SAM SANDERS, HOST:
My first official question for both of you about all these sanctions is, can I have y'all just define exactly for me what is a sanction - like, the third-grader definition?
STACEY VANEK SMITH, BYLINE: Oh, like Webster's Dictionary defines sanction as?
SANDERS: Yes, dictionary.com.
VANEK SMITH: I'm looking it up.
SANDERS: All of that. Do it for me.
VANEK SMITH: I thought I was so prepared, but this I did not prepare.
(LAUGHTER)
VANEK SMITH: Sanction.
AUNT BETTY, BYLINE: Hey, y'all. This is Sam's Aunt Betty. This week, a look at the sanctions against Russia. All right, let's start the show.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
SANDERS: Hey, y'all. You're listening to IT'S BEEN A MINUTE from NPR. I'm Sam Sanders. Every day, we are seeing new images and hearing new stories out of Ukraine - bombed-out buildings, gunfire, tanks on the ground, an incoming humanitarian crisis. And pretty much the entire world has united against Vladimir Putin. And while the U.S. and its allies haven't resolved to send in troops into Ukraine - at least not yet - they are taking steps to damage the Kremlin in other ways, mainly through sanctions.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: Together, along with our allies, we are right now enforcing powerful economic sanctions. We're cutting off Russia's largest banks from the international financial system, preventing Russia's central bank from defending the Russian ruble, making Putin's $630 billion war fund worthless. We're choking Russia's access.
(APPLAUSE)
SANDERS: But how do sanctions actually work? What effect do they have on a country like Russia? And more importantly, could they ever stop a war that's already underway? To help answer these questions, I called up the two best economic thinkers in the biz - Stacey Vanek Smith, co-host of NPR's The Indicator podcast from Planet Money, and Cardiff Garcia. He's the host of the long-form economic podcast "The New Bazaar."
CARDIFF GARCIA: As Stacey can attest, you know, economics journalists are never so necessary as when things are falling apart.
SANDERS: So I asked both Cardiff and Stacey to bring it back to the basics for me to help me understand the economic repercussions that Russia will face - a little sanctions 101, if you will. And also obligatory - we are taping this on a Friday morning, so things may have changed by the time you hear this. All right, with that, class is now in session.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
SANDERS: So when the international community tries to cut off Russia economically through these sanctions, what does that look like, and what exactly are they doing? Is there a switch for the banks? Is there HTML code for, like, wire transfers? How does this work?
VANEK SMITH: Well, like, on a very practical level, they basically kind of cut off most of Russia's banks from international economy. So that basically means that most of the companies in the world will not do business with Russian banks, won't hold their assets. It's sort of like shunning them in economic way. You know, it sort of isolates the banks.
SANDERS: You can't sit with us.
VANEK SMITH: Exactly. It's you can't sit with us.
SANDERS: OK.
VANEK SMITH: Yes.
GARCIA: Yeah. And, I mean, there's a lot of, like, technical things that are happening here, right?
VANEK SMITH: Yeah.
GARCIA: Like, it is, as Stacey said, cutting off Russian banks from being able to interact with the rest of the world. It is also freezing a lot of the overseas assets of the Russian central bank. These are reserves that are necessary to help prop up the Russian economy in the event of something like this, right? But actually, you know, there's a problem when you're holding all of your money in the countries that you're also pissing off, right? Like, they can take these actions.
You know, there are also attempts to freeze the assets of the people in Putin's immediate circle - so some of the oligarchs, some of the people in the Russian government. It makes it harder for Russian companies to raise money abroad. And there's a few others, but the net effect is to make it extremely difficult, close to impossible in some cases, for the Russian government, the Russian central bank and ordinary Russian businesses and Russian individuals to transact with the rest of the world.
SANDERS: Hearing you both talk about how these sanctions work, international governments can easily target Russian money and Russian banks, but, like, what about Putin's money? Is that safe, too, or is that going to be sanctioned as well?
GARCIA: If it's held abroad, it's not safe, right?
VANEK SMITH: Yeah.
GARCIA: You know, one of the things that the U.S. and the Europeans are trying to do is to essentially look for the assets that Putin holds and also the others in his inner circle that are held overseas and then try to effectively freeze them and in some cases possibly seize them. We don't really know yet.
VANEK SMITH: Yeah. In fact, I read a report that they're sort of on the lookout for some big yachts in certain seas that are owned by very wealthy Russians who they're trying to sanction to try to make sure...
SANDERS: I had a series of questions about the yachts.
VANEK SMITH: Yes.
SANDERS: Yeah.
VANEK SMITH: Yachts very interesting.
SANDERS: Well, the yachts are interesting because on top of international governments trying to punish the oligarchs through things I guess like the yachts, Twitter has become a sort of sleuth about the yachts as well. I've been seeing lots of tweets where internet do-gooders are saying, we found the oligarchs' yachts. Here's where they are. I'm just saying, what is going on with that? That seems very risky and dangerous.
GARCIA: Yeah. I mean, look. You know, there's a sense in which what's happening now is also taking place in, like, a new era where there's all this information out there. And, you know, there's a lot of, like, social media sleuths, as you said, looking not just for the yachts, but also for, like, the private jets that are owned by, like, these Russian oligarchs, tracking their movements and things like that. And it's just - it's added a whole new dimension to what's happening here.
So in terms of finding where some of these assets are, some assets are easier to find than others, right? Like, some things are in, like, bank accounts and things of that nature. But, you know, yachts are big and kind of tough to avoid. I mean, in a lot of cases, the whole point of having a massive yacht is to be conspicuous about it.
SANDERS: Exactly.
GARCIA: And now you want to hide it. Well, sorry. No.
SANDERS: Too bad. And apparently...
VANEK SMITH: Self yacht (ph).
SANDERS: ...They found some of these yachts because some of the yachts have these expensive machines that you basically pay Bloomberg for that give you immediate financial news...
VANEK SMITH: Oh, yeah. Cardiff always wanted us to get one at The Indicator.
GARCIA: Yeah.
VANEK SMITH: They were, like, really amazing for information portals.
SANDERS: Well, if you get a Bloomberg terminal, they can track your yacht. Beware.
GARCIA: All right.
VANEK SMITH: (Laughing) I'll keep that in mind...
GARCIA: Would've been a good investment.
VANEK SMITH: ...When I'm yacht shopping. Yeah, it is a funny thing. I remember sanctions have been used for a really long time. I mean, this is like the U.S.'s main weapon against Russia because it means not invading, essentially. It's a way to kind of try to fight Russia and Putin without actually getting troops involved.
What I find really interesting is that Putin kind of expected this and tried to, like, sanction-proof the Russian economy. As Cardiff pointed out, a lot of those assets have been frozen, but he kind of built it up. It was - it's sort of become known as something called Fortress Russia...
SANDERS: Wow.
VANEK SMITH: ...Where it was basically like, OK, what do we have to do to make sure that it doesn't matter if we get sanctioned? Because I think Putin fully expected this, so they just had this enormous, like, $630-something billion stored up. It's kind of like they've been training for this. Like, Putin has...
SANDERS: Wow.
VANEK SMITH: ...Kind of made the economy sort of, I mean, isolated...
SANDERS: Independent, yeah.
VANEK SMITH: ...Which is - you know, for an economy that basically survives on exporting oil and wheat, that's tricky.
SANDERS: Does that look like just having a warehouse full of cash? How do you do it? Like, does he just hide money under the mattress? What's going on?
GARCIA: No, it involves, you know, holding a lot of foreign currencies and a lot of foreign-currency-denominated assets, like foreign bonds and things of that nature. And, you know, Stacey's absolutely right. This was an attempt to fortify Russia against a situation like this.
What's been amazing to see is how that strategy has utterly failed. I mean, most of those $600-and-something billion of assets, or a huge portion of them, are immediately inaccessible to Putin and to Russia now, right? That's why these sanctions are so damaging, you know? And so I think this just goes to show the scale of how much Putin sort of underestimated the potential response of, you know, his geopolitical adversaries.
But I think what's important to realize about sanctions is that precisely by their nature, they're meant to be punitive. It means that there are no real, you know, economic winners from sanctions. These sanctions are targeted at Russia, which means that, like, there's going to be a tremendous amount of suffering inside of Russia, of course, but they also have big knock-on effects on the rest of the global economy.
SANDERS: I want to talk more about that because that's kind of what I'm worried about. I'm like, OK, how high are gas prices going to get? We know that Russia exports a lot of oil. We also know that we're in a moment of inflation and supply chain issues. Will any sanctions exacerbate those two things?
VANEK SMITH: Well, I think that is, like, such a fascinating question and kind of shows how we're all tied together so much because most of Russia's economy, most of its revenue comes from selling oil, and we haven't really restricted the sale of Russian oil, which seems like the most obvious thing - right? - the most obvious target to hit.
SANDERS: Why didn't we do that? Why didn't we do that?
VANEK SMITH: Well, because there is a shortage of oil right now in the global market, and so oil prices are like a hundred and something - like, it was like - I think they had $114 a barrel this week. So what happens is if we cut off Russian oil, oil prices would skyrocket, which means gas prices here and all over the world would skyrocket - and heating oil prices. And that would hit everybody. That's the problem, right? I mean, those aren't, like, discretionary items. Like, you kind of have to fill up your car to get to work or you have to heat your home. And so that could really hit people all over the world and people who don't have a lot of money, obviously, the hardest. If oil prices go nuts and double or triple, I mean, that can really hurt everybody.
GARCIA: Yeah, I love this point that Stacey makes about the interconnectedness of all these markets. The sanctions were designed, in theory, to not make it harder for the flow of oil and gas to come out of Russia, right? But in practice, something very different has happened. You know, a lot of the energy consumers, a lot of companies that would buy Russian oil and gas have actually avoided doing that because they're afraid of falling afoul of the other sanctions. So, for example, if you use a certain bank to finance the purchases of oil or of gas, well, suddenly those banks aren't going to let you do that anymore because they're afraid of falling afoul of the other sanctions. And so what's happened is oil and gas prices, in response to the sanctions, still have climbed quite a bit. And Russia is already encountering difficulties in selling its oil, even though, exactly as Stacey noted, the oil is not part of the deliberate sanctions because sanctions are not like these precise, neat and tidy things. They're messy. They're big, blunt, powerful instruments, and they can have all of these big unanticipated ripple effects. And so how long those effects are going to last is a little tough to say, but they are definitely already influencing energy markets. And as Stacey said, we've already seen this week that oil and gas prices have continued climbing, and it's tough to know how high they're going to go.
SANDERS: Coming up, more with Cardiff and Stacey and if sanctions have ever stopped a war.
Maybe we can't answer this question, but I'm going to ask it anyway. Have sanctions on their own ever stopped or prevented a war?
VANEK SMITH: I know that. You know, that was, like, one of the first things that went through my mind because I remember doing a really deep dive into sanctions against North Korea once. And that's very funny because they were trying to, like, specifically sanction, like, these luxury items that Kim Jong Un favored. It was like certain kinds of whiskey and, you know, Italian shoe brands and stuff like that. And that question did come up, too, obviously - you know, do sanctions work?
But I think, as Cardiff noted, these sanctions are actually, I think, hitting Russia a lot harder than even Putin expected. And Putin has basically, I think in certain ways, shaped the whole Russian economy since - you know, in the last probably almost decade around sanction-proofing the economy at a great price, even, because, I mean, I think it's prevented the Russian economy from growing at the rate it could've. One of the things I was looking at was that, like, 20 years ago, China and Russia - their economies weren't that different in size. I mean, China was four times larger than Russia, which is significant, but now it's 10 times larger than Russia's economy. Russia's economy is pretty little. It's like the 11th largest economy. Italy's economy's bigger. South Korea's economy's bigger.
SANDERS: Italy's economy is bigger?
VANEK SMITH: Oh, yeah.
SANDERS: Wow.
VANEK SMITH: It's really paid this huge price for, you know, having this little fortress around itself. And the interest rates in Russia now - just, I mean, the currency is tanking. The ruble is tanking. They're trying to - so they're raising interest rates a ton. So interest rates - I read this, like, in three different places because I didn't believe it - they're 20%. They're 20%...
SANDERS: Wow.
VANEK SMITH: ...In Russia right now...
SANDERS: Wow.
VANEK SMITH: ...Just to try to give the currency some value. And what are they in - Cardiff, right now in the U.S., it's like...
GARCIA: It will soon be like 0.25 or something like that.
SANDERS: Wow.
VANEK SMITH: Yeah, it's not even a percent. I know. I know.
GARCIA: Very low. Yeah, very low.
VANEK SMITH: I mean, and that - just, like, high interest rates make it so expensive to borrow money that it really can slow an economy down - 20% interest rates.
SANDERS: Yeah. So then I hear you talking about this, and I'm kind of like, well, can't there be a better way to get Putin without really screwing over Russians who may have had nothing to do with what Putin wants to do? It seems as if these sanctions are really, really hurting everyday Russians. And I know that's how it works, but there's no other way?
GARCIA: I would say two things in response. It is going to make it harder, first of all, on Putin and his inner circle to maneuver, right? I mean, they are having other effects. In fact, their intended effect of making it harder to prosecute the invasion, like, that actually could still be a realistic outcome here, right?
The second thing is that one specific worry I've seen about this set of sanctions as they've been designed by the Europeans, by the U.S., by the U.K. is that they don't really make it clear exactly what it is that Putin and Russia would have to do to have them be unwound. And this is an observation that was made by a political scientist named Dan Drezner that Stacey and I both like. And he says that sanctions work best when it's clear what it is that a country would have to do to get them taken off because otherwise the country might just keep doing the same thing it already is doing because they'll assume that the sanctions are never going to come off no matter what.
On the other hand - and this is where things get even more confusing, right? - it's possible that by leaving that ambiguous, that it will create the sort of negotiating space to arrive at a more peaceful, diplomatic solution later on down the line. I don't know how to adjudicate between those two ideas, but that just goes to show that there's a real kind of fog that we're trying to look through here and that, you know, when we talk about sanctions, again, we're not talking about things that always have exactly their intended outcome. There are so many variables involved that it just becomes a little bit unclear to anticipate what happens next.
SANDERS: Yeah. In all of this, with these sanctions around Russia right now, what has surprised you most about this round of sanctions in comparison to other previous rounds of sanctions against various governments?
GARCIA: How quickly they've been implemented and how severe they have been. This is partly a function of how quickly, you know, the invasion happened and how much it galvanized a certain amount of agreement between the U.S., European governments, the U.K. - the allies, essentially. But I also question whether or not, you know, these governments would've been willing to incur a certain amount of pain on their own side and the kind of pain that would be sort of unavoidable from a sanctions package this severe, and yet they went through with it. And that has shocked me, to be honest.
VANEK SMITH: For me, it's how effective they've been. I have to admit I was very skeptical when Biden announced sanctions. I remember being like, is that all we're going to do? But it's really been so surprisingly effective for me, and I think I've been impressed at how they've been able to kind of get to the heart of the Russian economy so quickly. And even though Putin was so braced for it, they've had such a profound effect.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
SANDERS: Thanks again to my guests, Stacey Vanek Smith and Cardiff Garcia. All right, listeners, coming up, more with Stacey and Cardiff as they play my favorite game, Who Said That?
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
SANDERS: We're back. You're listening to IT'S BEEN A MINUTE from NPR. I'm Sam Sanders, joined by, gosh, two of the smartest and most charismatic economic minds I've ever, ever...
GARCIA: As the saying goes, game recognize game, Sam.
VANEK SMITH: Oh.
(LAUGHTER)
VANEK SMITH: There's just a lot of love in this room right now.
SANDERS: Oh, I love it. I'm going to let you both right now tell our listeners who you are.
VANEK SMITH: My name is Stacey Vanek Smith. I am co-host of The Indicator From Planet Money, Planet Money's daily economics podcast.
GARCIA: And I'm Cardiff Garcia. I'm the host of "The New Bazaar" podcast, which is a long-form economics chat. And quite gloriously, I used to be Stacey's former co-host on The Indicator...
VANEK SMITH: Yes.
GARCIA: ...And Sam's former colleague at NPR, yeah.
VANEK SMITH: Cardiff and I were messaging back-and-forth before this, talking about how terrible we are at Who Said That.
GARCIA: We were wondering if it's possible to get a negative score on Who Said That.
VANEK SMITH: Yes, yeah.
GARCIA: Is that a thing or no?
VANEK SMITH: It's good to have achievable goals.
SANDERS: Let me tell you. You're going to graduate. You're going to finish this.
VANEK SMITH: OK, OK.
SANDERS: Someone's going to win.
(SOUNDBITE OF TV SHOW, "THE REAL HOUSEWIVES OF ATLANTA")
KANDI BURRUSS: Who had been saying that?
PORSHA WILLIAMS: Who said that?
SANDERS: Y'all have played before. You know how it works. Who Said That is the easiest game. I share three quotes from the week of news. You tell me who said it or get some key words. I'll give you a bunch of hints, but I will not give you any prizes 'cause we don't have any.
VANEK SMITH: The prize is getting to hang out with you and Cardiff.
GARCIA: Yes.
SANDERS: Oh, my goodness.
VANEK SMITH: That's prize enough. I know.
SANDERS: Oh, my goodness. I love - so much love in this recording. I love it so. Let's go. Here's the first quote.
GARCIA: Let's do it.
SANDERS: "I didn't watch 'Twilight.' Sorry. Not my taste. I don't hate it. I just didn't see it." Who said that?
GARCIA: It must have been...
SANDERS: A famous actress out doing press.
GARCIA: Kristen Stewart?
(SOUNDBITE OF BUZZER)
GARCIA: No?
SANDERS: No. She was in it. She was...
VANEK SMITH: Zoe Kravitz?
(SOUNDBITE OF VICTORY TUNE)
SANDERS: Yes, Zoe Kravitz.
GARCIA: Oh, man.
VANEK SMITH: How did I get that right?
GARCIA: I thought that Kristen Stewart might've said it because...
VANEK SMITH: Is that really true? Zoe Kravitz said it?
SANDERS: Zoe Kravitz did say that.
VANEK SMITH: Woohoo.
SANDERS: But to Cardiff, I could see Kristen Stewart saying, I didn't watch "Twilight."
VANEK SMITH: Oh, totally.
GARCIA: Exactly.
SANDERS: But she shouldn't say, not my taste. She was the star of the movie. She was the star of the movie.
VANEK SMITH: That would be a huge - that would be...
GARCIA: Yeah.
VANEK SMITH: ...A total Kristen Stewart move to be like, yeah, I never watched it.
SANDERS: She would do that.
GARCIA: Exactly.
SANDERS: She would do that.
GARCIA: Incorrect, though.
(LAUGHTER)
SANDERS: It's OK. So, Stacey, you got this one.
VANEK SMITH: Woohoo.
SANDERS: That quote did come from Zoe Kravitz. She is the co-star of Robert Pattinson in the new Batman movie called "The Batman." And on the press tour for this film, she admitted to Robert Pattinson, star of the "Twilight" film franchise, that she had never seen him in his breakout role as Edward Cullen.
VANEK SMITH: Yeah, how do you miss "Twilight"? Feels like you had to see it.
SANDERS: I watched "Twilight."
VANEK SMITH: I did, too.
SANDERS: So we should clarify here. So Zoe Kravitz did say, in fact, she did see the first "Twilight," even though in this press tour event, she said, I didn't watch "Twilight." Apparently she didn't remember it, which is fine. There are a lot of movies.
VANEK SMITH: That's true.
SANDERS: I will say, I don't...
VANEK SMITH: Do we believe that? It's like a power move.
GARCIA: I mean, yeah.
SANDERS: Right? Right?
VANEK SMITH: A Zoe Kravitz power move.
SANDERS: I will say, I'm not sure I'm going to see this new Batman movie. It's getting good reviews, but I'm kind of superhero-movied out. Will y'all go see it?
VANEK SMITH: There's so many of them.
SANDERS: There are so many of them.
GARCIA: Yeah, I'm going to see it. I like these dark, brooding versions of Batman that have been coming out in the last, you know, couple of decades, you know?
VANEK SMITH: Cardiff was always team Edward.
SANDERS: OK.
GARCIA: Yeah.
(LAUGHTER)
GARCIA: I have no idea what these words mean.
SANDERS: With that, quote No. 2. Stacey, you got that point. Congratulations. Here's the second quote. Tell me...
VANEK SMITH: I think last time I was pointless, so I am very excited. Cardiff, like, wiped...
SANDERS: You've already broken a record.
VANEK SMITH: Cardiff, like, mopped the floor with me last time. OK.
GARCIA: I thought we were playing this together, not against each other.
SANDERS: Wow. Wow.
GARCIA: But OK, if we're going to be all confrontational about it, fine.
VANEK SMITH: Well, when I wasn't winning, we were playing it together.
(LAUGHTER)
GARCIA: When I was winning, we weren't.
SANDERS: Yeah, yeah. For this next one, just tell me what I'm talking about.
VANEK SMITH: OK.
SANDERS: Here it is. Here's the quote. "If it had been a paper about putting another dinosaur into a different species, nobody would really care." What are we talking about - some big dinosaur news this week?
GARCIA: Oh, I didn't see this.
VANEK SMITH: How did I miss dinosaur news?
SANDERS: What is the most popular species of dinosaur?
VANEK SMITH: Tyrannosaurus rex.
GARCIA: Tyrannosaurus rex?
(SOUNDBITE OF VICTORY TUNE)
SANDERS: That's it. Who got it first? That's a photo finish right there.
GARCIA: Tied?
SANDERS: My editor says that Stacey was a tiny bit ahead.
GARCIA: I was going to say Chris Pratt, but OK.
SANDERS: Not Chris Pratt.
(LAUGHTER)
SANDERS: Y'all didn't see this?
GARCIA: No.
SANDERS: So this week, some dinosaur experts suggested that based on their research, that what we think is the species of Tyrannosaurus rex, it may actually be three different species.
GARCIA: Oh.
VANEK SMITH: Oh, that's great. Yes, and.
SANDERS: Why is that great? You were very excited about that.
VANEK SMITH: Because I have a weird love of dinosaurs.
SANDERS: OK. OK.
VANEK SMITH: I know. It's like nerdy not in a cool way. It's like just nerdy.
SANDERS: No, it's very cool.
VANEK SMITH: But, you know...
SANDERS: I just love the speed at which you said, that's great.
VANEK SMITH: It is a great thing.
SANDERS: Yeah, OK.
VANEK SMITH: Of all the terrible news we've been getting, like, that there are more kinds of Tyrannosaurus rex - this is great. Like, yes, I want - that is the news that I want in my news feed - that we've, like, discovered more different kinds of T. rexes. I mean, they're not around now. If this were like, they're alive now, more different kinds of T. rexes...
SANDERS: That would be a problem.
VANEK SMITH: ...Would not be - we do not want variants.
SANDERS: So this quote that I was telling y'all - this quote comes from Dr. Thomas Carr of Carthage College. And he was actually disagreeing with the other dinosaur experts who are now arguing that there are three species that make up T. rex. He gave this quote to New York Times, and he said, actually, no. But the folks who did say, wait; there are three T. rex species. They were led by a team consisting of paleontologist Gregory Paul, and they published their new research in the journal Evolutionary Biology this week. And they said, here's the thing. There are three types of T. rex, and the differences in the jaws and the teeth justify these new categories. They also suggested three new names for these three new T. rex species. And I'm going to translate the Latin for you.
VANEK SMITH: Please.
SANDERS: But these names would be...
VANEK SMITH: Yes.
SANDERS: ...Tyrant lizard emperor, tyrant lizard king and tyrant lizard queen. I love it.
VANEK SMITH: Oh.
GARCIA: I thought you were going to say, like, tyrant lizard emperor, and then one was going to be like tyrant lizard Godzilla, tyrant lizard, you know, King Kong or something like that.
VANEK SMITH: There's like a whole royal court of tyrant lizards.
SANDERS: Loch Ness.
GARCIA: Yeah.
SANDERS: Yeah, right?
GARCIA: Exactly.
VANEK SMITH: Yes. I mean...
SANDERS: I'm, like, imagining, like, a "Bridgerton" spinoff with dinosaurs.
VANEK SMITH: Those movies are going to write themselves.
SANDERS: Right? Let's do this.
VANEK SMITH: Tyrant lizard queen - I mean, how is that not already a movie?
SANDERS: Who plays tyrant lizard queen?
VANEK SMITH: Oh.
SANDERS: Meryl Streep. Give her everything.
(LAUGHTER)
VANEK SMITH: Meryl Streep. She can do it, you know?
SANDERS: We're going to share that point for the two of you...
GARCIA: Yes.
SANDERS: ...'Cause I'm being nice today. I'm being nice today. All right. All right, here's the quote. Tell me what famous actor, who plays cowboys a lot, offered up this critique of "Power Of The Dog" this week. "That's what all these effing cowboys in that movie look like. They're all running around in chaps and no shirts. There's all these allusions to homosexuality throughout the effing movie."
GARCIA: Kevin Bacon.
(SOUNDBITE OF BUZZER)
GARCIA: By, like - you know, like, six degrees, right? Like, yeah.
SANDERS: (Laughter).
VANEK SMITH: Kevin Bacon would never say anything mean. Alec Baldwin.
(SOUNDBITE OF BUZZER)
VANEK SMITH: Alec Baldwin would say something mean.
GARCIA: That's a good guess, yeah.
SANDERS: This is an older actor who always plays cowboys.
VANEK SMITH: Clint Eastwood?
(SOUNDBITE OF BUZZER)
GARCIA: Is Jack Palance still alive?
(SOUNDBITE OF BUZZER)
SANDERS: No, he's gone.
VANEK SMITH: I feel like Clint wouldn't throw shade? Would he throw shade?
SANDERS: This is - this was - this one is just - he was in "A Star Is Born," but not Bradley Cooper.
VANEK SMITH: Oh, Kris Kristofferson?
(SOUNDBITE OF BUZZER)
SANDERS: No.
VANEK SMITH: He was in "A Star Is Born," and he plays cowboys sometimes.
GARCIA: The guy with the really deep voice.
SANDERS: This actor - yeah.
GARCIA: You know who I'm talking about?
SANDERS: This actor has the same first name as I do.
VANEK SMITH: Yes, the white mustache who's in "1883."
GARCIA: Yes.
SANDERS: Yes. Him, him, him, him, him.
VANEK SMITH: What's his name?
SANDERS: Also in "Big Lebowski."
GARCIA: Sam...
SANDERS: Yes, keep going.
GARCIA: ...Elliott.
(SOUNDBITE OF VICTORY TUNE)
SANDERS: That's it. Cardiff, you got it.
GARCIA: Oh, yes.
VANEK SMITH: Go, Cardiff.
SANDERS: So this story is bonkers. Sam Elliott apparently did not like "Power Of The Dog" at all because as someone who portrays cowboys a lot in the movies, he didn't think it was true to life. He said on Marc Maron's podcast, quote, "why in the F does she" - this is the director - "shoot this movie in New Zealand and call it Montana and say this is the way it was? That effing rubbed me the wrong way, pal." Who asked you, Sam Elliott?
GARCIA: Yeah.
SANDERS: It's a movie. It's a work of fiction.
GARCIA: Yeah.
VANEK SMITH: It's a work of fiction. I do have to say that Benedict Cumberbatch was, like, kind of an unlikely cowboy, but he kind of pulled it off. He kind of pulled it off. I was like...
SANDERS: That movie got on my nerves.
VANEK SMITH: ...Benedict Cumberbatch could not be a cowboy 'cause he's, like, Sherlock Holmes in my head forever.
GARCIA: I just like that Sam Elliott essentially determined that he was like an authenticator of the cowboy experience. Is that what happened?
VANEK SMITH: Cardiff, he's not a cowboy himself, but he plays one on TV, and that (laughter) does give him some expertise, right?
SANDERS: With that, we have to name a winner of this round of Who Said That, and I'm going to just go ahead and say everybody wins.
GARCIA: Everybody does win.
VANEK SMITH: Aw. You know what I'm going to go ahead and say? I'm going to say everybody loses because you're leaving, Sam. There are no winners in this game.
GARCIA: Yeah.
VANEK SMITH: I know.
SANDERS: Let's at least call it a tie. We can say a tie. It's not losers or winners.
VANEK SMITH: OK, I like that. I like that.
GARCIA: Hey, who said that? Oh, I'm going to miss Sam Sanders. Stacey Vanek Smith said that. And I was like...
VANEK SMITH: Oh, that's right.
SANDERS: Oh, I'm going to miss you, too.
VANEK SMITH: A hundred points for Cardiff.
GARCIA: Wow.
SANDERS: Oh, my goodness.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
AUNT BETTY: Now it's time to end the show as we always do. Every week, listeners share the best thing that happened to them all week. We encourage folks to brag, and they do. Let's hear a few of those submissions.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
ANNIE: Hi, Sam. It's Annie (ph) in Richmond, Calif. The best part of my week was celebrating 13 years of sobriety with the crew of ladies in recovery who got me through the last two years virtually. We laughed and caught up over burgers and shakes in person, and I was reminded that I'm in the right place doing the right thing and I'm never alone.
JIM: Hi, Sam. After 46 years, I've retired from emergency medicine. I've been doing emergency medicine at different levels for 46 years. In that time, I've had the great honor to help life take its first breath and hold their hand when they took their last. It's been good, but it's time for me to hand this off to other people.
SEAN: Hey, Sam. This is Sean (ph) from Burbank, Calif. After 20 grueling months of continued education classes and MCAT studies and countless application submissions, today I've received an acceptance letter from my No. 1 choice for medical school, Howard University. And at 35, I'm living proof that it's never too late to follow your heart.
JANET: Hi, Sam. This is Janet (ph) in Asheville, N.C. The best thing that happened this week is that my wife was finally declared cancer-free. It's been a long three years, and we are hoping to keep moving on. Thanks for your show, and thanks for listening.
JIM: Thank you for all the great work that you do, Sam. Have a great week.
ANNIE: Thanks for your show.
SANDERS: Thanks to all those listeners you heard there - Annie, Jim (ph), Sean and Janet.
And I'm going to share the best part of my week right now. It comes out of some bittersweet news. This week I made a big announcement on the internet. I'm leaving IT'S BEEN A MINUTE and I'm leaving NPR in about a week or so. This was a big, tough choice to make. You know, I love NPR and public radio so much. But the best part of my week since that announcement was the outpouring of love and support and kindness from listeners all over the country and the world. You know, NPR will always be a big part of me. I love public radio dearly, and I love the audience and the community that we've built with this show over the last several years.
I'm so excited to hear how this show sounds with some new hosts in the coming weeks. Elise Hu, Jasmine Garsd, Juana Summers - they're all going to be coming in for a bit to guest host IT'S BEEN A MINUTE, and I will, of course, be listening. In the meantime, next weekend's going to be my last show here, so make sure to tune in. It's going to be a joyous celebration - a party, you could even say.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
SANDERS: All right, this week's episode of IT'S BEEN A MINUTE was produced by Jinae West, Andrea Gutierrez, Liam McBain and Anjuli Sastry Krbechek. Our intern is Aja Drain. Our fearless editor is Jordana Hochman, and our big boss is NPR's senior VP of programming, Anya Grundmann.
All right, listeners, till next time, be good to yourselves. I'm Sam Sanders. We'll talk soon.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)
Copyright © 2022 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.