Latest / The Bill Handel Show / Fraud | Gen Z Can’t Read

Transcript

Fraud | Gen Z Can’t Read · The Bill Handel Show

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: You're listening to Bill Handle on demand from KFI AM
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: six forty KFI.
• 0:06
  Speaker 2: AM six forty Bill Handle Here, good morning, it's a Tuesday.
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: It is June ninth. Today. We have a modified group here.
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: That is Amy is out for a couple of weeks,
• 0:21
  Speaker 2: Neil comes back on Monday, and comes back on Monday,
• 0:27
  Speaker 2: Nobody filling in for Neil, Heather filling in for Amy,
• 0:31
  Speaker 2: and Michelle filling in for Ann.
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: Okay, that pretty much is it, isn't it? All right?
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: As I said prior to the break, I have an
• 0:40
  Speaker 2: equation for you, and it's not that complicated.
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: And may want to write this down.
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: This is a mathematical equation in the world of politics,
• 0:50
  Speaker 2: and here it is Democrats when equals fraud, Republicans win
• 0:58
  Speaker 2: equal fair election. And if you don't think that's the case,
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: let's just look at what just happened in our primary
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: with three people running, three major players running for mayor.
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: One Karen Bass who won the primary. She's up in
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: the general election as one of the finalists because we
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: have two in California, and the top two vote getters,
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: notwithstanding party, get in. All right, the real fight was
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: Nithia Rahman, Democrat, communist, let's just say, very left wing progressive, socialist, progressive.
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: She calls herself Spencer Pratt, independent but mainly Republican, who
• 1:44
  Speaker 2: had the backing, not the endorsement, the backing of President Trump.
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: So here's what happens. The day of the election.
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: Spencer Pratt was ahead Suspanchia substantially, and all of a sudden,
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: as the mail in ballots come in and the vote changes,
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: there is fraud when the Democrat gets more votes. Because
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: the way it works in California, it's probably the easiest
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: place in the country to vote. First of all, mail
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: in ballots are available and are sent out to everybody
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: who is registered to vote. You have to show idea
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: to vote or to register but not to vote. And
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: the time that can be spent or the time that
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: is allowed for the vote vote to be counted is
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: pretty expansive. If, for example, a mail in ballot is
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: postmarked by midnight the election day, is what happened to me.
• 2:45
  Speaker 2: I sent it out very late, and this state or
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: in this case, the city, gets it within seven days.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: Guess what that vote counts.
• 2:55
  Speaker 2: And then there are a few other ways that votes
• 2:57
  Speaker 2: can be repaired or fixed. And therefore because of the
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: expansiveness of the way California votes, it is automatic fraud,
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: even though there's absolutely no evidence. Those that are advocating fraud,
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: that are against mail in ballots or certainly in the
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: expansiveness want more restriction of a mail in ballots are
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: arguing there is fraud, and when asked to, okay, fine,
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: and I would love to hear about fraud, I have
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: no problem with that. Show me just show me. Well,
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: we don't have We just know it's true. Show me no, No,
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: we just know it's true. The whole system is flawed,
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: but only if Democrats win, mind you, if a Republican wins.
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: There has not been one allegation of fraud in any
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: election in which a Republican has won, not one, certainly
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: not by the Republican side. Only when Democrats win. So
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: the president was going, how could dith Oraman win when Pratt.
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: Was head election day? Where do they come up with
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: the votes? They came up with the votes because of
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: mail in balloting.
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: That's how Democrats vote, mail in much more than Republicans do.
• 4:11
  Speaker 2: Republicans go to the polls much more than do Democrats,
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: and so the argument is the Republicans ahead the day
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: of the voting and the Democrats somehow catches up or
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: surpasses the Republican is fraud.
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: How could you lose this many votes? Well, it's easy.
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: It's because of California's mailing system, California's vote gathering and
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: vote counting system. And the argument is that is inherently fraudulent. Fine,
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: give us an example. I just want to hear it.
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: It's the same thing that happened during the twenty twenty
• 4:48
  Speaker 2: election when President Trump lost the election.
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: Fraud, fraud, fraud, rigged, rigged, rigged. And I was saying,
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: I got it. You know, I'm on your side. Just
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: prove it.
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: We don't actually have any proof, or the proof that
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: was presented was completely flawed on its face, And so
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: I said, I made this analogy yesterday. How about this. Okay,
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: no evidence. You're now arrested. You're tried for some crime
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: of which there is no evidence to prove you committed
• 5:21
  Speaker 2: the crime. But the judge of the jury knows that
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: you did it. We sort of know you did it
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: in our heart of hearts. We know you did it,
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: and you're guilty. And you get convicted with no proof.
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: Welcome to America and That's exactly the argument that's being
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: argued on this one.
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: It is this has made up stuff.
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: This is to try to overturn an election in the
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: presidential and it's you know what it actually does, I mean,
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: is it going to go anything? The argument that Pratt
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: should have won or he did win and Nythia Rahman
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: did not really win. Here's the problem with it is
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: not that the vote and they can count and recount
• 6:03
  Speaker 2: and count again. Georgia, for example, in the presidential had
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: three recounts and the Republicans are still screaming that was fraudulent. Okay,
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: And certainly in the case of the LA election, this primary,
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: where you can go to court all you want argue
• 6:21
  Speaker 2: that Spencer Pratt actually won, Okay, Mazel tov, enjoy yourself.
• 6:25
  Speaker 2: Knock your socks off. You're not going to come up
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: with any allegations because there aren't any. You're not gonna
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: come up with any proof because there isn't any widespread
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: faud It just doesn't exist. The problem is it puts
• 6:35
  Speaker 2: into jeopardy our belief in democracy because what it says
• 6:40
  Speaker 2: is we do not have fair elections in this country anymore.
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: Back to the equation, if a Democrat wins, it is
• 6:49
  Speaker 2: fraud on his face, even though there's no proof to prove.
• 6:54
  Speaker 2: There's nothing to prove the fraud. If a Republican wins,
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: there is fraud. Don't even bother arguing fraud because that's
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: a fair election.
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: Are we really going there? We have. Unfortunately, we have
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: gone there.
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: And now those people that are arguing our democracy is
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: at stake, I agree, not in the sense that we're
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: overturning our election process. The democracy is our belief in
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: our election system. And if you cease believing, then where
• 7:28
  Speaker 2: are we going with that? All right, moving into a
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: political statement that's being made. Guy but named Dilvan Alberson
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: owns a restaurant right near where George Floyd was killed
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: in South Minneapolis, and he's run it for fifteen years
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: and he has he actually started this free and donation
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: based restaurant.
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: It was a regular restaurant up to the.
• 7:59
  Speaker 2: Immigration aids and he said, no, no, we're going to
• 8:03
  Speaker 2: make a donation based restaurant. And that's to avert sales tax.
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: Because the government is so corrupt. He averts on his
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: side that you can't have as long as the government
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: is the way it is. It has to be completely corrupt. Okay, whatever,
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: another crazy person.
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: But in the meantime, so.
• 8:20
  Speaker 2: Then as a political move, he went to a donation
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: a free based restaurant where people go in, they eat
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: for free, and then just donate the money.
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: About forty to fifty percent just take the free food.
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: The other.
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: Fifty sixty percent. They put in enough money to keep
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: the restaurant not only going, but doing better than it
• 8:49
  Speaker 2: ever has.
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: And that is you know, what, does that prove.
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: That people are wonderful, that people donate a lot of money. No,
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: I think it proved that people who do go to
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: that restaurant have for at least a political viewpoint that
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: they agree that the immigration raids, they agree that the
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: government is a fascist government, I mean, on and on
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: their position. So it has become a political statement as
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: well as eating food as well as buying food. And
• 9:23
  Speaker 2: so what he did is his business increased dramatically, as
• 9:27
  Speaker 2: you can imagine. He cut down the menu, making easier
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: for the kitchen staff.
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: He had to.
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: Bring in more people, and it looks like he's paying
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: them decent wages. People who are there have gotten raises
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: and this whole issue, and by the way, that's not
• 9:45
  Speaker 2: new there have been donation or there been donation paid
• 9:50
  Speaker 2: restaurants for a long time. I remember going there was
• 9:54
  Speaker 2: a pop up restaurant that my daughter took me to
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: that it's should have been one hundred dollars a meal
• 9:59
  Speaker 2: and you pay whatever you want, you pay nothing, and
• 10:04
  Speaker 2: they after about a year said, okay, we're done. It's
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: one hundred and twenty bucks ahead because we're not getting
• 10:10
  Speaker 2: any money. But it looks like in many we're not
• 10:12
  Speaker 2: getting enough, but it looks like in Minneapolis it works.
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: And so have you seen those? And I'm seeing fewer.
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: And fewer of those those honor kiosks in businesses in
• 10:25
  Speaker 2: various locations where you have these open boxes of snacks,
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: of energy bars and potato chips, and then there is
• 10:34
  Speaker 2: a please put money in. Usually there's a price, but
• 10:37
  Speaker 2: sometimes there isn't. And not only are they empty of money,
• 10:43
  Speaker 2: because I used to go and of course grab as
• 10:47
  Speaker 2: much as I possibly can not put money in, but
• 10:50
  Speaker 2: if there was money in there, I took out the
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: money in addition to getting a energy bar. And unfortunately
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: there's more people like me than there aren't, or fortunately,
• 11:02
  Speaker 2: depend on how you look at it. But as a
• 11:04
  Speaker 2: political statement, this restaurant is actually doing well. But keep
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: in mind this is in Minneapolis, South Minneapolis where the
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: immigration raids took where just were inforced and of course
• 11:17
  Speaker 2: George not only was Judge George Floyd killed there, but
• 11:21
  Speaker 2: then the immigrations afterwards started in that area and it
• 11:24
  Speaker 2: had become a poster child of anti governmental, pro immigration philosophy. Okay,
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: so much for that free food. And by the way,
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: it's gotten pretty good reviews. You know, they make their
• 11:34
  Speaker 2: own homemade bread and soups, et cetera. That hasn't changed.
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: All right. Coming up, we're going to end the hour
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: with jen Z.
• 11:43
  Speaker 2: Now we've talked about what AI is doing to the
• 11:47
  Speaker 2: education system, why students are not studying as hard as
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: they should and cheating. Let me tell you about what's
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: going on on a level so much deeper than that.
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: All right, Coming up the top of the hours, Tech
• 12:02
  Speaker 2: Tuesday with Micah Dubuski, today ABC News reporter out of
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: New York who talks to us on occasion about the
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: world of finance, actually the world of tech. So it's
• 12:16
  Speaker 2: a Tech Tuesday segment coming up at day o'clock. In
• 12:18
  Speaker 2: the meantime, let me give a quick story a little
• 12:22
  Speaker 2: bit of history here, and that is going to UCLA.
• 12:25
  Speaker 2: And my ex went to UCLA and in the days
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: when she went, I don't even know if they have
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: that anymore.
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: You would have to.
• 12:30
  Speaker 2: Take a test English test, and otherwise you have to
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: take you would have a student would have to take
• 12:39
  Speaker 2: bonehead English as that was known with and couldn't move
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: forward without bonehead English and passing that basic English because
• 12:48
  Speaker 2: not enough students knew enough English to move.
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: Forward, at least at UCLA.
• 12:53
  Speaker 2: Well, since then, the students have become more bonehead in
• 12:58
  Speaker 2: the sense that fewer students come in with writing and
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: analytical skills. We've talked about that many times, and especially
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: now that AI is around. AI deals with punctuation, puts
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: things in a logical order, and you can literally just
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: scramble your words, throw disjointed concepts on a piece of
• 13:21
  Speaker 2: paper and AI will clean it all up. Well, it's
• 13:25
  Speaker 2: gotten even worse than that, because study has just came
• 13:30
  Speaker 2: out that students are coming into college not being able
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: to read. Now you go, how possible is that, Well,
• 13:43
  Speaker 2: it is for a couple of reasons.
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: One technology. Two, the.
• 13:50
  Speaker 2: Bar of education, the bar of literacy has dropped so
• 13:55
  Speaker 2: low that almost anybody can go into college except for
• 13:59
  Speaker 2: the very very few high end rare colleges, the UCLA,
• 14:04
  Speaker 2: the SC's certainly Stanford, Harvard, Yale. I mean, those obviously
• 14:10
  Speaker 2: demand some pretty rarefied air. But for the most part,
• 14:13
  Speaker 2: junior colleges and state colleges, it just isn't there anymore.
• 14:18
  Speaker 2: Yesterday we talked about analytical thinking, how that's not around
• 14:22
  Speaker 2: anymore because of AI. And I'm looking at the study
• 14:26
  Speaker 2: that was just done and it talked about literally the
• 14:30
  Speaker 2: ability of students to come in and read and write
• 14:34
  Speaker 2: basic concepts.
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: I mean an interview.
• 14:39
  Speaker 2: There's a theology professor in the University of Notre Dame,
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: Timothy O'Malley with a shocker, and he typically in his
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: early career assigned twenty five to forty pages of reading
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: per class in theology. And he said today, if you
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: assigned that amount of reading, they don't know what to
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: do with it. Students use AI act. He missed the
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: point of the assigned reading. So it's not just a
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: question of being unable to cope and look at fairly
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: complex concepts and just literature now reading Mark Twain, reading
• 15:17
  Speaker 2: Charles Dickens and understanding it. It's literally, the ability to
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: enter society.
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: What it needs to what needs to be done.
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: Now here's the other side of that coin is maybe
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: because of AI and its ability to do what it's
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: going to do, you never have to read, literally, you
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: won't even have to read. You'll simply talk into a
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: microphone and say, Siri, tell him, tell me about what
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: happened during the civil war.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: Outcomes an entire paper.
• 15:54
  Speaker 2: Well and even not an understanding what is the civil
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: war about? And here you go, you pull off the
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: computer and students don't know what what civil war? The
• 16:07
  Speaker 2: revolutionary war? I know it's the start of the country. Well,
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: who were some of the founding fathers? Well, let me
• 16:15
  Speaker 2: ask Siri, let me ask Claude, let me ask these
• 16:24
  Speaker 2: various programs. Again, we're seeing we're doing more than that,
• 16:28
  Speaker 2: more and more showing up, and it is simply a
• 16:31
  Speaker 2: way that we're looking at the future. And I've not
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: been afraid of the future. Frankly, I kind of thought
• 16:39
  Speaker 2: the future was going to be neat. I always have.
• 16:41
  Speaker 2: I thought we would live like the Jetsons live, and
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: we're moving in that direction pretty quickly. With the air
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: taxis and the cars, the automated cars self driving cars.
• 16:53
  Speaker 2: But I mean when it comes to intellectual thinking, when
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: it comes to analyzing, when it comes to simply trying
• 17:02
  Speaker 2: to figure out and doing any kind of analytical thinking
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: at all, it's just not happening. It's going to get
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: worse and worse. And college professors are spinning. And I
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: wonder know if they still have Bonehead English at UCLA.
• 17:19
  Speaker 2: I'm just curious about that and the number more students,
• 17:23
  Speaker 2: many more students had to take Bonehead English before they
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: could move on.
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: All right, we are done.
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: Coming up Tech Tuesday with Mike Dubuski, a little bit
• 17:35
  Speaker 2: about Apple next generation of its AI program, its improvements,
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: and then a brand new electric vehicle that Mike tested
• 17:45
  Speaker 2: in New York and it's not a car even so
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: that's coming right up.
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: This is KFI AM six forty. You've been listening to
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: the Bill Handle Show.
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: Catch my show Monday through Friday six am to nine am,
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: and anytime on Man on the iHeartRadio app.