The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW Eric Peters: Pontiac Racist? Taking Back Reality from ESG Mob

Episode Date: September 29, 2023

Eric Peters, EricPetersAutos.com. Liberty, cars & politics. UAW and the push for raise & a 4 day work week — the bigger picture is the society is going down a dead end road and we need to turn aroundFind out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

All right, welcome back. And joining us now is Eric Peters of epautos.com or ericpetersauto.com. And a lot of things have come up, a lot of articles, interesting things that he's put on his site since we last talked. And I wanted to talk to him about that but um i thought especially interesting to talk to him about all the attention that's been paid to the united auto workers strike uh by politicians uh it was joe biden who went there he actually he aced out trump and got there first trump wanted to go at the same time that the debate was happening so he could have a counter programming of an event but even during the debate you had doug bergumum talking about it as well.

So your op-ed piece. Thanks for joining us, Eric. Good to have you on. Oh, thanks for having me, David. Yeah, and to his credit, Orange Man said the unspeakable thing out loud. Yes. Yes. Yeah.

What is that unspeakable thing? Well, he talked about how it's not a matter of pay raises. It's about jobs being disappeared by this electrification agenda, which is what my article is all about, and that these UAW people had better get hip to the fact that they're not going to be worrying about cost-of-living adjustments in 32-hour work weeks if this thing proceeds apace because you only need so many workers to plug in an EV, and their jobs are going to be gone because of that. And the underlying premise of all of this, of course, is this green agenda, this idea of we're going to decarbonize everything. And of course, we're made of carbon, too, so eventually they're going to decarbonize

us. Well, they're telling you the truth about that, at least, you know. Yeah. They're just not telling you the whole truth. We understand what it's really about. It's about a depopulation agenda. But yeah, they're going to decarbonize us as well you know it's kind of what this all reminds me of you're talking about how it's a much simpler manufacturing process and of course a lot of this is going to be outsourced

we've already seen companies coming in and saying we're going to build the electric skate then you're just going to you know tack on the body or whatever else that you want to put on it and of course that doesn't have to be built here it'll be built on the places where they've got the minerals, which is in China, of course. But it, all this reminds me of the early days of computers, personal computers, when you had IBM and, you know, they, they went out, when they jumped in the market, they got the operating system from Bill Gates, who had already

stolen it from Digital Research. And then they decided that they would just go with off-the-shelf components, essentially, from Intel. And that opened it up for everybody to start making these things. And before you knew it, I mean, you even had some American Indian tribes who were manufacturing PCs, because anybody could put this stuff together. And that is really kind of what is happening now with the automobile It used to be very very complicated and it got even more complicated Because of government regulations about emissions and safety and all the rest of the stuff So that became a big barrier to competition for anybody getting into it

But now they have greatly simplified it with these ev things and it's going to be they're going to everybody's going to be jumping into And of course china's jumping into it in a big way, aren't they? Well, they're going to be homogenizing it. I published a piece earlier today about what Honda is about to do, which is it's going to release its own battery-powered appliances beginning in 2024 with a vehicle called the Prologue and then an Acura derivation of that called the ZDX. And all they are are extruded plastic shells with a Honda badge on them,

and underneath of them they've got the same GM Ultium battery platform that is underneath GM's battery-powered appliances. And so it begs the question, why bother? Why even have Hondas anymore? You know, Honda is a company that made its bones and its reputation on its engines. I go through in my article a number of the more famous engines that Honda had produced over the years, including the compound vortex combustion chamber engine that it had in the Civic back in the 70s that was so efficient that it didn't even need a catalytic converter to meet federal emissions regs.

And then you had models like the NSX and the S2000, which were like IndyCar race cars that you could drive on the street. They had 10,000 RPM red lines, just phenomenal vehicles. Well, they're about to give all that away because who cares? It's just another battery-powered appliance, and it's not just Honda. It's all of them. Essentially, they're trying to become the next Tesla, but then everybody's making the same thing. So what's the point in having 10 or 15 different companies all making the same thing? Yeah, they're all just boutique manufacturers, you know.

It's going to be a body by Fisher. But the same thing underneath all of them. As you point out, they really have had an amazing history, if you stop and think about it. It's kind of like the history of flight, you know, going from the Wright Brothers brothers up to the nsx you know it's like the supersonic transport because at the very beginning of this uh honda and um you know even mazda mazda survived they were just making like farm implements and some very simple motors and stuff at the end of world war ii they were there in hiroshima and they survived because they were in the shadow of the nuclear bomb that happened. They were on the other side of a mountain, and so it didn't blow them away. And they survived that and built on that.

But a lot of these car companies were just doing lawnmower engines, and then they went to motorcycle engines, and then they started doing small cars, and they started doing very, very sophisticated cars. And now everything is going to just be deconstructed, and all of that manufacturing expertise is going to be lost. That's a key thing to me. You know, when Toyota was talking about why they used BMW's model for their new sports car, they said, well, you know, we've been making all these sports cars,

but we haven't done any ourselves for a couple of decades, and we've lost the manufacturing expertise. They said, so we can't do something like the Miata that's done by Mazda. They've been doing this continuously for, you know, 30 years or so, but we haven't, and we've lost that manufacturing expertise. So we've got to rely on other people to do that. And it's going to be lost very, very quickly, isn't it? Yeah, and it's astounding when you think about it, too, because Toyota is one of the world's largest car companies. It has been the largest car company at one point or another. And if they haven't got the wherewithal and the resources to develop their own specific drivetrains for a particular vehicle, you know that there's a problem in the industry

generally. And these smaller car companies are not going to be able to do it at all. That's right, yeah. By the way, we look at things that are happening just from the cyber hacks, talking about what happened with the F-35, and the same thing happening with MGM Properties in Vegas, and Caesar's Palace was hacked and they admitted it. But, you know, we hadota that all their so their uh uh manufacturing was shut down a couple of weeks ago and and now the same thing has happened in

volkswagen they've shut down all their stuff all of this electronic stuff is just so vulnerable it's not just the batteries but as they are you know as we get more and more into computers whether you're talking about manufacturing or accounting or you're talking about the computers that are being deeply embedded in every kind of car, everything is becoming incredibly fragile and easily broken. I was going to say that word. What's that? Yeah, tiered levels of fragility. I was going to use exactly that word. And the other aspect of it is a kind of built-in obsolescence in that electronics tend not to age very well. You know, you think about your cell phone, and you buy a new one today,

and three years from now it's going to seem like a, I don't know, like a Betamax from back in the 80s. That's right. And it probably won't work at all because they deliberately engineer these things so that they can't be updated after a certain point, and so their functionality is diminished, and then the battery stops working. And so what do you do? You don't fix it.

You throw it away and get another one. Yeah, that's right. Yeah, it's much worse than the planned obsolescence they used to talk about with cars that, you know, people would, you know, they'd last typically like three years and people want to get rid of them. Yeah, but then they stuck around and a lot of people kept them and now they're making them into some very valuable antiques. But, you know, it was a big selling point that I remember in the 70s, Volvo's selling point was, you know, hey, our cars, average age of the cars in Sweden are 11 years.

And it's like, well, it's not necessarily because your Volvos are built so well. It's just because everybody's been made poor by socialism. And, you know, the interesting thing about the planned obsolescence is that a lot of people don't understand that that really didn't refer to mechanical obsolescence. It was more about trying to keep up with the Joneses. Yes. So, for example, General Motors would make the fins bigger one year rather than the prior year. That's right. And the idea was that, you know, you would look over at your neighbor's driveway

and see that his car had bigger fins than yours, and that would impel you to go down to the dealer and, you know, try to keep up with him by buying whatever the latest is. And then, of course, next year the fins got bigger or the grille changed in some other way. But the vehicles were very sound, and you could keep a 55 Chevy going for 20 years or longer without that much of a problem. It was mainly about social posturing rather than, quote-unquote, planned obsolescence. That's right. That's right. Yeah, there's still a lot of them driving around here, especially on particular weekends that you see that type of thing happening.

But, yeah, they make it bigger or they add more chrome. And then next year you got to have it with less chrome or smaller fins or no fins at all. It was, it was really about style and fashion. And that was a big part of why everybody was changing. Isn't it interesting that now people can't even afford to buy cars, let alone change them like they would a suit or a tie because. Oh, it's getting so crazy david i have uh this week my my uh my test car the vehicle that i'm reviewing is the uh the ford escape it's a ford escape and i emphasize that so it's a little crossover suv the thing is 47 000 wow wow that's amazing that truly is amazing well before we leave the autoworker stuff, right? You had, you know, Trump, I thought it was amusing because he goes there for a photo op. There's a lot of allegations that he had people. He goes to this place that is a holding up uh uaw signs and so some of the

local press went around and these people said no i'm not part of the union i'm just holding a sign here you know so they're they're saying this is an astroturf type of thing uh but then at the debate which is why he was there he didn't want to go to the debate he had doug bergham essentially saying the same thing that trump had been saying which which is that the auto workers are striking and it needs to be against the green agenda. And he talks about the very fact that he says we're subsidizing the cars and we're subsidizing a particular kind of car, not every car. We're particularly subsidizing electric vehicles when China is controlling 85% of the rare earth minerals that are going to be needed for these things. And so what we're doing is we're putting our own industry out of business and we're sending

it to China. But of course, that's what we've been doing for a long time, isn't it, Eric? You know, we've been giving them a pass with all this climate stuff so they can build as many power facilities as they want or refineries. And there's no restrictions on how many they build or how dirty they are. But now it's gotten to the retail level where we say, well, we're just going to send, we're going to prohibit, prohibit any manufacturing of this stuff by regulations in the United

States. It all must come from China. Yeah, it's paradoxical, ironical, and it's sad in that these people, these UAW people, do not understand that they're facing an existential threat. And in order for them to combat it, they're going to have to come to grips with something that's kind of difficult for them, and that they will have to question this green agenda, which is at the very core of the modern Democrat Party, which is essentially now a party of the elite left. And working class people have got to come to understand that, that the Democrat Party is the very thing that it used to accuse the Republican Party of being. It is the party of rich, arrogant elites who want to insurf and impoverish the working

class. That's right. And the middle class. That's right. That's right. You know, at the same time, he's virtue signaling to them. Biden is going there and saying that the UAW should fight for a 40% pay raise. And then Elon Musk, who I'm not a big fan of, but Elon Musk gave him a sanity check about that. And, you know, of course, that doesn't make any economic sense.

He says, so they want a 40% pay raise and a 32-hour work week it's a sure way to drive gm ford and chrysler bankrupt in the fast lane but of course you know the the fact that everything the minerals and all the rest of the stuff that they're going to have to use for this is going to be coming from china that is a super fast lane that for bankruptcy of an entire industry that used to be a cornerstone industry of our prosperity because it was a cornerstone of our manufacturing capacity and ability. And we're losing all that ability and capacity, and we're even losing our capacity to generate power.

Yeah, it's hard to imagine a worse time for the UAW to make these kinds of demands in view of the fact that the affordability of course has never been worse and it's getting worse all the time and it's not just the the price of the vehicles themselves which now average fifty thousand dollars that the average transaction price of a new car uh... it's the cost of money you know anybody who's paying any attention knows that interest rates on loans

have doubled anymore uh... and so that makes them even less affordable. And the idea that somehow these car companies are going to be able to pay their workers 40% more and cut their hours down to a 32-hour work week, and that that's not going to have any effect on the price of vehicles, and that they're going to somehow continue to make the same money to be able to pay these workers what they want for doing less work is insane. It's economically illiterate. Well, i think there's something else involved in that and that

is the 32-hour work week the four-day work week and we're seeing a big push on this not just to the uaw but we're seeing a big push on this in multiple different places they're doing it in the schools there's a lot of schools that are pushing for a four-day work week and then what that does is that puts pressure on the parents to push for a four-day work week because that's the point of the government schools for the most for most people they use them as daycare as child care uh not they don't care if they educate the kids just get them out of my hair so i can go to work type of thing and and so that that is they're pushing this four-day work week what do you see behind that push for the four-day work week i talked about this yesterday i'm curious to see what your take is well my initial reaction

is that they're kind of nudging us toward this the state of of infantilism and dependency where you get your uh ubi via your cbd uh uh digital token provided you're a good socially obedient little drone that's exactly my take on it yeah it's a push to move us to universal basic income, which is going to also involve CBDC. They want us working from home because, you know, if everybody's a Zoom worker, then they can, they don't even have to bring people in from other countries unless they want more social unrest.

But, you know, they could just, you know, have people in India doing the work, even if it's manual labor, if they got a robot that can be virtually controlled. So I agree with you. I think that's exactly what this is. People have been given a taste of being given money without having to go to work, and so let's keep that momentum going.

You know, Trump kicked that off with the lockdown, so let's keep that going. We'll go to a 32-hour work week, and of course, you know, maybe we'll pay the people less. Maybe we'll replace them with foreign workers who don't actually have to come here. They can stay foreign. Well, and there's a level of defeatism among the young in particular, and it's quite understandable. I, you know, I wrote an article the other day about what's happening in the real estate market and how even in my area, the cost of housing has gotten to the point. I live in a rural area. I should, I should predicate that with, so it used to be an affordable area, but now houses, little houses, little 1,100 square foot houses are selling for $300,000. And this is an area where the typical individual makes $25,000. The family income is about $45,000. People can't

afford that, let alone a 25-year-old just coming out of college or whatever, just trying to build his life. And they end up living at home. They just give up. And so they don't want to have a, they're not going to have a car. They're not going to have a house. They're going to be rendered perpetually dependent and playing games on video station. And so why not get their, you know,

QBI and just give up on life? And that's what they want ultimately. Yeah, I agree. Now, I think we need to seriously look at defunding the schools because I think that's a big part of this. When I was in Texas, there were entire schools that were basically

just people who had come here illegally. And we look at what is happening in Baltimore, paying $31,000 a year for the kids, and in 40% of the schools, there's not a single kid who is proficient in math. And those standards are not very high. They're very low standards. Basic supermarket math, right? Yeah, exactly, exactly.

Exactly. And so, you know, 40% of schools, not a single student can do supermarket math. And we're paying $31,000 a year for that. That kind of, you know, the dreamers coming here, well, it's destroying the American dream. And it's an incredible burden on everybody this government institution of schools and they're destroying our society at the same time we've got to somehow find a way to shut that thing down i think we're going to really destroy us economically as well as intellectually and spiritually and every other way that you could measure it the schools are a dead albatross around

the neck of this country absolutely completely agree completely agree with that. But I do think that the wheel is turning and that realization is dawning. To get back to the EV thing, I was reading something about what's happening in Europe and Germany in particular, and people are not buying these EVs. And Mercedes is extremely worried about their business model going forward,

having embraced this electrification agenda. And they're basically saying, well, what are we going to do if people don't buy these things? And that's happening here as well. We all are aware of what's going on with Ford and the debacle of Jim Farley and his embarrassing attempt to drive a lightning across the country. It was an epic fail.

And then Granholm essentially trying to do the same thing. People are cluing into what's going on. At last, finally, it took them a long time, but i do think the wheel is turning yeah that's true and you know the the garbage thing that granholm did the energy secretary um as she uh decides she's going to take a cross-country drive on the evs as well and you know it may have been to try to highlight oh well we got a problem here so that means we need more money and we need more personnel and we need more infrastructure for this particular thing i think that's what her purpose was uh the ford guy was trying to you know show people how it worked i think her her purpose was to show people how it's not working but they've now launched a probe into her because uh she was faking this

thing but of course you know the probes are going to be nothing other than a dog and pony, you know, show by somebody in Congress to be able to criticize her and get their face on TV. Nothing is ever done about any of this stuff. They don't pull any of this stuff back. They just continue to go along with what everybody else is pushing out there. It's a bipartisan push, and we need to understand that. Just like in the UK, I was talking earlier about how the conservatives are pushing through all these mandates to ban gas furnaces and gas stoves and to rip up the gas lines that are buried in the ground i mean they're destroying every one of these countries being destroyed by our own governments our own governments are at war with us over this climate mcguffin just like they were at war with us over the so-called pandemic MacGuffin. Yeah, and the key thing here is to simply raise the question,

why? Why? What are we doing this for? Let's talk about this so-called climate crisis, which I like to harp on the fact that they had to change the verbiage. They have to change the verbiage every so often because it becomes impossible to continue to maintain the narrative. You know, initially they would talk about global warming, but well, the records and the data didn't bear that out, you know, so they had to shift it around to this climate change, which can encompass anything. And now, instead of talking about carbon dioxide, they're talking about carbon to try and flim-flam people into equating it with something dirty like graphene, you know, or graphite.

It's just, it's so fundamentally oily. And you get back to this whole business of the schools and the innumeracy, you know, graphite. It's just, it's so fundamentally oily. And you get back to this whole business of the schools and the innumeracy, you know, you ask somebody, well, okay, you want to talk about the climate crisis. What's the percentage of the earth's atmosphere that's carbon dioxide right now? And invariably they have no idea. And when you tell them it's 0.04%, you know, and then they look at you and then you say, okay, so you're telling me that some sort of a fractional increase or decrease of so you're telling me that some sort of a, a fractional increase or decrease of that amount is going to have some kind of

a, a crisis level effect. Yeah. Oh yeah. During the headlights. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. That does not compute. And there was a, another piece I just saw, you know, there's about 16, 1700 scientists who got together and said, this is fake. But one of the things that they said, and again, you know, that doesn't make it true or false because you've got a large number of people or because you've got Nobel Prize winners or whatever. You had a large number of people, and you had several of them that were Nobel Prize winners.

But the key point was one thing that a guy said, which is just as important as the minuscule amount of carbon dioxide. And he said, we're being told by the IPCC from the UN, you know, the, uh, inner, um, international panel on climate change or something like that. Uh, and, and they're the ones pushing this stuff for the UN. He said, we're being told that there's a difference in manmade versus natural carbon dioxide. And he goes, please explain to me, um, how you got one atom of carbon and two of oxygen, how there's any difference in that.

But they're saying that if it's man-made, it's going to be different because it's going to last for hundreds or thousands of years. Whereas with natural stuff, it precipitates out in like three years. But the man-made stuff is going to be there forever. And it's going to continue to accumulate. And they said, this is utter nonsense. It's totally devoid of. We're living in idiocracy. We are.

We're living in idiocracy. We are. We're living in idiocracy. Yeah. All this furry stuff and the transgender stuff and everything is how they get people there. Everything has got to be subjective. And they're pushing that subjectivity, that 2 plus 2 equals 5. That's probably one of the questions on that math test in Baltimore. But, you know, it's not even idiocy. It's idiocy with a purpose, and it's an

evil purpose. They have deliberately dumbed down the populace so that the populace is vulnerable and susceptible to the kind of propaganda that they're peddling, and the hysterics that they're peddling. And this is all being done not to save the Earth or the environment, any of that stuff.

It is about establishing this hierarchical system of control with a technocratic managerial elite at the very apex of the pyramid and the rest of us living a very impoverished and serfed lifestyle where we're not allowed to do anything without permission, and we're very grateful if we've got Z-Bugs to eat, and that's it. Yeah, that's exactly it. Let's talk about something that is nostalgic and kind of fun.

You've got an article here, Pontiac is racist, and earlier in the program I had a thing about this guy who's giving up on being a trucker. He's just so frustrated with all the regulations and everything there, but I introduced it with the eastbound and down so people could see the Trans Am there, and I said, yeah, Eric's got one of those, and one of the listeners said, yeah, that's the only good trans out there is the Trans Am. Talk about Pontiac being racist. Barry's got one of those, and one of the listeners said, yeah, that's the only good trans out there is a trans-am. Talk about Pontiac being racist. Well, any iconography associated with Native Americans, American Indians, somehow has become racist. We're all familiar with the way the Washington Redskins had to change their name first to the Washington football team,

and now the Washington Commanders, even though they should be the Washington pilferers or some other such thing like that. And it's all being pushed by these neurotic, woke, left people. It's not being pushed by the American Indians themselves who loved the Redskins because of the positive associations that were conjured by the image of the noble warrior going out to fight on the field. And the same with Pontiac. It wasn't as though it was some kind of an Amos and Andy routine. They used the iconography of Chief Pontiac, who was a figure from the French and Indian War,

to be the face, if you will, of Pontiac as a brand, to conjure the noble chief leading the way. And it was wonderful, and people liked it. And it's just a very sad thing. And it's a good thing that Pontiac, I guess, was put out of its misery, you know, back in when, 2000, I'm trying to remember, I can't remember exactly, but it's been about 10 years since Pontiac got retired.

Because if they were still around today, I'm sure that there would be some woke left mob demanding that they change their name to some other thing because somebody is outraged and offended by the use of the term and the image. Well, it's interesting. You have the background of Chief Pontiac, which I didn't know, you know, but it's very much like you mentioned the French and Indian War. Very much like Last of the Mohicans, you know, James Fenimore Cooper. They could have called it the Chugung Chook. That would have been a bit of a tongue twister.

But Pontiac was there. He was an Indian chief in the Detroit area. Fort Detroit was where he was. And so that was a natural sequitur there for people there in Michigan to name it after this highly regarded Indian chief leader, you know, military leader, who had been allied with the U.S. But I guess that makes him evil as well, right?

He was allied with... Apparently so. You know, you had these really cool things associated with Pontiac, the car brand. You know, in the 30s and the 40s, they had the glowing chief hood ornament that was highly stylized and led the way. And then you had the famous arrowhead and all these other things that were, as a matter of fact, that were,

let me, let me interject here because I've got a picture of the head, uh, the, the Pontiac, um, uh, head that,

and, and I, when I saw your article, it made me think about my grandfather's car. He had one of these, uh, Pontiac chieftains or something like that. The only thing I remember about the car was this hood ornament that has this like amber

head of the Indian, you know, Pontiac. I thought that was the coolest thing because I was maybe about four or five years old and it was the only thing I ever remember, but I never forgot that. I've got a couple of different pictures of it. It's such a cool thing. And it had a lot of chrome holding, supporting this head, but then the head was projecting out. This is the way the car looks the car was not all that great but uh that that indian uh head that was there was really impressive and i never forgot that when i saw this article

about pontiac is like yes i gotta get that a picture of that yeah yeah it's things like that that created this emotional bond between people in their cars. One of my earliest memories of cars is looking underneath the hood of my parents' Oldsmobile 98 that they had back in the 70s. And I looked at this gigantic air cleaner, and it said Rocket 455 on it. And I remember that to this day. And that was like the first thing I thought, wow, that's really neat. And I wanted to see what was under the air cleaner. And look, fast forward, here I am today. Well, they would even make the taillights and stuff on the

Thunderbirds. They'd make them look like they were rocket turbines or something. You could just imagine it coming out of the back. But yeah, it was a lot of fun. They tried all kinds of things in terms of styling. Some of them worked. Some of them didn't. You know, some of them look really comical in retrospect, but some of them still. Some of them didn't. You know, some of them look really comical in retrospect, but some of them still look really cool in retrospect when you look at it. But it goes beyond that, you know. Yeah, go ahead.

We had this tremendous variety, which you can see if you go to an old car show today. You know, lines and lines of cars, each one profoundly different from the one that's sitting next to it. And that's a measure of what we lost. You know, people complain now about how everything looks the same. And I've got this great graphic of, I guess, about a dozen different new crossover SUVs of various brands. They're all white and they all look exactly the same. Well, I mean, it's true, but it's going to be even worse than that to get back to what we were talking about earlier, when not only do they look the same, but they literally are the same. And they just have the same electric drivetrains with that basically homogenized plastic extruded body draped over them with a different badge.

Oh, you can pick whatever color you like, maybe. You won't have to get white. You could get a silver one if you like. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, that's what we have become now, and I've joked about that. You know, it is interesting that, you know, we used to have cars of all different types of colors uh now everything is black white shades of gray with an occasional red that's basically basically what you see i've they've got some retro uh dodge chargers and stuff that are you know orange or green or purple or

something like that but for the most part it's all uh you know shades of gray and uh an occasional red car that's there i used to joke i joked joked with the kids, I said, yeah, back when I was growing up, TV was black and white, but the cars were Technicolor, and that's kind of the other way around. It's very Soviet. And I found out something interesting, by the way, because I'd noticed it, you know, you've noticed it, so many other people have noticed it, and I got to wondering why. And in the course of doing a little bit of research about the cars I review, I discovered that they are now charging a lot of money for other colors than silver, black, and white.

You know, like $700 to $1,200 to get something other than that in a lot of cases. And so that's why you see so many cars that are silver, white, and black. Wow. Okay. Well, yeah, that makes sense if they're going to make it something that's part of that. But before we get away from the Indians and everything, I like what you had to say. You said, as they purged the Redskins, you say in your article, as if fans of the Redskins were mocking American Indians when they cheered for the Redskins. Of course, they're not.

They're seeing them as cool, like the Vikings or whatever, or raiders or pirates or whatever. They're not mocking them. And you say most American Indians understood the Redskin name and image kings or whatever or raiders or pirates or whatever they're not mocking them uh you know and you say most american indians understood the redskin name and image were meant to honor the bravery and the spirit of the american indian warriors in battle and the redskins like any other professional football team played to win they didn't play to mock and that's the key thing right and that's what is so makes it so incredibly stupid about all this stuff. And yet you see now with

Taylor Swift and this football player that she's dating, I saw an article because every site that I go to, they've got something about Taylor Swift and the football player. And so one of the articles that came up, somebody was saying, well, maybe Taylor Swift can use her influence to get them to stop doing the tomahawk chop. I was like, why? Why would you want to stop the tomahawk chalk in the first place? This is all part and parcel of this effort to just suck the joy out of life completely. We're all supposed to basically don the proverbial Jesuitical hair shirt

and flagellate ourselves for existing. Yeah, yeah. You know, I remember when I was growing up, you know, we had neighborhood schools. basically don the proverbial Jesuitical hair shirt and flagellate ourselves for existing. Yeah. Yeah. You know, I, I remember when I was growing up, uh, you know, we had neighborhood schools,

they're all close together and the junior high school, the mosque, the mascot was a warrior, right? So it's like the warriors. And, and, and then when you go to the high school,

which are just a couple of blocks down, uh, that was the chiefs. And, uh, that was, you know, something that was the chiefs and uh that was you know something that was had big indian chief head that was on the outside of the school uh there in tampa is a chamberlain high school and um even the

liberal democrat mayor uh was pushing back on she went to chamberlain and she was pushing back on she said you know they're going to spend like a hundred thousand dollars to take this thing down and put some other mascot up there she goes but leave it alone you know it was fine and she's a you know a democrat uh liberal hard left liberal but you know you had you went from being a warrior up to a chief and of course in in the band they had uh the girls that were dancers they all had these big uh chieftain headdresses and stuff. They call them chief heads. And then that we had drum majors that were not dressed up in military uniform, but they were, uh, old people would have a fit about this. They, um, uh, were shirtless and before the game, they would rub them down with this stuff called Texas dirt.

So they had red skins and then they would put war paint over them and they had a headdress that went all the way down to the ground and then they would run around humanity oh yeah i mean it would be like blackface today you know i mean they would flip out if they saw this but it was great you know we had the coolest drum majors of any of the schools that were there um had a couple of times at one time stabbed one of the bass drums because they'd run and swoop but uh the with a spear because he had a spear but um it was it was a lot of fun. And then from that, you go from junior high school warriors to Chamberlain Chiefs, and then a lot of them went to FSU, which were the Seminoles. And they tried to change that mascot, and the Seminole tribe there in Florida said,

no, don't do that. We like that. It wasn't just a generic Redskin. It was a specific Indian tribe, and they really liked it. They were honored by that. They got it. They understood it. Yeah, the thing to understand here is these people will never be satisfied, and they're not really aggrieved. This is all just a cavalcade of convenience. That's right. You placate them with one, we'll defer to you on this. Okay, we'll take down our mascot. We'll change our name. It's never enough. There's

always something else, because the whole point of this is to maintain this ongoing sense of agreement that somebody has been wrong, that somebody has been victimized, and you owe us something because you did this. That's right. Yeah. And it's very much like if you do their pronouns, they're going to come back at you with something else, you know, because it's not about any of that stuff. It's about you submitting to to them and so if you submit to their pro their pronouns and next thing they're going to have you submitting to the furries or whatever other crazy thing they come up with it's about your submission and it will always be something else and it's always pushing us further and further away from reality because that's really the key thing for them you know if you

don't know anything and if you live in this fantasy world, then you're going to be very easily controlled in a virtual reality or with video games or with drugs or with sex or whatever it is that they want to throw at you. And actually, Yuval Harari has actually taunted people by saying that quiet part out loud. He said, yeah, we're going to control people with drugs and virtual reality and video games

and all the rest of this stuff. Well, they're already doing it. You look at teenagers, and what are they looking at? Invariably, they're pecking at that stupid phone. Even when they get together, you watch them, a group of them, instead of them talking to each other, they're all sitting there at the same physical place, but each of them is occupied pecking at their individual phone. That's right.

Yeah, I think it's funny, too, as you go through the different models, you know, in terms of thinking about what they have picked up with this stuff. The Oldsmobile Cutlass. Now, there's the pirate thing, you know. Yeah. You know, I guess, you know, they've now got literal pirates now in Oakland. You know, they have the Oakland Raiders, but now they've got literal pirates who are attacking people in their boats and stealing everything they can and sinking the rest of it. And the police say, well, we don't know. That's not our jurisdiction. We can't do anything about it.

And I'm looking past the buck on stuff like that. Sure. It's a clown show, and it's time for us to pull a curtain on it and say enough is enough on so many levels. You know, for example, we've gotten to where we are with regard to cars to a great extent because we accepted the premise that, you know, there's a pollution problem, there's an emissions problem, and that was true at one time. It's not true anymore. And I think the way to solve this problem is to demand cost-benefit analysis and to

say, look, it's one thing to say a car needs to have an exhaust scrubber, a catalytic converter that maybe it adds $300 to the price of the car, but it reduces the harmful pollutions by 50%, really 50%, not 50% of 1%, as opposed to some new thing that they're going to have to do to a vehicle to achieve a less than half a percent difference change in some so-called emission at a cost of $1,500 or $2,000. It's absurd. The government, if it's going to have these regulations, ought to be obliged to establish and prove that, look, first of all, here's the problem.

Secondly, what we're proposing is going to meaningfully improve or ameliorate that problem at a reasonable cost. And if not, it shouldn't happen. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, I can attest to the fact that, you know, I was driving a convertible back in the 1970s and had a little spitfire. And, you know, it was not an uncommon thing at all. It's actually, you know, half of the cars you'd get behind them.

It's like, whoa, you know,'s just vents, exhaust coming from them. I still drive convertibles and my convertible and that never happens anymore. I never smell anybody's exhaust. It is a non-problem. And they're just grasping at straws and it's just the metastasizing bureaucracy trying to control and destroy everything. That's really what we're seeing here. Yeah, well, they could never concede that mission accomplished, right?

That's right. You know, the EPA's been around now for about 50 years. And if they were to say, well, you know, we did a really good job, 99 point something, and that's actually the number, 99 point something percent of what comes out of the exhaust pipe of a new car is water vapor and carbon dioxide, neither of which have any effect on the environment. And therefore, our mission is accomplished. We don't need to worry about this stuff anymore. They'll never do that because think how many people are earning their livelihood that way, how many lobbyists are involved, how many, you know, just ripple effects throughout the economy,

how many bucks are being made off of these scams. So instead of acknowledging that they fixed the problem, they have to magnify the problem to justify not only what they're doing but what they want to do in the future. Yes, and of course, I would stress too that that's especially true of diesels as well. There aren't any diesel cars that you smell anymore either. They have taken care of that. Of course, they're taking care for the most part of getting rid of the diesels,

but they are still out there, and you don't smell anything from them either. Uh, they're running perfectly clean. They've gone through an incredible amount of expense to clean that up. Uh, but it is clean. And so these are problems that are not problems and the EPA, which was originally set up to, uh, uh, you know, to protect the environment, everything. They're just looking for whatever they can do.

Now they're shutting down power plants based on emissions that you can't tell anything about. You drive by these power plants, you're not going to smell anything. You're not going to see smoke coming out of them. They're clean. They're not like the ones in China and India, which they care absolutely nothing about. They never cared about it in the Paris Climate Accord in 2015. They said, build as many of these as you want. We don't care how dirty they are. Well, if you're talking about as you want. We don't care how dirty they are. Well, if you're talking about a global problem, then you would care about that. And some of the true believers did care about that at the time.

But they don't care about any of that stuff. They just want to shut everything down. And it just amazes me that so many people cannot see that that is really the true agenda, just to destroy our lives. Before we leave the pontiac thing though um you mentioned also the firebird uh being an american indian mythological figure of course you've got the firebird and you've got that that figure there but i just you know she's talking about all this other stuff it's like yeah i really hadn't thought about how many

different ways pontiac had tied in the Indian culture into their cars, and in a very positive way. You know, everybody liked that. Yes, and they made some of the most, you know, iconic cars in the history of the automobile. You know, one of the most obvious ones being the very first muscle car, which was the 1964 Pontiac GTO. There had been fast cars before that, but there had not been fast and expensive cars. You know, the genius of John DeLorean who ran the company back then was

to take basically an economy car, it was the Tempest, and put the big engine from the Bonneville into the Tempest and sell it for cheap. So now you didn't have to be a rich old man to have a fast car. And, you know, I mean, the thing just sold like, you know, like pancakes, and boom, everybody else wanted to have one, too. And so you had this great muscle car craze, and then, of course, the government shut that down, but Pontiac still persevered, you know, through the 70s. The Trans Am and the Firebird was one of the most popular cars on the road. Of course, government managed to kill that off, too, by forcing Pontiac to stop building

its own engines, so the Trans Am just became basically a reskin Camaro, and it lingered on for a few more years, but it eventually died, and along with it, so did Pontiac. Yeah, yeah. You even mentioned the shaker scoop. I remember those things. I remember that in those cars as well as in Mustangs. That was a lot of fun.

You know, big hole in the hood and a big scoop coming up to it that you saw the vibration of the engine in it. Even better, mine's got a flapper door so it's vacuum actuated so as you get on the gas, that door just kind of cantilevers open and then you hear the quadrajet

secondaries opening up and it's just the best thing ever. Oh, that's great. That's really good. Yeah, when we look at this um uh the they just keep moving this uh this forward um and um i guess the question is you know what are we going to do i guess we've got to uh we've got some really good hardware that's out there and cars and i think really the business of the future is going to be people who can do repair and people who can make the auto parts, you know, kind of like Jay Leno has, I think, going to see repurposing of some of the 3D printers and things like that, perhaps. I don't know. But then again, the next part of that is going to be how do we get the fuel?

Are we going to be able to have micro refineries? I'd like to see that. We've got micro breweries and and we've got here in Tennessee, they made it legal for people to have moonshine-type places. That's really taken over the tourist areas around here. What we need is to make it legal for people to do their own fuel because they're not going to build any more refineries at all. Sure.

I mean, I'm not a big fan of ethanol when it's being forced on us and you know the form of the ethanol mandates however uh you know you can make alcohol out of corn and and other such things and you can easily convert um an engine that was designed to run on gasoline to run on alcohol so that may be something we're going to have to learn to deal with too in the future yeah yeah instead of a still up in the mountains for moonshine you have it for fuel for your car you know and then things tied together, you know, all the bootleg NASCAR drivers that cut their teeth on running alcohol. Maybe they I think it's kind of interesting to look at this, especially in light of the fact that you had RFK Jr. make some overtures to the Libertarian Party, and some of the people there at the party talked about that as well. Dennis Kucinich said, no, no, no, no, no, he's not going to run as a third-party candidate. He's going to run as a

Democrat. I think that's kind of interesting. What do you think in terms of RFK Jr.? I haven't been involved in the Libertarian Party for about 25, 30 years. And, you know, I know that when I was there, you know, they had the leadership was open to anybody. And, you know, they would like to see somebody that was very popular and famous come in because they wanted to get the vote totals. But when I was there um the people in the party uh they would be very very factious and doctrinaire and uh if somebody was not towing the line exactly it's like no way you're going to get this nomination i i don't really see that happening from that standpoint even if he wanted to do it what do you think

well let's see uh rfk's uh first of, not a libertarian, but then neither is the Libertarian Party at this point anymore. However, I will say this about RFK Jr. I think he's not a psychopath. And, you know, that carries a lot of weight with me. I look at the orange man and his pathological narcissism, and I look at that thing that wanders around in front of the teleprompter in DC who's even worse. And I think to myself, you know, the bar is now so low, I would just like somebody who isn't completely out of their mind with evil and who actually speaks in complete sentences and can be reasoned with.

And so I don't have an issue with RFK. In fact, when I was out running earlier today, I thought to myself, you know what would be really great is if RFK and Orange Man got together and decided that they would each run as an independent and thereby cut out the Republicans and the Democrats. And then we could end the whole sham in a really public way. Oh, that would be good. Can you imagine? Yeah, yeah. Because it's those political parties that are so corrupt, and you certainly see that with RFK Jr., the way that they play with the rules and, you know, well, you know, we're going to set the order this year so that it helps our feeble candidate out front, Biden and all the rest of this stuff.

And if you campaign in some of these areas early on, then we're going to take all your votes away from you. Crazy stuff like that. But Trump is doing the same type of thing trump is going uh his organization is going into uh various um uh states and saying it's going to be a winner take all so if he comes out with you know 50 and a half percent he will get all the delegates instead of a proportionally added so that will make him get past the post faster than anybody else and of course they can do this because the parties are making the rules. The parties decide who's going to really to run and the parties decide who's going to get into debates and the parties decide who's going to get on the

ballots and all the rest of the stuff. It's one of the reasons why we have no real choices in this because of these corrupt political parties that are controlling everything. Well, sure. And on, you know, either depending, it doesn't matter whether you're talking about the Democrats or the Republicans, these as institutions, they're antithetical to people like Trump, who is not one of the good old boys inside the club, and they're antithetical to RFK, you know, the arrogance of these people on the left who constantly lecture us about our democracy,

and they won't even put the senile old pedophile in the same room with RFK to have a debate. So much for our democracy, right? Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Oh, well, you know, yeah, the two of them, the two guys who have been president do not want to run on the record. That should tell us everything we need to know about this. But you mentioned earlier, you know, you said, yeah, the libertarians are not even libertarian,

the ones that are at the top of the ballot. And it was one thing that just absolutely amazed me in 2020 was the fact that the libertarian candidate, Jo Jorgensen, was out there. She didn't care at all about the lockdowns and the masks and the closures. That was not even an issue to her. And it really was an issue to most of the libertarians that were running. It was there was one guy. I think his first name was donald but rainwater was his name he was in indiana and uh he started talking uh pushing back against all this stuff and he shot up into double digits and so i tried to interview him and he's like no no i don't want to do any interviews it's almost

like i'm scared of him because he was getting up high i have subsequently since i had this program within this last year uh i interviewed him because he's running for something. And he's a very smart guy. And he's very libertarian. But, you know, I don't know if now he's gotten over the fear that he might get elected. Well, you know, I don't understand how you can be a libertarian without accepting as your foundational principle, leaving other people alone, period. As a general idea, it's kind of like claiming that you're a Christian without believing in Jesus.

It's just absurd. Call yourself something else instead of pretending to be what you're not. That's right, yeah. And she still got over 1%, which I remember when I was involved in it, that was everybody was very excited that there had been, I think I think it was Ed Clark who got 1% in 1980 or something. And so that had been the benchmark, uh, even Ron Paul, when he ran as a libertarian, uh, only got about, um, you know, 400,000 votes or something like that. And so, you know, the, the people are getting, um, are more and more open to a third party. It's just that the ballots are closed to third parties.

And the Libertarian Party is about the only party that has the ability to get on the ballots because that's what they have been focused on. And that's almost exclusively focused on getting on the ballot. And they've been pretty successful at it, but they haven't been successful at anything else other than getting on the ballot because it's such a Herculean effort. And no other third party can even come close to getting on the ballot in a number of places. Yeah, that's right.

And, you know, I tend not to look at this as something that ought to be pursued politically. I look at this as more something that ought to be pursued intellectually, philosophically, and morally. If we could get enough people to accept the idea, hey, you own you, I own me. Let's agree to deal with each other voluntarily and peacefully. Let's not take each other's stuff. Let's not try to force other people to do what we want them to do. Let's live and let live. If we could get back to that idea, which is a very Christian idea, by the way, get back to that, I think that the political stuff would solve itself. Yes. Yesterday, I talked to Conor Boyack, who is the guy who put together the Tuttle Twins.

And those books are focused mainly on economics and politics from a libertarian perspective, you know, taking apart socialism and everything. As he put it, for young elementary school kids and politicians, that mentality. And so one of the first things that he said, and I absolutely 100% agree with it, he said, we focus everything on the presidential race, and we talk about that. There are some, you know, hopefully there's some issues that present themselves because of that. But he said that's the area where we can have the least effect. And so what he's done, besides his books, he's also got an organization there in the state that works on state-level issues. And he's been able to get more than 100 laws passed there in the state of Utah that actually increase freedom and free markets and things like that, where he says, you know, he's worked with Mike Lee to get Mike Lee elected,

and he said, you know, he said, I'm not saying that he's doing a bad job, it's just that you can't really get anything done by getting one senator elected. And you really can't get anything done by getting a president elected. And neither the people in Congress nor the president really want to go throw themselves on the barbed wire and take the hits for this stuff and get it done. They all want to push this stuff off to the bureaucracy, which is how we got into the situation where the bureaucracy and the judiciary are controlling everything. They don't want to take any responsibility for anything, so they're more than happy to abdicate that power to somebody else. Well, sure, and we've got this more fundamental problem, too, of people thinking that it's okay to vote for or support a politician to get the government to use its power, its

force to do things that would be criminal if they did them themselves. Yes. Yes. That is exactly the point. Yep. And there was an interesting, in terms of talking about that, Reason had an interesting take on, you know, Trump went to South Carolina and somebody presented him with a pistol that had his face card on the handle. Oh, I love this. Yeah. Everybody loves it. I got to

buy this. And then his campaign manager said he did buy it. And then people said, well, he's not allowed to buy it because he's been indicted for felonies and that's a prohibition. And, uh, so through all this whole thing, reason had a good take on it. Reason said, well, you know, if you stop and think about this, that's essentially the same law that Hunter Biden is being accused of, right? Because you've got to say, I'm not even indicted for a felony. I'm not a convict, and I'm not indicted. You have to also say, I'm not a drug addict, and I'm not a user of drugs. And so, you know, so, and their point was that a lot of people will excuse it for the guy that they like. The Democrats will excuse this for Hunter and the Republicans will

excuse it for Trump and say he shouldn't be punished for any of this stuff. And yet the reality is, is that, you know, the law itself is wrong and the ATF itself is wrong. You shouldn't have people for nonviolent stuff not be able to own a gun or purchase a gun legally. That law in and of itself is wrong, and yet people will not come together to oppose that from both sides of the political spectrum. Instead, they'll use it as a weapon against the other guy on the other side. Yeah, and that's a moral failing, and it leads you to be vulnerable. Essentially, this is why we have this sort of given this hyena tug over a piece of meat at every election, because you're voting in the hope that, A, you'll be able to use the government to force your neighbor to do what you want him to do. And also so he won't get the power to do the same to you in return.

That's an awful way to have to live your life. It is. It really is. And, you know, like I've said many times when I was trying to explain libertarianism to people, I would say, well, freedom is one thing you can't have unless you give it to other people. You know? And it's kind of like, you know, the golden rule or whatever. There's all these different ways that you can try to explain it.

But today, the society has become so polarized. And that's the thing, the big issue that I have with Trump is that they've become polarized over him. He's such a polarizing figure that they're making him a Mason Dixon line of a new civil war. And that's my real concern about all this stuff. And it's why, you know, when you look at these, all these indictments, obviously they're going way over the top on, on him while they let her, the things go. But we've seen this with the people that he incited that in dice and, and, and, uh,

told to come January the sixth and abandoned them and left them twisting in the wind. You know, these people have been given extreme punishments that are way beyond anything that is justified by anything that happened. Joe Bigso used to work with 17 years in prison, and he didn't get violent with anybody. This is absolutely insane, and this is the way they've weaponized this system, and they really are trying to push us into a civil war, I think. Yeah, well, and they're getting it closer and closer all the time. I thought it was noteworthy, as we're having these impeachment inquiries in the House, there's virtually no coverage of it on any of the major networks,

as opposed to the 24-7 endless harangues that were occurring whenever Adam Schiff would say something about Russia influence, Russia misinformation with regard to Trump. And what they're doing by doing that is causing people on Trump's side of the aisle to become absolutely enraged and apoplectic about what's happening to their guy. Yes, they want to stoke it up. And Trump is actually, I think think happy to see that happen because he raises money off of his uh off of his indictments i mean you know millions of dollars off of these

indictments every time another one comes it's like it's a big fundraising opportunity for him james carville with the democrats um when they said they're going to begin impeachment hearings of biden he goes i can't believe our good for how do we get this lucky that they're going to impeach biden because he knows that it is going to help him as well. And you're talking about the way the media is skewing this stuff. You know, five million dollar bribe for Biden and, you know, how they're going to split this thing up. They've got the emails. They've got this all this stuff memorialized in terms of FBI documents going back to June of 2020, you know, several months

before the election. And so, you know, in the House, they're showing that this was memorialized by the FBI. They're showing emails that they got from Hunter Biden's laptop. And yet all I hear from the establishment media is, well, there's nothing there. There's absolutely nothing. And it's like, are you kidding me? It was mailed to his house. And Anderson Cooper says, well, that doesn't prove anything.

If it doesn't fit, you must acquit. Yeah. It's kind of like there was a scene from Working Girl where she comes home and she finds her husband in bed with somebody else. And he gets up and he goes, it's not what you think. It's like, that's what these people are doing with hunter biden yes and and with everything i mean it's just beyond the point of absurdity uh as you see this stuff rolling forward but it's always great talking to you eric we didn't get a chance to get into all your prep stuff but we pretty much run out of time i got a couple of comments that i need to read before we

do run out of time but thank you so much for joining us again, folks. If you want great commentary on mobility, which is a foundational thing for Liberty, but also Liberty mobility. And he talks about real cars that you can still kind of afford. Some of them, they're starting to get more and more expensive, but I mean, he's not talking about the hyper cars that would,

that only the gazillionaires will be able to afford. But, again, ericpetersautos.com or epautos.com, a great place to get information about one of the key things that keeps us free, and that is our car. Thank you so much, Eric. Appreciate it. Thank you, David. 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, and 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. thedavidknightshow.com Thank you.