Podcasts about Overton

In this episode, Vance Crowe shares a keynote delivered at the inaugural Flinchbaugh Forum for Agricultural Policy in Manhattan, Kansas, honoring Dr. Barry Flinchbaugh's legacy of courageous, civil discourse. Vance unpacks the concept of “worthy adversaries,” explaining how respect and even resentment can guide individuals toward those who sharpen their ideas, and offers practical tools for productive disagreement: steelmanning, providing “click” moments of fascination, asking “how” instead of “why,” saying “tell me more,” and diagramming arguments to debate ideas shoulder-to-shoulder rather than person-to-person. Vance also explores how the Overton window shifts what's thinkable and why humility and openness to change are essential for changing minds.To test these principles, Vance presents a Peter Thiel–style paradox: Washington is correct that America needs more farmers, but mistaken in believing that printing money and transfer payments will secure that future. The argument is made that relentless monetary expansion inflates land and input costs faster than farm returns, and a provocative case is presented that Bitcoin—due to its digital scarcity—may siphon the monetary premium out of farmland over time. Vance challenges listeners to find their own worthy adversaries, articulate their own Peter Thiel paradox, and engage in courageous, curiosity-driven dialogue to keep politics rooted in conversation rather than coercion.

approved safe and guaranteed to prevent algae from c- coming back for at least 2 years No harsh chemicals no damage no black streaks just a clean beautiful roof that lasts Call Watkins Construction and Roofing at 601-966-8233 or visit nomoreroofstains.com today With a single handshake John Ravenstein buys millions in diamonds And that's the buying power it takes to be Mississippi's direct diamond importer You see we sell so many diamonds the finest diamond cutters from around the world come to us He's got the million dollar handshake I'm John And I'm Rachel Ravenstein That's why here at Juneker Jewelry you'll shop from 10 times the loose diamonds you'll find in average jewelry stores Because finding just the right diamond at the right price the perfect diamond for her is what Juneker Jewelry is all about Best of all we guarantee the lowest price in the state We even have 12 months interest free financing for qualified buyers So when you're ready we're ready at Mississippi's direct diamond importer And I want to shake your hand And make her the happiest girl in the world Juneker Jewelry Company Mississippi's direct diamond importer From anywhere in Mississippi we're at 1485 Highland Colony Parkway just south of 463 and Madison and junekerjewelry.com Pickup truck sports car motorcycle minivan townhouse 2story farmhouse fixer upper What you drive and where you live is different for everyone so it's important to have insurance that fits your needs and is just right for you At Shelter Insurance we understand that which is why our agents help you design a comprehensive auto home and life insurance plan Insurance that fits just right Proudly serving southeastern United States come see me Jamie Creel Ridgeland and Flora Shelter Insurance Broadcasting live from the Men's Health and Women's Wellness of Mississippi studios This is The Clay Edwards Show Welcome back in to The Clay Edwards Show Uh if you're watching online we got the volume fixed I'm gonna strangle uh Chip Matthews or whomever uh changed the setting But hey it is what it is It is what it is Uh we got it fixed here so I apologize if y'all missed that first segment there if you were watching online It will be available on the podcast the audio only podcast Uh but thank you to everybody who text in and dropped comments in It's all the more reasons why I need to keep the comments pulled up so I can see that I have a problem that I forgot to pull them up and- And it's a shame because it was the most salacious 30 minutes of radio I've ever done Absolutely If y'all missed that you missed I mean just breaking news and- I'll probably never be that intense again not by me either Me either Uh I said things that could get me canceled Y- uh finally I'll admit I said some things that could get me canceled We we I think we both called ourselves fat asses Uh the uh chronic fat ass syndrome was was the reference yeah I like it I like it Hey speaking of uh of all that good stuff guys you know one thing we got on this radio show is a bunch of great sponsors that are restaurants And I went and ate at one of them yesterday I had a business lunch with my buddy Brad Burleson over at U List Realty in uh in Edwin And and uh we uh went to McBee's And you know it's s- struggle when I go to these places and it's lunch has been my achilles heel 'cause if I eat lunch it's I'm usually gonna eat a healthy lunch And I don't mean healthy in the weight loss sense I mean in the- Healthy healthy Imma eat that blue plate Sure And but I did good yesterday 'cause they always have like a he- you you know you learn to create healthy options So I went with the grilled pork chop instead of the fried And I was proud of myself Yeah And I've got back I'll get one these soft drink kicks When and they know Christy the bartender my friend she'll she'll like "Dr Pepper and a water?" I'm like "Just the water." There you go "Just the water." But anyhow I say all that to say the blue plate special of the day at McBee's whether you're eating healthy or not they got you covered 'cause you can do the chicken breast but today's Thursday the special is red sauce spaghetti and it is oh so good if you like spaghetti I'm not even a red sauce spaghetti fan I like alfredos- Really Okay and the chicken spaghettis and stuff But I will eat it here and there Like if somebody cooks it I'm not pushing it away But I did I wanted to try everything on the menu Yeah So I could honestly give you my my opinion on it Their red sauce spaghetti's great but if that's not your thing they do have um hamburger steak which is works great for keto They have chicken breast or country fried steak And of course the vegetables okra and stewed tomatoes black-eyed peas turnip greens rice and gravy side salad lima beans green beans mashed potatoes mac and cheese fried okra or fries So you know if you been doing this long enough you know you can create you a carb less plate lunch right there from McBee's And uh I I went a little half and half yesterday I did get the fried okra 'cause they have in my opinion the best fried okra in town It's hard to pass fried okra man It it it really is Let's uh let's take a call real quick before we jump into this conversation on the Mazda Jackson phone line Hey good morning you're on the air Good morning Clay Uh I was headed toward I-220 yesterday going to Industrial Drive take my son some lunch I live in Rankin County of course But on the way up there that going there is nothing but a junk It's trash and I was thinking since the fair was gonna be in town everybody was gonna clean up everything mattresses on the highway Uh it was just it was just unbelievable And where was that at 20 westbound going to I-220- Oh oh to Industrial Drive Oh oh yeah It was terrible Yeah it it's bad C- like of course I come through there every day and I'm just wildly disappointed I will say that at least up through the Ellis Avenue area there they do have the street lights working again Uh so kudos to MDOT for that Okay Okay but everything else it it was just terrible the fair will be here today and they would have everything cleaned up but no Ah it's unfortunate- So but hey what you know if you don't expect anything you won't be disappointed when you don't get it.That is true And I didn't expect nothing else from out of Highlands County But thank you Have a great day Enjoy the show Bye You Thanks I love- Look- I love my callers Ca- can I say this though I actually do think that Mayor John Horn's doing a good job so far I do too Yeah I mean look are are there things that people wish would happen faster Yeah But if you look at sort of the level of activity you know just getting out and filling potholes and paving streets and the stuff that's the basic blocking and tackling I think they're looking for the right police chief obviously right now Um you gotta give them a little credit compared to where we were were you know just- Oh sure a few months ago Well you know it's like I said for the the year leading up to the election whoever wins if they'll just come in and quit doing all the wrong things right they'll they're gonna look really smart Just just letting you know like a like letting a a s- a let- letting a a wound heal on your arm a scab If we just quit picking at it it'll heal Uh the last mayor and the administration in general just kept picking at scabs And for the analogy here it's like uh traditionally you know for 100 years for government to run correctly you just take a right take a right take a right Uh at every opportunity to take a traditional right chalk away to the left And if you would just get back to taking the rights just doing the right thing period You don't have to be the smartest guy in the room but it's gotten so bad if you'll just do that again you're gonna look great And I think John's getting back to just do it just let's just quit trying to reinven- vent the wheel and just let it go round and round and some of this will autocorrect Yeah and look John's smart Um I think he's surrounding himself with some smart people I mean we'll see how it plays out It's earl- it's too early to say that it's going to be a a raving success But comparatively already they're doing things and I think have kind of built the right kind of team Um and then you know you look at the level of cooperation that I think you're going to get from the legislature from the governor um they all like him I mean he had a history of working across the aisle and being easy to talk to and easy to work with And I think people are gonna want to help um you know as we come up into this next session And so I think Jackson's like if if I I know part of of your brand has been like hey Jackson's not where it needs to be and that's true I think Jackson has an opportunity right now to right some wrongs Yeah 100% Look I said it straight up Now there's gonna be some things I talk about 'cause this this is my brand this is my show I mean I'm going to talk about Jackson crime and some of the things I see that are just- Sure out of control But like just the culture rot more so But I did say I'm I'm gonna give it a year bef- unless there's something just egregious I'm gonna give John a year to find the bathrooms so to say before I start really peeling back and you know being nitpicky 'Cause I I think that there's gonna be a lot there's a lot to un- to un-F around here and I'm gonna give him an opportunity to get that get his people in place let them figure out where the bathrooms are at And I'll be honest there the these people I think the expectation is you gotta come in and start working from day one and you're seeing that You mentioned it with the potholes And so these people they're hiring they seem to be hitting the ground running and that's uh wildly impressive uh based on the last 7 or 8 years And look I I would say this too is like uh it's possible to do both things to recognize that progress is being made in a way that is at least somewhat encouraging and simultaneously not to hide from the fact that there's some significant challenges in Jackson that are gonna be hard for anybody to solve for Uh no no doubt No doubt Because I I look I'm exci- I'm optimistic for the first time instead of pessimistic that some things are gonna get done and that we're gonna start enforcing some laws around here And little stuff like code ordinance and whatnot are gonna be big things And not just Quit just going after businesses to go after How about start going after people for the broke down cars in their yard All this little stuff You know get back to the quality of life things Get back to people holding the people accountable for not cutting their grass holding businesses accountable uh illegal signage I mean let's get back to enforcing what's on the books Code ordinances to me is just like the number one thing that the last administration just said "Nah We're we're not gonna bully the citizens." Yeah I mean I think this is true not just in Jackson but everywhere but having pride in where you live is a pretty good indicator of how of of the quality of life that you're gonna have Well you know look Russ one of the things for me that really grinded my gears and I did not intend to get on this but we're here now uh there's a crew of guys and God bless them and I don't talk about them much but it's the guys they're all from like Rankin and Madison County and they've been cleaning the interstates and all that It's Casey Bridges and some other guys and they're doing they're doing great great work Uh but uh there's a part of me that wishes they didn't do it and this is just selfish I get it I should be glad they're doing it and I should I should give them their roses right But they're they're doing it for a bunch of people who really don't appreciate it overwhelmingly They the second they cleaned up the interstate pressure wash it all their stuff these people and some of the comments I've seen online from people is "Y'all supposed to be doing it Y'all should be doing it We shouldn't be having to Y'all all left Jackson The least you can do is come back and clean it." I'm like how about thank you How about that H- how about y'all clean your own city Or how about I don't know the people that we pay taxes to clean and pressure wash the interstates and bridges and everything else how about they do You know Like the citizenry shouldn't have to be uh doing Yeah look and I think there's I think there's a danger a- and I came up in churches I came up doing mission work um and part of the danger that I saw in church mission work is like you would take a group of youth to some city right in the United States presumably with the thought that you were gonna share the gospel of Christ but really it was a work trip And you'd go into a neighborhood and you'd clean up trash or you'd paint houses um and and you were helping to beautify where people lived and at some level it reinforces bad behavior right Because in an ideal world some random person doesn't come and clean Russ's yard- Right 'cause Russ is trashy Russ gets out and cleans his yard because he cares enough about where he lives whether it's an 800 square foot or 8,000 square foot house right He cares enough about where he lives that he's gonna take care of his own property And if everybody does that communities get a lot safer they get a lot closer to each other um and so at some level it's reinforcing um bad behavior if somebody else comes and does it for you when it's something that you're capable of doing yourself and should be motivated to do Yeah How about don't throw trash out your car when you're driving down the interstate That's a good start How about don't litter so people don't have to do this Yeah I mean these are real simple things You know we're we're rewarding bad behavior Well how about y'all come pressure wash my driveway cut my yard I'm doing I'm doing good You know what I'm saying And look there are there are exceptions to this right If you have if you have an 85-year-old live-in widow who can't get out and cut the grass then I think it's awesome that somebody will go and volunteer to cut her grass Amen And that should happen right And so that's that's a different scenario Like I would rather see that energy put in that direction you know find out the little who the little old ladies are that need the help the little old men whatever Let's And I'm not saying people aren't helping them but I'd rather see that than um cleaning up the interstates and all that stuff Again I think they're d- I don't want to diminish what they're doing I think it's great But I feel like you're enabling the people who are littering and doing this I don't know I'm just wildly conflicted I think it enables bad behavior as y- as kind of it rewards bad behavior as you said Well and look I mean you see this internationally and I think even progressives now recognize some of the damage that was done globally in what was a well-intentioned thing like "Hey we're gonna go feed the world," right "There are hungry people we're gonna go feed the world." Or uh "There are places where there's not indoor plumbing or running water" or whatever we're gonna go fix that We did it for people and never taught people th- that skillset in a way that even today there's reliance there And so I think the challenge has always been like how do you be tenderhearted and compassionate the way that I would argue the Bible requires you to be while simultaneously recognizing that sometimes being tenderhearted and compassionate is forcing people to get into uncomfortable situations to figure it out for themselves Yeah Uh what I feel like is kinda done too and this is just from me directly here is it's raised the price of tea in China a bit 'cause now when I get to arguing about people and the things that they've done to Jackson "Well why ain't you out there like them other guys cleaning up the interstate?" 'Cause I'm not gonna clean up your mess I'm not your mama is why God bless them that they feel moved to do that and that's their ministry My ministry is putting my boot up your ass and and telling you that you've screwed up That's my ministry I mean look people were mad at MrBeast was it about a year ago 'Cause he was going into parts of Africa that didn't have wells And was digging wells And I mean I even again even really progressive voices were saying this is counterproductive because really what needs to happen in those settings is like people have the resources and institutional knowledge to do that for themselves 'cause that's sustainable long term Yeah And those wells were already dried up and no good and been robbed and pillaged and everything else from my understanding is It was all just a big waste and look at- Although I I will say that that guy tries to do a lot of good He really does He does He does I'm not hating on him Uh he he does try to do a lot of good but he gets paid very well for the good deeds he does That's true too You know with content monetization But hey I'm not a hater on that at all Thank y'all for the uh money I made the last couple months on uh my content All right Let's take a break When we come back we're actually gonna jump into the TPUSA versus Clinton uh debacle that's going on out there Don't go anywhere here on The Clay Edwards Show 1039 WYAB This is Central Mississippi's stimulating talk 1039 WYAB Pocahontas Jackson.It's time to fall into savings at Mazda of Jackson With ball games road trips and all the busyness don't miss a thing with 2.9% financing for 36 months on a new 2025 Mazda CX-5 Or get 2.9% financing for 63 months on the 2025 CX-90 One-year maintenance is included on your new vehicle purchase And take advantage of the pre-tariff inventory that's almost gone Shop online at mazdaofjackson.com or visit Mazda of Jackson I-55 Frontage Road in Jackson Looking for the ultimate reset for your body and skin At Core Wellness and Recovery you'll find next-level services like cryotherapy red light therapy infrared sauna body sculpting and advanced facials Whether you want to boost performance recover faster or just feel your best Core Wellness and Recovery delivers real results with 0 downtime From muscle relief to radiant skin this is self-care redefined Come experience the future of wellness Core Wellness and Recovery just off Highland Colony in Ridgeland Book now at corewellnessandrecovery.com Hey guys This is KC Ellis with LS Autoplex located on Highway 471N Brandon LS Autoplex known as Little Truck City is your old-school mom-and-pop-style dealership that's family-owned and operated We specialize in 4wheel drive trucks but don't worry we have cars and SUVs too Looking to sell your vehicle Bring it by LS Autoplex where we pay fair market value and we cut you a check on the spot Need your vehicle serviced or repaired We can handle that too Shop us online or set your appointment at lsautoplex.com That's lsautoplex.com Tri-County Tree Service the Jackson Metro's premier company to handle all of your tree service needs Russ Bourland and his team specialize in large tree low-impact removal Tri-County Tree Service has the right equipment to safely handle the most technical trim jobs or tree removals Storm damage can happen year-round so let them clean it up and they'll deal with your insurance claim Tri-County Tree Service By phone at 601-TREE-GUY or online at tricotreeservice.com That's tricotreeservice.com Craving something extraordinary in Jackson Manship Restaurant is where your taste buds hit the jackpot Join us for happy hour every day from 3:00 to 6:00 PM where your wallet will thank you and your stomach will sing Indulge in half-priced woodfire pizzas because why pay full price for half the fun And for just $5 dive into our private barrel bourbon picks That's right luxury on a budget Plus beat the heat with our frozen drink specials a tropical escape without the travel expenses Make your way to the Manship where happy hour isn't just a time it's an experience Are you a wine enthusiast Are you looking for the perfect bottle to elevate your next dinner The ultimate destination for wine lovers is 042 Wine & Spirits on West Government Street in Brandon The locally owned the locally operated 042 Wine offers something for everyone from local favorites to rare vintage wines 042 Wine & Spirits can help you find your next favorite wine The friendly and knowledgeable folks at 042 Wine & Spirits will help you find the perfect bottle for every occasion 042 Wine & Spirits located on West Government Street in Brandon ......... For decades you've known the name Martin's for good times great food and the best live music Now that's happening at 2 locations downtown Jackson and Livingston Check the websites martinslivingtonms.com and martinsdowntownjxn.com for the many special events and live music lineups You can chill with friends on the big patio at the Livingston location and enjoy the blue plate lunches and nightly drink specials Martin's downtown and Livingston Broadcasting live from the Men's Health & Women's Wellness of Mississippi studios this is the Clay Edwards Show Welcome back in to the Clay Edwards Show Uh we got about 5 or 6 minutes left on this hour here 6 minutes so let's just jump straight in I'm not gonna do an ad read right now Russ TPUSA verse Uh first off this is the first time you and I have had a chance to talk since the assassination of Charlie Kirk Let let me ask you this We You're g- you're here for the next hour right Uh I can stay for a while yeah Okay So w- we can peel this onion back a little slower When when that happened man take me back to 'Cause it's it's gonna be That's the moment I'll never forget That's 9/11 like 9/11 I'll never forget who I was with exactly what I was doing the whole thing is just It is f- f- like frozen in time in my brain the way I felt and everything I'm sure you've gotten threats- Yeah uh over the years You know I know I have Uh te- take us back to the the day of the assassination t- as this all this whole thing unfolded What Where were you at What were you doing How did you feel Put us in the timeline please Yeah yeah I was just I was just working Um you know I think I I happened to see on Twitter the the closeup video and I've never seen anything like that in my life Like I've I practiced law for a while and some of my practice uh involved life insurance claims and so I've seen photos that are gruesome I've never seen sort of in real time the amount of blood that was involved in that And I don't say that to be gory or salacious but- No I know what you mean it it that that alone the injury alone impacted me I think it was an odd moment in the sense that like we had seen President Trump obviously get shot in Butler Pennsylvania I didn't have the same emotional reaction to that as I had to the Kirk assassination Part of it is that Trump obviously survived I was gonna say the immediate That would be different if he hadn't of survived or hadn't got up on his own- I I think that's right Yeah I think the other part of it though is uh and and this may come across wrong is like at some level if there's gonna be a political assassination you would expect it to be someone in Congress or a president right Somebody that actually has the ability to impact policy that impacts people Charlie Kirk had none of that He had no political power other than the fact that his ideas impacted people Had influence And so the the thing that I think was disturbing is somebody that clearly doesn't have nearly the audience or scale that he's got but who has um been involved in conversations around policy for a long time is like "Hey somebody could be killed just for what they think." Um in a country that has been built off of the idea that the free exchange of ideas is sort of bedrock to who we are as a people part of what makes us ex- exceptional And so in that moment I think there was a vulnerability You mentioned 9/11 Obviously 9/11 involved 3,000 people dying it involved wars after the fact so a different scale but a similar type of vulnerability where you go "Oh my gosh like things like this can happen." To everyday people To everyday people Yeah Um and there was also this poignant moment in my brain of he's on a college campus and if you think about the whole point of college it really should be a marketplace of ideas where you test what ideas work and what ideas don't Iron sharpens iron kind of thing And so that's the that is the environment that should be most suitable to real exploration and debate of tough issues Um and so I think it was just sort of that juxtaposition of like here's a normal guy who got killed for his ideas and thoughts on a college campus um and it created a sense of real vulnerability I think it also woke up a lot of people who said like "Hey look this is not just a words versus words thing." Like we're at a moment societally where people are so angry at each other and see each other so much as their enemy that stuff like this can happen Yeah yeah That's a great that's a great explanation of it It it was just the the vulnerability and it really made me take a a step back and I I know that my friends and family all and and audience all mean well when they're like "Hey man you really need to keep your head on a swivel." And and so on and so forth you know with all the stuff that you deal with and do and say and everything else Uh and it did it made it real You make people mad Yeah Yeah Apparently So I'm very polarizing they say Uh but it it just ki- it blows my mind I won't say it kills me figuratively that that your words can anger somebody so bad that they want to kill you Like to me I'm just talking about thugs and criminals and people who have actually killed people and But it's never them that I'm really worried about It's people who feel like they had to defend them or that they get offended by the blast radius of me talking about them It's like I we have to kill this guy I w- "Oh so why does Clay keep talking about uh Black violence and Black on Black crime I wish he would shut up Oh you know what I'm gonna commit a crime I'm gonna be violent and threaten him." Like well you're mad You're gonna do the thing that you're mad that I'm talking about Well and look you know- It it blows my mind And it ain't just them I get I get I get death threats from from White people too Sure And and so what I would say is I mean like we we grew up with this adage "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words may will won't ever hurt me." There's some truth to that but uh there's also there there's a degree of falsehood to that because we're emotional people right And things do hurt people's feelings or get people angry or or fearful Um but we bought into for a little while this idea and it really started on the the left side of the spectrum in c- on college campuses that words are violence And if you allow yourself to believe that the things that Clay says and you say some stuff I disagree with Sure Um I say some stuff you disagree with right But like if you allow yourself to buy into this idea that the words that Clay says are violence then you become justified in doing violence But they also tell us that silence is violence So words are violence and silence is violence if you're if you're not You ca- you it's it's not just You can't just be against racism you have to be a outspoken anti-racist as well So if you don't agree with them publicly if you're not a outspoken ally you might as well be an enemy and that is dangerous as well Yeah I look I just think we've gotta we've gotta get to the point again where we recognize that violence is violence Like if I walk up to you and punch you in the face you have the ability to punch me back But if I walk up to you and tell you "You're a colossal dumbass," your response should be "Well I don't like you either," or whatever Yeah But you don't you don't You're not justified in in punching me in the face So I agree And so like just getting to the point where we're emotionally mature enough to recognize there are gonna be people who say things that we absolutely disagree with And we can either debate those people or we can roll our eyes and move on I mean I think that every time I'm on Facebook I'm like "Why are these random people starting fights with people you don't even know?" Right Like you are wasting your time Roll your eyes and move on Yeah I got into a Jeremy England commented something yesterday made a post yesterday about uh people P- people starting off they wanna debate you but they insult you first Like "You effing idiot why don't you debate me?" Or "You're a douchebag why don't you debate me?" Well you've already crossed into the assaults Sure Why would Why would I debate you I dealt with the same thing uh earlier this week with some little 300 followers uh sending me all kind of nasty messages trying to get me to debate him Basically he wants me to platform him Sure You know I'm like I'm just There's no- You're smart enough to know that right Yeah Yeah Like why why would I do that Sure But even if I were to entertain it the way you started the conversation off with the insults I have Why would I want to do that for you Like to introduce you to my quarter million followers uh would be the best thing that ever happened to you if you're if you're so good if your opinions are so strong you could take advantage of that like like I've done in the past But now because you've insulted me to start the conversation I'm not gonna do that We gotta take a break We'll be right back with Russ Lateno here on WYAB Actually we're going to carry the conversation on in the uh live chat during the break Y'all don't go nowhere You gotta take the headphones off for this Okay Yeah during the breaks it it sends the radio signal whatever the commercials through the headphones Okay But uh If we But we're still alive we can talk Uh I like this conversation and I don't wanna just stop it 'cause we're gonna have like a weird run of commercials here but it it is It's like if you wanna debate I'll I will debate you I don't really like the debating thing anyway Let's just talk Like you and I met up and we talked about the school choice stuff Yeah We're on the opposite sides of the same On some of And I came out of that conversation I didn't really change my mind but I appreciated the fact that we had a logical conversation and I was a- and you were interested in why I felt the way I felt And I think that's always the best way to If you're ever gonna get somebody to change their mind is to listen to how they feel about it be respectful about that and then explain why you feel the way you do put your side out there and let the uh marketplace of ideas win the day Yeah no I think that's right I mean I think There's there's this thing called uh sunk cost fallacy in economics which is like once somebody believes something or once they've invested in something It happens in in actual trading like marketplace where it's like "Hey I've invested in this stock and it's lost 50% of its value," and instead of getting out of it you're waiting for it to somehow redeem itself And I think the problem with modern debate is too many people go into it with a thought process that says "Under no circumstances am I ever gonna change my mind." And there's gotta be a willingness 1 to hear To your point hear what somebody else has to say and consider the possibility that they might be right and you might be wrong um if you're gonna have any kind of movement And I think that used to happen at a better in a better way before social media But social media has Like this conversation we're having obviously I guess on YouTube but um social media has made it such that you have an audience now So the stakes for changing your mind have gone up It's become harder to change your mind because that's seen as a pride hit or an ego hit Yeah Um right Versus if you're just having a one-on-one conversation you might go "Hey I hadn't thought of that that way." Yeah Well even If you look like you agree with the other person you lost Yeah Yeah Like you've you've lost some reputation Yeah You've lost part of your brand Um and I would say like even like the school choice conversation that we had Yeah like we disagreed on the idea of public to public um school choice like where a kid gets to leave one public school and go to another Um but we didn't disagree on the idea of like- Mm-hmm universal What's called Universal ESAs right Where like a portion of the money that students already are getting spent on by the state that would allow them to go to a private school Like I think we agreed on that part right We agreed with that So And that and that's what you You weren't aware that I did agree with you on that And we kind of came out of that It's like really it's just like if there's 2 3 thirds here there's just one third of this thing I don't agree with Yeah And so like but being able to have that conversation in a non-combative way it was like oh wait there actually is common ground Mm-hmm We just disagree on this one thing over here Well then there's an opportunity for us to get something done Yeah Well you know at the end of the day I'm a negotiator You know Yeah I'm a dealsman And uh- Well and that's the nature of that's the nature of life It's also the nature of of legislation is like you have to have trade-offs No no a- a- absolutely circling back to the the Jeremy England thing real quick So I just commented and I told the little the little story about this guy trying to argue with me I was like he started off with an insult Why would I you know grant him the ability to come on and you know just platform this guy Why would I make him famous You know what I mean So to say Not that I have not that my platform's that big but long story short And he never fails A coup- a couple people in the comments "Oh well Clay you don't You're scared to debate people You just like to argue with people." And you know what was funny is I've never been rude to a guest on this show ever Even people I've disagreed with Uh frankly it's hard to get people to come on here that disagree with me Uh but I've always been respectful I'm I I can't even think of a time that I've shouted anybody down Yeah Uh at all Maybe argue with some callers here and there that call very aggressively So it's like so it's kind of like this myth of because Clay is an outspoken conservative he must also be scared of debate uh because he doesn't interview Democrats Well f- bro where are these Democrats at that want to come on and actually debate You know so to say Well and at at some level it's like and you mentioned that you don't even like the word- Like straw man arguments that are put- Well you don't even like the word debate right And it's like well if the point of the conversation is a good faith exchange of ideas where people are open to having their minds changed those are conversations worth having If the point of the conversation is to get famous by making you look stupid- Yeah I mean no- nobody's ever had their mind changed by being made to feel stupid No Never Never Um they might give up They might well but they're at the end of the day they're angry about it Um and they're they're even more dug in to than where they started right And so yeah I mean again there's some there's some biblical truth here which is like you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar And if you want to have constructive conversations the best way to do that is not by assuming the other person is stupid but by trying to understand why they believe what they believe That's why Shawn and I have had such a good friendship that was supposed to kind of start off as a bit of a debate show We realized that we agreed on so much stuff for the most part And we also agreed that even when we get our angriest that we're gonna be adults Yeah And not get into a shouting match And in involving Shawn you know for those couple years on the show uh before they went off and did their own thing uh was really really good for me learning you know actually finally having somebody sitting across from me that we did disagree on some stuff And learning that for the most part we agreed on like real core principle things It's just kinda like these ancillary things that we disagree on Uh that was a very healthy uh growing point for me to be able to say okay maybe I'm not as bedrock about some of these things as I thought I was And then there are some things that it made me realize that I'm even more adamant about Well and there's something different when you're sitting down across from somebody versus preaching at them on the internet and you don't have to see them or meet them or whatnot right Like and you see that in other areas of life So like as an example the conversation around immigration and that's a complex conversation and I know your audience probably leans one direction pretty heavily But I would look at it and say okay a lot of people talk about mass deportation as an example of Mexican and South American immigrants But then you say well what about the fellow that serves your lunch when you go to this restaurant Or what about the the people that come and cut your grass or the- You start personalizing it And then you're like oh well I know so-and-so Yeah Right And then it becomes a lot harder to paint with such a broad brush I think that's true in the context of like republicans democrats liberals and conservatives too is like at some level if you just sit down with somebody who's like hardcore on the other side of you and you start talking about the things that they want out of life they want their kids to have better jobs than what they had right They want a house they want a car they want a safe community Like there are all these things that everybody wants like that everybody kind of views as like this is a measure of a good life And the real the real debate or the real sort of difference is how do we get there Yeah Um and like if you start from that vantage point where you don't assume that the other person is evil but they just have a different view on the way to get somewhere I think there's opportunity No I I agree and I talk about this a lot I'll come on here and I kind of paint with a broad brush but I do tell people "Look there's obviously you know nuance here." There's there's special exception I come in here and talk about democrats are evil but one of my best friends is a democrat You know Sure And Shawn and and and a buddy of mine Marvell I mean I could 2 off the top of my head 2 of my closest friends are are are democrats and think I'm wrong about a lot of stuff And that's fine Well you know we either talk about those things or we don't We talk about normal stuff Like we don't I don't ride in a car with my democrat friends and talk about politics the whole time you know We actually both like football Yeah Like there's real life stuff too that sometimes you kind of get lost in the arguing about policy and politics and culture war stuff that you forget that there's actually real life stuff that we enjoy as well And if you- Well I mean- find that common ground it makes life a lot easier A- and I don't mean to be overreligious on on your program but at some level it's like hey the Bible says that we were all created in the image of God That means democrats were created in the image of God too right The Bible says that we've all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God That means that republicans have sinned too right And so like at some level recognizing that if you have that sort of scriptural worldview it means no matter whether you disagree on a question of like immigration or whatever it is that like that other person was created in the image of God and like you they suffer with sin.Um and if you have that kind of humility going into it I think it's a lot easier to to relate to people Yeah you know I use this analogy a lot um Christians are very hardcore about the the they love to say "Gay being gay is against the Bible it's that's against the Lord's words." I'm like "Well so is having sex before you get married." Y- uh absolutely And it was like so I that's why I'm never like I don't get on the the the gay religious thing I don't that's that's their sin let them worry about that I have my own sin and I'd be a hypocrite if I sat there and talked about uh who they have sex with It's no different than who I have sex with when I'm doing it outside of marriage My sin is just as equal as as that Uh my only problem with the gay stuff is like it's the LGBTQ agenda as I you know as I refer to it as You know the the the pride parades with all the near pornographic stuff in front of children and d- drag queen story time No that's that's a whole separate thing from just your everyday run of the mill gay people And like I don't think they're separate Unfortunately they get all dropped under this big umbrella and if you have a problem with this well you must also have a problem with the 2 gay guys No I don't at all 'cause again their sin is no different than my sin Yeah I mean look I I would look at it and say at some level what happens is that the the natural human tendency is to focus on sins that you don't struggle with right So if you're heterosexual it's easy enough to talk about the sin of homosexuality because it's not something that you ever struggle with but if you wanna get uncomfortable you know talk about uh whether or not Russ is overweight right Yeah Because then that's the sin of gluttony Mm-hmm Um or the 400 pound Baptist pastor pastor who clearly is living an unrepentant life when it comes to their their dietary habits Um again the sin of gluttony and so like there's a very natural tendency to to isolate those sins that we don't personally struggle with and to ignore the things that we personally struggle with Heterosexual lust is a great example of that too Yeah And so I I don't think as as a Christian I don't think you should uh ignore what the Bible says is sinful behavior but I do think that you should operate in a way where you don't ignore your own sin um certainly 'cause that it it is hypocritical It it is and that is the one thing when you do this for 2 hours a day you will find yourself contradicting yourself a lot and and so I've learned to avoid contradicting myself I just try to be an open book and say "Look I'm k- a complicated individual as we all are There's gonna be things that I I find abhorrent but then there's gonna be things that I do that you find abhorrent." You know I try to find the common ground and just admit yes I we can all be a bit hypocritical at times But if there's some obvious stuff I try to just b- be like "Look that's" I I try I people think I'm very judgey I'm really not I gotta let let people live but the the Overton window has moved over so much that if you just wanna be left alone or just let people live that makes you far one way or the other now because the Overton window has moved so far I don't l- yeah there the problem is that there are not a ton of people who still believe in sort of what I would call American pluralism which I think is actually one of our founding values is that people get to believe different stuff All right we're coming back from break Chicken spaghetti on Mondays beef tip Tuesday pork chop Wednesday spaghetti Thursday and catfish Fridays And McBee's blue plate lunch comes with 2 classic southern sides and cornbread or a roll McBee's specials are served every weekday from 11:00 to 2:00 McBee's buzzing the Rez since 1982 Welcome to the Clay Edwards Show More adrenaline You know it's a pretty interesting time to to be alive What's the saying M- may the times you live in be interesting We've accomplished that more test top throne for your morning drive When you know you've got a problem how about tell people and be honest What's going on Going to war on cancel culture and bringing the spotlight on issues and topics from around the city of Jackson I feel like Jackson is slapping and no one else wants to talk about it The whole system is corrupt and evil It's unreal And they don't care and and everybody knows it It's just sad And fights for the soul of America I'm gonna need y'all to explain to me what a positive solution is 'cause you positive solutions only people have been in charge for a while now and I'm too many positive solutions You never Strap in Turn up the volume and get ready Jackson for unfiltered no sugar added talk radio It's award-winning podcaster Clay Boom shakalaka boom It's hour 2 of the most incendiary show on the R-A-D-I-O This is the Clay at Birth show here live on 103.9 FM W-Y-A-B We are streaming in stunning HD worldwide @SaveJXN on Facebook YouTube and X and we're on Rumble at SaveJXN If you're watching on any of those platforms hit the Like button hit the Share button if you're on Facebook If you're watching on YouTube drop a comment hit the Like It truly truly does help us with the algorithm If you like it they assume more people who watch the things that you like will like it too and they'll recommend these videos to people on YouTube which helps us grow And it doesn't cost you a penny to hit the Like button So please please please smash the Like button as the YouTubers- Like and subscribe Like and subscribe Like and subscribe Like and subscribe And uh we did We we gained over 500 subscribers on YouTube last month which I know in the big picture that may not sound like a lot but that's 500 new people that subscribed to a little old show out of Jackson Mississippi We're almost at 10,000 YouTube subs here 5 years into this and it is a it's taken a while There's not been no big one viral moment that's got us anywhere It's been just chipping away and chipping away and chipping away And I do think we'll eventually get that We'll we'll have that moment when we get you know X amount of followers and enough people see something that resonates with them But uh guys please uh do hit that Like button This segment is going to be brought to you by our friends over at You know I've been talking about it all week I want to drive it home It starts today round one the PGA Champion- Not the PGA Championship the Sanderson Farms Championship which is the only PGA event in Mississippi But not only is it the only PGA event it's the only major sporting professional sporting event in the state of Mississippi I know we can argue that college football is now a pro sport but And it always has been It has been for quite some time Yeah it always has been But uh it's the only legitimate pro-sport uh event in the state of Mississippi and it's right here in Jackson For all the negative things about Jackson this is one of the shining uh house on the hill you know beautiful moments that we have here in this city It's something we really should all wrap our arms around and get out and support if you want to keep it whether it's Jackson central Mississippi whatever there at the Country Club of Jackson And uh the first round starts today I'm going to be out there Saturday My buddy Fred Shanks my buddy Sutton my buddy Michael we're all going We got some Michelob Ultra Pavilion passes which you can get those as well at PGA I'm sorry at sandersonfarmschampionship.com And you can buy tickets You can buy the uh the Mick Ultra Pavilion It's kind of like their VIP thing There's going to be a bunch of TVs there You can miss You can catch all the college football action the golf action It's a great socializing event Just gonna be a grand time The weather's gonna be beautiful Come join us If you can't do Saturday get you some tickets for Sunday I think you just buy the ticket and go whatever day you want They're just Whatever ticket's good for any day but it's only one You You got to If you're going 2 days you got to buy 2 tickets So just FYI It's not a weekend pass Uh I do believe they do offer those But uh it's not too expensive Uh but you know it is a nice event and it does it does cost a few bucks But I think if you buy a ticket and a VIP pavilion pass it's about 130 bucks for both Which if you bought a concert ticket lately and you try to do a VIP upgrade you're probably talking about at least 500 bucks So for the money it's a really really good deal And uh parking's off site there at North Park You park there They they they bring a shuttle bus back and forth They'll keep them running all day You're not going to have to wait long to get to or from your vehicle The weather's going to be beautiful Come out there Hang out with me Come say hey And uh Saturday wear your favorite college colors It's University Day So going to be fun Russ you going to get by Uh we're going to an event tonight uh tied to it Um kind of their opening event and uh- A sponsorship party Yeah So we'll we'll do a little bit of that tonight and we'll see I I might Uh it's a good event And they- I'm trying to angle some tickets for the sponsorship party I I've been I've been working some angles that have not worked out so far But I would love to go to the sponsorship party Well we we can talk about it off air maybe Maybe so All right Well uh look so we got Russ Latino here Magnolia Tribune one of my favorite journalists in the state if not my personal favorite And Magnolia Tribune does just phenomenal work And Russ grabbed a hold of something like a dog on a bone the other day And I'm really glad he did because he brings a level of credibility and a level of scrutiny to to this topic that I think needs to be And he shines a light on it uh as one of the most influential journalists and policymakers in the state And it's the In the wake of Charlie death Charlie Kirk's death and that's why I wanted to really get Russ's opinion on that and kind of his thoughts on the whole thing before we dove into this These TPUSA chapters which is Turning Point USA for those that don't know Charlie Kirk's foundation that he founded And they Man they The growth has been stupendous since his death Thousands and thousands of new charters popping up And in these high schools where we really need to be trying to win the culture war uh just like colleges man We if we can get ahold of them at high schools they go to colleges you know kind of ready to fight the fight or knowing how to fight it And Clinton for some reason has decided that uh it's a no-go there So I've kind of laid the groundwork for you here man Tell us kind of what happened So let let me start by saying that um obviously what happened to Charlie Kirk was a tragedy a horrible tragedy I didn't always agree with him Um and I didn't always agree with TPUSA I did agree fundamentally with the idea that we should be having open debate on these issues um and that open debate is good And so-What happened was after his death to your point thousands and thousands of new chapters high school and college of TPUSA um started to form Um a couple of Saturdays ago so uh 2plus Saturdays ago um a teacher at Clinton High School sent out an email to a handful of students um and that email essentially said "Hey I know you're interested in this sort of stuff because you've talked to me in the past about wanting to start some kinda club that focuses on patriotism and sort of the exchange of ideas and debate Um what do you think about potentially doing a TPUSA chapter?" That email said explicitly this would have to be student-led Um you would have to come up with the names of other students who are interested in spearheading the effort to start this thing And there was a plan of sorts put together Some of these kids started sharing it with their friends they came back with names of people who wanted to be involved And essentially they planned to get together the following Tuesday September 16th to have a planning meeting with the teacher Well our sources say that that email got around to a wide group of people Um and one of the- the sets of hands that it ended up in was a set of parents who were very much opposed to the idea of there being a TPUSA chapter on Clinton's campus Um and that was communicated to school officials So what happens then is that on Monday September 15th the teacher that afternoon sends out an email to these students who are ready to meet the next day just saying "There will be no meeting tomorrow." Um the following day one of the students follows up and says "Well when are we gonna reschedule it?" 'Cause they're excited about doing this Um and she emails back and says "There won't be a rescheduling you need to go talk to the principal about this." Well the backstory of those few days and the way that we got ahold of this was that we got contacted by 2 sources that said "Hey look some students wanted to start this TPUSA chapter and they got shut down by the school administration." Um and we were told that there were 3 reasons given by the administration The first was that this was too political and "We don't do political clubs it's gonna be divisive." Um the second explanation which came later was "Well this was teacher-led and because it's teacher-led it violates a district policy." And then once students voiced "Hey no actually we want this," the third explanation that was given was "Hey it's too late in the year to start a new club." And so all of this unfolds- We're a month into school we're a month into school So all of this unfolds and you start to see And the only way we know this is 'cause we did public record requests on Clinton High School Um you start to see emails directly from students to the principal of Clinton High School Dr Brian Fordinberry saying "We want this." To the point that some of them are literally pressing him and saying "Tell me why we can't have this In writing please tell me why we are unable to have a Turning Point USA club." Um we get ahold of the story break it on uh social media And the response that we got from folks who live in Clinton was "Hey we called and talked to the principal and he said the reason they can't have it is 'cause they started it too late in the year." Well that night I start doing some research All right let's figure out is that true Is there a policy in place for this Read the entire Clinton Han- School handbook Nothing in there about when clubs can start Um read the entirety of the school district's policies Couldn't find anything So I wrote the principal and the- the school board attorney and just said "Hey look I've looked at all this stuff I can't find any policies that- that says that this can't be done this time of year." Um and we had posed a bunch of different questions public record requests whatnot Well they come back um the following day and release a statement that basically says "We didn't actually shut it down We just told them that it couldn't be teacher-led and that it couldn't be this year." Which is shutting it down Yeah Um and so anyway we- we've been able to get together all these public records It really looks from my vantage point like the 2 reasons they gave are pretense first of all students individually went to the principal and said "We want this club." ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... all of the documents ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... since 2019 The Tigers are playing well against Alabama this season but they aren't winning their first game of the season The Tigers were able to win their first game against ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... Alabama on September 19th 2020 They had a 31-0 victory at home against Alabama The Tigers won their first game of the season against Alabama on September 19th 2020 The Tigers have been playing well since then but they haven't been able to win their first game of the season The Tigers were able to win their first game against Alabama on September 19th 2020 They had a 31-0 victory at home against Alabama The Tigers have been playing well since then but they haven't been able the season The Tigers were able to win their first game against Alabama on September 19th 2020 They So they make good homemade ranch at Burgers Blues Barbecue is my point Get by check them out today Madison by the way the Madison location is open right now serving breakfast Dogwood in Flowood or downtown Brandon BurgersBlues.com to book a food truck check out the catering menu or to order and have your food delivered You can do it all in one great location BurgersBlues.com Website looks phenomenal too by the way Pictures of almost every item if you wanna know what it looks like That goes a long way Yeah You know Yeah no it does Um good websites good pictures all that stuff uh is how you market stuff right Gets people salivating We eat with our eyes Uh uh yep I think that's true Our eyes and our nose Yeah Right And my my eyes are often bigger than my appetite- Well as they say Yeah no I think that's part of the problem right Yeah absolutely So Russ wha- uh your your opinion do you just think this is political with TPUSA So let me say this for uh uh to start is I think whenever Clinton put out its statement in response to our original reporting they basically said it's incorrect that we tried to shut it down but then they explained why they had shut it down so it was an odd statement The other thing that I saw that bothered me almost more than the statement was the way that the media reacted which was just to just accept at face value with no critical thinking the explanation that was given Right So they're saying "Hey the reason we didn't do this is because it was teacher-led," while simultaneously admitting in the same statement that students independently came to us and asked for Right Mm-hmm Um so one that doesn't hold water And then they said "Yeah but we explained to those students that our 'practice' was to a- approve things this year and then h- allow them to go into effect next year." I asked the question point blank "Well what does that mean that next year there'll be a Turning Point USA chapter?" And they didn't answer that question But more importantly that policy does not exist in writing Right It doesn't exist anywhere um based on our investigation And so neither one of those things hold water And if neither one of those things hold water there must be something else And our sources said that the something else was the fact that you had parents that were angry about the idea of it coming on campus and a principal who just said "Hey this is gonna be too political which is unconstitutional." So w- what I would say Russ's opinion reading between the lines looking at all the facts I know the sources that we've talked to I think the principal panicked um and was trying to find a way to keep the peace which I can respect at some level which is "Hey we don't wanna rock the boat here We don't wanna create tension We want a unified campus This is gonna create some tension so I'm gonna find a way to say no." The problem with that is yes it violates the Constitution yes it violates federal laws yes it violates state law but there's a bigger sort of fundamental problem which is the way to deal with the fact that we can't have constructive debate in this country is not to have no debate at all It's to get better at having constructive debate Yes And that starts at an early age And so if we can create a system where yes there can be a Turning Point USA chapter and simultaneously yes there can be some sort of progressive chapter on campus and students get to decide who they wanna associate with and we create an atmosphere where hopefully those groups are talking to each other engaging with each other civilly we're setting ourselves up for much better conversations in the future than what we're seeing in our country amongst adults right now And so to me instead of saying "I don't wanna rock the boat," the answer should be "How do we create an environment where people get to associate with who they want they get to say what they want and we encourage students to do so in a way that is civil?" Uh I would love to see a list of the current of the current groups on the campus And w- we've asked for that right Um I I know that there are uh at least social organizations on campus that like you know some conservatives would find uh objectionable Um you know there's a gay straight alliance club as an example I I was gonna say like it would bet but bet the farm that there's an LGBTQ alliance of some sort on there uh there's gonna be some type of civil social justice Black pro-Black group and all those are fine as long as you have the ying to the yang And and and I would say great I would say great right Yeah Um it's it what you don't wanna do is a situation where you're having viewpoint discrimination And even like the other 2 uh you know arguments which is like "Hey this is teacher-led." Well 1 I don't think that's true based on the documents that we've gotten and I don't think it's true based on their own statement at some level But the Constitution doesn't say you can't be inspired by an adult if you wanna create a club on campus right Yeah Um people can get ideas from other people And and candidly every club on campus is required to have a sponsor So one man's sponsor is another person's teacher-led group right Yeah Um and then on this this timing thing is even if that policy did exist you would have to show that it had been consistently applied and it would still have to be tailored in a way legally that it didn't deprive people of their rights So you could say like a senior uh is on campus and they're saying "Hey you're making me wait until next year I won't be here next year I'm gonna graduate." Uh that was gonna be what I was gonna say We got a great comment here on X from uh Bourbon Diplomacy which may be the best name on X by the way That's a great name It says uh "Clinton School District attends school almost year round now so when is the correct time?" Yeah I mean again what they put out through surrogates after we did our initial reporting was "Hey we've got this policy and they're in violation," but can't even point to to something in writing I mean Yeah It it seems pretextual when you can't show something in writing And when you ignore a a public record request that explicitly asked for who are the other clubs When were they formed When were they allowed to be on campus They should be able to tell us all of that unless they're just not keeping records of what clubs are on campus which would suggest that they don't actually have a policy Right So what is the next step Is uh is Magnolia Tribune uh to the point of a lawsuit Well we wouldn't be the ones to file a lawsuit right A lawsuit would have to be filed uh either by some of the students who want the club which would be the the most likely scenario if they wanted to push that far or uh you know if there were adults on campus faculty that that thought that their rights had been infringed upon at some level Um my suspicion is that neither one of those things will happen because people don't like the idea of suing their own school Um it takes a rare person Like you'll occasionally see lawsuits percolate That's like one out of a thousand people has the courage to say "Hey I'm gonna do something like this." Is is Clinton in ISD or is it part of Hinds County I should know that I don't off the top of my head Uh- Yeah yeah no I do know that 'cause they they've got their own superintendent Yeah yeah it's independent Okay I I wasn't sure I I knew I know Pearl is and I and I grew up going to Byron which is part of uh Hinds County so I just wasn't sure if Clinton was part of that or not Never actually Yeah Never needed to know that So I mean a lawsuit is poten- is possible I I don't necessarily see that You know I I think the the most likely scenario if if the high school does the right thing they're not gonna come out and admit that they violated the Constitution No government official's ever gonna be like "Hey I violated the Constitution federal law and state law." What you hear instead is the kinda stuff that you heard here which is "Oh we wanted to help you but you didn't follow this unwritten process that we expected you to follow." So they're not gonna do that But if I were the district if I was on that board of of the school uh or if I was the principal I'd be trying to figure out a way to get it started Yeah there's gotta be a way to put the paste back in the tube a little bit here before it spirals outta control I mean you're sitting here like- Well it got it got mentioned on CNN That's where I was going yeah Um so so you know Abby Phillips' program Newsline on CNN it got mentioned there Uh I expect that there will be other national outlets that will be covering this Um there's an opportunity for Clinton to do the right thing and recognize that kids deserve the right to have this kinda club on campus if they want it Um for Magnolia Tribune's part we're not giving up right We still have several public record requests that we don't feel like have been answered uh and that weren

There are major differences between the Bank Panic of 1819 and today's flex loan crisis, but the end result is the same: Tennesseans struggling under massive debt that is not all of their own making. Plus, the local news for September 23, 2025, and funding cuts for disability services. Credits: This is a production of Nashville Public RadioHost/producer: Nina CardonaEditor: Miriam KramerAdditional support: Mack Linebaugh, Tony Gonzalez, LaTonya Turner and the staff of WPLN and WNXP

My guest is Kyle Kulinski, a YouTuber and political commentator. He is the host of the Kyle Kulinkski show. We discuss the success of the online right and ask what the left might learn from right-wing shitposters. We explore the breakdown of liberal norms and the shattering of the Overton window. American politics has become increasingly radical in the last eight years. We ask; what new formation of the DNC might follow? Last week's horrific events have sent a shock wave through our politics, media and culture. We want to acknowledge the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk. He is mentioned briefly in this episode that was recorded at an earlier date. You can get access to the full catalog for Doomscroll and more by becoming a paid supporter: www.patreon.com/joshuacitarella joshuacitarella.substack.com/subscribe

El Ayuntamiento de Barcelona ha lanzado un programa que "invita" a sus empleados a acoger inmigrantes de entre 18 y 23 años en sus propias casas. Aunque lo presentan como algo voluntario, ¿qué pasa si esto solo es el primer paso para convertirse en obligatorio? En Canarias también se lanzó el mismo programa. En este vídeo analizaremos qué hay detrás de esta medida, cómo encaja dentro de una posible estrategia de ingeniería social, y por qué podría ser el inicio de un cambio profundo en nuestras libertades y estructuras familiares. Y en tus inversiones inmobiliarias, por supuesto.

A moan about my travel plans being interrupted. Much love and gratitude, Belle x #presidenttrump #keirstarmer #noelcoward

Co-hosts Jared Yates Sexton and Nick Hauselman break down the chaotic aftermath of Charlie Kirk's assassination and how the right is exploiting it. They unpack the instant anti-trans scapegoating, JD Vance's open calls to wield state power against political opponents, Stephen Miller's “domestic terrorism” dragnet fantasy, and a media ecosystem already capitulating. They trace the Overton window lurching right, the surveillance machine waiting to be flipped on, and why even an ICE killing barely registers amid the frenzy. It's the pretext for repression, and the gate is closing unless we act. Support the show by signing up to our Patreon and get access to the full Weekender episode each Friday as well as special Live Shows and access to our community discord: http://patreon.com/muckrakepodcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

PRL 9-10-25 Ken Watlington, Kristi Overton, Donnell Coley, Rahjai Harris, Ethan Norby by Pirate Radio

In this episode of the show, Binksy, Baldy, Raj and Stu discuss the white-ball series between South Africa & England, NZ A's tour to South Africa and Ross Taylor's return to the international arena. We start the show by talking about South Africa continuing to impress across all formats, this time in a white-ball series against England. Aiden Markram at the top of the order has been well supported by a powerful and dynamic middle order of Matthew Breetzke, Tristan Stubbs and Dewalt Brevis as the Proteas surged to a 2-0 series lead. Throw in impressive displays from Keshav Maharaj and the rest of the bowling attack and South Africa looks a side that shapes as a strong contender for the upcoming World Cups. Turning our attention to England, we wonder whether Jamie Overton's decision to step back from Test cricket is a sign of things to come, and also assess where the holes are in this current ODI squad. The praise for the Proteas continues in the next segment as we talk about NZ's A tour to South Africa, as it has been a good week to be a Hermann brother. The home side took the 50-over series 2-1 thanks to runs galore from Rubin and Jordan, with Dale Phillips's 147 the shining light for New Zealand's batting display. To round out the show, we discuss Ross Taylor's decision to come out of international retirement to play for Samoa in the upcoming East Asia-Pacific qualifiers for the ICC T20 World Cup along with Sean Solia and the rest of the squad. Aside from it being a heartwarming story, it also raised a few questions for us about the international eligibility rules. Would it be good for the game to reduce the stand-down period? Or would that simply lead to manipulation? We'll be back in your feed again next week to discuss more stories from the world of cricket, including the Asia Cup as well as more of the South Africa series. Until then please take the time to give us a like, follow, share or subscribe on all our channels (@toporderpod on Twitter & Facebook, and @thetoporderpodcast on Instagram & YouTube) and a (5-Star!) review at your favourite podcast provider, or tell a friend to download. It really helps others find the show and is the best thing you can do to support us. You can also find all our written content, including our Hall of Fame series, at our website. You can also dip back into our guest episodes - including conversations with Mike Hesson, Shane Bond and Mike Hussey, current players such as Matt Henry, Sophie Devine and Ish Sodhi, coaches Gary Stead, Jeetan Patel and Luke Wright, as well as Barry Richards, Frankie Mackay, Bharat Sundaresan and many more fascinating people from all across the cricketing world. And if you'd like to reach out to us with feedback, questions or guest suggestions, get in touch at thetoporderpodcast@gmail.com. Thanks for listening. 0:00 Intro 1:00 England v South Africa - Proteas keep rolling on 4:10 England in a white-ball rebuild phase? 6:55 South Africa's depth looking good 11:00 Where are the gaps in England's squad? 14:30 Jamie Overton's decision to step away from red-ball cricket 20:20 NZ A v SA A - Good week to be a Hermann brother! 34:05 Ross Taylor returns to play for Samoa - should cricket's eligibility rules change? Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

First: Reform is naff – and that's why people like itGareth Roberts warns this week that ‘the Overton window is shifting' but in a very unexpected way. Nigel Farage is ahead in the polls – not only because his party is ‘bracingly right-wing', but ‘because Reform is camp'. Farage offers what Britain wants: ‘a cheeky, up-yours, never-mind-the-knockers revolt against our agonisingly earnest political masters'.‘From Farage on down,' Roberts argues, ‘there is a glorious kind of naffness' to Reform: daytime-TV aesthetics, ‘bargain-basement' celebrities and big-breasted local councillors. ‘The progressive activists thought they could win the culture war simply by saying they had won it', but ‘the John Bulls and Greasy Joans are stirring again'. Roberts loves how ‘the current excitement over flag-raising' is the ‘conniptions' it gives to ‘the FBPE crowd'. Of course, for Farage, planning for government ‘really cannot be a pantomime affair'. But ‘in these grim times' we ‘need the romping Reform'. Gareth joins the podcast to make his case for Carry On Reform.Next: the ‘she' consumed by masculine rageLionel Shriver reacts to the latest school shooting in America. The perpetrator was widely reported in the media with the pronouns ‘she/her' which, Lionel argues, is not just an issue around politeness. This glosses over the fact that the shooter was biologically male, adding to the majority of cases of school shootings that are conducting by men. By pandering to this incoherence of the reality of the situation, it doesn't help society to uncover the reasons behind the issue.Lionel joined the podcast alongside the Spectator's US editor Freddy Gray. Freddy points out how this shooting is just one example of how younger people can be transfixed by the very darkest sides of the internet.And finally: why people make up languages Constructed language expert Dr Bettina Beinhoff and author and historian Peter Parker join the podcast to talk about ‘made-up' languages. Why do humans construct languages outside of their every-day speech? Most people will have heard of Klingon or Elvish, used in books and film, but what about Polari – the subversive language used by groups of LGBT people decades ago – or the Potato language – which writer Melanie Ferbreach says her parents used to hide their conversations from her. Listeners may be impressed to hear Lara's own attempt at 'eggy-peggy'...Plus: with a special introduction from our political editor, Tim Shipman interviews shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick – is he trying to outflank Farage? Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast.Produced by Patrick Gibbons and Natasha Feroze. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

First: Reform is naff – and that's why people like itGareth Roberts warns this week that ‘the Overton window is shifting' but in a very unexpected way. Nigel Farage is ahead in the polls – not only because his party is ‘bracingly right-wing', but ‘because Reform is camp'. Farage offers what Britain wants: ‘a cheeky, up-yours, never-mind-the-knockers revolt against our agonisingly earnest political masters'.‘From Farage on down,' Roberts argues, ‘there is a glorious kind of naffness' to Reform: daytime-TV aesthetics, ‘bargain-basement' celebrities and big-breasted local councillors. ‘The progressive activists thought they could win the culture war simply by saying they had won it', but ‘the John Bulls and Greasy Joans are stirring again'. Roberts loves how ‘the current excitement over flag-raising' is the ‘conniptions' it gives to ‘the FBPE crowd'. Of course, for Farage, planning for government ‘really cannot be a pantomime affair'. But ‘in these grim times' we ‘need the romping Reform'. Gareth joins the podcast to make his case for Carry On Reform.Next: the ‘she' consumed by masculine rageLionel Shriver reacts to the latest school shooting in America. The perpetrator was widely reported in the media with the pronouns ‘she/her' which, Lionel argues, is not just an issue around politeness. This glosses over the fact that the shooter was biologically male, adding to the majority of cases of school shootings that are conducting by men. By pandering to this incoherence of the reality of the situation, it doesn't help society to uncover the reasons behind the issue.Lionel joined the podcast alongside the Spectator's US editor Freddy Gray. Freddy points out how this shooting is just one example of how younger people can be transfixed by the very darkest sides of the internet.And finally: why people make up languages Constructed language expert Dr Bettina Beinhoff and author and historian Peter Parker join the podcast to talk about ‘made-up' languages. Why do humans construct languages outside of their every-day speech? Most people will have heard of Klingon or Elvish, used in books and film, but what about Polari – the subversive language used by groups of LGBT people decades ago – or the Potato language – which writer Melanie Ferbreach says her parents used to hide their conversations from her. Listeners may be impressed to hear Lara's own attempt at 'eggy-peggy'...Plus: with a special introduction from our political editor, Tim Shipman interviews shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick – is he trying to outflank Farage? Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast.Produced by Patrick Gibbons and Natasha Feroze.Become a Spectator subscriber today to access this podcast without adverts. Go to spectator.co.uk/adfree to find out more.For more Spectator podcasts, go to spectator.co.uk/podcasts. Contact us: podcast@spectator.co.uk Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

talkSPORT Cricket Editor Jon Norman and George Dobell and Nick Friend from The Cricketer talk about the impasse that is the County Championship scheduling changes, Jamie Overton's decision to step away from red ball cricket and look ahead to the return of the County Championship.If you like what you hear please take the time to leave a 5 star review on the podcast page and follow @cricket_ts on X/Twitter. For even more content head over to the talkSPORT Cricket YouTube Channel and hit subscribe.https://www.youtube.com/@talkSPORTCricket hit subscribe.Thanks for listening to Following On: County Cricketer. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The news out of Scotland of the young girl compelled to wield a knife and hatchet in defense of herself and her little sister against the predations of ravenous third-world migrants imported by her own government should serve as a red flag, a political tipping point, into Western awareness of the existential threat presented to everything we value by Easterners intent on stealing our wealth, culture, and future for their own ethno-corrupt purposes.  After all … unless the American trajectory changes, soon such headlines will be coming out of our own communities.Time has become of the essence. The tipping point is upon us. The gyre is widening. The moment of choosing is now. What shall we choose? What shall YOU choose? To watch your world, your culture, your posterity, the greatest nation on Earth eradicated by third-world Orcs imported by your own government to compel you to bend the knee to their tyrannical impulses?  Or are you prepared to use your voice, your vote, your sheer will to forcibly shove that corrupted Overton window hard over to American nationalism? To save ourselves, our wives, our children from being drowned in third-world mediocrity, incompetence, greed, graft, and predatory violence?  Whether that involves fighting against enemies foreign … OR also enemies domestic?Is there an American exceptionalism worth saving from third-world invaders? The #1 guide for understanding when using force to protect yourself is legal. Now yours for FREE! Just pay the S&H for us to get it to you.➡️ Carry with confidence, knowing you are protected from predators AND predatory prosecutors➡️ Correct the common myths you may think are true but get people in trouble​➡️ Know you're getting the best with this abridged version of our best-selling 5-star Amazon-rated book that has been praised by many (including self-defense legends!) for its easy, entertaining, and informative style.​➡️ Many interesting, if sometimes heart-wrenching, true-life examplesGet Your Free Book: https://lawofselfdefense.com/getthebook

Daniel McAdams Join Stew for unfiltered, hard-hitting commentary that fearlessly tackles controversial topics like U.S.-Israel relations, exposing hidden influences in politics, media, and finance. This show slams the Overton window open, empowering listeners with bold truths to reclaim their sovereignty. Scott Siverts joins Stew in exposing a group's alleged global control, from Israel's founding to destroying Christian symbols in Wales. Joined by Scott from The Berm Pit, he calls for dismantling foreign lobbies like AIPAC to reclaim America. Western civilization has been infected by a parasitic invasion of foreign ideals and values that have been introduced into our culture by strange and morally degenerate people whose goal is world domination. We have been OCCUPIED. Watch the film NOW! https://stewpeters.com/occupied/ AUGUST FREEDOM DRIVE – JOIN THE MOVEMENT Unfiltered. Uncensored. Uncompromising. This August, take your support to the next level. The war on truth is real, and the Stew Peters Network is on the front lines. Subscribers get: Access to Exclusive Content Early Access to New Docs & Exposés Direct Line to the Movement Support the Resistance Your subscription funds the fight against censorship, tyranny, and globalist agendas. Join today https://stewpeters.tv

Lucas Gage is a USMC War Vet, author and activist. He talks getting shadow banned on X, kicked of YouTube, why there is an Overton window on previous considered radioactive topics, getting doxxed, and much more. PLEASE SUBSCRIBE LIKE AND SHARE THIS PODCAST!!!   Watch Show Rumble- https://rumble.com/v6xxqec-decentralized-network-of-organizations-is-the-future-lucas-gage.html YouTube- https://youtu.be/AF1zejZqCDM   Follow Me X- https://x.com/CoffeeandaMike IG- https://www.instagram.com/coffeeandamike/ Facebook- https://www.facebook.com/CoffeeandaMike/ YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/@Coffeeandamike Rumble- https://rumble.com/search/all?q=coffee%20and%20a%20mike Substack- https://coffeeandamike.substack.com/ Apple Podcasts- https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/coffee-and-a-mike/id1436799008 Gab- https://gab.com/CoffeeandaMike Locals- https://coffeeandamike.locals.com/ Website- www.coffeeandamike.com Email- info@coffeeandamike.com   Support My Work Venmo- https://www.venmo.com/u/coffeeandamike Paypal- https://www.paypal.com/biz/profile/Coffeeandamike Substack- https://coffeeandamike.substack.com/ Patreon- http://patreon.com/coffeeandamike Locals- https://coffeeandamike.locals.com/ Cash App- https://cash.app/$coffeeandamike Buy Me a Coffee- https://buymeacoffee.com/coffeeandamike Bitcoin- coffeeandamike@strike.me   Mail Check or Money Order- Coffee and a Mike LLC P.O. Box 25383 Scottsdale, AZ 85255-9998   Follow Lucas X - https://x.com/LucasGageX Rumble- https://rumble.com/LucasGage Website- t.co/uYDEM6eEJM Additional Links- https://bio.site/lucasgage   Sponsors Vaulted/Precious Metals- https://vaulted.blbvux.net/coffeeandamike McAlvany Precious Metals- https://mcalvany.com/coffeeandamike/ Independence Ark Natural Farming- https://www.independenceark.com/

Today I'm talking to economic historian Judge Glock, Director of Research at the Manhattan Institute. Judge works on a lot of topics: if you enjoy this episode, I'd encourage you to read some of his work on housing markets and the Environmental Protection Agency. But I cornered him today to talk about civil service reform.Since the 1990s, over 20 red and blue states have made radical changes to how they hire and fire government employees — changes that would be completely outside the Overton window at the federal level. A paper by Judge and Renu Mukherjee lists four reforms made by states like Texas, Florida, and Georgia: * At-will employment for state workers* The elimination of collective bargaining agreements* Giving managers much more discretion to hire* Giving managers much more discretion in how they pay employeesJudge finds decent evidence that the reforms have improved the effectiveness of state governments, and little evidence of the politicization that federal reformers fear. Meanwhile, in Washington, managers can't see applicants' resumes, keyword searches determine who gets hired, and firing a bad performer can take years. But almost none of these ideas are on the table in Washington.Thanks to Harry Fletcher-Wood for his judicious transcript edits and fact-checking, and to Katerina Barton for audio edits.Judge, you have a paper out about lessons for civil service reform from the states. Since the ‘90s, red and blue states have made big changes to how they hire and fire people. Walk through those changes for me.I was born and grew up in Washington DC, heard a lot about civil service throughout my childhood, and began to research it as an adult. But I knew almost nothing about the state civil service systems. When I began working in the states — mainly across the Sunbelt, including in Texas, Kansas, Arizona — I was surprised to learn that their civil service systems were reformed to an absolutely radical extent relative to anything proposed at the federal level, let alone implemented.Starting in the 1990s, several states went to complete at-will employment. That means there were no official civil service protections for any state employees. Some managers were authorized to hire people off the street, just like you could in the private sector. A manager meets someone in a coffee shop, they say, "I'm looking for exactly your role. Why don't you come on board?" At the federal level, with its stultified hiring process, it seemed absurd to even suggest something like that.You had states that got rid of any collective bargaining agreements with their public employee unions. You also had states that did a lot more broadbanding [creating wider pay bands] for employee pay: a lot more discretion for managers to reward or penalize their employees depending on their performance.These major reforms in these states were, from the perspective of DC, incredibly radical. Literally nobody at the federal level proposes anything approximating what has been in place for decades in the states. That should be more commonly known, and should infiltrate the debate on civil service reform in DC.Even though the evidence is not absolutely airtight, on the whole these reforms have been positive. A lot of the evidence is surveys asking managers and operators in these states how they think it works. They've generally been positive. We know these states operate pretty well: Places like Texas, Florida, and Arizona rank well on state capacity metrics in terms of cost of government, time for permitting, and other issues.Finally, to me the most surprising thing is the dog that didn't bark. The argument in the federal government against civil service reform is, “If you do this, we will open up the gates of hell and return to the 19th-century patronage system, where spoilsmen come and go depending on elected officials, and the government is overrun with political appointees who don't care about the civil service.” That has simply not happened. We have very few reports of any concrete examples of politicization at the state level. In surveys, state employees and managers can almost never remember any example of political preferences influencing hiring or firing.One of the surveys you cited asked, “Can you think of a time someone said that they thought that the political preferences were a factor in civil service hiring?” and it was something like 5%.It was in that 5-10% range. I don't think you'd find a dissimilar number of people who would say that even in an official civil service system. Politics is not completely excluded even from a formal civil service system.A few weeks ago, you and I talked to our mutual friend, Don Moynihan, who's a scholar of public administration. He's more skeptical about the evidence that civil service reform would be positive at the federal level.One of your points is, “We don't have strong negative evidence from the states. Productivity didn't crater in states that moved to an at-will employment system.” We do have strong evidence that collective bargaining in the public sector is bad for productivity.What I think you and Don would agree on is that we could use more evidence on the hiring and firing side than the surveys that we have. Is that a fair assessment?Yes, I think that's correct. As you mentioned, the evidence on collective bargaining is pretty close to universal: it raises costs, reduces the efficiency of government, and has few to no positive upsides.On hiring and firing, I mentioned a few studies. There's a 2013 study that looks at HR managers in six states and finds very little evidence of politicization, and managers generally prefer the new system. There was a dissertation that surveyed several employees and managers in civil service reform and non-reform states. Across the board, the at-will employment states said they had better hiring retention, productivity, and so forth. And there's a 2002 study that looked specifically at Texas, Florida, and Georgia after their reforms, and found almost universal approbation inside the civil service itself for these reforms.These are not randomized control trials. But I think that generally positive evidence should point us directionally where we should go on civil service reform. If we loosen restrictions on discipline and firing, decentralize hiring and so forth — we probably get some productivity benefits from it. We can also know, with some amount of confidence, that the sky is not going to fall, which I think is a very important baseline assumption. The civil service system will continue on and probably be fairly close to what it is today, in terms of its political influence, if you have decentralized hiring and at-will employment.As you point out, a lot of these reforms that have happened in 20-odd states since the ‘90s would be totally outside the Overton window at the federal level. Why is it so easy for Georgia to make a bipartisan move in the ‘90s to at-will employment, when you couldn't raise the topic at the federal level?It's a good question. I think in the 1990s, a lot of people thought a combination of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act — which was the Carter-era act that somewhat attempted to do what these states hoped to do in the 1990s — and the Clinton-era Reinventing Government Initiative, would accomplish the same ends. That didn't happen.That was an era when civil service reform was much more bipartisan. In Georgia, it was a Democratic governor, Zell Miller, who pushed it. In a lot of these other states, they got buy-in from both sides. The recent era of state reform took place after the 2010 Republican wave in the states. Since that wave, the reform impetus for civil service has been much more Republican. That has meant it's been a lot harder to get buy-in from both sides at the federal level, which will be necessary to overcome a filibuster.I think people know it has to be very bipartisan. We're just past the point, at least at the moment, where it can be bipartisan at the federal level. But there are areas where there's a fair amount of overlap between the two sides on what needs to happen, at least in the upper reaches of the civil service.It was interesting to me just how bipartisan civil service reform has been at various times. You talked about the Civil Service Reform Act, which passed Congress in 1978. President Carter tells Congress that the civil service system:“Has become a bureaucratic maze which neglects merit, tolerates poor performance, permits abuse of legitimate employee rights, and mires every personnel action in red tape, delay, and confusion.”That's a Democratic president saying that. It's striking to me that the civil service was not the polarized topic that it is today.Absolutely. Carter was a big civil service reformer in Georgia before those even larger 1990s reforms. He campaigned on civil service reform and thought it was essential to the success of his presidency. But I think you are seeing little sprouts of potential bipartisanship today, like the Chance to Compete Act at the end of 2024, and some of the reforms Obama did to the hiring process. There's options for bipartisanship at the federal level, even if it can't approach what the states have done.I want to walk through the federal hiring process. Let's say you're looking to hire in some federal agency — you pick the agency — and I graduated college recently, and I want to go into the civil service. Tell me about trying to hire somebody like me. What's your first step?It's interesting you bring up the college graduate, because that is one recent reform: President Trump put out an executive order trying to counsel agencies to remove the college degree requirement for job postings. This happened in a lot of states first, like Maryland, and that's also been bipartisan. This requirement for a college degree — which was used as a very unfortunate proxy for ability at a lot of these jobs — is now being removed. It's not across the whole federal government. There's still job postings that require higher education degrees, but that's something that's changed.To your question, let's say the Department of Transportation. That's one of the more bipartisan ones, when you look at surveys of federal civil servants. Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, they tend to be a little more Republican. Health and Human Services and some other agencies tend to be pretty Democrat. Transportation is somewhere in the middle.As a manager, you try to craft a job description and posting to go up on the USA Jobs website, which is where all federal job postings go. When they created it back in 1996, that was supposedly a massive reform to federal hiring: this website where people could submit their resumes. Then, people submit their resumes and answer questions about their qualifications for the job.One of the slightly different aspects from the private sector is that those applications usually go to an HR specialist first. The specialist reviews everything and starts to rank people into different categories, based on a lot of weird things. It's supposed to be “knowledge, skills, and abilities” — your KSAs, or competencies. To some extent, this is a big step up from historical practice. You had, frankly, an absurd civil service exam, where people had to fill out questions about, say, General Grant or about US Code Title 42, or whatever it was, and then submit it. Someone rated the civil service exam, and then the top three test-takers were eligible for the job.We have this newer, better system, where we rank on knowledge, skills, and abilities, and HR puts put people into different categories. One of the awkward ways they do this is by merely scanning the resumes and applications for keywords. If it's a computer job, make sure you say the word “computer” somewhere in your resume. Make sure you say “manager” if it's a managerial job.Just to be clear, this is entirely literal. There's a keyword search, and folks who don't pass that search are dinged.Yes. I've always wondered, how common is this? It's sometimes hard to know what happens in the black box in these federal HR departments. I saw an HR official recently say, "If I'm not allowed to do keyword searches, I'm going to take 15 years to overlook all the applications, so I've got to do keyword searches." If they don't have the keywords, into the circular file it goes, as they used to say: into the garbage can.Then they start ranking people on their abilities into, often, three different categories. That is also very literal. If you put in the little word bubble, "I am an exceptional manager," you get pushed on into the next level of the competition. If you say, "I'm pretty good, but I'm not the best," into the circular file you go.I've gotten jaded about this, but it really is shocking. We ask candidates for a self-assessment, and if they just rank themselves 10/10 on everything, no matter how ludicrous, that improves their odds of being hired.That's going to immensely improve your odds. Similar to the keyword search, there's been pushback on this in recent years, and I'm definitely not going to say it's universal anymore. It's rarer than it used to be. But it's still a very common process.The historical civil service system used to operate on a rule of three. In places like New York, it still operates like that. The top three candidates on the evaluation system get presented to the manager, and the manager has to approve one of them for the position.Thanks partially to reforms by the Obama administration in 2010, they have this category rating system where the best qualified or the very qualified get put into a big bucket together [instead of only including the top three]. Those are the people that the person doing the hiring gets to see, evaluate, and decide who he wants to hire.There are some restrictions on that. If a veteran outranks everybody else, you've got to pick the veteran [typically known as Veterans' Preference]. That was an issue in some of the state civil service reforms, too. The states said, “We're just going to encourage a veterans' preference. We don't need a formalized system to say they get X number of points and have to be in Y category. We're just going to say, ‘Try to hire veterans.'” That's possible without the formal system, despite what some opponents of reform may claim.One of the particular problems here is just the nature of the people doing the hiring. Sometimes you just need good managers to encourage HR departments to look at a broader set of qualifications. But one of the bigger problems is that they keep the HR evaluation system divorced from the manager who is doing the hiring. David Shulkin, who was the head of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), wrote a great book, It Shouldn't Be This Hard to Serve Your Country. He was a healthcare exec, and the VA is mainly a healthcare agency. He would tell people, "You should work for me," they would send their applications into the HR void, and he'd never see them again. They would get blocked at some point in this HR evaluation process, and he'd be sent people with no healthcare experience, because for whatever reason they did well in the ranking.One of the very base-level reforms should be, “How can we more clearly integrate the hiring manager with the evaluation process?” To some extent, the bipartisan Chance to Compete Act tries to do this. They said, “You should have subject matter experts who are part of crafting the description of the job, are part of evaluating, and so forth.” But there's still a long road to go.Does that firewall — where the person who wants to hire doesn't get to look at the process until the end — exist originally because of concerns about cronyism?One of the interesting things about the civil service is its raison d'être — its reason for being — was supposedly a single, clear purpose: to prevent politicized hiring and patronage. That goes back to the Pendleton Civil Service Act of 1883. But it's always been a little strange that you have all of these very complex rules about every step of the process — from hiring to firing to promotion, and everything in between — to prevent political influence. We could just focus on preventing political influence, and not regulate every step of the process on the off-chance that without a clear regulation, political influence could creep in. This division [between hiring manager and applicants] is part of that general concern. There are areas where I've heard HR specialists say, "We declare that a manager is a subject matter expert, and we bring them into the process early on, we can do that." But still the division is pretty stark, and it's based on this excessive concern about patronage.One point you flag is that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which is the body that thinks about personnel in the federal government, has a 300-page regulatory document for agencies on how you have to hire. There's a remarkable amount of process.Yes, but even that is a big change from the Federal Personnel Manual, which was the 10,000-page document that we shredded in the 1990s. In the ‘90s, OPM gave the agencies what's called “delegated examining authorities.” This says, “You, agency, have power to decide who to hire, we're not going to do the central supervision anymore. But, but, but: here's the 300-page document that dictates exactly how you have to carry out that hiring.”So we have some decentralization, allowing managers more authority to control their own departments. But this two-level oversight — a local HR department that's ultimately being overseen by the OPM — also leads to a lot of slip ‘twixt cup and lip, in terms of how something gets implemented. If you're in the agency and you're concerned about the OPM overseeing your process, you're likely to be much more careful than you would like to be. “Yes, it's delegated to me, but ultimately, I know I have to answer to OPM about this process. I'm just going to color within the lines.”I often cite Texas, which has no central HR office. Each agency decides how it wants to hire. In a lot of these reform states, if there is a central personnel office, it's an information clearinghouse or reservoir of models. “You can use us, the central HR office, as a resource if you want us to help you post the job, evaluate it, or help manage your processes, but you don't have to.” That's the goal we should be striving for in a lot of the federal reforms. Just make OPM a resource for the managers in the individual departments to do their thing or go independent.Let's say I somehow get through the hiring process. You offer me a job at the Department of Transportation. What are you paying me?This is one of the more stultified aspects of the federal civil service system. OPM has another multi-hundred-page handbook called the Handbook of Occupational Groups and Families. Inside that, you've got 49 different “groups and families,” like “Clerical occupations.” Inside those 49 groups are a series of jobs, sometimes dozens, like “Computer Operator.” Inside those, they have independent documents — often themselves dozens of pages long — detailing classes of positions. Then you as a manager have to evaluate these nine factors, which can each give points to each position, which decides how you get slotted into this weird Government Schedule (GS) system [the federal payscale].Again, this is actually an improvement. Before, you used to have the Civil Service Commission, which went around staring very closely at someone over their typewriter and saying, "No, I think you should be a GS-12, not a GS-11, because someone over in the Department of Defense who does your same job is a GS-12." Now this is delegated to agencies, but again, the agencies have to listen to the OPM on how to classify and set their jobs into this 15-stage GS-classification system, each stage of which has 10 steps which determine your pay, and those steps are determined mainly by your seniority. It's a formalized step-by-step system, overwhelmingly based on just how long you've sat at your desk.Let's be optimistic about my performance as a civil servant. Say that over my first three years, I'm just hitting it out of the park. Can you give me a raise? What can you do to keep me in my role?Not too much. For most people, the within-step increases — those 10 steps inside each GS-level — is just set by seniority. Now there are all these quality step increases you can get, but they're very rare and they have to be documented. So you could hypothetically pay someone more, but it's going to be tough. In general, the managers just prefer to stick to seniority, because not sticking to it garners a lot of complaints. Like so much else, the goal is, "We don't want someone rewarding an official because they happen to share their political preferences." The result of that concern is basically nobody can get rewarded at all, which is very unfortunate.We do have examples in state and federal government of what's known as broadbanding, where you have very broad pay scales, and the manager can decide where to slot someone. Say you're a computer operator, which can mean someone who knows what an Excel spreadsheet is, or someone who's programming the most advanced AI systems. As a manager in South Carolina or Florida, you have a lot of discretion to say, "I can set you 50% above the market rate of what this job technically would go for, if I think you're doing a great job."That's very rare at the federal level. They've done broadbanding at the Government Accountability Office, the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The China Lake Experiment out in California gave managers a lot more discretion to reward scientists. But that's definitely the exception. In general, it's a step-wise, seniority-based system.What if you want to bring me into the Senior Executive Service (SES)? Theoretically, that sits at the top of the General Service scale. Can't you bump me up in there and pay me what you owe me?I could hypothetically bring you in as a senior executive servant. The SES was created in the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act. The idea was, “We're going to have this elite cadre of about 8,000 individuals at the top of the federal government, whose employment will be higher-risk and higher-reward. They might be fired, and we're going to give them higher pay to compensate for that.”Almost immediately, that did not work out. Congress was outraged at the higher pay given to the top officials and capped it. Ever since, how much the SES can get paid has been tightly controlled. As in most of the rest of the federal government, where they establish these performance pay incentives or bonuses — which do exist — they spread them like peanut butter over the whole service. To forestall complaints, everyone gets a little bit every two or three years.That's basically what happened to the SES. Their annual pay is capped at the vice president's salary, which is a cap for a lot of people in the federal government. For most of your GS and other executive scales, the cap is Congress's salary. [NB: This is no longer exactly true, since Congress froze its own salaries in 2009. The cap for GS (currently about $195k) is now above congressional salaries ($174k).]One of the big problems with pay in the federal government is pay compression. Across civil service systems, the highest-skilled people tend to be paid much less than the private sector, and the lowest-skilled people tend to get paid much more. The political science reason for that is pretty simple: the median voter in America still decides what seems reasonable. To the median voter, the average salary of a janitor looks low, and the average salary of a scientist looks way too high. Hence this tendency to pay compression. Your average federal employee is probably overpaid relative to the private sector, because the lowest-skilled employees are paid up to 40% higher than the private sector equivalent. The highest-paid employees, the post-graduate skilled professionals, are paid less. That makes it hard to recruit the top performers, but it also swells the wage budget in a way that makes it difficult to talk about reform.There's a lot of interest in this administration in making it easier to recruit talent and get rid of under-performers. There have been aggressive pushes to limit collective bargaining in the public sector. That should theoretically make it easier to recruit, but it also increases the precariousness of civil service roles. We've seen huge firings in the civil service over the last six months.Classically, the explicit trade-off of working in the federal government was, “Your pay is going to be capped, but you have this job for life. It's impossible to get rid of you.” You trade some lifetime earnings for stability. In a world where the stability is gone, but pay is still capped, isn't the net effect to drive talent away from the civil service?I think it's a concern now. On one level it should be ameliorated, because those who are most concerned with stability of employment do tend to be lower performers. If you have people who are leaving the federal service because all they want is stability, and they're not getting that anymore, that may not be a net loss. As someone who came out of academia and knows the wonder of effective lifetime annuities, there can be very high performers who like that stability who therefore take a lower salary. Without the ability to bump that pay up more, it's going to be an issue.I do know that, internally, the Trump administration has made some signs they're open to reforms in the top tiers of the SES and other parts of the federal government. They would be willing to have people get paid more at that level to compensate for the increased risks since the Trump administration came in. But when you look at the reductions in force (RIFs) that have happened under Trump, they are overwhelmingly among probationary employees, the lower-level employees.With some exceptions. If you've been promoted recently, you can get reclassified as probationary, so some high-performers got lumped in.Absolutely. The issue has been exacerbated precisely because the RIF regulations that are in place have made the firings particularly damaging. If you had a more streamlined RIF system — which they do have in many states, where seniority is not the main determinant of who gets laid off — these RIFs could be removing the lower-performing civil servants and keeping the higher-performing ones, and giving them some amount of confidence in their tenure.Unfortunately, the combination of large-scale removals with the existing RIF regs, which are very stringent, has demoralized some of the upper levels of the federal government. I share that concern. But I might add, it is interesting, if you look at the federal government's own figures on the total civil service workforce, they have gone down significantly since Trump came in office, but I think less than 100,000 still, in the most recent numbers that I've seen. I'm not sure how much to trust those, versus some of these other numbers where people have said 150,000, 200,000.Whether the Trump administration or a future administration can remove large numbers of people from the civil service should be somewhat divorced from the general conversation on civil service reform. The main debate about whether or not Trump can do this centers around how much power the appropriators in Congress have to determine the total amount of spending in particular agencies on their workforce. It does not depend necessarily on, "If we're going to remove people — whether for general layoffs, or reductions in force, or because of particular performance issues — how can we go about doing that?" My last-ditch hope to maintain a bipartisan possibility of civil service reform is to bracket, “How much power does the president have to remove or limit the workforce in general?” from “How can he go about hiring and firing, et cetera?”I think making it easier for the president to identify and remove poor performers is a tool that any future administration would like to have.We had this conversation sparked again with the firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner. But that was a position Congress set up to be appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and removable by the President. It's a separate issue from civil service at large. Everyone said, “We want the president to be able to hire and fire the commissioner.” Maybe firing the commissioner was a bad decision, but that's the situation today.Attentive listeners to Statecraft know I'm pretty critical, like you are, of the regulations that say you have to go in order of seniority. In mass layoffs, you're required to fire a lot of the young, talented people.But let's talk about individual firings. I've been a terrible civil servant, a nightmarish employee from day one. You want to discipline, remove, suspend, or fire me. What are your options?Anybody who has worked in the civil service knows it's hard to fire bad performers. Whatever their political valence, whatever they feel about the civil service system, they have horror stories about a person who just couldn't be removed.In the early 2010s, a spate of stories came out about air traffic controllers sleeping on the job. Then-transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, made a big public announcement: "I'm going to fire these three guys." After these big announcements, it turned out he was only able to remove one of them. One retired, and another had their firing reduced to a suspension.You had another horrific story where a man was joking on the phone with friends when a plane crashed into a helicopter and killed nine people over the Hudson River. National outcry. They said, "We're going to fire this guy." In the end, after going through the process, he only got a suspension. Everyone agrees it's too hard.The basic story is, you have two ways to fire someone. Chapter 75, the old way, is often considered the realm of misconduct: You've stolen something from the office, punched your colleague in the face during a dispute about the coffee, something illegal or just straight-out wrong. We get you under Chapter 75.The 1978 Civil Service Reform Act added Chapter 43, which is supposed to be the performance-based system to remove someone. As with so much of that Civil Service Reform Act, the people who passed it thought this might be the beginning of an entirely different system.In the end, lots of federal managers say there's not a huge difference between the two. Some use 75, some use 43. If you use 43, you have to document very clearly what the person did wrong. You have to put them on a performance improvement plan. If they failed a performance improvement plan after a certain amount of time, they can respond to any claims about what they did wrong. Then, they can take that process up to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and claim that they were incorrectly fired, or that the processes weren't carried out appropriately. Then, if they want to, they can say, “Nah, I don't like the order I got,” and take it up to federal courts and complain there. Right now, the MSPB doesn't have a full quorum, which is complicating some of the recent removal disputes.You have this incredibly difficult process, unlike the private sector, where your boss looks at you and says, "I don't like how you're giving me the stink-eye today. Out you go." One could say that's good or bad, but, on the whole, I think the model should be closer to the private sector. We should trust managers to do their job without excessive oversight and process. That's clearly about as far from the realm of possibility as the current system, under which the estimate is 6-12 months to fire a very bad performer. The number of people who win at the Merit Systems Protection Board is still 20-30%.This goes into another issue, which is unionization. If you're part of a collective bargaining agreement — most of the regular federal civil service is — first, you have to go with this independent, union-based arbitration and grievance procedure. You're about 50/50 to win on those if your boss tries to remove you.So if I'm in the union, we go through that arbitration grievance system. If you win and I'm fired, I can take it to the Merit Systems Protection Board. If you win again, I can still take it to the federal courts.You can file different sorts of claims at each part. On Chapter 43, the MSPB is supposed to be about the process, not the evidence, and you just have to show it was followed. On 75, the manager has to show by preponderance of the evidence that the employee is harming the agency. Then there are different standards for what you take to the courts, and different standards according to each collective bargaining agreement for the grievance procedure when someone is disciplined. It's a very complicated, abstruse, and procedure-heavy process that makes it very difficult to remove people, which is why the involuntary separation rate at the federal government and most state governments is many multiples lower than the private sector.So, you would love to get me off your team because I'm abysmal. But you have no stomach for going through this whole process and I'm going to fight it. I'm ornery and contrarian and will drag this fight out. In practice, what do managers in the federal government do with their poor performers?I always heard about this growing up. There's the windowless office in the basement without a phone, or now an internet connection. You place someone down there, hope they get the message, and sooner or later they leave. But for plenty of people in America, that's the dream job. You just get to sit and nobody bothers you for eight hours. You punch in at 9 and punch out at 5, and that's your day. "Great. I'll collect that salary for another 10 years." But generally you just try to make life unpleasant for that person.Public sector collective bargaining in the US is new. I tend to think of it as just how the civil service works. But until about 50 years ago, there was no collective bargaining in the public sector.At the state level, it started with Wisconsin at the end of the 1950s. There were famous local government reforms beginning with the Little Wagner Act [signed in 1958] in New York City. Senator Robert Wagner had created the National Labor Relations Board. His son Robert F. Wagner Jr., mayor of New York, created the first US collective bargaining system at the local level in the ‘60s. In ‘62, John F. Kennedy issued an executive order which said, "We're going to deal officially with public sector unions,” but it was all informal and non-statutory.It wasn't until Title VII of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act that unions had a formal, statutory role in our federal service system. This is shockingly new. To some extent, that was the great loss to many civil service reformers in ‘78. They wanted to get through a lot of these other big reforms about hiring and firing, but they gave up on the unions to try to get those. Some people think that exception swallowed the rest of the rules. The union power that was garnered in ‘78 overcame the other reforms people hoped to accomplish. Soon, you had the majority of the federal workforce subject to collective bargaining.But that's changing now too. Part of that Civil Service Reform Act said, “If your position is in a national security-related position, the president can determine it's not subject to collective bargaining.” Trump and the OPM have basically said, “Most positions in the federal government are national security-related, and therefore we're going to declare them off-limits to collective bargaining.” Some people say that sounds absurd. But 60% of the civilian civil service workforce is the Department of Defense, Veterans Affairs, and the Department of Homeland Security. I am not someone who tries to go too easy on this crowd. I think there's a heck of a lot that needs to be reformed. But it's also worth remembering that the majority of the civil service workforce are in these three agencies that Republicans tend to like a lot.Now, whether people like Veterans Affairs is more of an open question. We have some particular laws there about opening up processes after the scandals in the 2010s about waiting lists and hospitals. You had veterans hospitals saying, "We're meeting these standards for getting veterans in the door for these waiting lists." But they were straight-up lying about those standards. Many people who were on these lists waiting for months to see a doctor died in the interim, some from causes that could have been treated had they seen a VA doctor. That led to Congress doing big reforms in the VA in 2014 and 2017, precisely because everyone realized this is a problem.So, Trump has put out these executive orders stopping collective bargaining in all of these agencies that touch national security. Some of those, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), seem like a tough sell. I guess that, if you want to dig a mine and the Chinese are trying to dig their own mine and we want the mine to go quickly without the EPA pettifogging it, maybe. But the core ones are pretty solid. So far the courts have upheld the executive order to go in place. So collective bargaining there could be reformed.But in the rest of the government, there are these very extreme, long collective bargaining agreements between agencies and their unions. I've hit on the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as one that's had pretty extensive bargaining with its union. When we created the TSA to supervise airport security, a lot of people said, "We need a crème de la crème to supervise airports after 9/11. We want to keep this out of union hands, because we know unions are going to make it difficult to move people around." The Obama administration said, "Nope, we're going to negotiate with the union." Now you have these huge negotiations with the unions about parking spots, hours of employment, uniforms, and everything under the sun. That makes it hard for managers in the TSA to decide when people should go where or what they should do.One thing we've talked about on Statecraft in past episodes — for instance, with John Kamensky, who was a pivotal figure in the Clinton-Gore reforms — was this relationship between government employees and “Beltway Bandits”: the contractors who do jobs you might think of as civil service jobs. One critique of that ‘90s Clinton-Gore push, “Reinventing Government,” was that although they shrank the size of the civil service on paper, the number of contractors employed by the federal government ballooned to fill that void. They did not meaningfully reduce the total number of people being paid by the federal government. Talk to me about the relationship between the civil service reform that you'd like to see and this army of folks who are not formally employees.Every government service is a combination of public employees and inputs, and private employees and inputs. There's never a single thing the government does — federal, state, or local — that doesn't involve inputs from the private sector. That could be as simple as the uniforms for the janitors. Even if you have a publicly employed janitor, who buys the mop? You're not manufacturing the mops.I understand the critique that the excessive focus on full-time employees in the 1990s led to contracting out some positions that could be done directly by the government. But I think that misses how much of the government can and should be contracted out. The basic Office of Management and Budget (OMB) statute [OMB Circular No. A-76] defining what is an essential government duty should still be the dividing line. What does the government have to do, because that is the public overseeing a process? Versus, what can the private sector just do itself?I always cite Stephen Goldsmith, the old mayor of Indianapolis. He proposed what he called the Yellow Pages test. If you open the Yellow Pages [phone directory] and three businesses do that business, the government should not be in that business. There's three garbage haulers out there. Instead of having a formal government garbage-hauling department, just contract out the garbage.With the internet, you should have a lot more opportunities to contract stuff out. I think that is generally good, and we should not have the federal government going about a lot of the day-to-day procedural things that don't require public input. What a lot of people didn't recognize is how much pressure that's going to put on government contracting officers at the federal level. Last time I checked there were 40,000 contracting officers. They have a lot of power. In the most recent year for which we have data, there were $750 billion in federal contracts. This is a substantial part of our economy. If you total state and local, we're talking almost 10% of our whole economy goes through government contracts. This is mind-boggling. In the public policy world, we should all be spending about 10% of our time thinking about contracting.One of the things I think everyone recognized is that contractors should have more authority. Some of the reform that happened with people like [Steven] Kelman — who was the Office of Federal Procurement Policy head in the ‘90s under Clinton — was, "We need to give these people more authority to just take a credit card and go buy a sheaf of paper if that's what they need. And we need more authority to get contract bids out appropriately.”The same message that animates civil service reform should animate these contracting discussions. The goal should be setting clear goals that you want — for either a civil servant or a contractor — and then giving that person the discretion to meet them. If you make the civil service more stultified, or make pay compression more extreme, you're going to have to contract more stuff out.People talk about the General Schedule [pay scale], but we haven't talked about the Federal Wage Schedule system at all, which is the blue-collar system that encompasses about 200,000 federal employees. Pay compression means those guys get paid really well. That means some managers rightfully think, "I'd like to have full-time supervision over some role, but I would rather contract it out, because I can get it a heck of a lot cheaper."There's a continuous relationship: If we make the civil service more stultified, we're going to push contracting out into more areas where maybe it wouldn't be appropriate. But a lot of things are always going to be appropriate to contract out. That means we need to give contracting officers and the people overseeing contracts a lot of discretion to carry out their missions, and not a lot of oversight from the Government Accountability Office or the courts about their bids, just like we shouldn't give OPM excess input into the civil service hiring process.This is a theme I keep harping on, on Statecraft. It's counterintuitive from a reformer's perspective, but it's true: if you want these processes to function better, you're going to have to stop nitpicking. You're going to have to ease up on the throttle and let people make their own decisions, even when sometimes you're not going to agree with them.This is a tension that's obviously happening in this administration. You've seen some clear interest in decentralization, and you've seen some centralization. In both the contract and the civil service sphere, the goal for the central agencies should be giving as many options as possible to the local managers, making sure they don't go extremely off the rails, but then giving those local managers and contracting officials the ability to make their own choices. The General Services Administration (GSA) under this administration is doing a lot of government-wide acquisition contracts. “We establish a contract for the whole government in the GSA. Usually you, the local manager, are not required to use that contract if you want computer services or whatever, but it's an option for you.”OPM should take a similar role. "Here's the system we have set up. You can take that and use it as you want. It's here for you, but it doesn't have to be used, because you might have some very particular hiring decisions to make.” Just like there shouldn't be one contracting decision that decides how we buy both a sheaf of computer paper and an aircraft carrier, there shouldn't be one hiring and firing process for a janitor and a nuclear physicist. That can't be a centralized process, because the very nature of human life is that there's an infinitude of possibilities that you need to allow for, and that means some amount of decentralization.I had an argument online recently about New York City's “buy local” requirement for certain procurement contracts. When they want to build these big public toilets in New York City, they have to source all the toilet parts from within the state, even if they're $200,000 cheaper in Portland, Oregon.I think it's crazy to ask procurement and contracting to solve all your policy problems. Procurement can't be about keeping a healthy local toilet parts industry. You just need to procure the toilet.This is another area where you see similar overlap in some of the civil service and contracting issues. A lot of cities have residency requirements for many of their positions. If you work for the city, you have to live inside the city. In New York, that means you've got a lot of police officers living on Staten Island, or right on the line of the north side of the Bronx, where they're inches away from Westchester. That drives up costs, and limits your population of potential employees.One of the most amazing things to me about the Biden Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was that it encouraged contracting officers to use residency requirements: “You should try to localize your hiring and contracting into certain areas.” On a national level, that cancels out. If both Wyoming and Wisconsin use residency requirements, the net effect is not more people hired from one of those states! So often, people expect the civil service and contracting to solve all of our ills and to point the way forward for the rest of the economy on discrimination, hiring, pay, et cetera. That just leads to, by definition, government being a lot more expensive than the private sector.Over the next three and a half years, what would you like to see the administration do on civil service reform that they haven't already taken up?I think some of the broad-scale layoffs, which seem to be slowing down, were counterproductive. I do think that their ability to achieve their ends was limited by the nature of the reduction-in-force regulations, which made them more counterproductive than they had to be. That's the situation they inherited. But that didn't mean you had to lay off a lot of people without considering the particular jobs they were doing now.And hiring quite a few of them back.Yeah. There are also debates obviously, within the administration, between DOGE and Russ Vought [director of the OMB] and some others on this. Some things, like the Schedule Policy/Career — which is the revival of Schedule F in the first Trump administration — are largely a step in the right direction. Counter to some of the critics, it says, “You can remove someone if they're in a policymaking position, just like if they were completely at-will. But you still have to hire from the typical civil service system.” So, for those concerned about politicization, that doesn't undermine that, because they can't just pick someone from the party system to put in there. I think that's good.They recently had a suitability requirement rule that I think moved in the right direction. That says, “If someone's not suitable for the workforce, there are other ways to remove them besides the typical procedures.” The ideal system is going to require some congressional input: it's to have a decentralization of hiring authority to individual managers. Which means the OPM — now under Scott Kupor, who has finally been confirmed — saying, "The OPM is here to assist you, federal managers. Make sure you stay within the broad lanes of what the administration's trying to accomplish. But once we give you your general goals, we're going to trust you to do that, including hiring.”I've mentioned it a few times, but part of the Chance to Compete Act — which was mentioned in one of Trump's Day One executive orders, people forget about this — was saying, “Implement the Chance to Compete Act to the maximum extent of the law.” Bring more subject-matter expertise into the hiring process, allow more discretion for managers and input into the hiring process. I think carrying that bipartisan reform out is going to be a big step, but it's going to take a lot more work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.statecraft.pub

Today, Hunter was joined once again by Grant Miller, Salt Lake City Public Defender and Representative of Utah's 24th House District. Last time that he was on the show, Grant was running for office. Now, Grant joins to discuss how his first legislative session went. From passing a bill to reduce fines and fees to helping ensure the Overton window didn't shift too far to tough on crime side, Grant gives us a reason to be optimistic even when we hold minimal political power.   Guest: Grant Miller, Public Defender and Utah House Representative, Salt Lake City, House District 24   Resources: Contact Grant https://www.grantmillerforhouse24.com/ https://www.instagram.com/grantistheguy/?hl=en     Contact Hunter Parnell:                                 Publicdefenseless@gmail.com  Instagram @PublicDefenselessPodcast Twitter                                                                 @PDefenselessPod www.publicdefenseless.com  Subscribe to the Patreon www.patreon.com/PublicDefenselessPodcast  Donate on PayPal https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=5KW7WMJWEXTAJ Donate on Stripe https://donate.stripe.com/7sI01tb2v3dwaM8cMN Trying to find a specific part of an episode? Use this link to search transcripts of every episode of the show! https://app.reduct.video/o/eca54fbf9f/p/d543070e6a/share/c34e85194394723d4131/home  

In this episode of the Buckeye Weekly Podcast, hosts Tony Gerdeman and Tom Orr dive into the controversial proposal by Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti for a 24 or 28-team college football playoff. The hosts express their concerns about the idea, discuss the concept of the Overton window, and analyze how this could affect the sport's regular season. They also look at various hypothetical playoff matchups and explain why such an expansion could render the regular season almost meaningless. Tune in for a detailed discussion on the future of college football playoff formats. 00:00 Introduction and Apologies 00:41 Controversial Playoff Expansion Proposal 02:04 Debating the Overton Window 03:28 Big Ten's Strategic Response 05:35 Hypothetical Playoff Scenarios 08:01 Impact on Regular Season and Championship Integrity 12:13 Chat GPT's Bracket Analysis 19:49 Final Thoughts and Sign-Off

In this powerful Monday Mindset session, Barry Overton—veteran, retired Denver police officer, entrepreneur, and real estate leader—shares his journey of discovering true purpose through service. Using the simple metaphor of a pencil, Barry reveals how greatness isn't found in titles or status, but in the impact we leave on others. He explores the pain of purpose versus the pain of regret, the role of mentorship and accountability, and the importance of embracing failure as growth. Packed with wisdom and personal stories, Barry inspires agents to realign their businesses and lives around fulfillment, service, and legacy.

The three mustaches take a trip to Southern California to solve the mysterious death of 46-year-old Janet Overton. After suffering from a mysterious illness for over two years, Janet suddenly collapsed in her driveway while preparing to go whale watching with her son. Did she die of natural causes, or something more sinister? Maybe she's born with it… maybe it's MURDER.Support this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/crime-corner-with-jessie-wiseman/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Lexlee Overton is a former trial lawyer who spent more than 30 years in the courtroom before choosing a different path. After experiencing firsthand how the legal profession can wear lawyers down, she founded Mind Over Law to help lawyers move beyond burnout and lead with greater clarity, resilience, and purpose. Today, she works with both individual lawyers and legal teams using a science-based approach that combines mindfulness, emotional intelligence, and practical leadership tools to build healthier law firms with better performance. WHAT'S COVERED IN THIS EPISODE ABOUT LAWYER WELL-BEING AND HIGH-PERFORMING TEAMS The legal profession loves to reward hustle, grind it out, power through, keep your head down and just get the work done. But what if the real power comes from doing things differently? Lexlee Overton spent decades playing by those rules until she realized something had to change. After 30 years in the courtroom, a health crisis at age 30 made her question everything about how lawyers are supposed to work. She founded Mind Over Law because she believes lawyers can be healthier, happier people and still do excellent work. Now she works with individual lawyers and legal teams, teaching them that energy management is way more important than time management. She's discovered that when leaders work on themselves first, they naturally start building better teams. In this episode of The Lawyer's Edge podcast, Elise speaks with Lexlee about why that "badge of honor" mentality around overwork is actually making lawyers less powerful, what happens when teams are chronically depleted, and how law firm leaders can build the kind of culture that actually attracts and keeps good people. 2:32 - Lexlee's personal breaking point and wake-up call 5:22 - The changing attitudes toward mindfulness in law 9:59 - Warning signs lawyers ignore before burnout hits 12:51 - Simple practices for skeptical, hard-driving lawyers 16:06 - The neuroscience of fight-or-flight in legal practice 18:32 - The statistics on lawyer mental health and malpractice 20:36 - Reframing the "lose your edge" mentality 23:15 - Why law firm leaders should care about well-being initiatives 26:41 - Using biofeedback to demonstrate coherency 29:12 - The one leadership habit Lexlee would change overnight 30:58 - Emotional intelligence in high-performing legal teams 37:16 - Getting started with culture change 40:04 - The curse of knowledge insight MENTIONED IN BEYOND BURNOUT: BUILDING HIGH-PERFORMING LEGAL TEAMS THROUGH WELL-BEING Mind Over Law | LinkedIn American Bar Association (ABA) study on lawyer depression and substance abuse Get connected with the coaching team: hello@thelawyersedge.com The Lawyer's Edge SPONSOR FOR THIS EPISODE... Today's episode is brought to you by the Ignite Women's Business Development Accelerator, a 9-month business development program created BY women lawyers for women lawyers. Ignite is a carefully designed business development program containing content, coaching, and a community of like-minded women who are committed to becoming rainmakers AND supporting the retention and advancement of other women in the profession. If you are interested in either participating in the program or sponsoring a woman in your firm to enroll, learn more about Ignite and sign up for our registration alerts by visiting www.thelawyersedge.com/ignite.

Jeremy Wendt sits down with Kim Dillon, the new Director of Overton County Schools, to discuss her unexpected journey from classroom teacher to district leadership. Originally planning to become an attorney, Dillon switched paths after having children and has now been in education for 23 years. She shares her thoughts on how career pathways have evolved, the importance of secondary education, and the recent success of AP and dual enrollment programs — including record-high AP test scores and the enthusiastic support behind the AP Academy they are hoping to implement this coming school year. Dillon also addresses the district's new no-phone policy, acknowledging the challenges of implementation while emphasizing the need for focused learning environments. Despite the pressures of state-level decisions, she remains passionate about her work and reminds us that the professionalism of educators deserves far more recognition than it often receives. Listen To The Local Matters Podcast Today! News Talk 94.1

Success doesn't just happen—it's built, brick by brick, on the foundation of discipline. In this episode, Barry Overton breaks down the three pillars that can transform your business and life: consistency, self-control, and resilience. Drawing lessons from legends like Kobe Bryant and entrepreneurs like Sara Blakely, Barry reveals:How a 4 AM routine can create years of competitive advantageWhy saying “no” might be the most powerful business decision you makeHow to turn setbacks into setups for bigger winsThe daily non-negotiables that keep top agents growing“Guard your yes” — a mindset shift to eliminate distractionsFrom goal-setting hacks to emotional resilience techniques, this Mindset Monday isn't just motivation—it's a practical playbook for building habits that last.

Mentor Sessions Ep. 023: Robbie Bernstein on Bitcoin vs. Government, Trump Fiscal Policy, Decentralization & Media CollapseWhat if Bitcoin is the ultimate Trojan horse against government overreach, Trump's chaotic fiscal policy, and dying centralized media? In this unfiltered Mentor Sessions interview, comedian and podcaster Robbie Bernstein (Run Your Mouth, Part of the Problem) torches the status quo, exposing how currency manipulation erodes personal responsibility, why decentralization is killing mainstream media, and Bitcoin's role as a defiant asset in a fiat nightmare. From Epstein conspiracies to Porch Tour tales, Robbie unpacks Trump's tariffs, government corruption, and why comedy is the new truth serum. Hesitant on Bitcoin? Robbie reveals his 40% net worth bet and how it defunds endless inflation. Dive into this wild ride blending Bitcoin, Trump, government scams, decentralization, media death, Epstein intrigue, currency wars, fiscal policy fails, Porch Tour antics, and razor-sharp comedy—essential for escaping the matrix!Chapters:• 00:00:00 - Intro• 00:01:06 - Wild Open: Epstein, Bitcoin Price & Final Solutions JokeHumor hits hard with Epstein lists, Bitcoin forecasts, and satirical takes.• 00:02:15 - Politics Realignment: Trump vs. DemocratsDiscussing Trump's declining popularity and why he's still the better option.• 00:03:18 - Porch Tour Tales: Meeting America's Autistic FansRobbie shares road stories from his unique backyard comedy tour.• 00:03:48 - Trump Critique: Fiscal Policy, Tariffs & Central PlanningBreaking down Trump's nightmares on economy, wars, and factory jobs obsession.• 00:06:15 - Bitcoin Voting Bloc: Why Root for Trump?How Bitcoiners influenced politics and Trump's pro-Bitcoin promises.• 00:08:08 - Currency Wars: Highlander Analogy & Bitcoin Trojan HorseBitcoin as the one true currency driving out fiat, with stablecoins' role.• 00:11:47 - Comedians as Truth Tellers: Covid & Media DeathWhy comics outperform journalists, plus Overton window shifts post-Covid.• 00:13:36 - Epstein Deep Dive: Trump's Handling & Elite BlackmailUnpacking the Epstein saga, Trump's fumble, and intelligence ties.• 00:18:30 - Decentralization Beauty: Media & Culture ShiftsHow media decentralization empowers ideas, with Bitcoin parallels.• 00:24:44 - Comedy Roots: Politics, Upbringing & SkepticismRobbie's journey from comedy to politics, influenced by 2008 crisis.• 00:32:02 - Batshit Conspiracies: Aliens, UFOs & Sorting TruthWild theories on aliens, government lies, and incentive structures.• 00:40:53 - Debt Awareness: $37T Hole & Bitcoin ContrarianismPublic ignorance on debt, plus Robbie's 40% Bitcoin allocation.• 00:52:44 - Wrap-Up: Best Sandwiches, Comedians & Porch Tour PromoFood favorites, inspiring comics, and invites to Robbie's events.About Robbie Bernstein:Comedian & Podcaster, Run Your Mouth & Part of the ProblemX: @robbiethefireWebsite: porchtour.com⚡ POWERED by @Sazmining — the easiest way to mine Bitcoin and take control of your financial future. ⛏️You own the rig

video: https://youtu.be/viTzTFszR_Q In this episode of Destination Linux, we interview the founder of Kove, Dr. John Overton, about the journey from co-inventing distributed hash tables that powered the early cloud to his latest breakthrough Kove:SDM, a Software Defined Memory system that literally lets servers "download more RAM". Overton dives into the open source ethos that shaped his career. If you're passionate about Linux, composable infrastructure, or tech that bends the laws of physics, this conversation is a must watch. Forum Discussion Thread (https://destinationlinux.net/forum) Download as MP3 (https://aphid.fireside.fm/d/1437767933/32f28071-0b08-4ea1-afcc-37af75bd83d6/38a5a806-3b8d-42aa-b5f1-dbd2d2e219cd.mp3) Support the show by becoming a patron at tuxdigital.com/membership (https://tuxdigital.com/membership) or get some swag at tuxdigital.com/store (https://tuxdigital.com/store) Hosted by: Ryan (DasGeek) = dasgeek.net (https://dasgeek.net) Jill Bryant = jilllinuxgirl.com (https://jilllinuxgirl.com) Michael Tunnell = michaeltunnell.com (https://michaeltunnell.com) Links: https://kove.com/ (https://kove.com/) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributedhashtable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_hash_table) Chapters: 00:00:00 Intro 00:01:21 Why we turned a 3-minute booth chat into a full interview 00:02:40 John Overton of Kove 00:03:48 Early career & inventing distributed hash tables 00:16:10 Foundational tech that made today's cloud possible 00:24:56 Sandfly Security, agentless Linux security [ad] 00:26:48 John's take on AI 00:39:52 The birth of Kove SDM – why it started 01:03:16 Making "download more RAM" real – memory-pool magic 01:17:40 Kove SDM vs. Compute Express Link (CXL) 01:24:54 What are there new challenges in computing you're excited to tackle? 01:35:39 Lightning round – guilty pleasures, movies & more 01:40:03 Outro

How has the landscape of legal education shifted, and what ramifications has that already started having? How do politics factor into judicial appointments more than ever before, and how did we get to this point?Ilya L. Shapiro is a senior fellow and the director of Constitutional Studies at the Manhattan Institute. He's also the author of several books, including Lawless: The Miseducation of America's Elites and Supreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America's Highest Court Cato Supreme Court Review.Greg and Ilya explore issues related to Supreme Court nominations, cancel culture, and the impact of bias in legal education. Their conversation also addresses the longstanding politicization of judicial appointments, challenges within legal academia such as DEI and student activism, and the broader implications for law and society. Ilya also shares potential reforms for improving the legal profession and education system.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:When the law becomes just another form of activism35:49: Another failure of our systems of legal education or of the culture of the legal profession. Young lawyers seeing themselves as the law or their legal tools as just another part of activism, rather than as a profession. Or law schools not teaching lawyers the same way. The way to be a good lawyer is to be able to understand and see all sides of a given argument or issue or dispute. That is how you can best advocate your own sides, your own client's position. Well, if half of that 360 degrees is illegitimate, or you cannot even discuss beyond the pale, outside the Overton window, as they say, then you are going to be a much less effective lawyer. And yes, I think the legal profession has suffered, in general, its credibility, its reputation.What universities were meant to be43:19: It is the purpose of universities to develop, to have free inquiry, to have civil debate, to confront new ideas. And if universities have not been doing that for a whole host of reasons, then I think that is a level of criticism—something that they should be held to account for.On judges and legal objectivity04:36: You would hope that law and policy are different things, because there is a reason why we separate out the judicial power, and that reason is for it to be a counter-majoritarian check. You do not need judges to buttress popular opinions. You need judges to protect against abuses of power by elected officials. You need judges to protect individual rights against mob rule. And so, it cannot be the case that what is right on the law is always going to be what the majority of policy views. When fear shapes the future of the legal profession30:27: Most students just want to get their degree, get their credential, get a job, have some fun while they are at it, and that is about it. They are not politically motivated or philosophically motivated. They are just there because—especially when we are talking about law schools, rather, or some other professional school as opposed to college—they are there because this is the next step on their career trajectory, and they are just trying to keep their head down so as not to be caught in the cancellation crossfire. And it is fear, and this is how I counsel students, is that you do not have to be a martyr. You do not have to stand up and be an individual, objecting to every injustice you face.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Ketanji Brown JacksonBurwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.Robert BorkTheodore RooseveltJames MadisonAlexander HamiltonJohn JayMancur OlsonWilliam TreanorThe Paper ChaseLewis F. Powell Jr.John Paul StevensGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at The Manhattan InstituteProfile at the CATO InstituteProfile for Burke Law GroupLinkedIn ProfileSocial Profile on XGuest Work:Substack - Shapiro's GavelAmazon Author PageLawless: The Miseducation of America's ElitesSupreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America's Highest CourtCato Supreme Court ReviewReligious Liberties for Corporations?: Hobby Lobby, the Affordable Care Act, and the ConstitutionAmicus Brief -- Alvarez v. Smith

Trump’s new religious liberty order isn’t just a policy shift—it’s a cultural permission slip. In this episode, the guys lay out why now is the most strategic time in a generation to start a business, plant a church, or build something that lasts. With 10,000 baby boomers retiring a day, and the Overton window swinging wide open, Christians have a window to reclaim territory our apathy gave away. We break down how to seize this moment without waiting for permission, what faithful entrepreneurship looks like in a post-COVID economy, and why the church must stop outsourcing courage. Don’t waste this presidency. Don’t wait for “someday.” The time to build is now. Fight Laugh Feast 2025 Conference (October 16-18, Nashville) - Register HERE: https://flfnetwork.com

Trump’s new religious liberty order isn’t just a policy shift—it’s a cultural permission slip. In this episode, the guys lay out why now is the most strategic time in a generation to start a business, plant a church, or build something that lasts. With 10,000 baby boomers retiring a day, and the Overton window swinging wide open, Christians have a window to reclaim territory our apathy gave away. We break down how to seize this moment without waiting for permission, what faithful entrepreneurship looks like in a post-COVID economy, and why the church must stop outsourcing courage. Don’t waste this presidency. Don’t wait for “someday.” The time to build is now. Fight Laugh Feast 2025 Conference (October 16-18, Nashville) - Register HERE: https://flfnetwork.com

The latest guest on The PR Week podcast is Cheryl Overton, founder of Cheryl Overton Communications and an alum of agencies including Egami Group, Zeno Group, PMK*BNC and Edelman. She talks about the growing appreciation for earned media and its versatility, why brands are wise to focus on consumers over the age of 50 and the changing nature of DEI at corporations. Overton also discusses the biggest marketing and communications news of the week, from more personnel changes at Edelman, Astronomer's celebrity response to its corporate crisis, American Eagle's controversial jeans campaign and much more.  AI Deciphered is back—live in New York City this November 13th.Join leaders from brands, agencies, and platforms for a future-focused conversation on how AI is transforming media, marketing, and the retail experience. Ready to future-proof your strategy? Secure your spot now at aidecipheredsummit.com. Use code POD at check out for $100 your ticket! Follow us: @PRWeekUSReceive the latest industry news, insights, and special reports. Start Your Free 1-Month Trial Subscription To PRWeek

Trump’s new religious liberty order isn’t just a policy shift—it’s a cultural permission slip. In this episode, the guys lay out why now is the most strategic time in a generation to start a business, plant a church, or build something that lasts. With 10,000 baby boomers retiring a day, and the Overton window swinging wide open, Christians have a window to reclaim territory our apathy gave away. We break down how to seize this moment without waiting for permission, what faithful entrepreneurship looks like in a post-COVID economy, and why the church must stop outsourcing courage. Don’t waste this presidency. Don’t wait for “someday.” The time to build is now. Fight Laugh Feast 2025 Conference (October 16-18, Nashville) - Register HERE: https://flfnetwork.com

‘More Sufficiency Now!' tees - for a sufficiently limited time onlyThere may no longer be an insufficiency of sufficiency themed t-shirts walking the streets but YOUR opportunity to join the burgeoning sufficiency movement is rapidly closing like the Overton window on climate ambition! YOU can make sufficiency a thing by heading to our merch page and grabbing one of these tees, which will only be available for the next week before they disappear like the t-shirt you didn't need in the first place. Run, don't walk over to: www.letmesumup.net/p/merch/.—From the Torres Strait to the Hague, this week climate was in the courts and your intrepid hosts cross examined not one but two landmark climate court cases: one dismissed in Australia, one seismic win in the International Court of Justice. While the case Uncle Pabai Pabai and Uncle Paul Kabai brought against the Commonwealth to Australia's Federal Court found the Federal Government does not owe a duty of care to prevent climate change impacts on Torres Strait Islanders, the judgement was not without a judicial side-eye at past governments' climate targets—“window dressing” and “no regard for science” were phrases that made it into the ruling. This excellent summary from Adam Morton at the Guardian is worth a read.Further afield, what started as a grassroots campaign from Pacific Island students led to a unanimous advisory opinion from the UN's highest court. Their view? States have binding obligations to protect the climate—and yes, they could be held liable for climate damages. The implications? This legal mic drop will have global ripple effects for some time. Watch this space!Our main courseRefined Ambitions or Rube Goldberg machines powered by beef fat and hope? Deloitte's recent report for the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, “Refined Ambitions: Exploring Australia's Low Carbon Liquid Fuel Potential' made it clear that clean-ish fuels can be yours, for a HEFA-ty price! Your intrepid hosts levelled-up on acronyms (HEFA, ATJ, FT, and PTL, anyone?) and zeroed in on aviation, freight, and mining as the big targets for low carbon, liquid fuels. And speaking of zeroes. These fuels are so expensive - like $1,000 to $5,000 per tonne of CO₂ abated expensive - this report had Luke feeling bullish on green hydrogen! If we're fuelling our planes with $10/litre synthetic champagne, maybe it's time to rethink the flight plan. No easy wins here. One more thingsTennant's One More Thing is: the Shift Key podcast Summer School miniseries, with Robinson Meyer and Jesse Jenkins! Basics; thermal techs; renewable techs. More to come!Frankie's One More Thing is: The UN report Seizing the moment of opportunity - ahead of COP30 and the next round of NDCs it's efficiency, renewables, electrification for the win!Luke's One More Thing is: An on-the-ground report from Allegra Spender's tax roundtable.And that's it for now, Summerupperers. There is now a one-stop-shop for all your LMSU needs: head toletmesumup.netto support us on Patreon, procure merch, find back episodes, and leave us a voicemail!

In this episode, Vance Crowe delves into the cultural shifts that are quietly but rapidly unfolding beneath the surface of our society. This change, is not inherently good or bad, but it's crucial to be aware of it to avoid the dangers of mob mentality. Vance discusses how the narratives that have long defined us are being challenged by new voices and ideas that were once considered unthinkable. Figures like Nick Fuentes and Sam Hyde are gaining traction among young people, offering perspectives that challenge the status quo and the traditional Overton window of acceptable discourse.These emerging voices are not just about political dissent; they represent a broader cultural shift where young people are seeking new ideas and narratives that resonate with their experiences and frustrations. As mainstream platforms struggle to contain these ideas, alternative platforms are flourishing, providing a space for free speech and new ideas. Vance explores how this cultural change could impact power dynamics and societal structures, urging listeners to critically engage with these ideas and consider their implications.Legacy Interviews - A service that records individuals and couples telling their life stories so that future generations can know their family history. https://www.legacyinterviews.com/experienceRiver.com - Invest in Bitcoin with Confidence https://river.com/signup?r=OAB5SKTP

¿Qué te pareció este episodio?¿Qué es la ventana de Overton y por qué ya no disfrutas de tu superhéroe favorito?Lee el artículo aquí: https://jugo.pe/superman-no-se-volvio-woke/Al suscribirte a Jugo recibes nuestro contenido diariamente. Tienes la oportunidad de ser juguero por un día. Pero, sobre todo, patrocinas que nuestro contenido llegue gratuitamente a personas que lo necesitan. Contamos con tu apoyo para no desenchufar la licuadora. Suscríbete aquí. Haz clic aquí para seguirnos en Twitter Haz clic aquí para seguirnos en Facebook Haz clic aquí para seguirnos en Instagram

Southwest Michigan's Morning News podcast is prepared and delivered by the WSJM Newsroom. For these stories and more, visit https://www.wsjm.com and follow us for updates on Facebook. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In today's news: Riverwood Center CEO Ric Compton is sounding the alarm about some upcoming changes to how the state manages behavioral health services. Plans to develop the former Overton property in South Haven into housing have hit another delay. A new invasive species has been found at the Wolf Lake State Fish Hatchery in Mattawan. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In today's news: Riverwood Center CEO Ric Compton is sounding the alarm about some upcoming changes to how the state manages behavioral health services. Plans to develop the former Overton property in South Haven into housing have hit another delay. A new invasive species has been found at the Wolf Lake State Fish Hatchery in Mattawan. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jesus' famous words in Matthew 24 come to life in the modern day, as we see wars, rumors of wars and rumors saturate the news cycle. But those who have studied history through a biblical lens know that this is just Jesuit theater, staged and choreographed conflicts, dialectics, signs and wonders — all to move the Overton window so that accepting the unacceptable becomes the norm.* 00:00 - Montage* 26:02 - Introduction* 36:44 - Why Nukes Are Fake* 1:36:25 - The Battle of Armageddon* 1:47:02 - Jesuit Theater* 3:11:47 - Floods* 3:29:50 - Iran War* 4:08:37 - Epstein & The Jews* 5:35:39 - Image of the Beast* 7:08:39 - Final Thoughts This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.danceoflife.com/subscribe

Referencias: - Noveno misionero muerto en lo que va del año: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2025/05/02/lds-missionary-magna-killed-after/ - Niños secuestrados por secta fundamentalista: https://abc7.com/post/amber-alert-issued-missing-idaho-teens-linked-fundamentalist-church-jesus-christ-day-saints-group/16852764/  - Revelación sobre la poligamia: https://www.kuer.org/race-religion-social-justice/2025-06-26/an-1880s-lds-polygamy-revelation-raises-awkward-questions-today-says-historian  - Tribune: Oaks y el electroshock: https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/11/16/dallin-oaks-says-shock/ - FAIR: Oaks y el electroshock: https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/aversion-therapy-at-byu  - Oaks y la criminalización de la homosexualidad: https://lattergaystories.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Principles-to-Govern.pdf - KnoWhy 2: El Libro de Mormón como manual administrativo: https://centraldle.es/knowhy/fue-utilizado-el-libro-de-mormon-como-el-primer-manual-administrativo-de-la-iglesia

Is your 2025 still aligned with the goals you set back in January? Barry Overton breaks down how to reset your business, reclaim your time, and build consistent momentum—with a life you actually love.In this energizing episode of Agent Power Huddle, Barry Overton shares how his move to San Diego transformed more than just his zip code—it recalibrated his lifestyle, business strategy, and mindset.This session is packed with real estate coaching gold for agents feeling stuck, distracted, or off-track midyear.

This episode was recorded at the 2025 Western Dairy Management Conference in Reno, Nevada.Dr. DeVries gives an overview of his presentation on the economics of feeding more than one ration to lactating cows, with special consideration for additional costs (beyond increased feed costs) such as delivering additional loads of TMR, labor cost and mixing errors. He notes that producer surveys indicate that simplicity and not making mistakes are reasons given for not feeding an increased number of different rations. The surveys suggest there is some real money to be made if appropriate rations are used. Diminishing marginal returns should also be considered: going from one ration to two will yield the largest gain in income over feed costs, with each additional ration yielding smaller gains. (1:52) Dr. Burhans and Dr. Overton discuss some considerations for feeding multiple rations, including environmental impacts, herd size, pen availability, feed costs and milk production impacts. Dr. DeVries emphasizes the costs of feed delivery are a big part of this as well. (9:20)The panel discusses a spreadsheet that Dr. DeVries presented during his presentation to calculate delivery costs. Dr. Burhans mentions some of the on-farm software gives an assessment of how close the actual ration was to the formulated ration, allowing for adjustments if needed. (16:28)The panel considers the importance of body condition scores and recording actual data during nutritionist walk-throughs of dairy herds. They also delve into feeding frequency and optimal feed refusals levels. (27:45)Panelists share their take-home thoughts. (43:08)Please subscribe and share with your industry friends to invite more people to join us at the Real Science Exchange virtual pub table.  If you want one of our Real Science Exchange t-shirts, screenshot your rating, review, or subscription, and email a picture to anh.marketing@balchem.com. Include your size and mailing address, and we'll mail you a shirt.

We want to encourage you to not just sit back and watch, but to really engage along with your church family today. So, gather up the family and grab your Bible, share this and invite your friends, turn your volume up, and let's worship Jesus TOGETHER today!Ready to take a next step? (Baptism, serving, etc) https://harvesttime.churchcenter.com/people/forms/125818Need prayer? Text HTPRAYER to 97000 and someone from our team will connect with you.Give online here: https://harvesttime.net/give

Head and neck cancers have many names based on where the cancer starts. Dr. Overton discusses risk factors, signs and symptoms and treatments.

What if the words you use every day are the biggest barrier to your success? Learn how shifting your language can transform your mindset, your habits—and your future.In this thought-provoking Monday Mindset Training episode, Barry dives into the transformational power of language and how your internal dialogue directly shapes your outcomes in life and business.From simple phrases like “I can't” and “I'll try” to deep mindset rituals inspired by icons like Michael Jordan and Thomas Edison, Barry explores how to rewire your thoughts and create forward momentum—even when the path feels unclear.

Still stuck in the hamster wheel of transactions? Discover how Barry built a business that runs without him—and how you can too.In this powerful episode, Barry Overton reveals how he made the leap from top-producing real estate agent to scalable business CEO—and why you should too. If you're feeling stuck chasing commissions or burned out from one-off deals, this session is your roadmap to building systems, creating leverage, and stepping into true entrepreneurial leadership.

If you've ever looked successful on the outside but were secretly falling apart on the inside—this episode is for you.Bill Overton spent decades as a top executive in the HOA industry… until his high-functioning depression caught up with him. In this powerful conversation, he shares what burnout really looks like behind the boardroom doors, why “self-care” isn't enough, and how leaders can model the mental health shift we urgently need.We go deep on his personal crash, his recovery, and how it led to him writing the industry-defining book Managing Mental Health. Bill's not here to sugarcoat anything—but he is here to give you tools, language, and hope.

In this episode of Anchored by the Sword, I'm joined by Naomi Overton—CEO, author, and general editor of Every Woman's Bible. Naomi's heart for people shines through every word as she shares her powerful journey of growing up serving in the orphanages of Tijuana, Mexico, and how a rainy day and a little girl's home changed everything.From that defining childhood moment to leading global ministries like MOPS and Stonecroft, Naomi walks us through her freedom story—a life marked by reconciliation, restoration, and God's vision for flourishing. We also dive into the incredible backstory of Every Woman's Bible—how it came to be, what makes it different, and the worldwide team of women who made it happen.You'll hear about: • Why Ephesians is her anchor • The power of crossing barriers in Jesus' name • How her mission was shaped by love and justice • What it means to truly embrace every woman • Why this Bible is both solid in theology and full of invitationWe also talk about how Every Woman's Bible isn't just another women's Bible—it's an embrace. A place where your story meets God's story and you're reminded you belong.

Either Trump ignores the courts, or his presidency will end in failure. It's that simple. Today, I go through a litany of immigration cases to show how far the Overton window has moved in the courts. So even if the Supreme Court magnanimously walks back a few of the rulings, we will still be playing behind par. Also, once again, the Supreme Court appears to be ready to overturn the conservative Fifth Circuit on a health care case, but not overturn liberal circuits. Finally, I discuss the lack of a plan to fortify red states against the hell that is coming our way. RINOs are blocking everything DeSantis wants to do in that regard. Relatedly, I discuss how marijuana is destroying everything in its path and how it's disgusting that most Republicans refuse to block it in red states. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices