Speaker 1: Is burning an American flag protected speech under the First Amendment?
How do we feel about Chiefs player Travis Kelcey and
his girlfriend getting engaged? And is the Trump effect coming
for Cracker Barrel? All of that and more on the
Kylie Cast. Hi everybody, and welcome to the Kylie Cast.
I am Kylie Griswold, Managing editor at The Federalist. Please
like and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts, and if
you're just listening to the show, be sure to go
check out the full video version on my personal YouTube
channel or the Federalist channel on Rumble. And if you'd
like to email the show, please do so at radio
at the Federalist dot com. We always love to hear
from you. Trump signed an executive order about flag burning
this week, and while Democrats and Libertarians are not too
happy about it, let me tell you why it's actually
pretty great. For some people. All they really know about
this EO is what they heard from Trump in this
one clip from the signing.
Speaker 2: Check it out what the penalty is going to be.
If you burn a flag you get one year in jail,
no early exits, no nothing. You get one year in jail.
If you burn a flag, you get and what it
does is insight to write out they use that language,
by the way, did they insight to riot? And you
burn a flag, you get one year in jail. You
don't get ten years, you don't get one month. You
get one year in jail, and it goes on your record,
and you will see flag burning stopping immediately, just like
when I signed the Statute and Monument Act.
Speaker 1: This makes it sound like anyone who destroys an American
flag anywhere will be thrown in jail. And thus the
shrieking from Democrats and libertarians and the corporate media about
this being an affront to the freedom of speech and
the First Amendment. And what they keep pointing to is
a five to four Supreme Court decision from nineteen eighty nine,
not the Taylor Swift album We'll Get to Turn a
little Bit, but a Supreme Court case called Texas v. Johnson,
of which conservative Justice antonin Scalia was part of the majority.
And this decision held that burning an American flag is
protected speech under the First Amendment. But this executive order
does not undermine Texas f. Johnson, It does not go
against it. It actually doesn't create any new laws nor
does it make flag burning itself illegal. Here's what the
Executive order explicitly says. Quote. Our great American flag is
the most sacred and cherished symbol of the United States
of America and of American freedom, identity, and strength. Over
nearly two and a half centuries, many thousands of American
patriots have fought, bled, and died to keep the stars
and stripes waving proudly. The American flag is a special
symbol in our national life that should unite and represent
all Americans of every background and walk of life. Desecrating
it is uniquely offensive and provocative. It is a statement
of contempt, hostility, and violence against our nation, the clearest
possible expression of opposition to the political union that preserves
our rights, liberty, and security. Burning this representation of America
may incite violence and riot. American flag burning is also
used by groups of foreign nationals as a calculated act
to intimidate and threaten violence against Americans because of their
nationality and place of birth. Notwithstanding the Supreme Court's rulings
on First Amendment protections, the Court has never held that
American flag desecration conducted in a manner that is likely
to incite imminent lawless action, or that is an action
amounting to quote fighting words, it's constitutionally protected. See Texas v. Johnson,
that nineteen eighty nine case. My administration will act to
restore respect and sanctity to the American flag and prosecute
those who incite violence or otherwise violate our laws while
desecrating the symbol of our country to the fullest extent
permissible on under any available authority. End quote. So that's
what Trump's executive order says. Note that the Trump administration
specifically references Texas v. Johnson, but also that it talks
about the manner in which a flag is burned and
specifically if it is quote likely to incite imminent lawless action,
which is not constitutionally protected speech. And that's something the
Supreme Court reinforced twenty years before Texas v. Johnson in
a case known as Brandenburg v. Ohio. So, in other words,
if you burn a flag in your backyard, the Feds
are not likely to come knocking down your door. But
if you burn a flag at a federal courthouse right
before an Antifa mob starts shooting at ice officers, that's
a different story. That would be inciting imminent lawless action. Thus,
the new executive order is not a violation of the
First Amendment, nor is it a violation of Supreme Court
precedent in Texas v. Johnson, even though I would argue
that was bad precedent. But we will come back to
that in a minute. But notice how the language of
the executive order closely mirrors the language of the incredible
descent in Texas v. Johnson. Here is Chief Justice John
Renquist dissenting from the majority quote. The American flag, then,
throughout more than two hundred years of our history, has
come to be the visible symbol embodying our nation. It
does not represent the views of any particular political party,
and it does not represent any particular political philosophy. The
flag is not simply another idea or point of view
competing for recognition in the marketplace of ideas. Millions and
millions of Americans regard it with an almost mystical reverence,
regardless of what sort of social, political, or philosophical beliefs
they may have. I cannot agree that the First Amendment
invalidates the Act of Congress and the laws of forty
eight of the fifty States, which make criminal the public
burning of the flag. He also writes the court decides
that the American flag is just another symbol. He's talking
about the majority here, about which not only must opinions
pro and con be tolerated, but for which the most
animal public respect may not be enjoined. The government may
conscript men into the armed forces, where they must fight
and perhaps die for the flag, but the government may
not prohibit the public burning of the banner under which
they fight. End quote. It's an excellent descent. I encourage
you to go and read the whole thing, because those
justices that dissented were right, and now Trump is right,
and again he's mirroring a lot of their words and ideas.
Now you can twist yourself in nots trying to make
all kinds of constitutional defenses for flag burning, but they
all fall flat for a few reasons. And that's in
part why I find Texas v. Johnson to be an
erroneous decision. First of all, there's a reason you won't
find prohibitions on flag burning in the Constitution, and that's
because the founders knew that if someone burned a flag
in public, a mob would string them up. We have
a whole host of problems the Constitution was not designed
to address. It can't reasonably be made to address them
without perverse or arbitrary results. Second of all, you will
not convince me that actions that were universally seen as
criminal magically became constitute, utional and sacred because five oligarchs
in robes said so, even if one of them was conservative.
Flag burning was a crime in forty eight states and
under federal law, and had been for decades, if not
much longer. But then as soon as some hippie in
nineteen eighty four decided that he was going to burn
a flag at the RNC, I'm supposed to believe that
now flag burning is an eternal right. No way. Third
of all, I would argue that flag burning is arson,
and arson isn't speech. It's a crime. You can try
to construe anything as expression, but we all inherently know
there are serious limits to expressing yourself, especially when the
underlying activity is itself a crime like arson. Can you
defecate on the public square as a protest and then
claim its speech, of course not. Can you go around
spitting on soldiers' graves in national cemeteries to protest war? Nope? Also,
a crime, So why can you set fire to the
emblem of our country? I would argue you can't, or
at least you shouldn't be able to.
Speaker 3: Fourth.
Speaker 1: It's really hard to convince people who actually love our
country that burning an American flag is somehow protected speech.
But burning a Pride flag or doing a burnout on
a rainbow crosswalk is a hate crime. And it's funny
because the same legacy media that are all up in
arms about free speech and the First Amendment with Trump's
order said nothing about free speech when they covered hate
crime charges for people who desecrated Pride flags. The same
standard does not apply. Chris Rufo perfectly summed up my
thoughts on the matter with this tweet quote, I'm sorry,
but as long as this is the status quo, I'm
not going to work myself into a state of hysteria
about Trump's executive order on burning the American flag end quote.
The Federalists CEO Sean Davis also said it well. Quote
if it's illegal to burn Pride flags or do burnouts
on rainbow crosswalks, then it should be illegal to burn
the American flag. And if it's illegal to burn a
dollar and protest of Fiat money. There should be no
issue with making it illegal to burn the American flag.
Either arson is speech or arson is a crime. No
more of this. It's okay when we burn your symbols,
but a crime when you burn our symbols. Nonsense, end quote.
And that's exactly right, especially when our symbols aren't red
or blue, they're red, white and blue. They represent all
of America, Texas. F. Johnson was wrong, Donald Trump was right,
and people who burn American flags, especially when it incites violence,
which we've seen repeatedly in this country, should absolutely be
prosecuted for it.
Speaker 3: Is your money actually working for you? The watch Doot
on Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski. Every day Chris
helps unpack the connection between politics and the economy and
how it affects your wallet. The purchasing power of the
dollar has chopped over the last thirty years by over
fifty percent, yet the total return in the stock market
is up eight hundred and seventy four percent. Make your
money work or watch it burn. Whether it's happening in
DC or down on Wall Street, it's affecting you financially.
Be informed. Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast
with Chris mccowski on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get
your podcast.
Speaker 1: Okay, if everybody's talking about something, we have to talk
about it on the Kylie Cast. And this week everybody
is talking about the fact that Taylor Swift is finally
getting her love story. Are we finally done with all
of the breakup songs we will see? Hopefully? Hopefully we
are fully done. Here to talk about Taylor Swift and
Travis Kelce's romance, whether they like it or not. Is
that released? Does Jordan Boyd and el Pernell. Jordan is
our staff writer and el Pronell is our assignment editor.
Welcome to you both, Good to you, Thanks so much
for joining me to talk about this either incredible news
or horrible news, depending on whether you are a Taylor
Swift fan or whether you just want to stop seeing
Taylor Swift's face all over NFL games this season. So
both of you, I would love to hear your just
initial reactions to hearing the news about Taylor Swift and
Travis Kelce. L Let's start with you just got reaction
right off the back.
Speaker 4: I think the first reaction I had was that her
ring was ugly, but I'm happy for her I don't know,
that's my that's my hottest take about taylor'swoock, But I mean, yeah,
it's it's always great to see people get engaged and
you know, hopefully get married.
Speaker 5: Sooner rather than later.
Speaker 1: How about you, Jordan, I would.
Speaker 6: Say, yeah, I mean, in theory, excited for someone to
get married and and finally get there at the agency
age after a series of failed relationships that were very public,
but also just a little bit hesitant about the path forward,
which I'm sure we'll dig into.
Speaker 1: Mm hmmm hmm. Let's start with the ring. I have
a picture here of the ring else since you brought
it up, I completely agree. I think this ring is hideous,
despite I mean, I guess it's pretty Taylor. Uh, it's
very vintage and unique and huge. You know, she's got
plenty of plenty of money to play with, and so
does Travis. I've heard ballpark estimates of what the ring
is worth, but I think those are pretty It's hard
to tell because who knows how many carrots that is.
I mean, it looks like it could be kind of
a shallow stone. Who knows. Point being it's very gaudy,
it's very large. It looks like costume jewelry. I have
heard a lot of negativity about the ring, but maybe
that's just because of the Federalist staff chat and my algorithm.
I don't know of too many people who actually really
like the ring, but maybe they're out there. I don't know.
What do you think about the ring? Jordan?
Speaker 6: Yeah, my industry actually, I mean not surprised at this size,
right Like, Taylor Swift is the biggest pop culture icon
right now, and it's been for a while, so you
expect her to be wearing a big ring. But yeah,
it's sort of I don't know.
Speaker 5: It lacks character in a really odd.
Speaker 6: Way in my opinion, and it might have been all
that said this, but it looks like a super Bowl ring,
which is a little bit odd considering Travis Kelsey was
the one who supposedly designed it in collaboration.
Speaker 5: With the jewelers.
Speaker 6: So I don't know. I don't know the implications of that.
I don't know if we should like overthink that almost,
but it is a little ode. I feel like it
just lacks character. For someone who has made such a
presence in pop culture, you would just expect something different.
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, yeah, Ell, what do you what do
you think of it, you think it's ugly, but what else?
Speaker 4: Yes, So, I mean it definitely looks like it was
picked out by someone with Super Bowl rings. But it
like I saw a lot of people describing it it's
as antique invented, which is in line with a lot
of Keylor Schwist's taste. But like, I think the size
doesn't work with the vintage look. Like when you look
you get an antique ring, it's not going to be
like seven carrots, and so, like the the goal band
is very dainty, it's like very intricate, and then you
have this like huge rock on it.
Speaker 5: I think that's where the mismatches.
Speaker 4: I think it's really hard to marry, to marry the
big chunky stone with the more delicate antique band. I
think if you're going to do a big stone, like
you need it to be very minimalist, or if you're
gonna do the antique band, then like have several diamonds
on it instead of one big one. I don't know,
but I think that's like the root of my aesthetic
complaint about it. But yeah, I mean it's it's pretty,
it's pretty diamond, it's pretty banned, but they just don't
go together.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree, Like, in what universe is this vintage
or antique unless you're talking Marie Antoinette vintage or something like,
it's not it's not as Yeah, it's not believably vintage
in the way that we think of things being more
quirky or unique, Like you can't go big like that
and also be that ent just this vintage aesthetic. I
agree with that.
Speaker 4: Can there be something really cool and fun about like
mixing too unexpected? Things didn't work here?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree, you definitely see well. I think Travis
Kelcey's design skills or lack thereof, come through in this
gaudy super Bowl ask ring. I saw on Twitter somebody's
photoshopped a Super Bowl ring on her finger and it
looked pretty similar, to be honest, So I want to know.
Speaker 5: Like, how is she going to fit a wedding band
with this? Okay, yes, that was my question.
Speaker 6: And also functionality, like anytime anyone wears the most massive
diamond in the world. I mean, she's not raising children
or cooking, but she did just talk last week on
a podcast about making sourdough, and like, how do you
even do anything with that thing.
Speaker 5: On your finger? You know, like, yeah, you either to
constantly take it off or you risk beheading it on everything.
Speaker 1: Right, right, that's a great, a great segue to that podcast, Jordan.
I got through the first hour and I I stopped listening.
I mean, I could have had it in the background
while I was doing something else. It wasn't like I
had to turn it off because I just couldn't listen
to it anymore. I like Jason Kelsey, I find him
enjoyable to listen to Travis's whatever. I mean, I don't
I could take him or leave him. I don't really care.
But from my understanding, this was Taylor Swift's first podcast
interview she's ever done. Or maybe I'm wrong about that,
but it seemed to be She's been on documentaries and stuff,
but never like on a two hour feature length podcast,
and it was so shocking to me. So anybody who's
ever listened to Federalist Radio Hour Back in the Archives
or whatever I'm on record As a Tailor Swift fan,
I've liked her music. I grew up with her music.
I was that girl who had all of the CDs,
and the CDs that were like the karaoke CD, so
you had the CD that had. It was just instrumentals
with not Taylor's voice and the graphics, so you could
put it in your karaoke machine and plug it in
and then you could beat Taylor Swift. And I mean
I grew up on her music, had all of it,
loved it until her recent stuff, which even like mid
to Near Range. I was into her most recent album.
I literally could not get through it. I started listening
to it and I had to shut it off because
it was just annoying me. It was just droning on.
There was no variety, it was not interesting. It was
just boring and ugh, it just it. I didn't like
it so anyway. But I was never one of those
people who would anytime Taylor Swift was on an interview
or perform live on something like I had to watch it.
It just Taylor Swift, the music. Yes, Taylor Swift the person.
Didn't really keep up with her at all. And then
to listen to her on this podcast, I was like,
oh my goodness, I feel like I'm listening to a
seventeen year old on a podcast. It was like the
things she was saying felt so not inappropriate, but like
inappropriate in the moment, like she goes on this whole
thing about this otter and how Travis Kelce wants an otter,
and she's like coming up with this little backstory for
this otter, and I was like, I am secondhand embarrassed
for you going on and on about this. It's like
you are seventeen. It was very, very odd, And so
I'm curious how she's going to be as a wife.
And I'm wondering if Travis is just infatuated by her
or like has to be with her because she's Taylor Swift.
So how do you break up with Taylor Swift? You know,
I mean she's the most famous woman in the world,
or if this is actually a marriage that is going
to work. I'm curious. And you asked, or you said,
you're maybe skeptical about it. What do you think about it?
Speaker 6: Yeah, well, you know, when I heard the news that
they got engaged, I went and pulled up the Instagram post,
and I know Taylor Kin has the secret language that
she speaks with her fans and refers back to old
songs and kind of weaves this web. But the caption
was about two high school teachers getting married, and it
just struck me odd that two people who I think
are thirty five were still so stuck in this high
school mindset, and I think, you know, I don't want
to make judgments.
Speaker 5: I don't know these people.
Speaker 6: But one of the biggest motivating factors for people getting
into a serious relationship and getting married is maturity. And
you can see how people who on paper were older
and got married but were immature, and how that didn't
work out.
Speaker 5: And then you see people who get married super young.
Speaker 6: At nineteen and were there maturity wise and made it
work and made it happen. And so you just wonder,
like a little of this millennialism stuck in the past
thing has really seeps into both Travis and Taylor's lives,
and they really haven't had a chance to like live
in the real world. They've both just sort of been
in their bubbles. Like Travis has been a football start
his entire life. A lot of guys have a reponing
when they leave high school and like don't play sports anymore.
You know, he hasn't had that reckoning. His retirement is
probably closing in, but he hasn't had that reckoning, and.
Speaker 5: Taylor probably will never get that reckoning.
Speaker 6: In that way that a lot of people get and so, yeah,
I am hesitant about what their relationship look like moving forward.
Speaker 5: What their plan is for children, that sort of thing.
Speaker 1: Hmm, interesting, what do you think about that?
Speaker 4: L So, I did actually look at the caption was cute,
which maybe that says more about my caption skills than
anything else. But so, what Jordan was saying made me
think about kind of a discourse we've seen happening on
Twitter where you have a lot of people who were like, oh, Taylor.
Speaker 5: Swift and Travis Kel's you're getting married.
Speaker 4: They're going to cause this like crazy, you know, baby
boom and all of a sudden, getting married and having
babies is gonna be cool again, and like that'd be
great if that happened. But I mean so, But then
on the flip side, I read I was reading an interesting.
Speaker 5: You know, like the opposite perspective. He was in compact.
Speaker 4: I forget the name of the author, but he was
basically like, look, it's great that they're getting married, but
this isn't as countercultural as it's being made out to
be because they're in their mid thirties, Like it's what
both of them have done, you know, And some people
do meet their spouse after you know, later in life
or after they've met career success. But both Taylor and
Travis have had years of career and material success and
they're kind of at the pinnacle of each of their
careers and now they're getting married. Now they found that
person to share their life with, now that they already
have their life kind of all built together. And you know,
everyone's love story is different. So that's not a bad
thing and of itself, you know, that's how it worked
out for them, But on a societal level, that's not
a good way to look at marriage. You don't want
to look at marriage this thing that happens only when
you have checked all the other boxes in your life,
and then it's just kind of just the crowning jewel
on top. Married is something that at its best, you know,
you you get married and you build your life together.
And so you've maybe that means finding your spouse and
getting married before you hit the pinnacle of your career.
A lot of guys don't hit their you know, career
peak until their fifties. Do you want to wait until
them to get married, Like, no, it's not. It's designed
to work, So I you know, that's not to say
they shouldn't get married like better now than ever, but
it's not a recipe that's going to work for most
people who aren't superstars.
Speaker 1: M hm. Yeah, that's a really interesting point, a really
good point. I think there's probably some middle ground between
those two, between those two takes right between this is
the best thing that's ever gonna ever happen, and it's
going to make marriage and babies cool again, and this
is not actually good news, or maybe that's probably not
how they teed it up, but that it's actually bad
because they've waited so long to get married. And I
don't know. I do think there's something to be said
for the fact that it was less than a year
ago that Taylor Swift posted on Instagram. It was about
the twenty twenty twenty four election, and she signed off
her Instagram post as a childis childless cat lady, which
obviously was a dig at jd Vance. It was a troll,
but still that was how she identified herself, was as
a childless cat lady. And she's still a cat lady
and she's still childless. But it's like this woman who
has had many, many boyfriends over the years that she's
been very public about or at least incorporated into all
of her breakup songs. But she's dated a lot of
non marriage material men, a lot of effeminate men, a
lot of men who are just like you know, very
artist and artisty and cerebral and whatever. And she I
don't think it's a coincidence that, you know, it took
her a long time, but that she finally meets a
guy's guy, a man's man, a jock who has a
normal like his brother, has a very normal family by
all accounts, a true American man, and in just two
years of dating, which you know, for some people that's
a long time, but not not by cultural standards. For sure,
after two years of dating, she's ready to settle down
with this jock of a guy, right after she signed
off as a childless cat lady. It's just it seems
like at least the right trajectory, even if it is
somewhat a case of arrested development, and two later, you know,
later than what is probably desirable both for her age
and for her career, to be settling down. What do
you think?
Speaker 5: Me? And interesting?
Speaker 1: Either? Whoever has thought interesting?
Speaker 5: I think it's interesting when someone, for whatever reason, like
family and children and marriage.
Speaker 6: Has become really politicized, and it's it's sort of been
assigned as like a value of the right, which is
that discourse that Jade Vance and Taylor Swift got into
last year about was, you know, the family first policies
that we're seeing make their.
Speaker 5: Way forward under the Trump administration.
Speaker 6: Aren't necessarily touted by Democrats, And so it's always interesting
to see someone who's been vocally on.
Speaker 5: The left for a while now on Taylor Swift.
Speaker 6: Choose to partake of something that she's previously shunned. And
I think it just goes to show like these values
matter not because they're political, but because they're the ones
that like sustain us. They sustain our society, they sustain
our culture, and everyone has a stake in them, and
a lot of people partake in them even though they
don't put in the legwork to preserve them. So I
think there's a really interesting contrast here and potentially an
opportunity for Taylor Swift to learn something about something that
she may have previously shown under the guise of it
being political. It's not political to want traditional marriage to
trump everything else, and for families to expand and for
us to bunk our replacement rate back up over two
point one. You know, we're a devastatingly low fertility rate
right now in the United States and the Western world,
and so we need to be thinking. It's past time
to be thinking about the kind of cultural norms and
institutions that we need to boost that because frankly, policies
aren't doing it anymore. And so I hope this is
a moment for her and other people who maybe haven't
had their eyes opened to the possibility that the institution
of marriage and family it's important. It's something that we
all need to work towards preserving and protecting.
Speaker 1: I wrote about this, I think last year when she
made the childless cat lady comments. But Taylor Swift herself
did not want to be a childless cat lady, like
I think that is probably the posture of a lot
of women who are single, but like they give the
game away because they don't actually want to be childless
cat ladies. Like Taylor Swift for her entire career has
been writing songs about marriage and family or entire career,
and it's like nobody believes Taylor that you don't actually
want to get married and that you don't actually want
to have babies, and maybe you're lying to yourself. Maybe
you're unwilling to admit it publicly because you're unwilling to
admit it to yourself because you want to, you know,
go on another tour or whatever. But it's like you've
been writing and singing about this for years, because it's
the natural yearning of the human heart to want to
desire these things. And like you said, Jordan's, it's what
sustains our entire society. So it's very, very important. I
saw a new study out from the Institute for Family
Studies about women's happiness and marriage, and let me read
you here. This is from the study, Okay, Institute for
Family Studies. Only thirty two percent of women believe that
women who marry and have children live fuller, happier lives.
So only one in three women thinks that it's better
that you'll be happier if you have kids and get married.
At the same time, fifty five percent of single women's
more than half believe that single women are generally happier
than married women. So women who have never tried these
things think that they're happier than the women who get married.
In a twenty twenty four Pew Research survey, less than
half of single women said they eventually wanted to have children,
which also lends itself to those low fertility or replacement rates.
Here is here's another thing from that IFS study. So
married women are more likely to report that life is
enjoyable those who are married with children forty seven percent,
So about half of them report that life is enjoyable
versus unmarried without children. So this is the bucket that
Taylor Shoot falls into. Only thirty four percent are likely
to report that life is enjoyable. Same here for reporting
being very happy. As for married with children, that number
is nineteen percent. It drops all the way to ten
percent unmarried without children. These are pretty shocking numbers like
this is definitely mark win a mark in the column
for marriage and family, and Taylor Swift, lover or hate her,
is well on her way, well on her way toward that.
This engagement brings to mind a comparison and a contrast
with another celebrity that you wrote about this week, Jordan
Millie Bobby Brown, who is much younger than Taylor Swift.
Why don't you tell us about the choices that she's
been making and how they differ and how they're the
same as Taylor Swift.
Speaker 6: Yeah, well, I know all was written about this too,
But Millie Bobby Brown became engaged and married at nineteen
and twenty to her now husband, Jay bon Jovi, and
so you know, that decision was very tuner culture for
the world that she's grown up in. Both her and
her husband grew up in front of the TV camera,
in front of paparazzi on both actors, models, et cetera.
And they made the decision to kind of reject this
Hollywood narrative of oh, you need you know, decades long
of failed relationships that are in public, and you know
you need to have a strung out engagement, you need
to wait to start a family until you're older, but
you can do it before you get married.
Speaker 5: There's just all these countercultural things.
Speaker 6: And what her and her husband did was get engaged,
get married within a year of getting engaged, and then
adopt a baby the next year. And so that's the
announcement that they made recently, is they adopted a baby
girl and are now a thriving family of three. So
to see such a display of what is normal people
like me and you like we all either fit into
that category of getting married young and having children young.
Are around people who fit into that category. But that's
not the normal in Hollywood. That's not normal in the
world that at least Taylor is in. And so to
see someone lean into that happiness and see that life
is a lot bigger than your career. Life is a
lot bigger than your next acting gig. Life is a
lot bigger than your next album, and and seriously, just
just reject every thing that Hollywood says about that. And
you know, when it comes to childbearing, a lot of
people will either have children together before they get married,
or they get old enough and have rejected enough relationships
where they're actually out of their prime fertility and have
very hard time conceiving. And the popular choice right now
is to turn to a systiary reproductive technology. It's easy
for someone in a position with a lot of money
to buy into that, and even potentially it makes it
more alluring if you're in an industry where your physical
body is on display, like modeling or acting or seeming,
and you don't want to make that sacrifice for pregnancy.
And so we've seen various versions of that come out
with as a celebrities where they buy into this art
and they use IVF or they want to become a
single parent because they've just given up on love, so
they buy eggs and sperm and create a child and
rent a womb and.
Speaker 5: Then raise that child in their fifties.
Speaker 6: And so it's just a very backwards way of doing
things that's been very normalized and celebrated in the media
wood but with Millie Bobby Brown, we haven't seen that.
So I think there's this moment where I'm holding my
breath for Travis and Taylor to see, Okay, are they
really following that natural progression that normal people follow to
just get married and then have children? You know, for
both of them, their biological.
Speaker 5: Cops are taking it's just a reality. And are they
going to lean into that.
Speaker 6: Are they going to wait and sort of use these
these outsourced reproductive technologies to make their dreams of becoming
parents true. I don't know, We'll have to see, but
it is interesting to see that that contrast between someone
like Milli Lobby Brown, who at such a young age
has already realized what's important in life, and someone like
Travis and Taylor, who are maybe playing ketchup a little.
Speaker 5: Bit right now.
Speaker 6: So we'll see what happens for the next few years.
But I'm hopeful, but also you kind of have to
expect the worst because we just have seen so much
outlandish behavior from celebrities before.
Speaker 1: Right, right, Al, what do you think it's going to
take to get America back to the Millie Bobby Brown
philosophy of marriage and child rearing? I mean, I think
it's feminism that sold women such an ugly lie, which
is why you see studies like this IFS study that report,
you know, more than half of childless, unmarried single women
think that they're way happier now than they ever could
be getting married and having children. They seriously think their
lives are fuller and better. And I mean, what does
it take. Is this just a spiritual problem? Is it?
You know, is it a cultural problem? When will people
realize that IVF is problematic? You know, what, what's it
gonna take to get us to normal healthy fertility rates
and marriage rates in this country.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's a spiritual problem and it's cultural problem. It's
lots of other kinds of problems too, you know, I
think like getting married and having babies is kind of
a contagious thing, like when your friends are doing it,
and then like you know, your friends are having babies
and you get to hold their babies in church and
you're like, oh, this this is so cute, Like I
want one of my own. And like with marriage, you know,
you you see your friends get married and you want
that for yourself, or you like even just getting to know,
you know, your friend's husbands and being like, oh, this
is a nice guy who's you know, he's not an evil,
horrible you know, like so many women, I think, whether
they've had bad experiences with men or they just have
this like preconceived notion from culture, have this idea that
men and marriage are oppressive and you know, have a
net negative effect. Obviously we all know that's not true,
and so like I have like just spending time with
people in your life who are happily married, who are
happily you know, have children.
Speaker 5: I think that's probably the best solution, you know.
Speaker 4: I So this is like Tangia, I want to go
back a little bit because as you guys were talking
about Taylor and Travis and like making the comparison and
Millie Bobby Brown and Jake bon Jovi. I was trying
to think of other celebrity couples to draw comparisons to,
and I feel like there's a little bit of danger
of this becoming like a Megan Markle and Prince Harry situation.
I hope not, but like Travis Kelsey definitely gives me
a similar impression. Is Prince Harry, Like Prince Harry was
the very like jock kind of brother. He was in
the military and he was the heart throb. And then
you had Megan Markle, who who was not nearly as
successful as Taylor Swift but probably thinks.
Speaker 5: That she is.
Speaker 1: Yeah, for sure, definitely undoubtedly.
Speaker 4: And that relationship, you know, she's obviously taken the reins
in that relationship. It's been kind of sad to see.
So I'm curious, Like, you know, to be married to
Taylor Swift, you have to recognize that she has a
very successful career and obviously like that's something you should
support as her husband. But I'm just curious to see
how that goes and how they do that kind of
delicate dance of supporting each other. I probably the most
comper person as far as just the situation that I
can think of with Grace Kelly in the fifties. She's
like America's sweetheart in this similar way that Taylor Swift is,
and then she gets swept off her feet by a prince,
totally leaves Hollywood and just like settles down to be
a princess and wife and mother. I don't really see
that happening with Taylor Swift either, so I'm just I'm
very curious to see, like how this goes. Obviously, both
Taylor and Travis are very successful. If they do have children,
who's going to take care of the kids. Are they
going to se the kids as they're going to be
a nanny? Is one of them going to scale back
their career? Like, I'm just very curious to see what
that looks like and hopeful that they make decisions that
are good for their marriage and their hopefully family.
Speaker 1: I wonder if in this scenario, Travis will be the
Grace Kelly, because I think Taylor's career will likely far
outlive Travis's, which is an interesting dynamic.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 1: Obviously, in my mind, she's one more bad album away
from being dead to me, But for a lot of America,
I mean, they love her and like new generations of
girls are growing up. You know, she's no longer just
the millennial entertainer. Gen Z has now grown up and
they've grown up on different albums than I did. But
it's like they also love her for different reasons. Whereas Travis,
you know, you've only got so many years in the
NFL before you are, you know, tearing all your knee
ligaments and just calling it a day. So I'm curious
about you know, is he just going to become a
brand ambassador? And I don't think he's the next Tom Brady.
I don't think he's going to be as successful and
stick around that long. Like he's going to be riding
her coattails and probably settling down to be mister mom
if I if I had to make a guess. But
we'll see, we'll see. Let's switch gears really quick. As
long as I've got you and we're talking about culture,
Let's talk about the other big cultural firestorm happening this
week and last week and perhaps the week before, about
Caracker Barrel, which has tied itself in all kinds of
knots and has been forced to walk back its logo change,
which thank god, because look at this new logo compared
to the old logo, the old logo, everybody knows it,
everybody loves it. Uncle Herschel, Uncle Herschel, I cannot talk today.
I'm so sorry. The cracker and the barrel lovely. They
got rid of both the cracker and the barrel and
put it on this AI generated looking completely sterile. Personality lists,
soul lists, cracker, barrel logo. Apparently they are now walking
back and going back to the old logo, but they
are sticking with their hideous interior design. The one on
the left is the old feel good country vibe everybody
loved it, felt like being at Grandma's house. And the
new one is Joanna Gaines's ship lap from Hell. No personality,
just sterile and awful. Sounds like they're sticking with that design.
I want the Federal least is hot, takes on the
whole situation and predictions for what you think the next
step is, Jordan, let's start with you.
Speaker 6: I mean, if they want to be successful, like Trump said,
host a press conference and good riddance to that CEO.
I mean she was warned more than a year ago
now by investors a rebrand was obvious folly.
Speaker 5: I believe for the words that the investor used.
Speaker 6: And she plowed forward. I don't know in what world
she already wears glasses, so I can't suggest glasses. But
what world is that new logo or is the new
design appealing? I mean, the Americana old timey, feel good,
warm country cooking vibes of cracker barrel are what make
cracker rorel cracker barrel. And to do it with all
of that for really no good reason whatsoever. The good
reason would have been, oh your stock at plomiting. No,
they did that to themselves.
Speaker 5: After the rebrand.
Speaker 6: It's just a little bit bizarre, and so yeah, steps forward,
get rid of the people who made this happen, because
it's terrible and unfortunately, I think they've already done some
damage to their customer base. They can't really come all
the way back from what they've done, especially because the
only thing they've really promised to budge on is the logo.
Speaker 5: They haven't said anything about the interior, so we.
Speaker 6: Could still be subjected to shift that from allowing your
words and walls of neatly organized rolling pins so robotics.
So yeah, I I you know, I want to believe
the boss, but until there's some change.
Speaker 5: Up in the top down leadership. I don't. I don't
think it will be trinking in a good direction.
Speaker 4: Jordan, you mentioned the rolling pins my favorite and like
my favorite, I mean the worst, but it was so
funny to mean the in one of the pictures of
the new design, they had like twenty flower sifters arranged
in like four by five or whatever on like a plaque.
It was so funny, like, I don't even know where
you get that many flower sifters.
Speaker 5: But that was my favorite part.
Speaker 4: Yeah, you know, I so do. Do you guys remember
a couple of months ago, I think when the Duo
Lingo announced that the Duo Lingo owl had died and
everyone was like, what on earth? And then you know,
it was just this like brilliant publicity stunt and everyone
was talking about the Duo Lingo owls and I think
he came back somehow. So I was thinking about that
when I was watching this Instagram reel where a guy
was saying, what Cracker Bill needs to do is like
have this whole campaign where they bring Uncle Herschel back,
but they but like brand it, like, you know, make
those like wanted posters and put Uncle Herschel on them
and make this whole like publicity stunt out of him
disappearing and then trying to get him back, and then
he comes back and then everybody's happy. That would be brilliant,
I think, and it would, Yes, he would be a
way to kind of poke fun at their own mistake.
I don't think they're smart enough to do that, but
I think they should.
Speaker 1: No, but it's a great idea. Can we also just
talk about the Trump effect here? I mean, the man
just needs to do one truth social post and it
just shames these people. You know, the stock plummeting wasn't enough,
all the outcry on social media and in the real world,
you know, people not eating a cracker barrel. That wasn't enough.
But Trump gets on and says one thing on social media,
and all of a sudden, the old logo comes back.
I mean, that is just that is just a beautiful thing.
Chef's kiss, especially because the CEO clearly like she would
hate Donald Trump, So that's just I mean, that's just funny.
I thought Sean Davis's point in The Federalist this week
was so good. He was talking about how cracker barrel
declined markedly post COVID in the way that almost every
other restaurant declined. Where food quality suffers, service suffers. I mean,
I think everybody has noticed this. Any takeout experience, any
dine out experience, any coffee shop experience, I mean, you name,
it has just been markedly worse post COVID, and everybody
wants even higher tips now for doing no work but
service and quality across the board plummeted, and Cracker Barrel
was no exception to that. And his point was that
the solution to that is to fix your service problems.
It is not to rebrand in this soulless way that
just demonstrates disdain for your customer base. And I think
that the redo of the PEG game was really the
icing on the cake that just showed Jordan hates it.
Look at that face. Used to be used to make
fun of you for being stupid if you weren't good
at this game, and now it's all like nice try.
It's it's the participation trophy of games. And also I'm
pretty sure they spelled a word incorrectly. I saw this
on Fox News that they spelled embarrassed incorrectly. And if
that ain't just so poetic, I mean, yeah, Jordan, I
get the sense you've spent a not insignificant amount of
time playing that peg game at Cracker Barrel.
Speaker 5: That is true, and I'm not ignoramus as it says.
Speaker 6: I usually do okay with it. But yeah, I mean,
I think you have to address the root cause. And
you know, if we've seen one thing from the Trump administration,
it's that is that they want to go after the
root cause. I mean, Trump is a businessman at heart,
and he's not interested in treating symptoms. He went throught
cause me seeing that in Maha, We've seen that in
you know, gutting fbidoj corruption, and we need people on
board with that everywhere. If crap girl had just went
after that root cause, they would be far better off
than they now, and instead they tried to treat the
symptom and do it poorly, and now they're worse off.
Speaker 5: So yeah, I think, I don't know.
Speaker 6: Trump is a businessman for a reason, and they tried
to throw him in prison a few times over different
business tactics. But the truth is is like his methods work,
and yeah, they should have listened a lot earlier.
Speaker 5: He should have never had this step in.
Speaker 6: But I'm glad they're listening now and hopefully they continue
to listen.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, I really like Elle's branding idea. I love it.
I think they should take her advice next. Maybe if
we can get in Trump's ear with that idea, we'll
be seeing Uncle Herschel wanted posters everywhere, and all it's
going to take is a true social post from him
and we'll get it. So I think we need to
make Cracker Barrel great again. And yeah, let's see. Let's
see what happens. Elle and Jordan, thank you so much
for joining me today. Appreciated having you as always, and
I hope to have you both back again very soon.
Thanks Kylie, I mean Pebud. Last week, Pete hag Seth
An RFK Junior teamed up to release the Bobby and
Pete Challenge. It was part of the Make America Healthy
Again movement and Fit Not Fat, where they encourage young
healthy Americans to their challenge, which was to do one
hundred push ups and fifty pull ups in any order
in ten minutes or less. Both of these men in
Trump's cabinet successfully did the challenge and they were just
extending it to the rest of America. Here's part of
the video. It's pretty great.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 7: Here we are in the bowels of the Pentagon for
the Pete and Bobby challenge. I think this was your idea,
so I blame you, But it's all about make America
healthy again. We're going to be fit, not fat. We
want recruits that are ready to go and challenge. What
are we doing today?
Speaker 8: Bobby, Oh, Pep and I are going to do our
part encourage American youth to do this challenge. And the
challenge is to do one hundred push ups and fifty
pull ups and any order you on in under ten minutes.
Speaker 7: So five minutes is the is the top standard that
we want to make.
Speaker 1: I'm going to be well. Of course, in response, the
New York Times dug up some experts to warn why
this challenge could be dangerous. It was so funny too,
because they enlisted experts to basically say that RFK Junior
and Pete Hegseth were doing their pull ups wrong. Anyway,
they ended up changing the headline to one hundred pushups
and fifty pull ups in under ten minutes. What could
go wrong? But the point is they had to come
out and say that this regimen or This challenge that
RFK Junior and Pete Hegseth issued was dangerous. And then
this week we were reminded why the Democrat New York
Times had to say that, and that's because this is
their guy.
Speaker 9: Yeah, how you move? Yeah, let go, let go, let's go,
let go. Yeah, let me go, let me get three,
let me get, let me.
Speaker 1: Get It isn't clear. This is Zoron Mumdani, who is
running for mayor of New York City. He is the
avowed communist socialist, just an all around disaster, not only
for the country but specifically for New York City. But
he can't even do a bench press. This is the
worst thing I've ever seen. He can't lift the bar.
He can't even do a single rep unassisted. This isn't
just somebody spotting him. This is somebody straight up moving
the bar up and down for him. And look at
his form. It's the worst thing I've ever seen. Look
at his hand placement, totally wrong. Notice that his foot
flails out. When you do a bench press, your feet
should be firmly planted, you should be pushing through your heels.
And this is just truly one of the worst things
I've ever seen, so it's really a beautiful moment of
choose your fighter. Do you want Pete Hegseth or Zoran Mumdannie.
Pretty easy answer for the majority of Americans and specifically
for the type of men that Democrats are desperate to
figure out why they're hemorrhaging. Hmm, why can't they lure
anyone with testosterone into their tent of diversity, equity, inclusion
and whatever the heck this is from Mum Donnie. It's
really quite a mystery. But at the end of the day,
this just fits in so perfectly with all of democrats
other shticks. It's all theater, it's all play acting at
being normal. It's LARPing as being relatable. Remember when Chuck
Schumer posted that ridiculous video of him grilling where it's
like just disgusting raw meat that he's putting cheese on
on the grill, It's like nobody's buying it. Or when
Democrats inorganically curse or drink beer pretending that that's what's
really going to lure the men back to their party,
Or when David Hogg gets on an interview and talks
about getting late, it's like, yeah, Wow, you are so
relatable and so masculine. Or Tim Walls runs on stage
in his camo but waves like this. It's like you
ain't fool in anybody. Nobody's buying what you're selling. So
to Zoran, Mom, Donnie, but also the rest of the
Democrat Party. All I have to say is, I mean,
come on, I mean, peb Oud, that's going to do
it for me today. Thank you so much for tuning
in to this week's edition of The Kylie Cast. I
will be right back here next week with more. Until then,
just remember the truth hurts, but it won't kill you.