The Three Whisky Happy Hour: Return of the Neocons?

With John Yoo hosting this week's episode in a vain attempt to deflect attacks, we devote most of the episode to foreign policy questions, ranging from Gaza, Ukraine, Venezuela, China, and . . . Africa? Yes, Africa. And why does it suddenly seem like Trump can be considered a neocon? 

And not to worry: Lucretia still gets in her licks on her favorite Supreme Court justice (you all know which one it is) for another exemplary performance (/sarc) in this week's oral argument about the Voting Rights Act case.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Well whiskey, come and take my pain the moneys lolly,
oh whiskey. Why think alone when you can drink it all?
In with Ricochet's Three Whiskey Happy Hour, Join your bartenders,
Steve Hayward, John, You and the international woman of Mystery,
Lucretia where the lapped it up? And David, ain't you

(00:27):
easy on the should have you got a giving? And
let that whiskey bloon?

Speaker 2 (00:33):
Welcome everybody to a live stream podcast of the Three
Whiskey Happy Hour, where I am joined by my co
host Steve Hayward. Say hi to everyone, Steve, and how
are you?

Speaker 1 (00:47):
Hi? Everybody? How am I? I'm good, but not as
good as Hugh. John. I notice that you have made
the transition from McRib to ribs this week. You send
us that picture of a gigantic pork river was a
beef rib.

Speaker 2 (00:59):
Say's just standard. That's a standard cocktail fair in Austin, Texas.

Speaker 3 (01:04):
It looked tougher than shoe leather. The way you were grimacing.

Speaker 2 (01:07):
John, you know you know you haven't lived till you've
had Prontosaurus.

Speaker 1 (01:12):
Okay, yeah, that thing was you.

Speaker 3 (01:16):
Do you have a comment.

Speaker 2 (01:18):
I didn't need to get to introduce the International Woman
of Mystery, Lucretia, how are you? And you have a comment?

Speaker 3 (01:23):
Well, thank you, and I'm drinking orphan Baryl again, which
is I've decided as my favorite and it is old
enough to vote so but I have to because if
you know my my financial straits, I have to limit
myself to once every six months or so, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:39):
Financial are you? Are you a furloughed.

Speaker 3 (01:42):
No, I've fired? Remember, Oh no, I got fired six
months ago. John. You just don't pay any attention.

Speaker 2 (01:51):
I just thought you were making that. I thought that
was a joke.

Speaker 3 (01:54):
You're really, I mean it kind of is. I'm fired
from all of my administrative positions. So where the money is, Yeah,
it is mostly because the college I do it that
for is gone anyway. But I wanted to give Steve
a hard time. My most pretentious intellectual friend I've ever known,

(02:15):
God love him, has these little grammatical infelicities that drive
me crazy. How are you today, Steve? Good me and Lucretia?

Speaker 1 (02:29):
What did I say that?

Speaker 3 (02:31):
You always say that, both of them, and so I
just just all I want to do for just a
moment is point out that there's this little part of
Steve that just doesn't want to give in to that
pretension because I know he knows better. Okay, sorry, I
thought you were.

Speaker 1 (02:46):
Talking about somebody else. You said, your most pretentious intellectual
that you know. I mean, surely there's somebody more than me. No,
I'm a chance.

Speaker 2 (02:55):
In the universe.

Speaker 3 (02:57):
The best part about Hadley on the whole day was
when he's when he started making fun of Steve's affectations.
I just wanted to get up and dance a jig.

Speaker 2 (03:09):
By the way, like like Hitler in front of the
Eiffel Tower, No doubt.

Speaker 1 (03:12):
Yeah, way. I'll pass this along for anybody who doesn't
listen to the Ricochet podcast. But I asked Charles Murray
this morning the same question I asked Hadley about Martini's,
and he reminded me I've completely forgotten this. He reminded
me that Robert Bork was not only a Jen Martini drinker,
but said, no olives because it's a cocktail, not a salad,
which I thought was good.

Speaker 3 (03:34):
The only reason to drink Martini's is because of the olives.

Speaker 2 (03:37):
No, okay, anyway, pretend why do you even pretend they're
a drink. It's just drinking a shot of vodkor shot
of No.

Speaker 3 (03:44):
I don't really like vodka. I definitely don't like vermouth
except in my mushrooms and onions. And it's actually just
it's just an opportunity to eat alcohol infused olives. So
there you go. Yeah, if I have to drink a martini,
that's what I'll do.

Speaker 1 (04:01):
All right, John, what are you taking this week?

Speaker 2 (04:03):
So I'm the host this week, and so I thought,
as the resident neo con on the podcast, that we
should talk about foreign policy. But also because foreign policy
has seen I think incredible change in just the last
week since our last episode. The United States broker a

(04:27):
peace deal between that brought the war in Gaza to
at least a ceasefire and the release of all the
hostages Israeli hostages held by Amas and Gaza, the withdrawal
of Israel back to about half the country a ceasefire,
and then an international peace treaty peace conference held in

(04:50):
Egypt to it seems to get the ball rolling for
a broader peace settlement that might normalize relations between Israel
and much of the hour world. That's incredible. Then this
week we also had a announcement of a summit meeting
that will take place in Budapest between President Trump and

(05:12):
President Putin. Of this of Russia is about to say
the Soviet Union, same thing, but of Russia. And today
you had a summit between Trump and President Zelenski of
Ukraine which ended up with President Trump being ambiguous. I
would say about whether we will provide Tomahawk cruise missiles

(05:34):
to Ukraine.

Speaker 3 (05:36):
So let's start out.

Speaker 1 (05:37):
But.

Speaker 2 (05:40):
This, if it were to happen, it would bring It
depends across how many would be given. But you know,
the Tomahawk is the US Navy's weapon of choice for
long range attacks and would bring much of the Russian
oil infrastructure within range of Ukraine weapons, Ukrainian weapons. So, okay,
you want to start with Steve. Steve, what do you think?

(06:02):
Is this too much winning? Is Trump really a foreign
policy mastermind? Or are these just maybe glimmers of hope
of a peace settlement but nowhere near to what people
are saying in the press.

Speaker 1 (06:19):
Yeah. So what I think is if Trump can bring
an honorable peace agreement that ends the war, he should
get the next ten Nobel Peace prizes. Right, I mean
I think that the let's talk more specifically about Ukraine
in a moment but I think what you saw, well,
let me do it this way, darnutt. Peggy Noonan, you know,
after she said something really sensible two weeks ago and

(06:42):
then wrote a terrible column a week ago, last Saturday,
she wrote a pretty good column saying, gosh, you know what,
what Trump is proving is that the experts really are
full of beans and we can't do anything right. And
it turns out that, you know, having a bunch of
real estate guys make better peace deals than all the
state departments stripe pants people. I think there's something to that.
One little detail I did not realize until today is

(07:03):
that after the invasion of Ukraine and what twenty twenty
two is that what it was, the Biden administration imposed
sanctions on Russia, including closing off their access to the
Swift international banking system, except they exempted from those sanctions

(07:23):
Russian oil sales. Well, I mean talk about wanting to
have sanctions that are symbolic and don't do very much.
That would certainly be it because that's the source of
so much of Russian revenue to fund their war effort.
And supposedly the Trump people are thinking about, well, if
we're going to go the sanctions route and you know,
I don't know. Sanctions always take time and I think
are of limited effectiveness. But they will put sanctions on

(07:47):
Russian oil sales, and you know, we'll see about the Tomahawks.
I don't know. Out There's my one that a stray
thought about this is having the summit in Hungary is
kind of interesting because right now, with an election looming
next spring, Victor Orbon is trailing in the polls. He's
been in office for fifteen years. And Ah, I saw

(08:09):
a tweet the other day from Barack Obama saying, Oh,
I'm meeting with friends of mine who want to strengthen
democracy in Poland and Hungary. Why do we need to
strengthen democracy there? Ah, because they vote for the wrong people.
That's why. That's the whole reason for it. It's unbelievable.
So I kind of think having the summit there in
Budapest is going to be a little feather and a
cap of Worbon. Trump will go out of his way

(08:31):
to praise the government. So I think there's a collateral
purpose for meeting there, which I'm all in favor of.

Speaker 2 (08:38):
Apprecia is it too much winning?

Speaker 3 (08:44):
Never too much winning? But I definitely agree with Steve
that I actually think it's more than the real estate
and the ability to the art of the deal, shall
we say, I think that because Trump willing to walk
away from the failed foreign policy establishments, failures, abject failures

(09:08):
of what since the end of the Cold War. I
don't know that we've had any major victory since then.
And that's a bipartisan thing, you know. You can talk about.
That picture of Obama gives me nightmares because he's sitting
there with his little hands crossed and his little legs

(09:28):
crossed and kind of hunched over, like, oh my god,
that guy was actually, at one moment the leader of
the free world. Anyway, He's of course very upset because
Trump is winning and wants to do anything he can, like,
you know, try to undermine some of Trump's allies, Poland
and strong allies like Poland. Anyway, what I think is

(09:50):
amazing about Trump is he just doesn't play the game
the way the game's already always been played. I'm not
certain how all of this is going to come out.
I have a lot of concerns about Gaza because.

Speaker 2 (10:04):
What are what are those because right now you read
the American press, it's right jubilation.

Speaker 3 (10:09):
Basically, they're murdering their own citizens. They're refusing to disarm there,
and Hamas is doing that, and the DM Palestinians are
in the street cheering them. Why do we care what
happens to those subhuman creatures? I am done. I mean,
you know, get them, maybe, uh, disperse them across well.

(10:31):
Of course, you know, no Arab country will take any
of them, because they're such despicable excuses for human beings.
But maybe, you know, get everything out of Gaza and
let the children. I think you have to go to
like six months in below, because otherwise they're already learning
how to shoot ak forty sevens and kill Jews. Gaza

(10:51):
is a hopeless, god awful place, and I'm not sure
what is worth saving there. They're just, you know, it's
the antithesis of everything human beings are supposed to be.
It is the worst of the Muslims that so bad
other Muslim countries won't take them. So I'm worried because

(11:14):
I think some of this success on Trump's part might
actually lead him, or at least the situation might lead
him to not be as tough on those scum as
he needs to be. I mean, he says he's going
to disarm them, but we're not going to do it
with American troops, And what does that mean? You know?
And in the meantime, Hamas still uses tunnels underneath schools

(11:39):
and hospitals and so on, and uses innocence as shields.
They're just they don't deserve I mean, I have a
really hard time saying something like that, because I believe
all human beings are deserving of a certain amount of dignity.
But those people have been so corrupted that they're barbarians.
I guess is how you know, the old old ancient

(12:00):
would put it hopeless and the only hope for them
is to bring in a whole new culture and get
rid of everybody over the age of four. I guess
i'd probably say, you know, that's my thought on the matter.
I don't know what to think about Ukraine other than
I'm hoping that the Tomahawk missile threat is just a
bargaining chip. And he doesn't really mean.

Speaker 2 (12:20):
By bye bye get rid of though you mean removed
from God and not kill. I don't want to kill them,
although in your own interests, it's absolutely not saying that
we should wipe out the population of gods, and you
mean just remove them from power and disperse themsels It's
not clear where they would because.

Speaker 3 (12:40):
Nobody will take them them. I just it's a tough call,
That's what I begin saying. I don't know what the
right answer is. But they're already celebrating and going back
to everything that made them horrible and despicable in the
first place. So I just don't know how it's going
to turn out. I'm hoping, for the world's sake, for

(13:01):
Israel's sake, even for the few innocent Palestinians that might
be there, that all of this peace plan actually works
itself out. I just can't really see how it's going
to happen.

Speaker 1 (13:13):
Had one observation is I did see a story earlier
in the week of one of the hostages, the live
hostages that came out, said his captors told them they
were very scared of Donald Trump in the election last year,
and that their treatment improved to some extent after Trump's
election because they, you know, they're scared of the guy.

(13:35):
It goes back to the old wild man theory, right.
I always thought that one of the things that sobered
up and we had the testimony of this from POW's
and North Vietnam and Hanoi in nineteen seventy two, that
when the Christmas bombings as they were called started, and
you know, Nixon ordered those serious bombings, which by the way,
had one of the lowest civilian casualty rates of any
serious bombing campaign in history. That's not the way the

(13:57):
media speamed about it. But never mind. That point was
is that, you know, Nixon ordered those that bombing campaign
and made no public announcement and left for the holidays
down in keep his gain, whoever it was he spent Christmas.
And the POW said they could tell by the change
and the fear they could see in the face of
their captors that this frightened them. So I think, you know,

(14:18):
Trump just out of the blue bombing with our B
two bombers the nuclear sites in Iran. That was a
game changer, along with Israel shooting missiles at Katar Here
a month ago, which we then tutted. But like the
Israeli attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in nineteen eighty one,
behind the scenes we were all for it, even though

(14:38):
publicly we say the usual nonsense. So I think there's
something to be said for that, so I don't know adestimates.

Speaker 3 (14:45):
Steve too agreed on all of that. The impact of
refusal by the Trump administration, Trump's State Department to say, well,
we have to have a two state solution, right once
that was off the I mean Republicans, Democrats, Moderates, whatever

(15:07):
you want to say, they it was always two state solution.
Why on earth would the Palestinians, even if they weren't
the scum that they are, deserve a state. I don't
understand where that even came from, but it became such
a it became dogma, It became a religious right to oh,
two state solutions. Give Trump credit for that one. No, no,

(15:29):
they don't need a two state solution. Let's have the
Muslim Arab countries come in and rebuild Gaza and you know,
amazing stuff is all amazing.

Speaker 1 (15:42):
Oh.

Speaker 2 (15:43):
The problem is that the country that would naturally an
next Skaza would be Egypt. But as you said, Egypt
doesn't want anything to do with them, but they're contiguous
with the Sinai peninsula. So and then i'm the other
big problem is the West Bank, because if there were

(16:03):
going to be a Palestinian state, it would be there
and Jordan used to have the West Bank, if you're
called back in your history, and they don't want it
anymore because the Palestinians, recalled, tried to overthrow the royal
family and after that they got kicked out. And Jordan
doesn't have anything to do with them either.

Speaker 1 (16:22):
You know, let's remember well, let's remember that that. You know,
Bill Clinton had worked out a deal with the Israelis
to offer the Palestinians. This is twenty five years ago
and Clinton was still president and Yasir Arafat was still alive,
to offer them about I think ninety nine percent of
the West Bank and Gaza and create a land corridor
and some other landswaps for some of the Israeli settlements

(16:43):
in the West Bank and and Airfat walked away from it.
And I always thought he walked away from it because
he knew that if he agreed to that deal, he'd
be dead in a week. The radicals would kill him.
And I don't think he wants you anyway. I mean,
I'm not trying to make out a case for his
beneficence at all. And to his Bill Clinton has bitterly
pointed out this ever since, because I think Bill Clinton

(17:04):
thought that would get in the Nobel Prize it might
have if it came about. And he still talks with
great bitterness about Arafat, and I've heard secondhand stories that
in private he's even more savage about the Palestinians and
their leadership. And you know that's crazy old Bill Clinton.
So there you go.

Speaker 3 (17:20):
I just want you guys to know that after that happened,
I had to purge my wardrobe of anything that even
hinted at hound's tooth, which is really upsetting because there's
some very nice I had some very nice wool hounds
tooth jackets, and I got rid of all of them
because I didn't.

Speaker 2 (17:39):
Ever want anything. People think you're wearing a cafea.

Speaker 3 (17:44):
I mean, Arafat never went anywhere without his houndstooth cafe.

Speaker 2 (17:49):
Well that's pretcire. You would look great in a burka
because there being ak forty seven underneath it, I bet
and obey in that probably that actually I had a
comment because Steve. You know, one big piece of news
for the podcast world that Steve runs to his universes
that he's welcomed uh the and other international woman mystery

(18:12):
girl who's no longer mysterious to the political questions sub
stack right right, big news in the picture. I've never
met her, I've never gone to the commenter con. I
was disappointed, Steve.

Speaker 3 (18:26):
What I was.

Speaker 2 (18:27):
Expecting someone up armed with bandoliers of AMMO on both
both arms and weapons, you know, something like a Ramble movie.
But to me, she looked like a Walmart reader.

Speaker 1 (18:40):
Oh my god.

Speaker 2 (18:42):
I wasn't scared at all. I was I was expecting
you know.

Speaker 3 (18:47):
Some.

Speaker 1 (18:49):
Yeah, don't be don't be deceived. John, by the way,
maybe uh maybe you know I'm gonna go with this. Listeners,
I put John up to saying those horribly monstrous things
because I want to get Susan on the potodcast. But
she's a technophobe by her own a mission. And you
know I did get her on Zoom once in Arizona.

Speaker 3 (19:06):
I should just drive up to her house and make tme.

Speaker 2 (19:09):
On with me. Well, I doesn't do podcasts, no, No,
I like.

Speaker 1 (19:13):
I run Zoom once a few years ago for a
meeting actually, and and and then something crash and it
was a you know, it's a lot of stress for it.
But I'll say this, one of the things I want
to interview her about is that because I asked you
one time I said, is it just me or are
most female comics not any good? And she says, oh no,
it's not you at all. They're absolutely right, And she's
got a whole riff about how why most women comedians

(19:34):
are bad. Well, she's really good, Lucretian. I have seen
her in action.

Speaker 4 (19:38):
Yes, by her appearance, she doesn't know to use zoom,
but she alleges to know how to manipulate the thing
on the AR fifteen in California that prevents you from
quickly shifting magazines.

Speaker 2 (19:51):
That's way more TechEd up then. I mean, you gotta
have way more skill than you operating zoom to do
that with that little bullet button and all that business.

Speaker 1 (19:59):
Don't fool of my appearances, John.

Speaker 2 (20:01):
Well, we're gonna let's have her on as a guest
next week, I hope, or the week after, and then
we can have try Cretia Ammo girl cage match and
that will even I will just hide because we don't
want to get in the middle of anyone.

Speaker 3 (20:15):
We don't fight about anything. You guys are an agreement, Yeah, yeah,
I agree on everything.

Speaker 2 (20:23):
By the way, watching the for people are not watching
the live stream, which is uh, you all should be scolded.
But for those who're not watching, you can't see that
Lucretia is opening a mysterious box which I'm sure some
kind of ammunition or gun she's cradling.

Speaker 3 (20:41):
Get it open. I'm pretty good at this. I'm going
to show you guys. Just shoot it well now, to
be careful because sometimes it just falls out on the
floor and breaks a tile.

Speaker 1 (20:52):
So what's what's going on? Well, say you're gonna move
on to Venizuhena? Are we skipping Venezuela? I mean still,
let's no.

Speaker 2 (21:00):
I think we should move on to Ukraine because we
talked mostly about Gaza, and so why don't we talk
about Ukraine? Uh? What is going on here with the
Do we worry about a Trump putin summit? The last
one produced? YadA, YadA, YadA nothing. Oh wow, it has

(21:22):
produced a gun out of her Amazon box. I guess
it wasn't from Amazon.

Speaker 1 (21:27):
Look at that.

Speaker 3 (21:28):
This was in six eighty six with a three fifty
seven with a four inch barrel.

Speaker 1 (21:35):
Hold that up.

Speaker 3 (21:38):
Isn't a beautiful it's mine.

Speaker 2 (21:39):
So not to get you or anybody in trouble, but
how is it that that came to you in the
mail in a cardboard box.

Speaker 3 (21:47):
I had to sign for it. I had to stay
home all day and wait for this, so I had
to show my ID. But the reason, you guys will
be happy to know, the reason that I have that
this was a gift. But the reason I was given
this is because I have one with a six inch
barrel and I can shoot. I am Annie Oakley with

(22:11):
that three fifty seven with the six inch barrel. The
problem is it's too big to carry. And this is
a little bit big to carry. Here's the problem, my husband.

Speaker 2 (22:23):
Just so the listeners understand, Lucretia now is very happy
because she got a three fifty seven that will fit
in her purse. Is that what you're saying?

Speaker 3 (22:31):
Yes, and all my purses have built in the past.

Speaker 2 (22:34):
There was just a little barrel sticking out of the top.
Well here's the.

Speaker 3 (22:37):
Actual This is the sad part. This is the saddest part.
Mister Lucretia kept buying me nine millimeters, you know. And
and the problem I cannot rack. I cannot rack the slide.

Speaker 1 (22:51):
The slide.

Speaker 3 (22:52):
My hands are too too are old and arthritics. So
but believe it or not, this baby, yeah, I can,
I'll take I'll take anybody out that I need.

Speaker 1 (23:04):
To that's a slick looking gun.

Speaker 2 (23:06):
I haven't it Has and Hamas and Hamas and Gaza.
Make sure you start shaking down people with handbags and
watch out the next the next woman in a barker
with a handbag with a slight bulge, And it could
be Lucretia coming to do business. So the next issue
I thought we talked about would be Ukraine? So are

(23:27):
we What do we make of the announced summit that's
going to occur between Trump and Putin? Has Trump had
a personality transplant on Putin and Ukraine war? Now he's
talking about possibly transferring Tomahawk missiles to cruise missiles to Ukraine.

(23:49):
He's been harshly critical of Putin. He says, I believe
the quote something along the lines of Putin tells us
a lot of bowl but doesn't do anything. Uh seems
like Trump has turned to one eighty on Plutin And
is this gonna Is this kind of you know, ratcheting
up of pressure and taking a harder line going to

(24:09):
produce finally a piece there abou Lucretia, why'd you start? I?

Speaker 3 (24:16):
I John, I'm not your I'm not your expert. On this,
I just pray for it. I'll be honest with you.
I'm you know, it's it's a little bit obvious to
me that Trump. Trump believed that, with his braggadocio and
other other things he brought to the table, that he
would have a quicker ending to the Ukraine Russia war.

(24:37):
And I think it's because he genuinely wanted it. You know, he,
unlike others in positions of power in Washington, d C.
He is not interested in lining the pockets of raytheon
et cetera, et cetera. Nor is he interested in a
you know, sort of a permanent war somewhere in Eastern Europe.

(25:00):
But it turned out to be a bit more intractable
than he expected. I do think, again blame Biden for
some of this, because Biden and putin in a way
that it makes it more difficult for him to walk
it back. And I think Trump probably didn't expect that.
So I think I am hoping the simplest, oversimplified explanation
is Trump is escalating things with talks of tomahawks, etc.

(25:24):
To get putin to the table. I think he's probably
got some carrot stick things going on in the background.
And maybe I pray it will work. I really am
no expert to make any kind of predictions. I wish
I was in Budapest, I will tell you that much.

Speaker 2 (25:43):
But look, you've you've been quite a pessimist about the
Ukraine War. I think and thought that we had over
committed and that we were wasting our resources.

Speaker 3 (25:52):
I still believe that. I still believe that, but I
also believe that the fecklessness of the Biden administration prolonged
that conflict a lot longer than it needed to be.
What if, I mean, is there going to be a
decision that that gives Russia some some of the occupied territory,
some of the territory that they've taken over. Why not

(26:17):
just have let that happen at the beginning, get get
Russia and Zelensky, putting in Zelensky to the table and
hammer things out. But there was never any interest in
that on the Biden administration's part. I also one more thing.
This is for all of my most extreme followers.

Speaker 2 (26:34):
Out there, they are as opposed to the moderates, just
saying PROD.

Speaker 3 (26:45):
It makes them feel better about the fact that they're
maybe not as extreme as they worried they were. But
never forget that, the the entire debacle, the despicable, vile
role of the Bidens, and the Biden administration in Ukraine
and the whole Trump impeachment and all of that. I

(27:07):
would love someday to see John Solomon or someone else
who's a really, really good investigative reporter figure out just
how deep the corruption and the rot goes on the
whole Ukraine thing. It's deep, There's no doubt about it.
And I just what I don't know is whether or
not that had some played some role in preventing Biden

(27:32):
from coming to encouraging a negotiated settlement with Russia.

Speaker 1 (27:37):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (27:38):
Again, not my ara of expertise.

Speaker 1 (27:40):
Yeah well, I mean I did point out, yeah, I
mean I pointed this out a couple of years ago
that the number one foreign donor country to the Clinton
Foundation was Ukraine by a lot. And I mean, come on,
that was not that was not Oh gosh, Ukraine said,
you know, we're really interested in the Clinton Global of
is nonsense. It was obvious what that was all about.

(28:03):
That was about corruption and money laundering and recycling State
department grants and all the rest of that stuff. It
just stinks to I have it. Lucreatia's right about this,
that said, I'm not for aggression, and I don't like
the Russians. I'm with the polls on all of this.
But by the way, John, where were you twenty minutes
ago when I was going through about you know, we're
going to put real sanctions on them and all the
rest of that. My only addition, okay, well, all right,

(28:26):
Well I'll just give one last thought, which is we
may now be in a circumstance where Trump's narcissism and
his personal self regard is to our advantage in a
big way. Why he's had all these triumphs and ending
conflicts around the world capped with now the cause of business,
no matter how the aftermath. Lucrete is right. But the

(28:48):
point is is this was a big deal that you
got to this point, and now the last remaining thing
is this. And because Trump had said I'm going to
end this thing quickly, because I'm the peacemaker, and all
the rest of that putin's him look bad. And if
Trump comes away empty handed or you know, the I
could see Trump saying, you know, tomahawks and as many

(29:09):
as they want, I don't know We'll see about that.
But my guess is now Trump has been delaying long
enough and going back and forth right his comment what
two weeks ago, Oh gosh, maybe Ukraine can win back
all that territory that they've lost, which would be a
pretty tall order. But I've got to think that between
the wild man theory and the fact that Putin is

(29:30):
making Trump look bad and Trump does not like to
be made look bad, I think that Trump has the
initiative here.

Speaker 2 (29:37):
So it is your point that because he wants to
win the Nobel Peace Prize, this is and I got
to I don't understand this obsession with the Nobel Peace Prize.
What I thought would be awesome as if he were
to win it and then he were not to accept
it in get the people who have won it. But yeah,
it is it really just the fact that he yeah, yes,
ever at the person who is at the Central American winner,

(29:59):
who made up the whole story that God or the
Nobel Peace Price.

Speaker 1 (30:02):
You go on and on.

Speaker 2 (30:03):
But is his desire for this Nobel Peace Prize really
such an obsession that actually leads him to doing the
right things, but it produces good policy as a side effect.

Speaker 3 (30:15):
I don't I think that's a little bit superficial.

Speaker 2 (30:19):
John.

Speaker 3 (30:19):
I think that you know, he joked about it, he
said he didn't want it, he wanted it for America.
But I don't think it's who cares if he gets
the noble presurprise. Obahama got it before he was even
in office, So it's not it's like the what is
it the MacArthur Pride.

Speaker 2 (30:39):
Yeah, and it's just.

Speaker 3 (30:42):
If you don't join a pantheon of truly great people,
who cares? But I do think he cares about being
known as a genuine peacemaker. I'd want to ask you
guys a real quick question, because maybe it's just the
circles I run in. I want to know why we're
obsessed with Gaza, even Ukraine, and we don't give a

(31:04):
damn about what's happening in Nigeria where Muslims are just
brutally just killing Christians in the most horrific manner possible.

Speaker 2 (31:19):
It is not strategically significant to our national security. Well
wait a minute, if we cared.

Speaker 3 (31:27):
About that, though, we would not care so about Gaza.
We would just have let Israel level them, which is
what I think we should have done.

Speaker 1 (31:34):
But I'm not quite sure that. I'm not quite sure
that's right.

Speaker 2 (31:38):
The Middle East is important because it's still this, you know,
after US, the largest source of oil and energy in
the world in the United States, right under the Carter
administration basically almost put it on a part of importance
with Europe, you know, when they Yeah, maybe that's a
mistake now that we have you know, we produce more
oil than they do, but we shouldn't care about them,

(31:58):
at least if it weren't next and that you know,
it doesn't sit on top of this large deposit of oil.

Speaker 3 (32:04):
Well, okay, NC, I still care about the fact that
Christians are being brutally murdered across the world.

Speaker 1 (32:10):
So anything is John's I'm not quite sure that's right,
that that what's going on in Nigeria is not of
some material interest in the United States. We've got a
lot of our oil companies have major operations going on.
Nigeria is one of the top oil producing countries in
the world. You must know that, or if you don't,
because you.

Speaker 2 (32:27):
Don't study cases about it.

Speaker 1 (32:29):
Yeah, well you don't. You know, it's because of your
neglect of the Clean Air Act that you don't know this.

Speaker 2 (32:35):
This was all building up thirty five minutes. You were,
but too quick bring the Clean Air Act.

Speaker 1 (32:40):
Two quick, Two quick points about this. One is is
that someone who has talked about this in a surprising
place is Bill Maher on his Friday quote unquote comedy show.
He said, yeah, Nancy Mason and they got along great.
I was surprised at that, right because you know, the
Hollywood elite hater anyway, and he was saying, yeah, this

(33:01):
is a scandal that we're not paying attention to this.
But the broader point is is that the most rapidly
christianizing is that the right word a region of the
world is Africa, yep. And these conflicts have been rising
for a while, and a lot of people have been
saying for a long time that people like what Robert
Kaplan is that the guy's name who does always travels

(33:21):
the right is that you know, this is where It's
not not that the Middle East is going to go
away in terms of the venue for primary conflict, but
Africa is really going to be where the rumble is
going to happen. And maybe that's two flip a.

Speaker 2 (33:34):
You know, people have been saying that for like sixty
seventy years, if not longer, No, and the Russian Soviets
wasted enormous amounts of resources struggling through proxies in Africa
during the Cold War. Did it do us any real good?
I don't think so. But if you look at the
it's just not it shouldn't be a priority, right, first priority.

(33:55):
And this goes to the question Steve wanted to talk
about is and it's securing the Western hemisphere, and that's
Venezuela for a second. That's the most important strategic priority.
Is securing the Western Hemisphere.

Speaker 3 (34:07):
Again, how can you care about the scum in Palestine?

Speaker 2 (34:13):
And I'm not saying they're as important as that, they're
just there is less important than them.

Speaker 3 (34:21):
No, No, why would there be any concerns upon wiping
those people off the face of the earth if what
you say is true? Because Israel, of course is the
key to peace and and all of our national interests
in the Middle East, So why not let Israel do
whatever it wants to do? I don't believe that. But

(34:42):
if you're going to do what you say, if you're
going to have a silly realist national security policy that Jos.

Speaker 2 (34:50):
I don't understand. What the alternative is is the foreign
policy should just be set on where Christians happened to
be in the world.

Speaker 3 (34:57):
Not Christians. It doesn't have to be Christians. Obviously Israel
is not primarily Christian. But there is no doubt I'm sorry,
I'm going to say it. There is no doubt that
Islam is the greatest source of evil in the world today.
And the fact that we are not fighting it everywhere
we do. We're not fighting it at home. You can't

(35:17):
go to Dearborn, Michigan and you have to have prayers.
You know, I won't even go there. It's I think
that if you can't understand that Islam is not a
religion of peace, it is a source of evil in
the world. There's no place you can find where it
is not at least a repressive ideology, much worse in

(35:42):
most places. We should be fighting Islam anywhere and everywhere.

Speaker 1 (35:47):
I don't agree with that.

Speaker 2 (35:48):
I mean, I think there are more moderate Islam. The
largest country Muslim country in the world by population is Indonesia.
In Indonesia is a very moderate form of Islam, and
they have been an ally of ours off and on
over the decades, as has been. Turkey right now was

(36:08):
a really important ally of ours. But this, my boy,
just like I just don't think that our foreign policy
is shoes should be set by religion.

Speaker 1 (36:16):
Well wait a minute, religion.

Speaker 2 (36:19):
I just said it's Islam. I think the biggest threat
to the United States is the Chinese Communist Party and well, okay,
more of a threat to us than these.

Speaker 1 (36:29):
Okay, well three points to someone who teaches grand strategy.
I'm amazed at how I'm too sure are about this
question on three grounds. But one of them is that
the whole subject about Islam is too long to take
up here. I'll just plant as a flag for later.
Perhaps that the problem with Islam is that it had
its enlightenment before its reformation, right, I mean, medieval Islam

(36:52):
was That's how we recovered played on Aristotle. Okay, long
story about that. And so you know Christianity a thousand
years ago at the Crusades, a lot of violence and
so forth, and you know that all changed with a
lot of okay, uh, and Indonesia maybe the leading edge
of being optimistic about what a future might be like
if they ever changed their mind. Okay, leave that aside.

(37:12):
But the other thing is, John is you should know.
You must know this, but maybe you don't is I
already made the point that Africa is the most rapidly
christianizing continent in the world. By the way, it's a
very conservative Christianity, which I like the breakaway Church.

Speaker 2 (37:32):
The Episcopal Church in Africa is far more conservative.

Speaker 1 (37:36):
Yes, And then the other The other problem is a
demographic one and how that's the population is growing in
Africa and if you ignore that, it's just storing up
a lot of trouble for the future. And point number three,
because you brought it up, is guess where China is
actively trying to tie up the place in what looks
like twenty first century neo colonialism. And no I think

(37:59):
that see that's anything. Oh now, see you sound about
Africa the way Lucretia sounds about Gaza. No.

Speaker 2 (38:06):
No, no, I don't want to move or wipe many.
I just don't think it's worth investment of American resources
because Africa is unstable, has vary right as the nation
state system was kind of grafted onto a continent that
was governed more by tribal systems. It's just too unstable country. Look,
the British tribe, the Germans tribe, the French tried, it's

(38:29):
all been pretty sorry. And during the Cold War we
had a competition with the Soviets and the Communists for
influence in Africa. I don't think it returned us really
much of anything. You know, I a lot of resources
in Africa. Let them do it. I mean it's I
don't think it's. The priority is security of the Western Hemisphere,
security of Europe and the Middle East and East Asia.

(38:51):
Africa is just way down on a priority.

Speaker 3 (38:55):
The debate, the conversation, if you if you will about Gaza,
for instance, is genocide. Nothing on the order of genocide
ever happened in Gaza, although.

Speaker 2 (39:08):
I don't think so. I don't think there's any genocide
going on Ina, but there's a lot.

Speaker 3 (39:12):
Of genocide happening throughout different parts of Africa, including and
especially Nigeria.

Speaker 2 (39:18):
So Lucretia, you're actually a neokon then, because this is
the way neocons actually think values should help dilate Ukraine and.

Speaker 3 (39:26):
Russia fight it out, have have have Europe fixed, you
know whatever. I don't care if what you say is true,
and most of Africa is still in a developing state.
It seems to me that we have much in common
or great we ought to have great sympathies with those

(39:48):
parts of Africa that are trying to develop, that are
doing so under Western values, and that's where we should
consider putting our resources if we're going to put resources
into those kinds of things at all.

Speaker 1 (40:03):
Well, I was going to kind of give you an example,
and it's and you never hear about it because it
is successful, and it's Botswana. Botswana has enjoyed much faster
economic growth.

Speaker 2 (40:13):
Uh.

Speaker 1 (40:14):
General Motors has a plant in Botswana that makes cars
for the continent. Uh. And why is it? Well, Botswana
is a country that looks pretty Western. They have secure
property rights, they have real democracy, they enforced in other words,
they actually have assimilated Western values and their prospect for them.

Speaker 2 (40:31):
So in a world of limits, there were limitless resources,
and you would want to help everybody, but you have
to prioritize where you spend defense dollars. Africa. Yeah, and
ash could come at over any country in Latin America,
over your any European country.

Speaker 1 (40:47):
They're far more Africa.

Speaker 2 (40:53):
Right to try to know, if you wanted to try
to build Western institutions, we should be doing it in
places like Columbia and venn Isuela and Okay, and that
should be first, and then Europe I think in the
midly second, and Africa at the end. I'm not saying
we should just walk away from Africa entirely, it's just
it's the lowest priority. We don't have enough money to

(41:15):
go around. To me, you guys sound like neo cons
I love it.

Speaker 3 (41:21):
No, it's not that at all.

Speaker 2 (41:22):
Okay, I don't know how we got slidetracked on.

Speaker 3 (41:28):
And we don't care about Nigeria and.

Speaker 2 (41:31):
Yeah, well, I mean this is I mean, this is
actually one of the fundamental ideas about Grand Strategy is
that you the United States does not want any hostile
power to be in charge of Asia or Europe. Africa
is just not as core because you can't. I mean,

(41:52):
the the cold blooded it is. The threatstar security would
come from the other industrialized parts of the world Africa
because they're just not.

Speaker 3 (42:02):
Catholic Church is much more interested in Gaza and even
Ukraine than they are in Africa. Where As a matter
of fact, it's not just the Anglican Church, it's also
the Catholic Church, which is experienced the experiencing the largest
growth in the world in African nations. And so I'm

(42:25):
not my point is is that it's just not it's
just not a salient issue for people, and it should be.
I don't care about Gaza anymore. I don't. They can
scream genocide all day long, they can margin the street
with their stupid purple hair and their nose rings and

(42:45):
everything else. I don't care.

Speaker 2 (42:47):
By the way, that's that's the protests in the United States,
because if that happened in Gaza, all those people will
be executed.

Speaker 3 (42:52):
Of course, it's just ridiculous.

Speaker 2 (42:55):
But why not purple hair, nose rings, and Gaza itself?
If you're you know, so, if you're a you know,
there's a deep strategy with wind Trump. But hind what
Trump is doing, he wants Gaza is just part of
the puzzle of settling down the Middle East, right, And

(43:15):
maybe that I agree that maybe that's letting the Israelis
have a free hand to do what they want. Because
we have helped them knock off the Iranians who are
hostile regime to us and the major troublemaker in the region.
The Middle East becomes calmer, and that allows us to
concentrate on other more important things. That's that's the only
point for us. Why Gaz is born because it's just

(43:37):
key to helping Israel settle the region down and it
seems to be working. That's what I actually went on
Fox today. I was on the Outnumbered show and the
first thing I asked was this, and I said, you
would have liked to Steve, I said, as the last
remaining Neo Khan, the original gangster Neo Kan, I confess
I was wrong about Trump. I think he actually knows
what he's doing.

Speaker 1 (43:57):
And then I said, but.

Speaker 2 (43:58):
There's a kind of a neo con unders standing of
what he's doing, which say that Middle East, pacify Europe,
focus on China, but then for the Western hemisphere.

Speaker 1 (44:09):
But meanwhile, it looks like we're getting ready possibly or
at least saber rattling, but maybe more with Venezuela.

Speaker 3 (44:16):
Before you move on to Venezuela, I have a question
for both of you, because I'm very worried about you.
How are you holding up? Are you guys okay?

Speaker 2 (44:25):
Well, your dog's okay?

Speaker 3 (44:26):
Is your wife okay? What the shutdown?

Speaker 2 (44:30):
Oh?

Speaker 1 (44:32):
Lives?

Speaker 3 (44:33):
No? You guys okay?

Speaker 1 (44:35):
Yeah?

Speaker 2 (44:36):
I actually I actually did have a conference cancel out
on me because of a shutdown.

Speaker 3 (44:42):
Our friend Ty had to cancel with the fifty seven
senior foreign military leaders from the Naval War College.

Speaker 2 (44:54):
Oh yeah, yeah, but but other than that, I don't
I haven't really even noticed a shutdown's been going on.

Speaker 1 (45:04):
No, by the way, did it come up John that
since you've done Outnumbered, you're the obvious person to go
on the view? Who says it?

Speaker 3 (45:10):
No?

Speaker 2 (45:11):
Oh? Yes, this came up. Yeah, this came up.

Speaker 3 (45:14):
They had a tete me though, did you Well, there's.

Speaker 2 (45:18):
Only so much television can contain for a family audience.
But no, So apparently the view people said no, Republicans
are willing to go on, and so an outnumber today.
They produced all these emails and tweets of people saying
they asked to go on a view and been rejected.
So my proposal was, let's have the greatest event in

(45:40):
cable TV news history and have a view versus the
Outnumbered OH match debate. Do you know that will be
the highest rated cable TV news show in history. I
was like, you could sell tickets, you could have a stadium,
you get three four thousand people would pay money to
see this, and I think that would be great. Let's
have a quasi civilized debate and let the two hosts.

(46:03):
I think the outnumbered hosts would kick the hell out
of the view hosts.

Speaker 1 (46:07):
Well, they certainly have better shoes, as we know from.

Speaker 2 (46:13):
So any last thoughts, because I still think we haven't
got to the Putin Trump summit.

Speaker 1 (46:20):
And yeah, I mean, what else is there to say
it's gonna happen.

Speaker 2 (46:26):
There's going to be any piece steel at all? I mean,
or do you think this is just put and string?
Trump belong again just like he did? An Anchoragelesta, I
don't you're the great student of US Russian summits.

Speaker 1 (46:39):
Well, yeah, I don't know. Look, it does appear that
Russian oil revenues and now gas revenues are way down
because Ukraine has successfully attacked a number of their facilities,
and they especially if we give them even ten Tomahawk missiles,
they're going to be in a world of hurt exporting
their oil and that may be starting to bear. I

(47:01):
don't know it is true. Well, I will tell this
brief story at the famous Reykvic summit, which was an
ambush of Gorbachev on Reagan and all the drama. Ever,
sens is it about? Do they do the deal that
is bringing you up?

Speaker 2 (47:16):
SDIB The deal was to go to zero on nucleus,
right right, But.

Speaker 1 (47:20):
Regan, you have a bestdi and yeah, oh, and of
course that's another interesting story. But there's an I got
the Russian transcript once, which was translated way more detailed
than the State Department note takers that they released later.
And there's one point where Reagan says to Gerbachev, hey,
you bought a bunch of American week and you haven't
paid us, And Gerbachev says, yeah, well, that's because we

(47:41):
don't have any money or bankrupt essentially what he said.
And and he says, and that's because you know, the
price of oil has gone way down because which it
did in the end, that was the deliberate strategy of
the Reagan administration. Oil went down to ten dollars a
barrel from you know, fifty by nineteen eighty five eighty six,
and Reagan said, yeah, you know, well our oil patch
and Oklahoma and Texas is really hurting from low oil prices,

(48:04):
which was true. That helped precipitate the savings alone crisis
a few years later, which really spread out of Texas.
And Gorbachev says, yeah, you know, you're not fooling me.
We know who started this. I Grbachov being very angry saying,
we know that you've been targeting our economy, especially our
oil revenues, deliberately, and he was not happy about it.
So I think that same dynamic still plays out. And

(48:27):
you know who knows the Europeans are really bad about
all this, and the Chinese. Ah, there's an interesting insight.
Somebody wrote today a shrewd article saying the country that's
going to determine whether this is going to come to
an end is probably going to be China more than us,
because if China says we're tired of this, we're going
to buy less of your oil, and maybe Putin has

(48:50):
to then make a deal. Whoa common whoa.

Speaker 2 (49:00):
If Lucretia's done on this, let's go to something even
more fun, totally switching gears. Our last topic will be
is perhaps one of the most important Supreme Court cases,
if not just of this year, but of many years,
which was whether the Voting Rights Act of nineteen sixty
five is unconstitutional. This is a case called Louisiana versus

(49:22):
Cala and Lucretia. I was just going to describe the facts,
but go ahead.

Speaker 3 (49:26):
No, I know, and while you're describing the effects. I
have a question based upon the way you just phrase that.
Is it the Voting Rights Act specifically, or is it
the interpretation of the Voting Rights Act?

Speaker 2 (49:37):
If you would addressed that, Yeah, the way it's been interpreted. Yeah,
by the way it's been interpreted by the Supreme Court
and by the government over many administrations. So as people
know listeners is this podcast are up on the Constitution,
they will know that the fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution
prohibits right discrimination and voting on the basis of race. Nevertheless,

(49:59):
the Southern dates engaged in widespread suppression of the black
vote until the nineteen sixty five Voting Rights Act, which
almost seems like it sounds like it repeats in the
fifteenth Amendment. There is also another part of the Voting
Rights Act of nineteen sixty five which was struck down

(50:21):
by the Supreme Court about ten years ago in a
case called Shelby County. That part, which is called Section five,
said that no basically southern state part of the Confederacy
could change anything related to voting without the permission of
the federal government. Quite incredible, and maybe that kind of
extraordinary remedy necessary in nineteen sixty five, but the Court

(50:42):
said by twenty thirteen the time for that was over.
This case is about the last, really part of the
Voting Rights Act that produces a lot of government intervention,
which is the Voter Rights Act of ninety five says
no racial discrimination and voting has been interpreted by the
Supreme Court and by the Justice Department over many years

(51:04):
to require states to try to create congressional districts that
would elect minority members of Congress, so called majority minority districts.
So the quandary states find themselves in is that no
matter what they do, they're going to get sued. If
they draw districts without regard to race, then they get

(51:27):
sued by the civil rights lobby for not creating enough
majority minority districts. If they draw districts with regard to race,
I think they're violating the fifteenth Amendment, and they get
sued by other groups. So who say you shouldn't be
doing this at all? So the thing, the reason why
I think this calls up the question that Lucretia's asking

(51:49):
is is a voiding Rights Act itself unconstitutional? Is that
this case was actually argued last term and in that case,
it was really about how manycial districts does the state
of Louisiana have to draw? And after hearing the case,
the court said no, no, no, We're going to ask
now for the bigger picture. And so they sent the

(52:09):
parties back and said brief instead, is this whole practice
on constitutional isn't just what this is loading Rights Act
of nineteen sixty five the weight it's been interpreted for
many decades. Also violation of the fifteenth which could end
the use of race in the drawing of congressional districts
and have a really, I mean immediate and deep impact

(52:30):
on congressional elections in the South. I think this would
produce twenty more Republican seats in the South in time
for the midterm elections if these maps are overturned anyway, Apreciation.

Speaker 3 (52:46):
Before Steve, Before Steve says, because I know he's going
to very profound things to say, I want to point
out the reason why I agree with you that this
is perhaps one of the most important cases in years
is that it really will get to the heart of
the question about whether or not the most important thing
for a voter to choose, the most important characteristic about

(53:08):
a politician, et cetera, et cetera, is that person's race.
And if the court would were to decide that it's
okay to continue to draw these complicated, contradictory majority minority districts,
it would be the end I think of any appeal

(53:31):
to justice to equal protection under the law. Either race
matters or it doesn't. Now that being said before, Steve
kind of corrects me can be right by saying, I
get that for one hundred years, the Democratic Party in
the South used every trick under the book in the book,

(53:54):
under the book, Wow, I've had too much scotch to
ensure that Blacks had no voting power at all. Grandfather
clauses poll taxes, party, you know, single party registration which
isn't covered by the voting rights Like. I get why
there was this need to shore up minority, especially black

(54:19):
voting in the South. I get it. I think they
took the wrong the wrong path, but I understand the
motivation behind it. However, if the important thing is that
a person is black or Mexican or whatever, or white,
our constitution has become a meaningless document. We are just

(54:40):
a tribal society. That's my and so God, I hope, God,
I hope that they look at Catanji and say, boy,
are you an idiot? Boy? Are you an absolute, complete,
total idiot. Has nothing to do with the fact that
you're black. It's because you're an idiot and you never
should have been appointed to the Supreme Court.

Speaker 2 (54:58):
Kas Let's let's let's bracket this because after Steve gets
to respond, we should focus on Justice Jackson's exact comments
journal argument, which have caused quite a feuaror which is
what you're referring to. So Steve, what is your thought?

Speaker 1 (55:13):
Well, yeah, I wasn't going to do that. It was
it was going to be. Let's see two or three
quick ones. One is we have come to the point
now that reminds me a lot of antitrust in the
bad old days. You know, back in the fifties and
sixties into the seventies. If a bunch of companies charged
the same price, they were guilty of collusion. If one
company charged the lower price, that company was guilty of

(55:35):
predatory pricing. Right, it's we see the same thing, by
the way, with a racial Tanjon banking. If you make
loans to low income consumers, it's predatory lending. If you
don't loan to low income consumers minorities. It's redlining, right,
So how the banks win in that? So they so
in this particular case, and Lucacia put her finger on

(55:55):
the point, which is something hearing Jaffa used to say.
He used to say, really, the sequencing should have been
the Voting Rights Act should have come first to allow
blacks in the South to vote. However, you had things
like forget congressional districts, but you had a lot of
cities in the South, like I think Montgomery, Alabama, they
elected all of their city council with at large elections,
which means it was going to be nine white people

(56:17):
or whatever, we're going to win, even though the city
might be forty eight percent black. Maybe, so they said, no,
you gotta have districts. Okay, fine, if you just carve
up even districts at random, you're going to get a
few minority districts. And at that time, in that power
right well, at that time, I think the numbers were
something like the Thornstorms had this in their Great book
twenty some years ago. You only had like one hundred

(56:39):
black elected officials at any level of government in the
Old South in nineteen sixty five, and today it's more
like ten thousand. It's obsolete. It's anachronistic, right, just on
the sort of the way things have changed. And by
the way, isn't it better? And here's Lucretia's point stated
in a different way. Isn't it better if black candidates

(57:01):
have to win white votes and white candidates have to
win black votes? Rather than segregating people and saying your
opinions should depend on your skin color.

Speaker 3 (57:10):
I'll go one step further. Stephen say that one of
the problems with changing at large elections to districts, or
one of the problems with that is that if you
had truly minority In simple terms, let's say you're talking
about a city council and forty percent of the population
is black and sixty percent is white. That's oversimplified, but

(57:34):
you get the point. So you draw the districts so
that two of five become black districts and they elect
a black person to office. That was the whole idea
behind the interpretation of the Voting Voting Rights Act of
nineteen sixty five. But what happens then, First of all,

(57:56):
the two blacks, assuming which is a wrong assumption, assuming
that the only thing that matters is the color of
their skin and the people the color of the skin
of the people they represent, they're a minority. On the
other hand, if you've got what did you say, forty
eight percent of the population in a city is black,

(58:16):
and somehow back in sixty five all of those particular
districts elected whites. How are those whites going to get
into office without appealing to the interests of the black population.
Those are the kinds of arguments that make the ridiculousness
of the Voting Rights Act just not just ridiculous, but

(58:39):
downright just unjust. I don't know the right word for it,
but I hope the Supreme Court does the right thing now,
John tell us what it was.

Speaker 5 (58:50):
Katanji said, so just as a this is almost like
I guess having at the end of the show, but
it would be an amused Bush at the beginning of
the show.

Speaker 2 (59:04):
Is in the course of oral argument, Catangie Brown Jackson
explicitly compared blacks to being disabled, and she said, why
isn't the Voting Rights Act just like the Americans with
Disabilities Act? And you had to pass the Americans with
Disabilities Act to be able to give the handicapped access,

(59:24):
the disabled access to buildings and places which they couldn't access.
And she said, isn't the Voting Rights Act just like that?
And then she says something like they're both disabled, a
huge controversy on social media.

Speaker 3 (59:39):
Well, yes and no. I will tell you that I
was mentioning it to someone and wanted to get the
exact quote, and it took me four pages of a
Google search and three different revisions of my search before
I could actually find the quote that being said. Because
Steve says we've gone along, which we have. I'm going
to do something I don't know normally do. I'm going

(01:00:01):
to begin with what is all of us? All the
three of us agree may be the best Babylon Bee
of all time. The caption is Clarence Thomas gently explains
to KBJ that not all black people are mentally disabled,
just her. But what I want to do is go

(01:00:24):
just a little further and read from the actual Steve,
maybe you should link to it in this case. But
not wanting to embarrass Jackson in front of the rest
of the court, Justice Thomas waited for a brief recess
to explain, I don't know how to say this best Katangi.
But not all people black people are mentally disabled. It's
just you. You have an exceptionally low IQ. The fact
that you have an exceptionally low IQ has absolutely nothing

(01:00:46):
to do with your skin color. You're just an idiot. Oh,
I'm so great. Oh, I mean again, it's just sorry.
You cannot do the Babylon b anyway. You look at
it all? Right? Are you guys ready? Sure you're okay
after the shutdown?

Speaker 2 (01:01:04):
Right?

Speaker 1 (01:01:04):
You guys are doing okay.

Speaker 3 (01:01:06):
I don't have to just making sure I guess that
men do. Wami held his own last night, unfortunately in
the debate because he kept to the lack of affordability
in New York. But anyway, first, Babylon Bee, could a
communist Muslim terrorist be the solution to New York City's

(01:01:28):
budget problems? Because it's for you, John. We didn't discuss it,
but we've discussed it before. John Bolton's mustache agrees to
testify against him in exchange for immunity.

Speaker 2 (01:01:44):
That's funny, Yeah, I know.

Speaker 3 (01:01:47):
There's there's there are actually some pretty good ones. Public
service announcement. Do not go really fast in a boat
with a Venezuelan flag, right now, that's right, there's a
couple more, with Israel withdrawal Hamas finally able to conduct
public executions in peace. I wish that's not even funny. Okay,

(01:02:12):
Democrats warn we are now further away from World War
three than ever before. One last one, Democrats explain to
young Republicans they're supposed to engrave their messages on bullets instead.

(01:02:32):
What a lucky week it's been?

Speaker 2 (01:02:34):
Yeah, always drink air whiskey, neat and buy more books
And Steve, what ai nugget do you have for us tonight?

Speaker 1 (01:02:42):
So this week I asked chat GBT to do a
parody op ed column by Luke Cresia. So it's it's
pretty good that here's just one paragraph and listeners. You
tell us if this is close or if it's lacking
a certain song Freud. Okay, here it is. Meanwhile, the University,

(01:03:03):
formerly the guardian of civilization, is now a cross between
a daycare and an inquisition. Students require trigger warnings for Aristotle,
but no warning whatsoever before plunging into the intellectual abyss
of gender fluid astrology. You can't even quote the Federal's
papers without someone accusing Madison of microaggressions. Madison the man's

(01:03:24):
only vice was writing too much. But that sounds about right.
You a set that, Lucretia.

Speaker 2 (01:03:32):
I actually don't think it doesn't sound like no, I
think all.

Speaker 3 (01:03:38):
Actually I think I told you guys really quickly that
we were at friend's house and pulled up a bunch
of stuff off Grop about the three whiskey happy hour.
And they love that. So Gropp loves John of course
a little bit. John's measured and adi and rational and

(01:03:59):
dah da dah Steve is They actually make some comments,
probably because of all my comments about your analogy, man,
But your analogies are usually pretty good and very instructive
for the audience, and I am just a raging nut job.

Speaker 1 (01:04:15):
Well, congratulations.

Speaker 2 (01:04:17):
In my mind.

Speaker 1 (01:04:18):
Talk to you guys next week.

Speaker 2 (01:04:20):
By everybody Ricochet Join the conversation.