04-28-26 Part Two - Cross Spars with Maher

Now, it's Red Eye Radio, Gary McNamara, and Eric Hurley,

“talk about everything from politics to social issues and news of the day.”

Whether you're up late or you're just starting your day. Welcome to the show from the Relief Factor Studios. This is Red Eye Radio. [MUSIC] All across the USA, we are Red Eye Radio.

He is Eric Hurley, and I'm Gary McNamara. Well, hello. [MUSIC] Red Eye Radio podcast. Two.

Yeah. Red Eye Radio and podcast. Picture us with cigars and what looks like maybe alcohol in glasses sitting here.

It's amazing, you said that.

Yeah, why? Because this audio cut I have ready to go is exactly that. Oh, and from Bill Mars. Yes, because this is why we believe people on the left are clueless and completely ignorant. Yeah, okay.

All right. And we have a number of audio cuts. This is just the first one to play. Yeah. And I thought this was interesting because I don't even know who the guy is,

but he's a comedian, apparently. David Cross. Yeah, I don't know him. Yeah. He looks a lot different now.

Okay. You would recognize him without the beard. He was in men in black. Just have a small room in men in black. His face is like his face and his nose.

Yeah. But he's got the beard. Everything else he looks like. He's got a John Daley golfer kind of a beard. And so.

But he's a Democrat socialist.

Listen to this back and forth between him and Bill Mars talking about. Communism in Mamdoni. All right. This is really telling. Here we go.

I mean, I'm politically more Democrat socialist. I believe he's socialist.

“Again, I think you're plainly been here to the left of me”

if you even say you're a socialist. Well, I said Democratic socialist. I know, but I know a Democratic socialist is that Mundami. Who's a straight up communist? No, he's not.

He has someone working. No. Yeah. He is. First of all.

Yeah. Someone working for him to see a weaver. Okay. Have you read about her? I have not.

See, that means you're in a bubble. Okay. Because you should have. Okay. Okay.

So he's like by me.

She's like one of his top lieutenant.

She's had his big issue was the rents too high. Mm-hmm. She's the head of like we're going to fix housing. Mm-hmm. This is like what got him elected.

He is not disavowder. And I could show you all her tweets that she's put out over the last few years in quotes. And one of them is elect more communists. Mm-hmm.

“I don't think you have to read between the lines.”

If somebody he stands with and by is saying, And also her other quotes are like, All homeownership is racist. Well, that's ridiculous. Exactly.

Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yes. I have an issue with that thing that she said. I don't know this woman.

I will definitely look her up. Mm-hmm. Again. He has known the bubble. Yeah.

He lives in the bubble. He has no idea and has no real interest before Bill Mar. And I don't know if he's actually going to look. Yeah. Yeah.

Her up. But it's just like, wow. And I know who he is. Yeah. I realize when he's voice went up high, he's the counter guy.

Yeah. When he wants to do when when Will Smith comes in and wants to do the time travel. Yeah. Yeah. He's the counter guy who also has the girlfriend, right?

Right. Yes. Yeah. Who lives with his mom upstairs from the. Yep.

And men and black. Yeah. Okay. I know who he is. Yeah.

Wow. He looks a lot different today. Well, no. But I've seen him before. Yeah.

I'm different podcast. He is his radical left as you can get. No. He absolutely is. He just told you that he used the word democratic before socialist.

But he's a socialist. Right. And he doesn't even realize that a democratic socialist is a communist. It's a communist. He doesn't even know that.

Right. That's because it's like I'm a half. It's like I'm a half measure socialist. That's what they want to tell you. That's what they think.

I'm because Democrat. When I'm a Democrat. Right. I'm a democratic socialist. That means I still believe in the election process.

No, you don't. Do you like voter ID? What do you think about that? That's gross. Well, no, you don't.

And and it's in and that's it. They, they love to soften it.

of words.

“You know, I mean, for a while, they were, they were using progressive.”

Well, and then you remember. I would back when it was MSNBC, you know, the whole bend over thing or lean forward. No, lean forward. As well.

I always get those two mixed up.

Hey there. I'm Paula Pan. I help people make the smartest money decisions possible. You're not ever worried about your salary. You need enough to make sure that you don't in a bad financial position.

Once you have that, your salary. It becomes moot. What matters from that point forward. Upside games. Any type of ownership stake or ownership potential.

That's the money. Remember, you can afford anything. Just not everything. afford anything. Follow and listen on your favorite platform.

They will.

And we don't even know what that meant.

“At least when you say we're progressive.”

It means. All right, that's based in we believe they believe. If you're saying that is about yourself and your progressive that you're saying. We believe that we're making progress. Right.

And we know the basis of that. Lean forward. We. That's sorry. You're not my doctor.

And it's. Well, it's the the the the part that we can't play of this interview. Because there's. If this back and forth. Yeah.

But it's when he starts talking about that his daughter goes to school with the transgenders. I'll do. Eight. Eight. Yeah.

What are you talking about them? Yeah. Yeah. Adults are leaving. No, no, no, no, no.

“They're just following what they're just agreeing with.”

They're just agreeing with the. And doing whatever the eight year old wants. And Bill Mars like, well, that's it right there. They're eight. They don't know what they are.

They don't stop it. Well, I mean, if you take. Eight year old shopping, just start at the basic level. You know, what is it? Gary, I know you grew up this way.

A lot of us did. And it was. We didn't go in and tell mom what we wanted to eat for dinner. That mom didn't come to me. What would you like to eat?

That seems to be the thing today. It's like, what would you like to. Well, I just give them what they want to eat. That way, at least they eat something. We would go ask mom what's for dinner.

Whatever she cooked, it's what we ate. And if we didn't eat it, we'd go hungry. Intermittent fasting was started a long time ago. And a lot of it happened because we didn't want to eat what mom cooked. But we didn't make that decision.

We didn't imagine back in the day, Gary. Mom gives you the grocery, the grocery store cart and says, you do the shopping. You decide what you're going to buy. And you are in control. Those are very basic decisions that we would not let eight year olds decide.

Now, do they say, mom, I want some cookies. I want some cookies. I want some cookies.

And then you finally give in because you realize I'm only going to give the child to you.

I'm eating the rest of the cookies. They want no. And it's a very basic. That's a very basic level to make the more serious point of the eight year old, having the right to make decisions about their life.

Because it is the welfare of the child. The responsibility of the welfare of that child is based on the adults who are in charge of that child, which includes when you start getting into chain making changes to this child's body, that are irreversible. It would be a group of individuals starting with the parents.

And sometimes not even the parents because many on the left believe the parents shouldn't have the final say so, that doctors if they want to do this should be able to do this. The child should be able to do this and elect to do this on their own and have that authority before they become an adult. They don't have the reckoning skills. They don't have the information.

Let's face it. Children don't know a lot. They have to learn it. I remember the old TV show WKRP, where they were trying to do a public service show.

And so Bailey got this expert on children and Dr. Johnny Fever was interviewing him.

And he said he was by adults. The guy looks at Johnny Fever. He says by adults standards, all children are insane. That's true.

But what's interesting is now by liberal standards, children actually look like critical thinkers.

They are. If you look at the liberal, the radical liberal mind does not ask the why. Because kids are always, the story is for why. Well, how does that work? Well, what does that you think about this?

They couldn't have a debate with an actual child. When I think about my nephew and then my great nephew that I'm close to both of them. When they were both. I mean, seven, eight, nine years old. It was constant question.

Why this, why this, why this. And you know what they were trying to do in their young minds. They were trying to connect the dots. They're forming opinions.

That's critical thinking.

What they're doing is they're training their mind to think critically. In fact, in that moment, they are thinking critically. Because what they're saying is, I don't understand that. I need more information. And at times because the rhetoric was so great.

I had to reassure them now everything's going to be everything's going to be fine. Yes. And frankly, and I would be honest, frankly, at your age, take care and do the stuff that you wish to do in your life.

“You need to be, I remember telling them, you need to enjoy this time of your life.”

Right. There's a lot of adult things out there that people will throw at you as if it's your responsibility. It's not yet. Right. You know, right.

Do your school, do your sports. Right. Do the best that you can. Yes. Right.

Right. Because the one thing and as I've told them both all my nieces and nephews because they've all come to me with every question known to, you know, especially when they get older. They want to know what I think on everything because they know what I do for a living. Right. Yeah.

And they see it and they're confused by a lot of stuff that happens.

One of the first things I always told them.

I get furious when you, when you have the, and I see it on the left more than I see it ever seen it on the right where they want to indoctrinate the children. Yeah. Which is why they want them in the opposite of the schools. Yeah. And I would tell all young, you know, kids that would ask me questions, the most vast majority of them, you know, relatives, do not agree with me because I'm your uncle.

I agree with me because you believe I've made a point that connects the dots and there's critical thinking to it and it makes sense that it can make sense in your brain. Do not agree with me if it doesn't make sense to you. Right.

“You need to develop your own mind and I constantly, even my nephew today, my great nephew.”

You know, you're not me. You're not anybody. Why are you? Yes. You need to come up with, you know, your own ideas, your own thoughts, but yes, you're right.

You need to be based on all the questions that you're asking me. You got all these questions. I mean, you're wondering how it goes on. Yeah. I'll tell you what I think you go to other sources and then you make the judgment on your own.

Well, you think is the best argument. That's, that's it. And that's how I raised my children. It's, I told them I said, as they became older teenagers and, you know, they were entering getting ready to enter adulthood. I told them I said, I'm not telling you that you need to agree with me.

“I, the only thing I ask of you, the only thing I advise for you is that you learn critical thinking.”

You learn to find the truth. And you know, there are things out there that, and we all did this. I did this with my parents. You know, you mentioned it recently talking about your dad and your parents. And it's the older you get, the more you, you not only, of course, agree with them, but you're becoming them because you understand.

You understand fully appreciate how you were raised. You know, when we laid my brother to rest together day. My brother would have been 65 this August. And I think about all five of us kids, you know, when we were kids, and I still think of us as kids. But my brother, you know, was, was a close just months away from his 65th birthday. You know, he wasn't a kid, but I still think of us as the kids, you know, and my parents still think of us as.

The kids. But I think about the way that we were raised.

Yes.

And which, which is critical.

“And I don't remember my dad ever telling me, you know, you know, this is how you should think.”

I don't, my mom or, you know, now when it came to Christian teachings, my mom was a Bible school teacher. And, of course, you know, my, my mom and dad were very religious and, and I thank God for them. And, and instilling me, instilling, and to me, those, those beliefs, those fundamental beliefs. But that's different than we're talking about the secular beliefs of the world and how things apply. I do believe the fundamental principles apply from Christianity.

I do, but beyond that, they didn't tell me how to think politically.

They didn't tell me what they did as they said examples.

And they taught me how to think and also how to follow through with responsibilities. And those are the things, you know, we talk about, but with the left today,

“what we're talking about here with David Cross and others, you know, they want you to believe that it's absolutely okay for the children to make their decisions.”

And for the parents to guide them in any other way, now I didn't hear David Cross say this, but others have said it. If the parents disagree with what the child wants, and we're talking children, then they deem that as abusive. Again, I don't, I don't hear David Cross saying that. I didn't watch the whole podcast. So I don't know what he believes in that regard. If it's a, all out abuse of the, if the parents step in and try and redirect that child,

but the parents are responsible for the welfare of that child.

My father never told me what to think except for when he said,

"Stop listening to that hippie animal music." It didn't work. Well, that's not. We are right, I radio. Brought to you by FPPF, fuel power max. Owner operators can save a hefty amount of money by participating in discount fuel networks.

If you're least in your fleet has a fuel optimizer program, use it. Such a program helps plan a trip based on fuel prices and locations in the carrier's fuel network. The larger the carrier, typically the larger the discounts that are possible. Fees for using such networks have become rare thanks to competition for drivers. Owner operators are well advised, however, to pass up network fuel stops that are too costly.

Or too far off route, sell inferior fuel, or are dangerously or poorly maintained. For independent owner operators, a bevy of fuel discount networks exist. From a variety of traditional fuel cards to the national association of small trucking companies network and the younger mudflap applications discounts at independent trucks stops around the nation. Research the options and discounts available to find the right one for you.

Owner operator business 101 is provided by Overdrive's Partners in Business Program. Go to OverdriveOnLine.com to the partners in business section of the website for more details on this and many other topics. Brought to you by Shell Rotella, with advanced synthetic technology is designed to help keep your rig running with more mileage and less maintenance. We'll be right back with more Red Eye Radio with a recording and Gary McNamara. [Music]

We're when I radio and he's our colleague and I'm Gary McNamara, more of the clueless coming up following the bottom of the art more audio on it. By the way, it's glad to see, I forgot how he put it for President Trump said, "Well, he's not really in love with the latest. It was something like that, I don't know if it was he used that exact term with the latest Iranian proposition." And I started thinking what he needs to say is, "No, we're not doing customs and negotiation."

“I mean, you remember that to remember sign-feld where they started out to, "Okay, we're going to do a TV series, 8,000 of peace and George negotiated it down."”

He said, "No, we're going to accept 8,000 of peace and it went down to 4,000 of peace." He's so he negotiated backwards, so I saw that yesterday when I saw the Iranian deal, I go, "We'll just project that and the president did." He rejected it just like, "No, this isn't going in the right direction." I love that. I mean, good, just say we're not going to allow Iran to do customs and negotiation."

Observing and analyzing the insanity,

they were currently in Gary McNamara and Mike Lee on Red Eye Radio. And he is currently in I'm Gary McNamara. Download our Red Eye Radio app today and you can listen when and where you choose. All right, more on, well, Democrats in the bubble, clueless liberals, whatever. This was really interesting. This is Lee Selden, head of the EPA in front of Congress, the other day.

With Representative Rosa Delaro, she's the one with the blue hair. Yeah, yeah, you know, who she is, and the real big glasses. And they go back and forth on climate change, and he's simply saying, "That's not in the law." Here's a Supreme Court ruling. She's just pure emotion back. And it's interesting because this is what we have told so many Republicans and conservatives.

All you need to do is argue the truth. Right. And if you know what you're talking about, they're clueless. Right. They're absolutely clueless.

“I think one of the biggest things that has happened to me since I've been doing, you know, since I've been in the media, covering politicians,”

you know, talk show host for 36 years now, overall in the media where I was even over news departments, even if it wasn't, even if I wasn't myself, a talk show host, I was the manager of the station.

So I dealt with it, is I was always under the delusion that in my in my 20s and even into my 30s,

that politicians must have some kind of talent or intellectual competence or intellectual knowledge that the average person didn't have. I bought into the BS. Yeah. Yeah. Some of the dumbest people I've ever heard speak are federal politicians. Yeah. Absolutely idiots. Right. Who couldn't run anything in business. Nothing. Right.

They could not survive in the real world. Right. And if you have, if you're a critical thinker, you can destroy these people in a debate. But here's this, uh, uh, back and forth between the head of the EPA, Lee Zeldon and Representative, uh, uh, Jelloral yesterday. When climate changes flooding our streets, poisoning our air, driving up healthcare and disaster cuts, how can the EPA justify abandoning that duty to protect Americans to appease polluters under the false flag of economic growth?

Following the law, Section 202 of the Clean Air Act, where does the same thing about fighting global climate change? Loper bright Supreme Court case, if you're familiar with it? No, maybe others are not, but let me ask. But that's really important. As a member of Congress, Loper bright says that we as an agency don't have the authority to get creative if Section 202 of the Clean Air Act. No, but you don't have excuse me. You do not have the right to say climate change does not exist, that it's a hoax and that's where this administration's coming up.

“You don't know what Loper bright is. Do you know what the major policy structure is? You're a member of Congress, you should know.”

Well, you're, you, you have moved from someone who's defended the environment to all of us. I'm very defensive about not knowing that two biggest landmark Supreme Court cases of last year are very, very defensive about changing your policy and your positions with regard to the environment. You want me to tell you what the two biggest Supreme Court cases are the last few years? This is what I want you to do. Michigan vs. EPA, West Virginia vs. EPA.

You know, you're here because you need money from us, so halt for the second and wait for the questions and answer the question.

Well, I answered your question and you didn't like my answer because you don't know what Loper bright is, because you don't know what the major policy doctrine is. Because you're asking me, you're asking me about Section 202 of the Clean Air Act and you don't, you don't read it. You don't know what it says. And what you want to do is to deny you want to-- No, I actually read the law. I do my homework. Really?

“You're just somebody who likes to have the microphone on. You know what I have to do?”

I read the law. I read the Supreme Court cases. Oh, you wait should do for your constituents. Is actually a read statute.

Read-- It seriously is.

It's like arguing with children who actually couldn't debate actual children.

Yeah. And it's really, really simple. The Supreme Court in their decision said what Congress has written down for the EPA to do, climate change doesn't exist. Right. Congress has input it in the EPA rules.

Right. So you can say everything that you want that's your job to put it in the rules. It's not my job to look at the law and say, well, since Democrats want to change it even though they haven't, I as a bureaucrat should take over the legislative branch and I as a bureaucrat should put my own politics into it. Right.

“Yeah. That's what he's saying. Right. Exactly.”

And she's just saying, but climate change is bad.

And you're saying climate change isn't bad. No, I'm telling you what the law is. The law does not anywhere say we need to control climate change in the law that Congress has created and then verified by the Supreme Court that said it. Well, major doctrine is that if it's not in there, you can't assume that it should be in there. Right. That's how you get. And this is what's really fascinating when you have Democrats screaming about authoritarianism.

Yeah. Yeah. They're the ones that don't want to go through the process. We have a legislature that makes the law. We have the executive branch that enforces the law of Congress and pay attention here everybody now in this class because the next audio cut relates also directly to this and it's not her and leseldon again.

It's another separate audio cut and the Supreme Court interprets what the law is if there's a question of what the law means that was created by Congress. And so now we go to our next audio cut which relates to this again. All right. And this is Dr. Ellis Sanford who is a Democrat congressional candidate in Pennsylvania being questioned by NBC about who do you think should be in charge of forcing immigration law? You ready?

All right. Here we go with this one. You also said you're running to abolish ice. This is something that we've heard other Democrats and activists talk about. Yeah. From an immigration enforcement perspective. Yes.

Who do you think should be in charge of enforcing immigration laws? It's a big question. And you could own calls because I just want to think about it. Well, yeah, we go ahead. We need to continue to continue though. Okay.

“Who do I think should be in charge of enforcing immigration laws?”

Not the executive brand. So not the president. So it belongs with Congress. No, it doesn't. No, not how the Constitution is written.

Congress does not enforce law. Nope. You know, it's like the city council doesn't enforce law. The police department enforces the law and the prosecutors do. The actual legislators do not.

Right. Congress does not enforce the law. It'd be impossible. No laws would be enforced. If Congress, you know, and we know Democrats have completely changed their mind from 10 years ago.

Right. The law that was created is what is enforced and who does the enforcement in our constitution is the executive branch through the department of justice. Yes. No, I mean, the the the left. You look at the open borders during Biden.

You know, a refusal to enforce the law and of course you come in with a new president. And he didn't have to have any new laws put on the books. By the way, the Department of Justice Department of Homeland Security. Yes. You have executive branches that enforce the law.

Right.

“That's how the she seems to be completely clueless on that.”

You could tell by her pauses. She doesn't even know about the three branches of government. And she's running for damn Congress. For God's well, you know, and it goes back to Scalia. The separation of powers is everything.

Yeah.

People, if you ask people what's most important part of the constitution.

And they would say the they would say the Bill of Rights.

It's the one thing that Democrats wish to destroy, which is the separation of powers.

Yep.

“And the other thing is their entire thing with getting rid of the electoral college and getting rid of the Senate.”

And having the tyranny of the majority, which you have seen, for example, in Virginia. Yep. Yep. Which is what the constitution is not. But if you don't know anything about the history of if your basic analysis is the constitution was written by slave.

So it's all authoritarian. Well, then you're completely clueless as to what the constitution is about. You have no idea. You have no idea what it's about. You know, and it's, but when you look at it, yeah, the separation of powers.

And I also look at the way it was set up the bicameral legislature with the Senate. It is imperative to keep like the separation of powers is imperative to not let power coalesce in one area of the government. Right. Where where that's where you get more authoritarianism. And then the Senate gives the states at least in one part of the legislature equal representation, which is what the founding fathers knew.

Because they were leaving great Britain because they believe they were being taxed without representation. Yes. And so the whole concept of the Senate is to keep the country together. Because if you don't have any representation, if you live in a small state and you have no representation and outside forces are controlling you. Right.

That's, that's a Brexit.

Excuse me, that would be there would be the European Union times a million.

Yeah. Which is what Brexit was about. That's the basis of it. Right. We're losing our representation as a country to unelected bureaucrats because we decided to join the world government.

I had to say the world government. Yeah. The European government and the whole book. Well, think about the states that we're trying to, you know, join together basically to really undermine the electoral college process. Yeah. You know, and let other determine other states basically determine how their electors were going to vote. No. Yeah.

It doesn't work that way. That's what they've done. They've basically said your vote doesn't matter, Virginia. Right. Even with the legislature might decide in a presidential election doesn't matter.

No, all the other matters is what other states might do.

Right. And they wanted to undermine the electoral process. Yeah. And the electoral college altogether, which is something they've talked about getting rid of. Well, this they think is an out is some kind of weird loophole.

It's not a loophole at all. If you just look at this little thing called the constitution. Well, there is no loophole around the electoral college. Exactly.

“States can't states do a compact or collude to get rid of the, which I believe that's why the Supreme Court will shoot it down.”

Right. No, I think it's going to be that I because you can't go into a compact states can't go into a compact without the information of Congress. Right. Number one, and number two, without I think an amendment to the constitution. If you think about at this level.

I mean, if they're going to, if they wanted to. Well, I would say that the right because you have to constitution. Because that's an article one I believe. Yeah. I would section.

Right. You can't go into a compact. So you have to change the constitution in order for this to happen. Well, everything you have to change the constitution for. Right. Yeah.

Yeah. You cannot, you cannot have a side path around the electoral college. It's like saying, well, we're doing this electoral college option. Well, there's not right. They're creating something that doesn't exist.

And that's exactly what they've been trying to do for a long time.

“And by the way, the reason that the bill of rights is not the most important part.”

But the separation of powers is is because if there's no separation of powers, Bill of rights is gone exactly. Yep. We are Red Eye Radio. Coming up more with Gary McNamara and Eric Carley.

It's Red Eye Radio. We are Red Eye Radio. He's our crowning. I'm Gary McNamara. I know this is a blast from a pass.

I don't know how long ago it was. But it went viral yesterday. Alano Mar some years back. Yeah. Talking about World War II.

Okay. Here we go. Here we go. All right. The last time the alien enemies act was invoked.

Japanese, Italian, immigrants doing war war 11.

I'm sorry. Which one? Did I miss a few?

“I mean, I know I was out for a few days.”

But it... Somebody said her, you know, because her name is... I-I-I-H-A-N. It looks like one one. It's like, is that 11 on?

[laughs] World War 11. World War 11. [laughs] World War 11.

Was it Obama that said the Marine Corps?

Instead of the Marine Corps?

“I think when he was reading one time at a speech.”

He pronounced it as corpse. I mean, they've all done blunders. Wow. World War 11. [laughs]

Yeah. No, that's a Roman numeral too. [laughs] Just say you know. [upbeat music]

This is Ridae Radio. On Westwood One.

Vince Conez is redefining news talk.

I'm Vince Conez, host of the Vince podcast. I'm bringing you the truth, beneath the headlines of all of the nation's top stories. In-depth interviews. We feature newsmaking interviews with the top guests on the whole planet.

And I'll ask the questions. You only dream of other interviewers asking.

“And a front row seat to the most important conversations of the day.”

This is a show with an obsessive focus on what's good for America. You are going to love Vince. The Vince show. Follow and listen on your favorite platform. Hi, I'm Joss.

I'll see you. I host of the Steck & Bechabins podcast. Most economists agree. Small amount of inflation is actually good. 2% is what you're going for.

Why is everybody freaking out? Oh, because it's the fallout. People don't track their budget. You have this slow slipping that happens every month. To all of a sudden you go, "Man, I don't have any money."

The reason is now two people go to a restaurant. The bill is $60. For two. Two guys walking to a restaurant. They start screaming.

Did that hilarious? $60. Steck & Bechabins. Follow and listen on your favorite platform.