Rantz Rewind: August 16, 2024

Good afternoon and welcome to the Jason Ranch Show on this dreary, cloudy Friday ahead of a weekend that's supposed to have thunderstorms. Ooh. Over on the Olympic Peninsula. How's this for? Ooh. They're doing a guaranteed income program, which is mostly a scam of an idea. But let's see if this one's going to be any different as they give free money to people with no strings attached. That is what's trending. Brought to you by Legacy Group Capital Construction Loans. The economy. I spent a lot of time looking into the idea of the program of universal basic income or guaranteed income. They have different names depending on where it is you are, but they are exactly the same kind of program, which is essentially giving you money every single month for a set amount of time. And we're just talking about the pilot programs. And they track to see whether or not it helps a person get out of poverty or just get a little more comfortable economically. Now, it's been tried. overseas for a very long time in a large way. And they've been doing some studies here in the United States across various cities like Stockton, California. They're doing something very similar in Tacoma. And now they're going to be doing it in Port Angeles. Now, again, depending on the program, you're getting either tax dollars funding this. or you're getting private funds. For the most part, we're talking about private funds, at least in this country. But their end goal is to convince you that this is good enough so that the government then funds it. And in this case... courtesy of King 5. It's a program that is going to be happening in Clallum County, courtesy of the Olympic Community Action Programs. It's called OliCap. And what they're doing is giving 25 families that are considered low income, $500 a month over the course of a year. It's going to be distributed on a debit card. They do that because they want to track how you spend all for the study. But you can spend it on whatever it is you want to spend it on.

Now, this is very similar, although shortened by a year, to what happened in Stockton, California, where they gave $500 a month. In that case, it was to 125 people, and it was over the course of two years. And they do this study, how it is the money is spent, and then they come up with these wonderful stories about how people's lives have been made better. Oftentimes, again, at least in the case of Stockton, as well as I believe in Tacoma, the people who are doing the studies are the ones who are backing the study, which means they have a clear conflict of interest, and thus they will do what they can in order to highlight all of the positive while ignoring all of the negative, or at least downplaying the negative. That's generally what it is we're dealing with. And that was 100% the case in Stockton, California, because I covered that for my book, What's Killing America. which if you get $500 a month for free, you should spend it on buying my book in bulk because then I get even more money back. And it's on sale for $16.99 on Amazon. But in this case, they're giving the money to these folks, including Haley, who is a resident in Port Angeles, who said now she's spending the money on essentials. She said this to King Five. The first thing. that I plan on doing every month when the funds get dispersed is probably just like paying for the internet and the utility bills. If I'm gonna use this, then I need to try to like actually use it to get out of the situation that we're in versus spending it willy-nilly on random stuff that isn't gonna mean much in the end. Except, of course, what is willy-nilly and spending on something that might not mean much in the end is going to be subjective, right? I mean, you can make an argument about something that you're spending the money on that I would call willy-nilly or vice versa, and you would disagree. So that is a little bit of, there's a lot of subjectivity involved in a lot of this. It's not objective. Some of it is, I think that we can all agree that if you're spending money on your rent, that's a good use of the funds, unless you told me that you were a single person who's living in a four-bedroom house that you can't afford. Right? Then, of course, we would say, well, that's ludicrous. Now, she is a mom, and she's got some struggles as someone who's low-income. I think the hard part is, like, not wanting the kids to think that they don't have anything. Now, because it's King Five, you're going to get a spin on this that is positive because this is one of those left-wing ideas that they've been shouting about for a very long time despite not having great results. They say that it has had great results. That's what it says in the story. It says with income inequality growing worldwide, this sort of guaranteed income is being studied across the globe. It's considered more of a floor to stand on than a safety net, and it appears to be working. And so then it gets into the details out of Stockton. And some of the data that they give you is so disingenuous. It's so disingenuous. And it is cherry-picked.

because you couldn't find any meaningful changes in employment in Stockton. And again, I've got an entire chapter of my book specific to universal basic income. I looked at the data. I looked at the study. What they're claiming is not necessarily true. They're handpicking numbers without giving you some details, including how they actually tracked the money that was spent. They couldn't track the money that was spent in large cases, in most cases, because people would take the money from the debit card, converted into cash. and then just spend it. So we didn't actually know. They talked about how there was some increase in employment, but that wasn't across the board. They don't tell us if it was full-time employment, if it was temporary employment. It doesn't tell us if they were about to get the job prior to starting this program. It doesn't give us any of those details at all. It just doesn't. But it says researchers have found a guaranteed income allows people to pay for childcare so they can look for work or care for loved ones. Yeah, that's true. But what is the end goal of this? The end goal is supposed to be to lift people out of poverty, right? Well, it doesn't lift people out of poverty. It doesn't. Now, are there one-offs in which people had some assistance that made life better? 100%. But it's not this silver bullet. It's just giving out free money. that's it and when you don't have any strings attached sorry if you're expecting me to fund it they're going to be strings attached i'm not going to give you money that's going to be used on booze or weed i'm not going to give you money so that you can go on a vacation even if it's well deserved that's not what i want my tax dollars to go to period I'm not okay with that. Now, if you're okay with it, great. You should donate to a fund that will give money to people who are low income to spend however it is they want. Now, the one thing that you can say that this program does, according to the studies, is it gives some people peace of mind. It might be temporary. It might be for the entirety of the program. It did increase the happiness of individuals. And obviously that makes sense. If I were to give you $500, you're probably happy that I did that. If I gave you $500 and said, you don't have to pay this back, you can spend it on whatever it is you want to spend. You're going to feel really good for that. But that's about all it does. And if you go to Finland where they did this for a very long time with way more than just a few dozen people, they found the exact same result. It made people temporarily happier, but it didn't change the employment rate in any meaningful way. Some people ended up getting jobs. Other people didn't. Some people ended up getting jobs while getting the extra amount of money. I can't remember off the top. I think it was like $600 our currency a month. But it doesn't tell you if they were going to get the job anyway, meaning did this actually help them get another job or they were already on the pathway to getting another job for this woman? Yeah, look, she says it gives her peace of mind. It makes it a lot easier for me to like breathe and not be constantly trying to figure out where to get the money to do the thing. And I can just.

relax about it for a little bit. So I read the whole King Five story. There's a package attached to it obviously because we're playing the audio. But keep in mind that they are rooting for this to work. So you're not going to get any kind of decent coverage here. You're not going to get objective coverage from King Five. And I know I can say that about pretty much any story that they do. But that's the reality. I mean, they don't even get into the criticisms and the data that supports the criticisms. They just say critics say this and then they quote this woman who says otherwise. It's Friday. I'm not going to get too upset and annoyed any more so than I am. But I did get a haircut today. And as Jackson knows, that means I'm in a pretty good mood. So let's find out what else is trending. What's trending in King County? King County announced today that their Operation Safe Transit program, it's a pilot program, has been able to arrest 82 people who have been committing crimes. while connected to either being on mass transit or right around mass transit, such as right in front of the bus stop or on a sound transit platform or at any of their facilities. They say 82 individuals arrested by the King County Sheriff's Office. And these arrests... They say are part of this larger safety effort because of this pilot that started on May 1st that wanted to improve safety conditions and the perception of the less than safe conditions of mass transit. And so they've been trying to. Not just make the arrest, but when you've got people who are fueling some of the crime and some of the perceptions and realities of taking transit, get those people the health care support that they need, the mental health care, the detox that they need. Because anyone who takes... transit, not even just in Seattle, but across the board of King County, there's a higher likelihood that you're going to run into these homeless people hanging out there. That's how they get around because they're not paying. So if you're at a sound transit platform in Tukwila or at C-Tac, yeah, you know exactly what it is I'm talking about. Now, they say of the 82 who have been arrested, three were identified as known drug dealers. The fourth had an outstanding warrant for assault, this according to the county. Deputies per Cairo 7 seized drugs. They recovered handguns. And some of them, at least one of them, was reported stolen. This is a good start.

That's the best I can say about this. Obviously, when you get 82 bad guys arrested, I'm going to say that is a positive. However, it's not just about the arrest. It is about what happens after the arrests. That's what this is about. Now, if you are getting them booked... Great. And they say they've made some policy changes. They've made exceptions, courtesy of Dow Constantine, to if you're arrested for a crime committed within the transit system, you can be booked for misdemeanor crimes at the King County Jail. Now, keep in mind that... Dow Constantine said we had such a staffing crisis that we couldn't accept any misdemeanor crimes. But all of a sudden he's making these exceptions. Why? Because it's obvious. This serves a greater good of getting people to go and take transit and get out of their cars. So he's willing to put some criminals in jail for that. That was never, his claim was never about. safety of staff and a lack of staffing at the jail. If it was a lack of staffing at the jail, it wouldn't matter whether or not these criminals were caught or alleged criminals caught in a transit-related crime, right? That doesn't mean the staffing crisis isn't still a staffing crisis. So this is obviously a bogus claim that he's made. He's got larger points to make. Now, he wants to keep... black youth and Latino youth out of jail, so he doesn't want them there. He wants to keep Latino and black adults out of jail, so he's not going to make a real move. But if they happen to be homeless or mentally ill, then he's totally okay with it in the context of serving the greater good of getting people on mass transit. That said, beggars can't be choosers. So again, I'm not going to pretend to be upset that these people are actually going to jail. But if they're going to jail for a day and then they're back out on... the transit system getting arrested, then obviously this isn't a success. Now, I'm curious about the 82 or so that they've arrested. How many are repeat offenders? Right? I'm very curious about that and they don't give those details. I'm going to try to dig in and find that because that obviously does paint a slightly different picture of a pilot program. And why is it a pilot program? How about this? Why don't you just make a rest of people who are breaking the law, period, whether they're doing it on a sound transit light rail system or a bus or, you know, on a street corner in Auburn? I don't care. where they're committing the crime they're committing the crime maybe make the arrest and then actually put them in jail and charge them i know crazy idea so find out what else is trending what's trending in pierce county now i'm not quite sure why

Jackson put this on our show sheet today, but maybe it's because I've been feeling kind of depressed about some animal stories lately. You know, a baby gorilla that's adorable being rejected by its mother. So now instead of punishing the mother, they're going to send a little baby gorilla from the Woodland Park Zoo somewhere else. That just seems wrong. We've been having these kinds of stories that the bear that swiped at a girl. After he was startled, they end up tracking it down from the Washington State Department of Wildlife ends up killing it. Like, I hate those kinds of stories. So in this case, it's about an owl that ended up getting entangled in a soccer net out in University Place. And when some young boys noticed that this little owl was stuck, they kicked it like a soccer. No, I'm kidding. They ended up. calling adults, calling their parents so that they can help this poor little thing. From Como TV, they say it happened on August 12th. Well, a group of brothers were playing soccer. Two of the five boys ran to their parents to get help. Jenna Daly told Como TV that the family of seven ran over. And the husband figured out, oh, this is a great horned owl as opposed to another owl of which I don't know what they're called. Jenna said her boys were eager to help and told nearby dog walkers what was happening saying, hey, please don't let your dogs get too close to this little owl that's caught in the net. Please, you're going to eat them. Don't. The family called the local wildlife department. and they were not a help at all saying, yeah, we'll try to get someone over to you to help out this poor little owl. We'll see what we can do. But they were told they could attempt to free the owl in the meantime if they felt comfortable enough. Now, it's my understanding that owls are not the friendliest. It's my understanding that owls can be kind of jerks and kind of vicious. In fact, wasn't it an owl that attacked that jogger that we talked to in Tacoma or Parkland? I can't remember, or Lakewood maybe. I can't remember where it was. We talked to him a few months ago. It was just an angry owl that didn't want it to go near because we're presuming that the owl's babies were there. And so especially male owls, they get pretty aggressive. But I guess in this case, the owl understood that it was tangled up and struggling. And so it was all like, okay, I'm chill. You can help me. But the dad in this Andy, he said he covered the owl with a towel to calm it because that's what happens when you cover animals and humans with towels so that they can't see what's going on, especially when they're in vulnerable positions where they can't even move. Put a towel over their head and they'll be like, oh, okay, never mind, all as well. I'm definitely no longer vulnerable now that I am still in exactly the same position, but I also can't see what's going on. Jenna said she held the owl still while her husband worked to cut the nylon netting from the talons and legs. They apparently did this for about 20 minutes, Como says. Then at one point, Jenna was all like, hey, you know, this is taking too long. Let's switch places. I'm going to cut the net.

Why don't you hold this owl? It's creepy holding this owl anyway. So they switch places. She attempted to finish removing the rest of the nylon netting, according to Como. Then she said, our boys named it Eleanor, the owl in a towel. How'd they know it was a female? Well, they don't see gender, and Eleanor is now a non-binary name. It was actually very cute the way it turned its head all the way around to follow us as we work to free it. Now... Ironically, the story doesn't actually say that they freed the owl. It doesn't give us an ending. However, I'm going to guess that yes, indeed it was freed. And I'm looking at a photo of it. Now, the dude has got his hands in these massive gloves. Almost like they were meant to capture, capture like the hawk at Seahawk games where it goes into the crowd and then it comes back and lands on the guy's arm. That's the kind of gloves that this guy has on. And it looks angry. On one photo, it just looks angry like, almost, but angry with itself. The eyes just have this look of, I can't believe I'm in this position. I can't believe I did this to myself. And now these two goofy family members are helping me get. This is so, God, I'm so humiliated. All the other owls are going to talk about me and they're going to make fun of me. They're going to be like, hey, where were you? I heard you got stuck in a net and had to be rescued by two doofuses. And he'll want to defend them as not doofuses because obviously they did the right thing. But then he's going to have to lean in and call them doofuses because otherwise. He's going to be the one who's going to be the butt of all the jokes. But he definitely looks like he's going to be judged once he gets out. They did end up freeing him according to the photo, even the coma didn't want to include it in the story. It was freed and it just left. It didn't even say thank you to the two adults. It just left. It's like, fine. I've been trying. I've had to pee so badly, but it was too hard to do it because I was stuck in the net upside down. And I'm pee shy, so I'm not going to pee while you can watch me. And I'm certainly not going to pee in your arm, on your arm or in your hands after what you just did to save me. That would be kind of rude. So it just flew off, which I would argue is more rude. I'd rather you pee in my hand than just fly off without even so much as a thank you. Jerk. Let's find out what else is trending. What's trending? Who cares? We're running out of time, but I wanted to jump into the story because it's out of Gig Harbor, and it is so weird. I've never heard of something like this happening. There is a place called Escape Hour in Gig Harbor. This is one of those escape room businesses where you go into a puzzle and you basically in whatever setting you're in. You have to figure out clues to find the key to get out of the locked room. You have a certain amount of time to do it before you lose and then they just open it and they kick you out and laugh at you for being too dumb. But in this case, for the last nine years, Escape Hour has been operating, has been thriving according to our sister station, Cairo News Radio. But then they got hit by cyber thugs, cyber criminals. And what they ended up doing...

weirdly enough, was release the escape hour secrets to the public and to the competition. So it sounds like it hacked into the system to find out all the answers to the different escape room puzzles within this business. And then they published it online. Which means anyone who goes looking for them would be able to find it, thus would have no reason to go into the escape room. Here's the owner, Kelsey, speaking to our sister station. The layout of the experience, what props we have, puzzles, the codes, everything. We're like, how in the world could he even have this? That is insane. Here's what the hacker said. I'll just cut to the case. I need money. I just want to show you that I've been able to get your intellectual property. Gig Harbor PD forward the case to the FBI's internet crime complaint center. And so now she says that she thinks the losses could be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Here's the glass half full approach to looking at this story, even though what she's going through is awful. Who's going online and looking for secrets to getting out of an escape room? Like is someone going out there searching Reddit? for some ways to get out of having to spend too much time going to escape hour in Gig Harbor. I think she'll be okay. I don't know how they promoted this all. I mean, for all we know, the hacker posted it on their Facebook page of people who were asking for info on, you know, what are your hours? I'd like to go tomorrow with my kids. That's possible, obviously, but I'm willing to bet she's going to be okay, or at least I'm hoping so. 1-800-4-65-7-74 your text. You're listening to the Jason Ranch Show.

to the Jason Rance's show. Thank you so much for tuning in. Don't forget, please make sure you become a podcast subscriber, not just because if you ever miss a moment of the show, you get to actually, well, catch up and hear it. But also because I get bonused on how many podcasts downloads I get. So that would be helpful to me. I do have a nasty shoe habit and a gambling addiction that must be funded. Yesterday, we talked a little bit about it. You had the economic plan that was announced, at least in part, of a piece of her economic plan by Kamala Harris at her rally, the first event she held with Joe Biden after he had the knives that were stuck in his back, those wounds healed. She basically said she's going to provide. some sort of policy that or legislation, I guess, that bans price gouging that puts price controls in place, specifically on grocery stores. Now, didn't really get a whole bunch of specifics on how that would happen, although I would note. that this is a response to being called a socialist or a communist or hardcore progressive is to then put in place anti-price gouging. legislation or policies. Now, what was curious was the way that this is being spun by the New York Times because they're saying that, well, you know, price gouging, what's price gouging to you could be price gouging to someone else in trying to pretend that this is somehow a viable policy that's going to work. But of course, it's number one, not a viable policy. And then number two, to be clear, is an absolute... 100% political stunt meant to get people to think that the only reason why their groceries are high is because of price, just greedy corporations behind our big grocery, let's just call it. Of course, it has nothing to do with Kamala Harris's policies with Joe Biden. It has nothing to do with the Biden Harris economic. policies. It has nothing to do with their Inflation Reduction Act that actually increased inflation. It has everything to do with just greedy people. Now, it's not a policy that will do anything, including Get Institute. Let's say by some sheer happenstance or we're being punished by God, she becomes president. She's not going to do anything here. She's not putting it in place. I mean, you even have economists who are liberal, some of whom worked for Obama calling this out. In fact, in the New York Times, Jason Furman, who's a Harvard economist who worked with the Obama administration, said that this is, quote, this is not a sensible policy. And I think the biggest hope is that it ends up being a lot of rhetoric and no reality. There's no upside here. And there is some downside. It is just being panned by folks.

Dave Ramsey, who knows a thing or two about finances, was on with Ingram last night. It's not sustainable because it's artificial. If you just put a lid on something, and if you want to explore what really happens, just go back to the 1970s. We tried it. There was a whole movement for price controls across everything because inflation was out of control and rampant just like it is now. And so it's been tried. It does not work. What works is to flood the market with supply. Lots of oil. means lower oil prices. Lots of labor means lower labor prices. Lots of whatever means lower prices. It's a simple supply demand curve. It's called economics and it's called the free market economics. When you insert government in it and try to artificially cramp it down, it simply does not work because you can only hold that hose for so long until the pressure builds up and then it blows on you. He's of course correct. And I saw an article in the Atlantic. I will be honest, I didn't read the whole thing because it's an article in the Atlantic. But the headline by Josh Barrow is 100% correct. It's titled, Harris's plan is economically dumb, but politically smart. Now, I agree with that. It is politically smart because it's taking advantage of the fact that people don't know really what she's talking about and, again, might be fooled into thinking. that the reason why they can't afford eggs or can't afford a baby formula is because of price gouging, right? They won't know this. She doesn't even, Kamala Harris doesn't even understand the plan. She couldn't provide any specific details as to why she thinks price gouging is at play here. And maybe some reporter one day will be able to ask her. Maybe one reporter might be able to pose a question to the candidate for president on the Democrat side. But of course she has to be willing to actually take questions. But she's not. Because she might get put into a corner to defend her about face on all of these policies that she's changed her mind on or get specific as to where she stands on this issue. Can she even define price gouging? Because as the New York Times says, well, you know, it has different definitions. Okay, what's the definition? And how would it be utilized here, Kamala Harris? Please tell us. Please let us know. I mean, it is so silly what it is we're doing here. And as Byron Donalds's pointed out this morning on Fox business, it's very similar to what Dave just said. It just, it does not work and cannot work. They don't work. They've never worked. The only reason why you even propose this is because you're trying to run away from your own economic record of the Biden Harris administration. Which is why it's political smart. Which is harmed. working families, middle-income families, seniors on fixed income, black people, white people, Hispanic people, Republicans, Democrats, and dependents. Everybody who's hurting from this inflation is because of Kamala Harris's tie-breaking votes in the United States Senate for the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act. Stu, they created a labor shortage and then they stubbornly raised inflation. with these crazy Green New Deal policies. And now they want to put their boot on the neck of companies. What you'll see if she has her way are lower supplies of goods and services to people who need them most. This stuff has never worked in any country at any time in the history of the world, let alone the history of the United States. And when you look specifically at the data, it even...

dismisses wholly their silly position because this is not just a position of Kamala Harris where she's blaming the, you know, the big grocers, basically, the greedy corporations. This was coming from the White House. We got that. press release back in March, I think it was. I remember talking about it where they were basically saying the reason why your prices are so high, despite the fact that the supply chain issues have been all figured out, were back to normal. It's because of greed. But when you look at the net profit for grocery stores in 2023, it had the lowest level. It's had since 2019. So it's actually gone down since COVID. 1.6% was the net profit margin. Now, does that sound like they're making hand over fist profit because of greed? 1.6% profit margin? No, of course not. Of course not. Profit margins in groceries or just food in general, food industry in general, is very, very, very, very low. Very low. And despite the fact that the supply chain issues have been ironed out for the most part, that doesn't really mean anything when it comes to a basic supply. The supply has to be there. You can have a working system amongst the supply chain, meaning the product can get from point A to point B because we got rid of any of the problems in the middle, some of the functional problems. But you still have to have the supply. to then transport. It's fine if you have a working train or a working boat or trucks that have gas in them so that they can actually get for point A to point B. That's the simple way to talk about the supply chain. Okay. You still have that products that get on that boat, on that train, in that truck. They can complain all they want about corporate greed and note that the only people who are making those claims are the socialists on the left. We're not hearing this coming from folks outside of what's his name, Robert Reich, for example, the former labor secretary. And he's the one that, for example, USA Today asked the question, could this actually work to bring down prices of food? And they said opinions are mixed. And who did they talk to? Or at least they pulled from one of his ex post, Robert Reich. And he says that this is purely, the high prices are purely placed on big corporations with monopoly power. And yet again, you would expect that if that were the case, their net profit would be more than 1.6%. Would it not? Wouldn't it be way more than that? Or are they greedy, but not that greedy? I mean, there are levels of greed. There are levels of greed. Of course, we know it. We know it. And, you know, they're telling us that the best thing that can happen is the government basically intervening.

And if you are very, very far to the left like Kamala Harris and you're in charge and the FTC is under you and your influence, what do you think they're going to do? What do you think it's going to do? She writes in this column, it's hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is. It is, in all but name, a sweeping set of government enforced price controls across every industry, not only food. Supply and demand would no longer determine prices or profit levels, far off Washington bureaucrats would. The FTC would be able to tell, say, a Kroger in Ohio, the acceptable price it can charge for milk. At best, this would lead to shortages, black markets, and hoarding, among other distortions, seen previous times countries tried to, seen previous times countries tried to limit price growth by Fiat. There's a reason narrower price gouging laws that exist in some U.S. states are rarely invoked. At worse, it might accidentally raise prices. That's because, among other things, the legislation would ban companies from offering lower prices to a big customer such as Costco than to Joe's Corner Store, which means quantity discounts are in trouble. Worse, it would require public companies to publish detailed internal data about costs, margins, and contracts and their future pricing strategies. Posting cost and pricing strategies publicly is a fantastic way for companies to collude to keep prices higher, all facilitated by the government. Really well done opinion piece that I highly recommend you check out. Again, it's at the Washington Post. There's also one over at the Atlantic. You're listening to The Jason Rancho.

Welcome back to The Jason Rants Show. Dennis Quaid has a movie coming out called Reagan. He plays Ronald Reagan. He is, I think he's behind this film from the producing aspect. He decided to move in the direction of kind of taking on his own projects and promoting his own projects because, well, as he quickly realized, this is a guy who is conservative. And as a result of that, he says he's pretty much been blackballed and targeted, not just in Hollywood, but by big tech. He's had his marketing campaign on Facebook throttled, he says. And he said the reason that Facebook gave is absolute nonsense. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever. He was on with Joe Rogan's podcast. We're kind of going through with Reagan right now, the movie. We're going through a... We're being, censorship is happening to us through Facebook. They have, Facebook banned advertising. A lot of the podcasts, this one will probably be banned on Facebook as well that's over the last couple of months. So why is Facebook throttling or, and throttle just means it's preventing it from being seen widely. We get throttled on Facebook daily. It's like it's a permanent thing on our Facebook account, which is why I prefer you go to my Twitter feed. or to even Instagram or newsbreak. Like the stories I post, the links I post are all available on X. Every single day when I write something, X will have the links or you can go directly to KTTH.com. I still post them on Facebook because throttling doesn't mean that no one sees it. But we went on our Facebook page, even just on videos. We were getting into like 50, 60,000 views on video clips that I would post to 100 to maybe 200 views. Stories that used to get clicked on 10,000 times or so now get clicked on 10 times or so. And it just happened. It just started overnight one day. And it seems pretty obvious why. And while I reached out to them asking like, what's going on? Oh, you know, you just here's some tips on how to better perform and how to, you know, get engagement up. It's like, no, no, no, no, no.

I didn't do anything different. I'm doing exactly the same thing. You're the ones who are causing this problem. No, sir, I looked at the account. There's no, there's nothing going on. You're lying. You're lying. Or no one is using Facebook anymore, despite the fact that I have 50,000 or so followers on my Facebook account. So why did Facebook take down the ads for Reagan? The reason being was that the content in it was an attempt to sway an election. A movie. I mean, the last time I heard, you know, Reagan was on the ballot 40 years ago was the last time. Do you think if you made a positive Obama movie, it would be to sway an election? Well, there was an Obama movie that came out during an election year in 2020. And, you know, nothing about that. And to me, I mean, just the act of... of betting or censoring that material as you were talking about is an attempt to sway an election. He's right. Maybe I'll go see Reagan. It comes out next week. Maybe this will be the time, because I haven't gone to a movie in a long time. Maybe I'll go see that next week. Quaid was also on Fox News at night with Trace Gallagher, which, by the way, I'll be on tonight at 8 o'clock if you want to check it out. If not, I'll post it, not on Facebook, but I'll post it on my ex account and Instagram under Jason Rance. But he also calls the censorship just very bizarre. Well, I am baffled by, to tell you the truth, because it was banned and they haven't even seen the film. So it seems like they don't want other people to see the film either, I guess. But, you know, we'll set up a screening for them any time and you can see for themselves. Now, by the way, the only positive in all of this, when you censor content. And you do so in obnoxious ways, clearly hypocritical ways, politically motivated ways. What ends up happening is you might end up bringing more attention to it. And so I'm wondering if now more people realize that Reagan is coming out, that Dennis Quaid is behind it, that it's a movie that comes out on August 30th. Whereas before. people maybe didn't even know. And I'm just looking at the Fandango listings, for those of you who are wondering, it's playing all over the place. It's going to be opened in Seattle, in Renton. It's going to be at the Woodinville AMC Lows, go out in south center, the AMC there, the Alderwood Mall. The Regal in Auburn, the Galaxy in Gig Harbor, the Regal in Marysville and Lakewood, the AMC in Lakewood. So this is a major release in Washington State, at least when I'm seeing on the western side of Washington State. So maybe we should all go out next week to watch the movie just to give them to the support.

to send a clear message to our buddies at Facebook and meta that you're not going to be able to get away with this kind of stuff anymore, that the second that we find out you're going after content because you don't like the message, which I guess you don't like what will presumably show the life of Reagan, probably not even in a negative or positive light, just it's a biopic, but they might have some positive parts about it. A positive parts about his administration and Reagan that Facebook doesn't like. And if anyone's reminded of, you know, conservatism actually working, that could hurt Kamala Harris. So we'll go ahead and throttle. Next time they do things like that, let's just all commit to supporting whatever the content is that they're trying to go after. And let's just let's start that right now with. Reagan, which comes out next Friday. Well, technically next Thursday night, but the weekend big release where it's wide will be on Friday. I actually, and the funny thing is, I actually wanted to see this movie. And I did forget what I did forget it was coming out because I don't watch television all that often. And the only time I see commercials if I am watching TV is if I'm fast forwarding on my YouTube TV DVR recorded program. Right. I mean, every once in a while I'll get targeted with Reagan ads, I suppose, on YouTube or something. But for the most part, I even forgot the film was coming out. So thank you very much, Meta, for censoring Reagan. Dennis Quaid goes on Fox News at night and the Joe Rogan experience and then talks about it, thus reminding me to look on my Fandango account and putting a little reminder so that I know to check out the movie next week. It's the Jason Rancho. Still kicking off the covers in the middle of the night? Meet Sheeks. Sheeks makes cooling sheets, pillows, comforters, and sleepwear designed to help end overheating and sleep-disrupting temperature swings. Our performance fabrics transfer heat 10 times more effectively, feel cool to the touch, and customers have left thousands of five-star reviews. So if you want deeper, more comfortable sleep this season, go to sheiks.com. That's sheeks.com, spelled s-he-e-e-e-X-com. Right now, Sheiks also offers free domestic shipping and a 60-night guarantee. Sleep cooler, sleep better. Shop Sheeks today at S-H-E-E-X.com. Having problems getting a good night's sleep? Apollo Neuro may be the help your body needs. Apollo Neuro is a wearable designed to calm your nervous system so you can fall asleep faster and sleep deeper without medication or side effects. It works by sending gentle, silent vibrations through your wrist that signal safety to your body, like a hug for your nervous system. The result? Fewer wake-ups, deeper sleep, and mornings where you actually feel rested. It's not just a sleep tracker. Apollo Neuro actively helps you regulate your body, and SmartVibs AI automatically personalizes the experience for sleep, calm, focus, and recovery.

It's scientifically backed, with clinical trial participants gaining up to 60 minutes of sleep a night. Try it risk-free for 30 days. That is A-P-O-L-L-O-N-E-U-R-O-com. Visit apoloneur.com and take $99 off today.