Season 12, Episode Twelve September 28, 2025

SPEAKER_04 0:00

This is the listening tube.

SPEAKER_00 0:08

Hello. Thank you for putting your ear to the listening tube. I'm your host, Bob Woodley. On this episode, we'll hear about the Bill of Rights, free speech, and an attack on the media. Plus, I'll examine President Trump's UN address.

SPEAKER_02 0:27

But first, not the headlines.

SPEAKER_00 0:32

Anyone who pays attention knows that there are certain states that are politically so far left that they may never stabilize anywhere near the center again. New York, Oregon, Washington, and of course, California. But California sets itself apart from the other blue states, mostly because of the outrageous policies of the governor there. The governor of California is as slippery as his hair looks. He signed some bills into law last weekend that should be cause for alarm anywhere in the country, but are just another day at the office for the executive branch of the Republic of California. I lived in Southern California for nearly a decade, and I must say that I loved it. In hindsight, I feel like I left just in time back in 1995. Over the past 30 years, California has become extremely progressive. More than Democrat, more than liberal. California has become a social experiment. One of the largest economies in the world has sucked the life out of its businesses as well as its citizens to waste away billions of dollars on failed projects and policies. All of them meant to be beneficial to the welfare of the general society. All of them leading to more poverty and depravity. Needless environmental regulations and a web of multi-level government permitting has led to housing shortages and increased homelessness. Just to make it sound softer, California even started calling the condition unhoused, as if they weren't worthy of a home. All of these people just need to be housed. Then why hasn't anyone built giant warehouses where people could live? Because that would look too much like a prison. So California wants to build low-cost housing, so fewer people will be homeless. After wasting billions of dollars on the homeless crisis with no results to show for it but more homelessness. Somehow, California thinks it's the responsibility of the government to build affordable homes. It reminds me of post-depression back in the 1930s. Not that I was there, but it only happened 30 years before I was born. The Civilian Conservation Corps put thousands of young men to work to make improvements to federal properties, and I'm sure they also built many habitable buildings. But if California has put itself in a position where they have to build houses for people, then maybe they should look at why the private sector isn't fulfilling the need. Supply and demand is supposed to work, and will if it isn't bogged down by over-regulation. The job of the government is to create an environment to support the needs of the people and the needs of the business that provide what the people need. That way, the government doesn't have to do it. But let's get down to the nitty-gritty. Who the hell is going to want a house designed by the government of California? I shudder to think about how utterly worthless such a domicile might be. First of all, you know it'll be a ranch because it'll have to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it's where the design would begin. It would have to be energy efficient. In California, that might mean the state could turn off your air conditioner in the summer if the demand for electricity got too high. Which it will because you'll be badgered into buying an electric car if you want to qualify for placement in a state-built house. Don't worry if you can't afford the car, it'll be added on to your rent payment. And no, you can't just buy the house. The state needs to create another form of income to pay for all the houses it's building. Plus, the state needs to create statistics that support its assertion that the rest of the world needs electric cars. So now you're not just reliant on the government for your housing and transportation, which they can turn off or reactivate at any time, but you're also a tool they can use to advance the policies they support, even if they don't actually work.

SPEAKER_04 5:23

And you can hang your hat on that.

SPEAKER_00 5:26

But that's what you should expect when policies are put in place that are sold as a solution to a problem without looking at what created the problem in the first place. It's the cautionary tale of the woman who swallowed the fly being played out at the state level. They would rather keep piling on hopeful solutions that admit that their policies don't work. One of the policies that is creating a housing crisis in California is its sanctuary status policy. When you allow anyone from anywhere to live in your state regardless of federal laws, and you protect them more than you protect American citizens, and provide more for them than for American citizens, you will have to find places for them to live. And your policies don't support the private sector's efforts to meet the demand. The state of California is too concerned with virtue signaling than with solid economics and legislative responsibility. The housing problem would be greatly diminished if the state didn't invite people to live there illegally. It's simple mathematics. But instead of doing what will most likely have a positive result in changing the supply and demand dynamic of housing in his state, the governor has instead decided to make an obstructionist and toothless law that demonstrates commitment to illegal immigrants over American citizens. Well, two laws, actually. The one you may have heard about makes it illegal for most law enforcement officers, including federal ones who work immigration, to wear masks that conceal their identities. I'll point out right here that the governor of California didn't sign a law prohibiting protesters or organized troublemakers from wearing masks. Just law enforcement. So why do people wear masks to conceal their identity? Well, if you're a bad guy, it's because you don't want to get caught by being identified. If you're a good guy, it's because you don't want any public recognition for your contribution. You know, like Batman or Spider-Man. Or because you know there are radical people out there who are going to get a picture of you and go to great lengths to discover your name and address and then use that information to threaten or expose you on social media. Just imagine for a moment what America would be like if Batman or Spider-Man were to be treated like ICE agents are today. People slashing the tires on the Batmobile, exposing Spider-Man's identity. The media discovering the Batcave and exposing it to the world. Instead of na na na na na na na na na na na na na na it would be nya nya nya nya nyh. And the media wouldn't even know what to do with Superman once they discovered he was one of their own. How did this conservative alien reporter get in here? We thought they were all liberal. The reason this law has no teeth is because the federal agents don't answer to the state government. The state doesn't have the authority to tell the federal government how federal agents have to dress. It's the same as if California made a law that said the uniform of all military personnel stationed there must consist of cocky pants and flowered shirts, so as to not traumatize the citizens. The state has every right to ban state police from wearing masks while on duty, but ironically, the California Highway Patrol is exempt from the law. Probably because they're so handsome. But the bottom line is that the governor of California is more interested in promoting an agenda than he is in enforcing laws. He also refused to recognize the difference between immigrants and illegal immigrants. They are not the same. But the talking heads on the left only use one term to describe all of them. Nobody on the right has a problem with immigrants and celebrate when new American citizens are sworn in. Therein lies the difference. Those who are here illegally have no desire nor benefit when it comes to assimilating or pursuing citizenship. Sure, there are exceptions, but they still went about it the wrong way, and we are a nation of laws. Well, depending upon which party is in control of the executive branch of our government. Immigration laws were loosely enforced during the Biden administration, and now the Trump administration is trying to clean it up, while guys like Gavin Newsom do whatever they can to get in the way.

SPEAKER_02 10:35

And if that wasn't enough.

SPEAKER_00 10:37

The governor of California didn't stop there. He signed another law on the same day that prevents immigration authorities from entering schools and health care facilities unless they have a warrant or judicial order. That won't stop immigration from doing their jobs, but it adds an extra step and provides activists the means to report ICE movements if they can get a hold of plans ahead of time. The law also requires schools to notify teachers and parents when ICE agents are on school grounds. I'm not sure what that's meant to accomplish, other than ring alarm bells for the media to gather and radical activists to obstruct. As for health care facilities, they'll now be a safe haven for illegal immigrants, just like they want the rest of the state to be. But California's obstructionism doesn't end there. California's Department of Justice was handed $50 million earlier this year by the state legislature. They've used the money to file more than 40 lawsuits against the federal government to protect illegal immigrants in California. Talk about lawfare. This week in 1789, George Washington sends the proposed constitutional amendments to the states for ratification. Those constitutional amendments became known as the Bill of Rights. Among them is the right to free speech. Specifically, the temporary suspension of the Jimmy Kimmel show on ABC. If you consider a television show a form of free speech, which many people seem to, then yes, Jimmy Kimmel's free speech was temporarily suspended. But not by the government, as you may have been led to believe, but by three independent television networks. I don't know if General Washington could have imagined anything like television or that it would be on late at night, but I'm sure he knew that the government shouldn't be in control of what people say. We hope people tell the truth, and there are laws about not telling the truth under certain circumstances, but for the most part, the right to free speech was to give people the option to criticize the government without the government prosecuting them for it. The freedom of speech doesn't give you permission to lie. And that's what Jimmy Kimmel did. He told his audience that the assassin of Charlie Kirk was a part of the MAGA gang, and that their only concern was gaining political points from the tragic killing. Three separate companies had to take action to ebb the tide of criticism that resulted from Kimmel's inflammatory remarks. No government intervention needed. Therefore, no violation of Jimmy's First Amendment rights. The First Amendment only prevents the government from controlling what you say, not the private sector. A lot of people seem to have forgotten that, or never realized it to begin with. It's the same as if you're talking shit about an ex-girlfriend and her big brother punches you in the face and tells you to stop talking about his little sister. He is definitely violating your right to free speech, and you should probably take his advice. But he'll only be charged with assault, not violating your constitutional rights. If you want some examples of how our freedom of speech has been violated, we need only look at the Biden administration. The left already has most of the broadcast media under its control, but the Internet was still in its Wild West stages when it came to free speech. Under the Biden presidency, Twitter and Facebook were under heavy pressure from the executive branch to stifle all kinds of speech. It took $44 billion for Elon Musk to open the Pandora's box of government violations of free speech on the Twitter platform. Once Trump regained the White House, Facebook came forward and exposed the pressure they got to delete posts and control content. And it started right away. Less than two weeks into the Biden administration, director of digital strategy Rob Flaherty sent an email to Facebook saying, cannot stress the degree to which this needs to be resolved immediately. Please remove this account immediately. I wonder whose account that was. Clearly, the government took away their right to free speech. There were no celebrities signing letters condemning this action. So since the government didn't take away Jimmy Kimmel's free speech, ABC put him back on the air. Upon returning to the air, here's what Jimmy Kimmel said, according to Yahoo News. Quote, our government cannot be allowed to control what we do and do not say on television, unquote. Which isn't true. The government can and does control what we say on FCC licensed stations like ABC. But he went on to say, quote, the President of the United States made it very clear he wants to see me and the hundreds of people who work here fired from our jobs. Our leader celebrates Americans losing their livelihoods because he can't take a joke. Let's break that statement down a bit. First of all, the president didn't call for anyone to lose their job at the show. The president didn't take Jimmy Kimmel off the air. The president clearly doesn't agree with a lot of what Kimmel says, but he hasn't advocated for mass firings at the show. The president does not celebrate Americans losing their livelihoods. Never has, never will. The president does advocate for smaller government, but larger private sector employment. So another lie by Jimmy Kimmel. But to say it's because the president can't take a joke would imply that what you said to start this whole drama, Jimmy, was somehow funny. It wasn't. You weren't making a joke, Jimmy. This isn't a matter of humor or free speech or sensitivity or even politics. Jimmy Kimmel went out of his way to use his platform, which is supposed to be funny, to instead lie to his audience. Sinclair and Nextar recognized it immediately. ABC eventually caught on, and attention was brought to Kimmel's shameful behavior. He clearly hasn't learned how to make amends. He continues to deflect blame. The irony is the administration he's criticizing is the one fighting for his right to free speech. Because if he was on the conservative side during the Biden administration, he might just now be getting his YouTube account back. Because it was just revealed that Google was also pressured into deleading and deplatforming people by the Biden administration. Anyone sincerely worried about free speech in America should rejoice in the fact that the Democrats lost the presidential election last year. Otherwise, their censorship would be continuing and getting more entrenched, and they'd be looking to silence not just what they consider disinformation, but eventually common sense as well. Don't be fooled by this nonsense that Jimmy Kimmel's right to free speech is being limited. That's just the left trying to gauge how easily fooled you might be. When you understand the reality, it's clear that the current administration is the most transparent and free speech supporting administration we've seen recently. If General George Washington were alive today, he would purposefully remove the glove from his left hand, tugging on one finger at a time, then the thumb. He would then recoil it over his left shoulder before extending it with significant rightward velocity, striking Jimmy Kimmel across his face, not for claiming his right to free speech, but for abusing it. General Patton wouldn't bother taking off the glove. This week in 1910, the Los Angeles Times is bombed. A large bomb destroys the LA Times building in downtown Los Angeles, killing 21 people. Today, the LA Times is a bastion of liberal journalism, supported by the left and the Hollywood elite. But in 1910, it was a labor union that bombed the newspaper. Back then, the LA Times was anti-union. They targeted the printing press, and the explosion triggered a fire on a ruptured gas line. It was one of many bombings done by the leftist unions in the early 1900s, which at the time were considered the largest domestic terrorism campaign in American history. Sadly, the left continues to rely on violence to express its disappointment with those who disagree with their ideology and agenda. The killing of Charlie Kirk and the shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas, Texas last week are stark reminders that violence is now an accepted tactic for progressive and left extremists.

SPEAKER_03 21:25

Sincerely, the listening to.

SPEAKER_00 21:31

This week in 1940, the Pennsylvania Turnpike, often considered the first superhighway in the United States, opens to traffic. There's a reason Pennsylvania is called the Keystone State. It connects the Northeast U.S. with the rest of the country, allowing for the movement of goods from what used to be industrial centers. Many of those industries are no longer in operation. That's why Indianapolis. Is now seen as the crossroads of America. This week in 1957, the first appearance of In God We Trust on U.S. paper currency. Many object to the motto on currency and cite the separation of church and state to support their argument. But in reality, there is no church present if you're only referring to God and not a specific religion. This week in 1962, the first broadcast of the Tonight Show starring Johnny Carson aired. Can anyone here tell me what political persuasion Johnny Carson had? No, you can't. And that's how late-night television hosts are meant to be. Just make us laugh. It's not that hard. Today, perhaps the late night personality with the most job security is the current host of the Tonight Show, Jimmy Fallon. He's managed to keep politics in the background of his commentary, even inviting Greg Gutfeld on the show, causing an uproar among those who don't remember what late-night television can be. This week in 1964, the free speech movement is launched on the campus of University of California, Berkeley. Huh. Why were Berkeley students being denied their right to free speech? I'm going to look that up.

SPEAKER_02 23:34

He's gonna look it up. He's really gonna do it. I want the truth!

SPEAKER_01 23:38

You can't handle the truth.

SPEAKER_00 23:43

As it turns out, in 1964, the administration of UC Berkeley was conservative. Not only that, but political activism wasn't allowed on campus. If you were a student at UC Berkeley and you took part in a political event on or off campus, you would be banned from campus moving forward. This was 1960s Northern California. The hippie movement, wearing flowers in our hair, anti-war and anti-establishment sentiment was growing. The Vietnam War was dividing our country, and students had a different point of view than the professors and administration of Berkeley. A sit-in demonstration led to police action, and the faculty voted to support the free speech movement. Today there's a different perspective on free speech at Berkeley. The professors are no longer conservative, and nor are the students. The only free speech being suppressed at Berkeley is conservative speech. But now, nobody at Berkeley is willing to stand up for free speech. The administration clearly supports free speech, promoting all points of view as required by law because they are a public university. But the students themselves are the true arbiters of what's allowed and what is not allowed to be said on campus. Unfortunately, the student body of UC Berkeley has abandoned the goals set forth by 60 students 61 years ago. The administration seems powerless or unwilling to revive the free speech movement that started there.

SPEAKER_02 25:27

Hey, if he says something smart, you can support the show from the homepage.

SPEAKER_00 25:35

This week in 1970, Jordan makes a deal with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine for the release of the remaining hostages from the Dawson's Field hijackings. Gee, Palestinians taking hostages as far back as 1970. Here we are in 2025, and Hamas is holding hostages as I speak. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine still exists today and is active in the war in Gaza. They not only held hostages, but used hijacking of airliners as a tool to advance their cause as far back as the 1960s. The PFLP has been designated as a terrorist organization by the US, Japan, the EU, and Canada. Their strategy of using hostages to achieve their goals seems to have hit a dead end in the most recent attempt. Israel is tired of the fighting and will no longer rest until all of Hamas is eliminated. Some people call it a genocide, but it isn't. If it were a genocide, every Palestinian living in Israel would have already been killed. Not to mention everyone still alive in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, and the entire region. If you think Israel can't do it, you're wrong. They can, and they haven't. Therefore, not a genocide, but an act of self-preservation. This week in 1979, the United States returned sovereignty of the Panama Canal to Panama. Perhaps one of the most boneheaded moves America ever made. President Carter, the really nice guy who became the country's oldest living chief executive, was perhaps the first in modern American history to try to make everyone happy. Even Panama. There was no need to give control of the canal to Panama, but he did it anyway. Now the Chinese Communist Party is trying to get control of it, and probably would have if the Democrats were still in power. But the current administration recognized the importance of the canal and the hazard of it being controlled by China, and took measures to regain control of the canal. President Trump went as far as threatening to use military force to keep the Chinese out. The Biden administration seemed content to let the CCP gain a foothold in the Western Hemisphere. It's a good thing a more clear-visioned and responsible president was able to prevent it.

SPEAKER_04 28:26

Send email to thelistening tube at outlook.com.

SPEAKER_00 28:32

American President Donald Trump addressed the United Nations General Assembly this week. A BBC reporter pointed out that when Trump last did so six years ago, the audience laughed. Not so much this time, though. The president did give those in attendance a few opportunities to laugh when he spoke in jest, but they otherwise sat in stunned silence. He spoke for about an hour. Quite possibly a self-imposed limit, as he didn't address one or two issues that would have been appropriate here. But Donald Trump did go scorched earth on some topics that are important to him and his vision for America and the rest of the world. His speech began with a summary of the state of America since his return to power and criticized the Biden administration more than once. It was a demonstration of the stark difference between what America was and what America is and will become. He put the world on notice that he is going to show everyone what bold leadership with the goal of prosperity for everyone looks like. So they better be paying attention. And they were. He decried war and highlighted his personal efforts to end them. Having done so, he proclaimed seven times in seven months and cited examples. He then pointed out that the United Nations is supposed to do that. That's part of the UN's mission. He let the world know that the UN offered no help or assistance of any kind in his efforts to bring about peace on multiple continents, embarrassing the host organization at their own party. He didn't stop there, though. The president also accused the UN of funding an assault on Western countries and their borders. He said the UN in 2024 spent $372 million on cash assistance to 624,000 migrants headed to the U.S., providing food, shelter, and transportation. In other words, the UN helped finance illegal immigration into the United States. The president went on and said, the UN is supposed to stop invasions, not create them, and not finance them. In the United States, we reject the idea that mass numbers of people from foreign lands can be permitted to travel halfway around the world, trample our borders, violate our sovereignty, cause unmitigated crime, and deplete our social safety net. He then went on to caution all countries to stand in defense of their citizens. Europe was a special target of his warning, not just on illegal immigration, or in some cases legal immigration as well, but that it is leading to a deterioration of values and customs and even laws, specifically Sharia law. And the president had plenty to say about European energy as well, pointing out the contradictory situation it's found itself. All of Europe has for a long time relied on Russia for much of its energy. So it's literally funding a war that they want to stop. But America has plenty of energy to sell now that Donald Trump is the president. He lambasted what he called falsely named renewables, coming down hard on wind-powered energy as expensive and insufficient to power anything large. China, he says, loves to sell those big windmills all over the world, but they don't use them. He encouraged Europe to take advantage of the vast oil reserves in the North Sea instead of taking up farmland with solar panels and windmills. President Trump went on to embarrass his host once again by recalling, for those assembled, the record of the UN when it comes to environmental prophecy. In 1982, he said, the UN predicted that by 2000, climate change would result in a global catastrophe. That was 25 years ago. In 1998, the UN said that within a decade, entire nations could be wiped off the map by global warming. That hasn't happened. He called it the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, and if you don't get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail. He gave Europe credit for lowering their pollution, but pointed out that all that effort was expensive and mitigated by the increase in pollution coming from China. The president did address the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza. He wants it to end, of course, but not in the piecemeal fashion we've seen so far. All of the hostages and the bodies of hostages being held by Hamas must be released, he said. He made brief reference to plans of some allies to recognize a Palestinian state by saying it would encourage continued conflict and would be a reward for Hamas terrorists. I thought he might have spent a bit more time on that issue, but in hindsight, he gave it just the amount of time it deserves. A Palestinian state doesn't exist. It has no borders, no population, no currency, no treasury, no government. If someone tells you they're from Palestine, you have every right to ask, where is that? The only way to answer is to name other countries. The state of Palestine, which has been recognized by many countries around the world, has no culture, no art, no buildings, no roads, no leader and no trade. Nothing to offer the rest of the world, no credit with which to acquire anything. Its recognition is simply symbolism with no real value to anyone, let alone those who claim to be Palestinian. It's no wonder the president skimmed over it. As for the war in Ukraine, the president's patience with Vladimir Putin seems to be running out. And because he is a man of peace, the president announced a verification system to enforce the Biological Weapons Convention, hoping the UN can play a constructive role. Despite the cautionary tales, President Trump was optimistic, inviting the world to America for the Olympics and the World Cup, and asking for a renewed commitment to our shared values. He said, Let us defend free speech and free expression. Certainly a snipe at what Great Britain and the EU is doing to silence certain voices. In England, people are being arrested for conservative social media posts. Check that, not even conservative, just realistic social media posts, can get you in trouble with a government that doesn't recognize free speech. He asserted that every leader present represents a rich culture, a noble history, and a proud heritage that makes each nation majestic and unique. He added that, quote, our ancestors gave everything for homelands that they defended with pride, with sweat, with blood, with life and with death. Now the righteous task of protecting the nations that they built belongs to each and every one of us. So together, let us uphold our sacred duty to our people and to our citizens. No one was laughing. I hope many were inspired. I'm sure there will be critics who will tell this story differently than I. Hell, even Trump supporters would tell the story in a different way. But there are a lot of things here on which we can all agree. In fact, after the president's speech, he had a meeting with the president of the European Union, who agreed with him that the EU was wrong for relying on Russia for energy while supporting a country at war with Russia. Was Trump right about everything? Well, nobody's perfect. But his speech at the UN certainly opened up a lot of eyes. Maybe even opened some minds. Time will tell. One thing's for certain, Donald Trump has not only set a course for the United States, but a course for the entire civilized world. We have never had a president who understands the dynamics of geopolitics more clearly, understands the leverage it is to be president of the United States, and who unquestionably has the best interest of citizens at heart. Not just citizens of the United States, but citizens of every country around the world. The Listening Tube is written and produced by yours truly, copyright 2025. Thank you for putting your ear to the listening tube. Be sure to follow the program at thelistening tube.com. I'm your host, Bob Woodley. It's the worst thing to happen to old people. For thou at infinitum.