• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30

Show Talk

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Local News

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

KSCO Live Show: 831-479-1080 KSCO Office: 831-475-1080

Important! For Dead Doctors Don't Lie Use: 888-379-2552

Kay's Commentary


Kay's Commentary Podcasts on Demand

Miss Kay's Commentary on the air? We've uploaded them all here in our podcast library.

All podcasts are designed to play from our website with no software required.
For more advanced options,
open our feed in iTunes or subscribe to our Podcast Feed.

Download File 

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

          I wrote this in June 2008, and it is timely. 

          As we think about China and how she has so rapidly become a world presence, we may remember Napoleon’s famous description “Let China sleep for when she awakens she will shake the world.”  

          Today, China is not only awake, but because of her enormous population, she is – or will become – arguably the greatest force in the world.   So, despite what our sophisticated Wall Street types have to say, China is getting richer and stronger, and we are becoming weaker.  Ironically, China’s funds are so invested in America that if she removes those possible billions and trades them into Euros our economy may collapse.  But, the Pandora’s box is now open and it will never close.  

          Why did we allow this inequity to happen?   Wouldn’t fair trade have been better than free trade? 

          Fair trade means that I give you 50% and you give me back 50%.  

          Recently I read a most intriguing article with regard to China, who is much more aggressive and aware than we are about acquiring the world’s dwindling raw materials.   China is now engaged in Africa, specifically the sub-Saharan countries like Mozambique, which supplies lumber, and Zambia, which supplies copper, and  the Condo has a wide range of minerals, and equatorial Guinea has oil.   China, at a frantic pace, is swooping up the copper, timber, natural gas, zinc, cobalt, and you name it.  

          Because China can see that in the foreseeable future – factoring in the recent luxury needs of China and India, plus all of Europe, Asia, and the United States – there will be a shortage of these raw materials.   The awakening giant is now buying up everything that the poor sub-Saharan countries will willingly sell her. 

          Evidently we are either too timid, not looking ahead, asleep at the wheel, or maybe too obsessed with corrupt American politics – well, in fact, our Country is involved in the sub-Saharan countries, but not in the aggressive way that China is. 

          We should wisely remember the forgotten word of Thomas Malthus who said some two centuries ago “The power of population is infinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for all mankind.”    In other words, eventually there may not be enough of the raw materials to serve all mankind.   Like China, shouldn’t we be more aggressive about obtaining the raw materials while they are still available? 

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2012

Download File

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

          This commentary is in my book.  I recorded it in the fall of 2010.   It is time for a little sexy humor. 

          Breaking news:  Suicide bombers in Britain are set to begin a three-day strike shortly.

          They are in dispute over the number of virgins they are entitled to in the Afterlife.   Emergency talks with Al Quaeda’s management have so far failed to produce any agreement. 

          The unrest began last week when Al Quaeda announced that the number of virgins a suicide bomber would receive after his death would be cut by 25% this month from 72 to only 60.  

          The rationale for the cut was the increase in recent years of the number of suicide bombings and a subsequent shortage of virgins in the Afterlife.  

General Secretary Abdul Amir told the press “Our members are literally working themselves to death in the cause of Jihad.  We do not ask for much in return, but to be treated like this by management is a kick in the teeth.”

          Mr. Amir accepted the limited availability of virgins, but pointed out that the cut-back was expected to be borne entirely by the workforce and not by the management.

          Last Christmas Abu Hanza alone was awarded a bonus of 250,000 virgins, complained Amir, and you can be sure they will all be pretty ones.  How can Al Quaeda afford that for members of the management but not even 72 for the people who do the real work?

          Al Quaeda Chief Executive Osama Bin Laden explained “We sympathize with our workers’ concerns, but Al Quaeda is simply not in the position to meet their demands.”        

Bin Laden defended management bonuses by claiming these were necessary to attract good fanatical clerics.   “How am I supposed to attract the best people if I can’t compete with the private sector?”

          Talks broke down this morning after management’s last ditch proposal of a virgin sharing scheme which was rejected outright after a failure to agree on allocation quotas.   Certain virgins sign up to be available in the Afterlife to accommodate the honored suicide bombers.   One virgin who refused to be named was quoted as saying “I will be compromised if I am agreeing to anything like that…..   it is just too much to swallow.”    Unless some sort of an agreement is reached, suicide bombers will stop the explosives shortly.

          The entire Australian continent stated that this situation would not affect their operations because there are no virgins in that area anyway.

          Late news:  Apparently the drop in the number of suicide bombings has been put down the emergence of Susan Boyle – and now that bombers know what a virgin looks like, they are not so keen to go to Paradise.  

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2012

Download File

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

We Americans pride ourselves upon being fair-minded, logical, and quite intelligent.  For the most part, all of those positive factors are true.

However, in one glaring area, our logic is incongruously ridiculous.  While we all agree that the Rule of Law must prevail if a Country is to be taken seriously – please explain to me why we tolerate sanctuary cities, also known as rule-breaking American cities.

As of now, there are at least 114 American cities which call themselves sanctuaries, all of which break our laws every day, and nobody says Boo. 

Those law-breaking cities in our U.S. choose to protect people who enter our Country illegally, and they condone the law-breaking by not allowing our police to send them back to their own countries.  

Note:  There are many people from foreign countries eager to come to America legally.  Sometimes they wait on line for five years to come here legally.  And, that way they are welcome.

This situation makes a farce of all our laws, which are blatantly broken, and it is now being considered for illegals to be given free tuition to our universities, while legals must pay.   Our Congress is also considering giving Social Security benefits to illegals but not to legals, with neither class having put in a penny.     

This behavior is beyond insane, and there are really 114 sanctuary cities as of now.  I suspect there are many many more, including New York, San Francisco, and many others, even Santa Cruz is also a sanctuary city.  

If many more U.S. cities become sanctuaries, our Rules of Law will no longer exist and we will no longer have a viable Country. 

I say kudos to Arizona for closing her borders to keep out illegals, and shame on Obama for slapping a lawsuit on Arizona’s Governor who was merely trying to save what is left of our Country.  

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2011

Download File

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

          After almost three dismal years of Obama’s leadership, we have learned that he has been a disaster.  He has had no experience in leadership whatsoever.   Many of us believe another four years of him will surely make our beloved U.S. a very weak country.  

          Let’s go back and review his initial campaigning and hopefully discourage others from voting him into office again. 

          About Obama – we know at least that during his first 18 years he was very much exposed to Islamic beliefs, mostly while living in Indonesia with his mother.  Most important, however, are his core beliefs and to what extend he has internalized those teachings.  

          Early on during his first campaign for the Presidency, he said he supports homosexual marriage, racial prejudices, gun control, socialized medicine, and the absolute right to abortion including partial birth abortion, which to me is barbaric. 

          A baby about to come out of his mother’s womb could have a gun put to his head legally by the attending physician if his mother gets cold feet at the last moment, and this has happened, and I am sorry to say continues to happen legally.

          Obama is anti-war, voted against the Patriot Act, and opposes the death penalty. 

          He said he loves Jimmie Carter, and he Obama was one of the most liberal members of the Senate during his short tenure.  He voted to give Social Security to illegals along with Hillary, and they both voted against making English the official language of the U.S.   I should add that during his stay in the Senate he never voted Yes of No on anything.  He always voted Present, which means that he did not vote at all.   

          Many times during these past three years he has shown his difficulty to make decisions, often wanting to put off crucial ones until after this coming election.   This habit shows weakness for the leader of a great Country.  

          He may have adjusted those core beliefs, especially since his trips to Iraq, Europe, and Afghanistan where he tasted the power of the Presidency.   Too bad that it was more important for him to show the world what a great basketball player he was while he dissed the soldiers standing in line for a long time to shake his hand. 

          Please Americans, think very carefully before you put your trust again in this inexperienced elitist man who for 20 years was very comfortable listening to anti-American sermons.   What we do this time will determine our direction in the world.  Will we remain a world leader, or perhaps become a mediocre third world country?

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2011

Download File

Dear Listeners,

          This commentary is in my book. 

          Philosophically, we humans grasp at inventing illogical expressions when we are uncomfortable with our own prejudices. 

          Case in point – let us examine the expression “occupied land”, which came into vogue only after the State of Israel was legally created in around 1948. 

          The British who owned the territory offered land also to the Arabs.  They declined and continue to decline.  They only want Israel annihilated. 

Immediately after Israel became a State, five Arab countries in the Middle East declared war on the new Jewish State – they were all defeated in a matter of days by the little Country.  That is when the expression “occupied” came into being. 

Israel, the victor, was and is the true owner of the conquered land – but the U.S. government calls that land “occupied”.  Is that supposed to mean that the aggressors who Israel conquered still own that land? 

Another opposite case in point – during the Mexican-American War in about 1846 through 1848, the U.S. invaded a part of Mexico known as Texas, which Mexico had received from Spain along with other land in the American Southwest.  The U.S. won the war, took Texas and the other States in the American Southwest, and probably California. 

It is said that Mexico was given a token $500 million for all that land.  The Mexicans have been resentful and angry since then, and rightfully so. 

They want their land back, but that will never happen.   Shouldn’t that conquered Mexican land also be considered occupied land?

Let’s fast forward to the present situation. 

Jordan, a country which owned half of Jerusalem in 1948, wanted all of Jerusalem shortly thereafter, so she declared war on Israel.  She lost, so now Israel owns that territory.  The U.S. maintains it is occupied land, and Obama forbids Israel to build houses there.  

Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel has told Obama he cannot dictate to Israel about Israeli land – and therein lies the stalemate between our two democracies.  I say kudos to Netanyahu for not allowing the U.S. to bully Israel. 

Meanwhile, the despicable dishonest U.S. media picks and chooses what it wants to expose, and never mentions that Israel won all that land honestly.      

It is all unfair, unjust, untrue, and Israel stands totally on its own.

Please – someone – explain the nonsensical expression “occupied land” or “occupied territory”, which is only used for land won fair and square by the Israel after it is attacked.  It is an honest issue our government refuses to recognize, confront, and acknowledge. 

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2011

Download File

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

          Because I respect, value, and agree with much of Donald Trump’s opinions and know he loves our Country as I do, I will use his current advice from his new book as this week’s commentary.

          Donald Trump is relentless when it comes to opposing Barack Obama and his policies. 

          He believes an Obama second term in the White House would be devastating for the United States.   

          We have many threats, he says, and the biggest threat is Obama. 

          Trump believes that stopping Obama is crucial.

          He argues that dealing with OPEC’s illegal cartel and lowering oil prices is key to turning around the U.S. and global economies. 

          He also says he would slap a 25% tax on all imports from OPEC nations.  A prime example is China.  It is devaluing their currency to give themselves a competitive trade advantage.

          Trump says he will hit China with a 25% tariff on all goods imported to the U.S. 

          He also advocates a 20% tax on all domestic companies that outsource their jobs overseas.

          He further says, I love free trade, but free trade is no good if you do not have smart people making deals for you with other countries.

          Trump is worth $7 Billion (with a B).  

          He wants to save Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.  And, you do that, he says, by creating a strong economy.

Trump further favors eliminating the death tax, as I surely do, which he calls immoral and a jobs killer.   He wants to lower taxes on capital gains and dividends and reduce the U.S. corporate rate from 39% to zero to encourage domestic business growth.   And, he would levy a 20% tax on all companies who outsource jobs overseas. 

          Trump contends that Congress should throw out Obamacare.   It cannot be reformed, salvaged, or fixed – it is that bad!   And, that 2700-page Bill is hurting job creations.  

          Now, about illegal immigration – Trump calls living in America, the greatest blessing a person could ever receive, and I totally agree with that, and he wants a serious border fence.  He supports tough enforcement when illegals are arrested and opposes efforts to grant in-state tuition to undocumented students.  

          And finally, Trump also says he wants to remain a player in the Presidential race because he is fighting for Common Sense and American Values.   And, I suspect he might even still run for President in the Summer of 2012. 

          So, these are Trump’s thoughts with which I mostly agree. 

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2011


Download File

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

          I wrote it in August 2004, and it is in my book, and I usually like to discuss this topic this time of year.

          “A fool and his money are easily parted.”  That was an expression I used often when my children were growing up and sometimes made foolish expenditures using their own money. 

          On a related subject, it was a creative idea cooked up by credit card issuers who saw a unique way to make more money.  Even they did not realize the enormity of their potential windfall.  The plot involved them, retail businesses, and the general public. 

It was a win-win situation for all involved.   For the participating public, it was a no-brainer because for the first time people could make purchases without paying up front. 

For retailers, it was worth up to 3% cost to get their money up front. 

          For over 50 years now, public credit cards have become a way of life, and in retrospect, one could believe it was liberating and good that the ordinary consumer, lacking big savings no longer had to wait to acquire things they wanted. 

That little plastic card had the potential to seduce one into acquiring luxuries one might otherwise have done without or waited until one had the cash first. 

That same little plastic monster has made debtors out of people who suddenly find they cannot ever seem to pay their monthly bills, and that is where they get sucked into monetary quicksand for all the nebulous pleasures of acquiring more stuff.  It is called Instant Gratification.  So often we let stuff own us. 

The most dangerous time of the year is the Christmas season when countless otherwise restrained people experience irrational exuberance and overextend themselves.  They foolishly purchase much too much, then they take months enslaved by outrageous interest rates, sometimes upwards of 25% on the unpaid balance, and these rates are imposed by the credit card issuers.  Some people do not get out from under, ever.

          Now, for some motherly advice:  for starters, our lawmakers should put reasonable ceilings on credit card interest balances, but that will not easily happen.  Nothing will change until people stop overcharging on their credit cards and pay up their dangling balances once and for all.  If that is not possible, then it is better to say “Thanks, but no thanks” to credit cards and live within your means on a cash basis.  You will then experience an indescribable peace of mind by not being in debt, and it is really worth it.

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2011

Download File

The following is a KSCO commentary.  Here is Kay Zwerling:

Dear Listeners,

          Since the 1920s, the issue of health has grown enormously.  Pharmaceutical companies were then in their infancy.  There were very few medications at that time.   I am not even sure that aspirin was around.

          Since then, the awareness of supplements is also new.

          Pharmaceuticals are medications, and supplements are usually vitamins and minerals.  The former can be very toxic while supplements are healing to the human body. 

          Pharmaceutical companies have grown very powerful, and now they want the FDA to control and even eliminate supplements so that they can sell more of their toxic medications. 

          Supplements like vitamin C now can only be obtained in Europe with a prescription.   The FDA now wants the power to control our supplements here in the USA by also having the public obtain prescriptions to purchase vitamins, and that is outrageous. 

          Do you think I am exaggerating?  Please listen.

          Back in the early 1990s, the FDA tried to make many many supplements illegal.  Consumers were so alarmed by the FDA’s powers that they staged a mass revolt.  The result was that Congress passed the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA).   That law protected supplements from the FDA unless the FDA can prove the supplement was not safe.   The irony of that was that many pharmaceuticals are unsafe, but supplements usually are not unsafe.   

There was, however, a loophole in the 1994 law.   The FDA was given the authority to regulate new ingredients introduced after October 15, 1994.  

So, what happened?   For 17 years, the FDA took no action, gave no guidance, and launched no enforcement of these new dietary ingredients.

And, that has been a good thing because for 17 years the dietary supplement industry has enjoyed tremendous innovations.   These innovations have allowed us to extract and concentrate the most effective natural ingredients.   As a result, millions of consumers have benefitted.  They have protected their hearts and arteries, found relief from their joint pain, boosted their memory, and much much more. 

And, during this time, supplements have enjoyed a remarkable safety record.  Statistics show that supplements are much safer than prescription drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, and even some foods.

Meanwhile, pathogens like e. coli in food kill at least 2000 people every year.  Drugs like Tylenol kill 450 people per year.   And, more powerful prescription drugs kill many more.  Even the FDA now says that Vioxx likely killed over 26,000 people before they finally took that off the market. 

Now, We the People must talk to our government representatives and tell them that we are very concerned about the new FDA power and control over our dietary supplements.   

Supplements have an unrivaled safety record while pharmaceuticals do not, and so that is why We the People must demand our government not let this law go through with the FDA.  The pharmaceutical industry must not have control over our vitamins and minerals.

For KSCO, this is Kay Zwerling.

© copyright 2011

KSCO Newsletter

Your Email:

We do not share your email with third parties.