Jeff Norman, The Norman Report Good evening everybody and welcome to The Norman Report. This is Jeff Norman and in the studio with me tonight is Geza X and Alex Voschinski. And they were just singing a couple of minutes ago, they wanted to sing along with the theme song. Do you guys think you got it or do you need to hear it one more time? Jeff Norman The Norman Report I should not sing, I'm sorry. I apologize to the viewing and listening audience. You know what, from now on forget the recorded theme music. You guys are going to do it live. We are going to, okay we'll do it live. Alright, well it's been, I don't know how long it's been since we've been on, but Jeremy Hansen who is the mastermind behind this operation was at a previous location and now we're at a new undisclosed location. It's kind of like an underground bomb shelter meets high rise, which is two opposite directions, so figure out what that means. But whatever the case, it is a pleasure to be back. I've been blogging lately about Donald Trump and the most recent post I called, what was it, something like the art of persuasion in the age of Trump. And I picked that title very deliberately because I really think, what's happening with Donald Trump is really significant in a lot of ways. So I wasn't being cute when I said the age of Trump. I actually mean that. The guy has accomplished an amazing thing in a very short period of time. And I'm saying this, I'm trying to say it as somebody who's not passing judgment on him. Although, you know, before all is said and done, I don't think there's anything wrong with stating. Passing judgment? Yeah, right. Uh-oh. I'm just making a distinction, you know. At any given moment, it's fine to talk about either. Like, do we like it, do we not like it? But it's not the same thing as, is this guy effective? Is he having an impact? And he has had an amazing impact. A son like him, now amazing. A huge impact. And I think not only on politics, but on culture. And I've been blogging up a storm on my website, which is normanreport.com, but also on Facebook. By the way, it's really hard to leave Facebook. It's like instant gratification. Oh, my God. I mean, if you like to debate, as I do. You know, if you do it on a website, you don't get into these ongoing debates. And Facebook is just so addictive. So I've been getting into quite a lot of conversations about Donald Trump. And tonight, our guests are going to indulge me. Gaza X is a punk rock icon. He produced some very well-known artists and records, including the Dead Kennedys. And he is... He's my partner at the Porter Street Lab. And we have... That's right. We have a consultancy firm. And we give great advice to nonprofits mostly, but also some corporations in just about any field of endeavor they need. And if you want to check out our services, you can go to the website, normanreport.com, and just click on Porter Street Lab. Gaza is a cultural critic. Really has a worldview that combines a lot of different elements. So I'm very curious to hear what he has to say about Trump. And Alex Voshinsky is our other guest. Alex is an immigration attorney. So behave yourself, Gaza, or he'll have you deported. Fine. No, no. I do not hold such powers. Now, Trump, of course, one of his central themes is the immigration issue. So some of it has to do with the art of persuasion. But regardless of what Trump is up to, I thought we... We ourselves should get informed and inform our audience about some of the facts and some of the difference between the hype and the identity politics that are going on and what the actual law says. I'm referring to the Constitution, and I'm also referring to statutory law. And also what you on the street say is the real deal. By the way, how do you make money? I mean, I don't mean to generalize, but immigrants don't strike me as the wealthiest. I don't think this is a sort of career path that you take in order to... Because you want to get really rich really fast. No, it's tough. Do you get paid from your clients, or do you do work for agencies? Yes, I get paid directly by the clients sometimes. All right. Well, don't worry. We won't be auditing your books. Take it easy. It's just a question. Don't be nervous. Books, more like pages. Pages. That's how I feel sometimes. I get it. All right. So Trump is quite the character. And let's start with Gaza. Now, we're talking about the age of persuasion. Right. And persuasion is... It comes in different colors. There's hypnosis. There's negotiating tactics. Behavioral science as well. Behavioral science. I think the average person has some sense of what negotiations are about and the different tricks that people play. They think... I think they do. But they're not necessarily well-trained in it, and that's where we're going with this conversation. Okay. So I think what you're saying is even though you may know the tricks of the trade, you still can be vulnerable to them. No, you usually don't know the tricks of the trade. It's sort of like insider secrets. And also, a lot of the times, you know, you think that you're having something sold to you because you go to, like, let's say, you know, Target, and somebody, a salesman, tries to sell you a TV. That's not negotiation. That's simple sales. And there's something that, you know, sure, they get some training, but that's the lower echelons. But with the higher, you know, paid power persuaders, for example, Xerox runs a very good school of sales for their salespeople. And a lot of times, people from other companies will encourage their salespeople to go to the Xerox school because it's so well put together. I never have seen the techniques that are employed there, but the general idea is that they learn sales techniques really from the... the core, which is how people respond emotionally to various stimuli and what orders to present, you know, an argument in and what to allow and what to disallow as the person that you're selling to, you know, is being persuaded. Okay, now, I'm not sure if we disagree or if it's just conflation, and maybe it's conflation that's okay, because I noticed you said that the salesmanship and negotiation isn't the same thing. To me, it is, or at least it's the same ball of wax. They're... It's both about persuasion. And I want to talk about your analogy to a car salesman in a minute, but let me just first finish. The one tried and true negotiating tactic that I think almost everybody knows is asking for more than what you really want. Great place to start. Yeah, because that's... And that, in fact, is how a lot of people start the negotiation. They'll ask for way more than what they want. And, you know, it almost doesn't even need explaining why, right? Exactly. You want to move the thing in your direction, and that way, when you give in, you have to give in less, and then you wind up being very happy. So, okay, sorry, I said the obvious. But even though it's the obvious, this is what Trump is doing now. He is doing this in the campaign. And I don't think hardly anybody realizes it. And I think the clearest example is the immigration policy. When he's talking about deporting 11 million people and building a wall and making Mexico pay for it and all that, you can tell by the way his detractors are reacting that they're not commenting on it as though it's a negotiating position. They're either saying he's an idiot, he doesn't know what he's talking about, or they're getting very angry and taking it as a serious proposal and saying why it would never work. But I think it's very simple. This guy wrote the art of the deal, right? It's not a secret who he is. And all he's doing, I say all he's doing as if it's nothing, it's actually very effective, but it's simple in a way. He's applying... He's applying his deal-making philosophy that he has perfected, or at least perfected in his world for many years. He's applying that to the political arena. And so when he says, you know, deport 11 million people, build a wall, make Mexico pay for it, that's his opening negotiating position. What do you think about that? Great. Let me tie that. That's so awesome, because let me tie that also to something that you wanted to explore, which is the hypnosis element. Well, one of the main techniques, one of the main techniques of hypnosis is to shock the conscious mind of the hypnotee so that it just is overwhelmed and can't deal. And you mentioned in a couple of your memos about this show about like America's sort of cognitive dissonance and how like, you know, the overwhelm factor of people just can't even believe what they're seeing is kind of making people just go, ugh, you know? I think that's great. I think that that's an amazing, amazing thing to observe, because really what's happening is that at a certain point in the mind, the conscious mind just shuts down. Then the unconscious mind, the subconscious mind as it's called sometimes, kind of rises to the surface and takes over. When that takes place, you are in a state of active hypnosis and also you're highly suggestible. Then you're suggestible by new things other than reason. You're suggestible by your emotions. You're suggestible by symbols. You're suggestible, by things that are very like stripped down, sort of catchy statements and stuff like that. Things go in and they don't get filtered and they don't get analyzed or criticized or scrutinized. And then they become a part of the other person's consciousness. And so there's sort of a concatenation of different things taking place. One is the sales thing, which possibly also just is built to include elements of hypnosis. But there's like an overt kind of hypnosis as well, which is just, hit him. So, it's so hard that they just go, ugh. And yeah, they're laughing. The Dilbert pieces were such a great thing because Dilbert was... Well, let's give him credit. Gaze is talking about Scott Adams, who's the cartoonist who created Dilbert. And he happens to be a trained hypnotist as well. And he has been blogging about Trump since the summer. And out of all the analysis that's out there on the internet, this is far and away the best, in my opinion. Amazing blogs. I've had an opportunity to read a little bit of, and I'm just like, I'm going to go home and read all the... Yeah, I got to get him on the show. They're amazing. I got to interview him. But what he was saying was that, there's a tell in hypnotism, which is that if the client starts to chuckle to themselves, that's actually a good thing because what's happening is their sort of reality threshold has been exceeded and suddenly they're taking in what's being said despite themselves. And that's really what we're going to be seeing a lot of. That's fine. In fact, I've thought, I don't know that much, but I've thought about it before. When people laugh, I've noticed they laugh in various situations. And I've thought about, why are you laughing? You know, I don't think people stop to think about that very often. Why are you laughing? Yeah, exactly. Sometimes it's obvious. It's funny. But other times there's something else going on. It's nervousness or whatever, right? Cognitive dissonance can make you laugh because all of a sudden, that's what a joke actually really is. A joke actually presents a situation, like a scenario that is like, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, just, outlandish. And, and yet, somehow true. And your mind kind of just can't deal with that juxtaposition. And it laughs as a, as a way of releasing that energy. Right. Now that's what's going on with Trump and, and the way the public is reacting to him. Yes. So, so you mentioned the phrase cognitive dissonance. Yes. That has at least three syllables. Can you explain what, what that concept is? Sure. Cognitive dissonance is a, a, a term used by behavioral psychologists and sociologists. And basically what it means, is that you're being presented with something or two things actually that don't agree with one another. And you might in one way agree with one of them and another way agree with the other one. And that creates a dissonance inside you, an actual dissonance of cognition. You're comprehending two things that aren't the same, that are the opposites, let's say, of one another. And you're not quite sure how to handle it. And usually that can be a breaking point in a lot of different situations. Hypnosis or even education in general. Is it a psychological disorder or is that too harsh a term? No, it's not at all. It's a real normal state of mind that everyone experiences. Cognitive dissonance is when what you see is not really what you believe and you're just like, whoa. You're not ready. You need time to process it. You often cannot process it. Right. It's like... Right. And the thing is, now you're a guy, who is full of empathy, a very sensitive person. But what we're talking about is the public forum and people debating and arguing about what policy should be. So it gets very tricky, I think, when you may be in some situations the type of person who's going to be kind of patient with somebody, not bite their head off. But on the other hand, you can't really do that if you are fighting for your point of view. If you want... So you get the kind of society you want, you want to live in, and the people you're up against are experiencing cognitive dissonance. What do you do? Do you treat them very gently like you're in therapy? Or do you go to war with them? You know what I'm saying? Well, ironically, reason doesn't really prevail, as I was saying earlier. It should, you know, as a kind of an intellectual or whatever. I prefer the idea that logic would win. You know, you present four facts on this side and four facts on this side and kind of like let them work themselves out. And whichever has the best facts wins. That's not how things work in the real world, particularly the world of high stakes, high drama politics, where everything is a sound bite and everything is basically shuffled down to the lowest common denominator. There's a sifting process that's happening. And people who know how to work that, Donald Trump being an expert in, you know, playing the media... Absolutely. And also playing negotiating and hypnosis techniques, you know, and identity politics is a phrase that's used. Right. And that's what we're talking about. Because he's... They're not paying attention to the details so much as they're getting a feel for who this guy is. And he's appealing to other people's identities. Like, you know, basically he's telling them, like, that the people who make good decisions will understand what he's talking about. So he's appealing to people's ego. And one of the reasons he's a master is you notice it sticks. Like somebody who's maybe not as advanced at it as he might try it, but then it doesn't stick in the public's consciousness. But he's like ruining, you know, Ted Cruz, low energy Jeb Bush. Think about how that stuck. Yeah. You know, he's done. He's done. Yeah. Low energy. Well, here's what's happening with the personality game or the personality cult that politics really is, is that he's winning on that front in a really, really big way because he is not... You look through his stuff, he's not really talking about any issues. He's so vague, it's pathetic. He hasn't said one meaningful thing. The media has jumped all over all of this stuff and created controversies. Really, literally, the media, as always, is creating controversy out of things that he says that aren't necessarily what he said. I'm going to, just for fun here, kind of pick a fight even at this table and say that a lot of the things that Donald Trump says actually are... They don't sound reasonable because they're coming from a person with an inflated personality who's trying to make an impression. But actually, when you look at what he's saying, some of those things, either he didn't say them and the media kind of made him say it, or he allowed it to be said by someone else and didn't stop it, or he's just saying some general thing that, you know, would require so much discussion anyways in the future that it's like people are making a big ballyhoo about it. Some of the stuff that he says, even as a... sort of a right-wing candidate, doesn't really bother me that much when taken sort of in its own context and not coming from him. But coming from him, filtered through his personality, you want to dislike it because you're trying to make an opinion about a person and their personality. So he's playing the personality card really strong. Right. Well, one thing, though, I mean, I pretty much agree with what you said, but... And I don't know if this is exactly the opposite, but it... I mean, I think it's a good point, but on the issue of substance, he may not be all that substantive when it comes to the details, but he is zeroing in on issues that matter. And he's owning the issue. And immigration is what I'm thinking about the most. And nobody else is articulating a clear policy. You see, he gets a lot of criticism, which is, by the way, another topic we can talk about, how he willingly accepts the criticism. He puts himself out there. He's a very serious person. I mean, I think there's so much... I mean, honestly, I intend to deal with Trump on an ongoing basis. There's so much going on. And this is a multilayered thing that we're broaching here. But the thing about immigration is that, you know, ask yourself, well, what other candidate has articulated a policy clear? You know, you're not going to let everybody in, and you're not going to keep everybody out. So, obviously, it's something in between. And nobody else has been any more specific than he has. So, at least, you know, maybe he's not... You know, he's saying almost nothing. But on the other hand, he's saying... He's at least introducing a topic that's valid and should be addressed. Now, Alex, let me ask, are you experiencing cognitive dissonance right now? I am experiencing a little cognitive dissonance. Well, I think his analysis of Donald Trump is fascinating. But... That's the weird thing about cognitive dissonance. When you describe it, it causes the thing you're... It causes... Yes, like trying not to think of a purple elephant. Clever. And you think about it. But you're an immigration attorney, so my assumption is this has been a topic of conversation among you and whomever you immigration attorneys talk to behind closed doors. What's your... We've discussed it some. Yeah. Well, my take on Trump is absolutely the hypnosis factor, as you call it. And he's trying to move people in a certain direction. So he's already appealing to people with certain preconceived notions about immigration that they want to keep immigrants out, they don't like people coming into the country and taking their jobs, etc. They're concerned about Muslim immigration because they associate that with terrorism and security concerns. So he's already appealing to that, and he's trying to move it to such an extreme then whenever he is going to put out some sort of a... some sort of a proposal that may sound a little more reasonable, though still extremely to the right, he is going to sound, oh, now he's, you know, he's making some sense. So that... I totally agree. That's what he's trying to do. All right, let me ask you a question, Jeremy. We have some video clips that I want to show and then talk about them. And we have them in a certain order. But what we've just been talking about now is really perfect for a clip that we were going to do, sort of in the middle of it. Jeremy, just say no if you can't do it. Can we do the Mika Brzezinski one, the one that was scheduled for last, first, instead? Yeah, no problem. Okay, good. Now, before you run that, let me just say why. I think this is an example of cognitive dissonance being experienced by a media commentator. Okay, she's an MSNBC pundit. And this, I think, was the day after or shortly after the San Bernardino terrorist attack. And what I... This is my reading. I don't want to say too much, but just a little bit to set it up. It looks to me like this is a person who's been very... She even says it has been very critical of Donald Trump. But now here she is worrying about terrorism because of what has happened. And it seems like these are two separate thoughts and emotions going on with her, and she can't even express herself. And I know you guys aren't psychologists, so I don't know if you can even answer authoritatively, but let's take a look at this and see what you think. So? So, that's, I think, a little bit problematic when we're looking at our visa process, probably. Right? I mean, I know I'm going to be like... What's that? No, just enunciate it. What are you saying? Well, I'm just saying that this is an issue that happened, that somebody came here and wreaked havoc on our society. Well, the question... I'm not backing Donald Trump's comments. I'm just saying. Well, what do you want to... What are you saying? Say what you're saying. We've been waiting. I'm saying that the visa process obviously has holes. And, you know, I'm not sure Donald Trump's concept is good for our country. Well, look, obviously it has holes. The 9-11 terrorists were here legally, too. So what do we do about it? Because we just had, like, a slaughter in our country, and now children are traumatized across our country. They feel ISIS is here, and most of us feel like it's going to happen again. So, what do we do about it? Because we just had, like, a slaughter in our country, and now children are traumatized across our country. They feel ISIS is here, and most of us feel like it's going to happen again. So, what do we do about it? Because we just had, like, a slaughter in our country, and now children are traumatized across our country. They feel ISIS is here, and most of us feel like it's going to happen again. So, someone tell me something better than what Donald Trump is saying. And there's got to be something better, because everybody has been sitting here for days, just lambasting him, including me, because I don't agree with it. But somebody needs a better idea. All right. Gays looks like he can't wait to comment on this. But that's what we're going to do. We're going to do it. We're going to do it. We're going to do it. We're going to do it. We're going to do it. We're going to do it. But that's what I was talking about, you know, with this idea of, well, nobody else has articulated another policy. And that's what she's saying. So, am I reading your body language? Yes. All right. Definitely. Go ahead. I mean— Get it off your chest. Great. Let's just step back a moment and realize what the actual forum is that all of this is being— played out on. Okay. We have a really, really strange media machine, especially in this country. We have a great deal of social division largely created by the media. So, you have Fox News on one side and you have CSNBC on the other side. And basically, they are on opposite sides of these candidates because everybody votes in blocks these days. So, you have one group of people that are just— I'm just going to say it. They're dead set against him, and the other ones that are pretty much for him. And what's really happening is the cognitive dissonance of that reporter, for example, or a person like myself, you know, I'm, if anything, a radical, not even a liberal. And yet, I find myself that if I get past the knee-jerk reflex, sort of lower echelon issues that he chooses to sort of address not very well, rather poorly, I find myself agreeing in principle with many of the things that he says. Because, you know, he's not stupid. He's actually picking out things that people want to hear about. And finally, somebody says something about it. Whether or not I agree with that or his delivery. I don't like his delivery. But when I go to the core of these issues, I say, yeah, they do need to be handled. And they do need to be looked at. It's the media that says that he wants to create a list of Muslims. He just kind of like sallies along with it when they bring it up to him. Just because like, okay, this stirs the pot even further. It's not necessarily what he said. Well, he said he wants to outright ban Muslim immigration. And it wasn't until he was questioned about it that he even retracted part of it. Which is that, oh, Muslim service members, you know, they're going to allow to come back in. And their U.S. citizens are going to be allowed to come back in. But he basically said. Well, he said, so for a while until we figure out what's going on. For a while. For a while. That could be an hour. That could be six years. But there's all this vagueness that he plays into it, too. You're so right. I understand that. I didn't see that particular quote. There's enough of them we could pull out of a hat that are just onerous as anything. But that's part of the negotiating. He's controlling the debate. Correct. And the other thing is that he, you know, he has a feel for what people are reactive towards. And also what people want to hear at least addressed somehow. Because everybody else just kind of like, you know, you know, politics is a very, very, I mean, we don't need to talk about how much has changed even since I was a kid. But, you know, there was used to be respect for sort of a, you know, what you might call a middle of the road attitude where people, you know, might vote on either towards either party, depending on voting their conscience. That doesn't happen anymore. People basically they check in at their favorite news source, if you want to call it. They get brainwashed and then they just go along with it. So he's in that forum playing it like a fiddle because, you know, his coarseness and his kind of raunchy temperament and all that kind of stuff just kind of like wins over with people who just want to hear something. Right. Now that what you just said, the raunchiness, I don't know if it's exactly what people have in mind when they talk about political correctness. But that was another one of my blog posts that I wrote back in September. And at that point, what I was arguing was that this is a much bigger issue than people realize. The people who are politically correct don't realize it because they're the problem. But they don't realize how much it's hated and how many people hate political correctness. And I think, therefore, Donald Trump's appeal is broader than what people realize because they don't ask about that in the polls. So it's not showing up. This reminds me a lot of Howard Stern back around 1980 or so. Right. Not only the act itself, meaning compare Trump to Stern, but compare the reaction. Yeah, great. That's great. Yeah. I mean, Stern was a radio host only in New York at first. And I may be a little bit off on the year, but it was around 1980 that he started to ascend. First, he was on one or two additional stations, then a whole bunch more. And there were people going, what? National? You don't. These kind of shows aren't national. This was like cognitive dissonance. What? This guy's not talented. He's just telling fart jokes. He's in it. National? We got to hear weather reports and traffic reports. And I remember, like, I'm thinking, what? Who cares about weather reports and traffic? And Howard himself was laughing at it. And so people like me, like, I warmed up to Howard partially because I liked at least a portion of his act. But I warmed up even more because he turned into a sympathetic figure because I was laughing at his detractors. Yeah. And I think it's very similar what's going on with Trump right now. Very. You know, I don't really start off liking Trump. Before he ran for president, I wasn't even the least bit interested in the guy. I'm only interested because he's running for president. Because that opens up a very rich context. Yes. But now that it's happening and all these people are turning into the biggest naysayers you can imagine, total denial. I mean, it started with you can't be serious about running to, like, you have no chance of getting the nomination. Then, you know, you have no chance of winning the presidency. And now people are talking about, well, you're not going to run for president. You're talking about, well, he might win by a landslide. You know, I'm exaggerating only slightly, but it's been a very rapid ascension. He's great in the polls. He's doing great. And people are very much in denial about it. And I think it's that political correctness thing which is a big part of it. And it cuts across political lines. A lot of his supporters are dismissed as right-wing kooks. And sure, some of them are. But it's like Howard Stern's audience. Howard Stern's audience is not all right-wing kooks. It's plenty of people who hate him. They hate political correctness across all political stripes and ideologies. Did we finish with your political dissonance? I forgot. Oh, with my dissertation? Well, I mean, you know, I could go line by line and try to dissect Trump's immigration plan, but— Well, we'll get to that. We have time. We have time. Let me give out the phone number, by the way, in case anybody wants to call in and get in on this. It's 800-893-9562. That's 800-893-9562. That's 800-893-9562. That's 800-893-9562. That's 800-893-9562. We have a call right now, so why don't we take it? Hello, you're on the air. Do you say on the air when it's the internet? You're on the internet. You're on the wire. Hello. Who's this? This is your old friend, Jerry Rubin, in Santa Monica, California. Hey! Oh, not Jerry Rubin the dead guy, right? Yes. No, of course not. No, but— How you doing, Jerry? Yeah, but still get confused with that name, even though the original Jerry Rubin's been gone for the past 20 years. Died jaywalking, sadly. Ever since that day, you haven't left the house, just to be on the safe side, right? No, but I'm finding this very—this show very interesting, Jeff. Thank you. And interesting questions, good philosophical things. I'm an ardent non-supporter of Donald Trump. I mean, when someone gets out there and mocks someone with disabilities the way he does, someone would—you know, it's ludicrous that someone would say, you know, you're a man, you're a woman, you're a man. You're a woman, you're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. You're a woman. people. And there's enough people that will laugh because they're used to reality TV. And certainly, Jeff, the Fox News Network and the others love to get the advertising money to make the debates really lucrative and high ratings. And Donald Trump is being used by them to make money. Yep. Well, just in case people listening don't know what you're talking about, there's a reporter. I don't know what his condition is. Maybe you know the name of it. But the symptoms are some physical lack of coordination. And Trump was mocking him. That's what Jerry was talking about. So I don't really want to defend Trump for the sake of defending him. But one of the things that occurred to me is that Trump is going a mile a minute. And, you know, he's like, it's like second nature to him just to mock everybody about everything. And he may not have even really stopped to think about what it was he was mocking that guy. You think that's a possibility, Jerry? And would you judge him in a somewhat different light if that were the case? No, I think you have to be sensitive to these things. And he knew it. And even afterwards, if he didn't know it, he should have said, geez, I'm sorry, I didn't realize what I was doing. That he's the kind of guy that would never apologize. He's the kind of guy that says, hey, if you're against me, I'm going to blast you. You know, that's just an uncool thing to do in real, you know, bipartisan negotiations. Forget about political correctness. And just I know you said you don't like it, but, you know, I'm not into just political correctness myself. But there are certain things that are basically correct. Correct is we want equality. We don't want to discriminate on the basis of race or religion or gender or sexual orientation, that we want to do things that are right to promote peace and coexistence. And we want a clean environment. We don't want to deny what the scientists say that we have dangerous things ahead from global warming and climate change. So these are not just politically correct. These are just... I mean, I was kind of... Well, politically correct is just sort of a catch-all phrase. Yeah. The thing that I... Just to clarify, you know, I'm not... I just use it because that's what everybody else uses. The thing that I think is really an important issue is that people have become very punitive about things that offend them and or that they're worried about. And that's what I object to. I think the way you just put it is fine. I mean, you gave your personal opinion. But what we've been plagued with as a society... I think the way you've been plagued with as a society over the last few years is that people start calling for boycotts and they want people fired and, you know, they want charges pressed, this and that. And that's really what I object to when it gets to the point of people think it's appropriate to take punitive action just because you find the comment offensive. Now, the other thing, Jerry, is you brought it back into the context of negotiating. And, again, this is not to defend him, but just to point out how he's using negotiating tactics. You said he never... He never apologizes. Now, that is a negotiating tactic. It's a position of power. You control the debate. You never allow yourself to be nudged. You do the nudging. And that is why he never apologizes. You might have a point. That's one way to look at it. And there's other ways to negotiate as well. What I tend to think is happening in a negative way, Jeff, and I see it a lot, when people who come to me and say, I come up to my bumper sticker table on the Santa Monica Thursday Promenade and I meet people from all over the country and all over the world, most people don't like him. And they're not fond of people like Sarah Palin as well or the Tea Party or things like that. But he has some supporters and they come up. And what tends to come out when we start having a conversation, Jeff, is real elements, strong racism. Even here at the NWO, we're talking about the word and other derogatory words. So I think what's happening is that they think, here's a guy that's saying things, get rid of these damn foreigners, get rid of these damn Muslims, all that. And I've been wanting to think that and say it out loud for so many years, and I really couldn't, but I want to be able to do it, and now I can. And that's a terrible thing. Well, I agree. And I think it's valid to note that. I'm not so sure it's valid to blame Trump, though, any more than it's valid to blame... I don't know. ...the Beatles for Charles Manson. You know, there's a world full of crazy people who react in all kinds of nutty ways to anything. But Trump is using... It's an indirect thing that's happening, but it's still something like... I know exactly what you mean. He's not directly to blame for people's stupidity for following him. And then, Jerry, you've got to also, like, you know, just, you know, kind of log into that whole notion of the lowest common denominator. He's got that. You know, by the balls, really, he's really, really clearly taking some of these issues and just reducing them down to their, like, absolutely meanest, lowest, basic, you know, flashpoint. And I think that that's just a matter of, like, trying to, like, you know, garner himself as wide and as dumb of an audience as he can. And to build a brand. You're absolutely right. He didn't become a multi-billionaire without being, you know, smart and having this kind of personality and ego. So I do worry about it, and I do think there's a possibility he could get the nomination. And I do worry about what that really means and how it's going to play out. But basically, it's pretty hard to understand how he could get away with demeaning, even someone I don't agree with politically, John McCain. Yes. You know, who is a war hero? I don't think Donald Trump would be able to have been captured and be able to take that kind of torture for years and years. And yet he demeans him, and he gets away with it. Same thing with the demeaning of how people look. Right. See, this is what I mean. This is, like, the way people reacted to Howard Stern. This is it right now. You see, Jerry, what he's doing is he's roasting McCain. You've probably seen the Comedy Central roast, the old Friars Club, Dean Martin roast. That's what he's doing. I mean, I understand it's not conventional, that it's not normally done, where you just roast people when they haven't consented to being roasted. But nonetheless, that's what's going on. He's roasting John McCain. He's not seriously making a commentary about prisoners of war or veterans. Right. And that's not what people running for president normally do. They normally don't go out there and roast people. They have policy proposals. But Trump realized something, which is he's not going to get elected. Based on policy proposals, he's going to get elected by getting the media attention with what he says. So is there any wonder there's cognitive dissonance when the candidates act as basically an insult comic meets negotiator? Well, it'd be great to see the Republican debate tomorrow. And I find myself tuning into them. And I'm sure millions of people will because Donald Trump is there. And actually, that part's not bad for democracy. Right. I mean, when millions of people who otherwise wouldn't pay attention to politics are getting involved, you've got to weigh that in against the other negative things, don't you think, Jerry? Well, I certainly want to see people get involved. And, you know, the more people that participate, the better. In fact, I often said we sometimes overly blame the leaders. What we should be doing is criticizing ourselves for not protesting adequately and passionately enough. Just as an aside. No. If we don't believe, the leaders will follow. And we're not doing our job as a movement. Jerry, could I ask you a question? Just as an aside, weren't you involved in a lot of 60s politics? Did you have a printing press in Westwood? No, no, no. Unfortunately, just to be honest, I've said it before on various radio shows and in print, I was too busy being a heroin addict. 18 hospitals, five suicide attempts. Well, let's hear it for a second. I was involved in 1979 in the anti-nuclear protest of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant with the group the Alliance for Survival. But I've been involved every day since. I really like Jeff. I always thought he was a creative guy, a great political person, but also a great humorist as well. And just listening to the show today, I think, is pretty good because you're a good radio host and have good guests with really interesting dialogue that you don't hear on. A lot of talk shows, you know, and I find it fascinating. I've been here for the past hour just listening on my phone. Good. Well, thanks, Jerry. I really appreciate that. And I'm sure our guests do, too, because he just complimented you, Jens, as well. Appreciate it. All right. Thanks a lot, Jerry. We'll talk soon. Okay. Happy New Year. To you, too. Happy Jew Year. Happy New Year. So that point about, you know, drawing people into the political process, it reminds me, I can't remember who said it. I would like to credit him. I thought it was a great point. And I'm somebody who lived in New York for 10 years, and I've lived in New York since, I mean, in L.A. since 91. So I know both cities. And the point somebody or other made was that people in L.A. don't hardly talk about local politics. They don't know very much about the mayor, what's going on. And the theory that this guy threw out there was because we don't have tabloids. And it made a lot of sense. In New York, and anybody who's lived in New York or spent any time there knows that everybody buys the Daily News, the New York Post, you go on the subways, everybody's looking at it, and there's all these salacious stories about the local characters, the mayor and so forth. And that's what gets you interested in politics. And then hopefully it'll segue into something a bit more substantive. But here in L.A., you don't have tabloids. And, Pete, we go years with the majority of the population. Not voting, not even, you know, you ask people in the street who are the mayors, they probably won't know the person's name. One of our mayors was going through a divorce, I remember. I think this is when the guy made the point. The guy was, like, going through a divorce. Not that we should, quote, quote, should care. But, you know, his point was, it's just an example how nobody knows what the hell's going on. Sure. We're too consumed with celebrities. We have tabloids, only all of them deal with that. But the point is, the celebrity crap is what draws them in. And it's not all bad. And that's what's going on with Trump. Trump, I don't know about every debate. I haven't looked at the statistics that closely. But that first Republican debate tripled the audience of any previous debate. Right, right. And the debates that followed actually had really high ratings as well. I mean, I don't remember the numbers exactly. But they're huge. Huge. Jeremy, if it's red, does that mean there's a caller on hold, Jeremy? Yep, that's what it means. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. Please forgive me, people. This is my first time out of the house. All right, let's take another call. Sorry. Hey, you're on the World Wide Web. If it's still me, then something's wrong with it. I'll come back. Oh, all right. I just wanted to come back and tell you I still love you, Jerry. I love you. You know, I'm thinking about putting a pie in the face of Donald Trump. I posted something on my Facebook page and been getting interesting comments about whether that's appropriate. Oh, it's appropriate. Give that a shot. A pie is always appropriate. And his protesters are treated very gently. So I'd hire a good lawyer before him. All right. Hey, that's actually a good setup. Thanks, Jerry. I'll talk to you later. That's a good setup. In the face of grand American tradition, what are you talking about? Well, we have a clip here of when Bernie Sanders was interrupted by protesters. Good. It wasn't with a pie, but it'll give us a chance to consider another candidate. Yeah. And also... I missed this one. I want to see it. And also this idea of how to deal with protesters. And pastry. So, Jeremy, if you could run that next one, please. Thank you, Seattle, for being one of the most progressive cities in the United States of America. We want an opportunity to address... We want an opportunity on life. Well, ask him. Get him in check and we'll shut him down. Now, if you do not listen to her... Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. Go ahead. The event will be shut down right now. Right now. Your decision. Make a decision now. One day, when the glory comes, it will be ours. It's the music part of the contextual version. I think the guy who made the video. One day, when the war is won. We will let... No, we are going to... We are going to let you out. We are going to let you out. We are going to let you out. We are going to let you out. We are going to let you out. We are going to let you out. We are going to let you out. All right, so we are trying to be reasonable. We are trying to be reasonable. We are trying to be reasonable. We are trying. We are gonna give you, we're gonna let you on the mic. We are gonna give you the mic. After Senator Sanders, after Senator Sanders, after Senator Sanders. After Senator Sanders. After Senator Sanders. Okay. All right. All right. All right. We're shutting it down. You are shutting it down. You are disrupting this event. You are disrupting this event. We will. You are shutting it down. We are shutting. Shut it down. We will shut it down. You are shutting it down. All right, Jeremy, let's shut it down here. Oh, my God. Wow. So. I'm not even sure. I'm having cognitive dissonance here. We are reasonable. We are reasonable. All right. So I guess that's like, you know, it made her think like she was being called a hysterical female. Oh, disgusting. I mean, she's really overreacting badly. Yeah. Now, so Sanders, you know, basically acquiesced. I'm not sure what options he had. You know, I mean, he's obviously. That was a little messy. Yeah. So the way Trump reacted to that was, oh, that Sanders is a pussy. Yeah, he just played it. I saw that part of it. I missed this part. Yeah. Yeah. And so Trump has been doing the opposite as he said he would. He goes, that'll never happen at one of my rallies. And so that's kind of like identity politics. You know, you're left with the thought that Bernie Sanders, who's kind of a wuss and, you know, he's going to roll over for obnoxious people. Now, a lot of people liked it, though, because there's, oh, well, you know, people are oppressed and they need to be heard. And, you know, he's open to that. Not those people. They were really big in the mess. But Bernie Sanders did make some progress in the way that he addressed this issue. And he did end up bringing in Black Lives Matter movement people into, as being part of his speeches at campaign stops. And so he did not. At this. At this point, I mean, he was totally lost. But later on, he did turn it into something positive for himself, I believe. Yeah, I think his somebody high in his campaign, I don't know if it's his campaign manager or somebody high in his campaign is from the Black Lives Matter movement. But I think she was already on the staff before these women acted up. As I recall, that was part of the reaction. Like, you know, they don't they don't know who they're yelling at. Bernie Sanders. Right. Good record. Yeah. No kidding. Right. Yeah. But it could be probably said. That Trump is really clear on the fact that. You know, what happens first is the image that sticks and that. So he's creating a lot of somewhat negative first images, but very strong ones and very, very, you know, sort of hitting hitting the trigger points. And so when people have to take something back, backtrack, make an adjustment, that always looks weaker, even if it comes out. By the media saying everything's fine, the public saying everything's fine. That's not really fine. I think that like hitting first and getting a reaction that you want is really the ultimate. All right, Jeremy, can we skip the next one and then just show Trump on immigration? This is from Meet the Press just this past Sunday. It'll look like Trump jumped from one thing to another, but it's just the way I edited it. He's first talking about whether or not Ted Cruz is eligible. To be president because he was born in Canada. And then he starts talking because of the way I edited it. He comments on whether or not the Constitution requires the United States to provide to take care of his way. He put it take care of so-called anchor babies, meaning the offspring of undocumented immigrants. Got it. OK, your chief competitor is Ted Cruz. You have brought up the Canadian citizenship issue. But let me ask you your opinion. Do you believe? He is constitutionally eligible. I know the Supreme Court has never weighed in on the phrase natural born citizen. What does that mean? But you yourself, do you think he should be eligible? So what happens is I was watching Lawrence Tribe of Harvard yesterday, who's a constitutional expert, one of the true experts. And according to him, it's a real question mark. And he is the you know, I would say he was is one of the great authorities on this subject. He has a question mark. And. But I do have a question. Let me tell you, from Ted's standpoint and from the party standpoint, he has to solve this problem because the Democrats will sue him if he's the nominee. If Ted is the nominee, he will be sued by the Democrats. And according to one of the great lawyers of the country at Harvard with strong opinions on this, the whole thing has not been this matter. As he said, this matter has not been determined. I understand that. I'm talking about your opinion. I would say that. I would want the Supreme Court to rule because they haven't ruled. I happen to disagree with the whole concept of anchor babies. I mean, you look at anchor baby. That's in the Constitution. No, it's not in the Constitution. If you read and if you look and if you go to the real scholars like different people that I can give you, they will tell you somebody comes over and they have a baby on our border. And it happens to be on this side of the border. We're not mandated to take care of that baby. You do not have to change the Constitution. You may you may need a vote in Congress, but you don't have to change. Now, there's a debate about that. I don't think it's even close. And I've been on this issue for a long time. No, no. People have to come into our country legally. Chuck, they have to be here legally. OK, so Alex Vyshinsky, you are an immigration attorney. By the way, the firm is called Immigration Rep. Immigrant Rep. I'm sorry. Oh, Immigrant Rep. Yes. And the website, I believe, is immigrant rep dot com. Right. Yep. OK, so I'm sorry. We only have a couple of minutes left. So I'm sorry to do this. If you could condense your response on both those issues. Ted Cruz. Running for president. Yes and no. Don't condense it that much. If you give us if you can give us two minutes of your very best analysis on those two issues. Ted Cruz and the anchor babies. Right. So with regard to Ted Cruz, he has admitted he was born in Canada. That's no secret. And his mother is an American citizen. He. Well, the Constitution is indeed not completely clear on when it says what a natural. Who a natural born citizen is. You can just read the Constitution from that text, derive that. But basically, the way that the immigration law has evolved is that you can get citizenship in two ways. You can get citizenship by birth or naturalization. Someone who is arriving from abroad, who is not whose parents are not American citizens and who is affirmatively applying for immigration status is doing so through naturalization because they're not a natural born citizen. When someone is either born in the United States or born to American parents, U.S. citizen parents abroad, then they are born a U.S. citizen. And as far as I know, there is no legal precedent for drawing a distinction as far as eligibility to be president or vice president between someone who's born here in the United States or someone who's born abroad to American parents. OK. And the other issue. Do we have the obligation constitution is statutorily morally in any way to take care of so-called anchor babies? Well, morally, I believe so. But that's that's my opinion. And I would not force my moral opinion on anyone else. But to gaze this point earlier that you made that Donald Trump basically just makes statements and sometimes you don't know what they mean. What does it mean to take care of? No. As he calls them anchor babies. But, you know, obviously not not to be. That's a great point. Take care. Take care. Exactly. What does he goes up? A lot of highly placed lawyers I know. Yeah. Those are. And he always talks about it that way when he was talking about, you know. But the other thing is, is the parents of the babies don't have. Right. In other words, the U.S. government can deport them. So it seems to me kind of a hollow victory. And they have to say, hey, this five month. Old infant is a citizen. But what good does it do the kid if the parents are going to be deported? Of course, they have deported hundreds of thousands of parents of U.S. citizens. And it does not stop them from doing that. They do it every year. I think it's a phony issue, basically, isn't it? It's a phony issue. In essence. There's no such thing as anchor babies because the parents don't get rights to speak of not not immediately anyway. Maybe when they're 20, the kid's 21 years old. And even then the process is so difficult and you can only do it really if you can. You can't afford a good lawyer if you can go through the entire process successfully. If you have not committed any criminal acts in the United States. Right. So it's forget it. It's far fetched, really. Well, immigrant rep dot com. Alex Voschinski, thank you very much. Thank you, Jeff. Gaza X. He is my partner at Porter Street Lab. And you can find the info about that at Citizen Jeff dot com. Thanks to Jeremy Hansen for making it all happen. This is the Norman Report. Norman Report dot com. Join us. Every Wednesday, 7 p.m. Pacific, 10 p.m. Eastern. Have a good night, everybody. Jeff Norman. The Norman Report.