On scolds Australia.
This is the Reader Panalty Show.
Good evening and welcome to the Rita Panney Show.
Coming up tonight, Melbourne labeled cold, broke and a terrible place to invest.
I'll speak to Nick Kata about that.
Shortly, Professor Ian Plymer on Matt Keane's latest.
Claims about nuclear energy.
We'll also have the latest from the US with Army Horowitz, including just how much more the Democrats are spending than the Trump campaign and later in the hour he is an absolute gem. We're thrilled to have Alex Epstein. He had to fact check some of the boldest lies told by mitzero activists and of course left he's losing it.
What's more dangerous? Straight white conservative men or axe murderers?
A straight white conservative man?
Why is he more dangerous?
Because they're capable of doing anything.
They're crazy.
We'll make them crazy.
They're wait.
But first, King Charles and Queen Camilla's royal to where of Australia has come to an end.
They farewelled Sydney this morning.
Crowds have flocked to us see the royal couple during their visits to Canberra and Sydney. During their final full day in Australia, the King and Queen took part in a community barbecue in Parramatta before heading over to the Sydney Opera House, where they were greeted by hundreds of fans.
They observed a military display around Sydney.
Harbor, and after being on her feet for almost the entire day, Queen Camilla was seen carrying her heels as she returned to Admiralty House barefoot. You've got to love that. She should have stayed on for the Melbourne Cup. That's what all the ladies do there. The visit, as we know,
was not without controversy. We'll discuss Lydia Thorpe a little more later, but there was also that damage, and there has been a development there with a man being charged with malicious damage after Sydney's iconic Queen Victoria statue was defaced with red pain.
Let's get a senior fellow.
At the Menzies Research Center, Nick Kater, into her discuss the latest news of the day.
Nick.
Lydia Thorpe did certainly still many of the headlines during this royal tour. What were your feelings about King Charles and Queen Kimilla.
I was smitten. I have to say, Rita, I was in the crowd on Sunday looking at them from a great distance. As close as I got. I didn't get to meet the King or the Queen, but look, I think it was terrific they were here. I mean for those of us. In fact, I guess almost everybody who's watching this program would only have known one monarch, and that was Queen Elizabeth. And we all were nervous about the transition of power, how that would go, because we've
never seen it before, but it's gone seamlessly. And to have King here, the King here, was just to put the stamp on that. So I'm very much grateful that his Majesty came. And you're hearing from a convinced royalist. Jim mononkis chair, Rita, So I'm afraid that's about the best I can say.
Well, yeah, I'm interested in your thoughts on Senator Lydia Thorpe because her antics are still being debated and criticized, as I her demands, because it wasn't just a stunt. She does have a list.
Of demands she once met.
And she has been criticized for being an enthusiastic participant a beneficiary of the system she claims to hate. And not only is she senator in the Australian Parliament on her healthy salary, fantastic benefits, but she's also a regular nick in the ultra exclusive quantus Chairman's Lounge. Now, how does she reconcile that with her thoughts on Australia.
Well, you've got to remember, Rita that the Chairman's Club always was and always will be ourboriginal land, sovereignty, never seed it. So it's actually lucky that she.
Lets the rest of us in it.
Course. But look, I mean, I'm really astounded that the Senate cannot get together and vote her out because she did take a loyal oath when she came into office, all bit through gritted teeth, to the Sovereign, to the Crown, and she's clearly disobeyed that and clearly shown that she didn't mean that one inch by her outrageous behavior on the in this week. I mean, this very unkempt, unprincipled woman stands up and starts screaming senities at the King,
and she is a member of our Parliament. I'm embarrassed by that, quite frankly, and I think the Senate. I'm surprised that the Senate doesn't seem to think it's got the powers to actually get her out or make her accountable for that, because they should.
Now.
I know she's got plenty of criticism, and rightly so, but I do think she will see this week as a win. She has had enormous coverage overseas, particularly in the British media, and there'll be plenty of Republicans here who might quietly agree with some of her points, which tells you more about them. I guess now I'm going to play some painful footage. Painful for Victorians.
Nick.
Here are some folk in Glasgow telling Harold Sun reporter knew he just how happy they are that long suffering Victorian taxpayers are paying for their Commonwealth games.
We've been executive the opportunity and how to develop the people testity.
Yeah, together, it's give them the place a little buzz here.
I'm really exciting to have something actually in Scotland than something to travel elsewhere.
I think it's very good for the city. Most of that quet number of people about to visit the city. That's pretty bringing for an income.
Yeah, I'm sure it'll be great for them.
I'm sure it'll be fantastic to have all the tourists and the locals enjoying the Commonwealth.
Games that we've paid for.
Victorians have played around six hundred million in total, and around two hundred million of that going to Glasgow to actually hold the games.
The state's not in a good place, Nick.
No, it's not, you said the introduction of the show's cold and broke and unbankable, and it's certainly cold. I always find it cold, and I was either whether not being too kind you down there at the moment. And it's got one hundred and fifty six billion dollars state debt and that's going to rise to almost one hundred
and ninety billion by twenty twenty eight. And no wonder because they keep throwing money around like confetti and then end up you know, oh they decided they didn't want the games after all, but they've still got to pay money to Scotland. It's disgraceful. And you know, Dan Andrews is the mystery to me is anybody ever voted for him? But plainly people down there there did. Perhaps the cold
gets to their heads or something. But you know, he is what he is and I just think that which is desperate for an opposition that can turn itself open to a government, well, I.
Think you just hit the nail on the head.
Then he got re elected, not only because he was a skillful politician, but he had no opposition. And I think people look at Victorians like were some sort of a freak show.
But when you've got a.
Completely spineless, principleless hopeless opposition, then you do have the other side elected quite easily. Now, one of Australia's top property developers, him Gerner, has weighed in on Victoria's housing crisis and the dire state of Melbourne. He told the Australian Financial Review that the strong consensus in other states is that Victoria is broke, it's cold, and your property prices don't go up.
While would you invest in Melbourne when there's been next.
To zero capital growth and the state has a massive debt problem. But Nick Gernar is supportive of the stamp duty discount being offered by the just to Alan government, saying it'd give investors a reason to consider the city again. But I've got to say I'm going to disagree. I
think this is an absolute travesty. I wrote about this in Today's Herald's Son The entire scheme seems to be hair braining these towers that are going to be building along train stations, but just on this stamp duty discount.
It's just so unfair.
On the face of it, a family buying a brand new, modestly priced house and land package out in the suburbs to live in white qualify for that discount. But you might have someone who's buying a penthouse off the plan for three million dollars that they plan to rent out and they will qualify for the discounts. It seems to be designed just to entice people to buy off the plan apartments, something that hasn't been a fantastic investment in recent years.
Nick, Yeah, yeah, I mean that's right. Land Act is incredibly unfair form of taxation. All forms of taxation are unfair in my view, but this is particularly unfair because you're taxing people on unrealized capital gains essentially, and as you're right in saying that if you build a sixty story tail block, if you were to build such a thing in Melbourne and stick lots of apartments in there,
the land tax per unit to be relatively low. But if you've got an elderly person who's living in the family home or they've got a boarder investment property out there in the suburbs on a quarter acre block of land, then they're in for real, real trouble. And it does punish people very hard, people that have script and saved to pay off them more it is get themselves a property or investment property. They're the ones being punished by this, and it's just a very unfair way of doing it.
Stamp duty is not great, by the way, but this is not the way to get rid of stamp duty.
I don't know.
This is just a scheme that they're introducing to make it more attractive to buy of the plan, but it doesn't extend to buying off the plan for a house. It's only really for units apartments. And they're going to nick by building these towers on train stations across Melbourne without consultation, without much of a planning process, so they're going to completely change the character of those suburbs. And the locals have invested and have got their home as
their biggest investment or obviously fairly irate about that. And it's not a surprise most of those train stations are in liberal areas, not that there's that many of them left in the city.
Now. I'm interested in a piece.
You wrote for The Australian newspaper about the real reasons behind Australia's declining birth rate. Australian National University demographer Is Alan told the Sydney Morning Herald that it's housing affordability, economic insecurity, gender inequality and climate boiling. That's the reason.
But you point the birth rate has been falling since nineteen fifty nine, when the average house in Sydney was less than ten thousand dollars in today's money one hundred and eighty two thousand dollars in today's money ten thousand dollars back then. So what is the real reason behind our birth rate plumbating?
Well, serious democracies really can't tell you because there's so many factors here. It is possible that housing may deter people to some extent from having children, but it's far from the only reason, because when you look at it, this is a trend that's been going on since the late fifties early sixties in the entire world. Right even in places like Thailand, they are now way below our birth rate and way below replacement level, even though they had a birth rate of six in the nineteen sixties.
So everywhere except Sub Saharan Africa, birth rates have fall and off a cliff and are continuing to fall. And so contrary to what the environmentalists have been telling us for the last fifty years that were in trouble because there's too many people, the fact is there's too few people. That's a real problem. And there's a problem with obviously
assuredage of labor around the world, not just here. And it seems to me extraordinary that so few serious politicians or policymakers have even mentioned this, let alone worked out what we do about it, because we have got to do something about it, sooner or later. We can't keep making up for it in immigration.
Well, that seems to be the fix, isn't it. That's the band Aida method that they have used. We did have that have a baby for the country under the Howard government, didn't we We had the baby bonus and Peter Costello remember that work picture with him with all the newborn babies that did work.
We saw a bit of a spike there they were.
I do like it.
Hung Yeah, a spike that came off at about twenty ten it started to decline again.
Yeah, that's it. I do like Hungry's approach.
They give a massive lifetime discount to mothers for the number of babies that have So if you have one child, twenty five percent discount of your income tax for life. If you have four, forget about income tax, you're not paying it. And that's seen their birth rate at skyrockett. They've got a few other measures to boost it as well. So yes, something to think about. Nikata, Thanks so much for your time tonight, Thank you.
Rider.
Joining me now is leading geologist and author Professor Ian Plymer, and let's start with Prime Minister Anthony Albernizi and Foreign Minister Pennywong.
They're heading off to.
Samoa for the twenty twenty four Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, which King Charles will also be attending. And it seems Australia is about to experience another climate shakedown with Pacific nations putting pressure on Australia over fossil fuel exports.
How much is this trip going to cost us, Professor, Well.
It's going to cost us a huge amount of money. Secondly, it's going to cost us a lot of credibility.
Here.
We have two people from the Australian government and they're entourage who are flying there now unless they're going to swim from Manly Beach across this somehow, and they're going to be using a lot of fossil fuels.
To get there.
And these fossil fuels, some of the South Pacific Island islanders claim putting carbon dioxide.
In the air.
This is warming the climate and the sea level is rising. Well, that's contrary to data that we've had since eighteen forty two on this part of the world. It's contrary to what we know about carbon dioxide. So I think this is yet again a massive display of hypocrisy, and yet again our Prime Minister running away from problems in Australia and gallivanting somewhere else around the world.
And I fear that the checkbook will come out at some point during this trip. So let's just brace ourselves for that now. The chair of Labour's Climate Change Authority, Matt Keane for Liberal Treasure of New South Wales, has lashed out at nuclear energy advocates, accusing them of being delay mongers who are trying to prevent renewables from succeeding. He labeled a push for nuclear and more gas as and I quote, an illiberal drive to intervene in the
market led energy transition. And he also went on to say that the delay mongers have latched onto nuclear power despite the overwhelming evidence that he can only drive up energy bills, can only be more expensive, and can only take too long to build. This in a cost of living crisis. It seems to me that people calling for gas to be included in the capacity investment scheme are trying to stop renewables in are very very interested in your response to Matt Keane's claims.
There, Well, this is just Sheer's stupidity. Mister Keane should know that when Finland put in its reactions the latest reactors, the cost of electricity went down and the retailer and the wholesaler also had lower costs. So we have evidence. Very recently, we've just had the Page Research Center do a study on the cost of energy. This was done by Gerrard Holland, and he looked at solar and wind, he looked at nuclear, looked at gas, and looked at coal.
By far the most expensive energy in Australia. Is solar and wind. This is when you look at the total costs, the land use changes, the putting in the new power lines, et cetera, Nuclear is quite cheap compared with that, Gas is also cheap, as his coal coals the cheapest, and that's because we already have the infrastructure for coal. Now, what mister Keane doesn't say is that sol and wind are not reliable, whereas nuclear, gas and coal are reliable.
What he doesn't say is that sol and wind have a very short life, less than twenty years, whereas nuclear is at least sixty years for a nuclear power plant. It's more than forty years for gas, more than fifty years for coal. What he doesn't say is that our future demands for energy are going to increase enormously. We're already using ten percent of energy for data centers with AI, it's going to be a lot higher. And what he's really saying is that the practical economics of the nuclear
lobby groups are starting to frighten people. The practical economics of the gas groups are starting to frighten the wind and solar people. These are the cheapest and most reliable and best forms of energy we can have in a country like Australia. And so we've got all these foreign corporations who are running the solar and running the wind, who are lining up for their subsidies, and the subsidies make the energy renewable. The subsidies say keep getting renewed.
And he's getting worried that the whistle's going to get blown on this. And we can see around the world that we can have cheap, reliable energy for very long periods of time from nuclear. So I recommend that viewers look at Gerard Holland's report from the Page Research Center. He aired these findings at the AIC conference on Tuesday, and these are showing that we are going down the wrong path. We've got far too many vested interests who
are whisperinging mister Keynes here. He doesn't understand the fundamentals of energy generation, and he doesn't understand the fundamental weaknesses of solar and wind.
And I do love the comment he has here about the illiberal drive to intervene in the market led energy transition.
But what do they do so much exactly?
There has been so much market manipulation subsidies to pretend that this is something that's being led by the market, it's purely organic, is just wishful thinking. I've got an early Lefty losing it for you. It's from the New Zealand Greens.
Coal, don't dig it, live in the ground, get with it.
I don't know what to say, But what do you say to the New Zealand Greens this, Prefessor Pliman.
I think they've been taking some of Kamala House scripts and talking from them. I have no idea what they're talking about. But what we do know is that the New Zealand coals on the west coast of South Island exceptionally clean, very high calorific value, very low ash and upprised coals. New Zealand does have energy from other sources from oil and gas in the Taranaki base, and some get thermal energy. That the New Zealand colls are some
of the best in the world. I have no idea what they're trying to say, except that perhaps they want New Zealand to become even more backward.
I think that would actually enjoy that very much, Professor im Plymer, thank you so much for your time this evening. Thank you still to came a bumper edition of Lefties Losing It and Army. Horowetz joins me with these laters from the US, including just how much more are the Democrats spending compared to Donald Trump?
Welcome back. Now it's time for lefties losing it.
And here is some great advice from Kamala Harris telling US supporters to be just like Jimmy Carter go out and vote early, followed by mad cackling naturally.
So look, it's Jimmy Carter. You can vote early. You can do. Jimmy Carter voted early.
We did have the Washington Post claiming he's very excited about Kamala.
Let's check in on Jimmy Carter.
This is the former president on his one hundredth birthday, just a few weeks ago, enjoying, hopefully enjoying a military flyover. I mean, really, shame on his family for putting him on display in that state. Whatever you think of Emi was a former president, he deserves a little dignity. You think his family would be watching out for him. Joe Biden's family has been accused of elder abuse over.
The years, but then you hear a speech like this.
From Joe and you suddenly stop feeling sorry for him. Before the cognitive decline. He was a dishonest scrote and he's still a dishonest scrote. Here he is earlier today expressing a desire to lock up Donald Trump.
He means it.
This is not a joke.
This the guy who also wants to replace every civil servant, every single one. Thinks he has a raton of the Supreme Court ruling on immunity to be able to need me if it was the case to actually eliminate physically eliminate, should kill someone who is he needs to be a threat to him. I mean, so, I know this sounds bizarre. It sounds like I said this five years ago. You locked me up. We gotta like him up.
If you like him. Did he just claim that Donald Trump wants to shoot and kill someone he.
Perceives as a threat.
Joe Biden is again inciting violence again, President Trump, and after two assassination attempts in two months, appalling.
And now let's check in on the man.
Who some various stuede observers believe has been the one pulling their puppet strings throughout the Biden Harris Administration's rain old mate Barack Obama just.
Can't understand how we got so toxic.
I don't understand how we got so toxic and just so divide and so better.
And I get why sometimes people just don't want to pay attention to.
The hoodspa of that man never fails to astoud. It's like an arsonist holding a match saying I don't understand why it's hot all of a sudden, where these flames come from?
Look in the mirror, champ. Okay, I've tried to.
Avoid this for as long as I can, but here is some local lefties losing it content Senator Lydia Thorpe launching into an unhinged tirade against King Charles.
Aside.
Again something people do, not our land, that give us one this style from us.
Our bones, our scar, our baby, our people.
He's out that we want to training in this country here.
This is not your lab, this is not your la. I'm not.
Now.
This left is losing its segment gets millions of views every week around the world. We have a massive audience overseas and they'll be shocked to learn that Lydia Thorpius, the screaming banshee just saw, is a senator in the Australian Parliament.
I will not.
Stand for racist racism in my workplace.
You are not helping the situation. And the Prime Minister knows exactly what he's doing. He wants that's just to come out and get me.
So where is my apart?
Fuck you?
Finally, here is Senator Olivia Thorpe doing some of her best work outside a strip club in Melbourne.
This was just last year.
To you and you man that stands with what like that?
Someone get in Parliament, press and you you. She seems like a good time but sadly, Senatoralia Thorpe received a lifetime ban from that particular establishment. Maxine's Gentleman's Club in Brunswick will no longer allow her entry. Sad Okay, let's go back to laughing at lefties losing it overseas. Here is a racist lefty in America. You know how she's voting.
What's more dangerous? Straight white conservative men or axe murderers?
A straight white conservative man?
Why is he more dangerous?
Because they're capable of doing anything.
They're crazy.
We'll make them crazy.
They're white.
You don't think that's racist at all?
No, And here is another woman back in Kamala because she thinks Donald Trump will take her birth control away.
If you were to vote for anybody in twenty twenty four, who is it going to be?
Kamala Harris?
Why is that?
Because I like having rates, having rights.
I'm gay and I enjoy being able to marry who I want, be open about that at work.
I'm also a woman. I take birth control. I like being able to do that.
Just exactly what rights did a gay women lose under Donald Trump's administration? And why would he want her to stop taking birth control? She's a lesbian, Why is she taking birth control? The whole thing is confusing me. Now, this lady has really isolated the most important thing in this campaign. You better listen to her, you pack of sexist pigs.
Regardless of who you're voting for. Stop referring to our presidential candidate as just Kamala. It's Kamala Harris. We do not talk about the other person running and say Donald, right, we don't just say Donald. Maybe we should, maybe we should start calling him Donnie. But up until this point, people have only felt comfortable referring to women in power by just their first names because they do not respect women in power. They did the same exact thing to Clinton.
So if you have an ounce of feminism in your body at the very least, say Kamala Harris.
Ah dear.
Doesn't it just fill you with warmth and confidence knowing that folks like that vote. Here is a couple wanting to send conservatives to re education camp. Just feel the tolerance and empathy here.
We're trying to send conservatives to re education camps to be more accepting.
Uh yeah, oh, elliot, all.
Right, So you would support take their rights away and sending them to the camps forcefully? Would you be in support of banning conservatives from voting?
I feel like everyone is to vote.
Oh, you're taking the rights away to a re education camp.
That is true.
Now, this next clip may have a little creative input. We will check in with the lip readers on what was actually said, but I like to think it was something like this.
So is Kamala doing Okay, Nope, she's down Joe.
Now we're basically Trump is killing us at the pole.
So yes, we're gonna lose.
Joe, damn it.
Wait, wait, what if I come back to run again as candidate?
Yeah?
Well, uh.
No, job man, You're not going back.
Shot.
Let's let it all play out.
Okay, let's just we'll talk later.
Joe.
Okay, women looking fine up in here.
Now, let's bring in documentary filmmaker and commentator Army Horoid's Army.
A lipreada engaged by The New.
York Post has deciphered what really occurred during that exchange between Joe Biden and Barack Obama at Ethel Kennedy's funeral. While caught on camera, the conversation was drowned out by the organ music, but professional lip reader Jeremy Freeman. Freeman, who's got sixteen years of experience, thinks this is what was said. She's not as strong as me, said Biden, and then Obama replies, I know that's true.
We have time.
And then Biden comes back with, yeah, we'll get it in time.
What do you think about all that army? Are they right? Do they have time?
Yeah? The New York Post doesn't have to hire a lip reader to hear me say this. No, they do not have time. Look, there's two weeks left in the election and they are down badly. All the momentum is moving toward Trump. He's literally the lat the RC people. Look, I'm a maniac, I'm a lunatic. I checked the polls, every morning and a couple times a day. He's down in every single swing state, every single one, count them all seven. Look they just said the quiet part. Quietly.
She is a terrible candidate and terrible at everything else. This is why she's down. And by the way, Liz Cheney is not gonna save your election. Look the word shot in freud. Okay, this is a German word shot in which means which means harm and damage and freud, which means joy literally taking comfort and joy in the harm of others. That word was literally created to define the state of Joe Biden's being. Right now, he is
living shot in freud, okay. I mean, look, Brutus and Cassius have nothing on how Kamala and a Democratic Party did Uncle Joe dirty. Right, he is going to reach out from beyond the grave with the ultimate I told you so and a middle finger to the entire Democratic Party. You screwed me over and look what happened. This is what's going down. Look, they even have there obviously damage control going on now. And remember the Obama administration were spying.
The New York Post said that doesn't sound like Joe Biden, really it doesn't. Oh yeah, it does. The maightiness is awesome. I love it.
Oh absolutely, it sounds like Joe Biden. Just have a look at his form there is from the early days, he's been bragging about himself. Remember when he was bragging about what great Marxi was getting at university. That was lying about all that, but he was bragging. Nonetheless, now the Democrats to have an enormous advantage. They've got the bulk of the mainstream media. They've got pretty much most of the popular culture, from Hollywood to music industry to.
Fashion, the whole lot.
The polls are tied despite the Democrats having all that and also outspending the Trump campaign. Kamala spent two hundred and seventy million in September compared to Trump's seventy eight million.
I don't think enough is said about this disparity and the spending army. If Trump had anywhere near.
The money the Democrats have to spend on his campaign, it would be all over.
You could be winning New York.
Yeah, this election would not be as close as it is. Trump would actually be running away this election. If he was just doing basic election blocking and tackling. He simply isn't. That's just the reality of the situation. Look, Kamala Harris is running a very traditional ground campaign. Okay, Right, they have four times the amount of staffers than Trump does. Okay, that's a massive number and a massive advice. Trump was running a cult of personality campaign. Now he thinks he's
winning because of that. That's not actually true. He's winning because he happens to be on the right side of all the issues. He was winning because we had four years of a horrible presidency by Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Look, he ran a cult of person out a campaign four years ago. He lost. Okay, Look, his unconventional perform, the unconventional preparation for the debate, which means he didn't prepare
for it. He lost the debate. He's winning because he happens to be on the right side of all these issues, and the momentum is on his side.
That's the problem.
He has not been spending the time and money. Look, she has raised billions from small dealers. She's spending time raising money. He's spending time and money on his legal affairs. This is a huge disadvantage for him, But ultimately he's going to win because everything is flowing in his direction, and he is coming after a company that nobody likes.
Well, you just casually announced it. There, it's all over. He's going to win. But that's part of the lawfare, wasn't it. The law fair was designed not just to further blacken his name in the eyes of the American public, to have him as a convicted felon, but also to distract him, to have him focused elsewhere, spending money elsewhere instead of campaigning.
Question about Look, and by the way, to be clear, I called this election last week. Now I didn't call this week. I already called it last week. No, he is got about that. That is actually part of their strategy, no question about it. And to a certain extent, it's working.
It is absolutely Now President Joe Biden has once again ignored his own advice. Remember he said this following the first assassination attempt on Donald Trump.
Fellow Americans, when I was speaking to night about the need for us to lower the temperature in our politics.
But now is at it again.
He claims that Trump is so dangerous that he ordered to be locked up.
Thinks he has a reader of the Supreme Ruling on immunity to be able to need me if it was the case to actually eliminate physically, eliminate, should kill someone who is he needs to be a threat to him. I mean, so, I know this sounds bizarre. It sounds like I said this five years ago. You'd like me up. We gotta like him up him.
Dear.
He tried to rectify some of the damage there and say lock him up politically, but please, he just claimed right there, army, that Trump wants to shoot and kill people. It's just an extraordinary way for the Democrats to tackle this campaign.
They have not.
Stopped that reckless retrick against Trump one. They continue to call him a threat to democracy, likening him to the likes to Hitler.
They're doing it all the live long day, Rita. No, there was an assassination attent, and of course everyone said, let's lower the temperature, let's reduce the rhetoric. But you know what, the next day he was on television doing all the threat to democracy garbage. The next day then there's a second assassination attent.
You think anything changed.
No, he's still a fascist, still a threat to our way of life, right, still, comparing him to Hitler and Mao and Mussolini, These are all the comparison they're making, And of course this comports with him saying, let's lock them up. Look the same democracy crowd, right, this is the Democratic Party. These are people who've been trying to subvert democracy in both deed and in word. Right, they have let's not forget, not to just forget to lock
it up stuff. They've been using lawfare like we talked about, to try to get him off his game on the campaign. Do we forget? They try to get him off of the ballots. They try to take Trump off of the ballots in different states. This is democracy. This is the same democracy crowd. Then, the rhetoric has included calling the Supreme Court illegitimate. They have called for the taking down the Electoral College. These are people are saying, hey, in
my city of New York, let's have nonsenizens vote. You tell me who is pro democracy? Who is anti democracy?
This is crazy?
Am I taking crazy bells? What's going on? Now?
You're one hundred percent right?
And don't forget installing Kamala Harris in validating fourteen million votes.
Biden actually went through a process.
He was supposed to be the nominee, and suddenly we've got someone who nobody appeared to vote for, who is now their candidate, and again they talk about norms and threats to democracy in Horowitz, Thank you so much for your time this evening.
Oh is your pleasure still to come?
Energy expert Alex Epstein joins me to expose the boldest.
Lies of net zero activists.
You're watching the Reader Paney Show and joining me now is best selling author of Fossil Future. While global human flourishing requires more oil, coal and natural gas, not less. Energy expert Alex Epstein alex is she.
Or isn't she?
This is the question we're facing. We know where Donald Trump's energy policy lies.
He's crystal clear about what he wants to do.
But with Kamala Harris's position, well, it remains murky. She's long said that she wants to ban fracking. She promised to do that when she was a Democratic presidential nominee back in twenty nineteen. She said she banfracking on day one. Now she says she doesn't want to do that. It would certainly ender her chances in a state like Pennsylvania if she had that policy these days, But really, where does she sit on this crucial issue?
Yeah?
I think it's actually just really clear. I mean, her position is net zero by twenty fifty, which basically means banded fossil fuel used by twenty fifty, and she supports steps to get there. And whether you ban fracking outright or just destroy fracking through a series of irrational regulations doesn't really matter.
The goal is to destroy fossil fuel.
So one way to think of it is you can destroy fracking without banning fracking, just as Obama pledged to destroy the call industry and largely succeeded without banning call. You just pass other regulations that make it impossible.
Now, the Biden Harris administration did straightaway block the Keystone pipeline.
What's been the packed off that decision.
This is one of the most damaging things because if you think about the situation with Canada, Canada just has enormous, enormous what's called proven oil reserves. They have way more than we have in the United States. They have huge amounts of untapped production that could be a great source of oil for us in the US, very well suited to our refineries, as well as oil that could supply the free world, which we need now more than ever.
Because we have a lot of hostile people with a lot of oil, and instead of taking a step toward more energy trade with Canada, and we should be doing a lot more, they just destroyed it.
And they destroyed it on a whim.
They basically just got the State Department to destroy it after over ten years of investment in planning. And so this not only just totally sabotaged a lot of our potential with Canada, it told everyone in industry you're you know, you could be on the chopping block at any moment, and so that does insignidvize investment. It creates fear, and so we haven't even started to experience the full consequences of stopping Keystone.
Now, Alex, let's have a look at this lotust a peace published by Monash University right here in Melbourne, Australia. They claim that Hurricane Milton and Hurricane Helene serve as a stark example of how climate change is influencing storm dynamics.
They also say it demonstrates.
How warmer ocean temperatures and shifting weather patterns can lead to severe damage in both coastal and inland communities.
And they also wrote.
Recent extreme weather events, including devastating tropical cyclones, underscore the critical need for global corporation and decisive action, and that it highlights a disturbing trend. Storms are becoming more impactful closer to the coast. Alex care to respond to what you've just.
Heard, and this is really damaging because the overall message here is let's get rid.
Of fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels are making the climate more dangerous. We get rid of fossil fuels, then we're going to be safer from climate.
But if you just think for a.
Second, have fossil fuels made us more endangered by climate or safer from climate? You just think, what was a hurricane like one hundred years ago, fifty years ago, even twenty five years ago compared to today, And it's obvious and the data bear this out that we're much much safer from hurricanes and other forms of extreme weather. And fossil fuels are huge reason why. They keep us incredibly resilient through things like heating and air conditioning, storm warning systems,
evacuation systems, building sturdy buildings, et cetera, et cetera. So we've become incredibly resilient to climate thanks to fossil fuels, and whatever climate affects fossil fuels have had are very hard to detect.
Particularly with storms.
This is why there's no strong trend with hurricane frequency or intensity. And so they're really just trying to make stuff up, saying like, oh it was it develops faster here and there. Just the big picture as fossil fuels are making us safer than ever from extreme weather, and so if you're manipulating science to tell us to get rid of fossil fuels, you're going to make make us far more in danger from extreme weather.
And you're I mean, if you did it, literally, you.
Just destroyed the whole country because the grid can't work without fossil fuels. I mean, imagine Australia without Call. That's over half your grid. So you know, you get rid of Call really quickly, a huge percentage of the population dies, the grid doesn't function, you have civil war. Like these guys are not at all thinking through what they're advocating, or they are and they just really hate humans.
Well, I think that's at the heart of a lot of the activism we see in this area. And one of the claims we hear over and over again in this country, and I'm sure elsewhere is that renewables are cheaper, that they actually lower energy costs, But the reality seems to be fairly different to that. Take me through this graph you recently shed. It seems to show that places with the highest percentage of renewable use seem to be paying more for energy.
Yeah, I mean that's a good description of what that shows. And we see this around the world, and Rita, let's just I think it should be pretty obvious to somebody, like imagine I said, hey, Rita, I've got something that's better and cheaper than the iPhone. But I'm not just gonna make it and compete with the iPhone. I need you to ban the iPhone and then give me a couple of trillion dollars in subsidies, and then I promise
it'll be cheaper than the iPhone. Well, if it were cheaper, then you wouldn't need to ban the competition and you wouldn't need subsidies. So obviously it's an inferior thing, and they're just issuing press releases with lies. So if you're actually better, then compete with fossil fuels on providing reliable electricity and other forms of energy, and they're not willing to do that because the technology and economics aren't there.
And really, what this whole renewable is cheaper thing for it's just a cover for the to pretend that we're not going to experience extreme suffering from banning fossil fuels. And what we've seen in Europe is just even with a little bit of restriction of fossil fuels, it creates a total energy crisis. So they should learn their lesson and if renewables so what are actually cheaper, can become cheaper, then let them compete on a real market to provide
reliable energy. Otherwise it's obviously just a lie.
Now you've highlighted more catastrophizing by the climate activists. It's something that we hear daily and it's not new. Let's go back twenty years to this from the Guardian in two thousand and four where they claim that climate change over the next twenty years could result in a global catastrophe, costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters. Once again, Alex, that claim has not aged too well.
Yeah, I mean, if we actually had news it would just constantly be telling us, guess what, life is better than ever. We're safer than ever from climate. Thank you fossil fuels. Let's give the fossil fuel industry a metal, like that's all we would be talking about, because we're obviously safer from hurricanes, we're much safer from drought, we're
saved from temperature extremes, like we should be celebrating. We've become incredibly resilient to climate, and whatever climate changes occurred hasn't mattered that much, and we shouldn't expect it.
To matter that much.
Why would one or two degrees change on the Earth overwhelm the most adaptable species in the history of the planet that's increasingly getting better at being resilient from climate. So people are just they're thinking about climate like it's the year thirteen hundred and just a drought is going to be a problem versus No, this is we're in the twenty first century. We're really good at dealing with climate. We're safer than ever from climate. We're in a climate renaissance.
Let's keep getting better at dealing with climate, and let's keep being freer and energizing the whole world and deal with real things like three people use three billion people using less electricity than a typical US refrigerator.
Like that's a real problem, not the weather.
Alex Epstein said beautifully, thank you so much for a time this evening.
Thank you.
That's it from a opnek Is news not I'll see you at eleven tomorrow.
Mm hmm