MURPHY’S LAW | Draw My Life ‘Anything that can go wrong will go wrong’


You have probably gone through this a thousand
times: the one day you leave your house without an umbrella, it pours with rain – you buy
something in the vending machine and it gets stucked – every time you drop a slice of toast,
it always falls with the butter-side down. You probably think it’s a conspiracy in
the universe against you, but nope, most of these misfortunes can be explained through
the Murphys Law, which says that “anything that can go wrong will go wrong”. We are not the first ones to realize that
these things happen. The famous scottish poet Robert Burns wrote in 1786 that The best laid
schemes o’ mice an’ men often go awry. In 1884 the novelist James Payn presented the
example of the bread and butter for the first time. But it wasnt until 1949 that Murphy’s law
or laws appeared as such thanks to the aerospace engineer Edward Aloýsius Murphy, after whom
they were named. Edward worked for the army in the US in big projects such as the Apolo
or the Apache Helicopter, developing security systems. He carried out a project for the US Air Force
to calculate the g-force (which measures the effect of acceleration due to gravity) a person
can tolerate when stopping abruptly. After several attempts, Edward modified the design
but didnt get any results. He inspected carefully the connections of the cables set by his assistant.
There were two possible ways of establishing the connection between the sensors and it
turned out they were ALL wrong. Not even one was right! So Murphy said: If there is a wrong way to
do something, then someone will do it. Little by little, the expression Murphy’s Law became
famous, and what had been born as a principle of security to take into account in engineering,
turned out to be a famous version of the inevitabílity of disasters. But… how much is it true when we are talking
about the Murphy’s laws? It all sounds like coincidence or superstition, however, tho
it might seem weird, science is behind many of these pessimistic statements. In 1996, the scientist Robery A. J. Matthews,
after several experiments, proved that the Murphy’s Laws are not about bad luck, but
about pure physics. He got an IG Nobel Prize for this. Going back to the famous slice of
toast that always falls with the butter side down, he demonstrated, based on the mechanics
of a rigid solid and the rotation speed, that for a slice of bread to rotate completely
and not end up smashed on the floor, the table should be more than 2’5 meters tall. Unfortunately,
Ikea doesnt sell any tables this high, it wouldnt be practical for human beings. Another Murphy’s Law is related to the negativity
bias and selective memory. We tend to remember bad things that happened to us and consider
them more important. If something goes wrong once, it’s gonna be stuck in our heads,
more than the other thousand times that actually went right. This is something inherent to
our human condition and our survival instinct. Matthews also talked about another foundation,
the illúsory correlation. According to it, when we are in a traffic jam, we always have
the feeling of being in the slowest lane. This happens because we spend more time looking
at other cars going passed us than looking at ourselves going passed others. Another reason he gives is statistics and
logic. If we get to a place where there are two lines, probably the one going slower will
have more people and there are bigger chances that we’ll be in that line. If there are
4 lines and we choose one, there is a 75% probability of one of the other lines being
faster. Also, if we lose a sock it’s more likely that, the next sock we lose is from
a different pair – because other complete pairs are the ones we are gonna be using.
Murphy’s Laws have become famous in order to explain negative incidents in our daily
lives that happen accidentally – to justify how jinxed we are or why the Universe is against
us… But truth is, if we investigate, almost all of these principles have an obvious reason,
as it has been proved throughout the years!!! Tiktakers, leave a comment telling us about
your experiences with the Murphy’s Laws!

UK Ambassador calls on Iranian government to de-escalate conflict


ARTHEL: KEVIN CORKE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ERIC. ERIC: FOX NEWS IS GETTING REACTION FROM THE IRANIAN OPPOSITION TO ALL OF THIS. PRINCE REZA, SON OF THE SHAH TELLING FOX NEWS, QUOTE, THIS IS NOT HUMAN ERROR, THIS IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY. HE IRRESPONSIBLY EMPOWERED HIS THUG TO FIRE AT WILL AGAINST INNOCENTS. BEARS FULL RESPONSIBILITY. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. KHAMENEI AND HIS REGIME MUST GO. THE NATIONAL UNITY FOR DEMOCRACY IN IRAN, THEY WANT FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY FOR FRIENDLINESS WITH THE UNITED STATES AND THE WORLD. THEY DESERVE THE SPORT FROM THE UNITED STATES AND ITS GOVERNMENT IN SENATOR FOR NATIONAL LIBERTY. THE LEADER OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF RESISTANCE OF IRAN, ALL IRANIANS, ESPECIALLY THE YOUTH EXPRESS SUPPORT AND SOLIDARITY WITH THE FAMILIES OF VICTIMS OF THIS HORRIFIC CRIME BY THE MULLAHS. PROSECUTE, PUNISH THOSE RESPONSIBLE. ALI KHAMENEI AS COMMANDER IN THE CHIEF OF ARMED FORCES AND HUE SAWN ROUHANI AND IRG COMMANDERS.>>THEY HAVE SEEN MANY SAID DAYS SINCE 2011, BUT THIS DAY IT IS POTENTIALLY ONE OF THE SADDEST BECAUSE IT IS FIRST TIME THAT A SECURITY COUNCILMEMBER HAS CHOSEN TO PLAY POLITICS WITH HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE. ERIC: BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED NATIONS CARE REASON PEERS DRESSING DOWN THE RUSSIANS ON SYRIA, HUMANITARIAN CATASTROPHE THAT SO SADLY CONTINUES AT HANDS OF PUTIN, ASSAD, THE IRANIANS AND GENERAL QASSEM SOLEIMANI. THIS AS THE IRANIAN PEOPLE CONTINUE TO TAKE TO THE STREETS IN ANGRY DEFIANCE OF THEIR GOVERNMENT, CALLING FOR THE REGIME TO GO. WHAT COULD HAPPEN? AMBASSADOR PIERCE JOINS US HERE IN THE STUDIO. GOOD TO SEE YOU.>>THANK YOU, ERIC. ERIC: PRETTY SHOCKING TO SEE THE PROTESTS GROWING. WE’RE TOLD THEY ARE CHANTING DEATH TO THE DICTATORS, TEARING DOWN BANNERS OF SOLEIMANI AND OTHERS. WHAT IS YOUR REACTION, YOUR GOVERNMENT’S REACTION TO WHAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE IN IRAN ARE DOING?>>THESE ARE POTENTIALLY INTERESTING DEVELOPMENTS. AS YOU SAY, IRANIAN PROTESTERS TAKING TO THE STREET AFTER THE DOWNING OF THE AIRLINER. I THINK IT IS TOO EARLY TO SAY WHAT IT MEANS BUT I THINK EVERYONE IS WATCHING IRAN VERY CLOSELY A THE MOMENT. I HOPE IT WILL BE ANOTHER SPUR TO THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT TO DE-ESCALATE TENSIONS, TO STOP PURSUING NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND, AS IT WERE TO COME IN FROM THE COLD. OUR FOREIGN SECRETARY, DOMINIC RAAB MADE THIS CALL TO THEM. THERE IS A WINDOW FOR DIPLOMACY NOW. WHICH HOPE IRAN WILL TAKE IT BUT ONLY IRAN CAN TAKE THAT DECISION. WE CAN’T TAKE IT FOR HER. ERIC: WHAT DO YOU LEADERS DO? DO YOU CALL FOR MEETINGS, CALL FOR DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THIS SPECIFICALLY, WHAT DOES YOUR GOVERNMENT WANT?>>THERE ARE MANY WAYS TOTIC SAL ONE IS READY FOR TALKS. PRESIDENT TRUMP, MR. POMPEO, MY OWN GOVERNMENT, BORIS JOHNSON, DOMINIC RAAB AS WELL AS THE FRENCH, WE ALL MADE OVERTURES TO THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT SUGGESTING THEY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF A DIPLOMATIC WINDOW THAT HAS NOW APPEARED, THAT THEY COME IN FROM THE COLD. I WOULD THINK THAT SORT OF THING IS NORMALLY DONE QUIETLY IN THE FIRST INSTANCE WITH SENIOR OFFICIALS MEETING, PRIVATELY, PERHAPS TO PREPARE A WAY FORWARD SO THAT LEADERS CAN MEET. THERE ARE MANY WAYS OF DOING IT. I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT TAKES A STEP.>>WHAT IS THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT DOING? ARE THOSE OVERTURES RECIPROCATED?>>THEY HAVE SENT A VARIETY OF MESSAGES BUT THE MESSAGES TEND TO BE VERY IN THE MOMENT, VERY TRANSACTIONAL. THEY HAVE NOT AS FAR AS I KNOW ACCEPTED U.S., FRENCH, OR BRITISH OFFERS. WE REALLY WOULD URGE THEM TO DO SO. WE THINK WHAT THEIR OWN PEOPLE THINK OF THE CURRENT SITUATION. NOW IS A VERY GOOD TIME TO DE-ESCALATE TENSIONS. STATEMENT, OF COURSE, WE MUS’NT TAKE OUR EYE OFF THE NUCLEAR WE. WE REALLY DON’T WANT IRAN TO ACQUIRE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. ERIC: OF COURSE THE PAST FEW MONTHS THEY HAD PROTESTS AND THE IRANIAN REGIME KILLED 1500 OF THE PROTESTERS. DIDN’T ALLOW THE FAMILIES TO MOURN THE YOUNG PEOPLE THAT WERE KILLED. THE PRESIDENT TWEETED OUT ASKING IRANIAN GOVERNMENT NOT TO KILL THE PROTESTERS. DOES YOUR GOVERNMENT AGREE?>>WE ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT. PEOPLE HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY, FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. THAT INCLUDES THE RIGHT TO PEACEFUL PROTEST. SOMETIMES THOSE RESULTS HAVE A VARIETY OF MOTIVATIONS BUT I THINK THE IMPORTANT THING IS THAT THE IRANIAN GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO LISTEN TO ITS PEOPLE. IT NEEDS TO DE-ESCALATE THE CURRENT SITUATION. THAT IS IN THEIR HANDS. WE MADE OUR OFFER. ERIC: ONE OF YOUR COLLEAGUES, THE BRITISH AMBASSADOR TO IRAN, ROBERT KERRY, HE GOES TO THE VIGIL, GOES TO THE VIGIL FOR 15 MINUTES, HE LEAVES AND THEY ARREST HIM.>>AS WE SAID, AS DOMINIC RAAB SAID THAT IS A FLAGRANT VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. THERE IS THE A CONVENTION, VIENNA CONVENTION ON DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS. IT GOVERNS WHAT HAPPENS TO DIPLOMATS ABROAD IN COUNTRIES SO THEY CAN GO ABOUT THEIR DUTIES IN SAFETY AND SECURITY. REPRESENTING THEIR GOVERNMENT. THAT IS WHAT AMBASSADOR McNAIR WAS DOING. HE WENT TO PAY HIS RESPECTS AT THE VIGIL. IT WAS IN HONOR OF THE IRANIAN STUDENTS WHO LOST THEIR LIVES ON THE AIRLINER. QUITE NATURAL HE SHOULD GO ESPECIALLY SINCE BRITISH PEOPLE WERE KILLED AS WELL. HE THEN LEFT THAT GATHERING, WHEN IT STARTED TO TURN INTO MORE OF A PROTEST. HE WENT INNOCENTLY OFF TO HAVE HIS HER CUT. THEN THE IRANIANS ARRESTED HIM, BUT HE IS OKAY.>>HE IS NOW OKAY, EVENTUALLY AND RELEASED AND WE TALKED TO THE IRANIANS ABOUT THIS BREACH OF INTERNATIONAL LAW. ERIC: QASSEM SOLEIMANI WAS SO-CALLED TERRORIST MASTERMIND OF THE HORRENDOUS CATASTROPHE THAT IS THERE. YOU DEALT WITH IT IN THE SECURITY COUNCIL AND IT STILL HASN’T ENDED RUSSIANS BLOCKED HUMANITARIAN AID.>>WHAT HAPPENED ON FRIDAY THE RUSSIANS HELD SECURITY COUNCIL TO RANSOM AND PEOPLE OF NORTHEAST SYRIA TO RAN SOME THEY REFUSED TO ALLOW U.N. TO SEND AID THROUGH WHAT ARE CALLED CROSS-BORDER CROSSINGS, GO INTO SYRIA FROM TURKEY, SYRIA, AND OTHER COUNTRIES WITHOUT THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT PERMISSION AND THE REASON THAT IS NEEDED BECAUSE THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT WILL NOT ALLOW ASSISTANCE TO REACH ALL THE COMMUNITIES MOST IN NEED. IT WASN’T JUST GENERAL SOLEIMANI WHO WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN SYRIA. I DO WANT AGAIN TO CALL OUT THE RUSSIANS BUT ALSO THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT THEMSELVES. GOVERNMENTS ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AFTER THEIR PEOPLE AND YET THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT WON’T ISSUE PERMITS FOR AID. THEY WON’T HELP GET THE AID TO PEOPLE MOST IN NEED. ERIC: FINALLY DO YOU FEEL WITH THE DYNAMICS PERHAPS CHANGING THAT THE SYRIA ISSUE AND THE TURMOIL WILL BE REDUCED?>>OH, THAT IS, THAT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION. I MEAN, WE HAD SOME FOOTAGE EARLIER OF THE SAD DEATH OF SULTAN KABUTZ. HE HAD BEEN A STRONG MODERATING FORCE IN THE GULF. HE HAS WIDE ADVICE FOR LEADERS. HE TRIED TO KEEP A PRODUCTIVE WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH ALL SIDES. I THINK IT IS GOOD NEWS HIS SUCCESS ARE SORE PLEDGED TO CONTINUE HIS FOREIGN POLICY WE IN BRITAIN HAD A RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OMAN FOR 200 YEARS. WE’LL BE IN CLOSE TOUCH WITH THEM, HELPING THEM KEEP REGIONAL STABILITY GOING. ERIC: I KNOW BOTH SIDES, BOTH GOVERNMENTS WILL LOOK AND WATCHING OUT, TO MAKE SURE PROTESTS ARE PROTECTED.>>ABSOLUTELY. ERIC: AND THE REGIME DOES NOT RESORT WHAT THEY HAVE DONE IN

If Bloomberg is Nominee, Do Dems Stay Home?


Let’s go next to our caller from the two six,
seven area code. Who’s calling today from two six seven uh, David? Yes. Hello. Hi, my name is Greg. I’m calling from
bucks County in Pennsylvania. I’m a big fan of your show. Uh, 11, my friend, a lot of
my friends on the left on are Bernie supporters as I am. And uh, but I’m getting very concerned,
uh, about the idea of a Bloomberg candidacy and I’m concerned that it will depress, um,
it will depress votes and that we will end up with Trump. Again. I understand the arguments
that he’s kind of, he’s a version of Trump, but I also lived in New York for most of my
life and I lived through Bloomberg, the Bloomberg, uh, ownership. And I’m interested in what
you have to say, um, to Bernie supporters and people on the left who are getting, um,
disappointed about the idea of a Bloomberg possibility of Bloomberg candidacy and the
idea that they might not vote. They might sit this out and I’d love to hear what you
say. Let’s say about all that. I think it’s D I actually, I posted to my Twitter
page a few days ago, something like a, I’m getting emails from some Democrats saying,
if Bloomberg’s the nominee, they won’t vote. Where are you guys on this? And I got like
6,000 replies from a lot of Democrats saying I won’t vote if it’s Bloomberg. And I totally
understand that. I mean in Bloomberg, um, you have a guy who represents a lot of different
things. You have a guy who represents a possible sort of bailout for the of possible bailout
for the establishment that may be seeing Joe Biden tank and are unclear about Buddha judge
and Amy Klobuchar doesn’t really have support if Bloomberg’s really polling 15 nationally,
maybe he’s the guy to get behind. But then you have a voter turnout question which you’re
bringing up. And the question is, if Bloomberg is the democratic nominee, given that Bloomberg
was a Republican for so long, given that Bloomberg’s politics on a lot of social issues based on
videos that have come out recently seem to not be particularly enlightened and progressive
to put it lightly, what is it going to do to turn out and how will he fare against Donald
Trump? My answer is I don’t know. And the reason
I say that is I get emails about polling that says, Hey, you know what? In face to face
match-ups, Bloomberg does really well against Trump. And then I get other polling that says,
Hey, you know, what if Bloomberg’s the nominee that we’ll keep the largest number of democratic
voters home. So I understand the idea that Bloomberg as the nominee might depress turnout.
There are so many conflicting data points that I just don’t have an answer about that
right now. And all I can really say is if you support the policies of Bernie instead
of Bloomberg, just go out and support Bernie now and then if there’s a different nominee,
evaluate it and make a decision as to what’s best at that point. Yeah, absolutely. I think it’s incredibly
difficult. There’s not even enough information yet tonight it’s going to be a whole different
spin on this. Um, because of the debates and of course the mentioning media, MSNBC in particular
has been, uh, ridiculous. This is, this is in their anti, uh, in their anti Bernie, uh,
screeds. So, uh, yeah, it’s going to be real. And one last question. Uh, if you had to vote
right now and you had to choose between Trump and Bloomberg, how would you vote? Yeah, I, I would vote for Bloomberg over Trump.
And I know there’s a lot of people saying there’s no difference. It’s just a richer
version of Trump with a lot of the same ideas that the reasons why I would vote for Bloomberg
over Trump are number one, the Supreme court choices Bloomberg would make would not be
as bad as the ones Trump would make. Number two, Bloomberg actually has both sort of diplomatic
and, uh, political experience that Trump lacks, which is the source of a lot of Donald Trump’s
missteps. That would be number two. And then number three, although it would be no great
party if Bloomberg were president, Bloomberg would restore some of the respect from world
leaders that we have lost under Trump, although certainly, certainly not all. So for me, I
wouldn’t be cheering about voting for Bloomberg over Trump, but I would definitely vote Bloomberg
over Trump. Yeah. Thank David. I really appreciate your opinion and I’m a great fan of the show. Thanks so much.

Amy Klobuchar: I Am A Fresh New Face In Politics | Morning Joe | MSNBC


>>>I LEARNED WHAT IT WAS LIKE>>>I LEARNED WHAT IT WAS LIKE NOT TO HAVE A PERFECT LIFE. NOT TO HAVE A PERFECT LIFE. WHAT IT’S LIKE NOT TO HAVE YOUR WHAT IT’S LIKE NOT TO HAVE YOUR DAD THERE OR CHRISTMAS MORNING. DAD THERE OR CHRISTMAS MORNING. WHAT I’VE LEARNED FROM THAT, WHAT I’VE LEARNED FROM THAT, NUMBER ONE, RESILIENCE. NUMBER ONE, RESILIENCE. GOT TO PICK YOURSELF UP NO GOT TO PICK YOURSELF UP NO MATTER WHAT, GOOD QUALITY IN A MATTER WHAT, GOOD QUALITY IN A PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. [ APPLAUSE ] [ APPLAUSE ]>>>ALL RIGHT.>>>ALL RIGHT. WELCOME BACK. WELCOME BACK. COME ON IN. COME ON IN. THIS IS GETTING FUN. THIS IS GETTING FUN. THAT WAS SENATOR AMY KLOBUCHAR THAT WAS SENATOR AMY KLOBUCHAR SPEAKING ABOUT THE POWER OF SPEAKING ABOUT THE POWER OF ADDICTION IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, A ADDICTION IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, A STATE HIT HARD BY THE OPIOID STATE HIT HARD BY THE OPIOID EPIDEMIC. EPIDEMIC. THE DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL THE DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE JOINS US RIGHT HERE, CANDIDATE JOINS US RIGHT HERE, RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW. ALSO WITH IS, COLUMNIST FOR THE ALSO WITH IS, COLUMNIST FOR THE “WASHINGTON POST,” GREAT TO YOU “WASHINGTON POST,” GREAT TO YOU HAVE BOTH WITH US. HAVE BOTH WITH US. HOW ARE YOU FEELING, AMY? HOW ARE YOU FEELING, AMY?>>EXCELLENT.>>EXCELLENT. EXCELLENT! EXCELLENT! [ APPLAUSE ] [ APPLAUSE ] WE — SOMETHING’S HAPPENING WE — SOMETHING’S HAPPENING HERE. HERE.>>YEAH.>>YEAH.>>AND I THINK A LOT OF IT I’VE>>AND I THINK A LOT OF IT I’VE BEEN HERE. BEEN HERE. I THINK 22 TIMES. I THINK 22 TIMES. BUT AFTER THAT DEBATE, SOMETHING BUT AFTER THAT DEBATE, SOMETHING SWITCHED, AND WE HAD DONE A LOT SWITCHED, AND WE HAD DONE A LOT OF HARD WORK TO GET THERE BUT OF HARD WORK TO GET THERE BUT IT’S ALLOWED THE PEOPLE OF NEW IT’S ALLOWED THE PEOPLE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE TO SEE ME IN A HAMPSHIRE TO SEE ME IN A DIFFERENT WAY. DIFFERENT WAY. NOT JUST MY POLICIES BUT WHEN I NOT JUST MY POLICIES BUT WHEN I WAS COMING FROM, FROM MY HEART. WAS COMING FROM, FROM MY HEART.>>ALSO, I’VE COACHED FOOTBALL>>ALSO, I’VE COACHED FOOTBALL AND I COACH, I COACH BASEBALL AND I COACH, I COACH BASEBALL NOW AND SOMETIMES I HAVE TO GO NOW AND SOMETIMES I HAVE TO GO LIKE THIS TO THE KIDS. LIKE THIS TO THE KIDS. BECAUSE THEY’RE LIKE — 11, 12 BECAUSE THEY’RE LIKE — 11, 12 YEARS OLD. YEARS OLD. TALKING — OVER HERE. TALKING — OVER HERE. HEY. HEY. RIGHT HERE. RIGHT HERE. HEY! HEY! YOU’VE BEEN DOING THAT TO US THE YOU’VE BEEN DOING THAT TO US THE WHOLE TIME. WHOLE TIME. LIKE, HEY, OVER HERE. LIKE, HEY, OVER HERE. OVER HERE. OVER HERE.>>HELLO!>>HELLO! YOU GUYS KEEP TALKING ABOUT YOU GUYS KEEP TALKING ABOUT EVERYBODY ELSE NLTSDS. EVERYBODY ELSE NLTSDS.>>AND NOW, YOU GUYS ARE KIND OF>>AND NOW, YOU GUYS ARE KIND OF FOCUSSED. FOCUSSED.>>EXACTLY.>>EXACTLY. THE DAY BEFORE THE PRIMARY. THE DAY BEFORE THE PRIMARY. BUT WHATEVER. BUT WHATEVER.>>WHEN YOU WANT.>>WHEN YOU WANT. AND YOU DON’T WANT IT SIX MONTHS AND YOU DON’T WANT IT SIX MONTHS BEFORE THE PRIMARY. BEFORE THE PRIMARY.>>ANYWAY, WE HAVE, SINCE THE>>ANYWAY, WE HAVE, SINCE THE DEBATE, RAISED OVER $3 MILLION DEBATE, RAISED OVER $3 MILLION FROM REGULAR PEOPLE ONLINE. FROM REGULAR PEOPLE ONLINE.>>THAT’S PRETTY GOOD!>>THAT’S PRETTY GOOD!>>WE HAVE BEEN SURGING IN POLLS>>WE HAVE BEEN SURGING IN POLLS AND RECORD CROWDS AT ALL OF OUR AND RECORD CROWDS AT ALL OF OUR EVENTS INCLUDING PEOPLE WHO WERE EVENTS INCLUDING PEOPLE WHO WERE SUPPORTING OTHER CANDIDATES BUT SUPPORTING OTHER CANDIDATES BUT ALSO PEOPLE WHO ARE ALSO PEOPLE WHO ARE INDEPENDENTS. INDEPENDENTS.>>SO WHY?>>SO WHY? WHAT’S HAPPENING? WHAT’S HAPPENING? WHAT’S HAPPENING? WHAT’S HAPPENING?>>IS IT THE ISSUES?>>IS IT THE ISSUES? IS IT YOU? IS IT YOU?>>I THINK PART WAS I STOOD UP>>I THINK PART WAS I STOOD UP ON THAT STAGE AND I SHOWED HOW I ON THAT STAGE AND I SHOWED HOW I WAS DIFFERENT FROM SOME OF MY WAS DIFFERENT FROM SOME OF MY OPPONENTS. OPPONENTS. MAYBE ONE OF THE MOST DRAMATIC MAYBE ONE OF THE MOST DRAMATIC MOMENTS WAS WHEN GEORGE MOMENTS WAS WHEN GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS ASKED, DOES STEPHANOPOULOS ASKED, DOES ANYONE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A ANYONE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH A SOCIALIST LEADING THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST LEADING THE DEMOCRATIC TICKET AND I SAID, BERNIE AND I TICKET AND I SAID, BERNIE AND I ARE FRIENDS, WHICH IS TRUE, WE ARE FRIENDS, WHICH IS TRUE, WE CAME INTO THE SENATE, BUT, YEAH, CAME INTO THE SENATE, BUT, YEAH, I HAVE A PROBLEM, BUT WAS THE I HAVE A PROBLEM, BUT WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO SAID IT ON THE ONLY ONE WHO SAID IT ON THE STAGE. STAGE. AND. AND.>>WOW.>>WOW.>>I THINK THAT LAUNCHED A –>>I THINK THAT LAUNCHED A — THOUGHT PROCESS IN A LOT OF THOUGHT PROCESS IN A LOT OF VOTERS HEADS. VOTERS HEADS. WERE LIKE, HMM. WERE LIKE, HMM. LET ME LOOK AT HER. LET ME LOOK AT HER. SO I THEN WAS ABLE TO TALK ABOUT SO I THEN WAS ABLE TO TALK ABOUT MY DIFFERENT VIEWS AND ONE OF MY DIFFERENT VIEWS AND ONE OF THE PRACTICAL THINGS WHERE I’M THE PRACTICAL THINGS WHERE I’M REALLY DIFFERENT HERE IN NEW REALLY DIFFERENT HERE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE IS JUST MY PLAN FOR HAMPSHIRE IS JUST MY PLAN FOR EDUCATION. EDUCATION. A BIG DEAL IN THIS STATE, WHICH A BIG DEAL IN THIS STATE, WHICH IS TO REALLY CONNECT WHAT’S IS TO REALLY CONNECT WHAT’S GOING ON WITH OUR ECONOMY WITH GOING ON WITH OUR ECONOMY WITH WHAT’S HAPPENING IN OUR WHAT’S HAPPENING IN OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM. EDUCATION SYSTEM. WE’RE GOING TO HAVE OVER 1 WE’RE GOING TO HAVE OVER 1 MILLION OPENINGS FOR HOME HEALTH MILLION OPENINGS FOR HOME HEALTH CARE WORKERS AND 100,000 FOR CARE WORKERS AND 100,000 FOR NURSING ASSISTANTS. NURSING ASSISTANTS. OVER 70,000 OPENINGS FOR OVER 70,000 OPENINGS FOR ELECTRICIANS. ELECTRICIANS. NOT A SHORTAGE OF SPORTS NOT A SHORTAGE OF SPORTS MARKETING DEGREES. MARKETING DEGREES. SOMEONE HAS ONE OUT THERE. SOMEONE HAS ONE OUT THERE. WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A SHORTAGE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A SHORTAGE OF PLUMBERS. OF PLUMBERS. IT’S LOOKING AT FUNDING K-12. IT’S LOOKING AT FUNDING K-12. FOCUSING ON THE ONE AND TWO-YEAR FOCUSING ON THE ONE AND TWO-YEAR DEGREES AND IT’S BETTER FOR OUR DEGREES AND IT’S BETTER FOR OUR ECONOMY AND DOUBLING PROGRAMS. ECONOMY AND DOUBLING PROGRAMS.>>SPORTS MARKETING DEGREES?>>SPORTS MARKETING DEGREES?>>WHAT?>>WHAT? IS THAT WHAT YOU HAVE? IS THAT WHAT YOU HAVE?>>I WISH!>>I WISH! I WAS — I WAS BORN TOO EARLY, I WAS — I WAS BORN TOO EARLY, APPARENTLY. APPARENTLY. MY GOD. MY GOD.>>WILLIE HAS ONE.>>WILLIE HAS ONE.>>I KNOW.>>I KNOW. I WISH I DID. I WISH I DID. WISH I DID. WISH I DID. WORK FOR THE NEW YORK YANKEES, WORK FOR THE NEW YORK YANKEES, FRONT OFFICE. FRONT OFFICE. [ APPLAUSE ] [ APPLAUSE ]>>AH, THAT WAS — OH!>>AH, THAT WAS — OH! LOOK AT THAT. LOOK AT THAT.>>BOO!>>BOO!>>I KNEW THAT WOULD GO OVER>>I KNEW THAT WOULD GO OVER WELL IN THIS ROOM. WELL IN THIS ROOM. I’M NOT POLLING WELL IN NEW I’M NOT POLLING WELL IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. HAMPSHIRE.>>AND A POLITICIAN, THE DAY>>AND A POLITICIAN, THE DAY BEFORE THE NEW HAMPSHIRE BEFORE THE NEW HAMPSHIRE PRIMARY. PRIMARY. YOU DON’T DO THAT. YOU DON’T DO THAT.>>AND TALKED A LOT ABOUT YOUR>>AND TALKED A LOT ABOUT YOUR CONTRAST WITH BERNIE SANDERS. CONTRAST WITH BERNIE SANDERS.>>YES.>>YES.>>UP IN A LATEST POLL IN THIRD>>UP IN A LATEST POLL IN THIRD PLACE NOW NIPPING AT HEELS SOON PLACE NOW NIPPING AT HEELS SOON OF MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG. OF MAYOR PETE BUTTIGIEG. HOW DO YOU CONTRAST YOURSELF HOW DO YOU CONTRAST YOURSELF WITH MAYOR BUTTIGIEG? WITH MAYOR BUTTIGIEG? IN OTHER WORDS, IN A SIMILAR IN OTHER WORDS, IN A SIMILAR LANE NOT FOR MED CUELLARICARE FO LANE NOT FOR MED CUELLARICARE FO AN OPTION, WON’T TAKE AWAY YOUR AN OPTION, WON’T TAKE AWAY YOUR PRIVATE INSURANCE. PRIVATE INSURANCE. WHAT’S THE DISHESFFERENCE BETWEE WHAT’S THE DISHESFFERENCE BETWEE YOU AND PETE BUTTIGIEG ON YOU AND PETE BUTTIGIEG ON POLICY? POLICY?>>MY AGE, 59, THE NEW AGE,>>MY AGE, 59, THE NEW AGE, THERE YOU GO. THERE YOU GO.>>AND I’M 32.>>AND I’M 32.>>IN THIS FIELD, THIS IS NEW.>>IN THIS FIELD, THIS IS NEW. SECOND THING, ACTUALLY GOTTEN SECOND THING, ACTUALLY GOTTEN THINGS DONE THROUGH THE GRIDLOCK THINGS DONE THROUGH THE GRIDLOCK OF WASHINGTON. OF WASHINGTON. PASSED OVER 100 BILLS AS A LEAD PASSED OVER 100 BILLS AS A LEAD DEMOCRAT. DEMOCRAT. YOU LOOK AT AN OPPONENT FOR YOU LOOK AT AN OPPONENT FOR DONALD TRUMP I’D SAY THAT IS A DONALD TRUMP I’D SAY THAT IS A NICE MATCHUP, BECAUSE HE TALKS NICE MATCHUP, BECAUSE HE TALKS AND BLUSTERS A LOT, BUT HASN’T AND BLUSTERS A LOT, BUT HASN’T HELPED PEOPLE WITH THINGS LIKE HELPED PEOPLE WITH THINGS LIKE RISING PHARMACEUTICAL PRICES OR RISING PHARMACEUTICAL PRICES OR RAIL TO MANCHESTER, LITERALLY RAIL TO MANCHESTER, LITERALLY RIGHT NOW YOU CAN GET BETTER RIGHT NOW YOU CAN GET BETTER CELL SERVICE IN ICELAND WITH ALL CELL SERVICE IN ICELAND WITH ALL OF ITS VOLCANOES AND THAT YOU OF ITS VOLCANOES AND THAT YOU CAN IN FRANKONIA NOTCH, NEW CAN IN FRANKONIA NOTCH, NEW HAMPSHIRE. HAMPSHIRE. ONE THING THAT UNIFIES US WE ONE THING THAT UNIFIES US WE WANT TO WIN AND WIN BIG AND I’VE WANT TO WIN AND WIN BIG AND I’VE WON IN RURAL AREASISH SUBURBAN WON IN RURAL AREASISH SUBURBAN DISTRICTS EVERY SINGLE TIME DISTRICTS EVERY SINGLE TIME INCLUDING MICHELE BACHMANN’S INCLUDING MICHELE BACHMANN’S DISTRICT, OKAY. DISTRICT, OKAY. THERE YOU GO. THERE YOU GO.>>YOON2,000 VOTES SEPARATED HIL>>YOON2,000 VOTES SEPARATED HIL CLINTON/DONALD TRUMP. CLINTON/DONALD TRUMP. SHE WON THE STATE, BUT BARELY. SHE WON THE STATE, BUT BARELY. THEY WANT A CANDIDATE THAT CAN THEY WANT A CANDIDATE THAT CAN ACTUALLY BRING PEOPLE WITH HER. ACTUALLY BRING PEOPLE WITH HER.>>DO YOU AGREE WITH VICE>>DO YOU AGREE WITH VICE PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT BIDEN’S CONCERN, PUT PRESIDENT BIDEN’S CONCERN, PUT UP AN AD, A MAYOR ISN’T READY TO UP AN AD, A MAYOR ISN’T READY TO BE COMMANDER IN CHIEF? BE COMMANDER IN CHIEF?>>VERY MUCH I RESPECT MAYOR>>VERY MUCH I RESPECT MAYOR PETE’S EXPERIENCE IN THE PETE’S EXPERIENCE IN THE MILITARY AND RESPECT A LOT OF MILITARY AND RESPECT A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE EXPERIENCE IN PEOPLE THAT HAVE EXPERIENCE IN SMALL TOWNS. SMALL TOWNS. I’VE GOT A LOT OF SMALL TOWNS. I’VE GOT A LOT OF SMALL TOWNS. NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS A LOT OF SMALL NEW HAMPSHIRE HAS A LOT OF SMALL TOWNS. TOWNS. I THINK THE ADDED EXPERIENCE. I THINK THE ADDED EXPERIENCE. I WAS IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AS I WAS IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AS WELL FOR EIGHT YEARS. WELL FOR EIGHT YEARS. AND I THINK THE, AS AN ELECTED AND I THINK THE, AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, BUT I THINK THE ADDED OFFICIAL, BUT I THINK THE ADDED EXPERIENCE I HAVE IS 12 YEARS AS EXPERIENCE I HAVE IS 12 YEARS AS A U.S. SENATOR. A U.S. SENATOR. IT IS ACTUALLY PASSING BILLS AND IT IS ACTUALLY PASSING BILLS AND KNOWING HOW TO WORK ACROSS THE KNOWING HOW TO WORK ACROSS THE AISLE. AISLE.>>BUT IS A MAYOR OF A>>BUT IS A MAYOR OF A 100,000-PERSON TOWN READY TO BE 100,000-PERSON TOWN READY TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES? PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES?>>I HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT>>I HAVE ALWAYS SAID THAT EVERYONE ON THAT DEBATE STAGE EVERYONE ON THAT DEBATE STAGE WOULD BE A BETTER PRESIDENT THAN WOULD BE A BETTER PRESIDENT THAN PRESIDENT TRUMP. PRESIDENT TRUMP. [ APPLAUSE ] [ APPLAUSE ] I BELIEVE THAT — ANY ONE — I I BELIEVE THAT — ANY ONE — I THINK THAT — THAT MY EXPERIENCE THINK THAT — THAT MY EXPERIENCE IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT HERE, IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT HERE, AND IT’S ALSO THE EXPERIENCE OF AND IT’S ALSO THE EXPERIENCE OF GETTING THE RESPECT FROM PEOPLE GETTING THE RESPECT FROM PEOPLE ACROSS THE AISLE. ACROSS THE AISLE. LOOK AT THE ENDORSEMENT I’VE LOOK AT THE ENDORSEMENT I’VE GOTTEN IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. GOTTEN IN NEW HAMPSHIRE. EVERY SINGLE NEWSPAPER. EVERY SINGLE NEWSPAPER. UNION LEADER. UNION LEADER. KEEN SENTINEL AND NOT TO MENTION

[NEWS IN-DEPTH] Analysis of Moon’s New Year’s address


president moon jae-in took over the main
headlines of Tuesday with his highly anticipated New Year’s address keywords
stood out in a speech including a peace and evident change the president has
vowed to continue efforts to create momentum to improve inter-korean
relations and speed up stalled North Korea u.s. nuclear talks while assuring
that the government will make evident changes in the nation’s economy specific
ways to achieve those pledges were also laid out today we dissect the
president’s New Year’s message with doctors homes had Yun professor at Cal
King University it’s great to have you with us good to be here
president during his New Year’s address said that much of the efforts were
focused on facilitating the talks between North Korea and the US and 2019
but today he emphasized that while keeping those efforts alive the two
Koreas should try and enhance cooperation at the same time what does
this imply to the president’s long sought peace drive on the Korean
Peninsula right in this address we again reconfirmed against his resolve to push
through the the peace process Korean Peninsula peace process there are three
parts to it we all knew that there is a stop the war mutual security assurance
but the third part is a prosperity through economic projects and all those
and that goes more to the inter-korean relations relationships and I think that
the president moon feels that because we’ve focused too much on the North
Korea and the u.s. relationship and now how he has stalled he feels that there
is a much to be done in the third part of it and also the inter-korean
relationship I think that’s why he has a flurry of new or renewed proposals and
offers to – to North Korea and probably he wants to get that that aspect going
in order to kind of help along what the the u.s. and North Korea is going
in terms of dialogues president moon also laid out specific measures to make
new progress and inter-korean cooperation he mentioned about boosting
cooperation on borderline provinces and called on joint efforts for Co
registering of DMZ as the unesco world heritage which is also linked to
president moons proposal made last year on turning DMZ into a global peace zone
how feasible are his newly suggested measures to boost inter-korean
cooperation ostensibly it is possible to have that project going because those
are not subject to sanctions explicitly and so if the North wants to cooperate
there is a chance to do it I think the the problem is that the North Korea is
not looking to kind of go with those kind of soft projects at this point it
seems like their bellicose messages and and escalating this tension is at this
point would not really jive well with those soft approaches and and the
cultural projects so in that sense I think there there might be a point where
this artificially imposed deadline from the North Korea about the u.s. actions
if that’s up sized or if that doesn’t go anywhere probably they’ll have to find
new ways to get the get the dialogue going
probably that might be one of the options so the biggest remaining
obstacle you would say is North Korea’s hostile attitude toward South Korea
great point I guess fundamentally whether they are on board with the
Korean Peninsula peace process and if they see the merits of that probably a
lot of things can piss facilitate but the evidence is so far has been that
their criticism about the South Korea and the lack of role
kosecki singularly focused on whether the South Korean actions would help that
the talk between the North Korea and the u.s. so they have to kind of expand the
horizons to get the overall packages of the peace process
going and again that requires North Korea kind of getting on board squarely
on the peace process oh three prongs abit another highlight of president ones
address today was his invitation to Kim Jungman to visit South Korea he called
an efforts to create conditions the right conditions to materialize Kim
jong-un’s promised visit to Seoul which is after the second time the president
has made such proposal since September of 2018 how do you gauge the possibility
of Kim jong-un crossing the border to the south in the near future I think
it’s in the same vein whether Kim sees the value of that it’s a continuation of
North South Korea relationship so that there would be a major step in that
direction as any of the summit meetings would would would be so in that sense if
the North sees that by visiting South Korea if that helps South Korea to talk
to the North Korea to you know make the better relationship among the three of
them probably that would be the avenue to go but as I mentioned before North
Korea at this point is focused on escalating tensions and putting pressure
to to the Donald Trump in his bid to re-election and so on and so forth so at
this point it doesn’t really create a environment to where Kim would visit
South Korea and become become a big message to to the United States at this
point so I don’t think he sees the value at this point but things could quickly
change as the new years progress and those artificial deadlines kind of runs
its course probably they’ll come up with new plans
what do you think is President when Jane’s strategy if you will of
re-invited Kim jong-un during his New Year’s address
I think he almost he has to at this point his whole theme of the new
addresses new direction more concrete actions and rather than proposing
entirely new things he wants to kind of progress or make progress on the
previous talks that have happening and the Kim’s visit to South Korea is
certainly the one of them and also DMZ development and also road projects that
north-south they have talked about those are the kind of a low-hanging fruit so
to speak if they want to engage because that the talks have progressed to some
extent before but again you know it comes down to whether the North Korea is
willing to go to that route other specific measures suggested by president
moon today include co-hosting of 2032 Olympic Games Coe entrance of North
Korean and South Korean athletes during this year’s Tokyo Olympics mm-hmm and
also a forming a north-south unified team for certain Olympic events you’ve
mentioned that North Korea wants something bigger but how do you expect
North Korea to react to these proposals right remember the North Korea’s
overture of a peace that started the dialogue with the US started with the
sports events Pyongyang Olympic Games their participation zuv it
so this culture and sports events is always a good option on a soft option to
go to that route again we come to a point to weather weather that is useful
probably not in the relationship between north and United States because they way
their way past that stage but in terms of north-south relationship probably
that will be a major events that they can make some progress between two
countries in many different fronts of cooperation so I think the moon has sees
a very significant value to that and depending on what happens with the North
Korea and the US if that stalls further
probably north would say well we have to go down this route and start up the this
talk peace process or the talk process again so that North Korea can come
around I mean the US could come around but that’s I think of the month or two
away from this point president moon also mentioned about his long-sought goal of
connecting inter-korean roads and railways and China and Russia has
recently requested to the UN for sanctions waiver on those projects as
well how feasible is the plan though depends on the president moons vision in
this area I think that in the road projects especially his diplomatic
abilities or his influence could then net some better fruits than just
focusing on the North Korea and the u.s. because the road projects in this region
at least to China is a significantly invested in it they’re involved in the
Russia is involved so having a good relationship with those who are
benefiting from this project probably there might be some agreements or some
projects to be done and that requires that concrete actions
from moon and that has to be in in difficult maneuvering with the what the
US wants in this region how a steer there will be about the any kind of
economic cooperation that happening in this region not only from South and
North Korea but with the China and Russia now to the economy the moon
administration has injected the largest sum of money in Korea’s history into the
job market which actually led to the highest employment rate Korea has seen
but although the job quality remains debatable right how do you assess our
government’s economic achievements 20:19 well the criticisms are that those
projects are not sustainable because if it’s a fiscal policy or a budget driven
then when the money runs out wouldn’t what happens to those jobs but I would
look at it more there hopefully because any kind of stimulus to the economy it
is a good beginning but then it has to be followed up by the structural changes
in the economy so that those changes that he made would be self-financing
rather than just putting government money into it so on and so forth
so I think that the success of that that they report cart of on those actions
would depend on what he does next I think he talked about the changes this
year I hope that includes a structural reforms in the economy because without
that probably that will kind of fall wayside so a structural reform is a must
to achieve president moons what he called evident to make evident changes
in the new year right especially in the venture sectors there are some
significant legislations that did not pass I think the president mentioned
that so his diplomatic or the the political abilities to bring those
together so that these lawmakers would pass there was a structural reform bill
probably that would go to the credit of his ability to revive the economy in the
new year now prosecutorial reform is another huge
agenda for president moon Jane and as part of the efforts the president and
the cabinet members today approved the bill passed by the Parliament to set up
an agency that will look into corruption by high-ranking government officials
your thoughts on president moon’s core processor real reform I think even
before he he pushed that that prosecutorial reform had a pretty broad
base the support that has to happen because it was a legacy from the
previous kind of regime I’m talking about the 70s and 80s so not just the
immediate Regine so in that sense I think the
devil is in the details I think the people quibble over how to get there
rather than whether we should get there or not so we got about seven months I
guess when that agency comes into a real physical being so I think that a lot of
details has to be worked out especially focusing on how we ensure that the
independence of that agency would make sure that the goal of making a agency
that really serve have a check and balance on any kind of a high level
civil servants corruption issues that is an issue none
III think the direction is there so it’s a matter of making direct making that
happen with a sufficiently competent details
and and the mechanisms to make sure that that happens before you go could you sum
up president ones New Year’s message for us today and what do you think are the
main factors that will propel his goals I think that he faces a lot of
uncertainties not only the u.s. job us-china relationship korea-japan
relationship and and north and the u.s. that influences our economic issues and
diplomatic issues as well peace and economy those were his key words I think
he has a direction right which is that Korea needs to step up to give more
flesh to those directions the Korea’s role has to step up in the the peace
process not just looking at what happens in North Korea in the US and also in the
economy he briefly talked about the structural reforms those are the
tangible actions that has to be really driven by the government in the new year
we cannot just look back and say well this is what’s happening all right many
thanks to you dr. song as always we appreciate the time tonight thank you

Wait Just a Minute: Former Diplomat Cécile Shea


[MUSIC PLAYING] Most Americans don’t consider
immigration a security threat, but some consider it
an economic threat. We need to speak
to those people, to help them feel more
economically secure, and help them to understand
that, actually, immigration is good for the American economy. The single biggest
thing that we can do to improve national security
is ensure that our intelligence networks are up-to-date so that
we know if the wrong people are trying to enter the US. America has always
been a welcoming place. People look up to America
because we have always taken your poor, your tired,
those yearning to be free, turned them into Americans,
and given them freedom. And the more that we
can present ourselves as that kind of a
country, the safer we are, and the more people
want to emulate us. Two things keep me up at night. The first is global
warming and climate change and what it’s going to mean
for our country in the next 15 years. And the second is the
loss of American prestige around the world
and how hard it is going to be to rely on
our friends in the future because they aren’t going
to respect us anymore. [TIMER CHIMES]

Sean Hannity CANCELS Geraldo Rivera


>>Geraldo has disagreed with other personalities
on Fox News when it comes to war with Iran. In fact, there was a video that went viral,
where he is saying it’s a terrible idea to escalate tensions with Iran and Brian Kilmeade
went at it with him. Now, recently he was supposed to make an appearance
on Hannity show, but that appearance was cancelled. And it seems like it was cancelled specifically
because Geraldo was gonna continue making the case that war with Iran is a bad idea. So he starts off with this tweet. Urging Donald Trump to keep his powder dry,
please don’t let this spin out of control. You can always hit them back. Please don’t let this become an escalating,
you hit me, I hit you back harder until we have another full blown, bloody Mid East war
on our hands. What would we win? And so then he ends up responding to someone
who apparently liked his tweet and he says, thanks. I’ll be on with Sean Hannity tonight counseling
restraint and talking about these deeply disturbing developments. And then later he said, Nevermind, Hannity
just canceled me. And I just like to end this whole exchange
with Malcolm Fleschner tweet, cancel culture strikes again.>>I really liked that tweet. So look, before we open this up for discussion,
I just wanna remind you of how passionately Geraldo feels about avoiding war with Iran. This was a segment that Fox had earlier. Take a look.>>Now we have taken this huge military escalation. Now I fear the worst. You’re gonna see the US markets go crazy today. You’re gonna see the price of oil spiking
today. This is a very, very big deal.>>And I don’t know if you heard
>>But this isn’t about his resume of blood and death, it is about what was next. We stopped the next attack, that’s what I
think you’re missing.>>According to the Secretary of State.>>By what credible source,
>>Okay.>>Can you predict what the next Iranian move
would be?>>They’ve been excellent, the US Intelligence
has been excellent since 2003, when we invaded Iraq, disrupted the entire region for no real
reason. Don’t for a minute start cheering this on. What you have done, what we have done, we
have unleashed.>>I will cheer
>>Then you, like Lindsay Graham, have never met a war you didn’t like.>>That is not true, and don’t even say that.>>If President Trump wanted de-escalation-
>>We should just let him kill us for another 15 years.>>If President Trump wanted de-escalation
and to bring our troops home. What this was a reaction to-
>>What about the 700 Americans who are dead? Should they not be happy because of him?>>What about the tens of thousands of Iraqis
who have died since 2003? You have to start seeing things. What the hell are we doing in Baghdad in the
first place? Why are we there? Why aren’t these forces home?>>You’re blaming President Bush for the maniacal
killing of Saddam Hussein?>>I am blaming President Bush in 2003 for
those fake weapons of mass destruction that never existed and the con job that drove us
into that war.>>Listen, you gotta give people credit when
they’re right, and Geraldo was right there. I think that he took a strong position. I also give Geraldo credit for consistently
speaking out against Donald Trump’s disgusting immigration policies on Fox. I’m sure that’s not an easy environment to
share your accurate opinions in. But yeah, so Hannity canceled. Now, who knows? Maybe they canceled him to maybe replace that
segment with something that involves a legal analyst or?>>I don’t know, should we give Hannity the
benefit of the doubt?>>Hannity did not want any of that smoke. He’s like man, I saw what you did to kill
me. And I don’t think any more clearly than he
does. His producers probably said hey, we’re gonna
go ahead and cancel Geraldo because first off, Geraldo’s only mistake was revealing
what he wanted to do that night. When he talked to the person who retweeted
him or liked it and he goes, thanks I’m gonna be on later to make sure I council against
this. They’re like no that’s not the agenda tonight. That’s not what we’re on board for. Of course, yes again we’re speculating. But I mean, if it’s not the case, go and let
us know what the other difference was. I mean, they canceled on me tonight so I can’t
come on and say what I had to say. So I mean, again, what’ll happen is you end
up revealing what your real intentions are and what your real beliefs are. And people on the region are like, well, 700
Americans were lost. You don’t care about the Americans being lost
when it comes to anything else except for pursuing war. And then so, of course, when Geraldo brings
up the tens of thousands of Iraqis dying, there’s no answer to that. Those aren’t real people? Those are casualties of war. Or when we talk about how we wanna make sure
we keep American troops out of harm’s way. They go hey, well American troops they signed
up for it. They knew what they were getting themselves
into. Somehow when it comes to having any kinda
empathy towards people it’s all based on whether or not you’re falling not behind this president
and his line of ridiculousness. Secondly, Geraldo use Trump’s talking point
about we gotta get out of these stupid wars. You can’t follow a guy who continues to contradict
his own agenda and policies throughout his presidency.>>Right, exactly. And look, it’s hilarious to me to hear anyone
on Fox News or even anyone in cable news talk about how egregious it is or how much of an
injustice it is when Americans die. When in our own country they constantly push
for domestic policy that leads to more Americans dying.>>Totally, my god.>>I mean, how many American die every year
because they don’t have adequate health insurance? And they will attack Universal Healthcare,
over and over again. They’ll talk about how we can’t afford it,
can’t pay for it. When it comes to beating that war-drum, by
the way, which is the most expensive policy to support, they’re all for it. They don’t care about American lives. American’s overall, just like troops are nothing
more than pawns, nothing more than props, that these lowly individuals use to make their
arguments when it’s convenient for them. But when push comes to shove, you think they
really care about the lives of Americans? How about all those segments that Fox News
has done on homeless people? Do they care about them? They defame them, they slander them as dead
beats, as druggists, as all sorts of things. They don’t care about human lives. What cares about is appeasing Trump, making
sure that Trump is happy with him. Because you never know, you might lose access
to Trump if you criticize him. And you might not be able to get a job in
Trump’s administration. We all know that Trump likes to pick people
out of Fox News. So it’s just gross. And look, not to get too leftist, I guess,
whatever you wanna call it. But that’s what capitalism is, that’s what
capitalism does. It’s all about profit, it’s all about ensuring
that you have the upper hand and you increase your chances of making more money, right? That’s what happens in our media all the time,
right?>>Making money and being a tough guy, that’s
the other part of it. Even people who don’t have, I guess, the interests
for lining their pockets. It’s, hey, we’re tough guys, we’re America. Hey, we don’t let them F with us like this. Hey, you’re not gonna say that to me. There’s a superiority complex that we have
from the moment that we’re born that says, we have to make sure that we talk about how
much better we are than you no matter what. You can be on the lowest totem pole in America. But you’re like, I’m an American, I’m better
than you. But your life actually has nothing to do with
this American dream that they’ve sold you. That you’re supposed to somehow pursue. And one more thing that they don’t care about
lives for is school shootings, mass shootings, Car Club shootings. We don’t care about that stuff, thoughts and
prayers. What bombs we dropping on people to stop that
from happening? American lives are being lost every day. You don’t care about American lives.>>Again, it’s just something that they cite
when it’s convenient to them to support a policy that’s horrendous, usually. And, in this case, it’s escalated tensions
and war with Iran. So, again, credit where credit is due. I think Geraldo is doing a good job. And I think that he should be proud of the
fact that Hannity canceled his appearance, right? Look, I don’t know what his future is gonna
look like. Obviously, Shep Smith, who had the audacity
to speak the truth every once in a while on Fox News is no longer there. But we know what Fox News is, Geraldo knows
what Fox News is. I don’t agree with Geraldo on many issues. But if you have any integrity and you actually
want to share truthful analysis with an audience, Fox News is not the place to do it. You’re hardly even seen on cable news shows
period, much less on Fox News.

AOC Takes A Shot At Biden


>>Freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
fired a shot at Joe Biden. This was when she was asked about a Biden
presidency to which she responded, God.>>In any other country, Joe Biden and I would
not be in the same party, but in America, we are. Now this was in an interview with New York
Magazine. I wanna give you some more context so first,
let’s take a quick look at the article itself. One Year in Washington, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
reshaped her party’s agenda, resuscitated Bernie Sanders’s campaign and hardly has a
friend in town. But let me just be clear about something. She might not have many friends in the Washington
establishment, but she has a lot of constituents and voters who are rooting for her and we’re
certainly among them. Now here’s how that line came up in the article. She said the Congressional Progressive Caucus
should start kicking people out if they stray too far from the party line. Other caucuses within the Democratic Party
in Congress require applications, Ocasio-Cortez pointed out. But they let anybody who the cat dragged in
call themselves a progressive. There’s no standard, she said. And I totally agree with her on that. I mean, we had Democratic presidential candidates
claiming that they were progressives while they were supporting fascist regimes in India. I mean, that’s not progressivism, like it’s
just->>Well, it’s easy to label yourself something,
yes.>>Yeah, exactly.>>And it’s easy to also imply that you support
the same, like if I were to ask you who among the Democratic primary contenders supports
the Green New Deal? Well, technically all of them, I guess, do
you think it means the same thing for all of them?>>Of course not.>>100% not, which is why we need to dig deeper.>>So she says the same goes for the party
as a whole. She was quoted as saying Democrats can be
too big of a tent. And we certainly know that. I know that this year in particular, when
I say this year I mean over the last six months, has been difficult in labeling myself a Democrat. Because there are members in Democratic leadership
who have enabled Donald Trump to an extent that I’m beyond uncomfortable with. And so identifying as part of the same party
has been incredibly difficult, but the way that the primaries are set up if you’re not
a registered Democrat in certain states, you cannot vote in the Democratic primary. And it’s gross that we have a system that
set up that way.>>Yeah, I hate that the party allows in people
who are so like at least ideologically violent to what it needs to accomplish for its constituents. But I feel like I identify with the Democratic
Party for the same reason AOC says that she has. We’re the actual Democrats, we embody the
spirit of the Democratic party going back way longer than the relatively recent neo-liberal
pro-corporatist thing that’s been, you know it’s been around for three or four decades,
but a big part of the Democratic Party and Democratic leadership. But farther back there, like, the part of
party that was able to get so many reforms for working Americans, that’s what the Democratic
Party needs to be. And just because some of these people are
running for office for the first time, and the party’s currently filled with these ghouls,
doesn’t mean that we don’t have the right to take it back.>>Yeah, you’re right. And we need to fight aggressively for that. Now people were not happy with what Representative
Ocasio-Cortez had to say about Joe Biden, and her views on the Democratic Party having
too much, casting a giant tent when it comes to ideology. And so since people gave her crap about it,
she defended her analysis. And she said, quote, yeah, I don’t know why
people are up in arms about this. Many other countries have multiparty democracies,
where several parties come together in a coalition to govern. In another country, I’d be in a Labor Party. Our primary field would cover two to three
parties and she’s absolutely right about that. Look, people have this visceral reaction to
Ocasio-Cortez because she has this incredible ability to call out the Democratic Party for
its devastating flaws and be effective in doing it. And so I think that that’s a great defense
of the point that she was trying to make. But she should also know that there are people
who are intentionally being obtuse. Like there are people who are intentionally
pretending like they’re dumb and they don’t understand what she’s saying, she didn’t say
anything controversial there.>>Yeah, it’s just true, learn about other
countries, I don’t know what to tell you. But that she has that ability to call out
the Democratic Party and specifically Democratic leadership, while also showing how it should
be done. She’s not just a critic. She is driving the conversation. She is organizing people and getting people
involved in this. That’s why you’re gonna see so many candidates
that were, some inspired by Bernie Sanders, others inspired by AOC. She’s in there as a critic, but she’s also
showing the way it should be.>>Absolutely.

Trumpist Nationalism is Silly & Won’t Solve Problems


We are going back to the phones at (617) 830-4750 let’s check in with Jeremy in Wisconsin. Jeremy
in Wisconsin on the six Oh eight number. Jeremy, what’s going on? Hey David, how are you doing? Good, how are you? Well, good, good. So my question, um, sort
of relates to, I guess the ever increasing role of international bodies and governance.
So seeing, I guess the example I’m thinking about is the Amazon rainforest. How that obviously
if it’s being destruct or it’s being destroyed, it has international consequences that affect
every nation. So I was wondering if you think with things like that going on and kind of
globalization increasing general, do you think international bodies will be more strong in
the future? And do you think they should go in that route? Well, I’ve said before that the um, the, the
idea that most of our major issues can be solved within country borders is increasingly
an idea of the past. I mean, listen, the U S can solve campaign finance internally. Sure.
But the U S is not going to be able to deal with automation and outsourcing independently.
We’re not going to be able to deal with climate change independently. We’re not gonna be able
to deal with pollution independently. Space travel is something that is going to exceed
country lines. It’s space exploration. So the hyper nationalist mentality that other
peoples problems are only theirs and not ours. And all of our problems are merely hours to
to solve. And we don’t need anybody else. It is such an antiquated and, and, and, and
uh, at this point, frankly bogus assertion that, um, we are going to need to solve these
issues together. That’s why that’s another reason, aside from sometimes the xenophobic
overtones of the hyper nationalists, it also just doesn’t work. That’s fair. Yeah. So I was wondering, I guess
you see the, I guess the results of the European model, how there’s been a little bit of pushback
to that with the rise of I guess nationalist rhetoric and parts of the world. Do you think
America is going to go down the European model and you’re going to see more, I guess global
connections in terms of um, making policy? Um, if we, if we elect the right people? Sure.
I mean, the current president is someone who has resisted that and is more of a go it go
it alone sort of guy. And the effect that it’s having is that increasingly the United
States doesn’t have a seat at the adult table on more and more issues when it comes to a
global trade. Trump is just putting tariffs on people and increasingly the, the, the sort
of outcast when it comes to climate change, he’s not even invited to a lot of important
summits and discussions. So I hope that that happens, but it’s going to depend on who we
elect. Awesome. All right. Thank you David. Appreciate
you answering my question. Alright, Jeremy, great to hear from you

How do we obey the moral law without being moralistic? – Sinclair Ferguson


We obey the moral law first of all by understanding
what it’s for, and there are various ways of putting this. I happen lifelong to be interested in the
game of golf. Golf is played according to rules. I have never met a golfer who has said to
me “if I move my golf ball nearer the hole,” never said “that’s fine” because the game
ceases to work when you don’t play the game according to the rules. And one of the most important things for us
to understand is that, take the Ten Commandments for example, the moral law. The moral law given in Exodus chapter 20,
is a written form and set in a negative cast for sinners of the basic way in which Adam
and Eve functioned as human beings. And of course, it’s written now for sinners,
and so it has a lot of negatives. But what the law is telling us¬—this is
the master plan for your life. You only function as the image of God as you
give expression to these principles in your life. As we do that, trusting in the Lord, there
really is, there’s no real danger that we will become legalistic. I think it’s true that people, many people
say just obedience to the law is legalistic because actually what they are irritated by
is the notion that anybody would tell them what to do. But if you are Christian, Jesus tells you
what to do. He says if you love me, keep my commandments. So, faith in Christ produces love for Christ. Love for Christ produces a desire to be like
Christ. Christ fulfilled the law, and so being like
Christ fulfills the law. There are two other elements. One is that’s the way we please our heavenly
Father, and the other is that both the Old Testament prophecy of the new covenant and
the letter to the Hebrews twice citing the words says that when you are born again what
is written into your heart is the law. So, in a way it’s kind of surprising that
so many Christians who believe in the Holy Spirit are apparently not well enough instructed
to know what it is that the Holy Spirit comes to do—that is to work into our hearts an
affection for an obedience to the law of God because of our love for and trust in the Lord
Jesus Christ. So long as we keep our loving heavenly Father
in view, as long as we keep our savior in view, as long as we keep the Holy Spirit in
view, we will be saved from any danger of falling into legalism no matter how much we
may be accused of doing that because we think it’s important to be obedient to the law. Usually that kind of accusation comes from
people who are irritated about the notion that anybody would tell you what to do, and
there’s a bundle of commands in the New Testament. I think the answer is fairly straightforward. The challenge is growing in grace so that
that becomes a reality in our lives.