Where's The Hysteria As Biden Assaults First Amendment? | February 3, 2021
Here's your conservative, not bitter host, Todd Huff.
Folks, where is the hysteria? Where is the hysteria in the media? The White House is asking the media take about this. Asking the media to provide the questions they plan to ask Jin Saki who will circle back to that. We'll circle back to Jen Psaki Jen Psaki, we'll circle back to whatever it is you you've asked her. And where's this concern? fear? Where's this? This outrage by the media wears this because remember, Trump was waging a war on the First Amendment simply by criticizing the media and calling them fake news. never occurred to the media to put their big boy and big girl pants on, I should say, or big boy or big girl pants on and fight back and actually articulate why what they were doing was accurate and truthful and honest and sincere. Of course, they don't want to do that. Because that's only making this more comical for the rest of us to watch them try to describe some of the nonsense actually most of the nonsense that they engage in each and every day. But there you go. Welcome, by the way to the program. I am your host, Todd Huff, you can reach me by email, thoughts, questions, opinions, concerns. If you want to say something funny, I take all those things including your adoration and praise. Todd, The Todd Huff show.com. Folks, if you want to listen to this program, daily as you should, by the way science has proven that listening to this program can stop and even reverse those dangerous side effects of liberalism. So it's not it's it's a good inoculation against liberalism. And we're you know, we're talking about vaccines and so forth with with COVID this will actually help vaccinate you against some of the the threats of the of another threat, roaming the countryside, which is liberalism, communism, socialism. One way to do that is download the podcast. It's totally free. Get it on iTunes, Stitcher, wherever it is that you get your podcasts and then you can take us with you wherever you go each and every day. So I want to go back to this issue. The White House has it's just so crazy to me. It's not because it's totally predictable from these folks. White House This is an article in Newsmax White House slammed, actually they put Wh wh standing for White House slammed for seeking briefing questions in advance. This is on news newsmax article. President Joe Biden's communication teams team has at times probed reporters to see what questions they plan on asking White House press secretary Jen Psaki, prompting concerns among the press corps. three sources with knowledge of the matter told the Daily Beast like The Daily Beast is the one that maybe broke this in the news Max is commenting on it. But this is where I found found this particular story. Leaders of a White House Correspondents Association zoom call last Friday. So here we are, what are we two weeks into this Biden administration. We're two weeks into this we've got 28 executive orders. By the way, that is four times as many that Trump had signed in the same period of time and all executive orders are not equal. That's one of the things that I want to make sure that the average person understands there is a legitimate use of executive orders. Executive Orders is are not to be used to create policy or legislation that Congress did not enact specific and it's even worse, I guess, the both bad, it's bad to create policy or legislation from an executive order. Because, as you remember, for those of you that still went to school, when they taught you how legislation was introduced, and a bill became law, you know that that's passed not by the executive branch or the president, but rather by Congress. That's the way it's supposed to happen. But that's not the way it often happens. And so, and so Congress oftentimes, either doesn't talk about it, you know, legislation at all, and the President just writes it into an executive order. That's bad. What's even arguably worse, although I'm on the fence on this, if it's really and truthfully, worse, is this notion that Congress does passes or they review legislation. They debate legislation, the legislation does not pass, as was the case with DACA. As was the case with DACA, under Obama, he wanted Congress to act on this issue, they did not. Then he wrote it into us not to law, he issued an executive order, which he said was temporary and all this sort of stuff. Now we act as though this has to be the the only path forward is to extend, you know, permanent citizenship to DACA, recipients and so forth. But Congress did act, they said we don't want to pass DACA. And then the President signed it into law, while not into law into executive order. Anyway, that's even arguably worse is when Congress says, you know, debates an issue and does not approve it. And then the president comes along and does it there are legitimate issues are legitimate purposes for executive orders. And executive order is supposed to be supposed to be a directive by the President of the United States. That issues a I don't know, a series of steps or a path, a plan, so to speak, in the order to execute the law that Congress has passed. So there might be a law that Congress has passed, the President can sit down and say, in order to fulfill the, you know, the law passed by Congress, here are the steps we're going to take pursuant to this particular bill or law, this is what we're going to do. That is much different than than just simply writing these things up out of out of whole cloth, creating policy creating legislation. And so the numbers, the numbers indicate someone's, I guess, affinity towards determining things this particular way. Again, at this point in his presidency, Trump had seven, Biden has 28 executive orders, anyway, so. So we've got that whole issue going on with Biden, but we've got here as well, this issue with the press. So as you know, the press is very friendly to the left of the Democrat Party. This is no secret, I don't even know why they think they can get away with this any longer. In fact, a lot of folks don't even care. A lot of folks, I think are under the impression that journalism, there should be two sides to journalism, conservative side and Republican and Democrat or liberal side. And that's not accurate. Either a journalist should truly be able to remove himself or herself from the story. ask the questions that matter present differing perspectives and let the reader or the viewer make a decision and determination as to what they think should happen which side they agree with. Maybe they agree partially with both sides. But that's not what we get today. People have been treated to such biased news reporting that they believe that that's the way that that it is if you want liberal reporting, go to CNN, if you want conservative reporting, you go to Newsmax ohayon and maybe at times Fox. That's what they think. But that's not the way that media is supposed to work. And it's definitely not supposed to work this way, where a zoom call takes place. And the President's communication team says Hey, what do you guys put on asking Jen Psaki today? What do you plan on asking her? Right, going back to this article? It says this, this is a quote from someone who is a white horse, white house correspondent. While it's a relief to see briefings return, the press can't really do its job in the briefing room at the White House is picking and choosing the questions they want. That's not really a free press at all. You don't say? So to my point in my question off the beginning, why is there not outrage in the media? When Trump looked at Jim Acosta and said, Jim, you're not fake news. You're very fake news. The media melted down Who is this guy? He's issuing an assault on the first amendment which by the way, is not accurate. He's challenging the things that the media is saying to which they could offer rebuttals and retorts and all sorts of things, but they don't they cry First Amendment. Meanwhile, we currently have a president of the United States, who's according to reports, asking his communicate communications team is asking for questions in advance so they can give them to Jin Saki. And so she doesn't give responses like this particular response. This is how this happened yesterday, White House briefing, Jin Saki was asked about the space force. Jen Psaki was asked about the state of this space force. Now keep in mind, you know, people, there is a legitimate when you look at defending this great nation, there are legitimate reasons to be concerned about being able to protect ourselves from you know, from threats that that enter into outer space now, because of satellites and technology and some of the things and reports that we've heard nations like China testing, you know, in thinking of doing, of course, you know, that when someone fires an IC, if someone were to fire an ICBM, intercontinental ballistic missile, those actually leave the Earth's atmosphere as well. circles or rather than, than reenters, the atmosphere heading towards its target. This is one of the reasons why space technology was so important in the era of the Cold War was to, I guess, to partially test some of the technology and to prove ourselves and our ability to get something from Planet Earth into into space, so that we could if, you know, in the in the world of the Soviet Union and the Cold War back in those days, they knew that we had the technology and the capabilities of delivering an ICBM, which of course, in those days would have cured a nuclear warhead. But But space is a legitimate place that we have to think about defending ourselves. In fact, if we don't, it's candidly a little bit. A little bit naive, especially when when I've read reports, you've read reports, what are the other things that are being that our intelligence teams are finding that nations are looking at doing in space that could affect us? I mean, think about it. What is it up? Oh, the I'm drawing a blank on the letters but the electromagnetic pulse attack EMP, I think, right? If a nuclear device or other device is detonated in at a certain altitude, I don't know if it's technically in space, but it could be it could take out communications, and the power grid and all sorts of things. EMP attacks are a threat. In fact, I just saw the other day that Russia poses a very legitimate threat in that regard to the United States and candidly to the to the rest of the world as well. But when Jen Psaki was asked about spaceforce, yesterday, she made a decision on the scope of space force. Wow, space force, how can the plane of today Today, it is an interesting question. I am happy to check with our spaceforce point of contact. I'm not sure who that is. I will find out and see if we have any update on that isn't this Biden's decision anyway, the question was if you missed that, because I was yapping there. The question was, has the President made a decision on keeping or keep keeping the scope face for us? That was the question that's the question needs to be worked on a little bit, but basically, is the President keeping spaceforce and what it was designed to do? Wow. spaceforce that's the plane of today. What the world? This is. The condescension. The the ignorance here. This is a legitimate I understand people want to mock spaceforce Okay. I mean, whatever. It's free country. I still I think. But what kind of respond to that this is the President's spokesperson mocking something under the direct command of the commander in chief, the President of the United States. So maybe it's a good thing that they get questions in advance so that Jen Psaki can have her reaction off camera so she doesn't say stupid stuff like this. Anyway, quick timeout is an order. Got plenty more to get to today, but I gotta take a quick timeout. Sit tight. Be back here in just a minute.
Welcome back by the way This program is brought to you in part by our friends at Raymond's auto and truck repair rate at Raymond is on the near West Side. It's technically in Plainfield, but it's really just right up against very near the county line in in Marion County, the county that Indianapolis resides in of course, so it's not far from from downtown or from the Indianapolis area west side down us 40. If you have damage to your to your vehicle, I encourage you to check out our friends at Raymond's auto and truck repair. You can find out more information by visiting their website. Raymond's auto and truck repair.com. That's Raymond's with an S. Auto and truck repair.com. So one of the reasons I want to kind of, I guess, move from our initial discussion about the press about Jen Psaki mocking the space force about the Biden communication team requesting the questions, the media is going to ask Jin Saki at these press briefings in advance. It's just the remark Can you imagine? Can you imagine the explosion? That would have happened if Kaylee mcenaney had done this? Or Sean Spicer? Or Sarah Sanders, Huckabee Sanders, who's apparently running for governor, I think I saw that in the state of Arkansas. Can you imagine the explosion of the pushback from that? How dare they This is an assault on the freedom. and rightfully so to me, this is, this is much more of a problem. If the media had done this, and who knows, some of them may have I'm not saying they did for the sake of clarity, but I wouldn't put it past them. I do not put it past these folks. And I, I say all this to say the reason we talk about the media on here so much is because it is a massive problem. It's a massive problem, it is incalculable how much damage they truly do to the free flow of information. And the average or the understanding of the average person as to what's going on in Washington, DC. Now you factor in the problems that we have with education. And you can see that it's even worse because now you have people who don't who weren't taught anything about our system of government about the way that it works about their responsibility and their role in defending and maintaining a constitutional republic. This is why Ronald Reagan said that freedom is always just one generation away from extinction. We haven't and it's our job to pass this on to our children. You know, I've said it on here before America isn't is a series of ideas, beliefs, America, radically transformed the way that governments and citizens or subjects back in the day interacted with one another. It was a one way street effectively. Do as I say, we're gonna run this country. We're in charge here. We'll do a we'll let you do what we think is appropriate, basically, was the mindset of many governments and governing authorities throughout the ages. This idea that Gov that that individual rights, what does that even mean? Some of these folks would have laughed hysterically at these notions and concepts, by the way, including people like Joseph Stalin, Mao, right, we see we see the left glorify some of these folks, definitely Mao, but they've killed 10s of millions of their own people. Just the hideous, disgusting, evil ideology that they have. they've embraced and this is the same ideology that is embraced by the radical left today, the same ideology. They want to malign and attack capitalism and free markets and private enterprise and so forth. They want to do that and that's look you, again, as William F. Buckley said, the problem with capitalism is capitalists meaning the ideology itself is sound, but there's individual capitalists that use their freedoms to do bad things. And yes, they should be held accountable, but not the entire system. The entire system is not responsible for their behavior. Right? communism on the other hand, the problem with communism or the problem with socialism is the ideology itself is socialism and is communism those two things are the problem. Meaning that exactly the inverse is true. Because the system is broken, it really doesn't matter what the intention of the person is the person who's in charge and socialism could be in fact, the benevolent dictator that the left has been clamoring for. In fact, they they say this is the reason that the communism ultimately failed was because there was not a benevolent dictator. Well newsflash, for starters, there's no such thing. This side of heaven, there was one person who lived that could have been, and he wouldn't have, by the way, he didn't, he was had the opportunity. In fact, the people expecting him to come to the earth. Were hoping he would set up an earthly kingdom, he refused to do so. And that was Jesus. Jesus is the one person who walked this planet that is capable of being a truly benevolent dictator, but look at how God God gives us freedoms. God is not I know that the left or the rabbit atheist think that God is a dictator. It's just there's a misunderstanding. God has God has interacted in lots of ways in the Bible, and so forth. But God has given us all freewill. In fact, the consequences, the consequences that people have faced, oftentimes result from their abuse of freewill. Just because there's free will doesn't mean that there's not morality. Morality can still be something you can use your choices to, to violate the moral law. And that's what candidly, we've all done. And that's why socialism and communism fail, is because there's a misunderstanding and that ideology of human nature of who we are. Anyway, so you factor all these things together, people don't understand. You know, there's just a misunderstanding of what we just talked about. And that particular point about communism, morality, socialism, freedom, right. Our founders said, our freedom, they acknowledge our freedoms come from God, not from the government. Our government simply recognizes that God is the giver of liberty. Where the Spirit of the Lord is the Bible says there is liberty. So people don't have an understanding of what this nation is why it is, in fact different than nations throughout the history of the world, nations that exist on the planet today.
Now, like, going back to Buckley's statement, like Buckley's statement, where the problem of capitalism is individual capitalists, the problem with our government or the people that are in our system is sound, my friends, our system is sad. In fact, our system has endured and has held together arguably by a thread at times, because the system is sound and strong, even though we've had some really bad people, making decisions, and doing things and cutting deals and enriching themselves and acting as though they are the epitome of the swamp in Washington, DC for a long time now. Now, I'm not saying that this is this can endure indefinitely. In fact, it's kind of terrifying to see some of the stuff that we're witnessing today, and the ideas that seem to be running rampant in Washington, DC. Perfect time permitting, I'll tell you about baby bonds, which is the latest idea the left has to give all babies, everyone who's born $1,000 or some such thing. And then based upon their family's income, they'll get anywhere from $0 if they're from wealthy families or $2,000 a year that'll go into a savings account, which somehow Cory Booker, and I think it's Ayana Presley, the other person enter introduced this, the stuff, they think that you can find a savings account that can get 3% interest, because apparently this can be a maximum of $46,000. In the first 18 years of, of an individual's life, if they get the maximum amount and they have an interest rate at 3%. Now, I will agree that what Biden is going to do, the economy is going to change is going to dramatically change things that we might be dealing with big changes in interest rates and who knows inflation, I don't know. But 3% interest I looked before the show. The average savings account yields 0.5% interest. The average money market account yields 0.11. Now, the article said savings account. So maybe they're talking about putting this in the market like a 529 plan that would certainly change But, of course, then there's more risk of losing it versus it being in the savings account. Anyway, point, his point is we have all these ideas that are these leftist radical ideas that are being introduced these socialistic ideas. And a lot of the individuals in this nation, going back to the point about the media that they don't know the full story, because the media won't tell it. They haven't been properly educated about America, its founding principles, why it's different. Why, why this little nation of rejects basically, I mean, nobody wanted, you know, the people were sent here that didn't fit into the, the kingdom of with King George and so forth. People that moved to were viewed as kind of second class citizens, and the system thrived. And we became the most powerful nation in the history of the world because of those ideas. And if those ideas change, if we deviate far enough from those ideas, then of course, we can see, we can see that the United States can change and we can stop being a prosperous nation. And in some ways, we've already seen that but but media is a problem and the contributing factor to that education is a problem and a contributing factor to that. And then you factor in what they want to do. And by silencing those of us who want to proclaim these truths, shut us down on social media, demonize us mischaracterize who we are, you can see it's kind of a perfect storm for complete ignorance for some people. So anyway, I get other thoughts on this. But as in the clock are telling me I'm way past due. So I'm going to oblige. Here, take a quick timeout. Pick this up. When we get back so tight back here in just a minute.
My vast, vast team of attorneys tells me that I've got to make sure that I tell you that listening to this program may in fact cause you to lean to the right. So take extra caution if you are operating a motor vehicle. As you listen to this program, heavy equipment. Be very, very careful, you will find yourself veering to the right sciences documented this is the case 98 98% of scientists agree with this by the way, it's 1% more than agree that man is contributing to climate change. So I'm just doing a public service. Want to check that off my list this morning and make sure that I keep you abreast of the risks. Look, you got to be aware when you listen to this program, that it affects you in more ways than you may realize. So speaking of climate change, so I want to continue our talk about media education, the narrative, and why we talk about these these things, why I think it's so important to understand the media and the risks that they provide to us. Listen to this, this isn't Breitbart. I'm opening this article up here. Bjorn lumberg. Forgive me if I've mispronounced that. Suppose it can be loam Berg says this Paris, Paris Climate accord would only lower temperatures. I'm gonna I'm gonna give you a guess here. You can have to scream it loudly because I'm not gonna be able to hear you unless you do so but he's predicting if if everyone followed all of their prom all these every country, including the United States and Barack Obama's original promises to the Paris Climate accord group and to the world. If everyone did everything perfectly by the year 2100, the end of this particular century, how much would temperatures decrease? This is his projections what he says. You ready for this? I'm going to read this to you the Paris Agreement, if fully implemented, with lower temperatures around the planet by drumroll 0.05 degrees Fahrenheit, stated, Bjorn lumbergh, President of the Copenhagen consensus center and author of false alarm, how climate change panic costs us trillions hurts the poor, and fails to fix the planet on Fridays edition of Sirius XM Breitbart News daily with host Alex Marlow. Here is what Here's what bjoern lumbergh said specifically if all nations did all of their promises, which include what Obama originally promised. So this is everything. This is all the kit and caboodle. This is every utopian promise, you know, when the seas knew that President Obama was elected president in 2008. And Obama told us from Chicago during that victory speech, this is the moment I don't have the godlike reverb on my microphone set up. But I could, I could probably set that up and do that for you to give you the full effect. But this is the moment that the sea levels will recede, they'll start to recede, they know, they see the great president obama at the helm of the United States government, leading this great nation and the seas will begin to recede, folks, the ultimate form, I guess, of worship, I don't know what that was all about. But nonetheless, all these promises that were put into place by President Obama, all of them, we did every basically, we did every utopian ideal that we could possibly come up with. Going back to the quote here, he says, we would see temperature cuts by the end of the century of less less than not even up to less than 0.05 degrees Fahrenheit. Let that sink in less than So basically, if we implement all of these programs that cost bazillions of dollars, that hurt the economy that, by the way, also hurt the poor, you want to talk about ways of helping people who are starting from disadvantaged circumstances or who are poor, who just need an opportunity, they need to be given an opportunity, they need to be given an opportunity, they don't need to have restrictions in place that are gonna make it harder to get a job that are going to put downward pressure on wages. They don't need Bernie Sanders or whoever else to say this is what the minimum wages, they need companies that can thrive. So that companies can be profitable, and multiple companies to be profitable, so that there's competition for for wage earners. Because you may have noticed, you may have noticed that the vast, vast, vast majority of workers make much more than minimum wage, which if you listened to the radical left, that should never happen, because companies are evil. And they try to keep the working man down every day. And so they shouldn't be paying wages above the absolute minimum. I mean, this is this is just basic economics folks. companies want the best employees. And when they find them, they want to compete to get them, they also realize that a job has a monetary value. A job has a value, it doesn't, it shouldn't be confused with the value of the individual person, because again, our intrinsic value in the mind and the eye of God is identical. Whether you're Mark Zuckerberg and worth bazillions of dollars, or you're, you have next to nothing, or literally nothing of your own and live in extreme poverty, your value to God, your value as a human being is identical. Your value to the marketplace is based upon a series of factors, your education, your training, your abilities, what the economy is, in your particular part of the world, your skill sets, all these things, how six out how successful companies are to be able to compete for you to work there. So, again, you look at these things that they that they tell us, going back to the climate here, if we did everything that they told us that we were going to do. According to Bjorn lumbergh, we would only see temperatures drop by the end of the century, another 80 years or whatever, we would only see temperatures drop, point zero less than point 05 degrees Fahrenheit. I can hear objections that Yeah, but Todd, we if we don't do these things, temperatures are going to raise and then insert some some crazy number that's probably been predicted by Al Gore, who by now, according to him, the planet should already be burnt to a crisp and no one living on it. Anyway, again, these things get more traction, because the media carries the false narrative. And I think that people are not properly educated on how to think instead they're told what to think they don't ask critical questions. They don't seek to truly understand meant to many people you do. This is the most educated informed audience that there is talk radio's audiences, very informed, very educated. But a lot of folks, they don't know. They've never been around anyone that raised these these questions. They haven't been taught to be critical thinkers. Instead, they been taught to memorize and regurgitate information, even in education, the educational system for the purposes of passing tests, and so forth. So anyway, quick timeout is in order. You're listening here to him with conservative, not bitter talk. I am your host, Todd Huff back here in just a minute.
Welcome back. So here's an intersection of media and education San Francisco teacher writes in op ed. Bernie Sanders mittens a lesson in white privilege. This is in the New York Post. I also saw this at the daily wire, you'll find this a lot of places you cannot Well, you have to subscribe to the San Francisco Chronicle to read the original article written by Ingrid sire ohci, a former UC Berkeley professor and now apparently high school teacher that's what I'm gathering from this. This is what the New York Post writes a San Francisco high school teacher wrote an op ed claiming bernie senator bernie sanders a manifest privilege for wearing his meme evoking inauguration outfit. You remember Bernie sitting there in the chair, cross legged? In his parka, looking all i mean total socially distanced, as well as distance from reality wearing his mittens, right? You've seen the memes of bobby knight throwing, throwing the chair with. with Bernie in it. Bernie doing I mean all sorts of things. You've seen these means probably. So that particular picture she claims. She says that initially on Inauguration Day. She said her class talked about the deeper meanings of the historic day, including the vulnerability of democracy and the power of ritual and gender. I'm not sure what that has to do with inauguration I guess, because Camila was up there. But anyway, Sanders, according to this teacher, was not even on the radar until he became an instant internet sensation for the mittens and brown parka. I puzzled and fumed as an individual she writes, as I strove to my best possible Teacher, what did I see? What did I think my students should see? A wealthy, incredibly well educated and privileged white man showing up for perhaps the most important ritual of the decade in a puffy jacket, and huge mittens. The senator she says, manifests privilege, white privilege, male privilege and class privilege in a way that my ways that my students could never see can see and feel I should say, anyway. Gotta get Sam out out of time here, come back and wrap up. This is what we're dealing with folks back here in just a minute.
And the mask, I left that part out, Bernie had his mask on didn't have to on which now I'm so confused on Dr. Fauci. I saw something yesterday. I remember Dr. Fauci said, two masks, it just makes common sense should work better than one. Then he came out and said, You know, there's no data to support that. Now I've seen him saying, or reports saying I think it was on Newsmax, I believe, where it said that Fauci the CDC may actually review data and come out with a tumor mask Ric Tam, sorry, I'm just I'm thinking how many of you How many of you are going to put on to mask How many of you when when if and when the CDC says word to masks are going to say I'm over? This right is over for me. I'm done with this silly not nonsense, but I gotta go folks. scgc tomorrow, take care.