BONUS SHOW: Weathermen say they can’t predict hurricanes, Texas goes after Doritos and M&Ms

Summary

Summary of "BONUS SHOW: Weathermen say they can’t predict hurricanes, Texas goes after Doritos and M&Ms" – The David Pakman Show (June 7, 2025)

In this engaging bonus episode of The David Pakman Show, host David Pakman delves into critical issues affecting public safety, scientific integrity, and consumer rights. The episode is structured into three main segments: the impact of budget cuts on hurricane forecasting, Texas's legislative move on food labeling, and the escalating harassment of journalists under political rhetoric. Each segment is thoroughly analyzed, with Pakman providing insightful commentary and expert perspectives.

---

1. Impact of Budget Cuts on Hurricane Forecasting

Budget Reductions and Their Consequences (00:45 – 06:30)

Pakman opens the discussion by addressing recent budget cuts to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Weather Service (NWS). He references comments from veteran Florida meteorologist John Morales, highlighting the tangible repercussions of these financial constraints on hurricane prediction capabilities.

• John Morales' Warning: At [02:15], Morales states, “There is a staffing issue. There's a 20% drop in weather balloon data. The Hurricane Hunter flights that NOAA conducts, which are crucial to storm forecasting, are threatened due to these budget cuts.”

Pakman emphasizes the severity of these cuts, describing them as a "sledgehammer attack on science with multigenerational consequences," and warns of the potential for "needless loss of life" if forecasting abilities are further degraded.

Ideological Governance Undermining Science (06:31 – 10:50)

Pakman critiques the ideological motivations behind the funding reductions, attributing them to a broader hostility towards federal agencies and scientific expertise. He connects these actions to patterns observed during Donald Trump’s administration, suggesting that the undermining of public institutions is a deliberate strategy to erode trust in government capabilities.

• Quote: “Cripple the system, say it's broken, and then eliminate it completely. That's the kind of playbook from a lot of these right-wingers.” ([03:20])

Pakman expresses concern over the long-term implications for American leadership in science and disaster preparedness, underscoring the loss of credibility on the global stage.

---

2. Texas Legislation on Food Labeling

Senate Bill No. 25: Enhancing Consumer Transparency (10:51 – 18:30)

Transitioning from environmental concerns, Pakman discusses Texas's proposed Senate Bill No. 25, which seeks to mandate warning labels on packaged foods like Doritos, M&Ms, Mountain Dew, and Skittles if they contain any of over 40 ingredients flagged as unsafe by other countries.

• Legislation Details: The bill targets synthetic dyes, bleached flour, and other additives, aiming to increase consumer awareness. If enacted, the law would take effect in 2027 upon Governor Greg Abbott's signature.

• Potential National Impact: Pakman speculates that manufacturers may adopt these labeling standards nationally to avoid producing separate versions for Texas, thereby influencing national food labeling practices.

Health Implications and Consumer Choices (15:00 – 18:30)

Pakman shares his personal stance on ultra-processed foods, recommending that their consumption remain under 10% of daily caloric intake. He advocates for a diet centered around whole ingredients, such as carrots, to enhance health and transparency.

• Quote: “I just don't eat them. I want to keep it out of my diet. I think that's a great thing for people to do.” ([16:45])

He critiques the politicization of food labeling, noting that conservative initiatives often under the guise of “making America healthy again” mirror right-wing populism. Pakman warns of a regulatory inconsistency where similar initiatives from the left are opposed, potentially leading to a fragmented and confusing regulatory environment.

• Quote: “Labeling should really be consistent with the science, and it shouldn't be about corporate power and political identity.” ([17:30])

---

3. Harassment of Journalists Under Political Rhetoric

Case Study: Chuck Todd’s Harassment (18:31 – 25:00)

In the final segment, Pakman addresses the increasing targeting of journalists, using former Meet the Press anchor Chuck Todd as a primary example. He details Todd's experiences of having his tires slashed and receiving death threats following public attacks by then-President Donald Trump.

• Chuck Todd’s Experience: “[...] his tires were slashed after then President Donald Trump publicly attacked him during Donald Trump’s first term.” ([20:10])

Pakman expands the discussion to include broader patterns of harassment faced by journalists, attributing this to the hostile environment fostered by Trump’s rhetoric.

• Personal Anecdote: Pakman shares his own experiences with online harassment and threats, illustrating the pervasive nature of this issue within political discourse.

Normalization of Targeted Harassment (23:15 – 25:00)

Pakman argues that Trump’s personalized attacks on individuals, rather than institutions, embolden his supporters to direct hostility towards specific journalists and public figures. He highlights the emotional impact of such targeted harassment and its implications for free press and democratic discourse.

• Quote: “Trump supporters do interpret Trump's words as marching orders.” ([24:00])

Pakman calls for a return to collective discourse, warning against the dangers of weaponizing personal attacks and emphasizing the need to protect individuals from politically motivated harassment.

---

Conclusion

In this bonus episode, David Pakman effectively interweaves discussions on environmental policy, consumer rights, and media freedom, presenting a cohesive analysis of how political decisions and rhetoric intersect with science, public safety, and the integrity of journalism. Through expert testimonies, personal anecdotes, and critical examination of legislative actions, Pakman underscores the importance of maintaining robust public institutions, transparent consumer information, and a free and safe press.

---

Notable Quotes:

• John Morales on Budget Cuts: “[...] a 20% drop in weather balloon data. The Hurricane Hunter flights that NOAA conducts, which are crucial to storm forecasting, are threatened due to these budget cuts.” ([02:15])

• On Ideological Governance: “Cripple the system, say it's broken, and then eliminate it completely. That's the kind of playbook from a lot of these right-wingers.” ([03:20])

• On Personal Dietary Choices: “I just don't eat them. I want to keep it out of my diet. I think that's a great thing for people to do.” ([16:45])

• On Consistent Labeling: “Labeling should really be consistent with the science, and it shouldn't be about corporate power and political identity.” ([17:30])

• On Journalists' Harassment: “Trump supporters do interpret Trump's words as marching orders.” ([24:00])

---

This comprehensive summary encapsulates the key discussions and insights from the bonus episode, providing clarity on the pressing issues of scientific funding, consumer protection, and the challenges facing journalists today.

Transcript

[David Pakman]

Hey everybody. David Here. What you're about to hear is an episode of the bonus show. We do a bonus show every day for our members and for a limited time, we will release one of the week's bonus shows on Saturdays exclusively for our audio podcast listeners. If you'd like to get access to all of the bonus shows, simply sign up@join pacman.com here is that bonus show episode foreign welcome to the bonus show. We spoke yesterday about how it appears as though the director of FEMA didn't know that there is a thing called the hurricane season in the United States where it's from between June into the end of summer, early fall, where we see way more hurricanes. It's that simple. It's a hurricane season. And now people are arguing, oh, is that a joke? Is that not a joke? Whatever the case may be, we now are starting to see the real world repercussions, aside from whether the FEMA director knows about hurricane season, we are starting to see the real world repercussions of the funding cuts, not just to fema, but also to the National Weather Service because veteran Florida meteorologist John Morales issued a warning about hurricane season. He is saying he's in Florida because of the budget cuts federally to the National Weather Service and to Noah, the National Oceanographic. I forget what Noah stands for. I'm sure you can google it. No need to email me. Okay. He can no longer guarantee accurate hurricane predictions and this video went sort of viral. He's covered storms for three decades. He says now there is a staffing issue. There's a 20% drop in weather balloon data. The Hunter flights, the hurricane hunter flights that Noah does, which are crucial to storm forecasting, are threatened due to these budget cuts. And he described it as a sledgehammer attack on science with multigenerational consequence and potentially needless loss of life. Needless loss of life how? Well, if your forecasts are degraded, you are less accurately able to predict where and how severe are hurricane impacts going to be. You then have to say evacuate everybody, even though we're not sure everybody needs to. Or, or you may not actually issue evacuation orders for people who should be evacuating. It's chaos. It's that simple. So this is a really unfortunate example. But it, but it's a stark and sort of really distills down how ideological governance in this case, it's just we're hostile to science, we're hostile to expertise, we're hostile to federal agencies. That's what it is. It can directly have deadly consequences, potentially at this point, we hope that it doesn't go from potential to real. And this warning from Morales, who's a meteorologist, it cuts through political rhetoric, and it just shows lives could be lost because we are defunding tools that protect people. And this fits into the pattern of the deliberate erosion of public institutions under Trump's second term. The goal appears not to just be, let's cut costs, because a lot of these things are really drops in the bucket. Let's undermine trust in government's ability to do anything. We don't want government doing a damn thing, certainly not federal government. And this is. I'm sorry that I talk about this so often because it's so relevant. Cripple the system, say it's broken, and then eliminate it completely. That's the kind of playbook from a lot of these right wingers. And we also. I mean, so that's like the broad analysis. More narrowly, American leadership in science and disaster preparedness is also at a humiliating low point. Covid. The COVID reaction under Trump is obviously kind of part of that. And there was a. There was a time when this was really the gold standard for. For global weather forecasting in the United States. And now we have American lives at risk. We're ceding ground internationally, and it is no longer theoretical. So the hope, of course, is, is that some of this will end up being reversed, But I don't know that it will, because Donald Trump tends never to reverse course when he is, I guess you would say, confronted by the reality of what he is doing. And that is why I am worried, especially for our friends in Florida, in Hurricane Ali, all across the country, that it could be a very rough hurricane season. I hope that that's not the case. Meanwhile, going from Florida to Texas, Texas is poised to pass Senate bill number 25. This would add warning labels to packaged foods like Doritos M&MS, Mountain Dew and Skittles if they contain any of over 40 ingredients that other countries have flagged as unsafe or not recommended for human consumption. This is backed by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. It's going after synthetic dyes. It's going after bleached flour and other additives. The law would take place, would take effect in 2027 if Texas Governor Greg Abbott signs it. Now, there's a lot of interesting things going on here. Number one, Texas is known for minimal regulation. Minimal regulation. What they're looking at doing is adding regulations around food labeling. One of the things that's also a reality is that if these companies that manufacture Skittles and all this stuff. If they have to label foods a certain way for Texas, they will almost certainly just start labeling them that way nationally to avoid having to do two different versions. So even though this is in Texas, it could actually have national implications. Now here's the very interesting thing. I am someone who suggests based on everything I've read, to really keep consumption of of ultra processed foods of these kinds, Skittles and others, to under 10% of daily calories. Where did I get that number? That's just what the literature I've read suggests. You know, you don't have to say zero of this stuff, but keep it below 10% of calories in a 2000 calorie diet. That would be get under 200 calories a day from this sort of stuff. And you know, you look at the calories on some of these things and you realize it's not a lot that that gets you to the 200 calories. I'm all for it. At the same time, I think it's important to know that there are a lot of games being played with this. Europe has already banned this stuff. I'll give you some examples. There are some dies which we hear Europe has banned it, but the US hasn't. And then you look more deeply and you find out that yes, there is a DAI that's allowed in the US that's banned in Europe under that name, but it is allowed in Europe under a different name, even though it is chemically essentially the same thing. So the point I'm making is I'm all for, let's reduce our consumption of ultra processed foods. You know, I'll eat chocolate, but Skittles and all of these things, I just, I just don't eat them. I want to keep it out of my diet. I think that's a great thing for people to do. Eat ingredients. Right? Go, go to, here's a carrot and I've got, you know, you're making something from ingredients that are just a single item that is better at the same time. Now this intersection of pseudo right wing populism and Maha make America healthy again, which on the surface is about consumer transparency, it's really about just sort of following the lead of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Who on much of this stuff is kind of going beyond what the science says on raw milk, on vaccines, on all of these things. Now this does put us in an ironic place. Conservatives who often oppose big government are suddenly all in on the nanny state style warnings. They want warnings about vaccines, they want warnings about Skittles. They want warnings about all of this stuff as long as it's framed as RFK and Trump's battle to make America healthy again. But when these same sort of initiatives came from the left and they were branded differently, they were against them, so could become a regulatory mess. I am all for labeling. At the same time, the labeling should really be consistent with the science, and it shouldn't be about corporate power and political identity that sort of governs how we are monitoring and putting information on food labels. And we'll see ultimately whether this is something that passes. Former Meet the Press anchor Chuck Todd revealed that his tires were slashed after then President Donald Trump publicly attacked him during Donald Trump's first term. And Todd said that this was actually part of a larger pattern of harassment and threatened threats that he was receiving. After Donald Trump mentioned him, he said he was getting death threats, he was getting weird phone calls, and that his tires were also slashed. And he recently did an interview with Times Radio where he said there was a correlation between when Trump would mention him publicly and the threats that he received. And apparently this applied to other journalists as well. You know, anecdotally, what I can tell you is that when Donald Trump Jr. And Candace Owens and Scott Adams and whoever else tweeted about one of my tweets a few years ago, the number of death threats not only I got, but that family members got, people found my dad and sent him messages like, you should have aborted your Jew son. Think about waking up to that one in your inbox. Anecdotally, I can tell you this is exactly how it works. When MAGA turns its ire and its attention to any individual, it becomes very, very bad. Now, Chuck Todd's specific story, the bigger story here, is the normalization of targeted harassment under Trump's leadership. The slash tires, the death threats, the indifference from Trump. This is a reminder of how Trump's rhetoric has really helped to create an unsafe environment for. For journalists, even without explicitly calling for violence. And. And it's part of the hostility to a free press. Trump's language will be. You know, sometimes he'll blur the lines between a critique and an incitement to do stuff, and Trump will say, I'm just talking about people. Chuck Todd's a nasty guy who wrote bad about me, but we know January six being a great example. Trump supporters do interpret Trump's words as marching orders. Very often it could be against the press, against judges, against political appointees. And then the other aspect of the story that's underscored is that Trump doesn't just attack institutions. He will personalize his attacks. And in fact, they are much more emotionally salient that way. Attacking ABC or NBC, all right, you know, it'll get his followers to at rallies, go fake news abc, fine. But when you go after Chuck Todd, when you go after Jim Acosta, when Donald Trump Jr. Went after me, do I have my Candace Owens one David Pakman does not have a soul, does not soul that personalization, naming, assigning nicknames, knowing his audience knows who to target, making sure his audience knows who to target. This creates an ecosystem where they feel emboldened and sometimes even justified in going after individuals. When we think about the post Trump era of politics, which were three years and six months, three and a half months, three and a half years away, we will eventually get there. MAGA may remain, it may not. We just don't know. One of the top priorities I believe has to be getting back to we, we can't be personalizing and weaponizing attacks in the way that we have because it's actually dangerous for people. And Chuck, Chuck Todd story certainly, certainly confirms that. Thanks for bearing with just me this week as producer. Pat is off. Bonus shows will be back to both of us next week and full length as well. Everybody doing double duty with Pat's much deserved vacation this week. I'll see you tomorrow. New show, new bonus show.

[Libsyn Ads]

Marketing is hard, but I'll tell you a little secret. It doesn't have to be. Let me point something out. You're listening to a podcast right now and it's great. You love the host. You seek it out and download it. You listen to it while driving, working out, cooking, even going to the bathroom. Podcasts are a pretty close companion. And this is a podcast ad. Did I get your attention? You can reach great listeners like yourself with podcast advertising for from Libsyn Ads. Choose from hundreds of top podcasts offering host endorsements or run a pre produced ad like this one across thousands of shows. To reach your target audience in their favorite podcasts with Libsyn ads, go to libsynads. Com, that's L I B S Y N Ads. Com Today.