You're listening to Civic Media.
You can tune into any of our live shows on any radio station across the state with the Civic Media app.
Find us in your phone's app store and listen anytime, anywhere.
Welcome.
Welcome back to mid mornings on civic media.
My name is Greg Bach.
I'm your host.
Everybody on your pal.
We are happier.
You're spending your time with us.
This wonderful but chilly Thursday morning.
If you want to be part of the conversation, the number is always 8557 5248 4285 575 civic leave a comment on the live stream or on Facebook, YouTube and the platform that we still call Twitter.
Lots of wonderful stuff still ahead, including a conversation with J. R. Radcliffe.
He is a writer for the.
I offer the journal Sentinel talking sports, talking most likely packers, probably bucks, lots of tumult, lots of craziness, but we'll be discussing the world of Wisconsin sports with JR at 1035.
And then 1052, this shouldn't be a thing.
It's the ocean of love edition.
So don't go anywhere.
And also after the show was done.
today with us, you don't have to go anywhere because we have lots of great programming ahead, including after us, we've got Tom Hartman from 11 to two.
And then John and Gordy actually speak with our next guest at three 30 today, as well as our buddy, rocker, uh, who is, uh, the, the creator of mad ink.
And then also Pete, uh, Pete Schwab with nightlight from five to eight, where he'll be talking to travel Wisconsin and Christina Laurie, who is a journalist.
who we've met through Pat, our buddy Pat Crite low and then Wisconsin dive bars founder Jared Schultz will be there to talk about all the wonderful, wonderful Wisconsin dive bars and his travel on his social media campaign.
That's all coming ahead throughout the day.
So don't go anywhere.
Civic media is always with you.
You can keep us on the dial or if you have the civic media app streaming us because the app is free.
You can stream for free.
You can listen to talk.
You can listen to music.
You can call text.
You can send a voice message.
You can also participate in contests when we have them.
But
That's just a little plug for the civic media app.
It's absolutely free.
So get that on your device today.
But right now we're talking to the man, former US attorney, current practicing attorney, a host of amicus, a law review on nine to 11 every Saturday morning here on civic media.
This is going to be show 181.
According to Jean from Eau Claire, Jim, welcome to the show.
Mr. Jim Santel.
How are you doing today, sir?
Speaking about tumult, my friend, which you were just doing a little bit of that going on in America once again today.
Any time we're talking about a law from 1807, probably that's the first time your ears should go up a little bit and think, gosh, what's going on here, right?
Yeah, so I was actually going to kick the whole thing off with what was happening in Washington with regard to the Senate vote that came down, but
There is more news out of Minneapolis.
There was another shooting by an ice agent against a man.
In this situation is being reported that he was attacked with a shovel.
I am sure that's going to frame the conversation to a certain extent, but the bare bones of it is that an ice agent shot a man they were trying to detain, shot him in the leg, and this has only served to increase the already rising, rising tensions in Minneapolis and the Twin Cities.
with the president this morning threatening to invoke the insurrection act.
So Jim, let's start there with what is the insurrection act?
Where does it come from?
And in what would be considered legitimate times and needs, how would it be used by a president or an administration?
And so once again, we go back to 1807.
I know that Kelvin and all your listeners are completely attuned to those early 19th century congressional enactments.
The Insurrection Act of 1807 generally gives the president the power, again, under circumstances which we'll get to, to send military forces.
We're talking about military, army forces, to states, to quell, to stop, to prevent widespread public unrest.
and to support civilian law enforcement.
Now, that all sounds very positive.
And indeed, it has been invoked from time to time.
We'll get to one of those most recent invocations.
But before you can invoke it, before the president, as he said, is just indicated.
before he can send military in under this authority, you have to call on the insurgents, so to speak, to disperse, you have to say stand down, and it underscores another fundamental notion, which is you've got to be able to represent, and again, this president certainly will not have a problem in saying that, whether
it's
And then we're talking about insurrection and rebellion.
all those things that we have talked about before.
And so he said, again, just as you indicated this morning, if the corrupt politicians of Minnesota don't obey the law, stop the professional agitators and insurrectionists from attacking the patriots of ICE, I will consider invoking this, sending the military troops into
Minneapolis.
Now there's another variation on that, which I'm sure your listeners are also thinking about.
We've talked about it here as well.
And that is the Posse Comitatus Act, a little bit later of 1878, seems to go in the opposite direction.
And that law is kind of a state's rights law.
It basically says that the use of military as a domestic police force
should not happen, right?
So you think, gosh, we've got these two different statutes.
And so the debate now to the extent the president pursues this insurrection act is going to be, but wait a minute, Pasi Comitatus, again, 1878 tells us that you can't use military to suppress an insurrection absent, absent, again, some compelling need to do so.
Interestingly, they'll
The last initial thing I'll say is we have had the most recent invocation of the insurrection.
It was back in 1992.
Those were the Los Angeles riots after those police officers were acquitted in the beating of Rodney King.
So it's been done, but we all recall, again, truly the rioting kind of situation Los Angeles on the edge.
That's the last time that the Insurrection Act has been invoked.
Again, should also be separated from this notion of sending the National Guard in.
ice, all these things are related.
But this one, this one is somewhat different because of the statutory basis for doing this.
It's a lot.
It's a lot.
And it also, I mean, you know, look, you look at the timeline of what happened in Minneapolis, you had the, the, the
Peace that came out about the video regarding the daycare scandal, which only prompted the president to send more ICE agents into Minneapolis.
At the same time, he was pulling National Guard troops out of the major cities he put them in last year.
And now that, oh.
The people of Minneapolis don't like the fact that ICE is there and shooting people and killing people.
And now they're upset.
Now he's saying, well, it's gone to, we're going to send even more people there.
So it's just like this wave of enforcement coming through.
And I guess I want to start with a basic question about this is what's happening in Minneapolis.
Are the people voicing their opinion?
And this is, this is, this is a, this, this excludes individuals who are committing violent acts, but the people who are marching and raising their voice.
Is anything what they're doing even remotely like an actual insurrection?
Like, what is an actual insurrection that would need this?
And I'm not even trying to make a January 6th joke here.
I'm being serious.
If he says I want to use the Insurrection Act, then people are going to say, well, there's an insurrection in Minneapolis, but that isn't true, correct?
And again,
just because with due respect to the office of the presidency, we know that the current occupant of that will say things and therefore justify actions by just labeling them.
But to your very good question, that doesn't mean it's true.
And so there's a thing called the Constitution of the United States of America that says, yes, indeed, under the First Amendment and frankly, other provisions, Americans have the right, residents have the right to protest in the streets of America.
and hear that have their voices heard to petition government for change to let government know when it's doing things they do not like.
And let's be very clear as a practical factual matter.
doing that does not qualify.
Those people are not seeking, whether it's yesterday or three weeks ago, four months ago, they're not seeking to overthrow the government.
This is not an insurrection where we're looking of the sort that frankly you could argue on January 6th.
Those folks seem to be looking to overthrow the government, assassinate leaders and stop the course of the future of the America.
People protesting is not rebellion.
It's not insurrection.
are not insurgents in the sense that they're undermining the basic core operation of government.
So the predicates for doing this, the factual basis is simply not there.
It is certainly saber rattling at the same time by our president who has not been afraid.
As you said to do this, all these combinations of things in and out and invoking whatever he can to, again, even his statement this morning or yesterday, it's all about politics, right?
And it just reeks of that.
That doesn't justify.
the invocation of the insurrection
act.
If you're just joining us right now on the show, mid mornings on civic media, I'm Greg Bach.
Welcome.
We're happier here.
We're talking to Jim Santel, who is a former U.S.
attorney.
current practicing attorney, the guy I rely on for all of my legal advice.
He's also the host of amicus, a law review, which show 181 premieres this Saturday, 9am to 11am.
It's a mini law school session.
Every single Saturday, chock full of great information, but I'm going to ask a question that you may never have been asked before, Jim.
And I'm apologize ahead of time because I'm going to need you to do some.
Next, out of the box thinking, let's go with that.
If we're talking about what happened in Washington next, as far as the senators kind of backing away from invoking checks and balances, and we talk about a president who doesn't really seem to.
care about what the Constitution, what the law, what the framers had in mind, what's stopping him from just doing it now and saying, well, I mean, I'm gonna use the Insurrection Act.
Pasicomotas, I don't care about that.
I don't care about any of you.
I am the leader and it's up to me.
The only thing that limits my judgment is my morality, is words.
So why does he even care about slalomling through?
That's not a word, but like moving his way through all of these quote,
standards and laws when he doesn't care in the first place to obey them.
That's been the history, not only the past year, but the previous term when Donald Trump was in the White House.
And so it goes back to this issue that you and I have chatted so often about, which is how do you stop this?
Or in the opposite direction, if the Congress comes forward in these other situations,
Where is their enforcement mechanism the executive branch obviously has the authority is he is the commander in chief of the military, right?
we saw that again recently in Venezuela and Unless there is some mechanism and I don't want to say there is none
But the president does have, frankly, all the cards, if you will, on his side of the table, if he decides, if this is more than just saber rattling, it may well be.
And he says, you know what?
I am just angry with all of those people.
Again, he describes them inappropriately.
And he does say military as the chief executive here and as the commander-in-chief, I'm ordering you in.
What is the remedy?
Well, again, the next issue you and I are going to talk about is you can go to Congress and say, we're going to put together a strongly worded resolution.
You can go to court and maybe even have the Supreme Court say, can't do this under these circumstances.
And then you ask what Andrew Jackson asked, which is,
you and what army is going to stop me from doing it while the army is with the president and that's also the reason why there's these these vestings of great authority in this president here other places and unlimited a hugely powerful president is so problematic sending military troops military troops into the cities of america
And what is the stopgap for that?
Well, they're out there procedurally, but they're not very strong because we only have one military.
And heaven forbid we should have, again, a civil war.
based upon invocations of civilians coming forward and fighting.
There is no clear answer to that, and he does have this great authority to do this.
It requires American people and Congress and the courts to look back and do everything you can do to say no.
It's not a predicament for doing this, Mr. President.
We don't support you.
Well, when it comes to the Congress, specifically the Senate, I don't know how much we can count on them.
We're going to talk more about that.
That news coming out of DC with a very disappointing vote out of the US Senate and talking more about the implications of that story in context to Minneapolis, in context to where do we go from here, in context to running Venezuela, apparently running Greenland.
It has overreaching impacts.
And we need to start talking about the.
the checks and balances deficit here in this country.
We'll be discussing that with Jim Santel as the host of Amicus Law Review.
Don't go anywhere.
It's mid mornings on Civic Media.
My name is Greg Box.
Stay tuned.
Stay informed.
Stay
close.
Stay up to date on the latest news and information for your local community and Wisconsin by signing up for our free email newsletter.
Visit civicmedia.us slash email to get started.
Welcome back to mid mornings on Civic Media.
My name is Greg Bach.
I am your host.
I'm your buddy, your pal.
I'm happy you're here today.
We got a great show ahead of you.
If you want to get in touch with us, be part of the conversation, eight, five, five, seven, five, two, four, eight, four, two, eight, five, five, seven, five civic is the number you can call or text.
You can comment on the live stream.
We are on Facebook, YouTube and the platform that we still call Twitter still ahead 10 35 sports with JR Radcliffe, who is a reporter for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
And then
10 30.
I'm sorry.
10 52 brings us.
This shouldn't be a thing today.
It's the ocean of love edition.
So don't go anywhere.
We got lots more coming your way, but we're going to continue our conversation now with Jim Santel, who's the host of amicus, a law review on civic media, nine AM 11, nine AM to 11 AM every Saturday morning.
You can listen to that live or stream it on the app or if you
Don't catch it live.
You can go to civic media.us slash shows, download it there or subscribe due to a podcast.
My point is I want you to listen to it because Jim knows a lot.
He informs me all the time.
So we are talking to him about the news coming out of Minneapolis with regard to the insurrection act being threatened by the president.
And we're going to move it onto something I believe that has just as much impact on Minnesota, but also the world with regard to Venezuela because
just yesterday, the Republicans blocked an effort to check Trump's power in Venezuela.
So the, if I get this correct, Jim, the original vote from the Senate was looking to curb his ability to do any further action in Venezuela, make it that he has to go through Congress.
There were Republicans who are on the side of the Democrats for this bill, but two of them flipped.
It came down to a tie.
JR JR Radcliffe is a sports guy.
JD Vance, our vice president broke the tie, thus defeating the bill, thus really putting harm in the, in the, in the conversation of checks and balances.
Am I getting that correct?
And again, we can chat about the numbers and the players here as well.
begin, of course, as you always do with the Constitution.
And this is where this comes from, the resolution initially.
Premise upon this notion that gosh, it's the Congress that should be declaring war, all sorts of other powers set forth in Article 1.
And yeah, the resolution initially looked as if it was going to pass with the help of these, as you know, the Senate very, very closely split.
And Josh Hawley and Todd Young and Rand Paul and Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, those five Republicans joining the Democrats and saying,
saying yes, before the president can do anything else, any other military action of the sort that we saw a couple of weekends ago, you have to get congressional approval.
Gosh, there's a concept, right?
And so what happens is that seeing the, I shouldn't say bad effect of this, that's just an affirmation of the law, right?
Unless the White House says, oh, don't worry about this, because in fact,
We're no longer there.
There are no longer any hostilities in Venezuela.
John Thune, who's the Senate leader there, said that everything is calm, once again, US troops, not there.
And although, again, there's still interest there, there's no reason for us to tell the president that he shouldn't, he should get authorization because we're not there anymore at all.
And again, you've just got to just write what happens is Josh Hawley, Todd Young, they go in the opposite direction, creating the 50-50 split here and the vice president breaks that tie.
And the resolution does not pass.
And it underscores what I think is implicit in your question, Greg, which is,
Even if that is true, we don't know.
You and I don't have eyes on exactly what's going on in Venezuela.
But let's assume that the president is telling us the truth and that indeed we are no longer there militarily and no longer doing anything else there.
What is the harm since we were all caught off guard?
What is the harm by the Congress simply saying, you know, Mr. President, if you wake up again on a Saturday morning or even weeks before a Saturday morning, decide you want to go back in before you do that again in Venezuela or any place else on the face of the planet, you got to come to Congress.
That's really what the resolution would have said.
And it basically would have, we like to have think that it would at least stop Donald Trump a bit in his tracks if indeed he decides to do anything else, whether it's
in Venezuela.
Well, it's in Greenland, other places around the world.
And yet our United States Senate, this is the non check and balance that you're talking about, says no, no, we don't have to say that anymore, because his actions don't support that.
I mean, it's
really, it's really a bill of reminder, like, hey, remember how everybody else has to talk to us that really applies to you just one.
Hey, just want to
Just want to remind you, buddy.
Just want to remind you.
And I think, you know, really quick, I think with the interesting things, this group, it didn't surprise me that Susan Collins was on there that Lisa Murkowski and, and, and honestly ran Paul because he has been vocal in his opposition and certain things for a while now.
Josh Hawley was very, very much a surprise.
Cause when I think of Josh Hawley, the first thing I think of his fist in the air, January 6th, 2021.
And he has been more and more vocal about pushing back, but the fact that he flipped again, thus giving
Trump more power from the Congress is very disturbing.
I assume because the show is your show.
Amicus, a law review is on this Saturday.
What are you going to be talking about this Saturday?
Will it be including this story out of Washington?
Checks and balances.
A lot of things can happen between now and Saturday morning.
We're asking the folks to do other things, right?
The Supreme Court had oral argument this week on this transgender women in women's sports issue, unclear what they're doing there.
And then there's an interesting case coming out of California.
An appeals court there supported the new five districts that Gavin Newsom and advocated for that people adopted there.
Court of Appeals.
Federal Court of Appeals says yes, those are okay.
Changes the dynamic arguably for November
2026, no small things happening in our courts.
If that all goes through, we need more offices there, don't they?
They need more offices.
I'll get a job at the local office.
I'm not moving to DC for that craziness.
No, thank you.
Jim Santel has been our guest.
He's here every week to talk about all the news coming out of the world of law.
Amicus, a lawyer, you catch it 9am to 11am every Saturday here on civic media, whether it's live on the civic media app or downloaded as a podcast.
You can catch up on episodes because it is episode 181.
But Jim, thank you so much.
Have yourself a great weekend.
I'll talk to you very soon, my friend.
All right.
After the 1030 news, we're going to be talking sports with JR Radcliffe from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
Get ready, folks.
We're going to have a hard talk probably about the Packers and maybe the Bucks too.
But don't go anywhere.
Get some snacks, grab some water, grab some coffee.
You're listening to Mid Mornings on Civic Media.
Stay tuned.
Stay close.
Welcome back to Civic Media, mid mornings, mid mornings on Civic Media.
It's, it's the mid morning.
It's Civic Media.
You're here.
I'm here.
My name is Greg Bach.
I am your host, your buddy, your pal.
And we are coming to you live from radio park in Racine along with sweet kelby on the ones and twos.
Again, my gosh, I'm so insensitive.
Calvin, good morning.
How are you an hour and a half later?
He says
that's okay.
Okay, Greg.
I don't mind.
I'm okay.
It's Thursday.
I'm kind of tired.
Okay.
Well, you heard it here folks.
He's okay.
He's tired kind of tired and it's Thursday
All right.
We're going to keep the show rolling along at the, at the, at the end we're wrapping it all up with this shouldn't be a thing ocean of love edition.
So don't go anywhere for that.
But right now we are bringing on one of our friends, our sports guru, a writer for the journal Sentinel and a guy who loves late nineties power pop.
That is Mr. JR Radcliffe.
My heart.
You see it.
Yeah.
So if you could, if you could hear the opening song, I don't even know who that was, but I saw it on the live stream when he was in the waiting room.
He got in it.
He grabbed that microphone.
He's like, he's in this cover band that's playing a county and or local fair this summer.
I will say
Last time I believe I heard bad day, which is a song off a very good 2000 album called something like human subject.
Innocent is the best song on that album.
I I said it was their self-titled debut Which is insanity because a I know it's not on the self-titled debut B their debut is called sunburn How did I not know that the lead singer of fuel who sings that song is no longer with fuel and I saw him play a show in in wawatosa next to a bakery With the band sponge another 90s
a
were his
One of the best concerts, maybe the best concert I've ever been to because it was such a random, there were like 50 to 100 people there.
It was super relaxed.
I loved it so much.
90s music makes me so happy.
I miss the 90s, guys.
I miss it.
I'm not going to lie.
I miss, I miss the 90s.
It was a different, simpler time.
Wow.
Well.
I know where I fall.
I was going to say, I was, it's funny.
You say that because I don't remember where I was at.
It was last week where someone mentioned the band fuel and I said to myself out loud to no one.
I forgot fuel was a band.
I forgot they were even a band because, you know, we'll get to sports in a moment.
Sports is great.
They're not going anywhere.
Those bands just all for me have blended into one big.
conglomerate of music like they like like like and honestly that's not a knock I'm not saying that to be insulting because it wasn't a it wasn't a genre and a period of time that did it for me personally so when I hear like fuel and it was a lit and like they all it could be the same band writing all the same songs and then I have to delineate through references that you just made
And I love that, uh, Bob fuel is out there touring solo.
I assume his name is Bob
His name is Brett scallions.
Now they were a unique band that the guitarists wrote all the songs and the lead singer had the voice.
So it was a really good partnership.
And then they went their separate ways and neither one has really found success since then.
Very sad.
But, um, I totally understand where you're coming from a little more important for me because I am, uh,
you know, end of high school, beginning of college, pretty important years there.
So I've
got
That's all I can say.
A couple of things too.
Fuel just sounds like a less successful American version of Oasis then because that you just told the Oasis story.
in two sentences, but also I am, I think I'm the same age as you are.
So I understand the importance of that late nineties, early 2000 music and, uh, you know, good on them.
I've, I pay there.
They, I always say this.
When people will you know, like oh, they're a one-hit wonder.
Well, it's one more hit than I have so I really can't say anything to anyone about it So if they're still enjoying it and and they'll eventually get back together because the money will be right and they'll be a festival and they'll be like Yeah, let's be friends again, but I love what yeah
they're biggest okay, okay, we didn't come
I'm not saying they're one hit wonder.
I was just merely using the term and I was paying respect to them
I mean, still one more hit than the both of us have.
So I really wouldn't, you know, that's true.
Yeah, I get it.
I get it.
I get loving the music that you grew up with.
I listen to country music, not much more simpler than that.
So when it comes to
simple songwriting, I'm all for it if it tells a good story, but.
Let's talk about the story.
That's called the segue that, you know, people are still discussing.
We discussed it without you or Paul on Monday because it was, I mean, the Packers season is over in a very, you know, I didn't know how it was going to go.
I mean, I knew how it was going to go.
They were going to win or they were going to lose, but I feel like with the Packers and this season, if they would have lost, it would have been, all right, you know, it was, it was an inconsistent season.
There was a lot of ups and downs.
There's a lot of, you know, things that can be talked about, but
The loss to the Bears, I feel, says a lot for the fact that, you know, between the missing, missing the kick to get the points, but also giving up 25 points in the fourth quarter, just that one quarter of play alone speaks volumes about the Packers season.
What, you know, what were your initial thoughts?
And then you had about a week now, where are you at?
Not right now with processing the 2025 Packers season.
like
And that created the laboratory where the bears could start to mount that comeback and, and we're able to do it.
It felt like a sinking ship the entire second half.
Um, even, even for non pessimistic Packers fans that I was surrounded by, like everyone kind of felt where that was going.
And I think maybe a few days later, the bigger takeaway, I mean, certainly the big question is what happens next with Matt LaFleur.
It sure sounds like the team is going to extend him and going to.
have him stay around.
I think that's an interesting conundrum for both the Packers and their fans.
I think if he comes back, it's going to be hard for a lot of fans to get fired up about the 2026 season.
But the bigger issue, aside from the rivalry with the Bears, is just watching the Bears thrive.
A team that has, over the last several years, been kind of a doormat for the Packers.
The Packers have had no trouble beating this team since, really, over the last decade, or at least in the last seven or eight years.
Um, that's, it can't be, you can't expect that to be the case anymore.
I still think these bears team got very lucky through, especially the middle of the season.
I think their quarterback is not as good as Chicago wants it to be, but ultimately they, they, they got results, especially against the Packers.
They were able to win some close games and, you know, like they're not going to get worse.
They've drafted very well the last few years.
They've got this first year head coach, Ben Johnson, who's been, you know, good for the vibes, good for quarterback development to certainly is one of his things.
And.
Just their, their offense is clicking.
Yeah.
To the point that you have to be worried that they will be the team to beat next year and the year after that and the year after that at a time when the Packers just made this trade for Micah Parsons to presumably like accentuate their super bowl case.
They now are second fiddle in their own division going forward and, and theoretically third fiddle because the Lions had a hot, had an off year or still a very good team that, you know, over the last couple of years has been the, the dominant fish and the NFC so, or the NFC North.
So, um,
concerning because Jordan Loving going to be in his 20s forever.
What are you getting out of this era of Packers football right now?
It's been a lot of playoff appearances, which is good, but just such a limited amount of success in the playoffs relative to what I think what Packers fans are hoping for.
If you're just joining us on morning, mid mornings on civic media, we're speaking with JR Radcliffe, who is a writer for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
He is a one of our sports gurus.
We're talking not only about the Packers season, but of late nineties, early 2000s, power pop, hardish metal.
I don't know how you classify some of those bands, but we're talking about that as well.
We talked about this on Monday and I kind of divert to Calvin as my as my go to Packer expert when, you know, because he follows it a lot more than I do.
And one of the things with regard to the question of Matt LaFleur's future and Calvin, you brought up was the fact that making it to the playoffs is a good sign.
But that doesn't protect coaches forever.
It's a matter of.
you know, all right, will you make it to the first or anything?
Cause this was the wild card.
And this is how unusual that the victory was for the bears is that late night television actually talked about it.
Like I think that the, if the Packers would have beat the bears, there wouldn't have been much other than like, Oh, the Packers are moving on.
But the fact that the bears beat the Packers, that was a late night story slash joke in the monologues.
So yeah, a playoff birth is good, but that isn't what protects jobs.
And do you think that
Matt LaFleur has only so many, I don't want to say chances, but just like, you know, if they make it next year to the wild card and lose, do you think the Packers will keep going with them?
I mean, it's, I, I, I, I don't know enough to make the call, but it seems like I can understand both sides of the argument.
So I think the point we're at now is he's under contract for one more year, but in the NFL, that's it's extremely rare for a coach to go into their last year as a.
quote unquote, lame duck coach.
So you're in a position where you have to either extend him or move on now.
And that's kind of the decision that the Packers have been facing with.
And again, it looks like we're heading towards extending.
So like you are committing to him for multiple years.
It's not going to be a, oh, we didn't get what we wanted next year and they'll move on.
The argument for moving on is they simply, they play very slowly.
It does seem to burn them a lot more than it burns other teams.
They have a tendency to give up leads a lot more than other teams.
They have a tendency to like losing kind of dramatic ways about as much as other teams.
And part of that is because they're just, they just move so glacially.
They believe in their running game.
They believe in, you know, wasting every second of the play clock.
And that is part of their strategy.
And it also limits the amount of chances they have to really run up the score.
And so they don't beat bad teams by a lot.
They barely get by in a lot of these games.
Um,
And the argument is, okay, at some point this is who he is, and you've seen too many playoff letdowns to want to continue.
The argument for keeping him is, well, he is a very good play caller, and he is, I think Mina Kimes of ESPN really put it well, that there's sort of this like,
One of the most important things you can have with a head coach is somebody who's on the same page with a quarterback and is unlocked to the quarterback's potential because the quarterback is so essential Everything comes back to do you have a good quarterback?
That's how you win in the national football league and right now they have a thing like they have a chemistry and it works and Matt Luffler has also shown when Malik Willis steps in and he won't be here next year But you know, he can work with a backup too like he can make the quarterback.
He can work to a quarterback strengths.
So I think
I still personally wonder how much he believes doesn't believe in Jordan love enough like should he let him throw down the field more I don't I don't know I Think ultimately the Packers will err on the side of keep keep that relationship intact Don't try to introduce something new you have a team that should still be able to win next year It's gonna have a you know, it's gonna be a little bit older.
It's gonna have a lot of key players back and
You don't want to mess with that.
You don't want to completely throw out, you know, throw everything out, have a whole new coaching staff and possibly need a year or two to figure it out.
So that's kind of what the backers are facing right now.
In the last about a minute left, really quick, one key thing they did this season that they have to change next season period, like whether it's just, you know, you're saying running the ball too much, what is the one thing you see as the, that must be changed for 2026 to be better than this past season?
They need, they need their guys up front to be better.
Their pass rush was non-existent without Micah Parsons.
Mike or Sean Gary did not do nearly enough this year.
I think they'll probably, I think he'll be gone this next year.
They need to find a way to generate pass rush.
It didn't happen enough.
Micah Parsons was like the only guy.
And then on the other side of the ball, same thing up front, their offensive line has to be better.
That's been a staple of Packers football.
They always have good offensive lines.
And this year, whether it was the personnel or putting the personnel on the right spot, I don't know.
It just didn't come together.
It has to.
You have to keep Jordan love upright and you've just, you just got a block better for all of it for running for passing.
It's just did not see that this year.
A conversation that will continue until camp next year or later on this year for the Packers.
JR Radcliffe is our sports guru writer for the journal Sentinel.
Thank you so much as JR lip syncs the music.
We appreciate your time.
We'll see you in a couple of weeks, my friend.
All right, when we come back, this shouldn't be a thing.
Ocean of love edition.
You're listening to Mid Mornings on Civic Media.
Stay tuned.
Stay close.
You're listening to Civic Media.
Find the latest news, information, and archives of all your favorite shows on the Civic Media website, civicmedia.us.
Welcome back to MidMornings on Civic Media.
My name is Greg Bach.
I'm your host.
I'm happy you're here, along with Calvin Butenhof on the boards.
We're coming to you live from Radio Park in Racine.
It's a little pal.
It's almost 11 o'clock.
It's 10, 10, 52.
We're happy that you're spending time with us today.
There's still lots of great programming ahead here on civic media at, uh, let's see here.
After us, we've got Jim and John and Gordy in the afternoon from two to five.
They will be talking again to Jim Santel, who was on earlier this, this hour, as well as rocker.
Uh, and then
Pete Schwabbo with Nightlight will be speaking with Travel Wisconsin, Milwaukee Journal, our journalist and influencer, Christina Laurie, as well as the proprietor and founder of Wisconsin Dive Bars, Jared Schott, Schott's Shoots.
Jared shoots.
There it is.
Talking about his social media presence and how he finds different bars around the area.
But after us, after the news is Tom Hartman from 11 to two.
So there's great programming ahead.
Don't go anywhere.
And even after night lights, still wonderful stuff.
If you can't catch anything live, you can always download it as a podcast.
Go to civic media.us slash shows.
Find the show you're looking for.
We currently are still under, as far as I know, we are still,
posting our episodes under Matt and Aaron air.
So if you want to listen to us back or you want to catch up, you're going to do that by going, yeah, we're still under Matt and Aaron air, but it is mid mornings with civic media, but you can always catch up there, subscribe as a podcast to all the shows, leave a five star review.
If you think we've deserved it, but it's great just to have you here.
And yeah, as I always say,
You have a limited time in your life and you're spending it with us.
And I truly, truly appreciate that.
So it is 10 54.
Actually, you know what, Calvin, before we do that, let's, let's talk about tomorrow.
Do you want to talk about tomorrow real quick?
Calvin, tomorrow.
Sure.
Yeah.
Tomorrow we're talking to our buddy, Kareen Hendrickson, who is running for Wisconsin state Senate of the 17th district.
We're going to talk about her campaign.
We're also going to talk about the state of childcare and the state of Wisconsin.
with regard, we'll do an overview of what happened with the budget last year, but also with possible threats of childcare funding freezes from the US government, from the federal government, the White House, which have already been taking place in various states around the country, including Minnesota and New York.
How will that affect Wisconsin if that happens here?
And just an idea of where she's at with her campaign as she runs for office in this election year.
Stay tuned to that interview.
Love to have you be a part of it.
But yeah, that's going to be on the docket for tomorrow.
Then great stuff as well.
We might be premiering a brand new game during audio sorbet.
I don't know.
We'll tell you.
It'll be really fun game.
What's with our, our senior producer, Mr. With, with Tucker senior producer.
So yeah, that's all coming up tomorrow.
Be a part of that.
But right now it's now it's time for 10 55.
We call this almost late.
So Calvin, it's time for another edition of this shouldn't be a thing.
If you have everything that should not be, send it into me.
My name is Greg.
Greg.Bach at civicmedia.us.
Again, Greg.Bach at civicmedia.us.
Whether it's a TISBAT suggestion, article guest, love to hear from you.
Greg.Bach at civicmedia.us.
Today's article comes from the Irish examiner.
Neil Michael has the byline.
It says, public urge to report unusual interactions between seals and other marine animals.
The public is being urged to report any unusual interactions between potential amorous seals sizing up other mammals such as dolphins, porpoises, and even penguins for some loving or possibly fighting.
So this is where I come down on this.
There's two sides, Calvin.
This is how I feel about it.
If they just want to have fun, I'm not reporting anything.
I'm not going to get in the way of people enjoying or animals enjoying themselves.
That's just how I feel.
If they're fighting, I absolutely would tattle.
I don't want anyone fighting.
And I didn't realize that seals could get aggressive like that.
I know dolphins are one of the most aggressive animals in the water.
We're not even going to get into that conversation.
But if seals are, are spoiling or starting fights and yeah, I'm going to tell on them.
Absolutely.
Calvin, what about you?
Yeah.
I mean, everyone, I certainly have this perception of dolphins as predators and not.
the sexual kind.
But apparently they're victims too.
And also my sense of scale, my sense of scale in the ocean is off because I'm surprised the seal's large enough to take on a dolphin.
I mean, when, when it gets a little, when it gets a little courage in it, you never know what they're capable of doing.
I mean, that's the thing is, is like, I wouldn't go fight a raccoon.
It would destroy me.
And it's like one 10th, my size, if that, but yeah, the interactions in Ireland and so far are baffling dolphin watchers there because including one Irish whale and the, what they're called Irish whale and dolphin group, the IWDG.
member who witnessed a seal, pull a common dolphin under the water after a struggle last week.
That's horrifying sounding too.
But again, you know, who am I telling?
Who am I going to like, am I, I'm calling like, I guess I'm calling the wildlife people in or do I call this IWDG?
What are they going to do about it?
I feel like I only endanger myself if I try to insert myself into the, into the situation.
And if they're just having fun, let them have fun.
If they're not, let them work it out.
I feel like a dolphin will win.
I just, like you said, Calvin, they're, they're aggressive in many ways.
And I feel like taking on a dolphin is not the smartest move.
I'm going to throw a porpoise in there too.
But yeah, I feel like that's a, that's, that's a situation that nature needs to work on.
I'm not going to go to the authorities and be part of this conversation.
Cause I am not a snitch.
Let it be said right here on the show.
When it comes to animal interaction in the ocean, I'm not a snitch.
That brings us to the conclusion of another installment of this shouldn't be a thing.
As always, I want to thank Calvin Tucker everyone in our traffic department all of our engineers without any of you I am talking into a microphone that does not work and the computer that is not on so I appreciate everything you do to make this show happen Speaking of making the show happen to all the people who called text it in left comments on the live stream and are just giving us your time when it's so precious
Without you, there's no us.
So that is always, always appreciated.
And we want to thank you for being here today.
As we said, after the 11 o'clock news, we've got Tom Hartman, then we've got John and Gordy in the afternoon, Pete Schwabba with Nightlight from five to eight, lots of great programming still ahead.
And then tomorrow we are speaking to Kareen Hendrickson, who is running for state Senate here in Wisconsin.
Just stick around.
It's gonna be fun.
We're gonna have a great time and we'll talk to you tomorrow at 9am as usual, mid mornings on Civic Media.
My name is Greg Bach.
Thank you so much for giving us your time.
Stay tuned, stay informed and stay close.
The national news cycle never stops, but it can be hard to find news about your local community.
Civic Media is dedicated to providing quality local and state news coverage across Wisconsin.
With the Civic Media app, you can get notifications about local stories that matter to you and your community.
Find the free Civic Media app in your phone's app store and choose notifications from the menu to tell us what kind of news you want to hear about.
