Nobody Wants To Be Governor of California

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Is there a Democrat who actually wants to be governor
of California? This is the question I ask myself. I'm
not sure if there is. It's odd you'd think that
becoming governor of California is just quite the political prize,
and that it would attract really prominent, serious, high name

(00:23):
recognition candidates with a really aggressive vision and who are
really jazzed and enthused, and it keeps attracting people who
seem like ready to submarine their own campaign. First, you
had Javier Bessera jump in, who had the incredible interview,

(00:46):
where after repeated opportunities to say, what would you do
differently from Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown to fix all
these problems that have metastasized over the course of the
Brown and Newsom administrations, Javier and Sarah refuse to say
what he would do, and in fact, all he did
say is that he would consult with experts, get a

(01:08):
bunch of experts together and figure out what they think
is the best things to do, specifically with regards to
housing and things like that, which would lead one to ask, well,
former Secretary of Health and Human Services, Sarah, why don't
we just have one of those experts run for office
rather than you if you clearly have no idea what

(01:30):
you're going to do. Well, we now come to Katie Porter.
Katie Porter, former member of the House of Representatives representing
kind of the Orange County area, who tried to run
for US Senate, did not win, lost to Adam Schiff,

(01:53):
and she sits down for an interview. I think this
was an interview with a local CBS affiliate, and she
has the following exchange.

Speaker 2 (02:05):
What do you say to the forty percent of California
voters who you'll need in order to win, who voted
for Trump?

Speaker 3 (02:12):
How would I need them in order to win? Man?

Speaker 2 (02:14):
Well, unless you think you're going to get sixty percent
of the vote, you think you'll get sixty percent? All
of everybody who did not vote for Trump will vote
for you. That's what you're in a general election.

Speaker 3 (02:24):
Yes, if it is me versus a Republican, I think
that I will win the people who did not vote
for Trump.

Speaker 4 (02:29):
What if it's you versus another Democrat?

Speaker 3 (02:31):
I don't intend that to be the case.

Speaker 4 (02:33):
So how do you not intend that to be the case?

Speaker 1 (02:35):
You do?

Speaker 4 (02:36):
You are you going to ask them not to run? No?

Speaker 3 (02:38):
No, I'm saying, I'm going to build the support. I
have the support already in terms of NATA.

Speaker 1 (02:42):
Right. She keeps going on, but it's like she's refusing. First,
She's like, how would I need their support to win
a general primary? A general election? And the reporter is like, well, like,
what if you're running against the Democrat? Which is a
very plausible scenario. Anyone who understands California's jungle primary system

(03:05):
understands that after the primary, it's the top two vote getters.
And if it's two Democrats facing each other, what are
you going to do to get Republican votes? And the

(03:27):
porter just can't have a pleasant conversation and just keeps
going on and on and on, just sort of arguing
with this reporter, and it finally gets to this point
where she just decides she's gonna up and leave the interview.
Here's how it evolves, all right here, let's get it

(03:49):
right here. Okay, here's Katie Porter with the local CBS.

Speaker 3 (03:53):
Reporter Ney to say that it's the do you need
them to win part that I don't understand. I'm happy
to answer the question, answer the questions you haven't written
in all answer.

Speaker 2 (04:00):
And we've also asked the other candidates, do you think
you need any of those forty percent of California voters
to win?

Speaker 4 (04:05):
And you're saying no, you don't.

Speaker 3 (04:06):
No, I'm saying I'm going to try to win every
vote I can. And what I'm saying to you is.

Speaker 4 (04:11):
That well to those voters. Okay, so you I don't want.

Speaker 3 (04:14):
To keep doing this, I'm gonna call it. Thank you.

Speaker 4 (04:19):
You're not gonna do the interview with them?

Speaker 3 (04:21):
Nope, not like this. I'm not not with seven follow
ups to every single.

Speaker 1 (04:26):
Boy. She's unpleasant, good lord. And this is the problem
for all Katie Porter, is that these kinds of accusations
of like being highly personally unpleasant, where it's like this
interview could have been very nice if she had just

(04:47):
responded with a less hostile attitude, like it's one hundred
percent in her control, but instead she insists on just
being a jerk the whole time. Now, this is the problem.
The decision by Kamala Harris not to enter the governor's

(05:10):
race has left things in a pretty blah state for
the California governor's election. Nobody really has great name recognition,
Nobody is really running away with it. I mean you've

(05:33):
got right now in the race, Katie Porter is in
the lead. I guess just because she's got better name recognition.
This was a poll Emerson College Polling, released August eighth,
so this is two months ago, but you know, nothing
significance really changed since then. Katie Porter at eighteen percent,

(05:56):
Steve Hilton at the Republican at twelve percent, Chad Bianco
at seven percent, Antonio Vio Ragoso, the former Democrat mayor
of Los Angeles at five percent, Javier Basrat three percent,
undecided is at thirty eight percent. Tony Atkins was at

(06:19):
two percent. She has since dropped out. So Porter I
think feels she's in the best position. I mean, she's
got eighteen percent of the vote, but it's not like
she's you know, she's not like going great. And actually,

(06:43):
according to a more recent poll, just from today, let's
see what have we got here, dad polling. According to
Zogby Strategies, while the Democrat is leading among other Democrats
ahead of the upcoming primary fore the election, she's behind
a Republican candidate, conservative commentator Steve Hilton, by six percentage points.

(07:08):
So there's more info coming in to say that, you know,
she's not even doing that great. According to Zogbie, Steve
Hilton is at about twenty nine percent of the vote
and Katie Porter's only at twenty three percent, with twenty

(07:30):
three percent saying that they were undecided. Now this story
is making that seem a little worse for Porter. I
think actually Porter would love a scenario where it's in
the top two, it's her and Steve Hilton, because I
think she would, you know, just being a Democrat going
against any any Democrat going against any Republican in the

(07:52):
top two. I think the Democrat's probably gonna win, so
I don't think she'd be too upset about that. But
here's you know, Steve Hilton doing better than she is,
and she's not like surging ahead necessarily. There's plenty of
time even for a new Democrat to jump into the race,

(08:14):
let alone, you know, one of the lesser candidates, to
sort of surge ahead of her. And it's just kind
of interesting to me that that the list of people
is is just so blah. Antonio Viri Gooza, I guess
is a seems like he'd be a more serious candidate.

(08:38):
He's a former mayor of Los Angeles, just not getting
any traction Javier Bsera. I'll admit I was wrong about this.
I had sort of assumed Besera would be a more
forward candidate. He you know, he's definitely one of the
most prominent people running. He's already one statewide election in
California as attorney general role he had, you know, maybe

(09:03):
the most one of the most significant positions in the
Trump administration, being head of the Department of Health and
Human Services. You would have thought he could tap into
a lot of different Democrat funding sources for his campaign,
and yet he's lagging behind. And I guess it's just
sort of his name recognition isn't that great, which you

(09:27):
is surprising again for someone who's already won statewide election
in California before. Now there are other rumors about what
could happen with the governor's race. There's this big rumor
floating around that Alex Padilla, currently the US Senator where
one of the two US Senators representing California, that Padilla

(09:48):
might jump into the race, with Gavin Newsom kind of
backing him, and that if Padilla jumps in, then if
he wins the governorship, his old US Senate seat would
be vacant and he could appoint someone to that Senate seat.

(10:08):
Some people think maybe he would appoint Gavin Newsom to
that Senate seat. That's a possibility, it's possible. Wouldn't be
the first time such a switcheroo happened in the history
of American politics, or I think even in the history
of California politics. That is a looming threat. And I

(10:30):
have noticed Alex Padilla is a lot more forward nowadays,
a lot more prominent. He got himself arrested on purpose
crashing that Christy Noam press conference, or I don't know
if he was arrested or just dragged out by security.
He's now front and center for all these Proposition fifty ads.

(10:52):
He seems like he's trying to sort of position himself
a certain way, and Newsom is allowing it. I mean,
Newsom is kind of controlling a lot of this Prop
fifty stuff, and you know, knew some very front and center,
and yet he's giving Padilla sort of this front and
center voice for some of this Prop fifty advertising. Or

(11:15):
I don't know, maybe new Some's not totally controlling it. Regardless,
Padilla is front and center with a lot of this stuff.
So I'm i guess I'm just sort of shocked that
Porter is submarining her own campaign just by her own
incredibly unappealing personality like that that she can't handle. These

(11:39):
were not aggressive, hardball, gotcha unfair questions from this interviewer,
like you know, she's trying to present the scenario of well,
what if you're it's two Democrats running against each other,
And Porter said, well, I don't intend for that to happen. Well,

(12:00):
what do you mean you don't intend for that to happen.
It's not even a question of you being first place,
Like you can't control who's in second place in the
primary relative to you being first place, or or I mean,
how do you intend to control a republic? The math
vagaries of what if you know, you know, what if
you get thirty five percent and then Steve Hilton gets

(12:23):
thirty three percent and another candidate gets thirty two percent,
like you know, stuff happens, like you know, you very
well could be facing or if that's flipped, if Porter
gets thirty five percent of Viarego's it gets thirty three percent,
Hilton only gets thirty two percent, and then all of

(12:43):
a sudden, it's Katie Porter versus another Democrat. You're gonna
have to appeal to Trump voters in that kind of
a scenario to win. It wasn't some horrible gotcha question,
and the reporters seemed totally pleasant and Porter Porter was

(13:05):
just a huge jerk tour and this is the thing,
it's consistent with her personality. There were all these stories
going back about Katie Porter being having this very bitter
divorce and Porter being terrible to work for with staff
members and things like that. It's funny how those stories

(13:28):
seemed to dog a lot of Democrat members of Congress
and a lot of prominent Democrats, Kamala Harris, everyone sort
of leaked out, but there were more than a few
leaks about how totally unpleasant it was to work for
Kamala Harris, how unpleasant it was to work for Amy Klobashar,

(13:50):
how unpleasant it was to work for Katie Porter. In fairness,
there were a ton of stories about President Trump not
always being the most pleasant guy to work for either regardless,
where there is smoke, it's fair to guess, in Porter's case,
that there's some fire, and you know, I'm not. It's

(14:14):
gonna be hard for a Californian to watch that segment
and have just have a bunch of warm fuzzies for
Katie Porter, and God knows that this is going to
be shared all over x all over social media constantly
just how unbelievably unpleasant she is. So I guess I

(14:36):
don't know who wants to actually win the governor's race.
I mean, Javier basera submarine his campaign right at the
start with a disaster of an interview. Porter seems to
be submarining her campaign with another disaster of an interview.
I feel like, if Alex Padilla wants the job, it's
his for the taking. Although I guess I cannot understand

(14:59):
why so someone would leave being a US senator to
go become a governor unless they're just a better person
than I am. Being a governor is so much more
work and so much more difficult than being a senator.
Being a governor, first of all, you have shorter terms,

(15:20):
you're term limited. You have to actually work, You have
to actually enforce the law, make decisions, manage relations with Congress,
negotiate stuff with the sorry the state legislature. You have
to be the adult in the room because the buck
does ultimately stop with you. You're the last decision maker
to either sign or veto legislation, and you have to

(15:43):
take into consideration real fiscal concerns, whereas if you're just
a member of the state legislature or of the federal
legislature Congress, you can be completely irresponsible and just not
care about the budget. Just oh yeah, sure, do you
just vote for If you're a US senator, you just
vote for things. You go to committee hearings, you listen

(16:03):
to stuff, you vote for things. That's it. It's a
very easy job. You're only up for election every six years,
not every four years. You're not term limited. I don't
understand why Padilla would want to leave the Senate to
go be the governor. It's not like being a senator

(16:24):
is like a less prominent job necessarily, although I guess
when you're governor you're one of one. When you're a senator,
you're one of one hundred. So maybe that's appealing to
some people. But I just don't know who wants to win.
Porters sabotaging herself. Vire Goza can't get it going. Nobody

(16:47):
else can seemingly really get it going, But Sarah submarined himself,
I'm not sure who's going to be governor when we return.
One of the fundamental problems Democrat canidates have is how
do you get all the Democrat votes without the Democrat policies.

(17:07):
That's next on the John Girardi Show. The problem that
these Democrats running for governor in California have is that
it's obvious that a lot of the problems in the state.
It's obvious to everyone with a brain now, it's obvious
that a lot of the problems in the state are
caused by Democrat policies. But if they want to win,

(17:33):
and critically, to get the endorsements and the money they
need to win, they have to continue to pledge allegiance
to Democrat policies. But it's also hard to win if
you're just gonna say, ah, I'm gonna do all the
same things that Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown did. And
this is sort of the intractable problem that Democrats find

(17:54):
themselves in. Javier Besarah thought he could wriggle out of this.
When he was RepA heatedly asked what are you going
to do different from Gavin Newsome or Jerry Brown? But
Sarah thought he could wriggle out of it by just
not saying anything he would do and just saying I'm

(18:15):
gonna get all the experts together and listen to their ideas,
which was sort of like, Okay, well, no, you can't
really do that. You're the guy running for governor. We're
not electing a panel of experts. We're electing you. You know,
why don't we elect one of those experts you're talking about.
Clearly they've got some ideas, and it was also just
it's just fundamentally dishonest. But Sarah's not a moron, Like

(18:40):
clearly he is a He's a longtime member of the
House of Representatives, a former Attorney General of California, prominent
figure in the Biden administration. He obviously has ideas and
thoughts in his head on what kinds of policies to pursue.
And he's obviously just deliberately dodging the question because he
doesn't want to say, yes, I'm gonna do everything the
same as Avenues. I'm going to do everything the same

(19:02):
as Jerry Brown. And the problem is, I think all
the Democrats ultimately think that pretty deep down, they all
think we should do the same thing that Gavin Newsom
and Jerry Brown were doing, we should not really have
a big break. Why well, because if you do anything
different in a way that crosses public sector unions or

(19:23):
environmentalist activist groups, and those are two of the major
choke points. Teachers unions are the real and public sector
unions are a big choke point for tons of government
spending spending on education, education policy. Environmentalist wackos are the
choke point for a ton of stuff stuff that impacts
whether it's a high speed rail system, whether it's water,

(19:45):
whether it's agriculture, whether it's new new home construction, building,
environmental regulation, all this stuff. If you cross the environmentalist wacko,
you're crossing the billionaire donors who give to them. So

(20:10):
Democrats don't want to cross either of those groups. They
don't want to cross the unions, they don't want to
cross the environmental waco groups. If they're not going to
cross those groups, fundamentally, they're just not really gonna change
anything from what Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown had been

(20:30):
doing for the prior fifteen years. It's just not going
to change very much. So I think that's one of
the intractable problems that Democrat candidates for governor have is
people are sort of dully unhappy with the direction California's going,
and it's going to be impossible for these folks to

(20:52):
say or sort of provide any kind of roadmap that's
really very much different from the prior fifteen years of
Democrat governors. And their only hope, I think is that, well,
Steve Hilton doesn't get going. That there's just a kind
of ceiling on how many votes any Republican candidate for

(21:16):
governor is going to get, and that Hilton's gonna be
limited by that ceiling, and you just need to slug
it out as the best looking Democrat and once you
do that, you win. And that's that Porter is hoping
that that's true. It seems like she's got I guess
I wouldn't. I guess I would have been surprised at this,

(21:37):
but I guess her Twitter notoriety and social media notoriety
has helped her here. I would have thought Javier Bassera
would have more name recognition than her, given that Besara's
one statewide office. He had a much more prominent role
in in the Biden administration, but he's lagging behind her.

(21:58):
I guess there's just she just has more name recognition
than he does, and as a result, she's the leading
Democrat in the polls right now. But he submarined his campaign.
She submarined her campaign. It seems like an election that
is ripe for the picking for someone else to vault
in and take this thing by the throat, take this

(22:20):
election by the throat and win it. Harris's decision not
to run. Let me conclude with this, Kamala Harris seems
like a moron for not running. I don't know, I mean,
especially after her release of this book, where she's burning
like every bridge humanly possible in national Democrat politics. I

(22:42):
don't know what her plan was. I had assumed that
it was that she had this sort of three roads
she could either well, okay, I assumed at first it
was two roads, either run for president in twenty twenty
eight or run for governor in twenty twenty six. I
guess I hadn't considered the third road, which is just
not being politics. And it seems like, if the book

(23:03):
is any indication, that's the path she's gonna have to take.
Because she burned so many bridges in this book. She
trashed so many people. She trashed the Biden people, She
trashed uh, Josh Shapiro, Pete Footagic, Tim Walls, this person
that person like just trashing all these people in her

(23:24):
book or or alienating those people in her book said,
I don't think I think she said something not nice
about JB. Pritzker, who I think he's kind of a
power broker within Democrat circles. I don't know how she
can possibly run for president after it, and she's decided

(23:44):
not to run for governor. Maybe she's just deciding, you know,
I'm going to take a decade off from politics. It
could be, but I mean she would be running away
with this governor's race right now because nobody, nobody wants
to win. Everyone is incompetent, but Sarah's incompetent as a campaigner.
Porter is incompetent as a campaigner. None of them have

(24:05):
the name recognition she does. This is an election that's
just a void that is desperate for someone to fill
the void when we return why I hate most Israeli
foreign policy discussions in America. Next on the John Girardi Show,
I want to talk about America Israeli relations as it

(24:29):
seems as though President Trump's peace proposal is being discussed
at least somewhat seriously right now, which I must say
I'm surprised by. I would have assumed that only in
so far as Hamas has to at some level agree
to it. And Hamas has been such intractable I want

(24:52):
to say a bad word on the radio, just intractable monsters. Oh,
just put it that way that I just never I
didn't think it had any kind of realistic chance of
going anywhere, But it seems like it's at least being discussed,
when I would have assumed that Hamas would have just
rejected it completely out of hand. I mean, one of
the fundamental things is you have to stop killing people

(25:16):
all the time, or wanting to kill Jews all the time,
and wanting to eliminate all Jewish people. And Hamas is very,
very committed to that. They really really like killing Jewish people.
And so many of the problems with the Israeli Gaza
conflict are have Hamas and their intractable moral monster attitude

(25:40):
at their root, using Israeli using hospitals and schools and
things like that as human shields, deliberately using civilians as
human shields in order to force Israel if they're going
to achieve military goals forcing Israel to kill as many
civilians as humanly possible. They want their own civilian population

(26:02):
to be killed for the propaganda edge against Israel. Now,
I want to discuss things that I kind of dislike
about both sides about well, I shouldn't say both sides
about various sides in the American debate about what our

(26:27):
relationships with Israel should be. So one of the things
I dislike is that everyone on the anti Israel side
within American policy debates, or maybe not everyone, but a
lot of people on the anti Israel side within American

(26:47):
foreign policy debates slides really easily into flat out anti semitism,
conspiracy theory land anti semitism. It's sort of where Candice
Owens seems to be wandering off into where all of
a sudden you go from geopolitically geopolitically thinking that maybe

(27:14):
at this point Israel is doing things in the in
their conduct of the war that are unjust questioning whether
American continued military investment in Israel is a good thing
or wise think. And I'm willing to have those conversations,
But the problem is that on the left it shifts

(27:35):
to flat out anti Semitism and people saying from the
river to the sea, Palestine must be free. Okay, you
want to completely eliminate the modern day nations state of Israel.
You want to you want all those people dead left
wingers doing these rationalizations for October seventh, people doing these
like calling Hamas freedom fighters, like all this utter nonsense.

(28:01):
I just can't abide by that. And so there's this
kind of left coded anti semitism that just seems okay
with like terror attacks against Israelis. There is also this
right coded anti semitism that continues to slide from critiquing

(28:21):
the actions or conduct of the modern day Israeli nation
state too, just like the Jews are bad, like and
can't I hate it. I hate how easy that slide
seems to be for so many people now on the
pro Israeli side. There's a couple of things that I

(28:44):
don't like. There's a decent amount of evangelical support for
Israel that seems which Ted Cruz very blatantly bluntly expressed,
that seems rooted in I think wrongheaded interpretations of the
Bible that I just don't think the Bible requires you

(29:08):
to have X Y or Z positions with regards to
the modern day nation state of Israel and to support
its military operations in all ways, in all times. I
just do not buy the theological arguments. I just think
they are weak. If you disagree with me, that's fine.
And I understand a lot of kind of Southern Baptists

(29:31):
and Southern Baptists aligned non denominational Christians and a lot
of Evangelicals have sort of theological commitments to this. I
don't really adhere to them. I think the Jewish people
will have some role at the end of time, and
I think as Revelation says that a lot of them

(29:51):
will convert to Christianity at the end of time. That
is a thing. But I am not on board with
a lot of this sort of I don't know. Some
of these movements among some evangelicals have like, you know,
we're going to bring this certain kind of cow back
to see if we can start doing the Old Testament

(30:13):
sacrifices again, and things like no, no, no, no, I'm
not going to have theological I don't think theology there
are theological commitments that should commit me to any one
side or another with regards to the nation state of
Israel and I think we should judge American foreign policy
involvement in the Middle East on the basis of as

(30:34):
we should judge all of our foreign policy decisions. Is
this in the long term strategic interest of our country.
That's how I think we should judge it. Certainly, we
should look at right and wrong. Hamas invaded Hamas unjustly

(30:55):
attacked Israel. I think Israel had a proper just war
justification for going to war against Hamas. Their odd bellum
going to war justification was good at a certain point,
though I guess I'm not forever comfortable with just an ongoing,

(31:19):
continuous war where the Israelis are just attacking, attacking, attacking, attacking, attacking,
and it doesn't seem like there's strategic goals necessarily that
are getting achieved. And while I don't want to use
a word like genocide, that the Israelis have engaged in

(31:41):
a genocide on Kaza, I don't think that's true. I
don't think that's accurate. I think that's a misapplication of
that term. And I understand how Israelis in particular would
be incredibly sensitive to misusing that word, giving the Jewish
experience in World War Two. Nonetheless, and I'm not talking

(32:01):
about the numbers produced by Hamas by the Gaza Ministry
of Health, which is a joke. I'm talking about the
numbers given by the Israeli government. You know, they've killed
a lot of people. They killed a lot of people. Now,
a lot of those people were combatants, a lot more
were civilians. And again I get it. Hamas wants civilian casualties.

(32:24):
They deliberately put their civilians into spots of danger so
that they'll be killed, so that the Israelis look bad,
so that it gives them a pr advantage on the
world stage. And it works. You got all these countries
in Europe who are declaring that they quote recognize the
Palestinian state, all these virtue signaling European countries who all

(32:46):
hated and treated Jews terribly for a decade, for centuries
and centuries now. So I'll admit that my thoughts on
all this are kind of complicated. I a certain point,
I think you have to sort of ask, is Israel's

(33:07):
prolonging of this war and the death that the prolongation
of this war causes, is it actually achieving any long
term goal for them? At a certain point, and I
don't know that it is. It's the difference between you know,
God forbid. We make some distinctions here within Catholic thought
on just war. What is a just war? What is

(33:30):
not a just war? There are two different ways of
thinking about it. There's ad bellum going to war justifications
of is it just for us to start fighting a
war against this person, against this country, and that involves
factors of you know, are we engaged in defense against

(33:52):
an unjust aggressor and a lot of considerations like that.
I think Israel is clearly in the right on the
odd belum going to war question. The other question, though,
is in belo conduct in a war during a war
bellum or bello is the Latin word for war. So yes,

(34:13):
you could be justified in going to war, but if
you commit horrible atrocities and are you know, directly intentionally
killing civilians and things like that, you're conducting your war
which you were justified to go into, You're conducting your
war in an unjust way. I think at a certain

(34:35):
point Israel needs to be operating in a proportionate level
to the actual military aims that they're trying to achieve.
And if they're just fighting and fighting and bombing and
bombing and killing and killing. At a certain point that
that in Bello conduct starts to be questionable. And overall
there's this broader question is the American interest advanced in

(34:59):
continuing to provide Israel with military funding? What are we
getting out of this? I don't know. Yeah, Israel is
one of the few sort of Western friendly democracies in
the Middle East. We have a lot of American Jews.

(35:21):
We also have a lot of American Muslims. I mean,
I guess I'm not you know, there's a certain part
of me that wants to say, why do we have
any involvement in this part of the world at all?
Show me some interest. I know, like oil is a
dirty word, but like, okay, are there natural resources there

(35:41):
that are important for the United States that our support
of Israel helps advance. I'm not sure that there is.
I mean, I want to see and hear a clear
expression of American interest. And by the way, wait, whatever
caution I have towards the Israeli cause, like, none of

(36:06):
it has anything to do with anti Semitism. I have no,
I don't have an anti Semitic bone in my body.
I think every you know, the various Jewish people I've
met have been nice and kind and decent and normal
human beings. I there's not an anti Semitic bone in
my body. I don't assume every single thing Israel does
because Israel does it is evil. I don't think Apak

(36:29):
has you know, spies who are gonna come into my
hotel room with a gun, like, No, none of that's died.
They don't have space lasers to fry people. Okay. I
just want to hear a clear elucidation of why is
continued military funding for Israel important because it seems as

(36:50):
though our decades long military support for Israel has really
embittered millions of Muslims throughout the whole Middle East against US. Now,
a lot of these people are very bad actors on
their own, granted, and maybe if President Trump can pull

(37:10):
this off, maybe he can pull off the greatest piece
coup in modern American history. I hope he does. It
would be wonderful if this was resolved. But I think
for a lot of discussions about our foreign policy with Israel,
I need to hear what is the actual American interest
when we return. Trump's not gonna win a Nobel Peace Prize.

(37:33):
Next on the John Girardi Show. I saw some story
come out that said experts predict President Trump unlikely to
win the Nobel Peace Prize. Yeah, no kidding. President Trump's
not gonna win the Nobel Peace Prize. President Trump could
broke her peace between Russia and Ukraine and Israel in
Palestine in the same year and he's still not gonna

(37:56):
win the Nobel Peace Prize. Why because it's a bunch
of liberal Europeans. They all hate Donald Trump. He told
them they have to spend money on NATO and he's uncouth. No,
he's never winning the Nobel Peace Prize. That'll do it,
John Gerardy Show. See you next time on Power Talk