, that a baby that is seven months old, if you would like, and it will be a difficult thing to do, but you can google what a seven month old baby looks like. It looks like a baby, and not only does it look like a baby, overwhelmingly babies at seven

months are entirely viable outside the womb. They could do a quick cesarian section if they had to, and have that baby out and breathing and crying and being a little baby with little tiny hands, a little tiny feet kicking around in minutes. But she thinks that this was a moment of coming together, and she received support for the decision to terminate the babies, terminate her own baby's life, and the Democratic Party has convinced young women across the

country that this is a good thing. In fact, it is something to be celebrated. It's a right to be cherished. Whenever you have your doubts about which side is morally in the darkness, which side is confused, which side is fighting for the wrong things, remember this story and think about all the people that you know that you think of as conservatives, whether friends in your day to day life, whether your pastor people that you see on TV, that

you listen to on radio. Who knows that this is wrong, what this woman did, what happened here, and who doesn't. And it really is a very important test because if someone doesn't know that this is wrong, they don't know that anything is wrong. And this society has really lost its way that we even have to have this conversation that May or Pete other Democrat candidates all think that

what happened here is okay. There will come a time I've said this to you before where we will look back on the abortion regime in this country the way that people now look back on slavery as a horrific, immoral, inhumane regime of terror and genocide and oppression. That will happen. I don't know if it will happen in my lifetime, but it will happen because one thing I am very sure of, science is on our side here, folks, seven month old baby. We were told that this doesn't happen. Well,

here the AP is telling us it does happen. Seven month old baby. At least you're on the right side of this one. We'll be right back. Well. I think there's no question that US economy is in very good shape. Look around the world. There's no question that China is slow and is slowing. The US is the right spot of the world. And regards to a middle class tax cut, you know, we'll be looking at tax cuts two point zero. It's something that will be something next year. But right now.

The economy isn't very very good changed. It was just announced that we had a record setting jobs report for the month of August, and African American jobs were the lowest unemployment rate in the history of our country. Likewise, Hispanic job report just came out, lowest unemployment rate in the history of our country. The women are doing great, Asians also lowest in the history of our country. It's incredible what's happening. Our economy is strong, our country is great.

We've never been at a better position. More people are working today in the United States than at any time in the history of our country, almost one hundred and sixty million people. So to all fellow American citizens, I say one simple word, congratulations. Sometimes I do a segment with you here on the Buck Sexton Show where I feel like, maybe this isn't going to be the most This isn't the most compelling radio it's not. It's not a new insightful idea, but I think you need to

hear it. And maybe it's just I think I need to say it too. The economy is booming. Remember if you will, the narrative after Bill Clinton dragged the country through all kinds of his personal mess is lying under oath and you know all that stuff. What you would hear from from so many Democrats was but we were at peace and we were prosperous, and that was that. That was all that you had to say. That was everything.

We were at peace and we were prosperous. Whatever Bill Clinton did in the Oval Office, whoever he did it with, and whatever he said about it didn't matter. This was the story. So I just got so excited. I just like whacked the microphone by accident. Hopefully it didn't make too much noise. Take that to microphone. It's gonna cost us money buck watching. Oh yeah, they're gonna find me

microphone abuse. I've heard some other radio shows. They gotta tell you a lot of microphone abuse going on there, but not with anyone's hand. So just saying, here's the situation the media. The media is focusing in on the most minute, nonsensical stories in part to distract, I think, to prevent any coverage of the really strong economy, and also just because they can't help themselves. They think that their audiences really just want to see anti Trump propaganda,

that that's what matters. Everything else is secondary to that, and I do believe that they have convinced themselves and not just bad Stouter. It's like, I just understand how the President doesn't think they were. It's all fair. I mean,

we're stell fair. But I also think that we need to double down at batch the president even more because he's a terrible Okay, this is what we're heading into, though, the most important decisions about news coverage in the country leading into an election, and I don't you know, if you're listening to this show, you must care about the news somewhat, But the most important decisions will be what is and is not covered. That's even more powerful than

how they cover things. Although as you know, based on what we saw with Trump, you know, they always find a way to make it about how he's bad. And that's why the coverage of the of Hurricane Dorian was interesting because it was decided before any before the first rain drops had fallen on dry land anywhere, it was decided that Trump needed to have a this needed to be used as a weapon against Trump. And that's when you Molly Hemingway, she was on I was on Fox

on Sunday and Molly was on right before me. Yet she had a great, a great mini rant on this.

They're completely beclowned themselves. And think about that Chiron. It says, as people die, Trump is doing this, So as people die, CNN and other media outlets are focusing on what exactly almost because you almost get the feeling that the media decided at the beginning of the week they were going to make Trump's handling the hurricane a major story, and then it turned out that the hurricane didn't make landfall in a way that was as devastating as they planned,

and so all they were left with was the map, and then they went with that. Anyway, at some point you have to, you know, a you shouldn't have just an oppositional stance as you as your approach, but if you need to have better news judgment, I mean I would I would like to ask any of the and Molly's totally right, although I think that this is now our expectation is that they're always they've always decided what they're going to do when it comes to Trump before

he does anything. But I would like to know does anyone hold the position, does any serious person hold the position that CNN is not oppositional that The New York Times, the Washington Post, MSNBC, NPR, ABC News, CBS News. Does anyone hold the position that they are not oppositional through this president? I would love to have that. There's not a person in America that I would be the leastmit

concerned about debating on that point. In fact, I would throttle, I would shellack, I would annihilate anybody in public on that debate because it's so obvious, it's so clear, and yet they don't agree to it. They still keep this this facade going of oh no, though, we're just covering Trump as he needs to be covered. I don't think so, not on my watch. Not acceptable, not true. It's time

for a woman in the White House. They're yelling, whoa Elizabeth Warren fans there, everybody, buddy, time for a woman in the White House? Can we just can we just may the best man or a woman win the race? That do we have to segregate this contest by gender all of a sudden or or right at the at the outset, do we have to do that? I'd rather not. I'd rather see who is good at this. I'd rather see who the best option may be for the American people.

But no identity politics going to be very very strong in this whole thing, and that's not going to change. That's not going to change at all. In fact, Bernie Sanders, I mean, you have Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, two of the despite what Elizabeth Warren said, for most of her professional life, two of the whitest human beings you will ever see anywhere. I mean, they are, you know, there is nothing but whiteness when you're talking about Warren

and Sanders. And yet they're both obsessed with appealing to the tenets of diversity, multiculturalism, and identity politics all all put together, I mean here here, And what's amazing is that they think that those who don't embrace that, who don't think that skin color determines political or should determine political beliefs as Democrats do, that individuals of different ethnicities should not think for themselves, they should think the way

that they are told to think based on their skin color, as Democrats do. That the people that have a problem with that, they're they're the ones that are dividing us up right, the people that believe in individual thought, who believe that we all should be able to think through what matters to us what's important, what is just, and what is good as human beings, we're the bad guys whore he send us for example, he's the good gun because you know, it's Trump who wants to divide us.

I think that all the Democrats do is divide us because the things that should be neutral in American life with respect to with respect to race and gender. You know, we all want a strong economy, we all want rule of law. We all want a secure or at least we used to all want a secure border. Those things that it used to be that we would argue with the other side over how to get there. Now we're

increasingly told no, we want fundamentally different things. And oh, by the way, the Democrats want you to think that we want fundamentally different things based upon ethnic origin, background, skin color, etc. That there's only one acceptable belief that people of certain skin colors can have, and if you veer outside of that, you're you know, you're a tool of the right, you're a conservative, you're a fake, you're a phony. Here's Bernie Sanders hitting the identity politics issue.

So gad, we are going not only to win this election, but together we are gonna build an unprecedented grassroots movement. Trump wants to divide us up. We're gonna bring our people together, black and white, Latino, Native American, Asian American, gay and strike immigrant Native board. I don't think that that's really what Democrats want to do. I think that they would much prefer a coalition of different identity politics

based constituencies that they can call upon. But it's gonna be very hard for them to pretend that they want unity when they will tell people, one, if you voted for Donald Trump, even if you voted for Obama once or twice before, if you vote for Donald Trump this time around, then you're clearly a racist. It's a very divisive and very nasty thing to say, an unfair thing

to say. And you look at the way that they talk about any number of policy initiatives and they break it down by race, they talk about, well, you know, there must be a different focus. You know, communities of color will view this this way versus everybody else will view it that way. I always I just stumble for a moment. I'm flabbergasted by how much that strikes me

as wrong and often really condescending from Democrats. That is what they do but you know what, what might actually unite us, the reality that Medicare for all is a horrible idea, a terrible idea. I'm going to complain to you later about my latest trials and tribulations with the

cable guy. And this is what The problems with moving are always the little things that turn into nightmares and you feel like you're losing your life to little, unimportant squabbles when you want to be focusing on the big stuff. But when you I have no recourse, when you are only given one option for a product and that is it,

things are bad all of a sudden. You know, I walk into a restaurant in New York City, and if I feel like they're being rude, you know, the staff, the matre d or the that makes it sound like I go to a fancy places. Oh buck, the matre d is being very rude. Do you no? But you know, if you're going somewhere and you don't like it and you feel like they're being weird you or you don't like the table, and this is true in most places

now where there's at least some critical massive population. You don't like the place, get up, leave, go find somewhere else. There's always somewhere else to eat in America. I mean, with very few exceptions, there's always somewhere else you can go. But that's a good thing because it means that when you go into a restaurant, there's a real incentive for

the people in that restaurant to keep your business. This is a this is a real thing that you see working in your own life all the time, whether you're going into Shay Fancy Pants or you know, the staff there, the individuals there. You know, is the place clean, is it well kept? Are they being nice to you? Is it welcoming? The answers, no, you go somewhere else. And so because of that cause and effect, there's a real effort to keep you when you have a Medicare system

that is entirely that that becomes the whole system. Get ready to wait forever for practitioners to start retiring early and not get replaced, for government bureaucrats to tell you what services you can and can't get, how long you will wait, and that's going to be it. And unless you are and this is what this is what's true of so many of the libs that are pushing this. Unless you are wealthy enough and part of the elite such that you will just pay out of pocket for

whatever services you need. That's always going to be an option. There's always somebody that won't take any insurance who will be able to give you. And but you'll create a multi tiered medical system, gonna have everybody that's in the government medicare program, and then you're going to have people who are paying out of pocket who can afford to do it, and then they're gonna be the ones, I'm sure, because there'll be a lot of lives saying, oh, but

isn't it a great system we have? I mean, I'm not going to get healthcare in this system, but isn't it a great system we have? Interesting to hear a voice from the Democrats side of things who is considered a kind of a tough as tough as nails guy, and he was very very tight with Obama. So you know, there's a lot of a lot of baggage, a lot of problems there. But he's not dumb. I don't think anyone has ever said that Ram Emmanuel is dumb. He's not a dumb guy. He's a sharp guy. Doesn't mean

he's a good guy. But he's sharp. He knows that Medicare for All is for the Democrats, just bonkers positions so far in the candidates have through the process. If you have not about on basically Medicare for all, which is we're going to eliminate one hundred and fifty million people's healthcare and we're going to provide healthcare for people that just come over the border. That is an untenable

position for the general election. As you know, George, I just biked around Lake Michigan, nearly a thousand miles through Michigan and Wisconsin, two really important states. Nobody had a diner ran at me and said take my healthcare away. Nobody is this is reckless as it relates to and you don't have to take the position to win the primary, and you're basically literally hindering yourself for the general election.

It is a loser idea, the loser policy that the Democratic Party is I think so stuck in the throes of anti Trump psychosis that they couldn't figure this out. It tells you a lot about where the modern left has really gone. I mean tells you about where the Democratic Party is today in this country. But this is a non starter, and you're gonna hear on third say the Democratic debate, You're going to hear them talk about Medicare for all like it's not crazy, it's a horrible idea.

It would be incredibly expensive, and it would be very, very bad healthcare. And every doctor that I know that I've asked about this is said, yeah, this is And I know a lot of I know some lefty doctors too, but I've talked to a few a few mds about this and they say, yeah, this is going to be a big problem as it is. A lot of them don't want to take Medicare as it is. They don't want to deal with it. So now now basically ninety percent of the people walk in their office are going

to be on some kind of a Medicare program. It's not going to work. It's a something for nothing situation. And then back to my initial point about incentives, there's no incentive for anybody to give you good care. You don't matter. It have to be a systematic catastrophic failure in the Medicare for All system for anyone to pay attention to anything. You think that if all of a sudden you can't get the surgery you can't get the

medical treatment that you need. That Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer are going to lose a night's sleep, absolutely not. All they care about is what does it look like on the scoreboard for the Democratic Party? Does everybody now have health insurance? It might might mean that you can't get care. But if everyone's got insurance, that's a compelling story that gets people re elected. Central planning is flawed. It fails because it has to fail. This will fail too.

This will be healthcare central planning on a massive scale. It's a terrible idea. Even Democrats who know anything though, it's a terrible idea. But man, get ready for Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders to battle it out on Thursday. Really worthwhile peace that I would recommend for all of you in the Wall Street Journal. I'll tell you about it now, though, so you can just listen to me if you don't feel like starting a journal subscription to see it. It is by Robert Pondicio and the title

is the Secret of a Charter School Success Parents. This is a controversial topic. It shouldn't be. It's obvious. I've said to you before. I mean, the greatest advantage that I feel I've had in life is having parents who were involved, who cared, who stayed married, who kept the family together, and who made the family a priority. Greatest advantage I've had in life, more than anything else. And

you see this in all of the research. Whenever there's an honest study done about what the most important factor is, for example, in charter school success, just to take that as a subset's parental involvement. That's the secret to the success here, because the parental involvement generates greater student involvement, and it means everyone's on board from the household during

the commute to this school to picking them up. This was a fascinating piece because Success Academy, of which there are fifty of these charter schools called Success Academy in New York City, serves seventeen thousand students, over ninety percent of them or minorities. I mean, the Success Academy is almost entirely black and Hispanic students. And these are Black and Hispanic students that come from socioeconomic backgrounds that are struggling. Right.

These are not wealthy people. A lot of them are unwelfare, a lot of them are struggling financially, vast majority of them would be considered low income. That was the phrase I was looking for. And their kids are kicking butt, kicking butt in math and in English in the statewide tests that are the only real metric that anybody could look at. They're doing great. Over ninety percent of the young African American students in Success Academy are proficient math.

Over eighty five percent are proficient in English, you know, in language arts, whatever the specifics are, what they call it. Why is that the case? Well, the way they've set up Success Academy, and this is this is controversial, They say, Oh,

it's controversial. Why is it controversial? The way they set it up is that there's it's a lottery system, but the lottery system gets winnowed down very quickly, so that if you do everything you're supposed to do, you have a very good chance about fifty fifty of being able to get into a Success Academy school. But you have to show up. The parents have to show up, parents have to pick you up. There's no after school programs.

This isn't a glorified all day long babysitting program, which is what you have in a lot of these public schools, they say, oh, we need you know, this and that program and this and that. You know, the kids have been in school for a long time already to say that the expectation should be that they could be taken care of by the state until six or seven o'clock at night. That's a very long day. That's asking a

lot from a school district. But a lot of parents don't show up, even those who initially enter their kids into lottery, even those who seem to want a better future for their kids, they're not willing to do the basic work of show up and do what you say you're gonna do, be involved. The parents who do that

their kids overwhelmingly successful. And this just gives the lie to oh, if only we had more money in the school system, if only we had different or better resources, or you know, whatever the case may be, then everything would be better. Then everything would be fun. It's not about more money in the schools. I have friends here in New York City who teach in some of the

most well funded public schools you can find anywhere. They have this whole school school renaissance program, and there's there's these exceptional teachers and they have brand new, brand new laptops and computers in every classroom, and the classrooms are spotless, and there's the kids show up and they're rowdy, and they're disrespectful, and they don't want to learn, and they don't care to learn, and they're just glorified babysitting programs

where in many cases the teachers are being asked to be in loco parentis in place of parents. That's never gonna work. Every veteran teacher I know in the school system who's not just a little automaton of the teachers unions and doesn't view it hasn't just taken all the look because public schools are a form of socialism. It is a form of central planning. Everybody who hasn't just completely drank all the kool aid on how great our public school system is. If only there was more money,

if only there was more money. They'll tell you that you don't even really need to know much about the kids. You know, if they have a chance of success. Did the parents show up to parent teacher Knight, Is there an adult, a guardian who will pick the child up after school and who's on time after school? Oh but no, you see, no one wants to hear this. This is

not a politically popular thing to say. It's a much better narrative for the teachers in the schools to say that they just need more money, which of course we know goes to the adults. And there's been an explosion of non teaching adults making all kinds of salaries, getting all kinds of benefits in the system for doing very very little that you would consider real educating. There's been a sixfold increase of the last I think ten or fifteen years in an administrative staff in these schools and

in failing schools. Parents don't want to be told that they're supposed to be involved in their kids' education. They think that that's what the school does. Parents don't want to be told that they need to encourage their children and to read at home, they need to make sure the homework is done. They think that's what the school is for. But that's wrong, that's wrong. By the time the kid shows up and sits down in the classroom, it has already been largely decided what his or her

fate is going to be. And the decision is not the states, it's not the localities. It is the home who is raising this child, who's in charge of this child? What is he or she being told about his education? About respect for authority, about trying to better oneself, about trying to learn to be a good citizen, a good person. Those are the that's really all you need. That's those are the data points that will tell you whether or not there's a real prospect of academic success for the student.

And that's what this charter school. These charter schools prove. If the parents show up and care and they're involved, the kids don't just have a shot, they do very well. The parents who think that this is a taxpayer funded babysitting program, they don't care. They're too busy, they don't want it to they don't want to back the teacher up and say yes you need to learn, yes you

need to be quiet. They are never going to have the results they want, and we're just going to keep being told there needs to be more marty, They needs to be more money. We've been shoveling money to the Department of Education and to the public school system now for decades. Scores don't budge charter school school. Charter school scores do. There's a reason for that, as this guy says, parental involvement is the secret sauce. We must change almost

everything in our current societies. The bigger your combon footprint is the bigger your more duty, the bigger your platform, the bigger your responsibility. Adults keep saying we owe it to the young people to give them hope. But I don't want your hope. I don't want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel. At least she's being honest. She's holding press conferences here. I'm not looking for this stuff. This is a a global climate change celebrity. And she

is a child. I don't mean, oh, she's really young, like she's twenty four or something. No, I mean she's literally a child. I think she's ten, eleven, twelve, something like that. She is a preadolescent who is giving lectures two major media outlets about how we need to change everything in our society. They are creating a platform for this child to tell us about one of the most

complicated issues that you could ever conjure up. I mean, we might as well have a twelve year old tell us all about the meaning of life and that we need to you know, get get rid of all law and possessions, and just prepare for the end of days tomorrow. I mean it's it's really on the same intellectual plane as that. It is absurd beyond absurdity, And yet here we are media is treating it like she knows what she's talking about, but she's in a sense giving away

the game here. She said, I don't want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. That's what so much of the climate change hysterius driven by, I want you to panic. They believe that it's better if people think that the world is going to end, because then you'll listen to anything. I mean, what won't you do if somebody tells you that you know your your house is on fire and they're the only person who can put it out, You're not really going to think long

and hard about, well, are you a good firefighter? And what's in my house? And do I have fire insurance? And know you're just anything to get that problem dealt with. But this is textbook propaganda and using a child to do it. I notice that you have some journalists who like to do the How dare you criticize her? She's just a child? How dare you elevate her. She's just a child. As I've said, I don't blame her. She does she doesn't know anything if somebody took and I

don't think that. I know that liberals are not beyond this. This is a a desperation that they have psychologically. This is why you have many blue checks and this became a joke in response to it. Many blue checks will tell you, you know, I just think that I don't know how to respond to my four year old when she looked into the eyes and said, I think that Trump's fighting against universal injunctions in the federal courts is

undermining our constitutionality and destroying our democracy. Like your four year old didn't say that clearly, right. I mean these journals that pretend this, but they believe that there's some there's some purity, some authenticity, some some emotional secret weapon that comes from a child holding certain political beliefs. I mean, I remember when I was four or five years old.

I think my parents were trying to keep me from, you know, picking my nose too much and making sure that you know everything that needed to win in the potty or I don't know. I don't know if that's when you're four or when you're two. I'm not good with the kids stuff. But I know that I wasn't lecturing people on climate change though, But I have seen I have seen libs running around at gun rallies. It's just not just climate change. Gun rallies too, with their

kids have big placards on. You know, I want to live vote against guns. Kid didn't make the placard. This is like people trotting out their babies and onesies. That's say, you know, vote for Elizabeth Warren because your baby has a onesie on. That says so. I mean, look, people can dress their however they want, but it doesn't mean that I could take the political messaging seriously. Oh it's really stunning, it really is. But you have a child

that's still lecturing the whole world. It's not just the American people. She's a global she's a global celebrity who knows nothing about this, but she does want you to panic. This is about panicking. This is like the little kid from what's that m Night Shamalan movie I see dead people? Remember that what was that one called producer Mark? You know I'm talking about forget what it's didn't remember the

name yet. I don't remember the name either, but it's the one with Bruce Willis when oh, big spoiler, he's actually the ghost. This is like the little girl who's saying, you know, I see climate change. It's like, well, okay, so what Meanwhile, there's somebody with childlike intelligence who's not a child at all. He's actually quite old, who's essentially parroting the same kind of rhetoric she uses. But the greatest crisis of our time is climate change. We must

begin to get this under control, ladies and gentlemen. I immediately would call for a four hundred billion dollars increase in funding for alternatives, the new science and technology that will bring us down to zero net zero emissions by twenty fifty. And I'll immediately immediately rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, which our administration put together because the rest of the world is accountable for eighty five percent of the problem

and we need to lead them and there's no leadership. Now, yeah, that's right. China, India, the developing world, they're really going to make themselves much poorer because of climate change. I don't think so. What they're going to do is swindle the developing world into transfer payments, which is just nationality based redistribution of wealth from us to them, and they can laugh all the way. And then what happens when there are emissions are how do they how can we

even measure the emissions in these countries? They don't know. I don't know. When I was in China, it is. It is really unsettling when you see the skyline over Shanghai or the skyline over Beijing and it has a when the pollution is really dense and the sun is trying to break through it but can't. It does have

a post apocalyptic feel to it. It looks like you're you're seeing the the horizon in a movie where people are rolling around in modified pickup trucks with like big axes and scythes and things coming out of the sides, desperate to find, you know, whatever little water there is. I don't know how many of you have seen the Mad Max movies, but it feels a little bit like that, like it's a post nuclear situation. It's and you see it and that's answer it. But that's pollution. That's actual

pollutants in the air. It's not CO two. Does anybody really think that they're going to curb all their CO two emissions because Joe Biden tells them to. Who can believe this, But I'm prepared for even greater degrees of lunacy. At the Democrat debate coming up this Thursday, they're going to try and out lefty one another because the current trend is that some of the lower level left wing candidates are losing some support. And it's going to that's right,

it's going to Warren, and it's going to Bernie. It's not going to Biden. Biden's support so far seems to be what it is the Democrat left wing base, a true progressives the Democratic Party. They're not for Biden. And so as you have fewer candidates, you'll see I think that that's a bigger percentage than certainly they're going to pretend it is. When it comes time for the general election,

they're gonna act like, oh, they're a normal party. But on climate change, you just you hear them say these things. Biden says, four hundred billion dollars, four hundred billion dollars of your money, it's taking money from you spend on a make believe problem. And with that four hundred billion dollars spent. I would want to know how many lives for example, and I understand that this has now become a thing that I'm repeating for you, but I think

it's important. How many lives could be saved with four hundred billion dollars spent on opioid making sure that first responders have the drug, I forget what it's called, that will save somebody if they're going through an overdose. How many lives are saved from the treatment programs that could be set up, the law enforcement efforts to eliminate this stuff from the streets. You know, there's a lot of

mislabeling of these drugs that goes on. In fact, the cartels, as I've told you before, try to make the opioids that they are selling look like they come. They copy the imprints of pharmaceutical grade opioid, so it looks like a pharmaceutical grade, but it's not. It's just what they made in some that somewhere in the hinterlands of Mexico, and then people take it and it's the dosage is rog or the chemical compound is stronger, and then they die.

How many lives would be saved, the number of lives that would be saved by the government spending four hundred billion dollars to try to transition us even faster than we are currently transitioned to green energy. The number of lives, says is zero. It will save zero lives. The benefit to all of us from that spending will be nothing. It's just a lot of spending. It's like taking a lot of money, putting it in a hole in the ground and lighting it on fire. That's what Biden wants

to do because climate change. So I had a victory today, victory day, after four consecutive appointments Producer Mark, four of them spanning many hours I must have spent. I think it was I would conservatively estimate three hours on the phone in addition, in addition to the four appointments with the Verizon FiOS to try to get them to just install my cable and internet properly. And this morning they

finally did it. They finally did it after they had some glitch in the system where they kept listing me as part of a group outage. But I wasn't part of a group outage. So every time I'd make an appointment to get this fixed, they would cancel it. Out the last second, because that's how their system works, because they thinking, oh, you're part of this group outage. I wasn't part of the group out it's I was starting to turn into Jack Nicholas in the Shining, like I

was losing my mind. And then I'd have to explain to somebody on the phone for thirty minutes, you know, I have to wait for fifteen minutes and then get on the phone what happened. And then they would do another appointment, and then they would cancel it out again, and you know what, at the end of the day, do you know what my prize is for getting cable

and internet installed properly? A really expensive bill correct, way, way way more money than I should be spending on cable and internet, of which they will waive none of the fee they had. Their Their official Verizon FiOS Twitter account keep sending me these dms being like, We're so sorry, we know we're messing up. I'm like, first of all, you're not sorry, and second of all, your multi billion dollar corporation, you know, how about free cable and internet

for a couple of months. That would make me feel like you're sorry, but they're not sorry. I bring this up not just because it's very frustrating, and I like to point out the frustrations of massive companies because I hate them, but also because it is a little bit of a reminder of what happens when you have a marketplace without competition. What are really what are my options than a building that a that's wired for Verizon FiOS?

What are my options in dealing with them? The option is don't have Internet, which is a tough thing to do in this modern era we live in, or just deal with them, deal with them and choke on whatever nonsense they tell you you have to choke down. By the way, the guy came today, you know what he told me, the original tech two weeks ago. It's taken me two weeks to get this resolve. The original tech had forgot to plug in a plug in the you know, in the other server room or whatever down the hallway

where they have the one plug. The guy just didn't do it. And you know, you sit here, you say to yourself, what can I take from this? I don't get any benefit from it. Nothing good happens as a result, except there's this. Now I know what it would be like to be in a centrally planned economy, and imagine everything that you were buying, every medical service, everything you were dealing with day in and day out on a

consumer basis, was like dealing with Verizon FiOS. You wait, you wait, they screw up, doesn't matter, it's on you wait more, wait around for three hours, guy doesn't show up. You know, the the abuse that we have of the cable guy, which has been a long standing thing. I mean I remember this from even my youth, right, I mean you you know that the cable they they have you in their grip if you if you want cable, and now for I mean Wi Fi, you just can't

function as a professional person in media. And if you don't have Wi Fi, just can't do it. There's no escape, there's and there's no justice. And that's that's my reminder of what we would all be dealing with. And I know this seems like a bit of a leap, but it's not. If you had single payer healthcare, every time you went to the doctor, it would be like a dealing with Verizon. Sometimes it's fine, sometimes it's you get through it, it's all. But when there's a problem, you

are totally screwed. And there is no. There is no way. You have no recourse nothing. So Verizon FiOS, you're terrible. Slash Central planning is bad. Let's do roll call. Ain't no party. Look a Team Buck party, because a Team Buck party. Don't stop. Yeah, we got Buck turned up to eleven. It's time for roll call. Facebook dot Com, slash Buck Sexton plus appending email address that we'll be able to give you for roll call, right, producer Mark soon,

I promise soon. The request is in. The request is in. So that's what we got. Let's see what else we got here? All right? John John rides by the way Saturday Original Squad Here. I remember when I missed the Overseas Deep Dives. I still love the show. Um yeah, man, I wish the Deep Dive. I don't know if if Overseas Deep Dives were more of a national crowd pleaser, I think I could do them. But people like their news of the day stuff. It seems. I don't know.

I'm these days. I'm just trying to trying to keep all the people happy. And sometimes you're trying to keep When I say all the people, I mean all of Team Buck happy. And it's not an easy not an easy go to know what is going to get that done? Brian rights Buck. I hope people are documenting the extreme weather events of today. According to the twelve year timeline Democrats have set, by the time people start running for president for the twenty twenty four election cycle, we should

be a third of the way to absolute disaster. I wonder what that will look like, probably a lot like today. Democrats have become the new doomsday predictors. At some point everyone just needs to admit just how ridiculous they are. Well, I'm already at that point. I am here to tell you that they are ridiculous. So there is that I

can tell you. They are a RIDICULOUSO. Kristen, Well, actually, before I go to Christen, I just say, it's not possible for somebody who has not been brainwashed to watch fifteen minutes or more of that climate change bonanza, that extravaganza that went on what was it last week on CNN. It's not possible to watch more than fifteen minutes of that and come away from thinking anything other than these people are nuts. That's what you come away from that thinking.

If you're a normal person, they are nuts. It is true, all right, Kristen writes, I heard Sheldon from Texas Is comment about paper straws. I have to wonder, is that Sheldon Cooper from the Big Bang Theory Christian Wow? Wow, thanks for writing in, Karen, Let's see live. The left has no desire to do anything about the opioid problem that plays directly into population control Live. I don't know if that's why the left doesn't care about the opioid

problem as much as they should. Just based on the body count, just based on how many people have lost their lives, you would think there'd be a much a much greater number of journalist stories on this, just much more of a focus on it. But the opioid epidemic overwhelmingly hurts people who are in rural areas or outlying areas of cities or suburbs. And it is mostly, although not certainly, not entirely, but as mostly affecting the white working class community. And so that's why the media doesn't

really see an urgent need to tell those stories. I think that at some level, the mainstream media believes that people who have white privilege and don't aren't able to use that white privilege to get beyond the trials and tribulations of substance abuse. Well, that's that's on them at some level, right. I really believe that there's a bit of a cold heartedness from much of the media toward the opioid epidemic because they don't view white working class

Americans as victims of anything. So there is a sense that, especially in elite media corridors New York, DC, LA, that people that are caught up in the opioid epidemic it's on them to deal with it and get beyond it, that there's no need to raise the alarm. So and if you think that I'm being too harsh, just tell me, why is it that you've seen so much more coverage

and fervent coverage. I mean people acting like it's the apocalypse, over climate change or over any number of issues, then you do over something that is a public health crisis that has direct to illegal immigration, by the way, obviously enormous impact on law enforcement. They don't tell these stories. They don't want the American people to focus on this because it doesn't fit into a narrative of the media likes.

It's just the truth, and it's uncomfortable to think about because there are so many people who have lost their lost their lives. This I had to I've mentioned this before on air. I had two very good friends of mine growing up here in New York City who both died of what were accidental prescription drug overdoses. Not I was never told specifically what the drugs were, but there are only so many drugs that one can be prescribed that are likely candidates for a possible overdose. One happened

when I was in college. One happened right after college, so and I still remember being at one of those funerals and seeing that family and hearing the father give the eulogy for his son, and it was completely heartbreaking. I still remember the sounds that he made to this day at that microphone, and it haunts me to this day.

So the opioid epidemic is something that you would think journalists would really want to dig into and try to raise, not just raise awareness, raise public action, raise public funds, and by the way, raising awareness of something that does have an individual action component is really useful. People should know that one pill, one pill can kill you. They should know that. I don't think everyone knows that. I

didn't know that till a few years ago. I had assumed that if you were overdosing on opioids, you must have been Look, I'll just say it, you must have been an addict. You know that it was primarily something that would affect people who were who were almost you know, junkies. It's just not true affects people that take the drugs

because they're prescribed and then they developed dependence. And if people die because they take the drug one time more than they should or one time and the dosage just wasn't wasn't properly, you know, properly meet it out because they're doing it recreationally and they certainly shouldn't because it's very, very dangerous. So there's just there's a lot more to it.

And yet look at how upset the Libs get when they talk about climate change versus the opioid epidemic, which they treat the opioid epidemic like it's, you know, the same as dealing with traffic fatalities or something. There's much there should be much more urgency in this issue. But all right, let's see we have Adam who writes buck on the millennials, strangely talking all taking all the factor into account and deciding tear down the mountain instead of climate.

From their point of view, with crushing debt and all avenues, difficult, not impossible, one might say, I'm not playing shields high Adam usually very astute, not really sure what you're going for here, by you write again, my friend, maybe I'm just a little, a little distracted that I've got I've got a lot on my mind, which usually the good thing about radio is that it forces you to focus on not things that are in your own personal life on your mind for the most part, but sometimes especially

for the end of the show, can creep in, like, oh, I've still I've still got to deal with that thing. Steven Right's best action movie is Raid two. Check it out well, Stephen. It sounds like something used to kill cockroaches. In fact, I believe it is something used to kill cockroaches thrucer mark fact check. I'm right, aren't I? Yeah, I use right to kill cockroaches exactly. So Raid two doesn't sound that awesome just based on that. But I suppose we could look beyond that and see what is

next on the best action movie list. Perhaps then Buck I personally cannot wait until the podcast is out earlier, so that I'm not at the mercy of my low station. Also be interested in seeing the Buckman in action when you get your video stream. All that and an email address too. Talk about safe and warm. I truly enjoy your second with Sean Parnell. I too, love the Jack Reacher book series. I certainly have to check out Shawn's books as well. Shields High. Yeah, I mean, Van, thank

you for your kind words about it. The thing about doing a second with Shawn is we're friends. We've been friend now for years. So it's fun when you get to do work like that with a friend, you know, when you get to sit and have a conversation. And that's part of part of what my job is here, which is just to do a show. And Shaan's just he's such a good guy. He's never there's no false bravado in him. I mean, he was a decorated combat

veteran and he was right right in this stuff. And you hang out with them, you have a burger, you know, you have a drink, and you're just like, this guy is totally cool and chill and nice dude. Nice dude, and it writes great books. I mean, the Outlaw Platoon is fantastic. I might. I might read some fiction just so I can read my buddy Sean Parnell's book. I might actually put it into the mix. I'm very It's

very rare for me to do fiction, very rare. I've done it in recent years, but it's not a usual thing. Buckman shields High and the Shield. I think it's fate. This is from Benny. Shield was great on the first show. That conflicted me mentally and emotionally because I found myself rooting for Vic even though he is clearly not a good guy the way I expect law enforcement protagonist to

be happy viewing Benny in Mississippi. All right, I mean the Shield is going to have to get I don't know where I can watch it exactly, so I gotta I gotta check it out. I gotta make it, gotta make it happen. Kyle, do you know it's probably as I gotta be on Hulu or Netflix, gotta be one

of the other Kyle rides Buck. I have a ton of professional respect for General Mattis that being said, I think the American public has a tendency to revere their generals too much because they're perceived to be different and ahaps more respectable than our politicians. A clause of its observed that war is just a continuation of politics by other means. So if we consider our generals to have mastered the art of war, then we shouldn't forget that by extension, many have also risen to that rank in

part by mastering the art of politics. And as any adept politician knows, the perception of persona you create for others is an important component of the political process. I'm sure someone as well read as General Mattis is quite aware of that. Yes, you know, I agree with you, my friend. I think that the Kyle, I mean, no one can ever take away, nor should they try to, the really outstanding career of service to his country the General Madnis Habit. That doesn't mean that he's an emperor,

god king. It doesn't mean that he can't be wrong, and it doesn't mean that sometimes perhaps he focuses a bit more on his own reputation and image then one would expect for a your military figure. I mean, at that level, you are talking about somebody who's acting often like a has to be acting like a politician when you're somebody who's running a combat in command when you're somebody who's the Secretary of Defense. Politics is a reality of your day to day life, so I think it's

impossible to completely extricate that. That's going to be it here in the Hut. For today, we're getting our countdown to earlier podcasts, So please everybody download the Buck Sexton Show. I'd rather subscribe to the Buck Sexton Show on iTunes. Just go on your iTunes and type in the Buck Sexton Show, or however you listen to podcasts, subscribe there because you're going to start seeing it popping into your feed by three Eastern with the next two weeks exciting stuff. Shields Eye