The only basis for even talking about global warming is the predictions spewed out by computer models. The only quote/unquote "evidence" of global warming is what models are predicting the climate and the weather will be in the next 50 to 100 years. Now, what those models spit out is only as good as the data that's put in, and it's an absolute joke. In terms of science, it's a total joke. There is no warming, global or otherwise!
They're not predicting global warming based on what's happened in the past; they're basing it on what their computer predictions say, and nothing more.
One of the reasons I think Barack Obama had the policy he did was purposely to create this flood of refugees from Syria. He wanted them!
I met with President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago in February. So he'd been in office about a month. It was for an hour. Went over there on a Saturday. They invite... Reince Priebus called and said, "The president wants to see you." He never once asked me what I thought. He never asked me once what he thought I ought to do. He never asked me what I think of this or that. My impression is this man is more self-informed and decisive.
Donald Trump is as decisive as anybody I've ever met. I just don't see him running around asking various people in his inner circle, "What do you think I ought to do here?" I think he knows what he wants to do, and he seeks support for it or talks to people that oppose him and he may listen to them. But I don't think he's indecisive at all.
I'm not an intimate of Donald Trump, but I have great instincts about people, and I have fairly good skill at sizing people up, and it's not phony. You can tell when somebody's talking to you and not really hearing you. I've been around powerful people ask me what I think about things, and I can tell they're not really listening. They just asked, to ask, try to score points that way. Trump listens. But you don't get the impression that he's listening from a position of indecisiveness, indecision or confusion. I've never met anybody with the energy this guy's got, either.
Stick with the global warming for just a second, because you're fully aware that I call it a hoax, and that might be off-putting to some. The simplest way to explain to people who want to believe it's true - and you know who they are. Those are people looking for ways to make themselves matter. They run around and they hear that they're to blame for the world getting warm, or that the country is, our prosperity, our high standard of living and the fact that we've stolen all these resources from around the world, that we're using more oil than we have any right to.
Everybody wants to matter. And that's the sales pitch. So all you have to do is go out and, you know, buy some new kind of newfangled hybrid car or agree to raise taxes or, if you go to the store, buy everything and anything with a green label on it and you are saving the planet.
I'm not saying attacks doesn't bother Donald Trump. I'm not saying that he's immune to it. I'm not saying that he doesn't feel it, but I don't think he's the kind of guy that's gonna cave to it, and I don't think he's gonna sue for peace. I think just the opposite.
I think Donald Trump is gonna continue to unravel as much of the Barack Obama agenda as he can, and I think he's gonna continue to wipe the floor with Democrats wherever he can.
Democrats losing elections. Donald Trump did win this. It's not illegitimate. And when the day comes that they realize and sober up that he's not going to be hounded out of office, that he's not gonna wake up one day and say to Mike Pence, "Here. Take the keys. I've had it." Then what are they gonna do? Because they're shooting every barrel they've got now. And they will probably continue. The think least we can make people hate him.
I don't think that Donald Trump's gonna look at his approval numbers and say, "Wow, the American people don't want what I want to do. I better change." I don't think he's gonna change his agenda. To have put up with all of this to date already says a mouthful. It already explains a lot to have put up with this, to have not lost his cool. And, by the way, on all of these tweets and all these allegations, all these predications, he ends up being right.
I know perception is reality in politics and I know how it looks, but the reality is Democrats lost the election and what they thought it was gonna be, a landslide with the best candidate they could have ever nominated, Hillary Clinton, look at the rejection. The rejection is real. They're creating a Fantasy Island world in which none of this happened. And that's where they're choosing to live. That's not healthy, folks.
The net neutrality game is to make everybody the same so that there's no difference and the prices are the same and if these Millennials got their way nothing would cost anything. But it's classic. This is a great illustration. Net neutrality is being stood upside down which is good because it's pro-competition, it offers customers options.
Net neutrality is a big deal to the left because it puts the government in charge of the internet. It puts the government in charge of content. It lets the government choose what you can watch and what you can't watch and what you pay for it. And that's bogus. In the name of competition, they want to take competition away from the net. They're leftists. They lie to you about what they want to do.
When I was growing up, I never expected to be able to afford everything I wanted. There are certain things I couldn't afford. I didn't run around blasting those companies or those things. I just decided I was gonna have to, if I really wanted it, find a way to pay for it. But that doesn't seem to be the attitude today. The attitude today is if you want it, you should have it. And if you can't afford it, it's not your fault. It's the provider's fault because they're corporations and they rip you off and they kill you.
The cord-cutting generation hates cable TV 'cause they think they're corporations and they rip people off and they make you buy a bunch of channels you never watch in order to get the channels that you do watch. They've always said, "We want to be a la cart. We want to be able to cord-cut. We want to be able to watch what we want." So it's now evolving where if they only want to watch HBO they can but they have to pay for it. If they only want to watch Cinemax, they can, but have to pay for it.
Look at the way liberals name things. "Net neutrality." It's like Switzerland! They don't take sides, everybody's fair, everything's the same. It's not what it is. Net neutrality rules are anti-consumer and anti-competitive. By definition, liberals don't believe in competition, and you know that. Competition is the root of all evil, as far as leftists are concerned, 'cause there are winners and there are losers, and the losers are sad and disappointed, and that's unacceptable. So everything must be the same. Nobody can have more than anybody else.
As far as leftists are concerned, nobody should have to pay more than anybody else. Nobody should make more than anybody else. Everything is supposed to be the same. It's the only way it's fair. It's the only way feelings don't get hurt. So when circumstances like that exist, they call that anti-competitive. Anti-competitive means they can't afford it.
Net neutrality is rooted in a number of leftist assumptions, and that is that all corporation is evil, that all profit is evil, and that all people in corporations are not people, because corporations aren't people. A gigantic rip-off. Then you couple their own economic circumstances into this and the way they've been raised, thinking if they want it, they should have it, then you get this so-called informed media and opinion about all this stuff.
I know it's different today than when I was growing up, and that's fine. But I have never been somebody, even when I was earning $19,000 a year, I never ran around whining and moaning about what things cost. What they cost was what they cost. And if I couldn't afford it, then I had to find a way to afford it or forget about it for now. It's just the way it was.
You know, I'm the mayor of Realville. I'm Mr. Literal. And I never saw the benefit of complaining and whining and moaning. I don't complain and whine and moan anyway, and I don't deal well with people that do. I don't know how to react to complaining, other than say, "Oh, gee, I'm sorry." I don't know how to react to whining and moaning. It kind of bothers me. So I don't do it myself. Lord knows, I got all kinds of things. I could spend the rest of this week whining and moaning if you wanted me to about things. I just don't.
If you start with the presumptions that liberals do, that corporations are evil and it all descends from that and that government is great and that government's there to make sure corporations play fair and are not mean and do not rip people off, there's a little bit of truth in everything. Some corporations are bad, some corporations have done bad things, but as a general rule, it's dangerous to subscribe to things like that.
Come on, let's face it. Jeans are like a Volvo or a Saab, or Prius, it's a liberal status symbol. Jeans are liberal status symbols. I know everybody wears 'em now. It's another battle we've lost. We run around looking like a bunch of hippies, and I'm not going to do it.
You know, I'm a broadcaster, folks. Broadcaster first, second, third, fourth, fifth, first and last I'm a broadcaster. Whatever else I am comes the in the middle. So I watch broadcasting as a business enterprise inasmuch as I watch it for content and so forth.
