4.22.2025 -- NLS -- Mahmood v. Taylor, Parental Rights, and McLean’s Misstep

On this episode with Neal and Julie...

They dive deep into the Supreme Court case Mahmood v. Taylor, which centers on a Maryland school district's refusal to allow parents to opt their children out of reading LGBTQ+ themed books. Neal argues that this isn't a case of banning books, but rather about preserving a parent’s religious right to abstain from particular content. He and Julie discuss how this case highlights broader issues of religious freedom, educational policy, and the left's perceived push toward ideological conformity in schools.

Neal proposes the idea of starting a podcast that shares stories like Rush Limbaugh’s children's books and the Bible, aimed at reaching kids whose values may not align with their parents. He suggests that if the left is pushing ideas on children, conservatives can counter with their own narratives.

The conversation also touches on political fallout surrounding Boise Mayor Lauren McLean's decision to fly a pride flag at city hall, and the legislature’s potential response, including enabling citizens to sue over such political displays. Neal and Julie analyze how McLean’s actions may backfire politically.

Throughout the episode, they emphasize parental rights, question cultural norms being promoted in public education, and explore the tension between inclusivity and freedom of belief. They also share lighter moments, joke about Idaho windstorms, and toss around podcast and contest ideas for future episodes.

Let’s talk advertising. When you want to advertise on the radio, you call the station, right? But what about Facebook, Instagram, Hulu, Disney+, Peacock, and other streaming platforms?

You could try clicking around, reading books, or taking online courses to figure it out—or you can let us handle it. At Sandhill Media Group, we’re your local experts in both radio and digital marketing.

Visit SandhillMediaGroup.com today.

Sandhill Media Group
The Sandhill Media Group LLC consists of 7 radio stations in East Idaho

Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.

Transcript

It's 807 on Newstalk 1079. Welcome to stay. If you'd like to reach us via text (208) 542-1079. Doug Schoen. I remember before Bill Clinton was elected, Democrats had gone too far left. But there was a movement, the New Democrats, who wanted to bring the party back to the center, which we did with Bill Clinton. Balance the budget, reduce the debt and deficit.

Cut welfare. Tough on crime. This Democratic Party, Laura, is going further left becoming abusive. And I think, frankly, to be blunt, irrelevant or worse. And that is tragic for my party and tragic, I'd say, for our two party system. It is devastating for the Democrats, but they just keep marching forward and that's okay. Like lemmings falling off the cliff.

And that's what's happening to the to the Democrats. So we and there are multiple examples of this. Elizabeth Warren did a, it did an interview. I don't know who this is. It looks like some podcast. And, you know, this is how that went. Do you regret saying that President Biden had a mental acuity? He had a sharpness to him.

You said that up until July of last year. I said what I believe to be true. And he. You think he was as sharp as you? I said I had not seen decline, and I had at that point, you did not see any decline from 2020 for Joe Biden in the 2021 Joe Biden. Not what I said, that you don't think the seniors he look, he was sharp.

He was on his feet. I saw him live event. I had meetings with him a couple of times. Senator on his feet is not praise. He can speak in sentences is not praise. Fair enough. Fair enough. Look, it is. The question is, what are we going to do now? Okay. No, it is not. That's not your question. To either ask or answer.

I mean, maybe as a Democrat, but I will tell you what you have to do is stop trying to avoid the reality and the obvious and the injury that you inflicted on America over the prior four years. That's what you have to do now if you want any. And I think it's a Hail Mary pass, to be honest with you, I really think the Democrat Party is in way bigger trouble then they're acknowledging, and that many people understand they're doubling to look at what they're doing right now.

What? Watch. Like I if you if you said okay, let's sit down. It's a it's an ad hoc Republican strategy meeting. How can we ruin the Democrat Party? Well, let's bait them into being sympathetic toward toward ms13. Let's do that. And then in addition to that, let's get them to cheer on boys playing against girls on the basketball court and every other court and field and track.

Let's and and you could go through and list all of the things that they are doing right now. And Republicans could not have picked a better strategy to destroy the Democrat Party than what the Democrats are choosing for themselves right now. Today, in fact, right now, the Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in Mahmood versus Taylor. And you might ask, well, what's mock mood versus Taylor?

Well, it's a case that revolves around a coalition of parents who believe they have a religious right to keep their kids from reading books that discuss LGBTQ plus themes. Not. Oh, and by the way, this is News Nation, which I feel has done a fairly decent job. This is garbage verbiage. There's a new term garbage verbiage. Parents who believe they have a religious right to keep their kids from reading books that discuss LGBTQ plus themes.

Can you believe that a journalistic enterprise is is writing those words in America today? Well, this is a case that surrounds parents who believe they have a right to determine what books their kids do and don't read. Okay, it's absurd. More lemmings off the cliff! Run faster, lemmings! You're flying off the cliff in a in a at a pretty fast pace.

The parents are not asking for the books to be removed from the schools like they're not. They're not wanting a ban. The humble ask is that you can't make my kid read these books. We're going to opt out. And I might be understating this. I would not be humble about this. I would be all hail. No about this.

No, no. School has the right to force your kid to read. You know, I remember back, and I know 80s, 90s and maybe early 2000s. And a lot of times this came from conspiracy corners where they said our schools are just indoctrination centers. Okay. All right. You might be overstating things just a little bit. Well, whether it was true back then or not might be debatable, but it is overwhelmingly and abundantly true now that that's what schools have turned into.

It's a place to go where your children are forced. Maybe not in Idaho ubiquitously, but in Maryland, major American state. And I'm betting there are other states that are right there with them that they believe they have a right to force kids to read certain books that would be called indoctrination. No way around it. The books include love Violet, which tells the story of a same sex crush between students.

Another book is Uncle Bobby's Wedding, which illustrates a gay wedding. And then there's another one Born ready. It tells the story of a transgender boy. Let me stop there for just a moment. Do I believe these books? I absolutely would defend the right of the authors and the illustrators and the publishers. I. I would go to great sacrifice to defend their right to publish these books in America.

No doubt about it. We we have to be willing to defend the freedom of expression. But do you remember? And I'm going to I'm going to throw a curveball at you here. Remember the fight over prop one and you had Judge Windmill years ago, like almost 15 years ago. He ruled that the right of association inherently includes the right to not associate.

So your First Amendment right, that gives you the opportunity to express whatever you feel. I mean, as long as you're not, you know, there are certain very limited exclusions to that. But for the most part, be who you want to be, express what you want to express. You also have the right to refrain from other people's expressions. You're never forced to absorb and ingest other people's First Amendment offerings.

But you have a school district in Maryland that feels like you don't have the right to refrain, the right to abstain, the right to opt out. I will tell you, we as conservatives are, we've been on the defensive for so long, we're starting to get used to being on offense. Our foot is getting used to the accelerator and I am loving it.

I we saw that in the legislative session this last year where we decided we weren't just going to protect what we had left, but rather we were going to proactively add to what we have. That is the attitude that we have got to maintain or or else we'll lose it all. We'll end up losing because every year it seemed like the left was cracking into more and more and more, and part of them cracking into it is a migration that I want to spend just a couple of minutes talking about, and we see this with a lot of things.

They've grown. They they have migrated from. We humbly request inclusion to. We now demand that you read this not to to go from availability to forced consumption in a matter of, what, 20, 30 years? This is how the left operate. This is how they will always operate. This is how they do this. They open the door with I come here hat in hand, please include me.

I that's all we're asking. We just want to be included. Okay. That's great. I love inclusion, I'm all for it. The problem is it morphs over time. And not only it starts out as, humble request for inclusion, which is totally good. I'm on board with that. But you give it enough time and it is a militant demand for acceptance and consumption of what they're putting forward.

And as conservatives, it's not just our rights or our prerogative. I would say it's our duty to push back, print what you want, publish what you want. Nobody should ever be forced to ingest that. And so I'm hopeful we'll see how the Supreme Court, does on this. By the way, this is Montgomery County Public School District, and it was the books were originally added in 2022 for students in pre-K through fifth grade.

Previously, parents could choose to opt out when the books were used as compelled instruction in class, but that option was eliminated last year when a federal appeals court ruled that kids could not step out of reading programs over LGBTQ plus content. As a result, a coalition of parent notice see, this is what's weird. This is what is really weird.

They view non consumption as discrimination. Discrimination used to be that you proactively didn't let people have a job, or you proactively would not rent to someone because they're gay, or they're black, or they're Mormon or they're whatever. You had to proactively prohibit them from doing something. Imagine the sense of entitlement that must exist, that you view it as discrimination.

If a court will not force your viewpoint onto the children of America. It's absurd, really, that if if I say no thanks, then that is a I a basis for discrimination. If I simply want to refrain from what you're offering the there's no injury there. Now, maybe your feelings are hurt, but there's no material injury. There's no economic injury.

There's no reputational harm, nothing. I just don't want to read a book about a gay crush. I don't want to read a book about a gay wedding that doesn't make anybody anti-gay. It's just not what they want. And there are good reasons why parents, don't want their kids to read that. Those are grown up themes, and it certainly is a discussion for later in life for a lot of parents.

This is one, the school board's Scotus brief reads this way. The storybooks themselves do not instruct about gender or sexuality. They are not textbooks. They merely introduce students to characters who are LGBTQ or have LGBTQ family members. And those characters experiences in points of view. Okay, that may be fine. That still not a basis for you to force the kids to read it?

That's still not a basis for you to short circuit the wishes of parents. Schools have already pulled at least two books, but the district continues to argue these stories are meant to promote acceptance and teach diverse cultures to children, not to violate any constitutional rights or okay, then stop violating their constitutional rights, which is I can refrain. And the reasons for my choice to abstain is none of your business, period.

No commas, nothing. It's just simply none of your business. You you don't have a right to understand my motivation. Why I don't want to read this book you're putting in front of me. See, this is the boundaries we have to recreate. And I think we're doing a pretty good job. I'm. I'm hopeful. I mean, I'm I'm usually not that great at reading what the Supreme Court's going to do, however, on this one.

And we probably won't know until June, I can see this one being an eight one or A72. I, I hope, I hope, I mean in our favor too. By the way, it's 823 on Newstalk 179. If you'd like to reach us on the Stones Automotive Group calling text line (208) 542-1079.

828 on Newstalk 179, there's Stones Automotive Group call and text line is (208) 542-1079 Neil Larson Julie Mason joining me in studio. Julie, I think I'm going to start a podcast. Tell me what you think. Throwing an idea by you here. Okay. I want to start a podcast that is secretly for the children of liberals. And we are going to read Rush Limbaugh's kids books and the podcast.

We're going to read the Bible, and, other other scriptures, and I, I'm not quite sure how I'm going to market this at this point, but I think that I can try to privately reach digitally, maybe through some clever online marketing, to reach the children of Democrats and liberals and tell them, do not tell your parents about this podcast.

There has to be a level of coercion there. How are you going to do that? Like you got to force it on them somehow. Well, I'm I don't have access to the schools. Okay. So I can't really do that. They I had some liberals do go to church, but I I'll figure that out. I'll figure. And you know what?

Even if there's no corruption, I mean, I think the, the attractiveness of the ideas themselves could be coercive enough that it makes so much more sense than my bozo parents are making that I'm going to to follow that. So the the attractiveness of the ideas themselves may be the coercion. It's the underground. It's like the Underground Railroad. But with podcast, you may have just named the podcast okay, the Underground Railroad.

Yes. Okay. And, make it a, make it a safe place. If if you're the child of liberals and you instinctively know your parents are whack jobs, this is going to be the safe place for you to come and listen to reason, commonsense and rationality. Okay. Do it. They need to. They need this in their lives. But, here's the here's the problem is that that feels so yucky to say that out loud, right?

Because parents should have the final choice and and but they don't believe that. No, the left is good with scheming. So if if they think they can come after our kids with their trash ideas, then their children are fair game. Right. I mean that's their rules. It is their rules. Let's live there according to their rules and, and maybe save their children from them.

And from their bad ideas. Yeah. Go for it. You have my support. I think it would be great. Like yeah. I don't know that I'll do it. You could do a YouTube channel. Yeah you could. Kids like to be read to. Yeah. You could do it that way. That's that's true. I could be the Miss Rachel, but I'd be Mr. Rachel.

And, we would teach, like, really cool stuff about the Constitution and about freedom and about, being an individual. Put it to really catchy tunes. Yes. And we could write little parodies about how climate change is largely a massive hoax and fraud. You could you could protect you could say, you know, how we pretend to be pop stars or we make believe doing this, or we make believe doing that?

Well, climate change is make believe. That's a great idea. Yeah, because hoax is not like a, five year old word. Yeah, but make believe. See? Yes. I'll help you. Okay. You'll be making the show. Okay. That's good. We're it's, climate make believe. Yeah. All right. Yeah, well, there's also gender make believe. There's lots of make believe going on.

Oh, for sure. Everywhere. Racial make believe. Yeah. You take a problem that is not as nearly as relevant as it used to be. Relevant is probably not the right word. As prominent. That's word as it used to be. But you make it seem like it's happening everywhere. Yeah, in sirup, in. Yeah, yeah, in, songs, in TV shows, it's happening whether you look at it.

That's true. That's not actually happening. Coffee is not racist. Yeah, but if you ask them, the make believe police say it is. Yeah. That's true, that's true. Somebody is throwing an insult at me in the text. I'm not sure what that was about. That's all right. Someone said, remember when the Christian Coalition was active in helping elect conservative candidates on school boards and such?

The leftists like to say that the conservatives aren't telling you who they are and what thereafter. Why? That is the approach they use. And the first thing that comes to mind. Yeah. Oh, so there is no that we're very open about the fact that we're conservative and Christian and we like, we don't try to hide it. I think the left tries to hide who they are.

Yeah. That was the mockery of what you were saying. Yes. Is that if you did it like the left. Yeah. You would, you would scream into it behind their back and get to the kids. Yes. Right. That that's true. But I'm only doing it because they're okay with it. That's the game plan they use. It's their rule.

So let's use their rules. Yeah. Yeah. Right. Well that would be like playing a a basketball game where you can't play one on one defense. Right. Yeah. You the one team can can play that defense. The other team can't. Yeah. That's not fair rules. You can play with if if they have the ability to play something, you have the ability to play something.

Yeah. Yeah. That's that's true. Yeah. Right. Which is an effective argument tool that even if you don't personally believe something, you can hold somebody accountable to their own rules. So, someone texted this in July, quote the kids shouldn't be forced to read something they don't want to read is not your best argument. I was forced to read Seawolf by Jack London.

I hate that book and nobody cared. Okay, this is about parents. And if parents wanted to opt you out of reading Seawolf by Jack London, I would defend their right to do that. Not because the kids didn't want to read it. Okay, parents are the decision makers here. And, so I this isn't about kids not wanting kids show up and they're like, oh yeah, tell me a story.

I want to hear a story. They don't they don't have the mental filters to know that, a book about a gay crush has lots of moral components to it that they may not be ready to absorb or understand or whatever. This is about parents being able to opt their kids out of material they find objectionable. And so I even it actually is a good argument.

But it's not about the kids. It's about the parents being able to make a decision for their kids. Well, previously you asked me the question if if you don't think algebra is worth learning, can you opt out of algebra? Yeah. And I said, yeah, yeah, you can opt out of algebra if you want to. You might fail the class.

So if you hated reading that book as a kid, you can opt out of reading it. You're going to get a bad score. Yeah. If you do, there's a consequence. There's a consequence. The point of this is, is that currently if the child, or the parent utilizes their rely, their, their right to freedom of religion, there's a bad score.

Yeah. And that's where you're, you're trampling on the rights. You don't you don't have a there's no right that exists in the Constitution to opt out of algebra. Yeah. You can. Yeah. And and your parents can choose to educate you a different way. That's the option. But if you stay in the public school system and you want to opt out of algebra, there's no fundamental right that protects you there.

Yeah, but you do have a fundamental right of religion to not hear about gay sex if that goes against your religious freedoms. Yeah, yeah. Or gay relationships or. Yeah, age. I mean, parents can determine age appropriateness. And if they, they can determine I don't want my kid ever reading it in K through 12. That's okay I, I don't know what is this addiction to foisting upon others the morals that you have for yourself because they want you to be like them.

This is the conversation we had yesterday that the coexist is a it is a false flag. It's a false front. That bumper sticker is a lie. Yeah. It's true. They do not want to coexist. Their their version of coexist is you're going to become like me. Yeah. You're going to do what I tell you. Yeah I yeah.

Yeah. And it's weird because they they are not for inclusion. They're not, it's this is the Boise mayor and the flag flying in front of City Hall. She's not for X, she's not for inclusion. There's a very specific group excluded from the LGBTQ large. Yeah a vast majority that is excluded from the LGBTQ flag. Yeah. Representation. So I, I it's weird how they it's a false front.

They twist things in their mind like it's, it's I think so much about the the left's argument is just smoke and mirrors. It's just a distortion of the truth. And what I like about the Supreme Court cases, nobody is saying that parent A who loves these LGBTQ themed books can't share these books with their kids. I'm not taking that away from them.

Yeah, the group bringing lawsuit isn't taking that away from them. You're not asking that be taken away from them. If they choose to do that with their child, they can choose to do that with their child. But you can't force it on another child. Yeah, right. We're back to that. You do. You will do us. Yeah. And they're not okay with that arrangement.

No they don't they don't like that. Well they can't they can make the social progress they want to make if that's the standard their ideology is, it doesn't do well in, in a freedom ecosystem. I'm not asking public school to make a rule that this child can't have that book in their backpack. Go ahead. If the parent, the child made that decision in the book is there, that is there.

Right? They can do that. What the what the problem is with the the crux of this lawsuit is it's being forced onto the kids. Yeah, yeah. That's right. You know what? I feel like the Supreme Court, this is going to be a pretty quick deliberation. I when it is a fundamental freedom for right of freedom of religion. I don't know how you can see it any other way.

Yeah. I, I'm supposed to be a Constitutional court because there's a very strong moral component here. I'm not arguing that you can force kids to learn algebra like I'm not I'm not going to make that argument. However, I will say you you can have a separate standard for these books simply because they do have a strong and divisive moral component to them.

And so you're I, I don't know, I don't know if there's any legitimate argument out there that I have a moral objection to the quadratic equation. The Pythagorean theorem, though, that one that I can't do that one. You know how many times I've had to look away from the hypotenuse?

Two angles, which. That's geometry. Not out. We're now migrating, but it's the same argument, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's that's true. And I'm acutely aware.

How are we doing this now? Because if we subtract out our personalities here, it's true. The Constitution doesn't have a personality. Arguments based on division here. Julie, how many times do we have to go over those times? Is is this could get exponentially out of control.

To infinity. Yes. Right. That's true. But no, like I don't I don't think there's a moral component to math. Like you don't. Is there a moral justify? Is there ever a moral justification for opting your kids out of me? You might have good reason, but yeah. Is there a moral reason that you could even think of that you would take your kids out of math class?

Well, not even a moral. There's not a constitutional because the freedom of religion doesn't apply to math. It's true. That's true. That's my point. In this whole thing, I this is a a fundamental right every citizen of America has. Yeah. And you're asking it to be taken away. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. You're right. And so yeah. All right.

It's 842. Newstalk 10792085421079. If you'd like to join us, and for no good reason, I'm going to play the clip of Elizabeth Warren's squirming. Listen, this was so fun to listen to. Do you regret saying that President Biden had, a mental acuity? He had a sharpness to him. You said that up until July of last year, I said what I believe to be true.

And he. You think he was as sharp as you? I said I had not seen decline, and I had at that point, you did not see any decline from 2020 for Joe Biden in the 2021. Joe Biden don't want I said that. You don't think the seniors he look, he was sharp. He was on his feet. I saw him live event.

I had meetings with him a couple of times. Senator on his feet is not praise. He can speak in sentences. Is not praise. Fair enough? Fair enough. Look it is. The question is, what are we going to do now? Well, what we're going to do now is take a break. And what we may do later is play that clip again.

So by the way, those pauses were not exaggerated at all. It was awkward as it sounds. I wish they could see her. Yeah, yeah, she really did squirm. It's 844. We'll be back. It's 852 now. On Newstalk 1079 Neil Larson, along with Julie Mason. Let's chat about Town and Country Garden. I just said we can advertise her.

We can talk about town and country gardens. That's fun thinking about Rex. Yeah. And so that's why that came out of my mouth. I brought up Rex. We're so interested in this glow in the dark petunia Julie, that we're going to try to get him to bring one in, and we'll take some pictures because it it's. I can't wait to see one of these.

It's super cool. I I'm sorry about that. I was I know you're still thinking about how are we going to make this work. Where would we take the picture? Like, all of that was running through my mind and so, yeah, let's talk about Town and Country Garden. I think the only place would be the janitor's closet. That's probably where we're going to have to do it.

So. Take the picture of the petunia in the janitor's closet. So, yeah, this is a really cool event that Rex is planning at Town and Country Gardens. That happens this Saturday. In the evening time. There's going to be music. There's going to be a food truck. There's going to it's a party atmosphere at town and Country gardens. That's because they're unveiling this specific petunia that has been, genetically modified.

Yeah, to glow in the dark. And there's a limited supply of them. You can learn all of the information about the petunia and the event at my garden geek.com again. That's my garden wkyc.com. That's their official website. And there's also an option when you get to that website to, sign up for our newsletter that helps you get on the VIP list for the event.

Highly encouraged to do that because it it I mean, it comes regularly. It gives you lots of cool tips and tricks. Great. Newsletter to be a part of. And so, yeah. Plus they have the four step lawn program you should get for your lawn. If you love your lawn, you'll get them the for sure. You want it to be green.

Yeah, absolutely. And all your other lawn and garden needs south of Idaho Falls, Yellowstone highway across from the malt plant. We'll be back after this. It's 858 and that's going to do it for this hour. But we'll be back another hour coming up. We'd love to hear from you on any of a number of issues that we've been talking about this morning.

Welcome back. It's 907 on Newstalk 179. Our two underway. (208) 542-1079. If you'd like to join us on the program this morning, we would love to have you. If you want to weigh in on a we had a couple of text, Julie, I think, the, attorney general's reaction I liked it. I think it made sense. I want attorneys general to not stretch the law for exotic purposes, especially when it's a political opponent.

And so he's exploring civil options, which I think there are some, perhaps some legitimate civil options there, to, to pursue, which is not going to be a crime. It's not going to put mayor McLean in jail. And it may not be an, formal fine. However, there may be some kind of civil action he could take that would lead to a court order ordering her to take it down.

And then if she defies that right, then, if she defies that, the court could then hold her in contempt, which is a crime. And so that might be the route you have to take, which I think is a legitimate, route if you know, she obviously has no problem doing the double middle finger to the legislative branch of our government.

Will she do the same thing to the judicial branch? Because the left seems to love the judicial branch. They seem to think the judicial branch is the only branch with power. When Republicans are in charge. But they say it's equal. I, I, I think that Raul Labrador letter for me says, hey, you guys, take a breath. You want me to get from point A to point B, no stops in between.

And I don't have an option for that. And I'm not going to stretch the law to make point A to point B an option. Yeah, but we might be able to get to an enjoyable solution if I go a, B, c, d and there's a couple of players doing these steps with me, yes, we then might be able to get to the option that are to the end result that we're all hoping for.

Yeah. And for me, also for me, there's an unspoken in his letter, which is this is going to create political damage for her in the long run. Yeah. Have some patience. You know, you said something earlier this morning, Julie, that I had not thought about before, but I think it's spot on. She is the mayor of Idaho's largest city and Idaho's capital city.

Now, she doesn't formally represent Idaho. Her constituents are the residents of Boise, but symbolically, she represents Idaho. I mean, she's the most visible mayor in the entire state. And when with, with, great. What is it with great, responsibility comes great. Something else. Power. Expectation. Yeah, something. Anyway, I think it was Uncle Ben from Spider man.

It said that. Anyway, whatever. You know what I'm saying? Uncle Matt and spider man. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I'm not a superhero. I just don't know those at all. Yeah. Okay, so Uncle Ben was the, Peter Parker's uncle. Yeah. So, Okay. That's why they call him Uncle Ben. I just realized that that's how that works. So, anyway, with great power comes great responsibility.

And she has a lot of power. She's the mayor of Idaho's biggest town and Idaho's capital city. And part of her responsibility. In fact, she took an oath as part of the responsibility that she would uphold the laws of Idaho. And because her own personal beliefs and ideology and ambition are more important to her than the oath that she took.

In fact, quite frankly, that's more important to her than her own integrity. Which is really sad. Yeah. Really sad. And I would agree with you, I think she's probably got her sycophantic cheerleaders that are saying you're the greatest, you're the best mayor in the whole world. I think in the long run this harms her. And I would bet you that there are probably some sensible Democrats in Boise that are going, I get why she's doing this, but you can't just do the double middle finger to the legislature.

Laws have to matter at some point. And I think that they're talking point of all of this actually plays in the legislators favor meaning. Well we thought you were smart enough and responsible enough to follow along with out a penalty. I guess we miscalculated. You are not smart enough and you are not responsible enough to follow a law without penalty.

So we will make one. And that would be my messaging over and over and over again with this. Yeah, yeah. Like I would look foolish. Yes I, I would agree, I would hope and and maybe they are I don't know, but this is where the Republican Party could really, really shine and maybe it wouldn't be enough to defeat mayor McClain.

I'd love to get a more sensible, even Democrat. If we could get just a center left Democrat in there, that'd be great. She's far left. I think that would be great for Boise and much better for Idaho. But every Republican lawmaker should be condemning her on their social media channels. They should be doing what Raul Labrador is doing on his.

They passed this law. Yeah. My question is, why aren't they I don't know, I there's a few that have spoken out. Yeah. And maybe they feel like well that's a nonpartizan thing. I'm part of the legislature. She's a city. Like they're two different spheres almost. I don't care that it passed a law that governs her. And and she is giving you the middle finger.

You need to speak up for the law that you passed and get a consensus and a chorus of condemnation against her, and maybe she'll start to feel that heat. A great coaches command. Respect. That's universal. Yes. Great coaches command respect. I would say the same thing for lawmakers doesn't mean you bully people into respect your behaviors. Command respect.

Trump is real good at this. Yes, be a little bit Trumpian. Yeah, yeah I would. And, maybe you know what, if you I think sometimes lawmakers are a little iffy calling out other elected officials because, you know, it's a rough and tumble game and sometimes it's not that comfortable. Okay, send out an email to each other saying, let's do this on the same day.

So you can you can operate in numbers. It's a little easier to do that. And then as an entire Republicans, I mean, the Democrats aren't going to and the Republicans who are actually Democrats aren't going to, but at least all the lawmakers that voted for this, they ought to they ought to be posting to their social media. We condemn mayor McClain for openly defying a law that we've passed.

I you know what else I sent you a video yesterday. She did this little roundtable. I will give her some kudos. She's a fairly accessible mayor, like she does a lot of things in the community. She's not hiding. Yeah, she's not. And so I if we're going to look at the the bad will mention some of the good.

So she sat down, dodged every tough question, but she said we're reviewing it. You don't have to review it. You're in clear violation of the law. There's no reviewing going on. It's like if I get picked up and my speedometer said 98 miles an hour, and the cops said, I clocked you at 98 miles an hour. And you said, well, I'll review it.

No, no, the facts are clear. You're clearly in violation. Yeah. You don't need attorneys to look at this, right? You've broken the law. Yeah. All right, let's go to the phones. (208) 542-1079 Caller go ahead. How are you today? I'm doing all right. How are you guys? Good, good. Doing well, hey, I just wanted to comment on this and say, you know, maybe some of the legislate Slaters feel like this was a oversight and not putting a penalty or some sort of financial, consequence on this.

And they, they feel like, oh, oops. And that's why they're not, commenting. But I ultimately think her reasoning is just stupid. When she says that the law was ambiguous, you know, when she says that there's no penalty, there is something to that in the sense that, you know, I've often believed that a law without, an actual penalty, without enforcement is barely more than a resolution or a wish.

Yeah, yeah, it's it's sort of like, what is that, a joint memorial? Like. It's a that's kind of what it is that that's true. And I would agree with that. I, I think every law that creates a violation of some kind needs to carry a penalty with it. I think that ought to just be standard for writing the law.

Yeah. I don't know why they they left that out or how that was missed. If that was an oversight. It just seems really odd. So let me before we let you go, caller, because I do have more calls to get to here. But we had Representative Earhart calling yesterday and she said, look at the silver lining, guys.

We the the left, the Democrats and some squishy Republicans have always shied away from including a private cause of action with bills because they're like, well, you can't do this because then it's a litigious society. Everybody's suing everybody. And, and but this McClane mayor McClane is giving lawmakers all the premise they need in the future now to include a private cause of action, section to these laws that are passed and and I, I don't necessarily like it, but I think it may reach the point where it's just needed that if you have these lawmakers, I guess, pave the way for residents to sue a mayor who's flying a divisive flag.

And, and, and then she won't I promise you she'll take it down. She's definitely showing her true colors with this one. Yeah. Yeah it's true. All right. Thank you for the call. (208) 542-1079. Let's go to the next caller. Welcome to the show. Good morning. I think the mayor, bungled this, politically speaking, because I think at some point she's going to end up caving in.

I don't know what that looks like, but I think the flag will come down one way or another, with or without penalties, and she's going to look like she gave in. I think a better option would have been, for her to make a big, spectacle of this. Like, look, the evil Republican led legislative body of the state of Idaho is making this take this flag down.

She could add fireworks, a parade, a big event to take the flag down, a funeral. She could weaponize this to fire up her base for the next election cycle and say, look, look what they're doing. We, you know, we need different leaders. Look, they made us take this flag down. So I think she messed this whole thing up politically, and now she's going to have egg on her face.

Would eventually the flag does come down. I think it's a very astute observation. I agree I agree with you. She she had a good opportunity here and she's she's kind of botched it. Right. She could have split the baby in essence and made both sides happy without causing more, divisive behavior in the community, which is always the issue.

Right? We just keep driving the wedge further and further between the, people. So. Yeah. Good point. Right. Okay. Thank you for the call. I like the theme he's developing though here, which he said, one way or another, I feel like we should be playing that song one way or another. Yeah. I'm gonna get, gonna get you get.

Yeah. Because that's what's going to happen one way or another. She's going to fall short of this. That has to be an arrow's library. It's gotta be there. I mean, if you look at all of the various ways, one way or another, she's caused herself political harm. It might be a civil lawsuit that gets her at the the the backstop, the where the buck ends is next January when they pass a law that has a penalty attached to it.

So one way or another, we're gonna get them. Yes. Yeah. And you know what? There you go. I thought, I think that's Blondie, and I was right for you. Right? It's Blondie, so. All right, we'll take a break. It's 920 on Newstalk 179. Hi, Facebook. Hey, Facebook. Did anybody else's house sound like it was going to fall down last night with the wind?

I didn't even notice. It there were a few gusts that were kind of nasty. What time? Maybe about 730, 8:00. Like that range. Okay. Yeah, I think it was a drive. Okay. This would be a great topic, Julie. Maybe not today, but sometime soon. And I think it's a I don't think it's controversial for us to talk about it, but I think it's a very radioactive topic, which is, someone asked, when is I going to take over teaching our children?

Oh, yeah, because I don't I don't think I will ever be 100% our, our kids teachers. I think that they could be a big part of how kids learn. Especially when the verbal models allow them to talk back and forth and to see what kids are writing. I mean, already I is doing image analysis and I, I was working with I what was I doing creating a website maybe.

No, but it was asking me to upload a screenshot of the errors that I was getting so I didn't have to copy and text, I just hit, I did the print screen, I did a screenshot and then attached it and it it read the the character recognition. It read it like a human being did. So I think, kids assignments will be graded by I, I think that the what they write for answers will be analyzed and so there's some stuff that's probably subjective, like essays that you write.

But if you're just writing the answers to problems, math problems or whatever, I, I think I can take up a big share of that. Yeah, I would agree with that. And all you have to do is look at history to see how things change throughout the generations, right. So your 1716 in high school and you have a dirt bike and something breaks on the dirt bike.

How do you fix the dirt bike. You tinker with it. Yeah. Until you figure it out. Yeah. Then we had kids. When my 17 year old wanted to figure out how to do something, he went to YouTube. Yeah, and learned it. Now. Yeah. My son has kids. And you know where that that kid's going to go to ChatGPT or a version like it?

Yes, yes, yes. So I did something the other day and it's it's a different AI model. I can't remember what it's called anyway, you know that app idea that I've told you about in the past? That could, I think, revolutionize our industry? It wrote the app. Yeah. The code like the code. Several minutes it went through and it was writing code, writing code, writing code.

And like, it didn't have it quite complete because there were little pieces that still needed to be put in. I just wanted to see what it would do, and I was astounded at the functionality that it was able to, to, to create for that, you you'd need a team for the finishing touches. But it got you 95% of the way there.

So my son in law is actually doing this right now. So he's developing an app for a business I did I think it's pretty awesome. He had ChatGPT write the app, and he has spent the last two weeks refining portions of it to make it actually function to a level that is appeasing to people, because an app can can be put out there and it kind of stinks.

Yes, it's got hiccups and blocks and whatever. And he you can just keep working it and working it and working it to get it to a spot. Yeah, yeah it is. And. And I mean, it's good for just refining like that too. All right. (208) 542-1079 on Newstalk. 1079. And what, Julie, what do you think should be the reaction of conservatives to mayor McClane?

Now we want the attorney general to do it right. Just just prosecutor. She's breaking the law. It's not that easy. There really is no good direct enforcement mechanism for her breaking this law. And you know what? She knows it. I would say follow what, Attorney General Labrador says to do at the end of his letter, which was flood her office with emails.

Yeah. Expressing your disappointment, expressing that how am I supposed to teach my children to follow laws when their own mayor isn't willing to follow laws? There are. There are obvious nonpartizan explanations for why she shouldn't be doing this. You don't even have to pick a side. Yeah. Flood her inbox. Yeah. I think politically, I think she will.

She won't listen to the law. Obviously she will listen to political pressure. So yeah, now she can listen to people outside of Boise. Maybe not. Maybe not. Although I think you could send an email saying, look, I don't live in Boise. I don't I'm not one of your constituents, thank goodness. But you represent Idaho as the mayor of the capital and the largest city and you're you're setting a terrible example for our children.

You're teaching them all they have to do. They don't have to obey laws they don't like or they don't agree with. I think that that's what she's doing. I also would be bold enough to say that if this flag is not flown, I asked the LGBTQ community to be tough enough to handle it, meaning I, I have lots of flags that could represent me in my life.

I have logos for businesses. I have, religious flags that could be flown. I have conservative flags that could be flown. The fact that they're not flying at the Boise, at the Boise City Hall doesn't hurt my feelings. And so I'm asking the members of LGBTQ to also be as resilient. It's not necessary. Okay, I that's an interesting point.

And I want to ask a follow up, because I agree with your point. I used to remember when we had the gay marriage debate, and they used to always throw this question at us as conservatives. If we believed that marriage was only between a man and a woman, they would say, tell me how a gay marriage is hurting you, or point on the dolly where gay marriage is, right?

Whatever. I would ask in the same spirit, how are you hurt if the rainbow flag is not flying at Boise City Hall? Yeah, that's a great question. What? What's harming you if you if that flag is not flying? Because I'll tell you what's being harmed by it. Flying the idea of the rule of law that is being harmed in Idaho because mayor McLean insists on flying that flag, that there is actual harm being done to our system because she is operating in a lawless fashion.

She's created a victim. Yeah, she's creating a cultural harm because that's an example for our kids that we don't want. But who who gets to operate that way? That I only pay attention to the laws that I agree with. That's that's you can't operate that way and sustain your republic. You just can't. But I would ask that question and I you know what I know we have lots of listeners that have different backgrounds here.

I would ask you that question. If the LGBTQ flag is not flown at Boise City Hall, how would that harm the LGBTQ community? Yeah, I think it's a great question. And if we're going to somehow temper the emotions that surround this, I think that that's a good question to go, hey, I'm trying to understand your emotions. Obviously, they're very heightened around this, but explain why they're heightened.

How are you harm and if you're harmed by it not flying, why am I not harm like then don't I get to claim harm that my flags are not flying? Doesn't somebody else who's, let's say it's somebody who's deeply embedded in, the the Navy? Yeah. Is it harmful to them if the naval flag is not up there?

Or what if it's somebody that's deeply embedded in the medical community? Are they harmed if the if the flag with the stick in the shirt, whatever the serpents or whatever, the blue one is not flying. Are they harmed? Hey, you're asking only one group of people to be represented, and you're saying if they're not represented, it's painful or why isn't it painful to other people?

Yeah, right. That's true, that's true. And the insistence on it is, is that a subconscious message that you're so fragile? We have to fly a flag to placate you? I'm sure there are some people that actually take that approach. Is that a fair question? Yeah, I'm sure there's people are like, well, I don't want to hurt them. They're already they they're hurt in a lot of ways.

And this is an easy one for me to give in to. Okay, sure it is easy, but that's weird to me because you're actually not fixing any kind of a problem. Well, you know what? It kind of reminds me of Julie. And the left does this all the time, where they placate certain groups, they tell black communities you're not smart enough to produce an ID at the ballot box.

We're not going to require one of you. That's racism. That that lowered expectation for a certain group of people is some kind of ism and some kind of discrimination. And when you think that certain groups based on a demographic characteristic in this case LGBTQ plus individuals are somehow not going to be able to abide their flag not being flown at City Hall, that is an insult to them.

You're diminishing them. You are you are diminishing them. You and I, Julie. We we try to be good members of our faith. I have never driven by City Hall going. I am so pressed because there's not an Angel Moroni flag being flown. I I've never felt that way. I've never felt that way. Because some other thing in my life that's very important to me is not represented on a flag flying at City Hall.

Right. I think there's a lot of things in people's lives that carry the same level of weight as being a member of the LGBTQ community, and I say that because I believe that would be the response by some members. Well, you don't understand how truly it forms their life. Okay. I, I would say almost every Olympic athlete will tell you because of the hours and hours and hours of dedication and training, the changing your eating plan, the doing the the sport for ten and 12 hours a day for forgoing lots of other things in your life so you can be an Olympic athlete.

Yeah, I would say that change their lives and they don't expect you to put a snowboarding flag up there. They don't expect you to put a swimming flag up there they don't like. Yeah, there are other things that ultimately change your life besides LGBTQ. You know what? My hunches. Julie, if if we could. I bet you there's a lot of people who are gay or lesbian, maybe even transgender, who would say, it's really not that important to me that they fly that flag.

This is virtue signaling by a white liberal who's probably straight. I think she's straight and she's just trying to garner points with other white liberals, quite frankly. And, I bet I would bet you that most gay people are probably going, I don't need somebody else to fly a flag. I just need them to accept me for who I am.

I want to work with them and have a good relationship. I want them to laugh with me. I want them to go to lunch with me, I want them. That's probably what they really want. They don't need a virtue signaling liberal to hoist a flag up on a flagpole. But that's kind of easy for her. I say that meaning it didn't take a lot of, hey, I'm going to take of my time.

Yeah, and my kindness and my. I'm going to sit with you and. No, you. It didn't take that kind of an effort. It's not easy because it might cost her a political office. So I get that there's some difficulty there. But, this is my issue with people who. Okay, we're going to go back to a topic we talked about yesterday, the black square on your Instagram.

What did you have to give to do that? Seven seconds. Yeah. That's true. And you felt like you moved mountains. Yeah. How about you actually go talk to somebody? Yeah. How about you be kind and take care of somebody? That's moving mountains? Do you think there's also, sense to, like. I'm just. I'm trying to put myself in in the shoes of, you know, a community that is in the minority, and they struggle, to feel accepted by society.

Do you think they would say, I don't want my flag being flown or the flag that I love or whatever align with, align with? I don't want that to be a middle finger. I don't want that being flown in a context that actually creates more division than inclusion. We could give everyone the benefit of the doubt. I mean, that's what it is.

I'm not sure they're all thinking that. But yeah, I think if I were to think through that, if there was something super important to me and I wanted it to be presented in a in a positive light, I'm not sure that I would want someone who's not part of my community, but claims to be an ally, to utilize it as a as a political tool, as a middle finger.

I would also say there's so many ways that are legal to align with your flag. Put a put a flag up at your house, put a bumper sticker in your window, a window sticker in your window, wear a pin, have it be on your social media profiles. Go to there's groups here locally that meet that are part of the LGBTQ community to show, support and love for each other.

Yeah, those are things that actually you can represent your own personal feelings that way. Yeah. Don't rely on a mayor to break the law for you. Yeah, yeah. That's true. Yeah, it's kind of a proxy thing, isn't it? All right, we've got a break. It's 936 on Newstalk 1079. We'll be back. Okay. Okay. With ChatGPT available, they're having a conversation on our Facebook Live that's making this, like, crop up in my head.

With ChatGPT currently available, how often do you go to your phone so Google or I'm Siri whatever. Yeah. To ask a question do you automatically default to ChatGPT now? Oh yeah I do. Yeah I do too. I don't even go to yes at all. Yeah. To answer questions. Yeah. In fact I always felt like this wasn't adequate. Anyway.

It didn't feel like it was that awesome because I could refine my search in a, in a web search to actually get what I wanted. Yeah. And ChatGPT has just made that so much faster for me. Yeah. So it is interesting because they're talking about using your phones and, and how this system isn't that great. I don't think it's that great.

And I think if you get familiar with ChatGPT, this one goes away. You just don't even you don't even use it. Yeah, I think so too. Yeah. It's it's it's my new Google. Yes. Yeah yeah yeah yeah I remember the first big search engine was Yahoo. Remember we used Yahoo for a few years and then Google came over, came along and took over at Google, the Google, the Google.

I've been kind of amazed at how many different AI models there are now. I, I've been, using Deep sea a little bit. I know it's Chinese owned and it's a little controversial, but it does some things better than ChatGPT. Yeah, like it handles large, large volumes of text better than ChatGPT. I've also it's annoyed me, but I've realized I get more of what I want.

Yeah, you need to play the game with ChatGPT and create a relationship with your version of ChatGPT. So when ChatGPT provides me a synopsis of a crime story and I like the way they summarized it, if I compliment ChatGPT. Yeah. And I say, in the future, will you please do this this way for me? Oh, I get so much better result.

Oh yeah. Honey goes a long way with ChatGPT. Oh yeah it does it, it learns what you like. Yeah. Yep. Agreed. Okay. Did we never did Timberline. Right. No. Okay. Let's do that here. Okay. That studio cover session person that I reached out to. Yeah, they just answered. Oh, good. Favorably. Now, someone. 941 on Newstalk 107, I, Neal Larson, along with Julie Mason.

All right. Let's chat about how you sleep. I was just telling Neil this morning I haven't slept well for like two weeks. I'm not really sure what's going on. I do know that one of my problems is my legs get a little bit achy, and that's from when I walk those extended miles, so I need to address that.

But some people have figured out a way to address their sleepless nights, which is they are purchasing the Z recliner recliner from Timberline Home. 10% of Americans don't even sleep in their beds. They sleep in a recliner, or they sleep on a couch because it is more comfortable. And Timberline Home is now carrying a product that is designed to be slept in.

It is a recliner that has heat, massage and recline options, also an option for zero gravity that increases your circulation in your legs. So if you're that person who suffers with restless leg syndrome, things like that, a recliner might be your answer. And there is another huge perk. The, recliners are made with a fabric that is infused with minerals that speed up blood flow by up to 30%, so your whole entire body is actually functioning better while you're sleeping.

Right now at Timberline Home in Idaho Falls, you can save an additional $300 on this recliner, but that's just for a limited time. So if you're needing help with your sleep and you think this could be the solution, you need to get down there fast. 711 East Anderson in Idaho Falls. Again, that's Timberline home. All right. Arguments underway in the Supreme Court over their allotted time.

Okay. And, we don't have any audio. I thought we may have an audio feed. But I think they just simply played a clip. Of course. This is the one. If you weren't listening earlier and are not aware, there's a school district in Maryland that wants to force kids to read LGBTQ themed books and not even allow a parental opt out for those books.

So a parents rights group, they filed a lawsuit, and it's actually made its way up to the Supreme Court pretty quickly. It was, I think, last year that they ended the opt out and the lawsuit was filed, in a federal, federal court somewhere, sided with the school district and then the Supreme Court took up the appeal.

You never know until the ruling comes out, but I'm I'm hoping it could be, one of the the milestone, rulings that would help define parental rights issues in other contexts as well. A lot of it just depends on how they rule, how wide a swath that ruling will be. But I'm hopeful that it, number one, will rule in favor of parents and that it has a pretty wide swath.

I like the concept that this came forward with. I mentioned earlier that I appreciate that it's a very constitutional case. It is in complete reference to your freedom of religion. And I think that it's much easier for these judges to rule on something that has such definitive constitutional value. Yeah. To it. I think that's how we won the Roe v Wade overturning.

Mississippi went two. They worked all the way up the courts with the concept that in the state of Mississippi, you're taking away our rights as a state to, represent our constituents like it was a very constitutional case that you you federally have stepped into something that should be a state issue. And when they brought a forward that way, it made it possible for the Supreme Court judges.

So you're right. Yeah, you're right about that. This shouldn't have been something that that federal judges stepped into the middle of. And it was much, much more nuanced than and much deeper than that. But when you talk about fundamental rights that we have, it's easier for the judges to rule on that. I believe that that's one of the things that they're trying to use to stop these deportations.

They're claiming fundamental rights of humans. Yeah. And and that you have to review those before you send somebody back. That's actually a I mean, that's a that's a pretty good argument to look at. The issue there is they don't fall under our citizenship so they don't get those rights. Yeah. And so that's what our side is arguing with all of those deportation hearings.

You know, it's interesting because I I've got a I don't know if I've ever met this person, but is a Facebook friend and he's very libertarian. He's actually opposing the Trump administration because he's talking really, really intensely about due process. But when I just think through it, this a layman's view here. The due process prior to incarceration is different than due process prior to sending someone back to their original country.

You're not depriving their ability to live and work and eat and, and make a life for themselves in their home country. But when you send someone to prison, you take away their fundamental rights. Now they if we've done due process correctly, the people who are in prison deserve to have had their rights taken away. Yes. Okay. But those two due processes are not equal.

And I think people are trying to argue by throwing out that term due process as though it's the same as your Fifth Amendment right, or, you know, all, all of the due process stuff that we have in the Constitution. I don't I would argue it is not even close to equivalent. Well, and that's what the Trump administration is saying, is that, sure, due process is a great thing that you deserve.

I deserve everything that we all deserve. But when you crossed the border illegally, that is when you violated the opportunity to have due process from step one, from step one over the border. Yeah, you vacated the opportunity to have that right. How did you come across the border correctly? And if you weren't an illegal immigrant, then we could talk about due process.

That's true. That's true because due process is you apply for entry into the United States, you flip the middle finger at due process when you crossed from the very, very beginning. That's that's a good point. Yeah. And that's what the Trump administration keeps saying over and over again. That's their fight with the with Garcia is that they're saying, great, whatever we put him on the wrong list will accept that.

You think that that was an accident. We'll even call it an accident. But guess what? He's illegal. Yeah, that's why he does not have the right to due process. So the Trump administration is going clear back to step one, saying it was all leak, all negated from the very beginning. Yeah. That's yeah, that that's true. And it's not even feasible to apply due process which can be very slow and cumbersome and time consuming to how many millions of illegals that Biden brought over here.

Yeah. If you're already illegal, you're illegal. You're right. That's true. You are illegal. And that alone is justification for a trip back home, right? You're going back and you're not coming back, right? I it is it all. It's also interesting that if you if you think about what we just explained about the due process and that you gave up that right, you vacated that right.

When you created a, when you committed a crime by coming across the border illegally. When you look at all of that, it's the reason that the media is insistent upon calling this man a Maryland man. Yeah, because that's the only way they can erase the argument that the Trump administration is making. Yeah. If you keep personalizing him as somebody belonging to that state, an actual resident of Maryland, you a race, the argument that the Trump administration is making.

That's true. It's it's deflect, deflect, deflect away from, away from the truth. So, Julie, I have a, I have a theory that most social studies or civic discussions have a karate Kid analogy. I'm not shocked by this. Yeah. And so I feel like there's a core of people who believe that all you have to do is say the words due process.

And it's like the crane. It was the move against which there is no defense. So if you come to me and you're like, we need to deport the illegals because they're here illegally, and I look at you and go due process. Yeah. I've instantly won the argument for some observers that are watching the argument happen and I'm like, no, no, there there's not.

I mean, the crane was a great moving candidate, but I don't think tossing out the words due process, it has no refutation to it. Yeah. Well it, they want it to be a universal coverage of it all. Yeah. And that's not how it works. That. So that's the second layer to the Trump administration. Fight here is we're deporting people who have criminal backgrounds.

Yeah. They're not just illegal immigrants. They're actually criminals as well with other crimes in America. Yeah. So they're doing a double layer of who they're sending home, and that's why they back up their argument with the concept that his wife had charges against him. He had been arrested because he was with Ms13 gang members. He has ties to Ms13.

He has the tattoos as representation that he's part of. Like that's their second layer, right? Yeah. The people who throw out due process like the crane move and saying it fixes everything. It doesn't fix everything. You can't use the crane move over and over and over again. It's all right. It loses his validity if you do that. Yeah, yeah.

I think we're going to start a new context or contest though. Okay. Where we we throw out some snippet of wisdom and the listener has to guess whether it's Mr. Miyagi, Yoda, Uncle Ben from, from Spider-Man, Spider-Man or Ben Franklin. Maybe. But let's just call him all Ben, because we don't need Mr. Miyagi. We don't need his first name.

It could be Ben. It could be. And Yoda's given name could be Ben. That's true. So it's just the Ben. The Ben philosophy? That's true. It'll be the Ben contest. Which Ben are we talking about? Pick your Ben. All right, we'll be back. It's 952 on Newstalk 107. Right. Okay. I gotta run real quick. Oh, go do your thing.

Been drinking water. Hold on. Have you ever walked away from the desk with your earphones still on? But you're like blah. You get pulled. Yeah I've done that a few time. Okay. Oh, shoot. Spencer, don't break up my idea. Had no idea that Mr. Miyagi's first name was Patrick. Is it really? You've got to laugh your face there.

Is it really Patrick? I don't know those movies well enough. I will tell you a story about my best friend. Her name is Betsy, and there will be listeners who know I'm who I'm talking about, but, middle school, high school. Back then, we would go to, like, Kmart or one of the other stores, and we would buy the Teen Beat magazine or something similar, and they would always have these glossy pictures of your favorite actors and actresses in them.

And my friend Betsy had the biggest crush on Ralph Macchio. He she thought he there was no man that was better looking than Ralph. And it's still to this day, it's something we disagree on because I didn't see Ralph Macchio as attractive at all. I'm like, he's scrawny and like, what are you seeing in him? But they she just loved him.

So her whole entire wall in her bedroom was Ralph Macchio posters. And, because we had this ongoing conflict, I always looked at, like the the movies as, like, dismissible because it was part of my argument. Right? Ralph's not that cute. Why did they put him as the lead actor? Blah blah blah blah, blah. So there's a whole bunch of those movies I can't even remember.

I there's, I can't even tell you the premise of Karate Kid two. I don't know, I remember the premise of Karate Kid one. Okay, I definitely remember Karate Kid one, but I think Karate Kid two was was that Okinawa when he went? And he had no idea. I think that was Okinawa. Yeah, I. And I'm getting the short end of the stick.

No, we were laughing about it in there. Number one and number two sitting in the tree. No. Hopefully that didn't go out over the air.

Other people, it didn't, I'm sure, but that would be funny. Who was your. I was just telling them that with my best friend. Best. Oh, we got to go on. Hold on. What's going on? I'll tell you what's going on. Neal messed up. That's what's going on. We're back. Let's talk really quick. Town and country gardens. Glow in the dark petunias.

They're coming Saturday night, Julie. And the public has a chance to not just see them, but buy them. And they'll be limited to buying three. But Saturday night, town and country gardens from, like, is a 6 to 10. I think it's 6 to 10. All right. You can go. They've actually in their instruction space. They have a classroom out there.

They're blacking out all the windows so people can walk through. It's like a reception line sort of. And you'll be able to go through and see the glow in the dark petunias. Yeah. You can find out all of the stuff about this event at my garden. Wkyc.com again, that's my garden geek.com and, super friendly website that allows you to sign up for the newsletter that puts you on a potential VIP list for the event on Saturday night.

And a programing note recs from Town and Country Gardens is going to join us on Friday at 730, just to kind of chat about this event and the glow in the dark Petunia is he bringing one? He said he would. He said he should have them. They're not shipped yet, so he should have them by then. Okay, well, good, because we're going to take a camera.

We're going to go into either the supply closet or the janitor's closet, and we're going to take a time exposure picture, try to do it, and we'll show off these glow in the dark petunias. There we go. Like very cool. So, if you want to check it out for yourself, South of Idaho Falls on the Yellowstone Highway across from the malt plant.

And, by the way, while you're there, get your four step lawn program. It is not too late to get this step one down. That's the Hume mates. And then step two will come along in another month or two. And, then throughout the summer lawn, your lawn will look beautiful, lush and green. So. All right, that's going to do it for the show today.

Thank you for joining us. Julie. And we will be back tomorrow though. Any any guests tomorrow? Not not as of right now. We've got invitations out. Not yet. Okay. Gotcha. Although we have in the pipeline, Attorney General Raoul Labrador. So. And we know we do have a guest tomorrow. Do you know what I was thinking?

It was. It was Monday. It's not Monday. It's Tuesday. Yeah. Just to say, really real fast. Raul Labrador is joining us tomorrow. Tomorrow 9:00, 9:00. Okay. We'll see you then.