Interview: War in Iran, Propaganda War in the United States
Dave and Eric Peters condemn the war in Iran as an unnecessary regime-driven conflict fueled by disinformation, while exposing alleged Republican hypocrisy regarding censorship and energy market manipulation. They critique mandatory automated braking systems and ethanol subsidies as tools to accelerate vehicle obsolescence and raise costs, arguing these policies serve agribusiness lobbies rather than consumers. The hosts further decry the Virginia boat licensing grandfathering rule as a step toward a "slave state," linking modern EV mandates to potential mobility restrictions that threaten individual liberty against authoritarian control. [Automatically generated summary]
All right, joining us now is Eric Peters, a friend of the show.
We've had him many times.
Always interesting to talk to Eric.
And EricPetersAutos.com is where you'll find a lot of articles about liberty and mobility because you can't separate the two.
It's kind of like what Jefferson said about life and liberty.
The hand of force can destroy, but cannot destroy them.
Well, that's true of mobility as well as liberty as well.
So thank you for joining us, Eric.
Oh, thank you, Dave.
I always have a good time coming on your show.
And I always enjoy it.
Yes, let's talk about the you've got several articles about what's going on with this war.
And I think one of the key ones was the news blackout that you talk about.
And I'm having that same problem as well.
I'm looking at all this stuff.
There's so much disinformation and very little real information.
And there is a point to all of that.
Yeah, doesn't it kind of feel to you sort of like Groundhog Day in that it's kind of back to 2020 where we weren't allowed to have access to real information about what actually was going on.
And instead, a steady stream of regime propaganda was foisted upon us to try to persuade us of things that were not true.
Now it's even more egregious.
It's startling how effectively they have managed to suppress any news about what is happening within Israel, for example, or what has happened to our bases in the region.
That's right.
They've got plenty of images about things going on in Tehran.
And it's clear they're trying to manage the perception of the war.
And this is outrageous because Americans have a right to know what's happening to their sons and daughters in that part of the world, as well as what the consequences of this.
I'm just frustrated about it, this evil, idiotic, unnecessary, gratuitous war.
It is evil.
Everything about it is evil.
And their lies are not even plausible.
The lies that they tell us in terms of the cruise missile hitting the school and all the rest of this stuff are as implausible as a lot of this AI slop.
And that's another aspect of it that's out there.
We didn't have that six years ago.
So not only do you have these people actively suppressing information about what's going on, but they're also putting out a lot of fake stuff.
You got people splicing together real clips from previous incidents that happened in other areas and putting those out as if it was something that just happened.
And then there's clearly AI clips.
Those are easier to spot.
So it's kind of interesting when I look at it on X.
A lot of people are saying, hey, Grok, is this real?
And I know that that's become, that's mocked in and of itself.
And yet it is pretty good in terms of between community notes as well as Grok.
It's pretty good at filtering out the lies that people are deliberately putting up there to promote one side or the other because they'll say, well, this particular clip is a mixture of this clip from back here and that clip from back there.
And they'll give you links to those things, as well as sussing out when you can see the artifacts from artificial intelligence.
And of course, sometimes people will put up stuff that's still got the Gemini logo on it.
And then they'll argue with people who call BS.
That aspect of it is new.
I hadn't seen that before.
None of us had seen that before.
It's frustrating and fruitless.
And I like to hang my hat on things that can be ascertained to be absolutely true, such as how much the cost of fuel has increased in this country.
That's an obvious consequence.
Gasoline on average is 50 to 60 cents higher now than it was just 10 days ago.
And I think the more relevant, the more important aspect of this, it's really not being talked about that much, is the effect upon diesel fuel prices.
Yes, yes, even more so.
Yeah, it's now up over $5 a gallon in most parts of the country.
And a lot of people don't make the connection between what they are paying at the supermarket and Walmart and everywhere else for things and the cost of diesel fuel, because of course, things are moved from A to B, generally speaking, by heavy trucks that burn diesel and diesel-electric locomotives.
So if the cost of diesel fuel goes up 25 or 30%, who do you suppose is going to pay for that?
We are.
That's right.
And we have all these hidden costs.
Going back to the OPEC embargo, which I know you remember as well as I do.
Who could forget it?
And when you have a shock to the system at the energy price level, it percolates through everything just like a value-added tax.
Every stage, it gets added there, especially because of the transportation of goods and services.
And diesel is a big part of that.
And diesel has gone up more than the gasoline at the pump.
And I think there might be a reason for that.
It might be some kind of manipulation that we're seeing there.
But you point out that it's so hard to find out what is happening in Iran.
We have some people like Colonel McGregor.
We have Scott Ritter who are talking about the damage that's been done to radar systems that control the FAD and Patriot missiles.
But, you know, they have sources and we can't verify that.
Of course, that's the part of that is the fog of war that you're always going to see.
But a big part of it is that they're always blowing smoke at us.
Well, you know, when they do that.
Yeah, left and right.
That's right.
The right is particularly egregious, but predictably so.
The thing that's astonishing is the so-called left, which at one time at least posed as being anti-war.
It was the left that aggressively reported about what was going on in Vietnam, for example.
Dan Rather on the ground, you know, looking at what was happening over there and helped to generate public outrage about what was going on over there.
Now the left is as bad as the right.
They're captive poodles of the same interests that are keeping us from knowing what's going on so as to try to render us powerless to really intelligently come to any conclusion about what's happening and then to do something about it.
And then the absurd lies.
I mentioned this every time I talk to somebody about Mike Johnson saying, well, they attacked us.
They shot at three of our embassies.
And it's like, well, you know, when that happened, that happened after you attacked their entire country.
It's incredible the lies that they push out there.
But you were talking about the fact you can't assess how much damage is being done to Iran or especially to Israel.
They have put out a complete news blackout in Israel to see what is happening with the missiles coming in.
Yeah, and it's being respected by the U.S. media, which tells you something.
After all, don't we have a right, irrespective of what the state of Israel and the government of Israel say, I think we have a right to know what's happening in this situation.
And yet, you know, we're being prevented from having that knowledge.
It's infuriating.
The whole thing is infuriating on so many levels.
It's hard.
Yeah, but look at how this has been shaking out over a period of time.
I mean, we went through this as everybody was pushing back against the atrocities in Gaza.
You had the Zionist lobby push very actively to get any of that protest against what that foreign government was doing to call that racism, anti-Semitism, and to censor it as hate speech.
And of course, this is where the Republicans always said they hate these hate speech regulations, they hate censorship.
They were eager to jump in and do it for their masters.
And so we have seen legislation after legislation proposed, some of it enacted by the Republican Party.
I still am astounded that Ron DeSantis went to Israel to sign a speech censorship bill on behalf of Israel.
Why would a governor of a state go to a foreign country and sign a censorship bill?
Of course, that's a rhetorical question.
Either he's owned or he's scared.
I'm not sure which it is.
It doesn't really matter ultimately.
There's another aspect of this, though, that I think Bear's discussing.
And I think Colonel McGregor has touched on this.
And it's the despicability inherent in the kabuki theater of the negotiations.
I put it in Erfinger's quotes before Trump decided to launch the war.
You know, they had the Iranians believing they sent these two arch Zionists, the president's son-in-law, Kushner and Witkoff.
I mean, ridiculous to send these two guys who clearly are partisan agents to supposedly sit down with the Iranians to try to hammer out some sort of a deal when there was no deal.
It was a foregone conclusion that the attack was going to happen.
You know, that's the sort of thing that, you know, Americans of another generation got up in arms about when the, you know, pardon the language, the dirty Japs sneak attacked us on Pearl Harbor.
That was considered bad form.
That was considered contrary to the way civilized nations behave.
And also being the aggressor, you know, attacking when you've not been attacked, attacking on the behalf of Israel, who had not been attacked at that point either.
And so all of that, the treachery, the lies, the snake attacks, it's just disgusting.
And in the back and forth, it came out that Benjamin Netanyahu called Donald Trump on the carpet because he said, I hear the Iranians contacted you secretly.
You're not talking to them without my permission.
Oh, no, no, we wouldn't do it.
And so to cover themselves, they said, we're not anti-Netanyahuism, right?
Because that's really what we're talking about here.
And so they said, we're not against him.
As a matter of fact, we got Kushner and Wickoff talk to him and the Mossad chief on a daily basis.
And it's like, well, that's kind of traitorous right there, isn't it?
Well, the thing that worries me most is that these lunatic ignoramuses, I kind of regard them as such, have now painted us into a corner in the sense that they put American and Israeli prestige, so to speak, on the line behind this.
And apparently they thought that by assassinating a foreign head of state, the Ayatollah Khomeini, that they would cause the regime to topple and it would be another cakewalk, kind of like the Venezuela operation.
And then they could strut around and show everybody how tough and big and bold they were.
Well, Iranians aren't folding.
And any thinking person understands why, because from the Iranian point of view, this is an existential thing.
That's right.
They know that if they lose this, they lose their nationhood completely.
They become a vassal state.
And therefore, they are going to fight hard to the very bitter end.
They're not going to give in.
And you can't just bomb these people into submission.
It's not going to happen.
It isn't happening very evidently.
And so what's next?
Are we going to commit half a million ground troops?
Where are they going to come from?
And that would take months.
And are the American people going to put up with a draft?
I hope you're going to be able to do it.
You know, with their sons and daughters being dragooned to be sent over to Iran?
And what then?
You know, if that doesn't work, what's the next step?
In other words, they've now placed particularly Israel in this position.
You know, Israel likes to be perceived as sort of the invincible hegemon in the area.
If the Iranians win by simply not losing, that's all they have to do.
I think it's not out of the bounds of possibility that the maniacs that run that state might resort to nuclear weapons to try to end this, you know, in a win, as they see it.
As a matter of fact, there's some clips that I've seen people talking back and forth.
I'm not sure myself what the status is of it, but it certainly looks like a nuclear bomb.
And if they don't use a nuclear bomb, they could use out of their arsenal things that are as destructive, if not more destructive, than many nuclear bombs that are conventional weapons.
But, you know, that is the magic word, going nuclear.
And yet, when you look at the massive destruction that they're unleashing, and I think the most sickening thing of all this is Pete Hegseth and how he revels in all this carnage.
And the maniac, he's out of hand.
He's one of those people who thinks that by blowing up the Middle East, he's going to hasten the return of Jesus.
He's lecturing the soldiers over there, apparently, that this is the end times.
It's this eschatological apocalyptic view based upon the Schofield Bible that some of these people have.
Huckabee is of the same mind.
That's right.
These people should be in a mental hospital, not having their lovers, hands on any levers of power.
Yeah, and I keep telling everybody, this is not Christianity.
Jesus said, blessed are the peacemakers because they'll be called children of God.
Not somebody who has physically traced their genealogy and claims that they got a connection.
And of course, there's questions about that as well.
But that's the reality.
And so he's out there quoting things like, you know, God who prepares my hands for warfare, my fingers for battle.
That's not what that's about either.
Because as a Christian, he should know that is metaphorical for a spiritual battle.
God doesn't equip our hands for warfare so we can go out and do preemptive strikes against civilians and murder hundreds of schoolgirls.
That's not following God.
And it disgusts me to see this.
And his tattoos are just as phony and his crusader ideas are just as nonsensical as his Christian ideas.
He does not represent Christianity in any way, shape, or form.
He is anti-Christian.
There's some other aspects of this.
The state of Israel, people like Netanyahu, he's at best a secular Zionist.
He's not even a religious observant Jewish person.
And there is antipathy and worse towards Christians in Israel.
They get attacked in the streets.
And nothing gets done about it.
And right now, the state of Israel is bombing, as you know, the Christian enclaves in Lebanon, killing Christian people.
And you've got, nonetheless, apparently it doesn't bother Hegzeph or any of these other crazed, demented Zionist, whatever you want to call them.
It's really something to worry about.
Yeah, they don't care about fellow Christians.
They only care about people who say that they're Jewish.
And this is really a sad thing.
But, you know, when we look at this, Eric, I'm looking at the gas tank for the U.S., the strategic petroleum reserve that we've got there, right?
What kind of idiot clowns go to war without filling up their gas tank?
And they didn't.
It's still less than 60%.
It's at 58%.
I started looking this up.
The stupidity of this, it almost beggars articulation.
You'll hear Trump talk about, well, we have Venezuela.
There is a lot of oil in Venezuela.
Yeah, it's in the ground.
And it's quite a different matter to get that oil out of the ground and get it refined and get it shipped and get it into the supply chain.
That's something that's going to take years to happen.
And it's not going to happen without resistance either.
As we're seeing in the Gulf states, it's very easy to do a terrorist attack if that's what you're inclined to do, to attack the infrastructure of your enemy.
If they regard the United States as a bully and as an enemy, there's a lot of people.
Empty Tanks and Oil Orders00:12:24
They could take it out on the infrastructure that's there.
And you may not be able to get any of that stuff out.
But you also had Lindsey Graham prattling around talking about how we're going to get rich.
We're going to control over a third of the world's oil between Venezuela and Iran.
You may not have any of it.
I mean, Israel started blowing up the oil refineries in Iran.
And at first, Lindsey Graham and Trump said, don't do that.
Don't do that.
We want that oil when we get it.
Now they're joining in with Israel, blowing this stuff up.
And now Iran is apparently looking at, they've already made a couple of preemptive strikes against desalinization plants, as well as a liquid natural gas plant and an oil refinery.
And they could basically, by attacking ports and refineries and factories, they could basically shut down the supply of oil and gas without even shutting down the Strait of Hormuz.
And it could take a very long time to get that back.
Effectively, they're doing it.
My understanding is a couple of ships have already been hit in the straits.
And Trump, in his usual poltroonish, bellicose way, says that, well, they should just grow some guts and they should drive their tankers.
He said from Mr. Bonespurs, who dodged the draft back in Vietnam, whose son, no offense.
I mean, I mean, Baron Trump is just a kid.
You know, I don't want to see Baron Trump get dragged into this any more than anybody else.
But the point is, you know, he's not going to suit up.
He's not going to go.
Trump's not going to send him.
Lindsey Graham has no skin in the Graham in the game.
None of these people do.
There's like this evil gerotocracy that just has no moral compunction whatever about putting other people's lives and fortunes at risk and at peril, and then just disregarding the havoc that they cause.
It's obscene.
That's right.
And he's more than willing to put the deepwater Navy in that tiny strait, which is shallow water.
It's very different the way they operate.
It's set up to be operating to hit things at a distance that are there in deep water.
They can't operate in that strait.
And if he puts them in there, and yet you still have his Secretary of Energy come out and lie about the fact that the Navy is escorting tankers to the Strait of Hormuz, had a big effect on Tuesday in terms of oil.
Even after people realized that it was a lie and even after they took the tweet down, even after the White House pulled back and said, well, no, that's actually not true.
It still had the desired effect on the marketplace, which is really truly crazy.
Yeah, temporarily.
You know, I think maybe Trump's idea is to goad the Iranians into attempting to sink an American aircraft carrier or something, which would then perhaps give Trump the pretext to nuke the Iranians.
The man literally said something about he's not limited by anything at all except his own view of what is right.
That's right.
He just does anything he wishes.
And when he was talking about the tariffs and his temper tantrum after the Supreme Court shut down that illegal move that he had there, when he was talking about that, he said, I can do anything I want.
I can apply any tariff that I want to to any country.
I can destroy any country that I wish.
And of course, he knows it's a tax and he knows that a tax is a power to destroy.
But of course, he can destroy any country he wishes with arms as well.
That's what he's trying to do.
And back to what we were talking about in terms of the war and how it's going.
Iran has watched what the United States has done for a very long time because we have been at war with them, not for 47 years.
The clock didn't start when they took over the American embassy and they put in the Ayatollah's.
That was a response to what we'd done about 26 years earlier in 1953 when we overthrew their government.
And I know because I knew some Iranian students in college who were telling me about that.
They were protesting the Shah's horrific regime when I was in college, and they were showing up with Balaklavas over their head and everything.
I said, what's that all about?
And they said, well, let me tell you about the SAVAC, you know, this thing that's trained by the CIA and Assad, secret police that would kill and torture people if they realize that you're a political opponent.
That's why we have the Ayatollahs is because we did regime change once before.
And we don't know what we're doing when we do regime change.
Sometimes we put in something that's even worse.
And if they say that the Ayatollah is worse than the Shah, well, you caused that.
Just like Trump caused the pump prices to go up, he caused the Ayatollah as our American policy by the CIA and the continuing deep state is what caused us to have an Ayatollah there.
And so these people have been looking at this for the longest time.
They realize that the Achilles heel of the mighty American military is to have a drawn-out war of attrition and to use asymmetric warfare against our very expensive, complicated, and centralized systems.
And they have a decentralized system and even taking out the Ayatollah.
And again, I got this from Al Jazeera because you have to read some of these other sources out there and try to figure out that the truth lies maybe somewhere in between these two extremes that we get here, the pro-Zionist media here in America and the anti-Zionist media that's outside of the country.
And so what they were saying was they had what they called the fourth successor.
And they had people for deep to replace the individual leaders that were taken out, as well as decentralized command and control.
And so they're in it for the long haul.
Absolutely.
You know, Americans, unfortunately, have a very superficial understanding of history, even their own recent history.
Iraq is a parallel for what's going on in Iran.
The sort of situational morality.
For many years, Saddam Hussein was considered to be a great ally of the United States.
There are famous pictures you could find online of Don Rumsfeld going to Iraq and shaking hands with Saddam Hussein.
And we use him as an ally against Iran.
Yes.
But then he became inconvenient for one reason or another.
And all of a sudden, at that point, they seem to have recognized, oh, he's a bad guy.
He has, you know, he has dungeons and he has secret police and he drags people off into the night, exactly like the Shah.
Yeah.
You know, and for people who live in these countries, it's just, it's beyond contemptible to hear.
It's bad enough what they do, but the way they have this moral unction when they do it and pre-posture as if they are fighting some sort of great crusade in the name of all that is good and decent when they are the most depraved, duplicitous, and evil people that you can possibly imagine.
Yeah, C.S. Lewis had a quote that was similar to that.
I can't remember exactly what it was, but it's like, you know, there's nothing worse than somebody who's on this moral crusade and think that God is on their side.
And they said, yeah, you know, the question is, are you on God's side?
First of all, if somebody tells you that God is on my side, beware of that person.
Yeah.
Because they typically think they're God, right?
Yeah.
And Americans in the main, a lot of them, not all, but a lot of them have difficulty viewing things from the point of view of others.
How do you suppose American Catholics would respond if, let's say, Iran had attacked the Vatican and killed the Pope and half the College of Cardinals?
That's right.
What do you suppose the reaction would have been?
You know, you don't have to like the Ayatollah Khomeini.
The point is he was their spiritual leader.
And generally speaking, most people don't like their leader being taken out by some foreign country.
That's right.
All they succeeded in doing was generating the fury of the Iranian people.
And the piece de resistance was the bombing of that school and killing 170 kids, girls.
That just doesn't wear well.
And they can't even apologize for it.
Senator Kennedy apologized for it.
John Kennedy out of Louisiana.
He apologized for it.
They can't have the decency to say, I'm sorry, we made a mistake.
That's not the type of thing we do.
Instead, you've got Pete Hegseth, we're going to kill everybody.
We're going to rain death and destruction from the skies.
How more disgusting can you get?
It's just beyond belief.
You'll probably find out in the next 24 hours.
They scrape the bottom of the barrel.
The barrel turns out to be even deeper.
That's right.
Well, you're talking about killing the Pope or whatever, killing the Islamic Pope.
You are a spiritual leader, not just to a lot of people in Iran, but to all these Shiites.
And that's about 500 million people, roughly.
And so that's not limited to Iran.
And so the war is not going to be limited to Iran either.
Yep.
You know, it's so obviously stilted, so obviously malicious.
People see it.
And I'll tell you, the thing that worries me the most right now is that as vile as Trump is, that he has, he's kind of gamed this out.
The only thing I can come up with to explain the gratuitous arrogance of his actions lately is that he doesn't fear consequences.
He's not worried about the midterms because I think that it's very possible that he's going to pull a Zelensky and declare an emergency.
And in an emergency, we can't have elections because it's too chaotic.
I wouldn't put anything past it.
Yeah, I wouldn't put anything past that guy.
He absolutely has, just like Hakeseth, they have nothing but contempt for the Constitution, for any law, for any rule, for any morality.
They have contempt for it all.
And Trump's M.O., I said, we've got three branches of government now, right?
We've got the legislative, the judicial, and the emergency branch, because that's the way he operates.
He declares an emergency and he does whatever he wishes.
It's not even the executive branch anymore.
Right.
And now Americans have gotten used to the sight of body armored goons marching around on the streets.
So it won't seem that odd to them if all of a sudden the emergency gets declared and they lock down the cities using these American latter-day version of the SA, you know, back in Germany, you know, back in the 30s.
Like you, I put absolutely nothing past this man anymore.
Or Pete Hegset, don't you find it amazing, you know, going back to this fight over you shouldn't follow illegal orders.
How dare you say that?
We're going to punish you.
We're going to take your pension and all the rest of the stuff for saying that.
Instead of saying, I didn't do any, I didn't give any illegal orders.
He said, how dare you tell people not to follow my illegal orders?
And now we've got the same type of thing happening yet again with Pete Hegseth, this time with Anthropic and saying, we've got some red lines.
We're not going to allow our stuff to be used for.
We're not going to let you do police state domestic surveillance.
And we're not going to let you do autonomous killing machines.
And so then Pete Hegset says, how dare you?
We're going to destroy you as a company.
That's also unprecedented.
We've never seen that happen to anybody.
Somebody that they're still using their product in this Iran war for targeting and for other intelligence, but they're now going to try to destroy that company.
And they're just off the charts in so many different ways.
There's also a matter of historical amnesia here in the sense that it was literally considered to be a war crime to claim that you are only following orders.
You know, the Nuremberg Code did not excuse what was done by the individual soldiers and the chain of command down the line when they claimed, well, the legitimate government of the state ordered me to load people into boxcars.
It ordered me to shoot these people.
I was only following orders.
That was not considered a legitimate defense.
Even though the orders were technically legal, they were still considered immoral.
So, you know, now we're in a situation where, again, the question isn't, well, are these orders constitutional?
Are they immoral?
It doesn't matter.
They are orders.
You must follow orders.
That's right.
You know, regardless.
And Americans are being conditioned to be good Germans.
These people are so filled with hubris, they know that there's not anybody that's going to stop them.
Nobody's going to oppose them except the other tribe, and it's going to be just dismissed as a tribal opposition.
But nobody has the power to arrest them in some kind of an international criminal court.
And so it's like, yeah, you and what army is going to bring me up to a Nuremberg trial, which they should be facing.
You're right.
They should be facing that.
But that's why they're acting this way.
And of course, the GOP as a group is just rolling over for all this stuff.
They're rolling over for the war.
This is the party that wants to tell you that they're pro-life.
This is the party that tells you that they're for protecting children, and yet they're protecting pedophile predators that are there.
It's disgusting to see this.
And they want to tell you that they are there to protect the economy.
Right-Wing Suppression Tactics00:06:39
And we've probably never seen anything as destructive as this particular war for the economy.
Yeah, particularly, it couldn't have come at the worst possible time, at the worst possible time.
We've been reeling now for five years since COVID.
People are just barely clinging to their status quo.
Can you imagine what will happen when it costs $100 to fill up a vehicle?
And when $100 buys you maybe a small bag of groceries at the store, if there are any groceries.
That's right.
This is economically, politically, culturally catastrophic.
People, when they are pressed into desperate situations, are going to begin to behave desperately.
And then it's game on.
And who wants that?
Nobody.
Apparently, only people who want that are Trump and his sycophantic apologists.
Yeah.
He's a one-man tool of chaos.
I think that was his purpose of being put in.
I call him a one-man fourth turning, war and depression, right?
And he wants to take us back to the last fourth turning of World War II and the Great Depression.
And he's doing everything he can to take everything down because they need to do that to rebuild their technocracy or whatever communist authoritarian nightmare system they got planned.
They have to first destroy the system that's here.
Trump has been doing that throughout his first and his second term, especially in the second term.
He's really accelerated that.
They're getting very close to their timing of 2030 where they want to have this new system in.
They've been boasting about that for the longest time.
And so it's got to all happen in this term.
And he is doing everything he can to create chaos and economic depression and war.
Yep.
You know, I apologize.
I voted for the guy again, stupidly.
I'll never do anything like that again.
And I allowed my hope to overcome my judgment.
You know, I should have remembered the way that he behaved during his first term, particularly the last year during COVID, when he did not end the emergency, when he had the power to do it, and when it was very obvious by the summer of 2020 that the whole thing was an overblown, overhyped fraud.
He could have at that point ended it.
He chose not to.
And what did that do?
That set the predicate for the mass absentee balloting and for election months that assured we were going to end up with Joe Biden.
That's right.
And now he's out there threatening to shut down the government if they don't pass his SAVE Act, which basically is to say, you're not going to do any vote by mail.
It's like, you're the guy who put the vote by mail in with your lockdown stuff.
And I said it wouldn't happen.
I said, this is going to be disastrous.
This is going to be the biggest manipulation of the election that you've seen.
I thought it was going to be manipulated, but I thought it'd be manipulated through computerized voting machines primarily.
But that offered another entirely new dimension.
And now he's out there even calling it the Save America Act.
And Save America was the name of his pack that he used to grift money off of people after the election that he had thrown with his rules and lockdown and vote by mail.
Then he sets up the Save America PAC and raises like $250 million and sends people to January the 6th.
He picked their pockets and put their head in a noose.
I think it's difficult for most of us who aren't sociopaths and psychopaths to really understand how these people operate and what they think, because we've got an internal check that, you know, if a certain thought crosses your mind, you go, oh my God, I could not, I can't do that.
That would be horrific.
I'm not going to do that.
So we don't think like they do.
And therefore, it was difficult for me.
I'll give you, you know, to see that Trump was put in there in 2016 to further a certain purpose.
Come 2020, we get Joe Biden.
What did we get with that?
We got the LGBTQ stuff, trannies.
We got the Summer of Love.
And that naturally outraged most normal Americans.
And the COVID stuff on top of it.
So it sort of set the stage for this resurgent populist nationalist movement that Trump is the head of.
He's going to ride his white horse in and he's going to save us.
And people voted for that.
And I saw that at Infowars.
I saw the people that Alex is bringing in that were associated with an intelligence agency.
And people think of the intelligence group as being these people like Clapper and Brennan who are left-wing.
There's a big right-wing component to it.
And those are the people that Trump was, that Alex is bringing in all the time to push Trump.
These are the people who are behind him the entire time.
So this is basically really a right-wing coup.
And I mean a real right-wing coup, like a Chile type of, you know, Pinochet type of coup that they're really queuing up here.
Well, it was brilliant because let's hypothesize that Harris had won.
Most of the people who are on the Trump side would have been hyper-vigilant, would have been outraged and protesting by the things that Trump has done.
But because it's Trump and there are members of the Trump cult, the Red Hat cult, they find ways to bend themselves over backwards to come up with some 55D chess explanation for it.
It's beginning to fall apart, but it's astounding the degree to which they have snapped into line, just like the people on the left that they derided as NPCs, you know, robotic sheep who were just following whatever the narrative was that was being deployed by the left.
Well, it's exactly the same thing now.
So, you know, the setup seems to be that if we do have elections, there's going to be this horrendous backlash against everything that is tainted by Trump.
He's going to have tainted populism and nationalism, perhaps irrecoverably for a generation.
I agree.
It's like a Herbert Hoover all over again.
I agree.
And we're going to get an authoritarian leftist dominated government for the foreseeable future, maybe forever.
I agree.
He's there to poison all the perspective of anybody.
You know, yeah, it's just like this Christian nationalism thing.
It's like, oh, you're Christian?
Oh, you support this Christian nationalism stuff?
It's like, no.
But it's this odious thing that they associate you with.
And then people start running the other way.
And it's kind of interesting, too, because remember, when Tulsi Gabbard got in, now she has basically discredited herself completely, opposing the war now, staying silent and staying in the regime.
She said, my position here is to restore trust in government.
RFK Jr. said the same thing.
And they have used that blind trust to betray people in terms of what people expected them to do.
They expected RFK Jr. to push back against the COVID shots, to expose the vaccines and other things.
Moral Responsibility in Braking00:08:36
And he hasn't really done that.
He's allowed that stuff to keep going.
I think it's been very effective at demoralizing people.
You realize that nothing ever, ever gets done for the good.
This Epstein thing, the reason it never goes anywhere is because both parties are all involved in this.
That's right.
They have a common interest in suppressing what was going on.
They have a common interest in making sure that nobody is ever held accountable, not Bill Gates, not Dr. Fauci, whatever happened to any of that.
These COVID-these people who visited unprecedented harm on the American people, nothing happens to them.
You or I, you know, we drive by a cop not wearing a seatbelt, you know, and we'll get, you know, we'll feel the full force and effect of the law, even though we've harmed absolutely nobody.
But, you know, you can harm hundreds of millions of people if you're Albert Burla or Dr. Fauci, and nothing happens.
And meanwhile, they co-opt people like RFK Jr. and Gabbard.
You know, people think, oh, they're going to do something for good.
And maybe they've done a little bit of good here and there.
But at the end of the day, they got played also.
And they just look like fools that got bamboozled again by the orange man.
It's appalling.
Well, you're talking about getting pulled over for minor traffic violations.
We just had a, it was exposed that there was the State Highway Patrol had some quotas, evidently, and you had certain officers who were very aggressively charging people with drunk driving.
And yeah, one guy, like 50 some odd people from one trooper, and half of them were not drinking at all.
They were completely sober, but he charged them with drunk driving.
So, yeah, this is the kind of stuff that we get when they put out quotas with this kind of stuff.
You get what we saw with ICE in Minnesota.
And you also see what Scott Ritter said was he said, they go in on this strike against Iran and they've got quotas in terms of the number of places that they want to hit, which means that they're not really careful about what they're targeting, right?
And so you wind up with this situation like we did at the girls' school.
That is the way all this stuff is being managed.
But let's talk a little bit about cars.
Absolutely.
Got an interesting article there, braking for a bag.
Tell people what you're talking about.
Yeah, an interesting story surfaced the other day about a guy who was driving his SUV with something called automated emergency braking, which most new cars have now.
And essentially, the system confused a plastic bag that was tumbleweeding across the highway with some kind of an object.
And the system is designed to slam on the brakes, you know, in the event that it thinks that the car should break and the driver hasn't braked.
And of course, you know, on a highway, when that happens for no apparent reason, it tends to result in somebody rear-ending you.
Yeah, that's just the nature of the thing.
And, you know, this AEB thing, the really pernicious thing about it is that the federal government has mandated that come 2029, all new vehicles have to have this technology.
Wow.
You know, their argument is, their argument is that, well, you know, we'll save, again, we'll save lives, you know, because inadvertent people who aren't paying attention to what's going on in front of them, the car will break for them.
The problem with it is, of course, that you have situations like this, inadvertent braking that are in and of themselves a danger.
I've had it happen to me.
You know, the federal government has registered thousands of incidents of this.
A couple of years ago, I was driving a Toyota Prius and I was the only car on the road.
Nobody was around me.
And all of a sudden, the car just slammed to a stop.
I guess it saw a ghost or something.
You know, because they always use the word smart when they talk about these technologies.
Smart.
It's just programmed.
You and I are smart in the sense that we can, you know, we can perceive things with our eyes.
And that this wonderful biological computer that we have called a brain can then filter and interpret the information.
And we can immediately say, well, that's just a plastic bag.
Yeah.
You know, it's not a child.
It's not a deer.
It's not anything I need to hit the brakes for.
I'm just going to keep on driving.
These dumb systems that rely on a camera find distinction.
Yeah.
So, you know, it was hallucinating, I guess.
Yeah.
But you remember a few years ago when they had, I think it was an Uber self-driving thing.
And they had fully autonomous driving because they had somebody behind the wheel and it ran over that lady who was homeless, who was crossing the street with a shopping cart or something.
And they said, well, it was dark.
She wouldn't have been able to see it.
And of course, the camera that was watching her, she's sitting there playing with her phone because she's been lulled into passivity because this thing is doing most of what it needs to do, but it doesn't stop when it sees a person coming.
But, you know, they said, well, you can't see her.
She's out there in the dark and she's not in the headlights.
I said, yeah, so this thing's got LIDAR and it can see in the dark.
Why didn't it slam on the emergency brakes?
And I said, well, we disconnected the emergency brakes because they were constantly kicking on for no reason at all.
So we just disable those.
And it's like one system after the other, right?
Failure.
There's a dehumanizing aspect to this, in my opinion, in that it detracts from agency.
What do I mean by that?
Well, you know, when I get behind the wheel of a vehicle, I'm in charge of the vehicle.
I'm responsible for controlling it.
And if I am neglectful, if I'm pecking at a cell phone, I don't do that.
But let's say I'm pecking away at my cell phone while I'm driving and I pile drive into somebody else.
Well, then I'm morally responsible as well as legally responsible because I didn't maintain control of my vehicle.
The accident could have been avoided.
Now what they're doing with these technologies is placing people in the position of not being either morally or legally responsible.
You know, after all, the car is responsible.
Well, who's responsible then when somebody gets killed?
Who are you going to bring into court or sue for damages?
And people get killed.
And how is that going to be compensated?
And think about that in terms of the autonomous killer robots, right?
Just like we saw with the situation at the school, if that was targeted and directed by artificial intelligence to whatever role it had.
But once they go to fully autonomous killer robots, then they can come back and say, well, who's responsible for that?
It's not my job, right?
Everybody can pass the buck on to somebody else and nobody has to take responsibility for it.
And that's another huge reason not to have these things because it allows people to avoid any responsibility.
So it allows them to be a lot more reckless and careless with what they're doing.
Yeah.
And there's another aspect of this I think people should be aware of, which I worry about.
It is that.
Once these things are a federally required safety feature, which they will be in 2029, which is less than three model years away from now, they will probably come up with the argument that a vehicle that does not have it, older vehicles, constitute a threat and a hazard.
They'll say, well, if every vehicle on the road had this automated emergency braking, then all sort of follow each other in a correct conga line.
And, you know, if this car breaked, then that car would break and they would all be in communication through V2V technology and we wouldn't have any problems and we'd reduce the fatality rate.
You know, it will help improve safety.
And then they'll say the only way that you can continue to operate a vehicle that does not have that technology on government roads, they call them public roads.
They're the government's roads.
Well, if you retrofit it, the problem is that that's not feasible to do from a technological or economic point of view with older vehicles.
You just, I suppose, could do it if you had limitless amounts of money and completely re-engineer the car, but it's not like adding a third brake light, let's say.
It's an extraordinarily complicated piece of technology.
And I see this as a way, another way.
There's so many of these pincers that are moving to shut us out of cars, that this is a way for them to effectively outlaw pretty much every vehicle that was made before roughly 2015 or so when this technology started to come online.
That's right.
It is very much like a singularity where you have all these different regulatory threads, as you point out.
It's like some kind of a spider's web.
It's all coming together to control every single aspect of our life and to make everything illegal.
I think they're just kind of waiting for the older ones of us to die out.
I saw this when we were in Virginia trying to cover an event at one point in time, and we were having difficulty seeing this thing.
So we thought, well, what we're trying to cover, so he thought, let's get a boat and we can get a different perspective on it.
So we go to get a boat and you had to have a license in Virginia to drive a boat.
And I said, I've been driving a boat since I was eight years old.
And I said, well, you're old enough that your grandfathered in.
So it's like anybody that was over 50 or something like that, they didn't require him to have a license.
But if you were under 50, you had to have a license.
Ethanol Push and EV Obsolescence00:10:02
And we're starting to see this with smoking cigarettes, for example.
I think it was New Zealand or Australia.
One of them made it illegal for anybody to ever smoke a cigarette if you were born after a certain date.
And so this is a kind of insanity.
They're just gradually ratcheting everything down into a slave state.
They're doing it.
It's kind of like, it's an interesting dichotomy to me in that it's sort of the superficial moralizing.
You know, like, how dare you smoke a cigarette?
How dare you have a beer?
Those things are outrageous and they must be stamped out forevermore.
On the other hand, these people are perfectly willing to commit genocidal mass murder, you know, and do horrible wholesale things to people that are egregiously immoral.
That's okay, but you better buckle up for safety.
That's right.
I saw a funny joke about Trump.
They said somebody just threw a beer at Trump.
Fortunately, he was able to dodge it.
Dodge the bottom.
He's had a lot of experience dodging the draft.
So yeah, let's talk a little bit about ethanol blues because while we're talking about alcohol, I was at a think tank once and it was all these conservative think tanks.
Heritage Foundation, of course, the biggest one.
But all these different states have think tanks as well.
And so this is a big convention of them.
And this one organization was hosting an event and they set it up as a speakeasy.
And as they handed out the invitation, they said, if you want to come to the party, you just show up and knock at the door and say, I'm here for the ethanol subsidy.
So you got ethanol blues again.
What's that about?
Well, it's just an ongoing thing that has been in existence now for what, 40 years at least, maybe 50 years.
When as a SOP to the agribusiness lobby, which is almost as powerful as AIPAC politically, they created this requirement in federal law that requires the introduction of ethanol into the fuel supply.
So most of the gasoline that's available at the pump is not actually gas.
It's 10% ethanol, 90% gas.
That's what you're buying.
So it's adulterated with ethanol.
Why does that matter?
Well, among other things, ethanol has less energy BTU content than gasoline.
So the unit volume, you know, if you have a gallon of E10 versus a gallon of 100% pure gasoline, you're going to get lower gas mileage.
You're not going to be able to drive as far on that.
So it costs you more to drive the ethanol-laced gas than it does real gas.
For older vehicles, it's a really sneaky way for them to sort of accelerate the obsolescence of vehicles that were made at a time when the assumption was that gasoline would be the fuel that would be used.
And this was all the way through the 80s.
That's when the RFG thing started to, the ethanol thing started to come online.
Well, vehicles that were made before then, you know, the engineers assumed that the gas tanks, fuel lines, rubber parts, everything that came into contact with the fuel was going to be coming into contact with gasoline, not alcohol.
Alcohol is chemically different than gasoline.
It has different properties.
It interacts differently with things like steel lines and plastics and rubbers, and it deteriorates and degrades them.
That's why, you know, even though vehicles have been made to be ethanol compatible now for 40-something years, power equipment isn't.
If you buy a chainsaw, if you buy a lawnmower, you'll probably see a little sticker on it that says, do not use ethanol fuel in this thing.
You have to find a station that sells, they call it now pure gas.
It's kind of like pure bloods.
You got to find a place that sells pure gasoline.
And it's worth the extra cost, particularly because it doesn't store very well.
That's the reason why they don't want you using the E10 in outdoor power equipment that sometimes will sit for four months out of the year, during the fall and the wintertime.
If you leave that stuff in the fuel tank, odds are your equipment isn't going to work come spring when you need to cut the grass or whack the weeds.
Yeah, when you look at it, Big Ag, you're talking about the footprint that they've got.
I remember the back and forth.
Even people like Al Gore was raging about ethanol.
He says, we don't want this.
We don't need this.
And so the environmentalists weren't pushing it.
It was Big Ag that was pushing it.
And we just saw the last week or so, the Trump administration and the Republican Party saying, we're not only going to not stop glyphosate, a known carcinogen that is permeating our food supply and poisoning our farmland, but we're going to mandate and compel its production.
And as part of that, we'll give them legal immunity against lawsuits.
And the Republicans applauded that when Trump did that as an executive order.
It's just insane.
Well, they're well paid to do that.
They're also talking about making E15, which is 15% ethanol, the new standard.
Because again, there's a lot of money.
And, you know, people don't really understand the sort of tiered effects of this.
It's not just the effects in your vehicle or your outdoor power equipment.
It costs a great deal to produce this ethanol.
And crops that ordinarily would have gone toward feedstocks, let's say, for cattle, are instead diverted to the production of ethanol.
So it has had a secondary effect of causing an increase in the cost of food.
People don't understand and realize that that's going on.
Who benefits?
It's not, you know, mom and pop Farmer Joe down the road.
It's these gigantic cartels, these combines that are using the government to rob us blind and ruin us at the same time.
Yeah, that's right.
You got an article about EV, the real purpose of the EV push.
But let me just say, you know, one of the things that you talked about, I think it was the Chevy Volt, Volt.
Was it Volt or Volt?
The one that had the generator, right?
Oh, you're talking about the Volt that was technically a hybrid, but it carried its engine chiefly as a generator.
That's right.
Well, now, as Ford is pulling back from this, they're moving towards what they call, they're now calling those extended range EVs, ER EVs.
And as you point out before, that's probably the best use of an EV that you could have in terms of using the motor as a battery and simplifying it so that you don't have to have this hybrid system and complicate the transmission stuff that's there and everything.
You don't have to use it, the gasoline as an engine.
You can just use it as a generator to charge the EV and you get a very long range out of it.
But what's going on with the EV push right now besides that?
Well, I was thinking about this the other day, and it occurred to me that one of the effects, and I consider it to be an intentional effect, of the attempt to push EVs, and they were pushed very hard for a number of years, was to push us out of vehicles both directly and indirectly.
Here's how.
By pushing the EVs, what they did was to greatly increase the cost of vehicles generally, not just the EVs.
Reason why EVs are money losers.
You know, Ford said that it lost about $20,000 on the sale of every one of its F-150 Lightnings, probably more than that.
All the manufacturers that were required to manufacture these EVs for the sake of regulatory compliance, they had to figure out a way to staunch the bleed somewhat.
So what they did was they pushed out some of the costs of the EV thing into the price they were charging for their other vehicles.
And that's why the cost of vehicles has gone up.
But the other aspect of it that's much more subtle is that the same regs that pushed the EVs pushed hybrid drive frames into mass production.
You know, originally when the Toyota Prius came out, that's sort of the archetypical hybrid.
And it came out, what, about 20 something, 20, maybe even 25 years ago.
The whole point of it was that, okay, this is a vehicle that is focused specifically on very high gas mileage.
You know, it was fundamentally an economy car, and it made sense in that context.
You know, essentially, they were using the hybrid drivetrain to kind of compensate for and overcome the fact that new cars have gotten so freaking heavy because of all the government safety candidates.
You know, it used to be possible to make a 50-mile per gallon car without a hybrid drivetrain.
That's become impossible.
So, anyway, that was the purpose of the Prius and its competitors, such as the Honda Civic Hybrid.
That went on for a number of years.
Now, if you look at the new car landscape, half of the vehicles or more that are on the market of all kinds have a hybrid drivetrain, including, and I think this is the telling part, high-end luxury vehicles, Mercedes, BMWs, Audis, Lexus.
It's risable.
It is ridiculous to believe that a person who spends $60,000, $70,000 on a premium luxury vehicle is sweating paying another $30 a month for gas.
They don't care.
They're not buying it because it's a hybrid, and yet it is.
Mercedes and BMW, two good examples, have cheapened out some of their formerly premium vehicles.
Used to be that in a vehicle like an E-Class Mercedes or a BMW5, the minimum you got was a six-cylinder engine for that money, a nice six-cylinder engine.
What do you get now?
You get a two-liter turbo four augmented by a hybrid system.
It's a compliance drivetrain.
And at the same time that these hybrid drivetrains have come online, the price has gone up.
The E-Class Mercedes is now $60,000.
Without the V6, it's thousands and thousands of dollars more expensive.
If you look at the current Dodge Charger, that was an electric car until they realized it wasn't going to sell, and they put their new six-cylinder engine in with a hybrid drivetrain, much more expensive than the previous charger with just an engine.
And you look at any vehicle you choose to pick that has a hybrid drive frame and compare its costs now versus what it cost just a couple of years ago, two or three years ago, without the hybrid.
And it's many thousands of dollars more expensive.
I've just been test driving the Toyota Grand Highlander.
As recently as 2022, that car came with the V6, Toyota's excellent 3.5 liter V6.
It now comes with a 2.4 liter turbocharged engine, hybrid augmentation and all of that.
And it's $7,000 more.
than it was just three years ago.
And these are these subtle costs that are being imposed on us.
And who can afford, you know, it's ridiculous to believe that working and middle income people are going to be able to pay $50,000, $60,000, $70,000 for a basic family kind of a car.
Cost of Driving for Workers00:02:05
So what can you conclude from that?
You can conclude they're trying to make it so that regular working and middle income people can no longer afford to drive.
That's the agenda.
That's absolutely it.
Yeah, absolutely.
They did everything they could to incentivize the EVs.
And now, as you see, and as you and I talked about this for the longest time, so well, we know what's going to happen.
They're giving them preferential treatment.
They're subsidizing them.
They're banning other cars from these low emission zones.
You can only go in there if you've got an electric vehicle.
Now they're coming after the electric vehicles.
Now they're taxing them by the mile and doing other things like that.
We know that that's the way they want to go because then that requires that they track you all the time, right?
So many aspects of this.
But the bottom line is they don't want you to have mobility because mobility leads to liberty.
Just look, that was our lifeline during COVID stuff was the car.
And you can imagine how much more effective the lockdowns would have been if the majority of the cars that were in circulation, if they could have thrown the proverbial switch, let's say, and simply disabled the vehicles remotely, the lockdowns would have been a whole lot more effective.
I certainly wouldn't have been able to do what I did, which was to jump in my truck and have a look at what was going on out in the real world.
I would drive by the local regional hospital just to see whether the bodies were stacking up and the lines were forming outside.
And then I did videos and recorded that.
And of course, I got demonetized on YouTube for doing that.
I was able to do it.
I live out in the country.
If I had been stuck with a connected vehicle, an EV, and they just shut it off, what am I going to do?
I'm going to bicycle the 30 miles into the city to see what's going on?
Probably not.
Yeah.
And with all the electronics in it, they can very easily geofence you out of any area that they want or keep you in the areas that they want to keep you in.
Let's go down memory lane because it's one of the things I love about EricPetersauto.com, the fact that you go back and look at some of the things that we have grown up with.
And you've got an article talking about the things that are no longer seen.
Talk about a little bit of those.
Corinthian Leather vs Connected Cars00:06:46
Yeah, I think it's just generationally, you know, like guys our age, you know, if you went to a car show when we were kids, let's say, and you looked at a Model T Ford and you saw all these strange things in the car, you know, what's this little lever on the steering column do?
What is that?
And the pedals look weird.
You know, and you had to have an old timer come along and explain to you, you know, what these things did and how the car worked.
Well, you and I are familiar with things like, you know, my old muscle car that I have out in the garage, my 76 Pontiac Transam.
It's got this little four-mounted dimmer switch.
Show it to a 23 and see if they know what that is.
You know, that's gone.
You don't see that anymore.
Well, you know, time progresses.
And I kind of thought, well, okay, imagine 30 years from now if we still have car shows and people are looking at vehicles from this time, 30 years from now, and they're going to see things like these weird little rectangular things.
What is that for?
What do you do with that?
And we'll have to explain.
Yeah, there was a time, you know, we plugged in our devices into these things.
So that was just one example.
You know, there are a number of others, you know, people who are too young to have remembered the 90s.
You remember when they had those seatbelts that buckled you in when you opened the door?
Oh, I had a car that had the Volkswagen Rabbit that I had did that.
It had a knee bar to keep you from getting hung, I guess.
If you're submarine under the seatbelt, but the seatbelt was actually plugged into the door.
So when you open it up, it would pull it out and you could just slide out.
And I remember taking Karen's grandmother in it, and it would fluster her to know.
She didn't know how to get out of it.
She's trying to pull herself up and around it.
She'd always wrap herself up in the seatbelt and I'd have to go around and detach it from the door to get her out.
It was kind of crazy.
Yeah.
Yep.
Those have been out of production now since I think the late 90s, early 2000s.
I can't remember when they were last available new.
So it's been 25 years.
So somebody who's 25 today will probably have absolutely no memory of those kinds of things.
So when they see it.
One of the things you mentioned is opera windows.
That's it.
There's another one.
That was a strange thing when it was done, an opera window.
But I guess.
We used to have these things called personal luxury coupes, models like the old Chevy Monte Carlo and the infamous Chrysler Cordoba, you know, that Ricardo Paulbon did in those commercials.
And actually, they were neat cars.
They were sort of, they were big cars, but they had two doors.
You don't see that very often anymore.
And they had fine Corinthian leather, whatever that was.
Fine Corinthian leather.
And one of the features that they used back then to signify that you were driving something luxurious was the opera window, which was this round piece of glass, fixed glass.
It didn't open that was on the rear C pillar of the car, you know, before the area where the rear glass is that supports the roof.
And it was just considered very stylish, very chic.
You never see that sort of thing anymore.
It's gone the way of T-tops too.
You never see T-Tops anymore.
That's right.
And of course, I think of opera windows.
I think of American Graffiti and that Thunderbird that I think it was Suzanne Summers was in that movie.
But the other thing you don't see, which is kind of in your picture here, and that is the fake vinyl roofs that are there.
And in the picture that you've got here, it's like a one-quarter vinyl roof.
It was chic to make it look like you had a convertible, even if you didn't have a convertible.
And now when we talk about, you know, I drive around, we have a convertible.
We put the top down.
And when I see another convertible, I look over and invariably it's some old geezer like me that's driving it.
I know it's quite something.
Now, you know, the thing that I've bemoaned the most is that, you know, we no longer have genuine luxury cars.
There was once a distinction between a luxury car and a sports car.
And then because everybody decided they had to be BMW, this began in the 80s and then in the midlight, BMW was considered sort of, I mean, the Euro cache thing.
Everybody wanted to be like BMW.
And instead of having like really comfortable three across bench seats, for example, and a column and a ride that was designed to be plush, you're not in a hurry.
You're just you're wanting a comfortable, smooth riding car.
Now we all have luxury sport cars with these sent you in bucket seats.
And look, I like sporty cars.
The point is everything doesn't have to be sporty.
Now minivans are sporty.
It's absurd.
You know, they all ride on 18, 19 inch wheels and, you know, they have rough rides.
You know, those who are people who have never had the chance to ride in a big land yacht American car from the 70s are really missing out on something.
There used to be a really profound difference in the way you felt when you were driving something like a Cadillac Sedan de Ville or an Olds 98 and something like my Transam.
I mean, there was a big, big difference.
Now they pretty much all drive the same, irrespective of the make model type of car.
They're all pretty much the same.
Yeah, I remember my dad had a big Cadillac Sedan de Ville, and my car was a little Triumph Spitfire.
And to go from one to the other would really kind of rip your head off.
You know, where you're in this, like you said, this gigantic smooth riding, you know, bench seat and everything.
It's like a mobile living room.
And then you go from that to this little tiny rattling thing that's looking like you can drive underneath the truck that's right next to you.
It truly was amazing.
Yeah, those are the days, weren't they?
Yeah.
Yeah, they were.
And I think it's a shame that there was this concerted effort, a marketing effort, to kind of make fun of, you know, the old man's car, the, you know, the Sedan de Ville with the white walls and the wire hubcaps.
I think we've lost something as a result of that.
You know, we've lost the diversity and difference that used to exist in the marketplace.
Everything is just homogenously, bleakly the same now.
And there's something ridiculous about all these 300 horsepower, 400 horsepower cars puttering along, you know, at just barely the speed limit.
That's right.
That's right.
I can deal with it when I, you know, when I roll up behind somebody who's driving, say, an old Volkswagen Beetle, because I used to have one, I know the car is struggling to keep up.
You know, it's having a tough time keeping up at 65 or 70 miles an hour.
But it's just obnoxious to come up behind some guy, you know, driving 47 and a 55, and he's driving his truck with, you know, 400 horsepower V8.
It's just, it's gratuitously, stupidly wasteful, in my opinion.
And I see it as an almost as a temptation that I almost cannot get past when I've got these big engines and lower speed limits.
So I don't like that aspect of it as well.
It's like they're really tempting me to do something here.
Well, it's always great talking to you, Eric.
Thank you for joining us.
And I love EricPetersAutos.com.
It was much more what he's talking about there as well.
As we didn't even get to Corvettes and what's happened to them over the years, but always great content.
Thank you, Eric.
Always a pleasure to have you on.
Oh, thank you, David.
I always enjoy our talks.
Thank you.
Tracking the Common Man00:01:15
The Common Man They created Common Core to dumb down our children.
They created Common Past to track and control us.
Their Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing in the communist future.
They see the common man as simple, unsophisticated, ordinary.
But each of us has worth and dignity created in the image of God.
That is what we have in common.
That is what they want to take away.
Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
They desire to know everything about us while they hide everything from us.
It's time to turn that around and expose what they want to hide.
Please share the information and links you'll find at thedavidknightshow.com.
Thank you for listening.
Thank you for sharing.
If you can't support us financially, please keep us in your prayers.