Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Now Charleston's Morning News with Kelly and Place.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
At seven oh four on a Thursday edition of the show,
we welcome you into the program. Good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
We're covering this morning's top staries. President Trump will seek
congressional approval for dose related spending cuts in this fiscal year.
Several reports say the White House will use a rarely
used procedure that recommends Congress take back spending. It has
already approved the over nine billion dollars in reductions targets,
mostly foreign aid, but also funding for public broadcasting. The
(00:36):
package of proposed cuts, separate from Trump's Big Beautiful Bill,
is due on Capitol Hill next Tuesday.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Now, see is this something that now has to go
through the House then bounce back over to the Senate
and don't I'm just a little bit curious about how
the process of this. So the recision package is, you know,
the incoming recision packages what we're talking about here? Nine
point four billion?
Speaker 3 (01:01):
Yeah, how come it's not the one hundred and seventy
five billion that they found right?
Speaker 2 (01:06):
So you mentioned NPR. I think PBS is on the list.
They're seven hundred and fifty thousand for you know, reducing xenophobia.
And Venezuela Sesame Street in Iraq, three million, four million
for sedentary migrants at Colombia. I mean, we've got on
the list of stuff that we've heard through the DOGE cuts.
But understandably, you know, here Elon is saying, see how
(01:29):
I'm out of here, My time's up, and he's upset.
The big beautiful bill doesn't do anything with regards to
the cuts that he literally took it on the chin
to find.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Well, Elon's learning a lesson in government. Not that he
needed to learn it, but imagine how frustrating it is
when you're used to being the CEO of these companies.
I mean, he created PayPal, he created Tesla, he created SpaceX,
and then now all of a sudden he's up against
the government and he's up against a brick wall.
Speaker 2 (02:04):
Yeah, I mean we but see, we the American people
want to see these guys cut, including Elon obviously in
the president I want to see these guys and gals
cutting our government down, not spending spending, spending. We just
went through more than four years of that.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
But that's not the way government works. And we were
talking about this earlier, like Elon said that this bill
can't be. He actually criticized Trump's big beautiful bill and
said it can't be big and beautiful at the same time,
which means, I mean it's so big that in order
to get it passed, you have to pay off all
of these politicians with what they want for their districts,
(02:40):
are their pet projects or their donors, and so it
just becomes bloated and they end up spending more money
and then you have to balance. All right, So is
it really worth what I want to do here in
order to swallow that bitter pill?
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Well, Ronda Santa sexual Us, you can pull the audio
appare we'll play it next. Ronda Santas out of flo
Florida's governor stood up for Elon and said, my god,
he fought against the swamp literally firebomb taking it on
the chin so many ways. And the swamp is winning
by all accounts.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
The swamp always wins. But we'll get those comments from
Governor Ron de Santis. Coming up next to.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
This is Charleston's Morning News with Kelly and Blaze.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Welcome in seven thirteen before the very talking about Florida's
Governor Ronda Santas standing with Elon Musk, who's out at Doge.
His time is up. I know he put a statement
out on ex Elon did, but also sat down for
what sounds like it's going to be a very interesting
interview to air Sunday on CBS about the cuts to
Doge that apparently didn't go anywhere. In fact, Ronda Santis,
(03:46):
governor out of Florida, said, Doge fought the swamp and
so far the swamp is won.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
Elon Musk went into this Doge effort. He was getting lampooned.
I mean like they're fire bombing his Tesla dealerships, media
smearing him relentlessly. His business has suffered, and yet we
have a Republican Congress and to this day, we're in
the end of May, past Memorial Day, and not one
(04:14):
cent in Doge cuts have been implemented by the Congress.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
Oh how frustrating.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Yeah, not one cent. And they wanted the media wants
to frame this as a breakup between Trump and Elon
that they all said was going to come sooner or later.
And you'll notice how Trump did not attack Elon when
he said that the big beautiful bill can't be both
big and beautiful. Trump did not go scorched earth on Elon.
(04:45):
He didn't even he gave him a pass and said, yeah,
well I agree, but you have to do some things
sometimes that you don't want to in order to get
the thing done. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
Literally said, this is the process, that's how it works.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Yeah, and that is the process of our government. And
that's the problem with our government.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Right, this being the swamp. I was going to say,
I mean, here they are trying to drain one hundred
and seventy five billion dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse
from the swamp, and the swamps not letting go. They
funded all of USAID in this package. They spent more money,
they didn't cut This is concerning, But we also need
to look at to your point on how government works.
(05:24):
Every time if we talk about tax cuts, what do
they say? That means that the government looks at it
as they're losing their revenue.
Speaker 3 (05:32):
Well, it's even if you lessen an increase in the budget,
they'll call it a cut. So if you were supposed
to get a ten percent increase in your budget and
it turns out it's only five percent, they'll frame that
as a five percent cut when it actually it's a
five percent increase. Right, that's the way the government mathematics works.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
It's completely lopsided upside down.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
Frankly, you know in this USAID, I don't know, Aid,
I don't know what's going to happen to that. I
mean this bill that was you're talking about to Congress,
the bill that Congress passed, well, it still has to
work its way through the Senate. So we don't know
what's going to happen in the Senate. And if they're
going to try to cut that. We know that the
President is trying to rescind spending on US AID to
(06:15):
the tune and public broadcasting the tune of nine billion
dollars out of what's already been budgeted for them. So
and then this big beautiful bill fight continues, and it's
going to continue probably at least till the end of June.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
Oh yeah, they're looking at a fourth of July passage.
But I don't know if we're going to see that.
In there's it's kind of a ticking time bomb. We're
either going to see the largest tax cuts or the
largest tacks in grease.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
Well hopefully. I mean, it would be disastrous to not
have it pass, and it would be a total fumble
to say all right, we are going because that was
the whole danger. That's why people didn't want to do
the big beautiful bill to begin with, was because if
you argued each of these on their own merit separately,
(07:04):
then supposedly you might be able to get some more
responsible spending cuts and things like that out of it.
And there's always the danger that if you can't get
it done, that the biggest tax increase in history is
going to take a fact when these Trump tax cuts
from his first administration sunset later this year.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
It is fixing a lot of things that are broken,
which is why it got passed out of the House,
so you know, and of course sweetening the deal on
no tax on tips over time and social Security. There's
certainly some sort of graduated levels of that. With regards
to Social Security, no tax, it's less tax. I know,
a lot of people have been asking what about the
(07:47):
Social Security.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Well it's up to a certain point there's.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
No tax, right well, and it's also graduated level depending
on your age and income and you know, like everything.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Yeah, I mean, we just need to do I would
like to see Trump move to abolish the IRS. I mean,
he's done big, bold things let's keep it rolling. Let's
keep it rolling and get rid of that awful agency.
I mean, I want to confiscate your money. And there's
no fighting them. I mean, who isn't afraid of the IRS.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
He's been talking about getting rid of the federal income tax.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Let's go, let's do well, that's what I mean by
getting of the IRS.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
I mean he's already put it out there. I mean
he's willing. Well, just but look at Congress. Are they
showing they're able? Where's their boldness?
Speaker 3 (08:33):
They don't have any boldness, you know, look at the
look what it takes to be a politician and stay
in your position for any amount of time. I would argue,
that's not the stuff that people with backbone and bravado
would thrive in.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Well, people with I and I talked to many politicians
off the air, off the record. Many of them who
are really strong and really great get actually pushed to
the side because they're not going along to get along
in the club, and they're a threat and it's a shame.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
So well, in a lot of cases that's also according
to them.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
So well, these are people that I've known personally for
a while.
Speaker 3 (09:14):
I mean, they'll all tell you they're fighting a good
fight and I've just been casht off to the side
because I'm so great and my fighting for you. So
you have to take some of that with a grain
of salt too.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
Well, you sort of just described Donald Trump, didn't you
in a way here's a man who stands out amongst Listen.
Come on, you've been in a group of people where
you stand out amongst the rest, and you know what
you're not going along to get along and that they
cast you aside one way or the other.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
Well, I'm just saying when a politician tells you that
they are one of those, I don't automatically take them
for their word.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Well, it's much deeper than that.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
You're listening to Charleston's Morning News on ninety four to
three WSC. Now back to Kelly and Blaze twenty four.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
We'll hit another one. Get the roadways as many kids
hit the bus stops here for the last day of school,
believe it or not for the school year, and check
the forecast as well for the weekend just ahead.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
Well, there's some happy parents then.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Or are they, because now they've got to figure out
what to do with the kiddos for the rest of
the summer while they're still schlepping it to work.
Speaker 3 (10:22):
Oh, I don't know, keep it amount of trouble. I think,
you know, the next happiest day other than when you
were a kid on the last day of school, is
when you're a parent and the kid has their last
day of school. It was for me.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
I think a lot of parents are like, let's uh,
we can't wait for them to get back to school.
There are a lot of this is the scramp, the
summer scramble now where many parents are scrambling to figure out,
you know, how to make sure to keep the kids
out of trouble.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
Yeah, I don't know. You know that's helicopter parents. When
you were a kid, did you need to be organized
all summer long and told what to do? And everything
was regimented like go outside and play, go outside, creation.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Though I were going to myself.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Like a different generation. So what it's a much more
dangerous world for the kids out there now than it
was then.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
No, I'm saying different generation in that the helicopter parenting
didn't exist for Gen X like it does now. I mean,
I'm just saying they're whatever you want to call it,
it is what it is. And you've got parents out here,
you know, wanting to make sure that their kids don't
wind up on the wrong side of the law frankly
cause them more problems.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
Yeah, I mean, I don't know if that's their main driver.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
I think be a little dramatic, but still, you know,
it's total. You don't agree that we and gen X
were my god, Like you said, go outside and play now,
like you know, the helicopter parenting. It's I don't know
how many kids even do that. It's just a screen
in their hand in the air conditioned house for however
(11:58):
many hours.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Like this is my point, and then it all has
to be all regimented, and here's your plans for the summer,
and here's what we're doing on you this day or
that day or Mondays or Tuesday or whatever it might
be used to be, like get lost, go outside and play,
make sure you're back in by dinner time.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
I love all the memes where it's like, you know,
our generations aren't the same, Like we used to drink
from the garden hose kind of thing, Like you guys,
you guys drink lottes from Starbucks at like eight, you
have iPhones in the fifth grade. Actually we did a
whole years back. I was shocked did unintended segments on
(12:38):
people calling in to tell us how young their children
were that were getting smartphones. I mean there were kids
that calling in in single digits, or parents of that
had kids in the car in the back seat that
had better phones than me. At the time. I'm like,
good god, these phones are like and they're only getting
more expensive. There are a mortgage payment.
Speaker 3 (12:58):
Well, you know, I'm not against kids having smartphones. Like
I always say, you have the world in your pocket,
and we still don't realize it. Sometimes we will sit
there and argue, it's like, pull out the phone and
look it up. Well, I just you know, so anyway,
it's a tool. So of course the tool can be misused,
but you know, I'm not against them. I was even
(13:20):
like concerned with my kids about video games, and then
I read some articles about how they think that it
increases brain connections neuroactivity in your brain, and I'm like, okay,
well that's a good thing. So yeah, they can play
their video.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Games and baseball. Like it's a balance. Let's have a
nice balance. I think we've gotten a little off kilter
with the balance.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
Well, I think we've gotten way off kilter because you
don't ride through neighborhoods anymore and see gaggles of kids
out there are all running around, you know now that
school is going to be out, And I would say,
like right there indicates there's some sort of problem. You are.
You is Traffic, Weather and Information Station.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
This is Charleston's Morning News on ninety four to three WSC.
Now back to Kelly and Blaze.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Seven thirty Good Thursday morning, twenty ninth of May. Here
on eighty four to three WSC.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
We're covering this morning's top stories. Health and Human Services
Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior is considering a move to
ban government scientists from publishing and leading medical journals. During
a podcast appearance, RFK Junior said Lancett, the New England
Journal of Medicine, JAMA, and other journals are all corrupt.
Although the publications are consistently ranked as the top medical
(14:39):
journals in the world, Kennedy alleged they are vessels for
pharmaceutical companies. Kennedy's proposing for agencies within HHS to create
their own in house journals and will become the pre
eminent journals in their field.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
Now, isn't it interesting that you've got journalism right, So
you've got the news out here putting this out as
if he's trying to quell free speech and information and
knowledge and access to it from inside the government, when
it seems as if it's been the opposite, where you know,
(15:15):
we've been fed a whole bunch of stuff. I mean,
I'm for more information, not less, and you know, from
and I'm saying from the media, the propaganda p I mean,
they're propment all kinds of stuff out here. To me,
he's providing information that they ought to be looking into.
Is it a funnel and a vehicle just for let's
just say, propaganda from the pharmaceutical company to run with.
(15:36):
I don't know, let's look into that.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
Well, you say you want more information, not less. But
the thing is they're not saying, Okay, the government's going
to start putting out their journals and because of the
integrity of them, that they're going to become the pre
eminent journals in their field. He's going to ban government
scientists from publishing in these other journals. Well, it is
(15:59):
less information.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Well, I don't agree with him banning it at all,
I don't think we should be banning it, but I
do I would. I am more curious about this whole
funneling of you know, in him a legend corruption here.
He seems as if he's trying to expose something.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Well, I'm sure that he is, but in so many cases,
I mean, I just I'm hesitant to say that the
government's a solution in just about any problem.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Well, I can understand that. I mean, that's whole high
We're here from the government, we're here to help, no,
thank you.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
And I would have to believe if there's not I mean,
I don't know. I would think that there's disclosure laws
and all of that. And if there's an if they're
not hardy enough to expose when somebody's being a shill
for a pharmaceutical company instead of sticking to the true
facts of the science, then that's a problem and they
(16:53):
should do something about that. And they should have to
at least disclose whether they're getting paid or where the
information's comeing from, and all of this, right, So there's
other ways to do it than ban them and then
have the government try to take their place. Well, so
he they're not banning the journals they're just banning government
(17:13):
scientists from reporting in the journals.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
This is one to follow as far as I'm concerned
to see where this goes. So this was during a
podcast appearance with RFK Junior, and he's alleging that they're
all corrupt. Who who all is corrupt? The government scientists?
Speaker 3 (17:34):
Who are No, he's saying, lands at the New England
Journal of Medicine, JAMA and other medical journals that are
considered the pre eminent source of Oh.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
He's basically throughout the world. I gotcha.
Speaker 3 (17:49):
He's saying that, No. There, you know that a lot
of times that this is the information in them is
in the articles that these scientists publish are swayed by
the pharmaceutical companies.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Vessels of the pharmaceutical company. So pay to play basically.
Speaker 3 (18:05):
Yeah. So, I mean, I understand his concern is banning
government scientists from publishing in these journals and then coming
up with the government's own journal in those fields? Is
that the right approach?
Speaker 1 (18:25):
Thanks for listening to the Charleston Morning Use podcast. Catch
Kelly and Blaze weekday mornings from six to nine
Now Charleston's Morning News with Kelly and Place.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
At seven oh four on a Thursday edition of the show,
we welcome you into the program. Good morning.
Speaker 3 (00:13):
We're covering this morning's top staries. President Trump will seek
congressional approval for dose related spending cuts in this fiscal year.
Several reports say the White House will use a rarely
used procedure that recommends Congress take back spending. It has
already approved the over nine billion dollars in reductions targets,
mostly foreign aid, but also funding for public broadcasting. The
(00:36):
package of proposed cuts, separate from Trump's Big Beautiful Bill,
is due on Capitol Hill next Tuesday.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
Now, see is this something that now has to go
through the House then bounce back over to the Senate
and don't I'm just a little bit curious about how
the process of this. So the recision package is, you know,
the incoming recision packages what we're talking about here? Nine
point four billion?
Speaker 3 (01:01):
Yeah, how come it's not the one hundred and seventy
five billion that they found right?
Speaker 2 (01:06):
So you mentioned NPR. I think PBS is on the list.
They're seven hundred and fifty thousand for you know, reducing xenophobia.
And Venezuela Sesame Street in Iraq, three million, four million
for sedentary migrants at Colombia. I mean, we've got on
the list of stuff that we've heard through the DOGE cuts.
But understandably, you know, here Elon is saying, see how
(01:29):
I'm out of here, My time's up, and he's upset.
The big beautiful bill doesn't do anything with regards to
the cuts that he literally took it on the chin
to find.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Well, Elon's learning a lesson in government. Not that he
needed to learn it, but imagine how frustrating it is
when you're used to being the CEO of these companies.
I mean, he created PayPal, he created Tesla, he created SpaceX,
and then now all of a sudden he's up against
the government and he's up against a brick wall.
Speaker 2 (02:04):
Yeah, I mean we but see, we the American people
want to see these guys cut, including Elon obviously in
the president I want to see these guys and gals
cutting our government down, not spending spending, spending. We just
went through more than four years of that.
Speaker 3 (02:18):
But that's not the way government works. And we were
talking about this earlier, like Elon said that this bill
can't be. He actually criticized Trump's big beautiful bill and
said it can't be big and beautiful at the same time,
which means, I mean it's so big that in order
to get it passed, you have to pay off all
of these politicians with what they want for their districts,
(02:40):
are their pet projects or their donors, and so it
just becomes bloated and they end up spending more money
and then you have to balance. All right, So is
it really worth what I want to do here in
order to swallow that bitter pill?
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Well, Ronda Santa sexual Us, you can pull the audio
appare we'll play it next. Ronda Santas out of flo
Florida's governor stood up for Elon and said, my god,
he fought against the swamp literally firebomb taking it on
the chin so many ways. And the swamp is winning
by all accounts.
Speaker 3 (03:11):
The swamp always wins. But we'll get those comments from
Governor Ron de Santis. Coming up next to.
Speaker 1 (03:18):
This is Charleston's Morning News with Kelly and Blaze.
Speaker 2 (03:22):
Welcome in seven thirteen before the very talking about Florida's
Governor Ronda Santas standing with Elon Musk, who's out at Doge.
His time is up. I know he put a statement
out on ex Elon did, but also sat down for
what sounds like it's going to be a very interesting
interview to air Sunday on CBS about the cuts to
Doge that apparently didn't go anywhere. In fact, Ronda Santis,
(03:46):
governor out of Florida, said, Doge fought the swamp and
so far the swamp is won.
Speaker 4 (03:51):
Elon Musk went into this Doge effort. He was getting lampooned.
I mean like they're fire bombing his Tesla dealerships, media
smearing him relentlessly. His business has suffered, and yet we
have a Republican Congress and to this day, we're in
the end of May, past Memorial Day, and not one
(04:14):
cent in Doge cuts have been implemented by the Congress.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
Oh how frustrating.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Yeah, not one cent. And they wanted the media wants
to frame this as a breakup between Trump and Elon
that they all said was going to come sooner or later.
And you'll notice how Trump did not attack Elon when
he said that the big beautiful bill can't be both
big and beautiful. Trump did not go scorched earth on Elon.
(04:45):
He didn't even he gave him a pass and said, yeah,
well I agree, but you have to do some things
sometimes that you don't want to in order to get
the thing done. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (04:53):
Literally said, this is the process, that's how it works.
Speaker 3 (04:56):
Yeah, and that is the process of our government. And
that's the problem with our government.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Right, this being the swamp. I was going to say,
I mean, here they are trying to drain one hundred
and seventy five billion dollars in waste, fraud, and abuse
from the swamp, and the swamps not letting go. They
funded all of USAID in this package. They spent more money,
they didn't cut This is concerning, But we also need
to look at to your point on how government works.
(05:24):
Every time if we talk about tax cuts, what do
they say? That means that the government looks at it
as they're losing their revenue.
Speaker 3 (05:32):
Well, it's even if you lessen an increase in the budget,
they'll call it a cut. So if you were supposed
to get a ten percent increase in your budget and
it turns out it's only five percent, they'll frame that
as a five percent cut when it actually it's a
five percent increase. Right, that's the way the government mathematics works.
Speaker 2 (05:50):
It's completely lopsided upside down.
Speaker 3 (05:52):
Frankly, you know in this USAID, I don't know, Aid,
I don't know what's going to happen to that. I
mean this bill that was you're talking about to Congress,
the bill that Congress passed, well, it still has to
work its way through the Senate. So we don't know
what's going to happen in the Senate. And if they're
going to try to cut that. We know that the
President is trying to rescind spending on US AID to
(06:15):
the tune and public broadcasting the tune of nine billion
dollars out of what's already been budgeted for them. So
and then this big beautiful bill fight continues, and it's
going to continue probably at least till the end of June.
Speaker 2 (06:29):
Oh yeah, they're looking at a fourth of July passage.
But I don't know if we're going to see that.
In there's it's kind of a ticking time bomb. We're
either going to see the largest tax cuts or the
largest tacks in grease.
Speaker 3 (06:43):
Well hopefully. I mean, it would be disastrous to not
have it pass, and it would be a total fumble
to say all right, we are going because that was
the whole danger. That's why people didn't want to do
the big beautiful bill to begin with, was because if
you argued each of these on their own merit separately,
(07:04):
then supposedly you might be able to get some more
responsible spending cuts and things like that out of it.
And there's always the danger that if you can't get
it done, that the biggest tax increase in history is
going to take a fact when these Trump tax cuts
from his first administration sunset later this year.
Speaker 2 (07:25):
It is fixing a lot of things that are broken,
which is why it got passed out of the House,
so you know, and of course sweetening the deal on
no tax on tips over time and social Security. There's
certainly some sort of graduated levels of that. With regards
to Social Security, no tax, it's less tax. I know,
a lot of people have been asking what about the
(07:47):
Social Security.
Speaker 3 (07:48):
Well it's up to a certain point there's.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
No tax, right well, and it's also graduated level depending
on your age and income and you know, like everything.
Speaker 3 (07:57):
Yeah, I mean, we just need to do I would
like to see Trump move to abolish the IRS. I mean,
he's done big, bold things let's keep it rolling. Let's
keep it rolling and get rid of that awful agency.
I mean, I want to confiscate your money. And there's
no fighting them. I mean, who isn't afraid of the IRS.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
He's been talking about getting rid of the federal income tax.
Speaker 3 (08:18):
Let's go, let's do well, that's what I mean by
getting of the IRS.
Speaker 2 (08:23):
I mean he's already put it out there. I mean
he's willing. Well, just but look at Congress. Are they
showing they're able? Where's their boldness?
Speaker 3 (08:33):
They don't have any boldness, you know, look at the
look what it takes to be a politician and stay
in your position for any amount of time. I would argue,
that's not the stuff that people with backbone and bravado
would thrive in.
Speaker 2 (08:50):
Well, people with I and I talked to many politicians
off the air, off the record. Many of them who
are really strong and really great get actually pushed to
the side because they're not going along to get along
in the club, and they're a threat and it's a shame.
Speaker 3 (09:05):
So well, in a lot of cases that's also according
to them.
Speaker 2 (09:11):
So well, these are people that I've known personally for
a while.
Speaker 3 (09:14):
I mean, they'll all tell you they're fighting a good
fight and I've just been casht off to the side
because I'm so great and my fighting for you. So
you have to take some of that with a grain
of salt too.
Speaker 2 (09:25):
Well, you sort of just described Donald Trump, didn't you
in a way here's a man who stands out amongst Listen.
Come on, you've been in a group of people where
you stand out amongst the rest, and you know what
you're not going along to get along and that they
cast you aside one way or the other.
Speaker 3 (09:41):
Well, I'm just saying when a politician tells you that
they are one of those, I don't automatically take them
for their word.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Well, it's much deeper than that.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
You're listening to Charleston's Morning News on ninety four to
three WSC. Now back to Kelly and Blaze twenty four.
Speaker 2 (10:00):
We'll hit another one. Get the roadways as many kids
hit the bus stops here for the last day of school,
believe it or not for the school year, and check
the forecast as well for the weekend just ahead.
Speaker 3 (10:12):
Well, there's some happy parents then.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Or are they, because now they've got to figure out
what to do with the kiddos for the rest of
the summer while they're still schlepping it to work.
Speaker 3 (10:22):
Oh, I don't know, keep it amount of trouble. I think,
you know, the next happiest day other than when you
were a kid on the last day of school, is
when you're a parent and the kid has their last
day of school. It was for me.
Speaker 2 (10:36):
I think a lot of parents are like, let's uh,
we can't wait for them to get back to school.
There are a lot of this is the scramp, the
summer scramble now where many parents are scrambling to figure out,
you know, how to make sure to keep the kids
out of trouble.
Speaker 3 (10:50):
Yeah, I don't know. You know that's helicopter parents. When
you were a kid, did you need to be organized
all summer long and told what to do? And everything
was regimented like go outside and play, go outside, creation.
Speaker 2 (11:04):
Though I were going to myself.
Speaker 3 (11:07):
Like a different generation. So what it's a much more
dangerous world for the kids out there now than it
was then.
Speaker 2 (11:13):
No, I'm saying different generation in that the helicopter parenting
didn't exist for Gen X like it does now. I mean,
I'm just saying they're whatever you want to call it,
it is what it is. And you've got parents out here,
you know, wanting to make sure that their kids don't
wind up on the wrong side of the law frankly
cause them more problems.
Speaker 3 (11:34):
Yeah, I mean, I don't know if that's their main driver.
Speaker 2 (11:36):
I think be a little dramatic, but still, you know,
it's total. You don't agree that we and gen X
were my god, Like you said, go outside and play now,
like you know, the helicopter parenting. It's I don't know
how many kids even do that. It's just a screen
in their hand in the air conditioned house for however
(11:58):
many hours.
Speaker 3 (11:59):
Like this is my point, and then it all has
to be all regimented, and here's your plans for the summer,
and here's what we're doing on you this day or
that day or Mondays or Tuesday or whatever it might
be used to be, like get lost, go outside and play,
make sure you're back in by dinner time.
Speaker 2 (12:16):
I love all the memes where it's like, you know,
our generations aren't the same, Like we used to drink
from the garden hose kind of thing, Like you guys,
you guys drink lottes from Starbucks at like eight, you
have iPhones in the fifth grade. Actually we did a
whole years back. I was shocked did unintended segments on
(12:38):
people calling in to tell us how young their children
were that were getting smartphones. I mean there were kids
that calling in in single digits, or parents of that
had kids in the car in the back seat that
had better phones than me. At the time. I'm like,
good god, these phones are like and they're only getting
more expensive. There are a mortgage payment.
Speaker 3 (12:58):
Well, you know, I'm not against kids having smartphones. Like
I always say, you have the world in your pocket,
and we still don't realize it. Sometimes we will sit
there and argue, it's like, pull out the phone and
look it up. Well, I just you know, so anyway,
it's a tool. So of course the tool can be misused,
but you know, I'm not against them. I was even
(13:20):
like concerned with my kids about video games, and then
I read some articles about how they think that it
increases brain connections neuroactivity in your brain, and I'm like, okay,
well that's a good thing. So yeah, they can play
their video.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Games and baseball. Like it's a balance. Let's have a
nice balance. I think we've gotten a little off kilter
with the balance.
Speaker 3 (13:41):
Well, I think we've gotten way off kilter because you
don't ride through neighborhoods anymore and see gaggles of kids
out there are all running around, you know now that
school is going to be out, And I would say,
like right there indicates there's some sort of problem. You are.
You is Traffic, Weather and Information Station.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
This is Charleston's Morning News on ninety four to three WSC.
Now back to Kelly and Blaze.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
Seven thirty Good Thursday morning, twenty ninth of May. Here
on eighty four to three WSC.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
We're covering this morning's top stories. Health and Human Services
Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Junior is considering a move to
ban government scientists from publishing and leading medical journals. During
a podcast appearance, RFK Junior said Lancett, the New England
Journal of Medicine, JAMA, and other journals are all corrupt.
Although the publications are consistently ranked as the top medical
(14:39):
journals in the world, Kennedy alleged they are vessels for
pharmaceutical companies. Kennedy's proposing for agencies within HHS to create
their own in house journals and will become the pre
eminent journals in their field.
Speaker 2 (14:54):
Now, isn't it interesting that you've got journalism right, So
you've got the news out here putting this out as
if he's trying to quell free speech and information and
knowledge and access to it from inside the government, when
it seems as if it's been the opposite, where you know,
(15:15):
we've been fed a whole bunch of stuff. I mean,
I'm for more information, not less, and you know, from
and I'm saying from the media, the propaganda p I mean,
they're propment all kinds of stuff out here. To me,
he's providing information that they ought to be looking into.
Is it a funnel and a vehicle just for let's
just say, propaganda from the pharmaceutical company to run with.
(15:36):
I don't know, let's look into that.
Speaker 3 (15:38):
Well, you say you want more information, not less. But
the thing is they're not saying, Okay, the government's going
to start putting out their journals and because of the
integrity of them, that they're going to become the pre
eminent journals in their field. He's going to ban government
scientists from publishing in these other journals. Well, it is
(15:59):
less information.
Speaker 2 (16:00):
Well, I don't agree with him banning it at all,
I don't think we should be banning it, but I
do I would. I am more curious about this whole
funneling of you know, in him a legend corruption here.
He seems as if he's trying to expose something.
Speaker 3 (16:15):
Well, I'm sure that he is, but in so many cases,
I mean, I just I'm hesitant to say that the
government's a solution in just about any problem.
Speaker 2 (16:25):
Well, I can understand that. I mean, that's whole high
We're here from the government, we're here to help, no,
thank you.
Speaker 3 (16:32):
And I would have to believe if there's not I mean,
I don't know. I would think that there's disclosure laws
and all of that. And if there's an if they're
not hardy enough to expose when somebody's being a shill
for a pharmaceutical company instead of sticking to the true
facts of the science, then that's a problem and they
(16:53):
should do something about that. And they should have to
at least disclose whether they're getting paid or where the
information's comeing from, and all of this, right, So there's
other ways to do it than ban them and then
have the government try to take their place. Well, so
he they're not banning the journals they're just banning government
(17:13):
scientists from reporting in the journals.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
This is one to follow as far as I'm concerned
to see where this goes. So this was during a
podcast appearance with RFK Junior, and he's alleging that they're
all corrupt. Who who all is corrupt? The government scientists?
Speaker 3 (17:34):
Who are No, he's saying, lands at the New England
Journal of Medicine, JAMA and other medical journals that are
considered the pre eminent source of Oh.
Speaker 2 (17:46):
He's basically throughout the world. I gotcha.
Speaker 3 (17:49):
He's saying that, No. There, you know that a lot
of times that this is the information in them is
in the articles that these scientists publish are swayed by
the pharmaceutical companies.
Speaker 2 (18:02):
Vessels of the pharmaceutical company. So pay to play basically.
Speaker 3 (18:05):
Yeah. So, I mean, I understand his concern is banning
government scientists from publishing in these journals and then coming
up with the government's own journal in those fields? Is
that the right approach?
Speaker 1 (18:25):
Thanks for listening to the Charleston Morning Use podcast. Catch
Kelly and Blaze weekday mornings from six to nine
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.