Speaker 1: This isn't an important thing, but it's a thing that
Speaker 1: annoys me. And that's a nice thing about having a
Speaker 1: radio show is that you can make it all about
Speaker 1: your own personal grudges. So I highly recommend it to
Speaker 1: all of you. The other day, I'm driving along and
Speaker 1: I see combined in one bumper sticker, not really a
Speaker 1: bumper sticker. I think it was more like a decal
Speaker 1: because you wouldn't want to screw up the bumper on
Speaker 1: a Tesla. It was on a Tesla. Now, I'm always
Speaker 1: a little astonished how many people seem to have Tesla's,
Speaker 1: just given I don't know average household incomes throughout the region.
Speaker 1: And there's a little part of me, as a struggling
Speaker 1: middle classer that sort of I'll admit it, experiences a
Speaker 1: twinge of jealousy when I see when driving around, like
Speaker 1: what am I not doing right? That I'm not affording this?
Speaker 1: And I think I think it's partially because we're saving
Speaker 1: a lot of money and we don't spend on you know,
Speaker 1: we don't have I've got my mom's old beat up
Speaker 1: car and another beat up truck that we use for
Speaker 1: driving the kids around SUV so we don't have car payments,
Speaker 1: and that's a good thing. Actually, it's probably in our
Speaker 1: long term interest that I'm not trying to move money
Speaker 1: around in such a way that I'm driving a Tesla
Speaker 1: with a fairly middle class income. Anyway, regardless, there's always something,
Speaker 1: I mean, when you're driving around in a seventy thousand
Speaker 1: dollars car, you're obviously making a little bit of a statement.
Speaker 1: It's a little bit of a power move. It's a
Speaker 1: little bit of a hey, check me out. I'm the
Speaker 1: kind of guy who can drive a Tesla. It's a
Speaker 1: it's a digmy move. And this was a bright red
Speaker 1: Tesla or no, no, it was this one. I saw
Speaker 1: another one online that I think that was bright red. Anyway,
Speaker 1: See this Tesla driving around and the decal on the
Speaker 1: back of it says muck Elon Fusk, so clearly trying
Speaker 1: to say the F word towards Elon Musk, but trying
Speaker 1: to do so in a sort of cute sea way
Speaker 1: where you don't actually have the F word on the
Speaker 1: back of your car. And this filled me with rage
Speaker 1: for some reason, the little petty grievances of our every
Speaker 1: day that sometimes I just feel need to have release gosh,
Speaker 1: it was so obnoxious to me. And I've seen this before.
Speaker 1: Today I stumbled across this a Twitter post from some
Speaker 1: random dufus with a red Tesla bright red Tesla candy
Speaker 1: Apple red with a similar decal because you know, they
Speaker 1: don't want to mess up. They're seventy thousand dollars car
Speaker 1: that says bought it before we knew how awful he is.
Speaker 1: In reference to Elon Musk, all right, let's begin this rant.
Speaker 1: I'm not some great defender of Elon Musk. I don't
Speaker 1: think he's the greatest human being in the world. There's
Speaker 1: a decent segment of people on the right who seemingly
Speaker 1: like they sort of try to make their job praising
Speaker 1: Elon Musk, hoping that maybe Elon Musk will notice them
Speaker 1: or something like that. I see these people on Twitter
Speaker 1: who basically seem to tweet all the time at Elon Musk,
Speaker 1: reply to Elon Musks tweets, try to stay in his orbit,
Speaker 1: talk about how wonderful Elon Musk is. Blah blah, Oh,
Speaker 1: Elon Musk is doing so much to promote freedom of speech.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk is so amazing. Tesla is such an amazing company, oh, oh,
Speaker 1: Starlink is so amazing, his various space rocket you know companies,
Speaker 1: whatever space acts whatever, so wonderful, blah blah blah blah
Speaker 1: blah blah blah blah blah. And I find a lot
Speaker 1: of that kind of sickening. I don't know if these
Speaker 1: people think that the you know being, because Musk is
Speaker 1: in fact very active on Twitter, given that he bought
Speaker 1: the thing, maybe they think that somehow remaining within his
Speaker 1: orbit will allow them to, I don't know, somehow get
Speaker 1: him to invest in them, or promote them, or somehow
Speaker 1: they can make money off of him. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: exactly what it is, but there seems to be this
Speaker 1: little Twitter ecosystem surrounding Elon Musk, which I find sort
Speaker 1: of Yeah, Musk is himself, I would say a moderate Republican.
Speaker 1: He was probably a moderate Democrat ten years ago, and
Speaker 1: today he's a moderate Republican. I don't think he's a
Speaker 1: pro life necessarily, I've certainly not really seen any evidence
Speaker 1: of that. He seems to be moving towards a very
Speaker 1: moderate boomer version of sort of soft right wing politics,
Speaker 1: where the Trump era is sort of perfect for him.
Speaker 1: I think Trump is sort of moderated things. When it
Speaker 1: comes to social conservatism, you can say that's good, or
Speaker 1: like me, you can say that's bad. Musk is very
Speaker 1: honestly The Republican Party platform that I was so vigorously
Speaker 1: criticizing seems like it could have been written by Elon Musk.
Speaker 1: And Musk is a big time Trump donor at this point,
Speaker 1: he's a big Trump backer. So but again, his actual
Speaker 1: politics are pretty darn moderate. And he's a very smart guy,
Speaker 1: obviously far smarter than I am in a lot of respects,
Speaker 1: as far as you know, engineering and computer programming and
Speaker 1: all the kinds of things that he's been able to
Speaker 1: accomplish that I have not. So I'm not here to
Speaker 1: say he's an idiot or something. But he's not like
Speaker 1: some right wing juggernaut, Nor do I think he's thought
Speaker 1: super deeply about a lot of conservative policy issues. Basically
Speaker 1: long and short. When it comes to politics, Elon Musk
Speaker 1: is a fairly unremarkable figure. The fact that he bought
Speaker 1: Twitter and applied his very moderate right wing sensibilities to
Speaker 1: it as far as content and what kinds of content
Speaker 1: it would or would not allow, you know, as opposed
Speaker 1: to the prior Twitter regime which was completely bought sold
Speaker 1: by the left and was willing to censor you know,
Speaker 1: the Hunter Biden laptop story and all kinds of other
Speaker 1: COVID misinformation so called. All that kind of stuff, I
Speaker 1: think is a breath of fresh air, and it's kind
Speaker 1: of an important thing for the American media landscape that
Speaker 1: Twitter is still the go to social media app for
Speaker 1: journalism and for news and messaging. You know, when President
Speaker 1: Biden announced that he was dropping out of the presidential race,
Speaker 1: he did so with a Twitter post. It wasn't with
Speaker 1: a normal White House press release. It wasn't through a
Speaker 1: press release coordinated to be sent to the news networks.
Speaker 1: It was through a tweet. But basically, because Musk crossed
Speaker 1: the left on like three things, three or four things,
Speaker 1: the left basically communicated him. They basically said, he's persona
Speaker 1: on Grada. We have nothing to do with him. Horrible evil.
Speaker 1: He crossed them on like three issues, and sometime around
Speaker 1: like twenty nineteen, twenty twenty or so, Musk became Musk
Speaker 1: was put into the category of for the left sort
Speaker 1: of canceled if he will uh, he was persona on Grada.
Speaker 1: He was outside of the realm of acceptable people to
Speaker 1: liberals within polite liberal society, where if you say you
Speaker 1: like him, it is cringe cringeworthy, and you are a
Speaker 1: bad person for mainstream left if you like him, and
Speaker 1: he is bad and you are bad if you like him.
Speaker 1: But this put liberals into a pickle. This change was
Speaker 1: happening kind of in twenty nineteen twenty twenty, twenty twenty one,
Speaker 1: and by that time Musk and Tesla, his car company,
Speaker 1: had come to dominate the American electric car market. It's
Speaker 1: the single biggest it's still like the biggest company for
Speaker 1: producing electric cars. They produce way more electric vehicles than
Speaker 1: GM and Ford and et cetera. I mean, it's and
Speaker 1: they've been sort of a real leader technologically and advancing
Speaker 1: zero emissions electric automobiles. Now, this leads me to part
Speaker 1: of what I don't really love about Musk is that
Speaker 1: I think he's made his empire basically on the back
Speaker 1: of federal and state subsidies for vironmental stuff, and he's
Speaker 1: been able to really leverage that. But it is bizarre
Speaker 1: how all of a sudden, the Biden administration comes in
Speaker 1: and Musk talks about this all the time, How the
Speaker 1: Biden administration officials who were promoting electric vehicles and zero
Speaker 1: emissions and all all that stuff with the EPA. This
Speaker 1: Biden team is staffed with these doctrinaire, young millennial liberals
Speaker 1: who've imbibed this sense that Elon Musk is bad. Elon
Speaker 1: Musk is bad, and he should be shoved out and
Speaker 1: he should be cast into the outer darkness where there
Speaker 1: is wailing and gnashing of teeth. So Musk has talked
Speaker 1: a lot about some kind of like electric car summit
Speaker 1: that the White House convened early during the Biden days,
Speaker 1: where they did not invite Musk and they did not
Speaker 1: invite Tesla, and Musk still fumes about it, and he's
Speaker 1: obviously correct. I mean, it's insane, like why would he
Speaker 1: And you know, Biden was talking talking about how Ford
Speaker 1: is a true leader in electric cars, and Musk made
Speaker 1: the point that you know, Ford had sold like not
Speaker 1: even a tenth as many electric vehicles as Tesla had sold.
Speaker 1: Obviously it's insane, and obviously it was motivated by petty
Speaker 1: political distaste for Musk. So as a result, you have
Speaker 1: all these sort of liberals and this is obviously liberals
Speaker 1: with money, like this is left wing people with enough
Speaker 1: money to buy a Tesla, or I guess maybe just
Speaker 1: lease a Tesla. Whatever, you have to have some money
Speaker 1: to be driving around in a Tesla. All these liberal
Speaker 1: people who clearly like Tesla's They like the car, they
Speaker 1: like how it drives, they like the fact that they're
Speaker 1: driving a zero missions car, and they can say, ah,
Speaker 1: look at me, I'm driving a zero emissions car. Aren't
Speaker 1: I hip and cool and progressive? You know. Let's ignore,
Speaker 1: by the way, the sort of deeper questions about whether
Speaker 1: Tesla cars, whether electric cars are actually better for the environment,
Speaker 1: whether it actually costs more as far as far as
Speaker 1: fossil fuel output to make a Tesla over and against
Speaker 1: a normal gas powered car, or whether are we just offsetting?
Speaker 1: Are are we just kind of shifting the environmental harms
Speaker 1: from America to Africa to the countries in Africa where
Speaker 1: we have to mine for rare earth minerals. For the batteries,
Speaker 1: what do we do with the batteries when they're done?
Speaker 1: How bad is it when you crash a Tesla and
Speaker 1: the engine explodes and it's a forty hour long fire.
Speaker 1: It's at fire that takes forty hours to put out. Anyway,
Speaker 1: I'm not actually one hundred percent convinced that if you
Speaker 1: buy a Tesla, you're actually doing something that's net positive
Speaker 1: for the environment. You're also I mean, where do you
Speaker 1: think electricity comes from? Has to come from somewhere. In
Speaker 1: many states, it's coming from burning fossil fuels. So your
Speaker 1: Tesla has a positive I've seen surveys of this that
Speaker 1: your Tesla can have a more positive environmental impact if
Speaker 1: you live in Oregon or Washington State, for example, where
Speaker 1: most of their power is from hydro power. If that's
Speaker 1: powering your Tesla, then its impact on emissions is going
Speaker 1: to be better than if you live in Oklahoma. If
Speaker 1: you live in Oklahoma, you're getting your power from coal
Speaker 1: and oil, you know, natural gas and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: Your net environment you'd have to drive the Tesla for
Speaker 1: thirty years before you sort of net out to have
Speaker 1: a positive environmental impact. But in short, I guess the
Speaker 1: thing I just can't stand. And again this is prompted
Speaker 1: by people I see driving around in tesla's but with
Speaker 1: decals letting you know that they don't like Elon Musk.
Speaker 1: I bought it before I knew how awful he is.
Speaker 1: Muck Elon Fusk. The two of these decals I've seen
Speaker 1: for people driving around. You know, I don't understand how
Speaker 1: people have the gall to drive around with a decal
Speaker 1: like that. You're the one who's invested seventy or eighty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars in this man, not me, Okay, I have
Speaker 1: no grand desire to protect Elon Musk. I think him
Speaker 1: buying Twitter is a good thing. That's the extent to
Speaker 1: which I'm going to sing Elon Musk's praises. That's it.
Speaker 1: He's a moderate Republican, and I think it was a
Speaker 1: good thing for press freedom that he bought Twitter, that
Speaker 1: basically we won't have the kind of censorship of our
Speaker 1: news that we saw during twenty twenty. That's the extent
Speaker 1: of my praise of him. The idea that this man
Speaker 1: is so evil that you have so One you want
Speaker 1: the benefit of driving a fancy schmancy luxury car. Two,
Speaker 1: you want the public prestige benefit of people thinking you're
Speaker 1: rich because you're driving around in a fancy schmancy car.
Speaker 1: Three you have given this man, Elon Musk, about seventy
Speaker 1: thousand dollars of your money, plus the free advertising of
Speaker 1: driving around in his product. But four, you're so preachy.
Speaker 1: You're so you're such a virtue signaler that you want
Speaker 1: other people to know that Elon Musk is bad and
Speaker 1: that you think he's bad in spite of the fact
Speaker 1: that you are seventy thousand dollars invested in him. So
Speaker 1: so you try to both sort of do a rationalization
Speaker 1: of yourself but also preaching to other people. Hence you
Speaker 1: put a decal on your car because you know you
Speaker 1: don't want to put a bumper sticker on it's such
Speaker 1: a nice, valuable car. You put a decal on your
Speaker 1: car to let other people know that you don't like
Speaker 1: Elon Musk. Boy, I wish people didn't like me that way.
Speaker 1: I wish people's form of expressing that they don't like
Speaker 1: John Girardi is by giving me seventy thousand dollars and
Speaker 1: running around doing advertising for the John Girardi Show, but
Speaker 1: with a decal on their shirt that says I don't
Speaker 1: like John Girardi. I'm sure Elon is using the seventy
Speaker 1: thousand dollars that someone paid for their Tesla and wiping
Speaker 1: the tears from his eyes to know that these people
Speaker 1: driving around in tesla's with decals that say bought it
Speaker 1: before we knew how awful he is. You know, I'm
Speaker 1: sure he's using all seventy thousand dollars of their money
Speaker 1: to wipe the tears from his eyes. When don't we
Speaker 1: return more about left wing preachiness and yard sininess and
Speaker 1: how I feel like a lot of this has really
Speaker 1: flipped in the last twenty years. That's next on the
Speaker 1: right on the John Girardi Show. I don't know why
Speaker 1: I get so infuriated with these. Elon Musk is terrible
Speaker 1: bumper stickers and decals which I only see on the
Speaker 1: back of Tesla's. I've now seen multiple of these where
Speaker 1: people are driving around in Tesla's and they've got a
Speaker 1: bumper sticker on decrying Elon Musk and saying what a
Speaker 1: terrible person Elon Musk is while driving a car that
Speaker 1: you gave him or his company seventy thousand dollars to buy,
Speaker 1: and while still advertising for that car by driving it
Speaker 1: around every day. It drives me insane. And it's like,
Speaker 1: what level of preachiness and self obsession and self rationalization
Speaker 1: do you have to be at to do that? Like again,
Speaker 1: you have to be like, okay, I really want to
Speaker 1: drive a rich fancy expensive car. I don't want to
Speaker 1: get rid of my rich, fancy expensive car because I
Speaker 1: like it so much, or I invested too much into
Speaker 1: it or whatever. Although for some of these people, I
Speaker 1: presume they could, you know, get rid of it and
Speaker 1: you know, take the financial hit. I don't want to
Speaker 1: take that much of a financial hit on this tesla
Speaker 1: I just bought anyway. So you want to keep driving
Speaker 1: your rich, fancy expensive car, or to virtue signal about
Speaker 1: how you care for the environment because it's a Tesla,
Speaker 1: so you know, zero emissions. You want all of those benefits.
Speaker 1: But you also want to be preachy to people about
Speaker 1: the three opinions Elon Musk has that make him socially
Speaker 1: unacceptable to lefties, about how Elon Musk is bad. So
Speaker 1: you want to be preachy. And it's also though you're
Speaker 1: trying to be preachy in a way that's self rationalizing
Speaker 1: and self justifying. I guess to your liberal friends or
Speaker 1: to your co fellow liberals out there, who might see
Speaker 1: you driving around in a Tesla and think, well, that
Speaker 1: guy's a phony liberal. Here he is giving Elon Musk
Speaker 1: ony thousand bucks and driving around in his fancy, rich
Speaker 1: person car. So you have to signal to those people
Speaker 1: who you think might be judging you. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: I'm one of the good ones. It's so annoying, and
Speaker 1: I feel like there's this level of preachiness among especially
Speaker 1: I think, I really think it was the Obama era
Speaker 1: that did this, because the people who were in college
Speaker 1: during Obama are now like my age, they're entering their
Speaker 1: late thirties early forties, are now becoming partners at law firms,
Speaker 1: are now becoming managers and directors and businesses. If you
Speaker 1: were in college during two thousand and eight and you
Speaker 1: liked Barack Obama and you got really into Barack Obama,
Speaker 1: there was this level of moralizing preening that you engaged
Speaker 1: in that made me want to push you off a cliff.
Speaker 1: The Obama people, for those of you who were not
Speaker 1: in college in two thousand and eight and were not
Speaker 1: following politics, Okayama, the pro Obama people, the kids who
Speaker 1: are like you know, in the college Democrats club during
Speaker 1: two thousand and eight when Obama was rising, they were
Speaker 1: the most obnoxious little pieces that, you know what, whoever
Speaker 1: walked the face of the earth. And this preening moralizing
Speaker 1: of the Obama era is what directly led to the
Speaker 1: concept of quote cancel culture, where basically these people were
Speaker 1: so obsessed with their self image as righteous, moral, good, upright,
Speaker 1: upstanding Obama people, and Obama represented this moral center of
Speaker 1: America blah blah blah, that basically they wound up shoving
Speaker 1: it to the outer darkness anything that they thought was
Speaker 1: too far contrary to Obama orthodoxy. And I really think
Speaker 1: it's from those kinds of people, that specific crowd of
Speaker 1: Obama era college students who are today instituting DEI regimes
Speaker 1: and are DEI managers. All the millennial staffers between the
Speaker 1: ages of about you know, thirty two to forty two
Speaker 1: who are staffing the Biden who are really running the
Speaker 1: Biden administration right now, these are the people who introduced
Speaker 1: this level of moralistic preachiness to American politics that they
Speaker 1: really replaced the religious right with the religious left. I
Speaker 1: think the religious right is deader than a doornail at
Speaker 1: this point, if it was ever very vigorous or alive.
Speaker 1: I think the religious right is pretty much dead and
Speaker 1: they've been and the moralizing left is very much vibrant
Speaker 1: and alive. And that's where cancel culture comes from. It's
Speaker 1: where the whole dee I regen comes from, where basically
Speaker 1: they get this thing that they're very self conscious about
Speaker 1: not wanting to say something that would make other people
Speaker 1: critical of them. And it's this constant sort of looking
Speaker 1: to the left, looking to the right, like, oh, did
Speaker 1: I say something wrong? I did I say something cancellable?
Speaker 1: Did I say something that was, you know, racially insensitive?
Speaker 1: Did I say something that was culturally insensitive? Or And
Speaker 1: because you don't want to be perceived as a bad person,
Speaker 1: you then nail people who do say the bad thing
Speaker 1: to such an extent to shove them into the outer darkness.
Speaker 1: So that's where we get absurd displays, like someone driving
Speaker 1: around in a Tesla having given Elon Musk seventy thousand
Speaker 1: bucks and a bunch of free advertising, but feeling the
Speaker 1: need to put a bumper sticker on the back of
Speaker 1: the car that says I don't like Elon Musk, as
Speaker 1: if that will absolve you of your sins. It's like,
Speaker 1: I have to be moralizing and preachy, but I don't
Speaker 1: want to actually sacrifice the privileges attendant with my high income,
Speaker 1: my status symbol, my nice card that I like that's cool,
Speaker 1: all right. When we return, there's this big story out
Speaker 1: of Georgia that Kamala Harris is trying to use to
Speaker 1: promote abortion. We'll talk about it next on the John
Speaker 1: Girardi Show. There are a couple of stories that Kamala
Speaker 1: Harris is promoting that I think this politically maybe signal
Speaker 1: that Harris is not doing so well. This stuff was
Speaker 1: promoted by Pro Publica. Pro Publica is a super left
Speaker 1: wing outlet that is funded by a lot of Democrat
Speaker 1: You know, if this was on the right, it would
Speaker 1: be called dark money, but it's one of these nonprofit
Speaker 1: entities that's really trying to promote various kinds of political
Speaker 1: things but doing so without endorsing candidates. And there's a
Speaker 1: lot of it on the left, there's a lot of
Speaker 1: it on the right. Pro Publica is one of these
Speaker 1: outlets that does this. There are two trying to attain
Speaker 1: extremely left wing political ends, but they have the cover
Speaker 1: of nonprofit status. Pro public has been behind the massive
Speaker 1: push to delegitimize the Supreme Court by promoting bogus story
Speaker 1: after bogus story after bogus story about Supreme Court justices
Speaker 1: being corrupted. All the stories about Clarence Thomas, all the
Speaker 1: stories about it's always the conservative members of the court
Speaker 1: who we highlight for, you know, accepting trips or things
Speaker 1: like that, all the same things that Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Speaker 1: did time and time again. But it wasn't bad when
Speaker 1: she did it for some reason anyway. So Pro Publica
Speaker 1: is a super left wing outlet, and because they're nonprofit
Speaker 1: for some reason, the media winds up getting stories from
Speaker 1: Pro Publica and then running with them, which would be
Speaker 1: as silly as like, well, it would be as obviously
Speaker 1: biased as if I at Right to Life of Central
Speaker 1: California published a bunch of articles and expected the Fresno
Speaker 1: Bee just to run with my with my writing, with
Speaker 1: my reporting, with my publishing. Obviously, I don't expect that
Speaker 1: Rights Life of Central California is a really you know,
Speaker 1: one sided when it comes to the abortion debate. I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess I'm not expecting a neutral news out now.
Speaker 1: If I expose something that's genuinely newsy, you know, maybe
Speaker 1: a media outlet should take it into consideration, But I
Speaker 1: don't expect them to uncritically take my work and just
Speaker 1: amplify it. That's basically what the media does with Pro
Speaker 1: publica who is far more left wing than I'd say
Speaker 1: Right to Life of Central California is right wing. Now,
Speaker 1: what's happened in Georgia is that two women have died
Speaker 1: from taking the abortion pill. Two women have died from
Speaker 1: taking the abortion pill, and the argument is being made
Speaker 1: that they died because of georgia law outlawing abortion, and
Speaker 1: that that's evil and that it's Donald Trump's fault because
Speaker 1: Donald Trump overturned rob Wade and Georgia passed. Georgie actually
Speaker 1: had passed before the overturning of Roby Wade, a law
Speaker 1: banning abortion after fetal heartbeat can be detected. Now, in
Speaker 1: both of these cases, the thing that killed these women
Speaker 1: was not Georgia's law. It was the abortion pills. Okay,
Speaker 1: George's laws, in large part don't involve prosecuting women for abortions.
Speaker 1: George's laws don't prevent doctors from doing follow up care
Speaker 1: for a woman who's undergone an abortion pill procedure. But
Speaker 1: these women basically got abortion pills through different means. One
Speaker 1: woman got the abortion pills. To this thing that democrats
Speaker 1: have been or people in the pro choice community have
Speaker 1: been super supportive of which is basically California based companies
Speaker 1: that ship abortion pills to states where abortion is illegal,
Speaker 1: and they source their abortion pills from China and India.
Speaker 1: You know, so you know they're super safe. Not they
Speaker 1: don't know that they're super safe. There's there's some real
Speaker 1: quality control questions that are left hanging here with instructions
Speaker 1: for women to basically self diagnose whether they are pregnant,
Speaker 1: how far along in the pregnancy they are, and to
Speaker 1: sort of walk them through how to do a at
Speaker 1: home abortion basically. Now, I should probably explain beforehand the
Speaker 1: abortion pill process is the most common way that abortions
Speaker 1: happen in America. Let me explain that. And I'm not
Speaker 1: talking about the morning after pill. This is not the
Speaker 1: morning after pill. The morning after pill is a drug
Speaker 1: called Levona or gestral. It chiefly functions as a contraceptive.
Speaker 1: There's some arguments that it could make the lining of
Speaker 1: the uterine wall hostile to an embryo implanting, but the
Speaker 1: main function of the morning after pill is to prevent ovulating,
Speaker 1: prevent the release of an egg. Okay, so it's genuinely contraceptive.
Speaker 1: That's the morning after pill. The abortion pill is a
Speaker 1: different drug called mifa pristone. You need a prescription for it.
Speaker 1: You don't need a prescription in California for you don't
Speaker 1: need a prescription for the Morning after pill. Do need
Speaker 1: a prescription for the abortion pill mifa pristone. You take
Speaker 1: mifa pristone up to ten weeks into a pregnancy in
Speaker 1: order to basically have the embryo or fetus be cut
Speaker 1: off from to have the embry or fetus detached from
Speaker 1: the uterine wall, be cut off from his or her
Speaker 1: food supply. The baby dies in the womb, and then
Speaker 1: a second drug called missaprostl, which is a often used
Speaker 1: to induce labor, woman takes a second drug called mister
Speaker 1: prostyl to expel the child from her body. Now one
Speaker 1: of the big health risks to the abortion pill, and
Speaker 1: this is a bigger risk the later on you are
Speaker 1: in pregnancy. And again the FDA only approves the abortion
Speaker 1: pill up to ten weeks into pregnancy. You know by
Speaker 1: which time the baby's got heartbeat, brain activity, arms, legs, head, torso,
Speaker 1: et cetera. Basically, that gets more and more dangerous. There
Speaker 1: are more and more complications the later you are into pregnancy,
Speaker 1: and one of the big risks of the abortion pill
Speaker 1: process is what's called an incomplete abortion. It's right there
Speaker 1: on the FDA label. That can happen up to five
Speaker 1: to eight percent of the time when people use the
Speaker 1: abortion pill. And just for context for you, sixty three
Speaker 1: percent of the one million abortions that happen every year
Speaker 1: in America are now taking place via the abortion pill.
Speaker 1: So if five percent of that six hundred and thirty
Speaker 1: thousand results in an incomplete abortion, meaning not everything was
Speaker 1: expelled from the woman's body, sent to the baby, whatever.
Speaker 1: And if everything is not expelled, you have big time
Speaker 1: risks to the mom's health. There can be infection, and
Speaker 1: in the worst case scenario, the mother can die of sepsis.
Speaker 1: So we're talking over thirty one thousand women per year
Speaker 1: are having incomplete abortions, and at least thirty one thousand
Speaker 1: women's probably more than that are having incomplete abortions and
Speaker 1: have to go to the er to get treated for this. Now,
Speaker 1: that's what happened to both of these women. One of
Speaker 1: these women was having twins, she took the abortion pill,
Speaker 1: she didn't get treatment, follow up treatment soon enough, she
Speaker 1: wound up dying. Both of these women basically died from
Speaker 1: incomplete abortions that resulted in the incomplete abortions. They didn't
Speaker 1: get treatment quickly enough, even though treatment would have been legal,
Speaker 1: even though there was nothing wrong with them getting treatment sooner.
Speaker 1: George's abortion law doesn't prevent that. What seemed to happen
Speaker 1: with the one woman was given these abortion pills by
Speaker 1: a doctor who didn't really care for her afterwards, who
Speaker 1: didn't really follow up with her. And this is one
Speaker 1: of the things that, by the way, one of the
Speaker 1: things that liberals have done is reduce the health and
Speaker 1: safety standards around the abortion pill. It used to be
Speaker 1: that you needed a preliminary appointment, an appointment where you
Speaker 1: received the abortion pill, and you needed a fire follow
Speaker 1: up appointment. But Barack Obama eliminated the requirement for the
Speaker 1: follow up appointment. Joe Biden eliminated the need for any appointment.
Speaker 1: You can just get the abortion pill prescribed to you
Speaker 1: after a talamedicine visit and then have it shipped to
Speaker 1: your house. So in both of these cases, what the
Speaker 1: woman needed was what's called a DNC, a dilation and
Speaker 1: cure tage. Now, a dilation and curateage is a procedure
Speaker 1: that can be done to perform an abortion, where basically
Speaker 1: you you basically go into a woman's uterus, you remove
Speaker 1: the unborn child via a suction machine, and you use
Speaker 1: a curet to sort of ensure that the interior lining
Speaker 1: of the woman's uterus is clear, that there's nothing remaining,
Speaker 1: the placenta, whatever remaining within the woman's uterus. Now that
Speaker 1: can be done for someone who has experienced a miscarriage, Okay,
Speaker 1: and that that is a totally legitimate healthcare treatment. Why
Speaker 1: if a child has already died in the womb through
Speaker 1: a miscarriage, not an intentional abortion, but a non intentional
Speaker 1: Sometimes miscarriages are called in the medical language spontaneous abortion,
Speaker 1: which adds a layer of confusion to this. But it's
Speaker 1: not an intentional This is not an abortion in the
Speaker 1: sense of directly intentionally trying to end the life of
Speaker 1: the unborn child. The child has died through a miscarriage,
Speaker 1: a DNC can be used to remove the body of
Speaker 1: the child whatever other material is located inside the uterus
Speaker 1: in order to prevent any infection from happening. So that's
Speaker 1: an important healthcare procedure, and a DNC procedure is legal
Speaker 1: in joy for a child who has died. Both these
Speaker 1: women could have gotten dncs in Georgia. Dncs are not
Speaker 1: illegal in Georgia. A DNC to kill a living child
Speaker 1: is illegal in Georgia after six weeks, but not follow
Speaker 1: up care. So basically, this media narrative for these stories,
Speaker 1: it's blaming Georgia's state law which didn't forbid the after
Speaker 1: care treatment that these women needed after their abortions. It's
Speaker 1: blaming them for these women dying. It's not blaming the
Speaker 1: abortion pill, which has this complication. It's not blaming liberals
Speaker 1: who eliminated the follow the requirement for follow up care
Speaker 1: after an abortion pill process. Basically, what these docs have
Speaker 1: decided is just fine, is just letting these women loose out.
Speaker 1: Just go to the er, just go to the ear. No,
Speaker 1: I'm not going to schedule a follow up appointment with you,
Speaker 1: even though five to eight percent of you are going
Speaker 1: to have and incomplete abortion. We know this, it's on
Speaker 1: the label. So when we return why I think this
Speaker 1: might be a sign of left wing desperation. Next on
Speaker 1: the John Girardi Show, this Georgia abortion story is idiotic.
Speaker 1: It's putting all the blame on George's abortion laws, which
Speaker 1: did not prevent providing the kind of care that these
Speaker 1: two women needed who died after they're after taking the
Speaker 1: abortion pill. It focuses none of the blame on the
Speaker 1: abortion pill itself. It focuses none of the blame on
Speaker 1: the Democrat efforts to provide abortion pills through illegal, shady,
Speaker 1: clandestine means, using Chinese and Indian sourced abortion pills to
Speaker 1: ship it the abortion pill into states where it's illegal. No,
Speaker 1: none of the blame is on them. It's all on
Speaker 1: Georgia for restricting abortion. So it's idiotic. None of the
Speaker 1: blame on Democrats who don't want required follow up treatment
Speaker 1: for women who've gone through the abortion pill process, even
Speaker 1: though five to eight percent of them are going to
Speaker 1: have serious complications that require a follow up surgery. And
Speaker 1: it makes me think they must be getting kind of
Speaker 1: desperate if they're going to this, if they're trying to
Speaker 1: dip deeper into the well of abortion by using these
Speaker 1: kind of stories that are not really pushing a very
Speaker 1: false narrative. I'd say to go to a pro publica
Speaker 1: story which pro public is a super left wing entity
Speaker 1: that has been pushing this story and just amplifying it.
Speaker 1: It must mean I wonder if this means they're kind
Speaker 1: of desperate. I wonder if Trump is doing a little
Speaker 1: better than maybe you were thinking. That'll do it, John
Speaker 1: Gilady Show, See you next time on Power Talk