Advocacy / AMAC In The Media / Politics

Robert Charles on Good Morning Ozarks – March 10, 2020

Charlie Engram

This the membership keeps growing, let’s tell them about AMAC, Bobby.

Robert Charles

You bet. So, very fittingly AMAC is the organization for those over the age of 50 who are more conservative in their thinking. Of course, it’s got all those benefits that come with an organization of this type – the financial benefits. It also, has a great magazine which incidentally comes out every four to six weeks and you end up with a better news pool than you would get if you were, I think, subscribing to Time magazine. It’s real news. It’s the stuff you don’t see elsewhere. And of course, it relates to everything from finances and medicine to benefits. I mean, it is – this organization, AMAC, is truly I worked in the Reagan White House, Bush 41, Assistant Secretary to Colon Powell, but I’m going to tell you, this organization is where I enjoy being, because this group, over the age of 50, is really a group that understands America. They’ve lived through crises. They know the ups and the downs and the beautiful part is this organization represents the values that I think are all American. First Amendment values, free speech, you know, freedom of worship, the freedom of assembly, the Second Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, you know, for trial – all the things that we believe are central to the American way of life. And, you know, there are not enough voices out there representing that, and in particularly in Washington and this this group really just is tireless 2.1 million Americans now, over the age of 50, and a great, truly great organization.

Charlie

Keith and I are part of that group and we did the extended membership. And we’re going to encourage everybody listening to go to AMAC… tell me how to get there?

Robert

Actually, it’s AMAC.us – or you can just Google A-M-A-C and you’ll find it. It’s a really – I think it’s a great organization at a time in American history when we’ve got to stand up for these values.

Keith O’Neil

AMAC.us and check that out and, by the way, you go to KLFCradio.com later today, hear Bobby’s podcast and get a link to the website as well.

Charlie

Bobby this morning I’ve got a list of some things I would like for us to talk about and then make sure that we leave plenty of time to talk about coronavirus and the overreaction of Governor – in my opinion – I know it’s serious, but what Governor Cuomo has done in the State of New York, I’m just not sure about. Let’s start right off the bat.

Keith

You want to talk about the talking about the Supreme Court?

Charlie

That’s where we’re going to go.

Keith

I have a question, Bobby, if you’ll allow me. If I said to you, or about you, Bobby Charles, if you go on Good Morning Ozarks for even five minutes, I’m going to come after you and you are going to pay. Would you perceive that as a threat?

[Laughter]

Robert

Well, I guess it depends who it’s coming from, but the bottom line is, yes. And the notion that – I know what you’re describing here, is that the majority leader – the guy is supposed to be the most responsible Democrat in the Senate, the Majority Leader or in this case the Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer, went out there and – I listened to that clip several times. He was he was almost at the edge of utter recklessness. He was out there threatening two justices on the Supreme Court. He was out there saying things that I think you could perceive in one of two ways. He says it was all political, but I think, at the end of the day, it was more than political.

It was a threat. Here’s what happened – nobody believes that Chuck Schumer is going to go out there with a hammer and do some damage to these two justices. What happens is when a responsible person becomes irresponsible and appears to advocate for something that could lead to violence – see, that wasn’t his only phrase. He also said that we’re going to hit you as hard as we can, etc. What happens is it causes other people to not only reduce the level of dignity and respect that they give to the court, and to opinions of the court – in this case he was alluding to some opinion that might relate to social policy or to a reversal of Roe v. Wade. He not only undermines the legitimacy of the court, but he causes people to think about doing something violent, and that is what is so irresponsible about this leadership. The House leadership has done the exact same thing in other environments. The notion that you forgive people for going out and riding and destroying things and beating people up with black masks, etc. That is not what America is made of. In fact, there’s a whole slew of Supreme Court decisions that make clear that if you go out and try to precipitate violence, you’re now violating the law. So, reality on Schumer, is that the guy just needs to wind himself in. And why did he do that? He did it because they are terrified. They’re terrified because this president has put – has filled 28% of the federal bench now with strict constructionist people, who actually read the Constitution, who refused to legislate from the bench.

He’s put a hundred and ninety judges on the federal district and circuit courts, and he’s put two on the Supreme Court. They are terrified, because judicial activism is coming to an end. The notion that that branch can take over the legislative branch and can legislate from the bench any social policy they want, they can turn the world upside down and inside out, nobody will react to it because who’s going to react to it? They’re the bench. They’re the final rulers of what the law is. So, at the end of the day, this president is getting traction now by putting judges, who are textualist, on the bench. People like, you know, of the spirit of Ed Meese and, you know what? I could not be happier.

Charlie

Well, let me say something that just blows my mind. Schumer did exactly what they’ve been accusing Trump of doing from the beginning. Inciting his people. And that’s exactly what he did. Well, enough said about Mr. Schumer. Let’s move on to something more exciting, Nancy Pelosi. So, here’s a question for you We finally have some bipartisan agreement. We understand Coronavirus is serious. We need to be attentive. We need to be concerned about what’s going on and be very diligent. So, we go to a bill – bipartisan – and we go to vote on the coronavirus bill, but Nancy chooses to put some Christmas ornaments on it and throw other things in there. Why do we allow that Bobby?

Robert

So, this is a trick that has gone on for a long time, and the Democrats play this trick quite often. If you have a flood, or you have a hurricane, or you have a tornado disaster, or you have some other bill that they call an emergency supplemental bill – and I ran a portion of a committee for five years. What happens is, in order to get it out of the chamber, you have to have majority votes in the House. That means majority Democrats, right now. I’d like to think next year alone. But it does right now. So, they can put anything they want on that bill because they know the president has to sign it. And the reason, one of the reasons to jump from 2.5 billion to 8.5 billion is that they put all kinds of various social policy long-range, you know, I’ll call them sweeteners, but really they amount to earmarks for their own members into that bill. Look, we as average Americans can look at this is why the president ought to have a line-item veto – Ronald Reagan wanted it.

We haven’t had one. Most governors have a line-item veto. When when a lot of baloney gets put in a bill that’s a waste of taxpayer money – hard-earned taxpayer money – the Executives at the state level usually has the right to put a red line through it and say we’re not spending money on that piece of junk, or that private bit of graft there or that private, you know priority. We’re going to put it where it belongs. This president asked for money to address, prepare for, respond to the coronavirus problem. You know, he went so far as to say, look, if you can direct money at things that come to $8.5 billion and they are truly needful, then you got my signature. He signed it anyway, because there isn’t any choice. I mean when the Democrats push a bill, a Christmas tree in front of you, with lots of ornaments on it, and all you want is the tree you still have to sign it. So, that’s what happened.

Charlie

I’m going to tell you, keep 2.5 to 8.5 and…

Keith

And I heard it started at 16 on their side and they brought it back down to 8.5.

Charlie

And you just got…

Robert

And they’re always looking for more. You know, it’s that old adage, you know don’t let a good crisis go to waste. So, they use it for their own benefit.

Charlie

All right, before we go to the break, let’s move on to Joe Biden. Okay. I have a question. Nobody like – I mean, nobody […] Excuse me, I said that. Nobody felt that Joe Biden was the perfect candidate for the Democrats. Little by little they start to drop out. Super Tuesday comes and we know that Bernie Sanders was probably not going to carry South Carolina. We understand that. But then, all of a sudden, he kind of pulls out of what I call a semi not a landslide victory on Super Tuesday. Bernie is still in it. But now all of a sudden everybody thinks he is the great hope. What in the world is going on? And the other day, a headline, of all things, when the stock market came back up they – somebody had the ridiculous idea to right “stock market surge due to Biden Super Tuesday victory.” Come on, Bobby!

Robert

Yeah, So, I think what you’re witnessing here, if you step back twenty paces, is a genuine act of desperation. And you know we started with Schumer, we get to Biden, but genuine acts of desperation in the face of what has been a rip-roaring economy, a great national security, great border security. I mean, objectively, just look at the numbers. You don’t have to take my opinion for it. On every major issue area, the President has racked up big successes in just three years, and against the wind. And so, what they did initially is they kind of thought, well Bernie Sanders is going to be our guy, Socialist, he’s the exact opposite of a Capitalist who believes in the Republican individual liberties.

 He’ll be the guy we put our money on. And Sanders is a 78-year-old guy who recently had a heart attack and, honestly, I think his political philosophy is sincerely held. I also think it’s a lunatic philosophy. Anybody who advocates for Marx and Engels really, you know, and sure Socialism is a halfway stop on your way to communism. That’s actually in the orthodoxy of the books. I mean this is not – and every time it’s been tried that’s where it goes, it either collapses or ends at communism. So, you know, Bernie Sanders is not a very cheerful fellow. And so, the Democrats, I think in a state of desperation, turned to the only guy that’s really got any experience at all that qualifies in their minds-eye as a moderate, even though he has kept far left himself. The problem with him is that is it Biden is really not up to it anymore. I mean this guy, 20, 30 years ago, maybe should have been thinking about being president, tried, failed. Was accused of plagiarism. His judgment is bad – gaffes were as bad back then. It’s just that they weren’t tainted by the added element here of what I think is a slow, sort of, losing of the grip. I think this guy is – He’s really not up to the game. And I think it’s really sad, in a way, because if I was a Harry Truman Democrat or a John Kennedy Democrat or a Jimmy Carter Democrat or a Bill Clinton Democrat I’d be looking around and saying where’s my candidate?

There’s nobody here that that has the competence and the philosophy of Harry Truman. They’re all gone. And so, you know, what could they do? They could pull a rabbit out of their hat, but I don’t think there are too many rabbits left to be pulled. And I think that at the end of the day this Democratic Party has configured itself in a way that is further left than with McGovern in 1972, and I think it’s a very sad turn of events. I think our Republic is strongest when you have people in the middle, that are both good candidates, run against one another, and one of them wins. You are not healthy when you know, at the end of the day, you’ve only got one party that’s behaving like a real American political party and the other one is just taking cheap shots and putting up people that aren’t really qualified for the job. But that’s where we’re at.

Charlie

The one rabbit, Oprah Winfrey, she’s out and of course we keep looking at in the big hat and the next one is Michelle Obama. She’s not going to run. Obama has not endorsed yet. I think that’s going to be funny if he does.

Keith

But he’s in the commercial.

Charlie

But he’s in the commercial because they’ve taken clips of the things he talked about. Bernie Sanders did the same thing. So, answer me this question. Today’s headline says, the most important endorsement comes today – Kamala Harris. How could that be the most important endorsement?

Robert

Yeah, I’ll be honest with you. Everything is going to be no news that’s turned into big news because they don’t have any news. Kamala Harris doesn’t really amount to much of anything. I suppose the value to Biden is that, although Sanders won all the California delegates, you have a liberal senator who ran, frankly, was unqualified for the job herself. I mean you looked at her saying serious things and she would be giggling on the sidelines. It’s really pathetic. I mean that’s not the way we expect, you know, the next Dwight Eisenhower or Pence or Trump to step to the depth of plate. And so, you know I don’t think it means much of anything, quite honestly. I think that the Democrats are in a tailspin, and they don’t really know how to get out of it. You know, it’s You know, I’ll just use a real analogy to flying. When you do get caught in a tailspin, you turn into the spin and pull up. That means you admit you’ve got a problem and you find a way out there. They’re stuck. They really don’t even want to admit they have a problem and they’ve got a couple of problems.

Charlie

Well, I will tell you one thing. Bernie Sanders is not going to give up. Okay, and so, whether it goes to a contested… Now, would you explain one thing before we go to the break? What is a contested convention?

Robert

Well, I think it’s a confused convention is really what it is. The Democrats have rules from 1967 that, you know, changed everything and, the whole idea behind Super Tuesday – this is going to knock you sideways – the whole idea behind Super Tuesday was that you would get a more conservative candidate earlier so that you wouldn’t have all this cherry-picking of people that really shouldn’t have been in the race. The problem you’ve got right now is that the Democrat demographics don’t line up behind anybody. If Biden is the guy, then all the Sanders people will be twice jilted. They will feel, as they did in ’16, that the center of the Democratic Party threw them over. And you think they’re going to turnout for Biden? No away. In fact, more than twice the number that were required to win the swing states of Bernie voters voted for Trump in 2016. You think they won’t with a better record and a sense of real anger at the Biden-wing of the party, whatever that is now, you think they’re not either going to stay home or vote for Trump again?

Of course, they are. And so, Biden is never going to be able to pull the Sanders people over. The worst part is that the Sanders people themselves – I mean this whole turnout has been fundamentally weak. Although they got decent numbers in California, the numbers were dramatically down in Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont, Maine. All over the place. South Carolina. Why? Because, actually, you’re getting about half the number of young people turning out that turned out in 2016, which was a lower number than turned out in 2008. And So, the Democrats, this whole, you know, the young people are going to save us thing, isn’t working. The young people are staying home, either because they don’t buy into Socialism, or they want to get a job in the Trump economy, or they don’t like a guy that 78 year old and 77 year old and can barely remember what state he’s in.

Charlie

You know what Keith; he made some very good points there about the voter turnout. Hey, the last thing I just can’t miss this and for some reason Keith, I’m losing it.

Keith

Let’s take the break while you think about it. 8:18 this morning on Good Morning Ozarks. We’ll be back with Bobby Charles after this. Bobby Charles is with us from AMAC. You can go to their website at AMAC.us and check out a conservative organization. You’ve heard about AARP and all that. This is a conservative organization that lines up more with our views, and the conservative Americans which there are millions. Bobby, a quick question here: Let’s assume for a moment that November goes the way that Charlie and I would have liked it to be, do you think we can ever get through the divisiveness and the hatred on either – you know that is happening in our country now – should Trump win?

Robert

So, the short answer to the question is, yes. And I certainly hope and actually believe that Trump will win as long as people turn out who care about the future of the country. Let me note, by the way, that AMAC, which represents Americans over the age of 50, and you’ve done a great job here in promoting AMAC, but AMAC is the conservative group for those over the age of 50, actually is composed you know it’s got more than two million members, but 62 or 63 million Americans voted for Trump, and I think the room for growth in this organization is high because Americans, both after the election and before the election, are looking for a voice in Washington. They really feel older Americans – remember, 35% of all voters are over the age of 50 and 25% of all voters are over the age of 65. So, what does that mean? It means that they vote actually, two-to-one, more conservative than liberal. So, if that’s the group that’s turning out, what’s going to happen in November, Trump wins. Can we get back to it? Yes, we can and here’s why. If you go back in American history, and I always go back to history, there are a number of times in the history of our country, whether it’s more recently in our lifetimes, like in the 1960s, or you go back to pre-World War II, this country was deeply, deeply divided pre-World War II. So, divided I would say it was more divided than it is now.

That you had these people who really did not want us to go to war and then you had those who understood that the future of the world depended upon it. As soon as the war commenced that that all went away. And when it went away some people were embarrassed, they’d taken extreme positions the other way, but it vanished. And I think the two things that will ultimately bring us together here is a strong turnout – I’d like to think some sort of a landslide – would kind of silence people not because they want to agree with Trump because they recognize that a lot of their fellow citizens actually think he’s doing a good job. Obviously, an economic – continuing economic boom will give people reason to be more enthusiastic about the future and about each other. And ultimately, I think that you get more level-headed leaders. I mean, they have spent their wad here. They have, you know, they fired all the guns they could fire at this at this situation with impeachment and the Russia probe and all the rest and I think at a certain point exhaustion sets in and people say, you know what? I guess I can probably get along with my neighbor and I guess we just see the world differently and that’s okay. I do think that’s ultimately where we’re going.

Charlie

Well, I’m glad that he didn’t go to the Irish thing the Pelosi put on it’s kind of a statement to say I’m not going to I’m not going to put up with this. Hey, we’re not going to go to coronavirus, we’re going to take the last five minutes talking about the global exchange crater as Russia and Saudi feud and causes oil to plunge and coronavirus fears. Your input on where you think that’s it with the oil today and stock market?

Keith

Stock market just open 1,300 points down. I believe?

Robert

Yep. So, I’m going to say something that’s very counterintuitive. I talked with a couple of bankers this morning and my view is, I’m not selling anything. I’m staying right where I am. I’m not a broker. I’m not someone who advises, but I will tell you that what I see here is a repeat of things we’ve seen in the past. But I’ll call it light. We had situations after 2001 and in 2008 in which the market tanked. And why? Because of a wide breadth of fear. In ’08 it was the banks and in the case of ’01, of course, it was 9/11. This is a situation that, in my own personal guesswork, I think we’re going to be back up – this market going to be back up within 30, 60, 90 days.

 Again, right where it was before. The two things that are driving it is psychology: fear of this coronavirus. This coronavirus, I don’t encourage people to take it lightly, but I do encourage people to just keep their heads about them and spin-down. Because this is really not – look, we lost 20,000 people in the last 12 months to the flu. This is nowhere near that, okay? This is just breaking up supply chains and creating fear and eventually that fear dissipates, because I think probably, on coronavirus, probably twice the number of people actually are asymptomatic around the world and we’re going to learn that the death rate is down there in the less than 1% range. But right now, we don’t know that because it’s so mild that a lot of people are not reporting it. So, at the end of the day, I think that the oil piece is, you know, it could actually be a silver lining. What is what is a dramatic drop in the oil price really mean? Forget the stock market, the stock market bounces up and down like a yo-yo. What is the what does that drop really mean? That drop really means that the consumer

[Yes.]

will have a reduced price, and the consumer is always the one that pulls you out of an economic downturn. So, reality here is that the consumer will get cheaper oil, manufacturing gets cheaper oil, ultimately the markets pop back up again, and I really – I think that there’s a great tendency in public psychology to overreact. And the more tense people are, and the more anxious they are, in general, the more they overreact. In this situation, I would say, just keep your seat, relax, and at the end of the day use some common sense when it comes to, you know, washing your hands and staying out of environments where you think you could be vulnerable. But at the end of the day, I think this is all going to pass, and in six months we’ll be looking back and everybody’s going to be going, you know, I didn’t really overreact. I know that everybody else did, but I was really not overreacting.

Charlie

All right. I want to take the last three minutes and, the other day on the phone, you know, we’re talking about when President Trump named Michael Pence to direct the coronavirus, which I thought was a smart move. He merely got attacked because he wasn’t a doctor. Would you please tell our listeners and two or three minutes we’ve got left, why vice presidents have taken that role over the years? Yeah, that’s exactly right. You’re exactly right Charlie, that is what happened. Vice presidents are invariably put in a position of authority in a crisis, and it’s happened, again and again, in order to take that first among equals – the president’s right hand – and create a sense of cohesion within the group.

I’ll go a step further. I have a piece coming out this week that really makes the point that the president has organized this response and preparation for it – started six weeks ago. You know, he’s organized this the way you organize a military unit. And that’s exactly the right way to organize the response to a crisis. The vice-president is operating as the commanding officer – in effect the CO – who in this case reports to the real Commander-in-chief. Below him you’ve got Azar who’s the head of the agency – HHS – who’s operating a set essentially as an XO, and below that you have essentially division chiefs. You have a CDC chief, you have an NIH chief. National Institutes of Health, NIH. You have all of these various inputs being flowed up through like an Operations Office, an Admin Officer, and so, what you’ve got is You’ve got a structure that is in place where the vice-president who must be heard because he is the president’s right hand, helps to guide things.

Helps to speak out, keeps the communication and the public face clean, clear and reassuring, as you should be. You have the XO essentially pulling all the threads together so that you end up with a cohesive response, both in the near term, the mid term, and the long term. You are moving and have been moving from the very beginning, from containment to an accelerated inoculation. All kinds of additional side pieces that make that work. You know, I don’t know that any president, you know go back as far as we record vice president’s taking over things like this, I don’t know that any president could have done a better job than Trump has done. And I’ll just point out that this is not Trump’s doing. This is a mild virus that originated in China that has ricocheted around the world and in a country of 350 million people we’ve got a half dozen you know, sadly that that have died, and we’ve got and we’ve got a number that that have come under the influence of the virus.

But it’s not, you know this is not the end of the world. And I will tell you again, I think even in this country what will end up happening is people will realize that as this passes and dies out that probably more people were affected, but asymptomatically, they just never knew it. and you know So, I think the president’s done the right thing vice president’s the right guy to be in charge and he’s doing a great job.

Charlie

Hey, we’ve got to go. Just wanted to ask you one question. I’m going to have you back – if I ask you about the New York Times – 1619, as it concerns slavery, versus group 1776. Are you familiar with that?

Robert

I’m not familiar with it, but you know, is that an argument that slavery began earlier?

Charlie

Yes. And so, if you take a look at Mark Levin last night and the wonderful gentleman that was on his program talking about 1619 versus it would be a great topic Bobby Charles. We can’t take… Keith, tell him how much we appreciate our friend.

Keith

Well, Bobby, there’s a handful of folks that we count as regulars and contributors to our program and you are on that list and we appreciate your time more than you realize.

If You Enjoy Articles Like ThisĀ - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like ThisĀ - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x