The Elsa Kurt Show

Shutdown Stalemate, Peace Breakthrough, Hard Truths

• Elsa Kurt

Share episode
SPEAKER_01:

Hey folks, it is uh Clay here tonight by myself uh on the Elsa Kurt Show with Clay Novak. Elsa is down in Florida doing what she does, her favorite thing in the world, visiting those uh beautiful grandbabies that she's got down there. So you've got me uh flying solo tonight. Uh we've got some uh pretty pretty interesting topics to cover, and we'll just jump right into it right away. Um government shutdown, week three. Um, so obviously, you know, Elsa and I have been covering this for the last couple of weeks, and um, you know, no progress so far, which is uh which is shameful. So um there's been nine votes uh across Congress uh to try and at least get the clean resolution through. And again, we've been through this a few times. The clean resolution, which is what is trying to be passed right now, merely keeps the government open. That's all we're hoping for right now. Government stays open, people go to work, people get paid, there's no change to expenditures, there's no ads to the budget, there's no detractions from the budget, none of that. All it is, all Speaker Johnson has been asking for uh for the last three weeks is a clean resolution that allows Congress to debate a new budget and pass a new budget. That's all they're asking for. It's an extension. That's it. A six-week extension was how all of this started. And now we're three weeks into it, and they can't get it passed. They can't come to any kind of agreement. And you can go, there's plenty of graphics out there, folks. Um, I, you know, Dan Crenshaw uh threw one up today that I saw on either Instagram or X, I think it was Instagram, where it laid out the the members of the Senate who voted for and who voted against. And it is very, very clear uh when you look at the colors behind each one of the photographs uh on who's keeping this government shutdown closing. And I can tell you folks, it's not red. Um, there was, you know, what uh two blue and one independent that voted uh for the clean resolution, all the rest red. Um voted against the clean resolution, all blue, one independent, one red. So it's very clear that those all the red, the two blue, the one independent, they want a clean resolution, keep the government open, keep people paid. Let's talk about this, let's get a better budget. It's very, very clear with the rest of them being blue, with the one red, who I'm pretty sure was Lindsey Graham, but I'm not positive, um, and and one independent, which we know is is Bernie, um, are all voting to keep the government closed. Uh essentially, that's what they're voting for, because they want um, you know, trillions of dollars of money for Obamacare for illegal aliens and and and a bunch of other programs. They want to add to uh, you know, the the existing budget uh before it's even passed, uh before the new budget's even passed. They want all of those things added. That's not what Speaker Johnson and and the GOP are asking for. They're asking for a six-week extension, and they can't get it done uh because why? Uh because the blue, uh the Dems won't even agree to talk about it. Um so there's a hardline game and a little bit of a stalemate. We'll see how long that piece of it lasts. Um now, the interesting part about this beyond the shutdown is that President Trump is using this to essentially validate uh the parts of the government that are bloated, uh are way too large, but or in some cases are completely unnecessary. Um and and there's a lot of consternation, there's a lot of backlash over this. In fact, the courts are getting involved about who can be uh furloughed legally, who cannot be, et cetera, et cetera. Um and a lot of people are upset because they think that this is some sort of underhanded way to, you know, fire uh or get rid of people or portions of the government that are unnecessary. Keep in mind, folks, President Clinton, I'm I'm fairly confident that number was in excess of a few hundred thousand government employees that he fired during his administration. President Obama fired people during his administration too. Um, President Biden, on the very first day of his administration, shut down the pipeline, fired all the pipeline workers. And do you remember what he said? I think most of us remember what he said, which was learn to code. There was zero sympathy from him and from anybody in his administration about all those pipeline workers being out of work. They didn't care. But now, because President Trump is trying to right size the government, which is exactly the phrase that President Clinton used when he fired all the government workers, uh, right size and gain efficiency in the government. Now he's being criticized for it, and they're saying he's been doing it in an underhanded fashion. Um, some people are actually saying unconstitutional. There's nothing in the constitution that says you can't fire people during a you know a government shutdown. I don't know where people, you know, everybody bends to the constitution and says, oh, that's unconstitutional, and there's there's nothing in there about that. Regardless, um that's President Trump is doing that. And it and and I think it's incredibly smart. We can see, all of us, the voters, the taxpayers, can see how our life is being affected or not in many cases, with or without these government workers at work. And if it's not affecting your life, if it's not affecting any of our lives, then we don't need them there. And and listen, big gov has gotten bigger in the last 20 years. Um, you know, it between the Clinton administration, the bloat during the global war on terror, which I don't give President Bush a pass, right? He didn't reduce the government as much as he probably should have, but then more bloat during President Obama, more bloat during President Biden. Um, it's gotten crazy. And President Trump, you know, he started this with the effort with Doge. We all remember that with Elon Musk, right? Find some efficiencies, get rid of people who aren't adding value. And this is what he's doing. It's another method um to get to the same end state. Uh so that's what he's doing. Uh, and and I applaud it. Uh I am not a fan of big gov. I think, you know, the states should own much more responsibility. I know they don't want to. Um, they want that government funding that is associated with all of this, and that's really what this is about uh is money. They want federal money. But the reality is that most of the things that the federal government is doing is not their responsibility. If you want to talk constitutional, which everybody loves to go back to the constitution, like I said, um there's a lot of federal level responsibilities that you could argue are in fact unconstitutional, states' rights. We collectively uh should be aiming for less federal government infringement and more state uh level government responsibility. Um, and that way you've got the ability, if you don't like the way the state that you live in is being run, you can move to another state. If you don't like the way the United States is being run, you've got to vote your way out of that, or it's a much more significant decision to move to another country. But states, states' rights, states authority, states responsibility, that's something that this nation was built on. And I think President Trump trying to shrink FedGov uh is a good thing. And I think he's trying to get back to state level responsibility. Now, there are some folks involved in this, some casualties uh in this entire thing that we all need to consider. And I'm not necessarily a fan of. The air traffic controllers are taking a beating, folks. Listen, they are expected to show up to work every day. Uh, we talked about it uh last week. Oh, by the way, recording today, 15 October. Uh, it is about uh 5:30-ish on the East Coast. I'm about an hour behind today, rolling by myself. Um, but today is yesterday was the first day, or today is the first day that air traffic controllers were gonna get a partial paycheck. Um, and they're expected to continue to work. And we've already seen impacts uh at some of the major airports. I think we're gonna start seeing impacts at some of the smaller airports as these air traffic controllers. Um, you know, if if you're not getting paid, uh it's really, really hard to get up and go to work every day. Um, and so you know, the air traffic controllers are taking being. There's other folks within the federal government that are still working every day and they're and they're working with little or no paycheck. Um, and I'm not I'm not necessarily a fan of that. I think, you know, we came up with a solution in the Department of Defense to pay service members. I am sure that we can probably look through FedGov and find money to pay the key and essential personnel within our government that were forcing to work during the shutdown and air traffic controllers being pretty high on that list, my personal opinion. Um, we did, interestingly enough, um find some money within the Department of Defense to pay our service members. Um, I spent a long time in the military, as most of you know. Um, I think this is a great effort by President Trump and SecWar exit uh to get our service members paid. Now, there is some controversy involved with this, uh, in the sense that for decades and decades and decades, and even I, as an army officer, was told this, there are different pots of money uh and the way that money is allocated within the DOD budget. Uh, and in many, many cases, you can't move, or we were always told that you can't move money from one pot to another. Once allocated, one design once designated, it was given essentially a color coding, um, and you can't mix colors. And that's what they did to pay our service members. They found research and development money that was not being used, or projects that hadn't, you know, the money hadn't been spent, and they reallocated it. And they took it from one pot into another pot um to pay our service members. I I applaud them for doing this. It's a uh to me, it's a smart, smart um solution to the problem. Um, they, you know, the service members, um, especially lower enlisted service members, make a lot less than most people believe or understand in America. You should probably go, it's it's completely it's out on the internet. You can find it, do uh military pay scale, uh Google it and find out what uh a young soldier in E1 through E3 with less than four years in the Army makes. Um, and uh you you'll probably be shocked. Um, and and many of you will turn around and say, Well, they get a lot of benefits. Um they they do, um, they get a lot of benefits, especially if they're living in the barracks. But if they're married uh and they have kids, think about trying to live on the on the money that they're being paid and doing what they're asked to do. Um, so I I do applaud the administration and and Sector Heggs uh for moving uh that money around. Now, the controversy associated with that is is it legal or not? And again, people love to throw around the Constitution. This is not a constitutional matter, but there may be some U.S. code um and there may be some legality to it on whether or not they can or can't do it. And you know, President Trump's not asking for permission and certainly is not asking for forgiveness. But uh Speaker Johnson said today um that there was threats uh murmuring through Congress from uh the Democrats saying that they may sue the administration uh for paying service members with DOD money, but suing because it's not the right pot of money, it's not the right color money. Um and his response was go ahead. Um, go ahead and sue us and try and explain why it's bad that we paid service members with DOD money. And and I applaud him for that response as well, because the absurdity of that statement, the absurdity of a lawsuit um when couched like that is uh is exactly that. It's absurd. The fact that anybody, anybody at all, would consider using DoD money to pay soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, etc., um, and taking it away from RD uh as something illegal, immoral, or unethical is absurd. Um so I applaud them for doing that. Now, um, listen, folks, I I take a lot of heat and I have, and I've never been shy about this. I I am not a Heggsit fan. I'm not a fan of SecWar. Um, the news as as they're titling it now, Secretary of War Hexitz. Um, I do have a lot of I do have issues with some of the things that he is doing. I do applaud a lot of the things that he's doing. Um, I do applaud his focus on the fitness of our force. I do applaud um, you know, his focus on war fighting at the war fighter level. Um I don't think he needs to be the guy doing it. Um, but in this case, a couple of outboys for him. First of all, is getting our our service members paid. Good for him. Uh, you know, guidance from the president, uh, followed up and executed by SecWar. Good on him. Uh, and that is the right focus, and that and that's where it should be. Um, he's got a couple of other things that I think he's been doing really, really well. By the way, he had to do an emergency landing. He was out over the Atlantic today, returning from uh Europe, and his C-32, which is about, you know, it's a small airliner that's allocated for the SecDef, um, but it's a C-32, uh, evidently got a crack in the windshield, uh, had to descend to 10,000 feet and then turn around and land in the UK. Um, so hopefully everybody, it sounds like that was uh safety precaution and uh and everybody's okay. Uh, but uh but that did happen to uh Secretary Heggs today, along with everybody that's traveling with them, and that is no small crew. I've I've hosted uh in theater in Afghanistan um former Secretary of Defenses uh a couple of times, uh Gates uh being being three of those visits. And I know what kind of an entourage travels with the Secretary of Defense when they go when they go places. So I'm glad everybody's safe. Uh regardless, uh Secretary Hegseth, um they landed today, but he has done a couple of things lately, which I'm a big fan of. Um one, like I said, is getting our service members paid. Uh two is he is looking at technology and the acquisition process within the military. For those of you that don't know, um acquisition being the development and purchase of um military equipment, uh military systems, is a can be a very, very long process. It can be also a very, very expensive process that the secret that the Defense Department, War Department, um, you know, bears the financial burden of most of the time. Um and and during uh the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the global war on terror, we did some um, we we shortened some timelines on some things, mostly small systems, small things. Uh we used to call commercial off the shelf. We would find a good piece of kit uh that was good for uh our service members and we would just buy it. We didn't care you know who who made it for the most part. If it was a good piece of gear um and we could buy it in bulk, we would do that. Things like camelbacks were some of the earliest um, you know, uh commercial off the shelf, um, Gerber multi-tools, you know, there were some other bigger things, some parachute system and some other things that came commercial off the shelf. Regardless, um, we were trying to field equipment, good equipment very quickly. Um in the meantime, while it was going on, we've still had the legacy system of developing pieces of equipment and then testing pieces of equipment, and then field testing certain pieces of equipment, et cetera. And it was a long, drawn-out process and it got very expensive. Um, Secretary Hegseth has has looked at this and said, we we need to rethink this. We need to rebuild it. We need to think of it in a different way and come up with something else. And and really what they're talking about is we have what you could refer to as a defense industrial base. Uh in other words, our defense the defense industry exists solely as the defense industry, many of those companies. They have no other purpose in life, they make no other pieces of equipment. Uh, they exist solely to serve uh the war department, formerly Department of Defense. Um, and that's all they're there for. And every time that the military needs or wants something new, um, we end up paying uh crazy prices for research and development, thus the money that we had available to pay our service members. But um, he has looked at this and said, we need to go back to having an industrial base that can be modified uh to serve the defense of the nation when required. In other words, um, you know, some of these companies, and I'm just gonna name some defense companies. He didn't name these, but I'm gonna use some in some examples. General Dynamics being one of them, Harris Communications being another one, right? There are companies like that that exist predominantly um, you know, for the in the defense realm. Um, he doesn't want them to exist solely for defense. Figure out something else to do, and when we need you, um, you know, we'll we'll come get you. And which is what we've we did in World War II, especially. Um, now that I like. And if you think back to the early days of COVID when we went mistakenly decided that we needed thousands and thousands and thousands of ventilators before we realized that once you put a COVID patient on a vent, they were you pretty much killed them. Um, we went to the auto industry uh to Ford and Chev, you know, GM and and all of them and said, hey, we need you guys to make ventilators and we need you to make them quickly. And they did. Um, they responded, they responded very quickly, and they converted some of their manufacturing to support and supply uh ventilators. Um again, a mistake uh in the treatment of COVID, but it was an example of us changing the industrial base to suit the needs of the nation, which is what Secretary Heggs is talking about. So it will also essentially reduce costs. Um, if you've got general dynamics out there building things for, you know, competitive capitalistic reasons, in other words, you know, things that are more focused on commercial airliners, on, you know, et cetera, et cetera, they can turn around when the military has a need and develop something or or use their existing technology, and and the military's not paying for them to exist in the meantime. They are a functional capitalistic business. So that's what he's talking about. I would offer to him and I would ask him uh to think about you know what you do that. Um, there's also training that has to happen. We've gone, you know, warfare is highly technical now. Um he is talking about things like, you know, the best drone makers in the world should be making drones for the Department of Defense, Department of War. But it's not us, it's not, it's not DOD or D, you know, War Department paying them to exist to build drones. They're a business that builds drones and the Department of Defense buys from them. Um that's the example or one of the many examples that he's talking about. But there's training that has to go with this in terms of things like high-tech uh equipment, helicopters, airplanes, tanks. Um we've talked about, you know, the industrial base. Uh it takes longer to train people to use equipment than it takes to build the equipment, uh, which is a crux that we're at right now. If we got into a big shooting war with China and we started losing F-22 and F-35 fifth gen fighters, um, we can build them. Uh they're expensive, but we can build them fairly quickly. What we can't do is train a pilot to fly them. Um, and and so that is something that I would ask Secretary Heggs as he's considering a relook of the industrial base and how we do acquisitions, uh, is relook how we do the training associated with the equipment that we're buying, um, because it's gonna matter. Uh timelines have to line up fairly quickly. So I I would ask him to consider those two uh as a you know as they interlock. Um I would also ask him, uh, you know, he he has uh put together a task force uh to look at uh soldiers living in the barracks. And for those of you that haven't looked around, um, there's plenty out there on social media, YouTube, and some other places. Barracks life uh is is not uh glorious. And in a lot of cases, it's it's downright shameful, the conditions that our our service members live under. And I would tell you that's because in many cases, and I know this will come to shock as a shock to many older veterans, is that so many things have become privatized in the military as the military shrunk, um, and we try and cut out as much overhead as we can so that the War Department or Department of Defense can just sign a check and hand responsibility off to somebody else. We've privatized enough things and they have ultimately, in almost every case I can think of, been an absolute disaster. Um and and I will go through a couple of those. One of them is the barracks uh or the billets, uh, in depending on which service you live in uh or a part of. So those barracks are not owned by units anymore. Uh, they're owned by a company, a civilian company who maintains them, who fixes them, who does all the repair work for them, et cetera. Um, we have plenty of cases of bad plumbing, black mold, um, bad electrical, um, you know, freezing air conditioning in the wintertime, scorching uh, you know, thermostats in the summertime. There's plenty of that out there um that, you know, generally was if it was a problem, it didn't last very long when the military controlled those environments. Family housing is the same way. Again, privatized. Um, I could give you 50 examples of um on post housing for families that is substandard. And when I say substandard, um, you know, when something breaks in your house and you're not allowed to fix it, um, and you put in a request to have it fixed and it takes a month to have something fixed, um, that's a problem. Um, when you, you know, when you don't have the ability to paint uh something in your house, or you're not allowed to, um, and it and it takes, you know, and and it's and it hasn't been painted, the interior of your house hasn't been painted in, you know, six, seven, eight years, and there's been three other families that have lived there before you, that's a problem. Um, there's there's lots of problems with that. Um, travel is another thing. US Transcom, which is operated out of Scott Air Force Base, put together this entire thing as everybody knows you move when you're in the military every three-ish to five-ish years, um, you pick up yourself or you and your family and you move to a different uh station. Sometimes it's only a year, you know, sometimes it's every year, sometimes it's five years. Regardless, so the military has always had a system that the military governed, and the only thing we contracted out often enough was the actual packing and physical moving, loading it on a trailer, moving it your personal items, your furniture, and whatnot to your new duty station. Everything else was handled by the military. Um that is no longer true. It was privatized, it was contracted out, and it's been a complete and utter failure. Um, so the latest on the list for being considered to be privatized is the commissary. And the commissary, for those that don't know, is the um grocery store on the base on the installation. Um, and so the benefit of having that, obviously, um, you know, single soldiers live in the barracks can usually walk or or get a ride to the commissary. Families use it for grocery shopping. Um, you pay no taxes. That is one of the nice benefits, is you're on a federal installation. You pay no taxes on the groceries that you buy. And in in a lot of cases, the prices are competitive or better than what you would find outside the gate on the local economy. Um, that commissary system is being considered to be privatized. And so, you know, we're kind of in the same, you know, those of us that know and have experienced it, um, you know, we're in this anticipatory, this is going to be a disaster kind of mindset. If they if they hand this off, if they privatize it and send it to uh, you know, a large grocery corporation, as an example of Kroger, and I'm not saying Kroger would screw this up, but a company like that, um, the anticipation is that like everything else that's been privatized, it'll be a mess. Um, I would, I would say the biggest difference in all of these things, and something for the second war to consider, is um when military takes care of military, um, things work better. When you've got a privatized business trying to take care of military, it doesn't work so well because they're worried about a dollar. They're not worried about people. When military takes care of military, they worry about the people. They don't worry about the dollar. Um, and again, with these folks, everybody who's in the service, what they're asked to sacrifice, I think that the best we can do for them is to give them the best support we can, which is the best housing possible, the best, you know, grocery store availability possible to make their move of their and to pick up their entire family and move them across the country or around the world as easy and seamless as possible. We owe them that. Um, and I would ask SecWar uh Hegzith that as he is gaining momentum and he is fixing things on the strategic level, which is where I would prefer that he keeps his focus. Um these are things that I think he needs to put some some effort into and some focus on. And I think they are fixable. Uh, but please don't privatize the commissary. Please return. And I know that that if we return some of these systems back to military control, that is going to cause more overhead in people, uh government employees or uniformed service members. I'm okay with that. Um I don't like the idea of privatized anything uh that regards soldier life support uh within the military. So, SecWar, a couple of attaboys for you. Um you're on the up. I appreciate what you're doing, um, but I would ask you to kind of take a look at those things uh and uh and and put something else into consideration. Okay. Um now, hey folks, this is the biggest news going. Uh I probably should have led with this. We'd done so much on the on the uh uh government shutdown over the last three weeks that I just had to I had to kind of open up with that. Peace in the Middle East, folks. Uh we talked about this last week, and frankly, I was a little skeptical that Hamas was going to cooperate. Um, and they and they did. Uh the Middle East peace deal has been uh signed and in phase one right now. Um the prisoners, all living prisoners, have been returned uh to Israel. Um, I don't know this for a fact. This has not been fact-checked, but I've seen it in a couple of places that no female prisoners that were assumed to be held or were still missing uh were returned alive. Every single prisoner that was returned uh the earlier this week were all males. If that is true, that is a statement uh that is from Hamas that is something that needs to be investigated, that's something that needs to be looked at and considered. We can't turn a blind eye to the fact, if that is in fact true, that they killed every female and let the men live. That's a significant issue. Regardless, um, it is good news. Uh, there is a ceasefire in place. Um the prisoners have been returned home, the living prisoners. There are some caskets uh with the remains of some um deceased prisoners that have been also been returned. Um I was skeptical that Hamas was going to sign off on this. Uh, I'm still skeptical that they will abide by it. Uh, and for those of you that haven't seen or don't know, that in the hours immediately following um the peace deal being signed, and even as the prisoner exchanges were going, were going on, or the prisoner returns were going on, Hamas started uh equalizing things within Gaza and within their population. Um, there are there is film footage out there of blatant daytime public executions happening at the hands of Hamas. Uh there is there are reports of Hamas raiding and killing a number of members of a local militia, anti-Hamas militia. Um so for everybody who is a Palestine, free Palestine, and they run that bandwagon, this is what you you fought for. This is what you asked for. You asked to protect uh a heinous uh government that is assassinating people. Literal executions in the middle of the daytime. This is these are the people that you've been defending. These are the people that you know think should be allowed to run their own country uh and and be given no oversight. It's atrocious that anybody with a in their right mind would support these people. But that's what's going on. And we've all seen it. However, we are in phase one. Uh U.S. service members have been dispatched to kind of assist with this. Um and uh, you know, the big boss, the big boss is not getting the praise that he deserves at all in very small numbers. Um there are some significant names who have given him some kudos. Um, Hillary Clinton, Secretary Clinton, has said um that she applauds what he did. Uh there are there are others, uh, you know, former uh Democrat big wigs. Um there are uh people within the current administration that have um very quietly uh given President Trump some credit for this. Um, but there are others who still refuse to acknowledge what he has done. President Biden and Secretary Blinken unbelievably uh tried to assume credit for this. I'm sure some of you have seen it. If you haven't, check it out. Um, President Biden, you know, in a speech, a public speech, you know, talked for a good three or four minutes about all of the effort that his administration put into this peace deal and and their 20 point plan and all of these other things, and then at the end basically said, and and President Trump carried it across the goal line. So really gave uh the administration, current administration zero credit for any of it. Secretary Blinken said essentially the same thing. You've got a number of folks who refuse to give uh this administration or this president any any credit for this. Um, as much as they've been begging and screaming and pleading for a peace deal for two years, uh, zero credit for President Trump. Uh and and interestingly enough, the timing of it all, right before the Nobel Peace Prize was given, uh, which he did not get. Uh, but the Nobel Peace Prize winner, uh, a young lady who won, and I don't have her name written down, but she uh in in gracious fashion uh contacted President Trump and let him know that she was accepting the award on his behalf because he should have won it. Uh and that tells you something right there. Uh and and so we we've got we've got a continued TDS problem um, you know, in this country. There have been a number of people who have gone completely silent uh in their zero criticism of Hamas. Uh you've got them uh zero uh accolades for President Trump or the administration, uh nothing for Secretary Rubio, who I know had a hand in this, uh, etc. Um, President Trump is, you know, he likes to throw his digs in there. Uh he's not gonna let it go unnoticed or unmentioned, but he is still focused on the task at hand. Uh, he has demanded, mandated a forced disarmament from Hamas because he knows that if they don't disarm, two things are gonna happen. One, the things that happened in the hours following uh the ceasefire will continue to happen. The executions, the raids and killings of anti-Hamas, you know, people within Gaza and some of the other territories. That will continue uh if they're not disarmed. But also he knows that they're just gonna refit and re-arm and rest and recruit and rebuild in preparation for another October 7th. They have to be disarmed. They cannot be trusted uh to operate freely as an armed uh, you know, have any kind of armed capability at all. And that's where President Trump is at. And he said it, they will disarm or we will disarm them. Um so I don't know how long this very frail uh piece will last. I'm I'm crossing my fingers, folks. Uh I really hope that this has got some staying power. Uh, but that disarming mandate from President Trump, appropriately so, um, will probably uh cost him consternation and could actually unravel this entire thing. So we'll we'll keep an eye on this as it goes. We can't not um you know, we have to keep an eye on this. Uh it is the Middle East and and a brokered peace deal is is unbelievable. I uh it really is unbelievable. You know, he had it right there at the end of the first uh term, his first presidency, and now within you know, nine months of this presidency, he's he's put it back in place, and uh it's amazing. So kudos to President Trump, Secretary Rubio, everybody else involved. Uh, this is good news for the globe. Uh and and unfortunately, we'll continue to see anti-Semitism rise within the United States, um, anti-Jew bigotry, all of those things. But at least for right now, the killing is stopped, which is all President Trump ever wanted. Uh, the killing is stopped in the occupied territories, in Gaza, uh, et cetera. Uh, and hopefully we'll start dismantling Hamas and give these people a chance to live a peaceful life, both in Israel and in what is known as commonly as Palestine, uh, not acknowledged as a as an actual place. Okay. Um, let's turn to some. Geez, this one just irritates, irritates me. Bradley Whitford, uh, who is an actor, uh, and truthfully, I don't even know if the guy's done anything. He was on West Wing. So he's in one of those, you know, he he thinks he was part of the government at one point in time. I know Martin Sheen still thinks he was the president. Uh, he was criticizing President Trump the other day in some absurd fashion. Actors Bradley Whitlock is uh, I think that's his name. Yeah, Whitford. Bradley Whitford, also an actor. Um, you know, he he was on the view, everybody uh compared his dad, who would have been 110, who was uh on a on a minesweeper uh ship in World War II. Uh he said his dad. And the world the the the the men and women who fought in World War II, they were Antifa. They were real anti-fascists. Antifa and and the heroes of World War II essentially are the same. That's the new tactic, folks. It's the same as it's the same type of tactic as calling George Floyd a hero. It's the same type of tactic as calling illegal aliens, illegal aliens asylum seekers. Because when you lessen it, you know, when you soften the verbiage, you or or you compare them or put them in the same class with people who are actually v of value, um then it becomes more difficult. It's the first step in making it more difficult to criticize, right? If you put Antifa in the same class as those that fought World War II, then it's really, really hard to criticize Antifa because then you are summarily, you know, uh criticizing those that fought in World War II at the same time. So this is the new tactic. And we collectively have got to make sure that this gains zero traction. This is shameful, it's embarrassing, it's disgusting. Um you know, our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines uh uh that fought in World War II were there to defeat the Axis, right? Axis being Italy, Germany, Japan. Was there some fascism dog? Sure there was. Okay, you also had an emperor, you know, in in Japan. Um they were defending uh Europe, right? They were defeating uh Japan that attacked the United States and defending the United States. That's what they were doing. Okay. They were not dressed up in black with garbage can shields and and face masks afraid to show who they were, uh, you know, on the streets of Seattle trying to beat up police officers and failing miserably, because Antifa is the biggest bunch of wimps. Um I could use some other very colorful language. Um, but it putting them in the same that that's not it's there's no equivalency, folks. Zero. There's no equivalency to my two grandfathers who fought in World War II. Uh one torpedo bombers in the Pacific uh off the USS Watts, uh, the other B-17s over Europe. Uh that's not Antifa. They were not Antifa. You know, I I had great uncles uh Pat who fought with Patton, Battle of the Bulge. I, you know, I I had like it's crazy to put people like that in the same class with these skinny bun man bun, skinny jean, blue-haired Antifa uh SOBs that are running around right now. They're they're not the same people. It's shameful to put them in the same class, really. It's embarrassing, it's disgusting. Bradley Woodford should be at the top of the cancellation list by everybody, everybody. If you I don't care who you are, I don't care if you're uh wear blue or red, I don't care. That is that's gross. Uh what a horrible thing to say about our veteran population is to put them in the same class with these pieces of trash, Antifa. Uh if he wants to put his own dad in that, that's up to him. But don't don't lump the rest of our veterans in with that, our World War II veterans. That's disgusting. Um it's a leap, but it's a tactic, and we can't allow that tactic to continue. Um, so keep your eye out for that, fight against it, speak up when you hear it, um, because he won't be the last person. I can promise you that. In fact, there's probably others out there already saying it, and I just haven't seen it yet. So pay attention for that one. Um, another person that is fighting on behalf of some good American values, Barry Weiss, Barry Weiss. So she has taken over at CBS News, uh, for those of you that haven't uh seen or heard. Um, and her number one focus is equal scrutiny of both parties. We call that journalism. That's real journalism, right? Scrutinize both parties. I don't care. That's what she wants out of her team at CBS News. And good at her thing. Her starting block is in a very doge kind of move. She sent out an email and said, tell me what you do at work every day. I want to know. Um, and then tell she said a couple of other things. Tell me what you are doing or have done that you are most proud of, and then tell me what is working or not working here at CBS News. Okay. Now we we have all been held accountable for what do you do all day at work? Um, and a good boss, good leadership team will always ask you, what's not working? And they want to make the the organization better, which is what she's doing. So, of course, in typical, very, very typical Hollywood fashion, a lot of the a lot of the people who work at CBS News um are part of the Writers Guild, which is a union. Uh, and the and the writers guild has already stepped in as a union and said um they sent a note to CBS News and to Barry Weiss and said, we want to know, we want answers. We want to know why she needs to know these things. We want to know if these are going to be held over people, if they're gonna determine layoffs or discipline, who's gonna have access to the answers. They want to know. And they have told their members, the members of the writer's guild that work at CBS News, don't answer that email. They also want a list, they want a full list of who was sent the email. Um, but they they've told their members don't answer that question until we get answers from CBS. So you've got a boss who is asking for accountability of her employees in not only what they're doing at work, but what kind of quality work they're doing and how to improve the organization. And she's already being derailed by a very liberal protectorate union um who is deeply embedded in in all of Hollywood. So um I I applaud her for her effort. Uh I applaud her for what she's trying to do. She understands intimately that journalism, real journalism is dying. Uh I think she also understands from a business perspective uh that if she can turn CBS news into real back into real journalism, from a business perspective, I think she's got a winner. And I think she knows it. So um I I truth I don't um envy her position. I give a lot of credit for what she's trying to do, and and I support that. Uh, I've never been a huge CBS news fan, but but that, if she can return that, I would watch that. And I think most of us would, because that's all we've been asking for. Um, in fact, that's what Elsa and I have been talking about is the return of real journalism, uh, so that you can get what is truthfully fair and balanced. And again, as long as they go by what she said, which is equal scrutiny of both parties, when you do reporting, political reporting, that's the way it should be. So good for her. Um one more kind of heavy topic. Um, and uh, and this one hit me personally today. I I got a phone call uh from somebody who used to work for me when I was still in uniform uh to tell me that somebody else who we both worked with had committed suicide earlier this week, uh, a veteran, uh combat veteran, a lot of combat time, uh still a fairly young man who who carried some demons uh and and you know succumbed to them uh just early this week. And so I do this a lot. Uh, you know, I I speak publicly as often as I can about veteran suicide. We've heard the the words or the the number 22 a day. Um, and this you know, 22 a day has been around way too long. It's probably not even accurate anymore. I don't know if it's more or less, but if if it's not consistently going down, if that number is not decreasing, we we as a country, uh, and truthfully, the VA and the war department are failing. Uh we spend a lot of money on equipment, we spend a lot of money on training, we spend a lot of money on uh some benefits. Um I think we need to re-evaluate where our money's going uh because 22 a day is uh is obviously too many. One a day is too many. We'll never get to zero. I understand that. But um this one just hit a little close to home with me today, and uh and and I would be negligent if I didn't take the opportunity to say something. So um for those that are out there, uh, you know, 988 988 style 9888, um call somebody. Um call a friend, call a relative, call me, uh, call call anybody. Uh call the hotlines. There's plenty of hotlines out there. 988. Um please, before I before anything else, make a phone call. I I talk often about getting left of the boom. In other words, addressing veteran suicide before it becomes a crisis event. Uh, and I think that's where we need to be. So for all of you veterans out there, uh, find your thing. I encourage veterans to find your thing. Uh I I found a couple of organizations that I'm a part of, a couple of charity organizations, veteran-centric organizations uh that I'm a part of, but there's plenty of things out there. The VFW, the American Legion, there's uh uh unit, you know, former unit reunion type organizations. Um, I don't care if it's church, I don't care if it's a Sunday softball league, I don't care if it's Tuesday night bowling. Um I it can be a book club. Um find something to belong to. Veterans are genuinely social people. We we live and operate in a social environment. We are surrounded by people all of the time. We are part of groups and organizations and teams in everything that we do. And a lot of veterans, when they leave the military, they lose that sense of belonging and they wander. And and and that's where I think we can make a huge dent in that 22 a day number, is if we can help our veterans find their their thing, find their group, find your tribe, whoever that is. It doesn't even have to be military related. I don't care, but find something to belong to, and I think that more than anything else will help. Um and again, folks, it it you know, I I've gotten too many of these phone calls in my life, and I know that's probably not the last one. Um, and I dread them when I get them. Uh, but we've got to do something different, we've got to do something better. Um, so um if you are uh have any touches in that world, uh if you have any large organizations, if you have uh connections with veterans uh and and uh you know this has touched you and and you feel like you need to do something, um, please contact me uh through my website, claynovac.com, send me an email. I'll be happy to come talk to you. I'll be happy to get on the phone with you, talk to you, um, and uh and and see if we can fix this or at least fix part of this. We got to do something better, folks. Uh, and I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to say this. Now, you know, Elsa and I have made a conscious effort to try and end the show with something a little lighter over the last few months, and I think we've done a pretty good job. So I got two for you tonight. Uh one, if you're a Ted Lasso fan, I I just, and I'm a soccer guy, but I just watched all of Ted Lasso within the last few months. And then when it was over with, I was aching for something new. Um, I have one for you. Uh, if you like good comedy, uh, you know, sports is the vehicle, but it's not really about sports. There's a great show out there called Chad Powers. Uh that I, you know, it's this first season's only going to be, I think, six episodes. There's been four episodes released. It's hilarious. Um, it uh stars Glenn Powell. Uh and uh it is based on the Manning uh the Manning brothers are the producers, Eli and Big Manning. A few years ago, Eli Manning dressed up in some prosthetics and a wig, and he went to a walk on triad at Penn State as somebody named Chad Powers and uh and and just had a great day. And and people didn't, you know, the head coach who just got fired uh from Penn State, but people didn't know that it was him. Uh and it was a a great little, great little thing. Well, it's turned itself into a TV show and it's great entertainment. So that uh, you know, if you're looking for something, it's on Hulu, it's called Chad Powers, that's that's a good one. Um, take a look at that one. And then uh this one is just so absurd that I couldn't pass it. Um but um Katy Perry, uh, who I can't stand her music, whatever. She was married to Orlando Bloom, uh, who most people know from the Pirates of the Caribbean movies. Uh, he was also in Blackhawk Down very briefly, among many, many other things. Uh, but she was married to Orlando Bloom. They have split up. And evidently Katy Perry has left Orlando Bloom for a French-Canadian chick named Justin Trudeau. Yeah, you heard me right. As scary as that is, uh, she left Orlando Bloom for Justin Trudeau. Katie Perry, ladies and gentlemen. If you didn't dislike her before, you probably dislike her now, uh, or you dislike her more than you did. Um, and I'm not here to bring hate on anybody, but oh my lord. Really? Justin Trudeau? Come on, folks. Okay, folks, that's all I've got. I'm a little bit under an hour, but no banter with uh Elsa to keep the show going, so I'm not gonna prolong it. But uh thanks for uh hanging in with me for the hour. Um you can uh you can find my my books, the uh initial novel, Keep Moving, Keep Shooting, and the sequel, uh Cross the Bear, this one right here, uh, both available on Amazon. The third book, Rebellous, will be released on Veterans Day. Uh so buy, keep moving, keep shooting, buy cross the bear, get caught up before the third book comes out uh on Veterans Day. And that third book is Rebellous. You can find them on Amazon, you can order them through Barnes and Noble, uh, ebook, hardcover, softcover. Yes, I'm working on an audio book. It's not done yet uh for all three of those, but that's where I'm at. So uh, folks, again, thanks. Uh we will have Elsa back next week. Thank, thank the Lord. Um, doing this by myself is not a lot of fun, but uh I do appreciate y'all hanging in. And uh, as always from me, keep moving, keep shooting.

SPEAKER_00:

Combat veteran Terry Davis thought he left the fight behind. In Tampa, he uncovered a deadly conspiracy. Now he's back home.

People on this episode

Head Shot

Clay Novak

Co-host