×

Clay and Buck

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

Stacey Abrams Blows Off Joe and Kamala in Georgia

11 Jan 2022

CLAY: Buck, we got an interesting story that’s gonna be playing out here a little bit after we go off the air today. Joe Biden is traveling to Georgia to talk about his attempt to get new voting bills passed through the Senate by ending the filibuster. Now, of course — at least ending the filibuster for purposes of changing these laws, which we talked about it yesterday, I believe.

The odds of these being legal, constitutional, and upheld based on recent Supreme Court jurisprudence as it pertains to state rights to manage federal elections are very low. But they’re trying to send a message — after they dragged Biden across the finish line — that it’s a fundamental threat to our democracy that all these states went back and said, “Hey, let’s avoid the chaos that existed in the 2020 election, when all of the rules got changed.”

Well, it’s interesting because Georgia is gonna be a battleground — and we talked about this, Buck — where Stacey Abrams might have an interesting opportunity here because if Biden’s not gonna run in ’24, then Kamala Harris would have to be the nominee, otherwise it would be racist or sexist of the Democrats to not pick a black woman based on their entire party platform, which is “everything is racist.” She would clearly be the next person up for that job.

So Stacey Abrams said that she did not have time. She had a schedule conflict. So she’s not going to be at Joe Biden’s speech that he is doing in Georgia. She’s running for governor again. What do you think about this, Buck? Is this a sign that Stacey Abrams maybe is angry that Joe Biden didn’t pick here as the nominee? Certainly, I think at minimum, it is a sign that his overall approval rating in the state of Georgia is really low, and she doesn’t want to be photographed with him or videoed with him. What’s going on here?

BUCK: I think there is an understanding that Joe Biden right now doesn’t bring much in the way of upside. He served his purpose, Clay. We’ve talked about it here before. To be a guy that people knew who was — because he was so mediocre but also so known he was somewhat nonthreatening at a time when the country had gone through the maximum, not just the actual problems of covid virus but then the mountains of unnecessary fear and anxiety piled on top of that.

So Biden served his purpose then. No one watches Joe Biden now and says, “Yeah, I want that guy pushing for me!” No one views Joe Biden and says, “This is somebody who is going to have a political capital that will transfer to my aspirations.” That’s what I think this really is right now. Why…? I mean, we can answer the question pretty obviously.

What would Stacey Abrams gain right now from having Joe Biden so close to her on an issue like this when really people are already talking about how maybe she steps into the limelight, so to speak, herself. Maybe she all of a sudden becomes — which is amazing! She’s never even won a statewide office. (laughing)

CLAY: That’s right.

BUCK: She’s the fake governor of Georgia, but that doesn’t actually count.

CLAY: And she wasn’t even that close, Buck. She lost by 50,000 votes.

BUCK: Yeah.

CLAY: She’s continued to refuse to concede. But she’s trying to run again as the governor. I just think it’s an incredible indictment of where Biden is as the leader of the Democratic Party right now that he’s going to Georgia and the most famous, I would say, Georgia politician — even though, to your point, Buck, she hasn’t actually won an election. I think people recognize her name more than they recognize Ossoff or Warnock, who were the two guys who ended up getting elected to the Senate. It’s a sign of how toxic Joe Biden is that she won’t even appear with him in the backyard there of her state.

Recent Stories

Get Password Hint

Enter your email to receive your password hint.

Need help? Contact customer service.

Forgot password

Enter your e-mail to receive your account information via e-mail.

Need help? Contact customer service.

Rush Warned That Putin Wanted to Reassemble the Soviet Union

11 Jan 2022

Be sure to listen daily to Rush’s Timeless Wisdom podcast here or on iHeartRadio. It’s absolutely essential information from America’s Forever Anchorman.

Recent Stories

EIB 24/7: Clay & Buck’s Show Prep

11 Jan 2022

  • AlexBerenson.substack: If you are a vaccine company executive, it’s time to slam the brakes
  • New York Post: The feds’ booster push shows public-health decisions aren’t data-driven – Dr. Marty Makary
  • National Post: Open the damn country back up, before Canadians wreck something we can’t fix – Jordan Peterson
  • New York Post: New York may have passed peak Omicron surge, data suggests
  • HotAir: Fox to Psaki: How is this still a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” if the boosted are getting sick?
  • Legal Insurrection: Mass Formation Psychosis. The Madness of Crowds. And The End Of Progressive America
  • Breitbart: HHS’s Becerra Warns ‘People Will Die’ if SCOTUS Knocks Down Vaccine Mandate — ‘Will Be on Their Conscience’
  • Gateway Pundit: House GOP Oversight Members Release Emails of Fauci and NIH Officials Concealing Information on Wuhan Lab Leak Theory from the American Public
  • BizPacReview: AZ hospital system allowing Covid-positive health care workers to work amid ‘critical staff crisis’
  • Daily Wire: Pfizer CEO: COVID-19 Could Be ‘Controlled’ By Annual Vaccines, Pills To Treat
  • PJ Media: The Branch Covidians Are Basically the Same as the Heaven’s Gate Cultists (Except Not as Nice)

  • New York Post: Biden to push Senate filibuster change in Georgia speech as liberal groups boycott
  • PJ Media: J6 Detainee Says Pretrial Solitary Confinement Is ‘Inhumane,’ ‘UnAmerican’
  • Federalist: Wisconsin Parents Join National Crusade To Wrestle Their Kids Back From Left-Wing Government Schools
  • FOXNews: Convicted murderers, sex traffickers received COVID stimulus checks while in prison, court docs show
  • Legal Insurrection: Analysis: Nearly Half Of 500+ Higher Ed Schools In CriticalRace.org Database Mandate Race-Based Training And Study
  • Politico: Dems’ filibuster conundrum: It’s not just Manchin and Sinema
  • HotAir: WaPo, Slate: The grocery shortage isn’t just real, it’s expanding
  • New York Post: Eric Adams has only hobbled his war on crime by giving his his brother and Phil Banks top jobs
  • Breitbart: Kevin McCarthy: Chamber of Commerce ‘Left’ Republican Party ‘A Long Time Ago,’ Not Welcome Back
  • Daily Wire: RNC Sues NYC Over Noncitizen Voting Rights Law: ‘American Elections Should Be Decided By American Citizens’
  • Daily Wire: Stacey Abrams To Skip Voting Rights Speech By Biden: ‘This Is Pretty Damning And A Warning Sign’
  • Legal Insurrection: Flashback May 2020 Assault On The White House: 60 Secret Service Agents Wounded, President Trump Taken to Secure Bunker
  • NewsBusters: Journalists EXPLOIT January 6 to Push Dems ‘Voting Rights’ Agenda

  • Recent Stories

    EIB 24/7 VIP Video: Watch Clay and Buck Open the Show

    10 Jan 2022

    C&B opened the week talking about the bombshell data dropped by the CDC’s Rochelle Walensky.

    Only EIB 24/7 members can watch this exclusive video.

    If you’re not a member, sign up now. You can also use the special VIP email pipeline to Clay and Buck to share whatever is on your mind.

    Watch It Here:

     

     

    Recent Stories

    Nobel Prize-Winning Doctor Echoes C&B in WSJ Op-Ed

    10 Jan 2022

    CLAY: I gotta give credit, Buck. The two pages that I’m most interested in seeing every single day are the Wall Street Journal editorial pages. They are by far the most honest, the most interesting, the most thought-provoking, and the most fact-based — and fearless, I would say — of any newspaper pages in the media. And I’m old school in the sense that I still read the actual physical newspaper. So I turned to it this morning, Buck, when the Wall Street Journal got to the house, and I read this piece, and I might mangle these names.

    Luc Montagnier (that’s the French pronunciation; Montagner if you’re a southern guy; I have no idea how exactly to pronounce it) and Jed Rubenfeld wrote a headline here: “Omicron Makes Biden’s Vaccine Mandates Obsolete,” and, Buck, the entire argument here is effectively — this is an emboldened part of their piece — “There is no evidence so far that vaccines are reducing infections from the fast-spreading Omicron variant.” And they argue that as a result, “there is no scientific basis whatsoever for OSHA’s vaccine mandate.”

    And they close their piece by saying, “Neither Health and Human Services nor OSHA ever considered Omicron or said a word about vaccine efficacy against it for the simple reason that it hadn’t yet been discovered. In these circumstances, long-standing legal principles require the justices to stay the mandates and send them back to the agencies for a fresh look,” which is an interesting argument which I hadn’t even thought about.

    It was well said by these guys in this article, because at the time of the Biden covid vaccine mandate Omicron didn’t exist, and so they need to reconsider the science behind their argument. And so the Supreme Court could just send this back to HHS and OSHA and say, “You have to redo this entire vaccine mandate because the science upon which you relied has changed.” It’s a little bit of a way to dodge having to make a big decision about executive authority.

    BUCK: Right. This is a moment in time where any reasonable, rationale decision-making body — the Supreme Court; OSHA itself; oh, I don’t know, the Biden regime’ the mouthpieces at the CDC, you know? Where’s little Fauci? I have the seen him in five minutes. I don’t know what’s going on. It’s been five minutes without him on my TV screen.

    CLAY: (laughing) It is true.

    BUCK: And you say, “Hold on a second. Someone explain to me how this makes any sense, given the realities of the underlying justification for this. They took this out of individual hands — your rights, your freedom as a person to not have something injected into you or else you would face serious consequences.” In New York City you’re effectively locked in your home unless you get the shot. It’s horrible what they’ve done to people here. Okay?

    That was all based on the, “Oh, I can’t be near ’cause you’re gonna get me sick.” Well, now we know, unless you’re gonna avoid all human contact, you might actually get exposed to covid, vaccinated or unvaccinated. And they can’t even distinguish between the duo in terms of infection likelihood anymore or viral spread — unless I’m missing something, unless there’s some data I don’t know about.

    They did do recent studies to show that those who are vaccinated versus unvaccinated who do get infected have about the same level of virus in their nasopharynx, right? So in terms of initial infection, maybe for the first 60 days, Clay, you’re more protected or the first 90 days you’re more protected. But after that you’re not. So what’s really the justification here for making people get the shot? They don’t have answers. They’re just coming up with it on the fly.

    CLAY: This is maybe the most blockbuster part of the entire article here that I’m reading from the Wall Street Journal. For those of you out there, I shared this on Twitter and encourage you to go read the article for yourself. Again, one of the writers here, Dr. Montagnier. I’ve pronounced his name different ways now.

    BUCK: Lean into the French. Montagnier?

    CLAY: He was the winner of the 2008 Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine for discovering HIV. So this guy’s kind of a big deal. Nobel Prize winner. All right, listen to this paragraph, Buck, because this is a jaw-dropping paragraph and I think we’re gonna talk some with Alex Berenson about this tomorrow in the third hour of the program for those of you out there who want to hear this discussion.

    But here’s what they say: “The little data we have suggest the opposite” in terms of omicron protecting vaccinated people. “One preprint study found that after 30 days the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines no longer had any statistically significant positive effect against Omicron infection,” just 30 days, but listen to this, “and after 90 days, their effect went negative — i.e., vaccinated people were more susceptible to Omicron infection.

    “Confirming this negative efficacy finding, data from Denmark and the Canadian province of Ontario indicate that vaccinated people have higher rates of Omicron infection than unvaccinated people.” Buck, if this paragraph that I’m reading from in the Wall Street Journal is correct, not only is there not now — as Joe Biden has been saying for months — a “pandemic of the unvaccinated,” what we actually have in this country, Buck, based on this paragraph and these studies, would be a pandemic of the vaccinated! It’s earth-shattering.

    BUCK: I can guarantee you that if Clay or I or any of our brothers and sisters in the conservative movement took those exact words — and forget about attribution and plagiarism for a second, okay, just for the purpose of the story here. If we took those exact words, put them onto our Facebook page or put them onto Twitter, there’s a very high likelihood that you would get a strike.

    You’d be suspended and maybe permanently suspended for taking the words of a Nobel Prize winner in science on what’s happening right now based on the data. So can we all understand the people that are telling you “it’s the science” are cowards, they’re liars, and they don’t know what the heck they’re talking about. The corporate media in general — aligned with the Democrats — has failed to even do the most basic due diligence on Fauciism.

    They’ve been at every stage of this pandemic pretending to have the answer, Clay, based upon things that they clearly could not really know. But they said, “We’re a hundred percent sure.” At what point is “I’m a hundred percent sure” and then “I’m actually wrong ’cause I wasn’t sure” the same thing as a lie? Right? To say that we know these vaccines work so well and will stop transmission and will stop infection to find out catastrophically how much that’s not true?

    Well, it’s not like they said, “We think.” They said, “We know, and you must get the shot based on us knowing,” and they didn’t, and they were wrong, and there needs to be accountability for that because otherwise how can we trust what they say going forward? Why should anyone listen to the next Fauci pronouncement? Oh, I’m sure you’ll see him walking around in three masks in a matter of weeks now ’cause he takes the virus seriously. By the way, does AOC take the virus seriously? ‘Cause she just got infected! She was down in Florida.

    CLAY: It’s not gonna take long ’til AOC blames DeSantis for her covid infection. By the way, her covid infection: Post-double vaccine, post-booster. By the way, she’s also gonna be fine. Maybe the virus was just supremely attracted to her because she’s so good-looking, right? Maybe that’s the big takeaway here.

    Recent Stories

    CDC’s Walensky Drops Data Bombs on Biden Covid Narrative

    10 Jan 2022

    CLAY: The Dark Ages for the Biden covid regime. Everything, it feels like, is falling apart for them as it pertains to the overall narrative of Joe Biden’s entire 2020 presidential campaign. He said, “I’m gonna shut down the virus, I’m not gonna shut down the economy,” and the virus is surging and it feels like to me, Buck — and I’m curious if you got this sense too — ever since the Supreme Court arguments on Friday (which we talked a lot about) over the covid vaccine mandate, that Biden has lost control finally of the narrative.

    We got a couple of clips of Rochelle Walensky, the CDC director, that I’m gonna get to in a moment. But, Buck, you’re in New York City, the place with basically the highest covid rate of infection once more, effectively two years after March of 2020. What is the vibe on the ground, and do you also have the sense that I do coming out of this weekend that basically the Biden White House has just finally lost control of the covid narrative that they’re trying to sell to the American public?

    BUCK: The narrative is in free fall. To say it’s collapsing is one thing. I think it’s actually going in the other direction too. It’s not just that people are ceasing to believe a lot of what the established consensus storyline is. They’re starting to say finally — and I think this is a good thing — “Wait a second. How long have they been wrong about this? Why should we trust this narrative going forward? Why should the apparatus have so much control over our lives?”

    Clay, it was just bombshell after bombshell the last few days with what’s being said ’cause, first of all, let’s just all take a step back. We’ve had this enormous fight over mandates, and in New York City they implemented it. The federal government — just to remind everybody — is supposed to start (I believe today) the initial phase, although it’s really a phased-in process, of the OSHA mandate, right?

    That’s why we have the Supreme Court oral arguments, and this is why there’s the urgency of whether there will be a stay. So you’re in the phase now where, technically, the federal government supposed to be forcing these shots into people’s arms or they can get a test every week and be harassed forever and be masked up or get fired, right? That’s where we are.

    Clay, up to 40% of covid patients — according to Rochelle Walensky and the CDC — in the hospital may be there for other reasons. I know you have this audio, but the numbers now are telling us what we’ve been saying all along, which is covid is dangerous to a small percentage of the overall U.S. population. The vaccines do not stop the spread. They’ve had to admit that. That’s obvious now. They do not stop the spread, and they might be dramatically overcounting — the CDC might be dramatically overcounting — hospitalizations and deaths.

    CLAY: Yes, and we’re gonna play a couple of these clips for you. I also… There’s a great editorial, I shared it, and we’re gonna talk about this, too, because I think it ties in it to overall crumbling foundation of the Biden covid narrative on the opinion page of the Wall Street Journal: “Omicron Makes Biden’s Mandates Obsolete.” If you want to do a little reading during a commercial break here in a little bit, we’re gonna talk about that piece, which is written, by the way, by a Nobel Prize-winning physician.

    So it’s kind of a significant person to be writing that story. But first, Rochelle Walensky — it seems to me to some extent — has been deputized as the official sudden truth-teller. Now, she’s not sharing data that you and I, Buck, haven’t been talking about for a long time. But what’s landing here is this data is blowing people away, and it’s also making people realize — stop and say — “Wait a minute.

    “Why have we not known about this before, and what else are they not telling us?” Now, there are a couple of different clips that I want to play here. Friday, Rochelle Walensky went on Good Morning America, and she said what we talked about for a long time, that the people who are dying with covid have four or more comorbidities often. Listen to cut 3 of Rochelle Walensky, CDC director, Friday on Good Morning America.

    WALENSKY: The overwhelming number of deaths — over 75% — occurred in people who had least four comorbidities. So really these are people who were unwell to begin with.

    CLAY: Okay. So this is what we’ve been saying. If you are not well, if you have a high level of obesity, you are under particular risk from covid. This is from data that the CDC has been unwilling to share with the American public on shows like Good Morning America with people like Rochelle Walensky sharing it. So if you missed that, over 75% of deaths, she said, are occurring in people with at least four comorbidities. And these people are not well, she is saying, okay? Now, also she went on Sunday with Bret Baier on Fox News, and she was asked directly, “What percentage of the people that are counted as covid deaths died from covid, not with covid?” Listen to this answer.

    WALENSKY: Yeah, Omicron we’re following that we carefully. Our death registry of course takes a few weeks to collect, and of course Omicron has just been with us for a few weeks, but those data will be forthcoming.

    CLAY: All right. So really the question there is an important part from Bret Baier, too, ’cause he said directly, Buck: Hey, there’s 835,000 deaths that are attributed to covid. How many of those are deaths with covid? That is, people have many different comorbidities. In other words, if you’re in hospice and — as often, unfortunately, occurs in hospice — you die not with any one particular cause.

    You might have pneumonia, you might have the flu, you might also have covid, you have many different illnesses oftentimes that are occurring simultaneously but you are on your way to death otherwise. That would be counted as a covid death or — memorably as has sometimes happened — if you come in to the hospital after getting hit by a bus and you test positive for covid, you are a covid death.

    BUCK: Right. Okay. So how could we have had anything even approaching a rational and reasonable policy discussion, Clay, when the CDC is effectively telling us the numbers — and remember, the numbers are what they use to justify everything.

    CLAY: Everything.

    BUCK: There was a time when New York City was shutting down schools because of the positivity rate of covid tests, which makes zero sense, right? How many people are taking tests? Are asymptomatic people taking tests? They have had the numbers game being played this whole time, and now when they say things like 75% of covid deaths are those who are essentially at high risk of dying from the flu, any number of upper respiratory problems…

    CLAY: Very unwell.

    BUCK: People with four comorbidities? That’s statistically someone who is at risk from just day-to-day life. We’re all going there, by the way. We’re all gonna be at that point. But when I hear her say that, I have to think about all the lives — ’cause, remember, they also tell us almost everybody who is dying in the hospital is unvaccinated. I find that… The most recent data on that was pretty stunning. It’s like .003% of those dying are vaccinated. So they’re saying everyone in the hospital in the U.S. who’s dying is unvaccinated.

    CLAY: That’s not true.

    BUCK: I know, but the CDC is saying it. But just take that moment and pause and think about what that means. Think of all the lives that could have been saved if we had gotten 99.9% of those truly at risk vaccinated instead of firing 35-year-old nurses with natural immunity and trying to force everyone’s 10-year-old to get the shot. Think of the dispersal of resources, the lack of trust, the authoritarian overreach that has been created by trying to do this — and not just mass vaccination. Mass booster campaign now for everybody. People look around and say, “Who are the morons in charge that think this is actually working?”

    CLAY: Well, and what this represents to me, Buck, is the internal polling in the White House on covid must be a disaster right now for Joe Biden. Because the first thing I say is, okay, they’re going to now start sharing data that, frankly, when you and I would share it on social media, what would we get told? Oh, you’re trying to kill grandmas, you would sometimes be told, hey, you can’t share this. It appears to me that Big Tech — and I’m curious if you buy into this — it seems like Big Tech has stopped restricting the spread in many ways of critical commentary surrounding covid all of a sudden.

    BUCK: I just got hit. On my Facebook account, I got dinged the last 24 hours for something I said on this show, which we then shared at Facebook.com/BuckSexton. So we’re now fighting with them.

    CLAY: It’s an untruth, they said?

    BUCK: “Independent fact-checkers.” I have run circles as have you around these independent fact-checkers for months when you look at what is actually true, who ends up being right versus who is going along with the narrative at the time. Journalism, Big Tech, my friends, they have betrayed not only their professions but in country over the course of the pandemic bid refusing to stand for truth, refusing to make sure there’s accountability for the abomination of a CDC which at this point they’re the worst three-letter agency in the federal government which is an astonishing accomplishment.

    CLAY: And the people who are doing these fact checks, well, that’s interesting that you just got dinged. Because what I have noticed is it seems like there now is a willingness to have a debate about what’s going on surrounding the covid vaccine. And I continue to say “covid vaccine” in quotation marks because the question that I ask, Buck (laughs), that got everybody riled up last week on Twitter was just this: Name me any other “vaccine,” in quotation marks, that you have to get three or four shots in a year, and it doesn’t prevented you from getting or spreading the virus. I’ve never heard of that happening.

    BUCK: This is the crappiest vaccine anyone’s ever heard of No one has ever been sitting around saying, “Yeah, get the MMR vaccines and maybe get them four times a year for the rest of your life and maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t, doesn’t stop the spread.” Of course, this is not what we thought of and this is not what they told us. To be very clear, they said 95% protection. You don’t get it. You don’t spread it.

    But, Clay, to your point about social media what I think we are seeing is that it’s more apparent number of that there are some people who are allowed to say what you and I say; and so that’s okay now, but are you and I allowed to say it? Can I say the vaccines don’t stop the spread? I might get dinged, I might get shut down, but Rochelle Walensky can go and say it, right? It’s about who can go say what which just goes to say this is all about power dynamics and has been all along.

    CLAY: And the politics. And the politics I think on this are disastrous now for Joe Biden. And I think they are trying to figure out… They’re in a tough spot, right? Because they used covid to keep Donald Trump from getting reelected in 2020. All of the death counters — which miraculously have disappeared, even though the deaths are continuing to go up — all of the nuance surrounding these death numbers — wait a minute, what’s the difference between a covid death with covid versus death because of covid?

    These were conversations that were not allowed to happen, and now as they look ahead to the red wave that is coming in 2022 to this midterm as every single day, Buck, more and more people… My phone… I don’t know about you, but there are friends of mine that I will hear from pretty regularly who may have been critical of some of my covid comments earlier. And they’re like, “Man, I’m starting to look at the data, and a lot of what you’ve been saying is true.” Yeah, it’s not that I’m pretending to be a Nobel Prize-winning scientist. I’m just looking at the data and using it to inform my opinions, which is what all intelligent people should do.

    Recent Stories

    Cobra Kai and the Best TV/Movie ’80s Girlfriends

    10 Jan 2022

    BUCK: Clay, also I have to give some props, you said that Mrs. Travis liked Cobra Kai, and it kind of jogged my memory because I was like, “Wait a second. I trust Mrs. Travis’s opinion on this.” You, I don’t know, “Mr. I Like Hamilton,” but Mrs. Travis, I trust. I went back. Cobra Kai is amazing. It’s a very well-done show for what it is and you can really have the whole family watch it, pretty much. A little bit of cursing but that’s it.

    CLAY: Yeah, 100%. So my wife watches a lot of shows, and so I use her as the sounding board, and she said, “If you like Karate Kid,” which I did, “you will love Cobra Kai.” So on Friday I was like, “You know what? It’s a long week. I’m just gonna kick back and watch a show.” So I watched all of season 1 of Cobra Kai on Friday.

    BUCK: You hadn’t seen it before?

    CLAY: No.

    BUCK: Oh, my gosh. I watched season 3. I binge-watched season 3 this season, didn’t even coordinate this.

    CLAY: No, I watched season 1, I’m all-in for seasons 2, 3, and 4 now. When football season gets near the end, I have a little bit of free time.

    BUCK: Was LaRusso the bad guy? It changes up a little bit in your head. Your head space changes a little bit.

    CLAY: Johnny is an incredible actor in this show. It’s really funny, well done. If you liked Karate Kid at all, it’s a good one to watch with your kids. I’m watching with my kids. As you said, some language. But in general, not too bad.

    BREAK TRANSCRIPT

    CLAY: Buck, as we went to finish off the second hour there, a shocking revelation from inside of the Clay and Buck staff relating to one Ali on our staff. Ali, is your mic turned on? Can you come on and share what you shared with us? Buck may not have even heard this story. You know the story? I didn’t know it. So we were talking about —

    ALI: When I was really little, the cool kid on the block told me that, after we saw the movie, from that day forward, my name — which is Alice — was going to be “Ali with an I” because of The Karate Kid.

    CLAY: Because Ali is the love interest — Buck, that is amazing — thank you, Ali. By the way, Ali is a producer on the show. She’s been with Rush before us for —

    BUCK: — 20 years? 20-years plus?

    CLAY: — 20-plus years. We have an incredible staff. I don’t think we give them enough credit. This same staff — for those of you out there — stayed with us when we came in in June and worked out preparing all the “Best of” with Rush. But it’s a testament to Rush and the staff that he had created that they all wanted to stay and continue to work on the show that he had built, and Ali’s a big part of that. By the way, Ali on Karate Kid, Buck, best-looking girlfriend for any movie that grew up watching. Can you beat Ali on Karate Kid?

    BUCK: Elisabeth Shue, who went on to be a pretty well-known actress. She was actually in The Boys, the Amazon show about the superheroes. I think it’s called The Boys, right? I saw it. I just forget.

    CLAY: Leaving Las Vegas. She was the love interest of Nicolas Cage.

    BUCK: She was in The Saint, which is a weird movie but kind of underrated with Val Kilmer from back in the day for those of you who really appreciate nineties cinema.

    CLAY: Also, the brother of Andrew “Billy” Shue, who was from —

    BUCK: Melrose Place.

    CLAY: — Melrose Place, back in the day, the spin-off of 90210 that Aaron Spelling made a billion dollars off of.

    BUCK: And if you really want your brain to explode, he is on the bench in The Karate Kid as one of the extras who looks on during the tournament, Elisabeth Shue’s brother.

    CLAY: I did not know that.

    BUCK: I got the wild movie trivia going on now.

    CLAY: So, can you beat Ali on Karate Kid? Mercedes… Remember the movie License to Drive?

    BUCK: I feel like I’m just gonna get in trouble here.

    CLAY: By who you pick?

    BUCK: I’m gonna get in trouble. I’m gonna get in trouble.

    CLAY: Oh, you’re worried about girlfriends now?

    BUCK: Not that.

    CLAY: 1980s. You were a kid.

    BUCK: That’s true. That’s true. I was a big fan of the lady who gets the guy into trouble in Caddyshack, if you know what I’m talking about.

    CLAY: Yeah. I liked her. Here’s a couple that I’ll give you” Princess Leia in the Jabba the Hutt bikini may have sent many men on their way to adolescence. I knew I was heterosexual when I saw Princess Leia in the gold bikini in Jabba the Hutt’s lap. That was in Return of the Jedi, for those of you out there. I would also say, again, Karate Kid is at the apex there.

    You can also treat Buck and I. It’s tough to beat Ali in The Karate Kid. There are still a lot of people… I had a Halloween party recently, and one of the couples was Daniel LaRusso and Ali ’cause she has that cheerleader skirt that she wears for much of the movie. Then you also got Saved by the Bell. A lot of people out there are big fans, if you remember.

    BUCK: Kelly Kapowski.

    CLAY: Tiffani Amber Thiessen.

    BUCK: Since we’re going down this pathway and some of my radio listeners for a long time know, she did end up marrying international kajillionaire superstar Justin Timberlake. I was a big Jessica Biel, a Seventh Heaven fan back in the day.

    CLAY: She’s around your age, though.

    BUCK: Yeah.

    CLAY: I liked Neve Campbell. They’re doing a new Scream movie. I was a big fan of Neve Campbell back in the day. She was around my own age. Drew Barrymore. I was a big fan of Drew Barrymore back in the day. But when you pick somebody around your same age, I understand why your girlfriends would be upset with you, frankly.

    BUCK: I think we have to get back to saving America now, Clay.

    CLAY: All right. So, I want to play this. I wanted to make sure everybody knew why Ali was Ali. I didn’t know that story, so she got it from when she was in elementary school and Karate Kid was so popular.

    Recent Stories

    Shannon Bream Tip: Court Ruling on OSHA Mandate Thursday?

    10 Jan 2022

    CLAY: Buck, I just got a text. I was texting with Shannon Bream, who is Fox News’ Supreme Court legal analyst and also was on with us Friday discussing the oral arguments that took place. And she was flagging for me something that could be pretty significant, and it is that the Supreme Court has added a day to release opinions on Thursday of this week. She just said that’s interesting because it could be that they’re going to rule on that Biden vaccine mandate and the stay in particular as soon as Thursday.

    She thought it was interesting that they have added a day to release opinions that would otherwise not necessarily have been anticipated or been a part of the regular schedule. And that’s why, based on her texting about that, I also think that could be somewhat significant in terms of the overall decision that they are going to render which I think is going to say that the Biden vaccine mandate’s unconstitutional.

    BUCK: You think they’re gonna put a stay in place.

    CLAY: Right.

    BUCK: So there will be a stay, but you don’t think there will be…? I think —

    CLAY: If I were betting, if I had to put money on the line right now based on having listened to the oral arguments; they may allow the Biden mandate for health care workers, although I think that’s a little bit of a harder call. And right now, it feels like the health care companies are basically just saying, “We don’t have mandates anymore anyway,” ’cause they’re letting covid-positive nurses back in hospitals.

    BUCK: Think about that, everybody. That’s not an insignificant point. I talked about it last week, Clay just brought it up a few moments ago here — and Rhode Island, I think, is one of the places where they have officially said you can bring in covid-positive nurses to work as long as they’re masked up, as if that’s…

    Let me ask you: Would you rather, if you were a person at high risk…? You’re 85 years old and have a history of upper respiratory issues, maybe have emphysema, something like that. Would you rather just take your chance with someone who’s an unvaccinated nurse or someone who is, “Oh, I’ve got pretty bad covid but don’t worry! I’m wearing a mask for the most part.”

    CLAY: Yeah, it’s a fascinating question. I think some of these places are actually bringing back covid-positive nurses to wait on covid-positive patients, right? Isn’t that one of the ways…? Now, how do you restrict their ability to interact with other patients? I understand is a challenge. But I think they’re so desperate because so many nurses are out with covid issues that they’re doing whatever they can to get nurses back.

    BUCK: I gotta track this one down. I saw this over the weekend; I’m pretty sure it’s true. It looks like nursing homes in Connecticut may be taking people who are covid positive back now. So, if you have had covid, you’re going back into the nursing home. So, we are in this cycle, folks, and really ultimately what you realize is the notion that we were gonna stop the spread or stop the virus if we listen to Fauci was a fantasy and a very destructive one.

    CLAY: It’s all crumbling right now, and Joe Biden is having to handle that as it crumbles around them.

    Recent Stories

    Psaki: Jan. 6th Is Rallying Cry for Dems to Change Voting Laws

    10 Jan 2022

    BUCK: This is what Jen Psaki said. We were talking about this. She just had her White House press conference. There’s one thing that she said I thought was interesting and wanted to play it for you. Go for it.

    PSAKI: And that we have to ensure January 6th doesn’t mark the end of democracy but the beginning of a renaissance for our democracy, where we stand up for the right to vote and have that voted counted fairly, uh, not undermined by partisans afraid of who you voted for or try to reser– reverse an outcome.

    BUCK: A lot of bullcrap meandering. Here’s the point, Clay. You see it; I see it. Everyone listening needs to know this: January 6th is now the rallying cry for changing through federal law, which would override hundreds of different laws in states across the country. When it comes to ballot harvesting, when it comes to ID requirements for voting, override all of that, which upends our system, actually, to make it more similar to the covid pandemic year — or else you’re an insurrectionist and you support January 6th. That’s what’s going on.

    CLAY: It’s also unconstitutional, and even if you want to talk about whether or not this is gonna pass — and it does not seem like it’s going to pass because they’re not gonna change the filibuster rules to allow it to pass. Even if it were to pass, if you look at recent Supreme Court jurisprudence as it pertains to local voting rules and regulations — state law in other words — this federal mandate, I do not believe, is remote constitutional. So that in and of itself is a huge part of this story that no one takes the next step towards.

    I think you’re right, Buck. Look, the storyline here is going to be — based on where we are right now, lots of things can change. But it appears we’re gonna see a red tide in 2022. All of you should get out and vote, and we need to have consequences for defund the police, for lockdowns, for your kids not being in school. That’s the way you win long term is by holding politicians responsible.

    That’s the essence of democracy. But when Republicans dominate in 2022 and when there is a red tide — which I believe is going to be roaring across the country representing sanity — what is going to happen is, Democrats are going to say, “The reason why we lost is ’cause racism,” and that’s gonna be their storyline going into 2024 to try and justify why they lost in 2022.

    BUCK: And then they’re also probably gonna have to explain why they might pass over the first female black vice president for a different candidate in the Democrat Party because they think that Kamala can’t get it done. Won’t it be fascinating, Clay, to watch the, “We lost because of racism — oh, by the way, we’re not actually gonna have Kamala Harris as a standard bearer of the Democrat Party because we have no confidence in her.” This will be an interesting situation they put themselves in.

    CLAY: They’re hoping, because Biden’s already pledged to put a black woman on the Supreme Court, that Stephen Breyer is going to step down — this is my thesis — and then they’re going to try and put a lot of pressure on Kamala. And that would need to happen, by the way, Breyer stepping down at some point this summer to allow, theoretically, the Democrats to muscle in a replacement for Breyer before we get into the midterms, and it becomes virtually impossible to replace anyone.

    Recent Stories

    Stop Genuflecting at the Altar of “Experts”

    10 Jan 2022

    CLAY: I want to play this clip ’cause I’m starting to see, Buck, more and more doctors, it’s amazing how many people are so afraid of being outside of the consensus opinion that they won’t say what they actually believe, which would, by the way, change the consensus opinion, right, because everybody actually said what they think, then our conversation and debate, the marketplace of ideas would actually be more honest. But Lucy McBride spoke out and said, “Doctors have an obligation to help people frame risk.” Again, for so much of this entire covid discussion, it’s been about terrifying people, and we’ve had almost no discussion of probability or risk analysis or trying to make sane decisions. Play cut 13.

    MCBRIDE: Those of us in the medical profession — particularly those of us who are patient facing, who help people every day — understand their unique vulnerabilities for disease whether it’s from covid or cancer. We have an obligation to help people frame risk — to deliver fact-based, nuanced information. Fear does harm. It only makes people afraid! It doesn’t affect people’s decisions. So when I’m on Twitter or right now with you, I’m trying to help people understand that look, Your risk for covid is as different as someone else’s. And revving the emotional engines of people’s anxiety only does harm.

    BUCK: This is what we’ve been talking about for how many months now —

    CLAY: Two years! Two years, basically.

    BUCK: — about reasonable risk acceptance. And you’ve started to see this. I believe there was an AP fact check maybe over the weekend of this term that has started to get used, and it is one of the failures — I’m gonna say this in general: one of the failures — of conservatives on the right is that we like to use the lexicon that exists. The left creates new terms and terminology and changes terms and terminology to suit its political needs. We’d have better… People say, “Why do you refer to them as commies?” Because it’s disparaging and they’re a bunch of Marxists. That’s why I refer to them as commies.

    CLAY: It’s also funny. It’s also a funny insult.

    BUCK: Why, thank you, my good man.

    CLAY: Yes. I like it. I agree.

    BUCK: Me too. So that’s why I refer to them as commies. But here you have mass formation psychosis. You started to see this, people have been talking about it essentially as a more official sounding mass hysteria, “dogs and cats, living together, mass hysteria,” as my man Clay certainly knows.

    CLAY: Yes.

    BUCK: Ghostbusters.

    CLAY: Great Ghostbusters reference.

    BUCK: So now they did a fact check saying like the American Psychiatric Association doesn’t recognize this term or doesn’t recognize it in the context of how it’s been used. Whatever. Who cares! The point is, people have lost their gosh-darn minds here, okay? People are having a mental break down — and if you’re wondering what I mean, go ask your neighbor who’s wandering the woods alone with a mask on, “What are you doing?” They will look at you like you are crazy. This is an anxiety disorder. There’s something wrong with people. The circuitry of their brain isn’t functioning the way that it should when it comes to risk.

    CLAY: Also, that’s an opinion! You can’t fact check an opinion and label it as false! Tonight, Buck, Alabama is playing Georgia. I am betting on Georgia to win this is game. They are a 2-1/2 point favorite. That is my opinion. Georgia is going to beat Alabama. Lots of other people out there can have a different opinion. Alabama is gonna beat Georgia, whatever it is. I can’t be fact checked today on that opinion. Now, I will either be right or wrong based on the result of the game. But the inability…

    It’s important to notice what’s going on here now. They are expanding their fact-check universe to the point they are now fact-checking opinions, which is impossible. Fact-checking opinions is nonsensical, because all it’s predicated on is the idea of what opinions you are allowed to have or not to have. So if somebody wants to argue, “Hey, we’re in the midst of a mass hysteria over covid,” that’s their opinion. You can’t then say, “This is factually inaccurate,” because it’s their opinion of what’s going on in society.

    BUCK: The dark core of Fauciism all along has been the pretense or the make-believe of “this is fact.”

    CLAY: “I am science.”

    BUCK: “I am science,” as Fauci says, area actually are making judgment calls that other people could and as we see now should have reasonably disagreed with. To pretend that your judgment is fact is the heart of authoritarianism. It’s “this has to be done, it must be this way, there’s no other argument allowed.” That started in March of 2020 — and that it has lingered this long is a function of the libs, the leftists, the commies seizing so many of the institutions, not just of government, but also of mass communication and using it to propagandistic effect.

    CLAY: Amen — and, Buck, the entire purpose of politicians is not to constantly genuflect at the altar of “experts.” It’s to weigh conflicting opinion and make a decision about what we should do, and I feel like that’s been totally lost in all discussion. Politics, by and large… When you are voting for someone for an office, you are trusting their judgment. Everybody’s busy; they don’t have time to look at every bill. When you press that button, when you make that decision, when you pull that lever…

    However your vote is tallied, when you do that, you are saying, “I trust your judgment.” That’s really the most important choice that you are making is in their judgment. When a politician says, “I’m going to defer to an unelected bureaucrat like Dr. Fauci; whatever he says to do, I’m going to do,” well, why in the world did I elect you? I didn’t elect Dr. Fauci at all. Use your reason, your intelligence, and your judgment to analyze conflicting data and make rational choices. We totally skipped over that, and the media made it worse, Buck, because they said, “Well, if you’re not listening to this particular scientist, you are anti-science.” No! That’s what everything is: Balancing out different competing interests is the essence of judgment in adulthood.

    Recent Stories