In this episode of Rush to Reason, John Rush dives deep into the contentious topic of unions within the public sector. Together with Andy Pate and Rachel Gressler, they dissect the complexities around union negotiations and the legislative attempts to streamline processes that could potentially leave taxpayers in the dust. The conversation explores the balance of power between workers, employers, and those financing government operations—the taxpayers.
SPEAKER 06 :
This is Rush to Reason.
SPEAKER 19 :
You are going to shut your damn yapper and listen for a change because I got you pegged, sweetheart. You want to take the easy way out because you’re scared. And you’re scared because if you try and fail, there’s only you to blame. Let me break this down for you. Life is scary. Get used to it. There are no magical fixes.
SPEAKER 05 :
With your host, John Rush.
SPEAKER 13 :
My advice to you is to do what your parents did! Get a job, Turk! You haven’t made everybody equal. You’ve made them the same and there’s a big difference.
SPEAKER 02 :
Let me tell you why you’re here. You’re here because you know something. What you know you can’t explain, but you feel it. You’ve felt it your entire life. That there’s something wrong with the world. You don’t know what it is, but it’s there. It is this feeling that has brought you to me.
SPEAKER 08 :
Are you crazy? Am I? Or am I so sane that you just blew your mind?
SPEAKER 06 :
It’s Rush to Reason with your host, John Rush, presented by Cub Creek Heating and Air Conditioning.
SPEAKER 04 :
And we’re back, Hour 2, Rush to Reason, Denver’s Afternoon Rush, KLZ 560. Myself, Andy Pate, Rachel Gressler joining us now. Rachel, welcome. How are you?
SPEAKER 17 :
I’m doing well, Andy. Thanks for having me.
SPEAKER 04 :
Visiting fellow in workforce at the Economic Policy Information Center, or EPIC, talked to us about, and this is something that Andy and I both are really big on, and that is, talk to us about unions in government.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yes, the unions play a very powerful role for federal workers, state and local workers as well, but also this is an issue of the government’s role even in private sector workers. And so recently the Senate held a hearing looking at some labor law reforms one of those was a law that would potentially force employers and workers in a union into a contract to which neither of them might even agree to this is forced arbitration in an attempt to have faster contracts the problem here is Yes, it can take a long time to come to a contract when a workplace becomes unionized, especially if this is an employer that’s never dealt with a union, doesn’t know what the laws are, what its rights are, how it needs to respond. And we need to know that union contracts often cover hundreds of different provisions, and they can be 800-plus pages long. So these are things that take a lot of time. But what this law, the Faster Labor Contracts Act, would do is to say that if that employer, the union, can’t come to an agreement within 90 days, then they’re going to be forced to do mediation, and they only have 30 days of mediation. If that doesn’t work, then they’re going to have an unelected government bureaucrat appointed as an arbitrator that has the final decision, you know, ultimately needs contracts because the employer and the union need to get one arbitrator, and then they have this unelected bureaucrat. So you’re going to end up potentially with contracts that neither side even agreed to, and can that even be an enforceable contract?
SPEAKER 10 :
Now, Rachel, are we talking an unelected bureaucrat for that state or nationally? Because the reason I ask really quickly is if it’s for a state, okay, we are in a deep blue state here in Colorado, so that bureaucrat is going to side heavily in favor of the union no matter what.
SPEAKER 04 :
That’s right.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yep. No, this is going to be a federal bureaucrat from the Federal Mediation and Conciliatory Service. But we do know that most federal employees are predominantly on the liberal side. Very much.
SPEAKER 10 :
Would the Trump administration, I mean, as long as we have that kind of leadership, be able to, oh, shall we say, rein in the types who would be in those positions?
SPEAKER 17 :
They could. And that’s another reason not to have this, is that this shouldn’t be something that’s political. I agree. The contract between two parties should not, you know, swing back and forth on the outcome of these contracts just based on when your contract expires or starts, who’s in office.
SPEAKER 10 :
No, actually, that’s what I was getting to. See, the great fear for me is, OK, what happens the next time a Democrat’s in? Suddenly, all of these arbitrations all over the country would go one way and be disastrous and force all kinds of companies into bad labor negotiations, wouldn’t it?
SPEAKER 17 :
Exactly. And these are provisions that can force those companies out of business entirely. And then all those workers have lost their jobs. So I don’t think that they’re thinking through this. And it’s also not good for the workers, even those who voted for the union. They voted for a union thinking that they’re going to be able to participate in these contract negotiations, and they’re going to get a vote on whether or not they agree to that contract. That’s not going to happen anymore. There’s no vote for the workers under this.
SPEAKER 10 :
There’s no vote? No, there’s no vote.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s not automatic. If they can’t reach an agreement, it’s a done deal.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yep. But all you got to do, look, that means that if you know the arbitrator is going to be left wing, I’ll just put it that way, okay? I’m going to call it politically, okay? If you know the arbitrator is going to be left wing and you’re the union, why would you negotiate in good faith? Wouldn’t you just say no to everything?
SPEAKER 17 :
Exactly.
SPEAKER 10 :
Our way or the highway. Right. Because you know we’re going to get our way. Right.
SPEAKER 17 :
You just make the most extreme demands possible so that whatever it comes down to, even if it’s a little bit further from what you asked for, it’s still going to be extremely one-sided.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, so this is on the private side. Would this have any effect upon the public union side? Which, by the way, I wish we’d pass a law and get rid of unions in the public sector altogether, because I think it’s a joke that I, as a taxpayer, get no say in how all this works, and yet these unions do. Anyways, that’s another story. But at the end of the day, does it affect both sides?
SPEAKER 17 :
Yes, it does. But I do want to just point out that Franklin Delano Roosevelt agreed that we should not have unions at the government level because you as the taxpayer don’t have a seat at the table. And instead, both sides are negotiating against you as the taxpayer. But yes, this is something that is up to the states. You know, when they are dealing with their own workers that are in state level unions or local level unions. One state, Michigan, does require this Biden arbitration process. And the irony there is that sometimes it takes even longer to get a contract than it does when you’re just left to the freedom of negotiating these things on your own.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yep. What do we do, Rachel, to fight this? What can we do on our side, I guess? What can our listeners do? Let me ask it that way.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yeah, I think they need to point out to those who… you know, are advocating for a policy like this, it’s understandable. Like if a workplace is unionized and it’s taken a year and a half, there’s obviously frustration. You thought that you were going to get a new contract quickly. But understanding that these things take time and you don’t want your employer to go out of business. So those who, you know, have a stake in this or are interested in it, understanding that there’s a whole lot of unintended consequences that could come with this. And it’s really just a major violation of personal rights. This is forcing people into a contract when the essence of a contract is that the two parties signing it agree to it. So it’s really a matter of personal freedom.
SPEAKER 04 :
One last question I have, Annie has one as well. Who’s pushing forward this Faster Labor Contract Act?
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, it’s not who you would normally think. This is a Republican Senator, Josh Hawley, who has introduced… Really? Hawley?
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, it’s because Josh is a knucklehead sometimes. Sorry, the guy doesn’t understand business.
SPEAKER 17 :
On labor issues, yes, it is disappointing. He tends to turn to this class warfareism in the hearing, looking at this, just pointing out CEO pay and other things that… You know, it’s not getting to the crux of the issue. You know, you can be pro worker and, you know, conservatives are very pro worker, but they are pro individual worker and protect their freedoms.
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah. But I mean, look, he’s got to appeal to the right. So what is his I’m just going to say excuse. OK, what’s his reasoning for actually backing something this dumb?
SPEAKER 17 :
Well, I think he taps into the frustration of the workers who want to have a contract sooner than they do. And he seems to have an animosity for large businesses like Amazon and others.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, he does. I mean, he’s got a real chip on his shoulder for those particular companies. I’m not quite sure why. I went over this on my own program, you know, last week. I don’t think Andy was with me that day, but I was going over this very topic. And Josh is wrong, by the way, flat out. And I’ll say when our side is, just like I’ll call out the other side. But at the end of the day, he’s not looking at things correctly. He doesn’t see the value in what these CEOs actually bring to the table.
SPEAKER 17 :
Yeah, but I think another provision that he has supported, and it was discussed at this hearing, is something called the Warehouse Worker Protection Act, and that’s specifically going after Amazon. And it’s really just a case of stepping into government control over private sector workers, industrialization, kind of on the road to serfdom here. How many industries are we going to take control of and micromanage the way that they operate their businesses?
SPEAKER 04 :
Great point. Great point. Rachel, how do folks get a hold of you and or follow what you’re writing and talking about?
SPEAKER 17 :
Yep, you can go to epicforamerica.org. And we’ve got lots of great work, including, you know, pushing back right now on, you know, the best policies to get the government back and running and to not be putting us on a path towards bankruptcy.
SPEAKER 04 :
Awesome. Rachel, as always, I appreciate it. Thanks for joining us when you do. Thanks so much. You’re very welcome. Have a great rest of your day. Again, Rachel Gressler, it’s G-R-E-Z-L-E-R, Economic Policy Innovation Center, EPIC for short. All right, up next, Veteran Windows and Doors. Save money on Windows and Doors by going straight to the source. That’s what Dave does at Veteran Windows and Doors. Find him today by going to klzradio.com.
SPEAKER 08 :
You’ve met with a window and door company that says they’re the best. But are they really? Before you sign anything, meet with our trusted partner, Veteran Windows and Doors. Owner Dave won’t pressure you into buying. Instead, he’ll educate you on the energy codes and efficiency ratings your home actually needs. Because here’s the truth. If your windows and doors don’t meet the right standards, your heating and cooling bills could skyrocket. That’s why Veteran custom designs every window and door to fit your home and your energy requirements. They offer Provia’s unlimited customizable options from colors and designs to hardware and panel styles so you get exactly what you want and need. Plus, with Veterans Fair pricing policy, everyone gets the same great deal. No hidden markups or high-pressure tactics. Don’t settle for companies that skip the details or rush you to sign. Choose Veteran Windows and Doors. Start now at klzradio.com.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, up next, Ridgeline Auto Brokers looking for a new used car. They will take great care of you. Look no further than RidgelineAutoBrokers.com.
SPEAKER 01 :
Are you in the market for a reliable car that won’t break the bank? Do you need high-quality auto repair? Then look no further. Ridgeline Auto Broker specializes in quality used cars that cost between $15,000 and $25,000, making them a great option for first-time drivers or anyone looking for a good deal. At Ridgeline, we pride ourselves on providing a transparent and hassle-free car buying experience. That’s why we never charge any dealer fees. Plus, all of our vehicles are inspected by our team of ASE certified technicians. You can trust that the car you’re buying is in excellent condition. And remember, we can also service your vehicle after the sale. At Ridgeline, we offer competitive financing options for vehicle purchase or for vehicle repairs. Ridgeline now has two locations, one in Boulder And now a second location in Fort Collins, located at 1101 North College Avenue. Both locations offer full-service auto repair and a host of off-road accessories. Check out all our services at RidgelineAutobrokers.com. Ridgeline, the smart way to buy or service your car.
SPEAKER 12 :
Putting reason into your afternoon drive, this is John Rush.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, we are back. Rush to Reason, Debra’s Afternoon Rush, KLZ 560. Okay, I’ve got some other things we’re going to cover, but just to recap that whole last conversation in regards to unions in government and representing government workers. And some of you that are represented by one, I’m sorry, I’m going to say this. Don’t like it. Again, as we talked a moment ago, Andy’s got a different reason, but I don’t like the fact that I, as a taxpayer, get no say in what goes on, and the union actually has more say than I do as a taxpayer, and yet I am the guy. I’m technically the employer, and I don’t get a seat at the table. That’s wrong.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah. And by the way, my reason is very similar to yours. I’m just going to couch it differently, okay? There are always three people involved in any business. You got the employer, you got the worker, and you got the customer, right? Right. Okay. The worker must never have more leverage, more power than the customer, okay? And people think… You mean the employer. No, I mean the customer. Okay. And let’s look at education for a moment. Okay. Good one. This is why I’m against public teacher unions.
SPEAKER 20 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 10 :
All right. Because a customer should have – ordinarily, you go to an ordinary business. You go to Walmart. You go to McDonald’s, whatever. You have the greatest leverage of all. You can take your money and walk out the door. and say, no, I don’t want to spend it here. Your product isn’t good enough or it’s too expensive, whatever. You’re not giving me the bang for the buck, so I’m going to go with my buck somewhere else. That is the leverage of the consumer. I can take my money and go somewhere else, okay? Right. And that is why I don’t have a big problem with businesses being able to unionize. All right. There are some times when unions are very, very positive, very, very needed. I don’t think many in the modern term. I think most unions are very destructive. But at least if a union goes into a business and drives up their costs, the customer can say, hey, now your product is too expensive for them for the I don’t get the bang for the buck. So I still have the leverage. I can take my money, go elsewhere. I can walk out the door with my money. The problem with government is I can’t. So with a public school, you’ve got these complete imbeciles saying, well, you can still go to private schools. Yeah, then I’ve got to pay twice. I’ve already paid my taxes, like you say, taxpayer. I’ve already paid my taxes in. So this school is tax-funded. I can’t take my money and walk out the door. I have to go somewhere else and pay again. I got to pay twice just to have the freedom for my kids to be raised the way I believe. Correct. This is why… There should be no public unions. Why? Because your customer has no leverage. You should not have more leverage than your customer. They cannot walk out the door with their money and go get a better product elsewhere. Therefore, you should not be able to negotiate and make their product more expensive. What do you think?
SPEAKER 04 :
I agree with you 100%. Absolutely. That’s exactly why.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah. And it’s very similar to the taxpayer because you’re like, I’m a taxpayer. I’m roped in. I can’t. It’s the same thing.
SPEAKER 04 :
It is.
SPEAKER 10 :
And it really angers me. These people who believe in public unions, I look at them and I say, look, you’re just a bunch of Marxists. That’s all it is. All you want to do is take, take, take.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yep. Yep. I can’t argue that, Andy. No. And again, we don’t talk a lot about this because, frankly, it’s one of those subjects that as much as I would love to see it change, it’s not. It is what it is. It’s been ingrained now for so long that you’re never going to get rid of them. But I hate them. I hate them.
SPEAKER 10 :
Oh, yeah. Public service unions.
SPEAKER 04 :
They should not exist.
SPEAKER 10 :
They should not exist.
SPEAKER 04 :
Teachers unions, public service unions, none of those should exist.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 04 :
They should be outlawed.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah. Look, teachers, if you want to have the power of a union— Then give your customers the power to walk out the door with the money. Give them vouchers.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, they don’t want to do that. Of course they won’t. As you know.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, obviously, because they want your money. Right. And they want to not have to compete. And here’s what gives me, it really gives me heartache. They want to not have to compete for your money. And then they want to be able to negotiate with leverage to get more of it.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
When they don’t have to compete for it.
SPEAKER 03 :
Correct.
SPEAKER 10 :
When you can’t walk out the door with it.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yep. You’re right.
SPEAKER 10 :
That is evil. I’m sorry, but that is just evil. How many people in your life have that kind of power over you, John?
SPEAKER 04 :
Only government. Only government. No one else does.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, but I mean, government already has the power to take your money. But what I mean is these people have the power then to actually negotiate and get more of it without you having any say.
SPEAKER 04 :
True.
SPEAKER 10 :
I have no power over a public union.
SPEAKER 04 :
Zero, Andy. You don’t get any say whatsoever.
SPEAKER 10 :
Right. So if the, you know, if, I don’t know, pick whatever. If some portion of the government wants to go on strike, I look at them and I’m just saying, oh, really? You want to go on strike? I can’t go somewhere else with my money and get this product.
SPEAKER 04 :
I can’t get my services anywhere else.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah. You know, I think you should all be replaced overnight.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I agree. Well, it’s why today I voted today. I’ll go ahead and say that. And when I look in, I didn’t have a lot to vote for because I’m in an unincorporated area, so there wasn’t a lot to do. But the school board thing comes up. And I’ll tell you right now, when I’m looking at school board candidates, the biggest three strikes in your out is if they’re associated with any kind of teacher’s union. Oh, yeah. You’re done. Done. Gone. X, X, X. You’re done. Yeah. There’s no vote coming to you. If I see anything at all where you’ve been in one, you are in one, they’ve endorsed you. In fact, I voted for one. That’s the biggie.
SPEAKER 10 :
If they’ve endorsed you.
SPEAKER 04 :
You’re done. In fact, I voted for one today where they took an endorsement away. I’m like, OK, that guy gets my vote. Oh, yeah. That was easy. You’re getting my vote because they just pulled it, meaning you’re standing up for something they don’t like. I’m in for you. Yeah. That’s an easy decision at that point.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, I love you.
SPEAKER 04 :
I’m voting for you. I’m all in for you, man. The teachers union pulled any kind of support for you. In other words, they won’t endorse you. Okay, you’re my guy. You’re done. That’s it. We’re finished. It’s an easy vote.
SPEAKER 10 :
John, but take a step back. What kind of mentality does it take to want your customers powerless? Okay, John, you are a businessman. You consult a lot of businesses. You teach them how to run business. You teach them how to compete for the customer. And the ultimate thing is to value the customer. Look at these as real human beings who I have to serve and serve well to make a living. Okay. What kind of mentality does it have to be to want your customers powerless?
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, that’s evil. It’s pure evil, Andy. Yes. That’s all. It’s just pure evil.
SPEAKER 10 :
Why do you think I left the left? Okay. I grew up with that. I looked around. I’m like, wait a minute. We want our customer. You know, I use different wording at the time, but we want our customers to be powerless. We want them to. Are you kidding me?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yep.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yep. So we’re going to herd their kids like cattle. Yeah. We’re going to herd their kids through one system where we get to indoctrinate them. They can’t take their money and go anywhere else. We’re only going to teach one side. And we get to go on strike and get more money if we don’t think we have enough. And by the way, there are people in public service who I wish even had more money. I’d like to pay cops more. I’d like to pay the military more. And by the way, there are some teachers I’d like to pay a whole lot more because I think they’re great.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay. Some who aren’t.
SPEAKER 03 :
Agree.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay. But I mean, but this idea of wanting your customer to be powerless to me is a very, very, very arrogant thing.
SPEAKER 04 :
I agree. I agree. All right, let’s do this. This is Up Against the Break. We’re going to come back. I guess I’m going to talk about that might be a little bit controversial, but maybe not. Probably not to Andy and I. We’ll talk about it when we come back in a moment. Anyways, Dr. Scott’s up next. Again, he is looking out for your overall wellness and well-being. Not crisis care, but wellness care. 303-663-6990.
SPEAKER 01 :
Tired of rushed appointments and cookie cutter care? At Castle Rock Regenerative Health, Dr. Scott Faulkner offers true concierge medicine. Personalized, unrushed, and on your schedule. Not the schedule of big health care. No crowded waiting rooms. No waiting weeks to be seen. Dr. Faulkner isn’t tied to the limitations of traditional practices, so he can focus on what matters most. You. He takes the time to really listen, understand your goals, and customize care to fit your body and lifestyle. From regenerative therapies and IV nutrition to integrative whole body health solutions, you’ll get advanced options designed to help you truly heal and stay healthy. If weight loss is part of your journey, they offer medically guided plans tailored to you, helping you lose weight safely and sustainably with real support every step of the way. And for those experiencing changes in energy, mood, or vitality, ask about our personalized hormone therapy. We’ll help you restore balance and feel your best at every stage of life. Ready for a different kind of health care? Visit CastleRockRegenerativeHealth.com or call 303-663-6990 and start your journey with Dr. Scott today. You can also find Dr. Scott at RushToReason.com.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, Medicare Supplemental Insurance. A group insurance analyst can take care of you there. Give them a call today. Find them at e-gia.com.
SPEAKER 18 :
Finding the right health insurance plan can be confusing, and picking the wrong plan can cost you thousands of dollars more in medical costs out of your pocket. Call Paul Linegro at GIA Insurance, and his team of ACA health specialists will help you find the right plan for your needs and at the very best premium. As independent brokers, GIA Insurance can help you navigate through the maze of health insurance options. so you get the right plan to fit your needs at the best premium. GIA never charges fees, and your premiums will never be any higher than going directly to the insurance companies or buying online. Receive the local hands-on service you don’t get with a call center or online. Whether it is qualified health insurance plan, dental, life, or vision insurance, GIA has got you covered. Call 303-423-0162, extension 100. GIA is an authorized enrollment center for Connect for Health Colorado, the only place you can get an advanced premium tax credit to lower your premium.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, Roof Savers of Colorado, and yes, Dave would love to help you extend the life of your roof. He can rejuvenate it, by the way, with his RoofMax product, making it last longer, and in some cases, you know, a decade or more. And by doing so, helping you out with the insurance side of things as well. Talk to Dave today. Find out how that works for you. 303-710-6916.
SPEAKER 09 :
August heat and those September storms can really take a toll on your roof here in Colorado. But before you shell out thousands for a full replacement, call Roof Savers of Colorado. Roof Savers offers RoofMax, a quick, affordable, eco-friendly treatment that restores flexibility and extends the life of your asphalt shingles. all for a fraction of the cost of a new roof. As the seasons start to change, now is the perfect time to get ahead of winter damage. In just one treatment, RoofMax rejuvenates your roof, improves protection, and gives you peace of mind before the snow hits. Call Roof Savers of Colorado today for a free roof assessment at 303-710-6916 or visit us at RoofSaversCo.com and ask about our seasonal specials. Roof Savers of Colorado, we add years to your roof and protection to your home.
SPEAKER 05 :
Call in to the KLZ studio line, 303-477-5600. Now, back to Rush to Reason.
SPEAKER 04 :
And we are back. Rush to Reason, Denver’s Afternoon Rush, KLZ 560. Myself, Andy Pate. And I just want to slip this in really quick because I normally, Josh Hawley, like the guy. I think he’s a brilliant person for the most part, which also shows you that you can be a really brilliant person and still get some things completely wrong. And there are some things that he gets completely wrong. This whole idea of that last… conversation we just had with rachel in getting this whole you know labor this faster labor contracts act passed i mean bad bad bad idea josh on top of that for josh to come out and attack you know ceos and by the way these are companies that they may or may not like at the end of the day but you know what a company in the free market has the ability to pay their ceo whatever they feel like they need to attract good talent to keep the company moving forward And at the end of the day, the workers get paid what a worker is worth, period. This whole idea that, you know, we could cut salaries out of CEOs and give everybody else in the company a raise is absolutely one of the most idiotic things you could ever say ever.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, you know what the big problem here is? The worker is worth more to Josh Hawley than the worker is to that company. You know why? Because the worker is one vote.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
And the CEO is only one vote. Good point. Yeah, and so therefore, you’ve got a lot of workers and one CEO. Josh Hawley is thinking politically. He’s not thinking principally.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. Which, let’s talk about this. There’s a lot of comments that happen every time you get in an election cycle. Our side will even promote this particular phrase. I don’t agree with this phrase. Some of you know exactly what I’m going to say here in a moment and why. But there’s this phrase of principles over principles. Party. By the way, I don’t believe in that. I believe the opposite. It’s party over principles. Not to say that we loosen up principles and we go different directions and, you know, Andy, we basically abandon all of the things that we stand for. No, I’m not saying that. But here’s the thing.
SPEAKER 10 :
But that is the accusation.
SPEAKER 04 :
That is, yeah.
SPEAKER 10 :
And the second you say you don’t agree with principles over party, they look at you and they believe that you are a rhino, you’re unprincipled, you don’t care.
SPEAKER 04 :
Go ahead. Answer that. I just want to win because if you go principles over party, it’s a losing strategy. Let me ask you. That’s like, for example, let me use a sports analogy for some of you. Andy can probably correct me on this if I’m wrong and maybe explain this a little bit better. But being principled over party would be like I watch plenty of football. And there are times where, let’s face it, refs get calls wrong sometimes. Sure. Completely wrong. And if you as a coach spend the rest of the game, let’s say there’s a bad call in the first quarter. You know, there’s an interception that’s really not an interception. Or there’s a fumble that’s not a fumble. Or a guy catches the ball, he’s really inbounds, but actually he was out of bounds. Whatever. I mean, a bad call. It just happens. And they happen. Refs aren’t perfect, and sometimes even the replay guys get it wrong. You see it happen. You’ll even watch a replay a day later, and it’s like, I don’t know who in the world got this thing screwed up, but they did. So my point is, if it’s a principal matter, which it is at that point, the coach, he could be mad. He could be so focused on the fact that that call was wrong that he spends his entire three quarters after focused on that and that alone and doesn’t have his team where they need to be by the end of the game, and in fact, Andy, they lose. That’s principle over party.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, you’re actually getting to something that I’m going to get to here in just a bit. First of all, I want to ask a question. How valuable is a principle that doesn’t get elected?
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s not valuable at all. It doesn’t matter then. There’s no value.
SPEAKER 10 :
It can be the most valuable. It can be gravity. If you’re not elected, it doesn’t matter. Right. These people who say principle over party, I believe, are unprincipled. OK, good way saying it, because what they are is emotion. What they’re saying is emotion over strategy. Right. OK. And why, Andy, why do you say that? Because they’re not taking in all the principles. They’re only taking in the principles that matter to them. So they’re saying, you know, my freedom of speech, for instance, and you know what I believe in freedom of speech. I’m an absolutist. OK. And they’re saying if I don’t push principle, principle, principle, no matter what. Then, you know, I’m a compromiser. I’m a rhino and so forth. But I look at them and I say, well, now, wait a minute. Here’s a principle. Whoever gets the most votes wins an election. Here’s another principle. But you can’t. OK, here’s another principle. You can’t sell a product that the that the customer doesn’t want. You first have to persuade them they want the product. OK, have you taken the time to persuade over 51, you know, 51 percent of Coloradoans to believe in your product? Well, we’ll get. No, no, no. Have you?
SPEAKER 04 :
And by the way, what they’ll use is a great example of principle over party. We saw this with Joe O’Day. If you’re a candidate that believes in first term abortions, but not second and third trimester abortions, because I’m so principled that I believe in life at conception, which I do. But I’m so principled, there’s no way I can ever vote for that guy because that particular person, guy or gal, believes in a first-term abortion. That, Andy, is principle over party. And that’s where I will divide with him because that’s when I can say, listen, as much as I am a full right-to-lifer, you guys hear me talk about it on the podcast each week with Preborn. I mean, the reality is, yes, I am a big believer in life across the board, by the way. It isn’t just a conception. It’s all the way until you’re on your deathbed, and you could have an ailing disease, whatever the case may be. I am one that believes in that life, Andy, all the way through, because I’m a person that believes that way, period. Now, on the same token, can I vote for somebody that maybe that’s the only thing I differ on – maybe in Joe O’Day’s case, it was that, and probably he’s a little bit more of a spender than I am, so I probably differed with him on some budgetary things. But all in all, the rest of what Joe stood for, as a senator, I could have got behind. And I think Joe’s the kind of guy where I think you actually, at some point in time, probably could have had a conversation with him, and you might have even convinced him to maybe come more to our side – of the podium, if you would, when it was all said and done. But I at least got to get him elected to even have that conversation. I know at that point in time who he was running against, which, by the way, is the guy that’s going to run for governor here in Colorado, is running for governor, will win the Democrat primary. That’s Michael Bennett. Is there ever a snowball’s chance of bringing Michael Bennett to my side, Andy? No. No. OK, but but he’s now the senator because we had a big tiff inside of our party over Joe O’Day versus Ron Hanks, because Ron got all hurt over the fact that, you know, you know, Joe won the primary. In fact, went against him, even ran as a quote unquote independent.
SPEAKER 10 :
Ron literally campaigned to have his former supporters not vote for the Republican candidate for the Senate. He drew votes directly away from our candidates.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yep.
SPEAKER 10 :
I mean, think about that. OK, look, John, I mean, bottom line, you got us talking about abortion for a moment. Then we’ll go on to others.
SPEAKER 04 :
But by the way, that’s one of the first ones. It’s funny how you start talking principle over party. Right. That’s one of the very first and not only, but it is one of the top answers that somebody will give you when they talk about this principle over party thing, by the way. It is probably the number one thing they’ll bring up as an example. Am I right?
SPEAKER 10 :
Oh, yes. On our side, absolutely.
SPEAKER 04 :
If Canada believes in abortion, then I can’t vote for them. That’s a principal issue for me.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, it’s not just that. They’ve got to fully, fully, fully be 100% pro-life. Like we are. And what I say is this. You have to establish a beachhead when it comes to abortion. Remember Saving Private Ryan and they had to rush the beach. It’s very bloody and messy. Why do you do that? Because you’ve got to establish a beachhead. Then you can work from there. Okay. Abortion is the same way, folks. There’s no way. that you’re going to get people to all at once believe that we must illegalize all abortions in all cases, including rape, right now. Right. Okay, that’s not going to happen, so what do you do? You first say, okay, but what about late term? I mean, look at this. We have a fully functioning human that just isn’t born yet.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay, can we at least agree on that? Yeah, that’s right. And what about tax funding? Can we at least agree that— We shouldn’t fund them that way. that people who don’t believe in this shouldn’t be forced to fund it. In other words, you pay for your own medical decisions.
SPEAKER 04 :
Point being, Andy, there’s some stepping stones with every one of these particular topics that you have to make headway on or you’re never going to win, period.
SPEAKER 10 :
Exactly. Now, if you get that, and by the way, if you get somebody to be against, okay, late-term abortion, okay, the last two, three months, all right, guess what you just established? You just established a beachhead, and from there you can say, okay, well, if it’s a human life there.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right. Is it a human life at five months, four months, three months?
SPEAKER 10 :
And you can work it back. Now, the left understands this, the right doesn’t. The left understands we get first downs on our way to a touchdown. The right only wants to throw Hail Marys. And if you don’t throw a Hail Mary, which never works, then you are a compromiser.
SPEAKER 04 :
And the left’s done that in every single area out there, from policy to money to abortion to the Second Amendment. I can go down the line, folks. And we are a party of all or nothing. It’s just how we do it, because we’re so quote-unquote principled, we have no strategy in how to gain ground in these particular areas. Right. We don’t do it. Well, another principle— And honestly, we do it because of this phrase, principle over party. Because of that, we make no headway, ever. Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, you see, a principle, people have to understand, what is a principle? A principle is simply a truth. Okay, it’s something that is true that applies. Okay, that’s what it is. All right, let me give you another principle. If you don’t have a majority in the House of Representatives, you are out. Right. You get voted off the island. Yes, especially if you are up against a side that is totally united, which we are.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay, the Democrats are a fully united mob.
SPEAKER 04 :
That’s right.
SPEAKER 10 :
All right. And you have to keep in mind that mob wants some very bad things that you don’t want.
SPEAKER 04 :
They want blood, Andy.
SPEAKER 10 :
They want blood.
SPEAKER 04 :
Absolutely.
SPEAKER 10 :
And, you know, how many Fettermans are there?
SPEAKER 04 :
Not very many. Not enough. Let me count them. One. Yeah, there’s not enough.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay, there you go. It’s a big country, man. You have one John Fetterman in an entire country. And by the way, he disagrees with you on a number of things. He is going to vote for the Democrat to be Senate Majority Leader if they have 51 votes. Okay? Okay. Here’s the thing to keep in mind. Let’s say that there are 20 issues. Once again, we’re talking principle over party, right? That is a stupid statement. I agree. Okay. Let’s say there are 20 issues that are very important to you. That Democrat is going to disagree with you on probably 20 out of 20, at least 19.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, at least 90%.
SPEAKER 10 :
But probably 20 out of 20. That’s right. Okay. The Republican who you don’t like is still going to agree with you.
SPEAKER 04 :
18 out of 20 probably.
SPEAKER 10 :
Probably.
SPEAKER 04 :
Or more. Or 19 out of 20.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, yeah, or at least, you know, 14 or 15. I always use Liz Cheney, who to me is one of the worst Republicans of the last century. I despise Liz Cheney. Guess what? Liz Cheney voted in alignment with Trump over 90% of the time, while Democrats were under 10. And she was the worst of the worst. So, folks, if the worst of the worst is voting with him 90 plus percent of the time, Vote your party because you’ve got to have more R’s than D’s.
SPEAKER 04 :
Otherwise you lose.
SPEAKER 10 :
That’s a principle. But you see, so when these people say, I’m for principle over party, no, you’re not. You’re on principle. You’re for emotion over strategy, okay? Because if you were for principle, then you would look at all the principles, not just, gee, this is my one issue that’s big to me. You’d look at all 20. You would look at strategy. You would look at the principle of majority, right?
SPEAKER 11 :
Mm-hmm.
SPEAKER 10 :
You would look at all principles. You’re not doing it because you don’t believe in principle. You believe in your emotions. What do you think?
SPEAKER 04 :
No, you’re spot on. And there are organizations in this town, I won’t name names because I don’t want to be in trouble, but there’s organizations in this town that preach and teach a lot of what we’re talking about right now, Andy and I, the principles over party, by the way.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, one meets in the springs.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I’ll just be straight up honest. It’s a bad organization. It’s wrong. You’re teaching no strategy. You’re teaching a lot of history and a lot of things that we should stand for, and I get all of that, and that’s great. But at the end of the day, you’re teaching to not have any strategy on how to win. And I’ll just say this straight up. Worst thing that ever happened to this state as far as the conservatives go is that particular organization because they’ve taught too many politicians on how to not win.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, they have.
SPEAKER 04 :
I’m sorry to say, but that’s been part of our – the rhino watches of the world and so on, they all talk about how this is the problem and that’s the problem and this is why we don’t win and that’s why we don’t win. You know what? I can almost go point to one particular organization that puts out a lot of candidates and tell you they’re the reason we don’t win.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, it’s basically, if when you look, and the funny thing about this organization is this, they cross over the divide of the GOP. There are members who come out of this organization who are both in the Rhinowatch libertarian-esque grassroots, which is terribly mislabeled.
SPEAKER 20 :
Yeah, that’s a loose term.
SPEAKER 10 :
You know what I mean, the Rhinowatchers, but you also have those who are in the quote-unquote establishment.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
And they all say that I graduated this year of this organization.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right, right.
SPEAKER 10 :
But what I can tell you is this. What comes out of that organization is generally… Now, some wonderful people, of course, but… You generally have two very damaging things. Number one, the consultant class comes out of that organization and they suck in the money. Right. They’re grifters. They suck in the money and they never win because they use terrible strategy. But you also have these libertarianized people who destroy the Republican Party from within.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. Yep.
SPEAKER 1 :
100%.
SPEAKER 04 :
So again, some of you on that side of the aisle will talk about how, you know, it’s this that caused, you know, where we’re at the demise of the, you know, the party here in Colorado. And this is why we don’t win anymore. And that’s why we don’t win anymore. And it’s because of this open primary that we don’t win anymore. Yeah, folks, no, I hate to say this and hate to break it to you. But There’s actually an organization in the state that probably has had more to do with losing than the open primary will ever have to do with losing.
SPEAKER 10 :
I agree.
SPEAKER 04 :
And I mean that wholeheartedly. And I won’t say the name because I don’t want to be in trouble along those lines and, you know, have lawsuits and other things. But you guys can go all figure out who that is on your own pretty easily.
SPEAKER 10 :
John, I have spoken to this organization. OK, I mean, I’ve spoken. And they were wonderful people.
SPEAKER 04 :
But they’re just misguided.
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, yeah.
SPEAKER 04 :
They’re wonderful people that are very misguided. And I know some of the founders of this organization. And by the way, I think they had some good intentions early on. Unfortunately, those intentions went awry and they became, quote unquote, so principled they lost the will to win. Well, let me sum up. I shouldn’t say the will. No, go ahead. That’s not the right way to say it, Andy. They became so principled, they lost the ability to figure out how to win. The will to win is still there, but they don’t know how. Is that a better way to say it?
SPEAKER 10 :
That’s a great way to say it.
SPEAKER 04 :
They want to win, but they have no idea how.
SPEAKER 10 :
John, winning, there are a lot of principles that go into winning. A lot of principles that you have to—let me give you one really quick here. What’s the biggest principle in business? Who’s always right?
SPEAKER 04 :
customer.
SPEAKER 10 :
Oh, okay.
SPEAKER 04 :
The market.
SPEAKER 10 :
Guess who the customer is in Colorado?
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s the voter. Yeah, let me see it that way, because the customer is not always right. The customer is always the customer, but here’s what always is right. The market. The market’s always right. Right. Because what the market is demanding is always right, no matter what.
SPEAKER 10 :
Right, but the customer’s always right is a generalized statement for the market.
SPEAKER 04 :
Correct.
SPEAKER 10 :
The market is always right. And that is a principle that is completely ignored by by the people, by the Republicans in Colorado who say principle over party. The ones who say principle over party totally ignore the principle of the market.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. Right. And how to win.
SPEAKER 10 :
In other words, they are emotion over strategy.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, and again, I keep saying this, but I’ll continue to say it. These are typically people, not all, because there are a few exceptions to this, but typically speaking, these are folks that come out of financial institutions. These are folks that come out of the political end of things. These are people that maybe have run a business, but not in the traditional sense of a business. Most of them have never run a retail business. business. And no, a banker isn’t a retail business person. Sorry to say bankers don’t know the retail market world. In fact, I’ll just say this straight up. Most bankers don’t know the market because they live in their own little banking bubble. I’ll just say they do.
SPEAKER 01 :
They do.
SPEAKER 04 :
They live in their own banking bubble. There’s very few good bankers left, by the way, because most are morons. But that’s for another discussion for another day. At the end of the day, they don’t know their market either. Otherwise, they wouldn’t be doing They do. Anyways, that’s another conversation.
SPEAKER 10 :
That I don’t know. I will defer.
SPEAKER 04 :
The reality is most of your candidates and the people that are, quote unquote, in charge of the party in Colorado right now, frankly, have never ran a business. Don’t know how. Couldn’t if they had to.
SPEAKER 10 :
What you’re saying is they’re totally detached from the market, that they seek to win.
SPEAKER 04 :
Absolutely. And because of that, we lose. I agree. Folks, it’s not Rhino Watchers. It’s not the open primary. It is not the open primary that’s making us lose in Colorado. It’s you and your attitude and lack of discernment in all of the areas that Andy and I are talking about that’s making us lose.
SPEAKER 10 :
I agree. Let me ask you this, John. Would you agree that all the people who say principle over party, principle over party, that everyone who says that, they personally have a small set of principles that are most important to them, the hills to die on, that they say this is what comes first. This is what matters.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah. And usually it will be two or three things.
SPEAKER 10 :
Right. Two or three things. Okay. Follow me here. But if they’re not looking at all the principles, first of all, everybody has a different two or three hills. And secondly, if you line up all the hills, you wind up with 20, 30 hills. And finally, if you don’t obey the principle of the market. none of those hills are going to win.
SPEAKER 04 :
You’re right.
SPEAKER 10 :
So let me ask you this. Are they principled?
SPEAKER 04 :
No, they’re not.
SPEAKER 10 :
Thank you.
SPEAKER 04 :
They’re not because they don’t know how to win. Golden Eagle Financial coming up next. Al Smith, listen to Al tomorrow, by the way, with his own program from 2 to 2.30. Otherwise, we’ll be right back after this interview. KLZ 560 is where you find Al.
SPEAKER 07 :
This is TJ with KLZ Radio, and once again, we have Al Smith with us from Golden Eagle Financial. And Al, we’re coming up on the end of the year, and I figure there’s probably quite a few things that a retirement planner has to do to prepare for the new year, yes?
SPEAKER 16 :
Well, there are a couple of things that have a 31st deadline that we talk to some of our clients about. If people are thinking about converting part of their traditional IRA to Roth, they’re That needs to be done before December 31st. And we don’t usually wait until the last week in December because the financial companies get really busy. So it’s a good idea to address that in November. And usually by then people have a pretty good idea how much money they have earned, and we can guesstimate their tax bracket.
SPEAKER 07 :
So you’re just basically helping them reach out to figure out what sort of distribution they should get from an investment.
SPEAKER 16 :
Well, not so much distribution, but if they’re younger people, they may have a longer-term strategy to convert traditional IRA to Roth. And that will add income to their income tax they pay each year. And we usually wait till near the end of the year because by then people know what tax bracket they will be in. But it has to be done before December 31st.
SPEAKER 07 :
Excellent. And that’s why we trust you, Al. How can people get in touch with you if they want to start their retirement planning adventure with you?
SPEAKER 16 :
That’s a good way to describe it as an adventure. You can reach me at 303-744-1128. And if you’re driving when you hear this, contact KLZ and they’ll put me in contact with you. All right. Thanks for joining us today, Al. Thank you for having me.
SPEAKER 05 :
Listen online. KLZradio.com. Back to Rush to Reason.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right, we are back. A few minutes left of this particular hour. Okay, Andy, when it comes to Mendami, who probably will win in New York because we can’t get the Republican there to drop out and actually give the Democrat a chance to win because he actually might if we would do that. But that’s not going to happen. Right. So what happens to – By the way, once again, principle over principle. Party. Another example.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, in other words.
SPEAKER 04 :
Another example.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah. Dude, you’ve got to set aside. There, he’s actually abandoning principle. He’s not looking at the market.
SPEAKER 04 :
And he’s not looking at what’s best for the country, but that’s another conversation. So what’s going to happen to New York afterwards?
SPEAKER 10 :
Well, as you know, Mamdani is a disaster. He’s a full communist. What this is, folks, I’m going to make this very simple. New York is voting for looting.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yes, taking money out of your pocket.
SPEAKER 10 :
This is a vote to loot the wealthy. They might as well have torches and pitchforks and be overrunning the gates of mansions.
SPEAKER 03 :
Correct.
SPEAKER 10 :
That is what they are about to do in New York.
SPEAKER 03 :
Correct.
SPEAKER 10 :
This is nothing but legalized looting. And here’s the beauty of it. They all get to do it with votes. They don’t have to do it with guns and violence so they can feel good about it. Okay. I’m not a criminal. I’m just with a bunch of other people voting myself somebody else’s money. Yep. Okay, here’s the thing. So the rich naturally want to leave. And so everybody’s saying, yeah, the rich are going to leave. But here’s the problem, John. Who’s going to want to buy their property and move in? Only wealthy people can buy these properties. No wealthy person’s going to want to move to New York. So I wanted to ask you this. If you’re a rich person in New York… You better leave now. Well, it’s too late. Everybody already knows that he’s going to be elected. The property values have already plummeted. So… Would you consider this strategy? And I think a lot of them might. I’ll buy property somewhere else, say Florida, and call that my primary residence and change my residence and become a Florida person. Yeah, Floridian. And that way I’m not paying New York taxation. And I can operate out of there. You could do that. But why even sell my house, which is now plummeted in value? Why sell my home? Instead, hold on to it. If I can rent it out, great. Probably can’t. But what I do is hold on to it until Mamdani passes.
SPEAKER 04 :
You could do that.
SPEAKER 10 :
The Mamdani period passes because he’s going to run. And so here you got all these millionaires. Let’s say all these millionaires around New York, they do this. And they switch to where they no longer are citizens of New York. And so they don’t pay taxes there, right? And they have primary residences elsewhere. Would that work? Can they do that?
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah.
SPEAKER 10 :
Then they should. They can. Or let’s say they do sell their place. If I’m somebody else, I would say sure. Because you’ve got to keep in mind, these people who are millionaires and even billionaires, billionaires look at this and say, oh, yeah, I’ll buy it as a second house.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
I’m not going to be a resident there, but I’ll buy it as a second home.
SPEAKER 04 :
And some of them, by the way, they’ll just take the loss. It can be my New York pad. They’ll just take the loss and move on and not worry about it. Some won’t care. They have enough money. It doesn’t make any difference at the end of the day. That’s the thing that the mayor doesn’t even understand.
SPEAKER 10 :
I totally understand that, John, but we have to keep in mind the loss is going to be enormous. The loss they’re going to take on their homes is going to be just – I know that they are incredibly wealthy. They don’t care, but – If.
SPEAKER 04 :
I mean, for some of those, even if they get half out of it, Andy, they won’t care. They’ll just move on. Okay. But if you’re a billionaire. That’s what Mondami doesn’t understand.
SPEAKER 10 :
Right.
SPEAKER 04 :
They’ll do that.
SPEAKER 10 :
If you’re a billionaire, let’s say you’re a billionaire in Texas, and you could have a New York pad up there in the financial capital. By the way, the financial capital is going to migrate. It’s going to leave New York. Okay. But if you can have a pad, a beautiful, rich place there in New York, so you buy that. as just your fun place.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay. But you’re not going to live there.
SPEAKER 03 :
And there’ll be some deals. Some of that will happen.
SPEAKER 10 :
So can they move? Will they be able to move out of there? Now, if they do that, does Mamdani, because look, here’s the only thing. Everything Mamdani wants to do, he can only do by stealing.
SPEAKER 03 :
Right.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay. And so does he then say, well, then what I’m going to do is I’m going to do most of it through property taxes. Jack those way up, which will only crash the value of these places further.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I don’t know. And I don’t know enough about New York. If it’s like Colorado, they can’t do that without some either legislative statewide and or something along. In other words, they can’t just I don’t know.
SPEAKER 10 :
I don’t know in New York City.
SPEAKER 04 :
I don’t think he can just arbitrarily go and raise property. You can’t hear in Colorado do that arbitrarily. That has to be done either legislatively or with a ballot initiative. You can’t just go, you know, raise property taxes across the board in a city.
SPEAKER 10 :
But you can with the Bell Initiative.
SPEAKER 04 :
You’ve got to keep in mind, New York now— But that would be a statewide issue, I believe. I don’t think just a city can do that. I believe so when it comes to property taxes, yes.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 04 :
Because those are going to— Then he’s got a problem. Because those are going to other areas outside of just the city.
SPEAKER 10 :
Then he’s got a real problem because I got news for you. People around the state aren’t going to want to pay.
SPEAKER 04 :
No, they’re not. No, it’s going to be a problem. You’re right on that. For free buses in New York. And by the way, some of you that maybe are more familiar with New York laws versus what we do here in Colorado, but I still think statewide property taxes are set the way I just said. I don’t think an individual city or county can go in and set their own rates.
SPEAKER 10 :
Okay, here’s another question. Do you have to move out of state? What if you decide, okay, I’m a rich person. I’m just going to move. Out of New York.
SPEAKER 04 :
You could.
SPEAKER 10 :
But to a different part of New York nearby.
SPEAKER 04 :
You could.
SPEAKER 10 :
So I’m not a resident of New York, so you can’t tax me.
SPEAKER 04 :
Of New York City. Yes, you could do that.
SPEAKER 10 :
Right.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah. And this is something that he’s probably not thinking through. You do enough of what Andy just said. Oh, they will do it. Property values will come down as soon as property tax. It’s actually a double whammy because as the new assessments come out and there’s all these sales that are now tracked at a lower rate than they have been, actually your property tax collection will come down, not go up.
SPEAKER 10 :
Oh, yeah. The property values for the wealthy are going to plummet. They already have. I mean, they’re not going to. That’s already figured in because people have known he was going to get elected now for a better part of a year. So property values for the wealthy in New York are already at an all-time low, I’ll bet. They’re just cratering. But if I’m one of the wealthy, I may look at that and say, you know what? It’s not even worth it to sell it. I’ll just get a primary residence elsewhere and have this be my fun place.
SPEAKER 04 :
Gotcha.
SPEAKER 10 :
What do you think?
SPEAKER 04 :
Possibly. Let’s do this. We’ll come right back. We had a call coming in. Let’s see. Cup Creek heating and air conditioning coming up next. It’s your $56 off tune-up special right now. Go to klzradio.com and find them there.
SPEAKER 15 :
Make sure your furnace is ready before the cold sets in with Cub Creek Heating and AC. Right now, Cub Creek is offering a very affordable furnace tune-up to get your system in top shape before winter. After sitting unused all summer, your furnace could face issues like mechanical or electrical failures, gas or carbon monoxide leaks, fire hazards, or it might not even turn on when you need it most. Cub Creek certified technicians will clean your entire system, replace the filter, and test every component to make sure it’s running safely and efficiently all season long. Don’t wait for the first freeze to find out something’s wrong. A pre-season tune-up can help you avoid costly emergency repairs and keep your family safe and warm. Beat the winter rush and schedule your tune-up today with Cub Creek Heating and AC, our certified rain pro partner. And here’s a bonus. Mention this ad from KLZ Radio and save $56 on your tune-up. But hurry, it’s for a limited time only. Visit klzradio.com slash HVAC to book now.
SPEAKER 05 :
This isn’t rage radio. This is real, relatable radio. Back to Rush to Reason.
SPEAKER 04 :
Somebody called and asked if ranked choice voting in New York City is why Mendami will actually win. No. I mean, yes, they have ranked choice voting, which, by the way, is a terrible, terrible idea. It’s going to continue to be pushed here in Colorado. It’s an awful idea when it comes to getting elected officials, getting officials elected, I should say. But is that the problem in New York City with Mendami?
SPEAKER 10 :
No, no. You’re eight to one Democrat to Republican there. So when you have that disparity, ranked choice means nothing. But here’s the big problem, John, and you and I have always said this. When the criminals and parasites greatly outnumber the producers, you’re going to get a Mamdani. Communism is going to spring up.
SPEAKER 04 :
Correct.
SPEAKER 10 :
And by the way, it’s coming to another city near you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, New York City is not going to be the last George Soros trial of getting a particular candidate like his elected. If he wins there, he’ll do it again and again and again. He’ll go to other big cities like Detroit and Denver and Chicago and L.A. and a lot of other places and make it even worse than it already is because that’s exactly what’s going to happen in New York City.
SPEAKER 10 :
Yeah, and L.A. basically has one already.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, but believe me, it’ll just get worse. It’ll just continue to implant other individuals that make it worse than it is right now.
SPEAKER 10 :
Look, it is all robbing people through votes.
SPEAKER 04 :
That’s right. That’s exactly right. All right, we’ll be back. Another hour coming your way. Rush to Reason, Denver’s Afternoon Rush, KLZ 560.
SPEAKER 14 :
I’m a rich guy.
