June 29, 2023 • 34 mins
Doug McIntyre is in for John & Ken. Eugene Volokh comes on the show to talk about the Supreme Court decision regarding Affirmative Action. More on the fallout from the Supreme Court's decision. Corbin Carson comes on the show to talk about reparations
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Caf I AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John and Ken Show on demand
on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Doug mcattyre pinch hitting for John and Ken, who have
got some well deserved off time here. We're up on
the fourth of July weekend, coming up the big birthday
for America. We're here until Conway comes along. Timill join
us later on this how will give you a chance
to win some dough And we've got lots of stuff
to talk about, including one of the stupidest schemes I've
(00:30):
ever seen for a criminal. We'll get into that. You're
not going to do well in jail when you're convicted
of this. And we're also going to talk about the
reparations report that was issued. As you know, there's a
move in Sacramento to issue reparations for slavery and the
effects thereof. So Corbyn Carson's going to join us on that.
But the headline story, enormously significant story, is the Supreme
(00:52):
Court today overturning, on a six to three decision essentially
forty years of so called set of law on affirmative action,
so a negative on affirmative action, ruling that it is
unconstitutional to consider race in university admissions, eliminating the principal
tool of the nation's most selective schools that have used
to diversify their campuses. So to talk to us about this,
(01:14):
to get into the weeds on the law, because what
do I know about the law?
Speaker 4 (01:18):
I mean, the only thing I know. I've been a defendant,
but I don't know anything about the law. So we
went out and got somebody who really does.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
He is, of course, the professor of law at the
UCLA School of Law. It's a pleasure to welcome to
the show. Eugene Vollach. Eugene, how are you.
Speaker 5 (01:33):
I am well, how are you?
Speaker 1 (01:34):
I'm good?
Speaker 4 (01:35):
Thanks for coming on. We really appreciate it. So does.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
The basis is the fourteenth Amendment equal protection. And if
I am getting this straight, what the court ruled, the
Conservative Court ruled on this was that essentially, in order
to eliminate racism, you are practicing racism. You are practicing
discrimination against qualified students who won't get a seat in
(02:00):
in a college or university because of nothing that they did.
It's because a preference has been given to somebody else
based on the color of their skin.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
Is that correct?
Speaker 5 (02:11):
Yeah? That's pretty much though. The Court said that universities.
Public universities are not allowed, generally speaking, to favor people
based on race, just like we wouldn't expect them to
favor I don't know, Christians over Muslims or something like that.
At public universities and private universities, so long as they
(02:31):
get federal funds, are subject to this federal statute, Title
six of the Civil Rights Act, And that applies the
same standards to private universities pretty much anyone out there,
because almost all take federal funds.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
Now does this ruling? Does this ruling effect, for instance,
historically black colleges like something like Grambling or Howard University,
would they now be open to accepting students across all
(03:06):
racial I mean, I know, first of all, Howard University
and Grambling except white students. They except Asian students and
Hispanic students. But would this possibly, if you will, change
the composition of those schools as well.
Speaker 5 (03:21):
So the Court didn't have to confront this issue directly
just because the particularly universities there were University of North
Carolina and Harvard. My sense is that indeed, historically black
colleges remain mostly black because a lot of black students
are drawn to them, and a lot of other students
are not drawn to them. So I don't think that
(03:43):
they that they have preferences for black applicants. In fact,
I wonder they might have sometimes preferences for other applicants
precisely because they want to be somewhat less overwhelmingly owly
black guys, So that might be affected in some measure.
I don't think that that's going to be a major issue,
just because, again, as you point out, and as I
(04:06):
understand it, generally speaking, they don't discriminate in favor of
black applicants. It's just that black applicants are more likely
to seek them out.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
And one of the arguments for opponents of the Affirmative
Action program at this point in twenty twenty three has
been that America has moved on from the days when,
for instance, you can go back to the twenties when
Jews could not really get into the Ivy League schools
was very difficult, and obviously we know that it was
extraordinarily difficult for African Americans and other minorities and women
(04:35):
to get into prestigious schools for many, many years in
American history. Well that's obviously changed because of affirmative action
has been very successful in increasing the diversity of student
populations and faculty and board of directors and board of regions, etc.
Speaker 5 (04:52):
Etc.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
So opponents of affirmative action continue would say mission accomplished.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
That you're there.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
It's hard to imagine going forward that universities all of
a sudden are going to become enclaves of racial discrimination,
given just the composition of who runs.
Speaker 5 (05:06):
Them, right, So I think the argument is that whatever
may have been the case when the universities had just
been discriminated against them, where you needed to kind of
give a benefit to people to compensate for the fact
that they themselves had just been discriminated against before today,
(05:31):
that kind of personal experience while you were denied access
to unc last year or five years before, now we
need to compensate for that is just not relevant now.
Of course, supporters of race based affirmative actions say, well,
the one reason that there are fewer blacks and Hispanics
in various schools is that there's been societal discrimination in
(05:54):
past generations and even in the present, but by other institutions.
And that's the important thing that the majority, the important
controversial thing the majority says is you can't discriminate based
on race to compensate for societal discrimination, for societal discrimination
in the past and maybe even for some societal discrimination
in the present. That that's just not a basis for
(06:20):
harming a say a white or Asian applicant today in
order to benefit a black or Hispanic applicant. That in
the past there have been lots of discrimination against blacks
and Hispanics, that that doesn't justify the individual discrimination that
these universities are currently practiced.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
We're talking with UCLA law professor Eugene Voloch, and this
suit originated with an activist, but it was it was
very much Edward bloom is his name, and he was
very much opposed to affirmative action, but it was it
was fronted by a group of Asian students who argued
(06:58):
successfully that they are being discriminated against as affirmative action
might equalize opportunity for people of color, for African Americans
in particular, it comes at the expense of opportunity for
Asian students.
Speaker 5 (07:13):
So I think that's right, and there's actually some evidence
that Asian students are being treated not just worse than
black and Hispanic students, they're being treated worse than white students,
and that as a result as they're bearing the brunt
of it. But even if that's not so, they're still
bearing the brunt of it together with white students. Well,
(07:34):
here's one way of thinking about this argument. You often
hear about people saying, oh, we want institutions that look
like America. Well, if you really do want institutions that
look like America, then you do have to have for
universities aggressive discrimination against Asians, because indeed, Asians are generally
over represented at many top universities that set you see systems.
(07:58):
Historically they had been, and there are even now that
race preferences, perhaps especially now that race preferences have been
prohibited in UC for a couple of decades now. So
if you really believe, at least some versions of the
pro affirmative action we want a country that looks like America,
excuse me, we want universities that look like America argument,
(08:21):
then yes, Asians would be heavily discriminated against back in
the day, I think in the nineteen nineties. In fact,
that was an argument that I think Bill Clinton was
quoted as making that we need to have affirmative action,
because otherwise universities like Berkeley could be one hundred percent Asian.
(08:41):
My view is, well, that's fine if that's the way
the applications come out. But this has been in fact
part of the kind of racial balancing argument that we
had seen, at least from some supporters of race based approtment.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
Yeah, twenty five years ago I heard people I was
teaching a class at UCLA and the extension program. People
were then joking that UCLA stood for you see lots
of Asians. So this is not a new phenomenon. But
let me ask you a non legal question here for
a second. Because you teach on the campus, it's a
magnificent campus, it's a magnificent school, it's desirable globally. What
(09:16):
has your experience been as a teacher, as a faculty
member at UCLA in terms of the way the student
body reflects modern America.
Speaker 5 (09:28):
You know, I teach law, so I teach First Amendment law.
And it's true, I would like to have students who
have all sorts of different perspectives and who have kind
of create a lively class discussion and have a sense
of the world. I very much doubt in my experience
(09:50):
that the race matters that much. I think actually their
religion may matter more, But I don't approve of the
university giving a preference to say Catholics because we don't
have enough Catholics in First Amendment classes. I think their
ideology probably matters more. I think things we can't do
much about, like their age, they're all very homogeneous. They're
all very non diverse. A's to some things as to age, generally,
(10:13):
as to at least their socioeconomic future, even if not
their present or their parents' socioeconomic status. So the fact is,
I'm never going to have a class that's full of
people who really proportionally represent the whole country and the
whole range of human experience in the country. I'm just
(10:34):
interested in having smart students who are hardworking and who
do a good job. I think the best way of
doing that is by admitting them based on things like grades,
things like test scores and such imperfect measures as they are,
but you know, they're probably the best we have as
opposed to based on things like race or sex, or
religion or sexual orientation. It's not like those latter factors
(10:57):
don't count for anything in class discussion. Obviously in some
mentory you could see them being helpful. I just don't
view that as the really important.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Professor Eugenevollock, thank you so much for your time. You
appreciate your uh, your being with us and your insights.
Speaker 5 (11:10):
All right, very much, my pleasure.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (11:12):
And when we come back, we've got so much more
to get into. Tim Conway will join us in just
a bit.
Speaker 6 (11:18):
You're listening to John and Ken on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 3 (11:24):
Boy, what a historic day between the Supreme Court on
affirmative action and we got California warming up with a
bullpen with the reparations, and boy, that's only going to
be even more controversial. We'll get into it in just
a bit, but first we want to give a chance
to win some dough.
Speaker 6 (11:37):
Now your chance to win one thousand dollars. Just enter
this nationwide keyword on our website money. That's money m O.
Speaker 5 (11:44):
N E.
Speaker 6 (11:44):
Y Editor now at KFIAM six forty dot com. Slash
cash powered by Sweet James Accident Attorneys. If you're hurting
an accident, winning is everything called the winning Attorneys at
Sweet James. One eight hundred nine million, that's one eight
hundred nine million or Sweet James dot com.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
Make sure you go to KFIAM six forty dot com
forward slash cash. That's where you need to enter the keyword,
which is money, and you'll need to go to the website.
Winners will be notified by email, so make sure you
check your junk and your spam folder to see if
you want and listen to KFI AM six forty for
the winning keyword every hour, every weekday from nine to
(12:21):
twenty with Gary and Channon all the way till five
twenty with Tim Conway Junior. So the next opportunity will
be tomorrow, so keep lesson. Just set you ready to
go to KFI and then snap the knob off so
it's always on KFI and then you don't have any problems.
Speaker 4 (12:35):
All right, let's get into this.
Speaker 3 (12:37):
We just talked about the affirmative Action being overturned by
the US Supreme Court and there is going to be
an enormous political fallout. Obviously, there's a cleave right down
the middle of America. Like everything else, the left right
split is reflected in this issue. Getting rid of affirmative
(12:58):
action has been a dream for conservatives for a very
long time, and keeping it has been sort of a
bedrock issue for people on the left and especially for
minority voter as many minority voters, not all. Obviously, President
Biden was quick to come out and condemn this and
everybody's lining up along the ideological divide as you would expect.
(13:18):
And in the middle of it, once again is the
Supreme Court and this concept of settled law. We saw
it earlier when the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Weighed
after fifty plus years, and that was obviously a profoundly
significant decision. States are still wrestling with the consequences of that,
with some states even trying to prosecute women who go
out of state to get abortion services, etc. And the
(13:41):
Democrats exploited it during the midterm election. Instead of getting
creamed in the midterm election like everybody expected, they actually
held the Senate and they did pretty good in the House.
So politically speaking, the affirmative action issue probably breaks to
the Democrats' favor in twenty twenty four. I mean, this
is the reality we like to think, and the Supreme
(14:02):
Court likes to pretend that it's above the gutter politics
that the rest of us wallow in twenty four to seven,
but If you really want to see a court that
is completely apolitical, go to night court.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
Go sit in night court, watch a judge there.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
You know, processing people have been hauled in for driving
drunk or something like that. There's no politics involved in that.
The politics at the Supreme Court has always been there,
it will always be there. And this cuts to this
concept of settled law. There is no such thing as
settled law. Even when we have been living for a
(14:36):
very long period of time, and it could be one
hundred years, it could be two hundred years, that concept
can blow up with a five to four decision when
a Supreme Court comes along that has changed, it shifted
its ideological bent.
Speaker 4 (14:55):
All of a sudden, settled law is unsettled.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
And we've seen that and huge cases in this particular
historic term of the United States Supreme Court. And we
all know everybody says elections have consequences, which is why
this Supreme Court term will be very consequential when it
gets to the twenty twenty four election. I guarantee you
that both left and right are fundraising right now based
(15:19):
on this decision. Now, what does it mean for America? Well,
anything that involves race is going to be a big gong.
It's going to really send out vibrations into society. As
we know, ever since the George Floyd murder, we're still
feeling that, from defund police to crime on the rise
as police departments have backed down and more fearful of
(15:44):
aggressive policing, et cetera, etc. There's all kind of unintended
consequences for things as well. Will this bring out more
minority voters in upcoming elections?
Speaker 4 (15:53):
Possibly?
Speaker 3 (15:54):
Does it mean that there's going to be a rollback
of diversity on US college campuses and university campuses. I
got to be honest with you. I'm not nostradamis My
crystal ball is notoriously No, it's not only foggy, it's cracked,
and it's in a pawnshop in Van eyes. But I
can't see modern American universities all of a sudden rolling
up to welcome welcome matt for diverse student body populations,
(16:18):
because first of all, the faculties are diverse. This is
not This isn't the you know, this isn't animal House.
Speaker 4 (16:26):
It's not nineteen sixty two.
Speaker 3 (16:28):
It's not the nineteen fifties where colleges were largely lily
white and Christian and male. Not only are the campuses different,
the faculties are different, and the board of regions are different,
and the board of the investors, the fundraisers, the big
benefactors of colleges and universities, corporate grants. If you want
(16:51):
to use the woke term, fine, Modern American colleges are
very woke, and it's hard to imagine a rollback to
the old when colleges were something other than that. But
it definitely represents the sea change because there was a
time and not that long ago, and there are plenty
of people walking amongst us, including parents and grandparents or
(17:13):
great grandparents at least, who grew up in America where
college was not for them and the only way they
got there was through affirmative action. And when you live
that life, then you understand why people are reluctant to
let it go.
Speaker 6 (17:28):
You're listening to John and Ken on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
We got a whole bunch of stuff to get into,
including this story. And what an irony that this story
shows up the same day that the Supreme Court overturned
the affirmative action program that's been sort of settled law.
Part of American culture for a very long time. But
California's Reparations Task Force has not on the condemned that.
(17:57):
But they've also issued the report and for or what's
in that report? We turned two the man who's got
the story for us, Corbin, Welcome aboard.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
How are you.
Speaker 7 (18:07):
I'm doing pretty good? Thanks for having me.
Speaker 8 (18:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
This is the nation's first reparations task force. It spent
two years. It submitted its final report for potential what
potential reparations could look like for Black Americans in California.
It lists one hundred and fifteen policy recommendations, but to
be clear, it does not recommend payment amounts or ways
for states to fund potential future payments. There was a
(18:32):
formula released a month and ago that estimated a person
could receive up to one point two million dollars. There
were some other suggestions of payment abount amounts. Non monetary
recommendations include formal apologies, criminal justice, housing, education, and healthcare reforms,
just to name a few. The task Force was enacted
by an Assembly bill called the California Task Force to
(18:55):
Study and develop Reparations proposals, and its stated ad mission
was to study and recommend ways to redress the historical
atrocities perpetrated against African Americans in California, and spent the
last two years documenting how quote enslavement and it's enduring
legacy of systemic racism, cemented structural inequality, and recommend many
(19:16):
methods for repairing the resulting harm. And let's start with
a task member, Senator Steve Bradford, who's from la and
he talks about exactly what this task Force was designed
to do.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
The job of a.
Speaker 9 (19:28):
Task force was not to implement anything. It was simply
to recommend and to advise. It is now up to
the legislature, which I'm part of, and the governor to
implement it. Over the last two years, this task Force
has documented in great detail the history of slavery not
only in this nation but in California, and the patterns
(19:50):
of systemic racism and injustice that continued long after slavery ended.
Speaker 7 (19:55):
And like you said, there was a lot of anger
on the b of this affirmative action affirmative active decision
that was struck down today by the Supreme Court. There's
a couple hundred people in Sacramento at this hearing that
talked about it, but a lot going on today.
Speaker 4 (20:14):
Well, corporate.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
One of the ironies is is that affirmative action was reparations.
The basis for passing and instituting affirmative action programs was
to make up for the systemic and baked in discrimination
that took place after the freeing of the slaves and
the years of Jim Crow and all of the you know,
(20:38):
codified by law discrimination that took place. The affirmative action
was created to compensate into clear paths for equality, for
a path to equality, you know, the problem that I've
always had with and again the Task Force hasn't put.
Speaker 4 (20:54):
A number on this.
Speaker 3 (20:55):
I am in favor of direct reparations, and by direct
reparations when I means we had this story a few
months back of Bruce's Beach where a piece of property
right on the coast was really scanned a black family.
The Bruces were robbed of their proper land and their
direct descendants. There's a traceable lineage to that land and
(21:17):
the people who were awarded their land back. So when
you can make a direct appropriation to compensate a family
that was robbed of tangible assets, I am all in
favor of you know where this will become an enormous
problem at some point.
Speaker 4 (21:37):
Is at some point Cuba.
Speaker 3 (21:39):
Will break away from the yoke of communism, and there
are thousands and thousands of families in America who came
from Cuba.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
I went to high school.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
I have a friend of mine who fled Cuba as
a young child with his family, and they hope someday
to reclaim their property back in Cuba. When the Castro
regime and its aftermath finally is thrown onto the sheep
of history, well, that's going to be a real mess
to try to sort out who owned that and do
they still own it, and who's on that property. But
(22:08):
one of the challenges here is that any kind of
cash reparations payment in California would be paid out of
the general revenue fund unless there's some kind of, you know,
magic source of money. All money is the people's money,
So you would essentially being take you would take taxpayer
money from African American taxpayers to redistribute it to other
African Americans. It's it's a Rubik's cube of difficulty in
(22:32):
terms of how do you negotiate this right?
Speaker 7 (22:35):
And you're talking about what I think I saw an
estimate of two and a half million black people in California,
and in some estimates are that that would be eight
hundred billion dollars, which is twice the state's annual budget.
But some of the things that also that you mentioned
that came up today, we heard from Governor Newsom who
was also addressing a question about the task force and
(22:58):
talked about affirmative action at the same time about what
the country is is what he calls a regression of
civil rights.
Speaker 8 (23:06):
And take the responsibility to answer and to be accountable
to what's going on as relates to race relations in
the state and the nation. I am very mindful of
our past. We're experiencing this rights regression, on civil rights,
on voting rights, and LGBTQ rights, on women's rights, women's
access to contraception.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
It's a very.
Speaker 8 (23:25):
Serious moment in our nation's history. And you're seeing this
rights roll back in real time, this regression in real time,
and I hope folks wake up to it. And so
this Reparations task Force, the report, the context of that
decision today only reinforced the seriousness purpose to which we
will review it.
Speaker 7 (23:41):
And then that of course has to go any packages.
There was Assembly amendment there was an assemblyman and a
senator on.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
The task force.
Speaker 7 (23:49):
So those will be taken to the legislature and then
have to make it to the governor's desk, and you
can kind of hear in what he's saying which way
he leans, but nothing is guaranteed at this point. And then,
as you mentioned, I covered the Bruces be each story
extensively when it was going on from the very beginning,
and there was a large argument about who was paying
for this and kind of the interesting part was that
(24:10):
it was La County land, even though the beach was
in Manhattan Beach, and the atrocities that were attributed to
that situation came from a Manhattan Manhattan Beach City council
back in nineteen twenty and so that was a huge
two year argument. And you know, just recently, as you said,
(24:30):
the money was given. I think it ended up being
about twenty million dollars, is what the county bought the
land back from the family for. And so, yes, this
will play out and be a larger argument moving forward.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Well, it's a real problem if you're going to start
thumbing through the sins of the past and try to
put a modern day cash price on that you could
go to the internees of Japanese during the World War Two,
or the Zootsuit riots, or where you want to go back.
I'm just curious Corbyn, we Alreay talk about Corbyn Arson
kfi's Corbyn Carson. Did anybody talk about the fact that
(25:05):
California entered the Union in eighteen fifty as a free state?
So for fifteen years, California was a state while slavery
was legal in America, but it was never a slave state. Now,
there were people who brought slaves into the state illegally
and kept them in bondage, but it wasn't codified by law.
Has anybody talked about that aspect?
Speaker 1 (25:27):
Yeah?
Speaker 7 (25:27):
The task Force talked about studying the institution of slavery
in the US, including the keeping of enslaved persons and
enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Acts in California, and how
those actions and structures put in place during the enslavement
period and thereafter resulted in a system.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
This is the task Force words, resulted.
Speaker 7 (25:47):
In a system that relentlessly subjected African Americans. The report
claims to trace this through California's history into the present,
and both details the ongoing adverse impacts on living African
Americans and present numerous ideas for policy changes designed to
begin the process of repair. But I do want to mention,
if you're talking about sins of the past, the one
(26:08):
thing that was a very powerful moment for people in
the room this morning was when Task Force chair and
repertory Justice attorney she's from La Camilla Moore, she listed
what are are what some are calling or what she called,
racial disparities documented in the eleven hundred page report.
Speaker 10 (26:27):
Never forget that we were enslave in this country longer
than we have been free, shadow slavery, sharecropping, convict leasing
to join the facto, segregation, redlining, educational funding discrepancies, predatory
financial practices, unfair labor practices, chronic unemployment, medical experimentation, intellectual
(26:49):
property depredation, environmental terror, family separation, police brutality, Anti African
American hate, crimes, vigilante violence, judicial terror, war on drugs,
mass incarceration, unfair sentencing, the school to prison pipeline, extreme poverty, homelessness, gentrification, wealthlessness.
Speaker 4 (27:11):
We have been relegated.
Speaker 10 (27:13):
To the bottom of the caste system in this country.
Speaker 7 (27:16):
And again those things that she mentioned are documented in
this there's about nine phases in this report, which is
live and online and people can thumb through it themselves,
but it's a lot of documentation that points to some
of the things she was mentioning.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
All Right, THAT'SFI is Corporate. Carson Corbin, thanks so much
for being well us appreciate itiated that. Okay, when we
come back, we're going to have a chat with Tim Conway,
as I understand that mister Conway's people have agreed that
he would come in and do some cross talk with
me before we yield the balance of our time to
mister Conway. And we're also going to tell you about
a scam. You just don't want to go to prison
(27:50):
for the crime I'm going to tell you about.
Speaker 6 (27:53):
You're listening to John and Ken on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 4 (28:00):
The One, the Only Big Dog. Tim mcnway Junior.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
Yes, thank you very much, Thank you man.
Speaker 3 (28:07):
Now here's the thing about us doing cross talk. We
know so much about each other personally sure that we
have to play it safe because we could destroy each other.
That we have enough backstory, that's right, that we could
totally destroy not just our what passes for careers, but
our personal lives.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
One hundred percent. Well, you and I, Doug McIntyre and
I used to live together in Burbank, right, not that
we're judging, No, I mean, and that was it was
right over here on Priscilla, wasn't it Priscilla?
Speaker 6 (28:35):
Yea.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
And now that's a huge McMansion. Now they tore that
piece of crap down that we had.
Speaker 4 (28:39):
Actually they didn't tear it down. They expanded. They expanded
it that way. It's a remob that's exactly. They left
the door knob on it and everything else is new.
Speaker 2 (28:49):
This is obviously the you know, Thursday before fourth of
July traffic is unbelievable out there. People are are splitting.
They're not going to work tomorrow and they're done.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
Here's the thing about post code COVID traffic. It makes
no sense. There's there's days when you can get on
the one on one and you're just try sailing, and
then the next day glaciers are pissed that it's just
like nothing. It's you know, skeletons in the carpool.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
I did see something in the news today that that
struck Maybe it's sort of odd, probably true, but human
beings are the are the only creatures on the planet
whose mouths are shrinking.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
That's why we have crazy teeth.
Speaker 2 (29:27):
Like every other animal, mammal, fish, reptile, whatever. Over the
last billion years, they've been eating the same crap for
a billion years. We've changed over the years, we've had
food is softer. Now we don't have to, you know,
attack a straws right, and it shrinks your mouth. And
that's why you get all those crazy teeth.
Speaker 4 (29:45):
Well, Bill Handles throwing the curve off on that. Huh.
Speaker 3 (29:51):
Now, let me ask you this because you like a
good scam, that's right. In fact, one of my forever
memories when we were housed together, when you came into
my house, you had actually moved out, and you come
into my house without knocking, and you asked the following question, Hey, buddy,
what's your handwriting look like? And I said, nothing legal
(30:13):
has ever followed that.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
I needed. I needed somebody to sign something.
Speaker 4 (30:18):
Your sister and you don't want to drive.
Speaker 2 (30:20):
I didn't want to drive the Malibu, and I'm like, hey,
can you sign this? I said, what does your signature
look like? And Mac and was like, no way, that's
no way.
Speaker 3 (30:29):
So as a fan of a scam, I saw this
in the La Times, uh not the La Daily News,
which I write for you at the l eight Times
had this about this guy. His name is Ray Brewer.
He's going to jail because he was running a manure scam.
And here's what he was doing. He tried to con
people into a vesting in a company that was going
to take cowpoop and turn it into green fissionable material
(30:52):
and methane, et cetera. Only it was all a scam.
And the reason I bring this up is he's not
going to do well in prison. I mean, if you think,
you know, you're in the in the yard, and you
remember what it was like in the yard, right exactly.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
You're in the yard and what you do is scratchy.
I shot up a school bus, right, you know what
you do? I hit a bank?
Speaker 6 (31:11):
What well?
Speaker 4 (31:12):
I was running a poop scandal.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Of the fake business manure is you know when you
go buy it at home deep or lows, it's a
dollar for thirty pounds, how much is the guy going
to make?
Speaker 4 (31:24):
That's right?
Speaker 3 (31:24):
I remember years ago a guy hijacked a grease truck.
It was a truck that would go around to restaurants
and pump the French fry oil out of the deep
fryer and go restaurant to restaurant. And apparently there's an
aftermarket for this. I have no idea, you know where
it was actually Down's patio when Burbank used to buy
it from it, they burned down.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
By the way.
Speaker 3 (31:44):
But but but it's like there are some crimes. Everybody
understands why someone would rob a bank, but I can't
understand some crimes, like how does one conceive of the
idea of stealing grease?
Speaker 2 (31:56):
Well, you know, it starts young. There was a kid
in on tear cRIO, Canada. He worked outside of a
small town called Blenham, Ontario, and he used to buy
eggs from the local grocery store. And he'd come home
and with a little bit of bleach, he'd take the
stamp off them, you know, because they're all stamped, you know,
grade A or where they're from or whatever. And yeah, yeah,
and bleach, you know, take a little bleach, take the
(32:18):
little ink mark off of each egg and then go
down a block and in front of a farmhouse and
sell them as fresh eggs. And the guy, the kid
made millions, not millions, but thousands over the summer, you know.
Speaker 4 (32:29):
But it's just the brain. The brain works in marvelous.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
That's right, that's exactly right.
Speaker 4 (32:33):
I mean there was a guy who put he got caught.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
This is many years ago. He would wait till a
bank closed. This is back before ATMs and when there
were bankers hours. He waited till dark and then he'd
put a signup says, pardon our dust, use this box
for night deposits. And then right all that just people
would throw money in the thing.
Speaker 1 (32:52):
That's great.
Speaker 4 (32:53):
You know, if he could put his mind only to
the purpose of good.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
Well, I mean, you remember Seinfeld, you know they the
most interesting one of the funniest episodes is when what's
his name was unemployed? I know you're not a big
fan of s What who was it that was unemployed?
Speaker 1 (33:11):
Not Kramer at the other guy? George? George.
Speaker 2 (33:13):
Yeah, but George was unemployed and he worked his ass
off while being trying to get unemployment checks, harder than
he's ever worked in life.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
Well, that's frequently the case with criminals. That's right, hey, folks,
speaking of criminals, I'm going to be stealing your money.
Excuse me, I wan my book. At July eighteenth, at
the Grove at Barnes and Noble. Frank Shadow is the book?
Speaker 4 (33:31):
You go to? Doug mcare dot comments.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
Is that thing finally out?
Speaker 4 (33:34):
July eighteen?
Speaker 1 (33:34):
You got to come on and promote it? Oh, I
guess you just did.
Speaker 2 (33:37):
That's what I'm doing now. Sorry, That's why I'm here
July eighteenth. We'll keep promoting it. July eighteenth. All right,
where at the Grove at the Grove, you know people listen,
half ass, let's get it.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
Let's knock it out.
Speaker 2 (33:46):
July eighteenth at the Grove at the Grove, seven to
nine pm.
Speaker 1 (33:50):
Seven to nine pm. Oh, I can go.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
What is that right after the show? You come on
over there? What day of the week is it? That's
a Tuesday? Tuesday?
Speaker 1 (33:57):
All right, I'm gonna go do that. We'll promote the
hell out of it.
Speaker 4 (34:00):
All right, you just did.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
And then we have Mike Love coming on tonight, the
co founder of the Beach Boys, and then Dean Sharp
as well. Do you know that there's of all the
five I think there's five beach Boys, there's only one
that knows how to serf.
Speaker 4 (34:13):
I don't have to surf either.
Speaker 1 (34:14):
Hey, yeah, you're not a beach boy.
Speaker 4 (34:16):
Eric. Thanks for having me. Yeah, Mark Ronner and Ray
kim Ko.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Let's go to the phones.
Speaker 3 (34:21):
Joe Kik, Joe Joe Jen some headlines Conway coming off.
Speaker 6 (34:25):
Hey, you've been listening to The John and Ken Show.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
You can always hear us live on kf I Am
six forty one pm to four pm every Monday through Friday,
and of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
Caf I AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
You're listening to the John and Ken Show on demand
on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Doug mcattyre pinch hitting for John and Ken, who have
got some well deserved off time here. We're up on
the fourth of July weekend, coming up the big birthday
for America. We're here until Conway comes along. Timill join
us later on this how will give you a chance
to win some dough And we've got lots of stuff
to talk about, including one of the stupidest schemes I've
(00:30):
ever seen for a criminal. We'll get into that. You're
not going to do well in jail when you're convicted
of this. And we're also going to talk about the
reparations report that was issued. As you know, there's a
move in Sacramento to issue reparations for slavery and the
effects thereof. So Corbyn Carson's going to join us on that.
But the headline story, enormously significant story, is the Supreme
(00:52):
Court today overturning, on a six to three decision essentially
forty years of so called set of law on affirmative action,
so a negative on affirmative action, ruling that it is
unconstitutional to consider race in university admissions, eliminating the principal
tool of the nation's most selective schools that have used
to diversify their campuses. So to talk to us about this,
(01:14):
to get into the weeds on the law, because what
do I know about the law?
Speaker 4 (01:18):
I mean, the only thing I know. I've been a defendant,
but I don't know anything about the law. So we
went out and got somebody who really does.
Speaker 3 (01:23):
He is, of course, the professor of law at the
UCLA School of Law. It's a pleasure to welcome to
the show. Eugene Vollach. Eugene, how are you.
Speaker 5 (01:33):
I am well, how are you?
Speaker 1 (01:34):
I'm good?
Speaker 4 (01:35):
Thanks for coming on. We really appreciate it. So does.
Speaker 3 (01:39):
The basis is the fourteenth Amendment equal protection. And if
I am getting this straight, what the court ruled, the
Conservative Court ruled on this was that essentially, in order
to eliminate racism, you are practicing racism. You are practicing
discrimination against qualified students who won't get a seat in
(02:00):
in a college or university because of nothing that they did.
It's because a preference has been given to somebody else
based on the color of their skin.
Speaker 4 (02:09):
Is that correct?
Speaker 5 (02:11):
Yeah? That's pretty much though. The Court said that universities.
Public universities are not allowed, generally speaking, to favor people
based on race, just like we wouldn't expect them to
favor I don't know, Christians over Muslims or something like that.
At public universities and private universities, so long as they
(02:31):
get federal funds, are subject to this federal statute, Title
six of the Civil Rights Act, And that applies the
same standards to private universities pretty much anyone out there,
because almost all take federal funds.
Speaker 3 (02:44):
Now does this ruling? Does this ruling effect, for instance,
historically black colleges like something like Grambling or Howard University,
would they now be open to accepting students across all
(03:06):
racial I mean, I know, first of all, Howard University
and Grambling except white students. They except Asian students and
Hispanic students. But would this possibly, if you will, change
the composition of those schools as well.
Speaker 5 (03:21):
So the Court didn't have to confront this issue directly
just because the particularly universities there were University of North
Carolina and Harvard. My sense is that indeed, historically black
colleges remain mostly black because a lot of black students
are drawn to them, and a lot of other students
are not drawn to them. So I don't think that
(03:43):
they that they have preferences for black applicants. In fact,
I wonder they might have sometimes preferences for other applicants
precisely because they want to be somewhat less overwhelmingly owly
black guys, So that might be affected in some measure.
I don't think that that's going to be a major issue,
just because, again, as you point out, and as I
(04:06):
understand it, generally speaking, they don't discriminate in favor of
black applicants. It's just that black applicants are more likely
to seek them out.
Speaker 3 (04:13):
And one of the arguments for opponents of the Affirmative
Action program at this point in twenty twenty three has
been that America has moved on from the days when,
for instance, you can go back to the twenties when
Jews could not really get into the Ivy League schools
was very difficult, and obviously we know that it was
extraordinarily difficult for African Americans and other minorities and women
(04:35):
to get into prestigious schools for many, many years in
American history. Well that's obviously changed because of affirmative action
has been very successful in increasing the diversity of student
populations and faculty and board of directors and board of regions, etc.
Speaker 5 (04:52):
Etc.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
So opponents of affirmative action continue would say mission accomplished.
Speaker 1 (04:57):
That you're there.
Speaker 3 (04:58):
It's hard to imagine going forward that universities all of
a sudden are going to become enclaves of racial discrimination,
given just the composition of who runs.
Speaker 5 (05:06):
Them, right, So I think the argument is that whatever
may have been the case when the universities had just
been discriminated against them, where you needed to kind of
give a benefit to people to compensate for the fact
that they themselves had just been discriminated against before today,
(05:31):
that kind of personal experience while you were denied access
to unc last year or five years before, now we
need to compensate for that is just not relevant now.
Of course, supporters of race based affirmative actions say, well,
the one reason that there are fewer blacks and Hispanics
in various schools is that there's been societal discrimination in
(05:54):
past generations and even in the present, but by other institutions.
And that's the important thing that the majority, the important
controversial thing the majority says is you can't discriminate based
on race to compensate for societal discrimination, for societal discrimination
in the past and maybe even for some societal discrimination
in the present. That that's just not a basis for
(06:20):
harming a say a white or Asian applicant today in
order to benefit a black or Hispanic applicant. That in
the past there have been lots of discrimination against blacks
and Hispanics, that that doesn't justify the individual discrimination that
these universities are currently practiced.
Speaker 3 (06:36):
We're talking with UCLA law professor Eugene Voloch, and this
suit originated with an activist, but it was it was
very much Edward bloom is his name, and he was
very much opposed to affirmative action, but it was it
was fronted by a group of Asian students who argued
(06:58):
successfully that they are being discriminated against as affirmative action
might equalize opportunity for people of color, for African Americans
in particular, it comes at the expense of opportunity for
Asian students.
Speaker 5 (07:13):
So I think that's right, and there's actually some evidence
that Asian students are being treated not just worse than
black and Hispanic students, they're being treated worse than white students,
and that as a result as they're bearing the brunt
of it. But even if that's not so, they're still
bearing the brunt of it together with white students. Well,
(07:34):
here's one way of thinking about this argument. You often
hear about people saying, oh, we want institutions that look
like America. Well, if you really do want institutions that
look like America, then you do have to have for
universities aggressive discrimination against Asians, because indeed, Asians are generally
over represented at many top universities that set you see systems.
(07:58):
Historically they had been, and there are even now that
race preferences, perhaps especially now that race preferences have been
prohibited in UC for a couple of decades now. So
if you really believe, at least some versions of the
pro affirmative action we want a country that looks like America,
excuse me, we want universities that look like America argument,
(08:21):
then yes, Asians would be heavily discriminated against back in
the day, I think in the nineteen nineties. In fact,
that was an argument that I think Bill Clinton was
quoted as making that we need to have affirmative action,
because otherwise universities like Berkeley could be one hundred percent Asian.
(08:41):
My view is, well, that's fine if that's the way
the applications come out. But this has been in fact
part of the kind of racial balancing argument that we
had seen, at least from some supporters of race based approtment.
Speaker 3 (08:54):
Yeah, twenty five years ago I heard people I was
teaching a class at UCLA and the extension program. People
were then joking that UCLA stood for you see lots
of Asians. So this is not a new phenomenon. But
let me ask you a non legal question here for
a second. Because you teach on the campus, it's a
magnificent campus, it's a magnificent school, it's desirable globally. What
(09:16):
has your experience been as a teacher, as a faculty
member at UCLA in terms of the way the student
body reflects modern America.
Speaker 5 (09:28):
You know, I teach law, so I teach First Amendment law.
And it's true, I would like to have students who
have all sorts of different perspectives and who have kind
of create a lively class discussion and have a sense
of the world. I very much doubt in my experience
(09:50):
that the race matters that much. I think actually their
religion may matter more, But I don't approve of the
university giving a preference to say Catholics because we don't
have enough Catholics in First Amendment classes. I think their
ideology probably matters more. I think things we can't do
much about, like their age, they're all very homogeneous. They're
all very non diverse. A's to some things as to age, generally,
(10:13):
as to at least their socioeconomic future, even if not
their present or their parents' socioeconomic status. So the fact is,
I'm never going to have a class that's full of
people who really proportionally represent the whole country and the
whole range of human experience in the country. I'm just
(10:34):
interested in having smart students who are hardworking and who
do a good job. I think the best way of
doing that is by admitting them based on things like grades,
things like test scores and such imperfect measures as they are,
but you know, they're probably the best we have as
opposed to based on things like race or sex, or
religion or sexual orientation. It's not like those latter factors
(10:57):
don't count for anything in class discussion. Obviously in some
mentory you could see them being helpful. I just don't
view that as the really important.
Speaker 3 (11:05):
Professor Eugenevollock, thank you so much for your time. You
appreciate your uh, your being with us and your insights.
Speaker 5 (11:10):
All right, very much, my pleasure.
Speaker 4 (11:11):
Thank you.
Speaker 3 (11:12):
And when we come back, we've got so much more
to get into. Tim Conway will join us in just
a bit.
Speaker 6 (11:18):
You're listening to John and Ken on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 3 (11:24):
Boy, what a historic day between the Supreme Court on
affirmative action and we got California warming up with a
bullpen with the reparations, and boy, that's only going to
be even more controversial. We'll get into it in just
a bit, but first we want to give a chance
to win some dough.
Speaker 6 (11:37):
Now your chance to win one thousand dollars. Just enter
this nationwide keyword on our website money. That's money m O.
Speaker 5 (11:44):
N E.
Speaker 6 (11:44):
Y Editor now at KFIAM six forty dot com. Slash
cash powered by Sweet James Accident Attorneys. If you're hurting
an accident, winning is everything called the winning Attorneys at
Sweet James. One eight hundred nine million, that's one eight
hundred nine million or Sweet James dot com.
Speaker 3 (12:00):
Make sure you go to KFIAM six forty dot com
forward slash cash. That's where you need to enter the keyword,
which is money, and you'll need to go to the website.
Winners will be notified by email, so make sure you
check your junk and your spam folder to see if
you want and listen to KFI AM six forty for
the winning keyword every hour, every weekday from nine to
(12:21):
twenty with Gary and Channon all the way till five
twenty with Tim Conway Junior. So the next opportunity will
be tomorrow, so keep lesson. Just set you ready to
go to KFI and then snap the knob off so
it's always on KFI and then you don't have any problems.
Speaker 4 (12:35):
All right, let's get into this.
Speaker 3 (12:37):
We just talked about the affirmative Action being overturned by
the US Supreme Court and there is going to be
an enormous political fallout. Obviously, there's a cleave right down
the middle of America. Like everything else, the left right
split is reflected in this issue. Getting rid of affirmative
(12:58):
action has been a dream for conservatives for a very
long time, and keeping it has been sort of a
bedrock issue for people on the left and especially for
minority voter as many minority voters, not all. Obviously, President
Biden was quick to come out and condemn this and
everybody's lining up along the ideological divide as you would expect.
(13:18):
And in the middle of it, once again is the
Supreme Court and this concept of settled law. We saw
it earlier when the Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Weighed
after fifty plus years, and that was obviously a profoundly
significant decision. States are still wrestling with the consequences of that,
with some states even trying to prosecute women who go
out of state to get abortion services, etc. And the
(13:41):
Democrats exploited it during the midterm election. Instead of getting
creamed in the midterm election like everybody expected, they actually
held the Senate and they did pretty good in the House.
So politically speaking, the affirmative action issue probably breaks to
the Democrats' favor in twenty twenty four. I mean, this
is the reality we like to think, and the Supreme
(14:02):
Court likes to pretend that it's above the gutter politics
that the rest of us wallow in twenty four to seven,
but If you really want to see a court that
is completely apolitical, go to night court.
Speaker 4 (14:14):
Go sit in night court, watch a judge there.
Speaker 3 (14:16):
You know, processing people have been hauled in for driving
drunk or something like that. There's no politics involved in that.
The politics at the Supreme Court has always been there,
it will always be there. And this cuts to this
concept of settled law. There is no such thing as
settled law. Even when we have been living for a
(14:36):
very long period of time, and it could be one
hundred years, it could be two hundred years, that concept
can blow up with a five to four decision when
a Supreme Court comes along that has changed, it shifted
its ideological bent.
Speaker 4 (14:55):
All of a sudden, settled law is unsettled.
Speaker 3 (14:58):
And we've seen that and huge cases in this particular
historic term of the United States Supreme Court. And we
all know everybody says elections have consequences, which is why
this Supreme Court term will be very consequential when it
gets to the twenty twenty four election. I guarantee you
that both left and right are fundraising right now based
(15:19):
on this decision. Now, what does it mean for America? Well,
anything that involves race is going to be a big gong.
It's going to really send out vibrations into society. As
we know, ever since the George Floyd murder, we're still
feeling that, from defund police to crime on the rise
as police departments have backed down and more fearful of
(15:44):
aggressive policing, et cetera, etc. There's all kind of unintended
consequences for things as well. Will this bring out more
minority voters in upcoming elections?
Speaker 4 (15:53):
Possibly?
Speaker 3 (15:54):
Does it mean that there's going to be a rollback
of diversity on US college campuses and university campuses. I
got to be honest with you. I'm not nostradamis My
crystal ball is notoriously No, it's not only foggy, it's cracked,
and it's in a pawnshop in Van eyes. But I
can't see modern American universities all of a sudden rolling
up to welcome welcome matt for diverse student body populations,
(16:18):
because first of all, the faculties are diverse. This is
not This isn't the you know, this isn't animal House.
Speaker 4 (16:26):
It's not nineteen sixty two.
Speaker 3 (16:28):
It's not the nineteen fifties where colleges were largely lily
white and Christian and male. Not only are the campuses different,
the faculties are different, and the board of regions are different,
and the board of the investors, the fundraisers, the big
benefactors of colleges and universities, corporate grants. If you want
(16:51):
to use the woke term, fine, Modern American colleges are
very woke, and it's hard to imagine a rollback to
the old when colleges were something other than that. But
it definitely represents the sea change because there was a
time and not that long ago, and there are plenty
of people walking amongst us, including parents and grandparents or
(17:13):
great grandparents at least, who grew up in America where
college was not for them and the only way they
got there was through affirmative action. And when you live
that life, then you understand why people are reluctant to
let it go.
Speaker 6 (17:28):
You're listening to John and Ken on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 3 (17:35):
We got a whole bunch of stuff to get into,
including this story. And what an irony that this story
shows up the same day that the Supreme Court overturned
the affirmative action program that's been sort of settled law.
Part of American culture for a very long time. But
California's Reparations Task Force has not on the condemned that.
(17:57):
But they've also issued the report and for or what's
in that report? We turned two the man who's got
the story for us, Corbin, Welcome aboard.
Speaker 4 (18:06):
How are you.
Speaker 7 (18:07):
I'm doing pretty good? Thanks for having me.
Speaker 8 (18:09):
Yeah.
Speaker 7 (18:10):
This is the nation's first reparations task force. It spent
two years. It submitted its final report for potential what
potential reparations could look like for Black Americans in California.
It lists one hundred and fifteen policy recommendations, but to
be clear, it does not recommend payment amounts or ways
for states to fund potential future payments. There was a
(18:32):
formula released a month and ago that estimated a person
could receive up to one point two million dollars. There
were some other suggestions of payment abount amounts. Non monetary
recommendations include formal apologies, criminal justice, housing, education, and healthcare reforms,
just to name a few. The task Force was enacted
by an Assembly bill called the California Task Force to
(18:55):
Study and develop Reparations proposals, and its stated ad mission
was to study and recommend ways to redress the historical
atrocities perpetrated against African Americans in California, and spent the
last two years documenting how quote enslavement and it's enduring
legacy of systemic racism, cemented structural inequality, and recommend many
(19:16):
methods for repairing the resulting harm. And let's start with
a task member, Senator Steve Bradford, who's from la and
he talks about exactly what this task Force was designed
to do.
Speaker 1 (19:27):
The job of a.
Speaker 9 (19:28):
Task force was not to implement anything. It was simply
to recommend and to advise. It is now up to
the legislature, which I'm part of, and the governor to
implement it. Over the last two years, this task Force
has documented in great detail the history of slavery not
only in this nation but in California, and the patterns
(19:50):
of systemic racism and injustice that continued long after slavery ended.
Speaker 7 (19:55):
And like you said, there was a lot of anger
on the b of this affirmative action affirmative active decision
that was struck down today by the Supreme Court. There's
a couple hundred people in Sacramento at this hearing that
talked about it, but a lot going on today.
Speaker 4 (20:14):
Well, corporate.
Speaker 3 (20:15):
One of the ironies is is that affirmative action was reparations.
The basis for passing and instituting affirmative action programs was
to make up for the systemic and baked in discrimination
that took place after the freeing of the slaves and
the years of Jim Crow and all of the you know,
(20:38):
codified by law discrimination that took place. The affirmative action
was created to compensate into clear paths for equality, for
a path to equality, you know, the problem that I've
always had with and again the Task Force hasn't put.
Speaker 4 (20:54):
A number on this.
Speaker 3 (20:55):
I am in favor of direct reparations, and by direct
reparations when I means we had this story a few
months back of Bruce's Beach where a piece of property
right on the coast was really scanned a black family.
The Bruces were robbed of their proper land and their
direct descendants. There's a traceable lineage to that land and
(21:17):
the people who were awarded their land back. So when
you can make a direct appropriation to compensate a family
that was robbed of tangible assets, I am all in
favor of you know where this will become an enormous
problem at some point.
Speaker 4 (21:37):
Is at some point Cuba.
Speaker 3 (21:39):
Will break away from the yoke of communism, and there
are thousands and thousands of families in America who came
from Cuba.
Speaker 4 (21:46):
I went to high school.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
I have a friend of mine who fled Cuba as
a young child with his family, and they hope someday
to reclaim their property back in Cuba. When the Castro
regime and its aftermath finally is thrown onto the sheep
of history, well, that's going to be a real mess
to try to sort out who owned that and do
they still own it, and who's on that property. But
(22:08):
one of the challenges here is that any kind of
cash reparations payment in California would be paid out of
the general revenue fund unless there's some kind of, you know,
magic source of money. All money is the people's money,
So you would essentially being take you would take taxpayer
money from African American taxpayers to redistribute it to other
African Americans. It's it's a Rubik's cube of difficulty in
(22:32):
terms of how do you negotiate this right?
Speaker 7 (22:35):
And you're talking about what I think I saw an
estimate of two and a half million black people in California,
and in some estimates are that that would be eight
hundred billion dollars, which is twice the state's annual budget.
But some of the things that also that you mentioned
that came up today, we heard from Governor Newsom who
was also addressing a question about the task force and
(22:58):
talked about affirmative action at the same time about what
the country is is what he calls a regression of
civil rights.
Speaker 8 (23:06):
And take the responsibility to answer and to be accountable
to what's going on as relates to race relations in
the state and the nation. I am very mindful of
our past. We're experiencing this rights regression, on civil rights,
on voting rights, and LGBTQ rights, on women's rights, women's
access to contraception.
Speaker 1 (23:25):
It's a very.
Speaker 8 (23:25):
Serious moment in our nation's history. And you're seeing this
rights roll back in real time, this regression in real time,
and I hope folks wake up to it. And so
this Reparations task Force, the report, the context of that
decision today only reinforced the seriousness purpose to which we
will review it.
Speaker 7 (23:41):
And then that of course has to go any packages.
There was Assembly amendment there was an assemblyman and a
senator on.
Speaker 1 (23:47):
The task force.
Speaker 7 (23:49):
So those will be taken to the legislature and then
have to make it to the governor's desk, and you
can kind of hear in what he's saying which way
he leans, but nothing is guaranteed at this point. And then,
as you mentioned, I covered the Bruces be each story
extensively when it was going on from the very beginning,
and there was a large argument about who was paying
for this and kind of the interesting part was that
(24:10):
it was La County land, even though the beach was
in Manhattan Beach, and the atrocities that were attributed to
that situation came from a Manhattan Manhattan Beach City council
back in nineteen twenty and so that was a huge
two year argument. And you know, just recently, as you said,
(24:30):
the money was given. I think it ended up being
about twenty million dollars, is what the county bought the
land back from the family for. And so, yes, this
will play out and be a larger argument moving forward.
Speaker 3 (24:41):
Well, it's a real problem if you're going to start
thumbing through the sins of the past and try to
put a modern day cash price on that you could
go to the internees of Japanese during the World War Two,
or the Zootsuit riots, or where you want to go back.
I'm just curious Corbyn, we Alreay talk about Corbyn Arson
kfi's Corbyn Carson. Did anybody talk about the fact that
(25:05):
California entered the Union in eighteen fifty as a free state?
So for fifteen years, California was a state while slavery
was legal in America, but it was never a slave state. Now,
there were people who brought slaves into the state illegally
and kept them in bondage, but it wasn't codified by law.
Has anybody talked about that aspect?
Speaker 1 (25:27):
Yeah?
Speaker 7 (25:27):
The task Force talked about studying the institution of slavery
in the US, including the keeping of enslaved persons and
enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Acts in California, and how
those actions and structures put in place during the enslavement
period and thereafter resulted in a system.
Speaker 1 (25:44):
This is the task Force words, resulted.
Speaker 7 (25:47):
In a system that relentlessly subjected African Americans. The report
claims to trace this through California's history into the present,
and both details the ongoing adverse impacts on living African
Americans and present numerous ideas for policy changes designed to
begin the process of repair. But I do want to mention,
if you're talking about sins of the past, the one
(26:08):
thing that was a very powerful moment for people in
the room this morning was when Task Force chair and
repertory Justice attorney she's from La Camilla Moore, she listed
what are are what some are calling or what she called,
racial disparities documented in the eleven hundred page report.
Speaker 10 (26:27):
Never forget that we were enslave in this country longer
than we have been free, shadow slavery, sharecropping, convict leasing
to join the facto, segregation, redlining, educational funding discrepancies, predatory
financial practices, unfair labor practices, chronic unemployment, medical experimentation, intellectual
(26:49):
property depredation, environmental terror, family separation, police brutality, Anti African
American hate, crimes, vigilante violence, judicial terror, war on drugs,
mass incarceration, unfair sentencing, the school to prison pipeline, extreme poverty, homelessness, gentrification, wealthlessness.
Speaker 4 (27:11):
We have been relegated.
Speaker 10 (27:13):
To the bottom of the caste system in this country.
Speaker 7 (27:16):
And again those things that she mentioned are documented in
this there's about nine phases in this report, which is
live and online and people can thumb through it themselves,
but it's a lot of documentation that points to some
of the things she was mentioning.
Speaker 3 (27:29):
All Right, THAT'SFI is Corporate. Carson Corbin, thanks so much
for being well us appreciate itiated that. Okay, when we
come back, we're going to have a chat with Tim Conway,
as I understand that mister Conway's people have agreed that
he would come in and do some cross talk with
me before we yield the balance of our time to
mister Conway. And we're also going to tell you about
a scam. You just don't want to go to prison
(27:50):
for the crime I'm going to tell you about.
Speaker 6 (27:53):
You're listening to John and Ken on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 4 (28:00):
The One, the Only Big Dog. Tim mcnway Junior.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
Yes, thank you very much, Thank you man.
Speaker 3 (28:07):
Now here's the thing about us doing cross talk. We
know so much about each other personally sure that we
have to play it safe because we could destroy each other.
That we have enough backstory, that's right, that we could
totally destroy not just our what passes for careers, but
our personal lives.
Speaker 2 (28:24):
One hundred percent. Well, you and I, Doug McIntyre and
I used to live together in Burbank, right, not that
we're judging, No, I mean, and that was it was
right over here on Priscilla, wasn't it Priscilla?
Speaker 6 (28:35):
Yea.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
And now that's a huge McMansion. Now they tore that
piece of crap down that we had.
Speaker 4 (28:39):
Actually they didn't tear it down. They expanded. They expanded
it that way. It's a remob that's exactly. They left
the door knob on it and everything else is new.
Speaker 2 (28:49):
This is obviously the you know, Thursday before fourth of
July traffic is unbelievable out there. People are are splitting.
They're not going to work tomorrow and they're done.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
Here's the thing about post code COVID traffic. It makes
no sense. There's there's days when you can get on
the one on one and you're just try sailing, and
then the next day glaciers are pissed that it's just
like nothing. It's you know, skeletons in the carpool.
Speaker 2 (29:12):
I did see something in the news today that that
struck Maybe it's sort of odd, probably true, but human
beings are the are the only creatures on the planet
whose mouths are shrinking.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
That's why we have crazy teeth.
Speaker 2 (29:27):
Like every other animal, mammal, fish, reptile, whatever. Over the
last billion years, they've been eating the same crap for
a billion years. We've changed over the years, we've had
food is softer. Now we don't have to, you know,
attack a straws right, and it shrinks your mouth. And
that's why you get all those crazy teeth.
Speaker 4 (29:45):
Well, Bill Handles throwing the curve off on that. Huh.
Speaker 3 (29:51):
Now, let me ask you this because you like a
good scam, that's right. In fact, one of my forever
memories when we were housed together, when you came into
my house, you had actually moved out, and you come
into my house without knocking, and you asked the following question, Hey, buddy,
what's your handwriting look like? And I said, nothing legal
(30:13):
has ever followed that.
Speaker 1 (30:15):
I needed. I needed somebody to sign something.
Speaker 4 (30:18):
Your sister and you don't want to drive.
Speaker 2 (30:20):
I didn't want to drive the Malibu, and I'm like, hey,
can you sign this? I said, what does your signature
look like? And Mac and was like, no way, that's
no way.
Speaker 3 (30:29):
So as a fan of a scam, I saw this
in the La Times, uh not the La Daily News,
which I write for you at the l eight Times
had this about this guy. His name is Ray Brewer.
He's going to jail because he was running a manure scam.
And here's what he was doing. He tried to con
people into a vesting in a company that was going
to take cowpoop and turn it into green fissionable material
(30:52):
and methane, et cetera. Only it was all a scam.
And the reason I bring this up is he's not
going to do well in prison. I mean, if you think,
you know, you're in the in the yard, and you
remember what it was like in the yard, right exactly.
Speaker 4 (31:06):
You're in the yard and what you do is scratchy.
I shot up a school bus, right, you know what
you do? I hit a bank?
Speaker 6 (31:11):
What well?
Speaker 4 (31:12):
I was running a poop scandal.
Speaker 2 (31:14):
Of the fake business manure is you know when you
go buy it at home deep or lows, it's a
dollar for thirty pounds, how much is the guy going
to make?
Speaker 4 (31:24):
That's right?
Speaker 3 (31:24):
I remember years ago a guy hijacked a grease truck.
It was a truck that would go around to restaurants
and pump the French fry oil out of the deep
fryer and go restaurant to restaurant. And apparently there's an
aftermarket for this. I have no idea, you know where
it was actually Down's patio when Burbank used to buy
it from it, they burned down.
Speaker 1 (31:43):
By the way.
Speaker 3 (31:44):
But but but it's like there are some crimes. Everybody
understands why someone would rob a bank, but I can't
understand some crimes, like how does one conceive of the
idea of stealing grease?
Speaker 2 (31:56):
Well, you know, it starts young. There was a kid
in on tear cRIO, Canada. He worked outside of a
small town called Blenham, Ontario, and he used to buy
eggs from the local grocery store. And he'd come home
and with a little bit of bleach, he'd take the
stamp off them, you know, because they're all stamped, you know,
grade A or where they're from or whatever. And yeah, yeah,
and bleach, you know, take a little bleach, take the
(32:18):
little ink mark off of each egg and then go
down a block and in front of a farmhouse and
sell them as fresh eggs. And the guy, the kid
made millions, not millions, but thousands over the summer, you know.
Speaker 4 (32:29):
But it's just the brain. The brain works in marvelous.
Speaker 1 (32:32):
That's right, that's exactly right.
Speaker 4 (32:33):
I mean there was a guy who put he got caught.
Speaker 3 (32:37):
This is many years ago. He would wait till a
bank closed. This is back before ATMs and when there
were bankers hours. He waited till dark and then he'd
put a signup says, pardon our dust, use this box
for night deposits. And then right all that just people
would throw money in the thing.
Speaker 1 (32:52):
That's great.
Speaker 4 (32:53):
You know, if he could put his mind only to
the purpose of good.
Speaker 2 (32:56):
Well, I mean, you remember Seinfeld, you know they the
most interesting one of the funniest episodes is when what's
his name was unemployed? I know you're not a big
fan of s What who was it that was unemployed?
Speaker 1 (33:11):
Not Kramer at the other guy? George? George.
Speaker 2 (33:13):
Yeah, but George was unemployed and he worked his ass
off while being trying to get unemployment checks, harder than
he's ever worked in life.
Speaker 3 (33:19):
Well, that's frequently the case with criminals. That's right, hey, folks,
speaking of criminals, I'm going to be stealing your money.
Excuse me, I wan my book. At July eighteenth, at
the Grove at Barnes and Noble. Frank Shadow is the book?
Speaker 4 (33:31):
You go to? Doug mcare dot comments.
Speaker 1 (33:33):
Is that thing finally out?
Speaker 4 (33:34):
July eighteen?
Speaker 1 (33:34):
You got to come on and promote it? Oh, I
guess you just did.
Speaker 2 (33:37):
That's what I'm doing now. Sorry, That's why I'm here
July eighteenth. We'll keep promoting it. July eighteenth. All right,
where at the Grove at the Grove, you know people listen,
half ass, let's get it.
Speaker 1 (33:45):
Let's knock it out.
Speaker 2 (33:46):
July eighteenth at the Grove at the Grove, seven to
nine pm.
Speaker 1 (33:50):
Seven to nine pm. Oh, I can go.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
What is that right after the show? You come on
over there? What day of the week is it? That's
a Tuesday? Tuesday?
Speaker 1 (33:57):
All right, I'm gonna go do that. We'll promote the
hell out of it.
Speaker 4 (34:00):
All right, you just did.
Speaker 2 (34:01):
And then we have Mike Love coming on tonight, the
co founder of the Beach Boys, and then Dean Sharp
as well. Do you know that there's of all the
five I think there's five beach Boys, there's only one
that knows how to serf.
Speaker 4 (34:13):
I don't have to surf either.
Speaker 1 (34:14):
Hey, yeah, you're not a beach boy.
Speaker 4 (34:16):
Eric. Thanks for having me. Yeah, Mark Ronner and Ray
kim Ko.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Let's go to the phones.
Speaker 3 (34:21):
Joe Kik, Joe Joe Jen some headlines Conway coming off.
Speaker 6 (34:25):
Hey, you've been listening to The John and Ken Show.
Speaker 2 (34:27):
You can always hear us live on kf I Am
six forty one pm to four pm every Monday through Friday,
and of course, anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app.
The John Kobylt Show News
Host
John Kobylt
Popular Podcasts
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Decisions, Decisions
Welcome to "Decisions, Decisions," the podcast where boundaries are pushed, and conversations get candid! Join your favorite hosts, Mandii B and WeezyWTF, as they dive deep into the world of non-traditional relationships and explore the often-taboo topics surrounding dating, sex, and love. Every Monday, Mandii and Weezy invite you to unlearn the outdated narratives dictated by traditional patriarchal norms. With a blend of humor, vulnerability, and authenticity, they share their personal journeys navigating their 30s, tackling the complexities of modern relationships, and engaging in thought-provoking discussions that challenge societal expectations. From groundbreaking interviews with diverse guests to relatable stories that resonate with your experiences, "Decisions, Decisions" is your go-to source for open dialogue about what it truly means to love and connect in today's world. Get ready to reshape your understanding of relationships and embrace the freedom of authentic connections—tune in and join the conversation!